评论详情页
杨正瓴
赞
+1
赞
+1
1970年以后，人类物理学看上去没有重大进步
http://www.sohu.com/a/234786002_410558
物理学家 Neil Turok 说：“自1970年代后，所有的理论工作都还没有产生一个成功的预言，这是很令人震惊的现状。”
他说：“现如今，物理学家撰写许多的论文、建立许多的理论模型、举办许多的研讨会议、相互引用彼此的研究成果——我们拥有了好的科学所需要的一切。但我认为，一个好的物理理论就是要能成功地作出预言，而这正是目前所缺乏的。”
"All of the theoretical work that's been done since the 1970s has not produced a single successful prediction," says Neil Turok, director of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada. "That's a very shocking state of affairs."
Lots of activity, little progress Physicists today "write a lot of papers, build a lot of [theoretical] models, hold a lot of conferences, cite each other — you have all the trappings of science," he says. "But for me, physics is all about making successful predictions. And that's been lacking."
2020-02-25 22:23
http://www.sohu.com/a/234786002_410558
物理学家 Neil Turok 说：“自1970年代后，所有的理论工作都还没有产生一个成功的预言，这是很令人震惊的现状。”
他说：“现如今，物理学家撰写许多的论文、建立许多的理论模型、举办许多的研讨会议、相互引用彼此的研究成果——我们拥有了好的科学所需要的一切。但我认为，一个好的物理理论就是要能成功地作出预言，而这正是目前所缺乏的。”
"All of the theoretical work that's been done since the 1970s has not produced a single successful prediction," says Neil Turok, director of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada. "That's a very shocking state of affairs."
Lots of activity, little progress Physicists today "write a lot of papers, build a lot of [theoretical] models, hold a lot of conferences, cite each other — you have all the trappings of science," he says. "But for me, physics is all about making successful predictions. And that's been lacking."
全部回复2 条回复
杨正瓴
1
+1
1
+1
回复@胡大伟：您说的很对！！！ 
————————————————————————————————
2017年05月，《自然》杂志主编坎贝尔（Philip Campbell）先生说：
如果问问科学家们，他们最引以为傲的研究发表在哪里，他们回答的往往是其他一些不太知名、不太被引用的期刊。
换言之，《自然》以及其他一些在选择上比较挑剔、又有高影响因子的期刊，仅代表了重要科研文献的一小部分。
引用自：《科技日报》 2017-05-25，改变科研评估规则，现在是时候了，《自然》总编辑 菲利普?坎贝尔
http://digitalpaper.stdaily.com/http_www.kjrb.com/kjrb/html/2017-05/25/content_370085.htm?div=-1
http://news.sciencenet.cn/htmlnews/2017/5/377413.shtm?id=377413
If scientists are asked where they are most proud of their research, they tend to answer a list of other less well known and less cited journals.
In other words, "nature" and other journals that are critically selective and have high impact factors represent only a small portion of important scientific literature.
引用自：http://www.bestchinanews.com/Explore/4926.html
Editor in chief of nature: it's time to change the rules for scientific research evaluation
————————————————————————————————
2017年05月，《自然》杂志主编坎贝尔（Philip Campbell）先生说：
如果问问科学家们，他们最引以为傲的研究发表在哪里，他们回答的往往是其他一些不太知名、不太被引用的期刊。
换言之，《自然》以及其他一些在选择上比较挑剔、又有高影响因子的期刊，仅代表了重要科研文献的一小部分。
引用自：《科技日报》 2017-05-25，改变科研评估规则，现在是时候了，《自然》总编辑 菲利普?坎贝尔
http://digitalpaper.stdaily.com/http_www.kjrb.com/kjrb/html/2017-05/25/content_370085.htm?div=-1
http://news.sciencenet.cn/htmlnews/2017/5/377413.shtm?id=377413
If scientists are asked where they are most proud of their research, they tend to answer a list of other less well known and less cited journals.
In other words, "nature" and other journals that are critically selective and have high impact factors represent only a small portion of important scientific literature.
引用自：http://www.bestchinanews.com/Explore/4926.html
Editor in chief of nature: it's time to change the rules for scientific research evaluation
02-27 21:48
