TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Nature retracts controversial superconductivity paper by embattled physicist

187 pointsby marvinbornerover 1 year ago

12 comments

xeckrover 1 year ago
The silver lining is that the media hype probably got a lot of people interested in physics and materials science. Some of them will undoubtedly go on to make great discoveries and contributions to the field in the future.
评论 #38185171 未加载
评论 #38185297 未加载
评论 #38184998 未加载
评论 #38185668 未加载
评论 #38186193 未加载
评论 #38187021 未加载
评论 #38185454 未加载
评论 #38185809 未加载
nus07over 1 year ago
He also featured in Time - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;time.com&#x2F;collection&#x2F;time100-next-2021&#x2F;5937727&#x2F;ranga-dias&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;time.com&#x2F;collection&#x2F;time100-next-2021&#x2F;5937727&#x2F;ranga-...</a><p>And he falsely claimed that his company had funding from OpenAI and Spotify.
评论 #38186741 未加载
zwiebackover 1 year ago
Science working as intended.
评论 #38185554 未加载
评论 #38186192 未加载
评论 #38187955 未加载
civilizedover 1 year ago
This guy is now known beyond reasonable doubt to have committed research fraud multiple times. Why does he still have a job?
评论 #38185609 未加载
评论 #38187167 未加载
评论 #38185950 未加载
bada-boomover 1 year ago
What does Nature have to lose from publishing hype? If there&#x27;s enough pushback, they retract it six years later and wash their hands.
setgreeover 1 year ago
So here I&#x27;m learning that Nature published their paper, which claimed an absolutely world-changing breakthrough, after the lead authors had already had two papers retracted?<p>the Springer Nature Group has a profit margin of 26% on annual revenue of ~€1.7bn [0]. If they were keen to publish this paper, they could have afforded to send an expert to the lab to actually see the process for themselves.<p>But that&#x27;s not the kind of thing you do if your core business model is to publish splashy headlines...<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;group.springernature.com&#x2F;gp&#x2F;group&#x2F;media&#x2F;press-releases&#x2F;springer-nature-releases-annual-progress-report&#x2F;23572562" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;group.springernature.com&#x2F;gp&#x2F;group&#x2F;media&#x2F;press-releas...</a>
评论 #38185579 未加载
评论 #38186025 未加载
评论 #38186494 未加载
评论 #38185752 未加载
superconduct123over 1 year ago
Found this bizarre: the authors response has a whole section that reads like an ad for MATLAB: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;dangaristo&#x2F;status&#x2F;1707165711427063902" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;dangaristo&#x2F;status&#x2F;1707165711427063902</a><p>Not sure what the point of that is, it almost sounds like ChatGPT
评论 #38185938 未加载
评论 #38185544 未加载
评论 #38185618 未加载
评论 #38185872 未加载
评论 #38185715 未加载
评论 #38186500 未加载
Nitionover 1 year ago
Note: This is <i>not</i> about LK-99.
评论 #38186496 未加载
jspannover 1 year ago
The disappointing part of this is the large parts of the population who will look at this and other recent cases (see: Francesca Gino) and think that &quot;academia is broken&quot; or &quot;scientists can&#x27;t be trusted&quot;. That narrative will even be amplified by many YouTubers and periodicals who were quick with those headlines. However, as soon as this work came out, multiple scientists voiced concerns, several even filed complaints with the journal. Those in the field even took steps to reproduce the work found in the paper. The fact that this error was caught and several were skeptical enough to comment is how the system should work. Arguing over results that are too good to be true, taking steps to try to reproduce it independently, and publicly taking it down is why science can be trusted. Research isn&#x27;t going to be perfect every time but peer review and reproduction should weed out the less than credible.
评论 #38185110 未加载
评论 #38185100 未加载
评论 #38185203 未加载
评论 #38185113 未加载
评论 #38185094 未加载
评论 #38185115 未加载
BS_Alarmover 1 year ago
Just this one? Only the beginning...! <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nature.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;s41586-021-03544-w#change-history" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nature.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;s41586-021-03544-w#change-hi...</a>
评论 #38186505 未加载
wly_cdgrover 1 year ago
&quot;The Nature news team is independent from its journals team&quot; lollll
评论 #38187044 未加载
评论 #38185091 未加载
twiddlingover 1 year ago
Just file it with the table top fusion one
评论 #38185109 未加载