Paper’s too good?

I have to do good, especially in Lent period. Nine days ago I have tried to do good by helping a publication of a manuscript that, in my opinion, is exceptionally good but does not seem to receive a proper consideration in Physical Review Letters. I wrote a letter to editors. Till now, I’ve received no response. So it looks like this attempt to do good failed as many others. In a weak hope that a bit of publicity still might do some good, I publish the letter here (scrapping small sensitive details).

************************************************************** 

Dear dr Mitra, prof Castro Neto,

I have learned from the authors of  arXiv:0906.4076 that this submission has finally received a negative publication advice. In my opinion, this advice can only result from an unfortunate misunderstanding. Thereby I appeal to you to reconsider the decision. I do not make this appeal for the sake of the authors: they can take care of themselves. I make it because I fill attached to PRL having published my major contributions there. I want the journal to accept  the manuscripts that report true advances in theoretical physics. I do not want to hear the rumors that the current evaluation procedures and referee’s attitudes make the acceptance of original manuscripts very unlikely, instead favoring secondary research and aberrative speculations.

While the manuscript submitted is not free from presentational drawbacks, nor from the statements reflecting personal tastes of the authors,  it reports  the biggest advance in bosonization since seventies of last century. It restores scientific truth distorted by several recent publications of very questionable quality, those by chance have received a positive publication advice.

If you think that a detailed and balanced referee report will help you to make a correct decision, I would be willing to provide one. 

 *********************************************************

Be Sociable, Share!

•