Sunday 15 February 2009

Divalent hydrogen

In a recent Nature communication scientists from Harvard presented the preparation of divalent hydrogen. It goes according to the following scheme:

Tell me I am picky and jealous. But what should you expect of this? Is only this figure the only thing wrong in the article? Take it as a mild critic but I am disappointed. There is probably great science behind all that and mistakes happen but should you not proof read before you publish in a high impact journal? And it really takes away information because it is not obvious if the imine or the amine is present.

Maybe the correct way would be to silently tell the author. But if it is a Nature paper it should withstand some public critic in my eyes.

Since I am already complaining: Not stopping at a pedestrian crossing is like aiming a loaded gun at un-armed people who are already abiding to rules that only have to exist because of the car drivers.


GGS said...


Hehehehe, you are right. This look a little bit odd (I mean it do not make any sense at all:). I have got some chemistry experience and I do not remember anything like that when they were teaching me chemistry at the University. They probably meant to have a imine there but made a horrible mistake. LOL

You were saying that someone should proofread before publishing this kind of stuff in high impact journal. The problem is that once you get there it may be easy to publish your stuff again especially if your using the same background research as before.

Or in the worst case a hand washes a hand, you now what I mean ... LOL


Felix said...

yes, that is the problem with these things ...
but hopefully blogging can at least do something because it is easier to point out the problems

btw: nice bio-pictures ;)