Peer Reviews

 

Recognition vs. Peer Review

​

Who has recognized the theory of absoluteness? Many people have heard about the so-called peer review, and they know that in order to pass it, you need to submit your theory to the scientific journal that provides this service.

​

However, they may not know that a scientific journal is not the only way to present a new scientific theory to the world. You can write a book, make a film, present your theory at a scientific conference, and even publish it on a website; all of these methods are equally good.

​

When it comes to peer review, many people confuse it with recognition. When you present a new theory at a scientific conference, website, or in a book, no peer review is required. And in general, a theory can be peer-reviewed in a scientific journal but not recognized by science. And the opposite is true: it can be published on a website or in a book, not peer-reviewed, yet be totally correct. Peer review is just a filter for a specific scientific journal where one person (rarely two), with dubious and unconfirmed knowledge of physics, reviews papers to reduce the number of incorrect articles written by amateur physicists and protect the reputation of the journal.

​

Recognition of a theory, on the other hand, is its acceptance by whole science (not by unknown person in a journal).

 

In fact, today, on the planet of "fools", there is no procedure for recognizing scientific theories! This means you can create a new theory, but there is no mechanism for recognizing it as correct or incorrect. For example, there has never been an official recognition of Lorentz-Einstein's Theory of Relativity with the names and signatures of scientists who recognized it.

​

This is why, Dmitry Bonch advocates the creation of such a mechanism and the recognition of Lorentz-Einstein's TR as pseudoscientific. Special documents for this have already been prepared and sent to certain authorities.