Universal Journal of Physics and Application Vol. 5(4), pp. 701 - 706
Reprint (PDF) (151Kb)

CAN THE _OPEN DIALOGUE POLICY_ BE MADE FOOLPROOF? Reflections following some recent articles published in COP

AUTHOR(S) INFORMATION: Elitzur A.C.

ABSTRACT

Old and New Concepts in Physics is a unique forum in today's scientific community. It allows, at the Editor's judgment, publication of a paper which a referee advised to reject, with the negative report turned into a published Comment, followed by the author's Reply. As the Journal's subtitle indicates, this is an attempt to facilitate an open dialogue on the most profound issues in theoretical physics. In view of the field's unfortunate impoverishment observed during the last few decades (Smolin, 2006), this is a timely enterprise. As a new member of COP's editorial board I find this service an honor as well as a heavy responsibility. Giving up referee anonymity is bound to create expectable unease. Indeed, time and again I found myself in the role of the “bad guy,” advising against a paper's publication. The Editor sometimes heeded my advice but on another time chose to publish a paper I advised to decline (Ignatovich, 2008a). Later, when I saw the forthcoming publication of a debate over an earlier paper (Georges, 2008; Sharma, 2008), I again strongly advised canceling the publication. The editor, understandably, chose not to do so. Without doubt, no editorial decision can leave everyone happy, even the more so with COP. It is therefore only with Prof. Kapuscik's kind permission that I revisit the above cases and share with the readers my concerns about them. Disagreements aside, I concur with the Editor's authority in these matters which, with every new issue, face him with difficulties spared from editors of ordinary journals.