Re: [Phys-L] Decoherence and gravitational time dilation

[Savinainen Antti <antti.savinainen@kuopio.fi>]

Hi,

I wrote:

> The paper was published in Nature Physics so it should have some credibility.

John D. responded:

> Sorry, that's not how it works.  Journals do not offer a money-back guarantee of correctness.  That applies to
> Macmillan (publisher of Nature), to Reader's Digest, to the New York Times, and all the rest.

I know this and agree with the sentiment (appeal to authority is not a good thing). However, my point in "some credibility" was that the manuscript must have been scrutinized by people who should know a great deal about the topic. Of course, this is still not a guarantee of correctness. Just recently I was told that about 50% of the papers in Nature turn out to be incorrect (I do not have a reference for the claim, unfortunately). This is usually not because of a sloppy review process but rather due to the nature of new ideas.

--------

At any rate, I enjoyed reading John's explanation of physics!

Regards,

Antti
-- 
******************************************************************************************
Viesti on tarkastettu roskapostinsuodatus- ja virustorjuntaohjelmistolla.
Tarkastuksesta huolimatta noudata asianmukaista varovaisuutta liitetiedostoja avatessasi.
******************************************************************************************