Nature 的立场和42年前的“狸猫换太子”
Nature’s Stance, and the “狸猫换太子” Affair of 42 Years Ago
2012年：
On 14 February 2012, Nature acknowledged receipt of the manuscript “An n-Shell Lattice Model for 3D Quasicrystal” (tracking number 2012-02-01719). On 22 February 2012 — eight days later — the decision letter, signed by Dr Rosamund Daw, Senior Editor, Physical Sciences, declined it. The letter states that such manuscripts are declined “without sending them to referees.”
2012 年 2 月 14 日，《自然》确认收到稿件《三维准晶的 n-Shell 点阵模型》（编号 2012-02-01719）。2012 年 2 月 22 日——八天之后——决定信发回，签署人为物理科学高级编辑 Rosamund Daw 博士。信中明说：此类稿件系“不送交审稿人”而退回。
Source: the author’s archive — Nature’s receipt and decision e-mails (14 and 22 February 2012).
2014年：
In 2014, Nature published “What is a crystal?”, the explainer of its Milestones in Crystallography collection, canonizing the post-1984 definition of a crystal. Its author was Senior Editor Rosamund Daw. Its references are the canon itself: Shechtman 1984; Levine & Steinhardt 1984; Pauling 1985; Maddox 1985; Cahn et al. 1986.
2014 年，《自然》发表《什么是晶体？》——其“晶体学里程碑”特辑的解说文章，为 1984 年之后的新定义立传。作者是高级编辑 Rosamund Daw。它的参考文献就是正典本身：谢赫特曼 1984；Levine 与 Steinhardt 1984；鲍林 1985；Maddox 1985；Cahn 等 1986。
Source: Daw, R., Nature 511 (Suppl 7509), 18–19 (2014), DOI 10.1038/nature13366.
1984年：
In 1984, the name “quasicrystal” was given, in Physical Review Letters, to a six-dimensional quasiperiodic construction (6D Model) (Levine & Steinhardt, “Quasicrystals: A new class of ordered structures”), while Shechtman’s discovery paper in the same volume carried the title “Metallic phase with long-range orientational order and no translational symmetry.”
1984 年，“准晶体”这个名字在《物理评论快报》上被给了一个六维准周期构造（Levine & Steinhardt：《准晶体：一类新的有序结构》）；而同一卷里谢赫特曼的发现论文，标题是“具有长程取向序而无平移对称性的金属相”。
Sources: Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 1951–1953 (1984); Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 2477–2480 (1984).
1985年：
In 1985, Nature published the three-dimensional defence — Pauling’s twinning paper — and its editor John Maddox published a comment titled “Cold water on icosahedral symmetry.”
1985 年，《自然》发表了三维一侧的辩护——鲍林的孪晶论文；其主编 John Maddox 发表评论，题为《给二十面体对称性泼冷水》。
Sources: Nature 317, 512–514 (1985), DOI 10.1038/317512a0; Nature 317, 471 (1985).
1986年：
On 9 January 1986, Nature published four letters under the shared heading “Pauling’s model not universally accepted”, in which Cahn, Gratias, Shechtman and others answered Pauling in Nature’s own pages.
1986 年 1 月 9 日，《自然》以共同栏目标题《鲍林的模型并未被普遍接受》刊出四封来信，Cahn、Gratias、谢赫特曼等人在《自然》自己的版面上回应鲍林。
Source: Nature 319, 102–103 (1986); the Cahn–Gratias–Shechtman letter at p. 102, DOI 10.1038/319102a0.
1992年：
In 1992, the International Union of Crystallography redefined “crystal” by its diffraction pattern, rather than by a periodic arrangement of atoms.
1992 年，国际晶体学联合会把“晶体”的定义改为锚定于衍射图样，而不是原子的周期排列。
Source: Acta Crystallographica A48, 928 (1992).
2000年：
In 2000, Nature published the first stable binary quasicrystal, Cd–Yb.
2000 年，《自然》发表了第一个稳定的二元准晶 Cd–Yb。
Source: Tsai, Guo, Abe, Takakura & Sato, Nature 408, 537–538 (2000).
2009年：
In 2009, Nature printed an incorrect figure for the annual salary of Tsinghua professor Shi Yigong — 1.7 million renminbi. Its correction (Nature 457, 648) apologized for the mistake. The correction did not give the correct figure, and Nature has never given it since.
2009 年：《自然》把清华教授施一公的年薪印错了——170 万元人民币。它的勘误（Nature 457, 648）为此道歉。勘误没有给出正确数字；此后《自然》也从未给出。
Sources: Qiu, J., Nature 457, 522 (2009), DOI 10.1038/457522a; Correction, Nature 457, 648 (2009), DOI 10.1038/457648g.
点评：《自然》是错在逻辑？还是错在数学数字？
2007年：
In 2007, Nature Materials published the six-dimensional (hyperspace) structure determination of that same Yb–Cd quasicrystal, accompanied by a News & Views titled “When all pieces fit together.” Chemical & Engineering News headlined its report “Quasicrystal Structure Solved”, describing hyperspace crystallography as a 6-D technique.
2007 年，《自然·材料》发表了同一个 Yb–Cd 准晶的六维（超空间）结构测定，并配发 News & Views，题为《当所有的碎片都拼合在一起》。《化学与工程新闻》以《准晶结构已被解出》为题报道，称超空间晶体学为一种 6D 技术。
Sources: Takakura, Gómez, Yamamoto, de Boissieu & Tsai, Nature Materials 6, 58–62 (2007); Thiel, Nature Materials 6, 11 (2007); Chemical & Engineering News 85(3) (2007).
总观察（1986–2025，据本次检索）/ Observation (1986–2025, within the scope of this search)
In the quasicrystal literature of Nature and its sister journals, structures are invariably described in the superspace (6D) framework — for example Nature 404, 740 (2000); Nature 428, 157 (2004); Nature Materials 6, 977 (2007); Nature Physics 8, 790 (2012); Nature Communications 9, 154 (2018); Nature Physics (2025). Within the scope of this search, no three-dimensional lattice model of a quasicrystal has appeared in these journals.
在《自然》及其子刊的准晶文献中，结构无一例外地以超空间（6D）框架表述——例如 Nature 404, 740 (2000)；Nature 428, 157 (2004)；Nature Materials 6, 977 (2007)；Nature Physics 8, 790 (2012)；Nature Communications 9, 154 (2018)；Nature Physics (2025)。据本次检索范围，三维点阵模型的准晶从未在这些期刊上出现过。
问题，Questions of Motive (questions only — no conclusions)
问题1：
Why did the editor who declined the three-dimensional n-Shell model in eight days, without peer review, become — two years later — the author of Nature’s official account of what a crystal is, an account in which no three-dimensional lattice model exists?
为什么那位八天之内、未经同行评审就退回三维 n-Shell 模型的编辑，两年之后，会成为《自然》“什么是晶体”官方版本 的执笔人——而在那个版本里，三维点阵模型不存在？
问题2：
Why have the Nature family’s quasicrystal milestones — the stable binary quasicrystal of 2000, the “structure solved” of 2007 — all belonged to the six-dimensional framework?
为什么《自然》体系的准晶里程碑——2000 年的稳定二元准晶、2007 年的“结构已被解出”——全都属于六维框架？
问题3：
“When all pieces fit together” — did anyone ask whether the pieces might also fit together in three dimensions?
“当所有的碎片都拼合在一起”——有没有人问过：这些碎片，在三维里是不是也能拼合在一起？
问题4：
In 1986, Nature opened its pages to Pauling’s critics. In 2012, it would not open its peer review to a three-dimensional model. What had changed?
1986 年，《自然》向鲍林的批评者敞开了版面。2012 年，它不肯向一个三维模型敞开同行评审的大门。这中间，什么变了？
问题5：
In 1985, Nature’s editor poured cold water on icosahedral symmetry itself. By 2014, Nature’s editor was narrating the six-dimensional settlement as the very definition of a crystal. When did the referee become the chronicler of one side?
1985 年，《自然》的主编给二十面体对称性本身泼冷水。到 2014 年，《自然》的编辑在把六维的定局叙述成晶体的定义本身。裁判是从什么时候起，变成了一方的史官？
问题6：
If a three-dimensional model that lists every atomic coordinate cannot obtain even a review at Nature, what evidence could ever displace the 6D framework in its pages?
如果一个把每一个原子坐标都列出来的三维模型，在《自然》连一次送审都得不到，那么，还能有什么证据，能在它的版面上动摇 6D 框架？
问题7：
Seventeen years have passed. What was the correct figure?
17 年过去了。那个正确的数字，到底是多少？
问题8:
Did Nature play a part in the “Civet Cat Swapped for the Crown Prince” affair of 42 years ago?
《自然》是否在 42 年前那场‘狸猫换太子’里，扮演了角色？
转载本文请联系原作者获取授权，同时请注明本文来自李世春科学网博客。
链接地址：https://wap.sciencenet.cn/blog-2321-1559522.html?mobile=1
收藏
