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.
Macrocycles, flexibility and biological activity: A tortuous pairing - Here's an interesting paper from the Jacobson, Wells and Walsh labs at UCSF and Stanford that seeks to demonstrate how restricting the flexibility of macr...
5 days ago