Scientific Papers That Were Rejected Before Going on to Win a Nobel Prize (2016)

Re:Scientific Papers That Were Rejected Before Going on to W... by dekhn on Thursday October 10, 2019 @09:55AM (#21214502)

To be honest, if I was a reviewer, and somebody sent the first NMR paper to me, I'd reject it. It was a truly crazy idea that came out of war tech. Even when I did NMR in the 90s, it was still pretty crazy: you have a supercooled superconducting magnet and put a sample into a spinning buffer of air, then bombard it with radiowaves and listen for the echo. The echo, if carefully deconvolved, provides unbelievably fine details on the electrically shielded nuclear environment.

Did I mention it was a 23T superconducting supercooled magnet, where you inject charge (electrons) and they swirl around without neglible resistance for months at a time?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Scientific Papers That Were Rejected Before Going on to W... by JoeAltmaier on Thursday October 10, 2019 @09:58AM (#21214556)

Confused. Isn't that exactly like so many other papers involving Big Physics? Large equipment, complex math, remarkable clarity, new/surprising results?

Don't know what about 'needing a big magnet' precludes this being a valid physics paper.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Scientific Papers That Were Rejected Before Going on to W... by jchallis on Thursday October 10, 2019 @10:11AM (#21214685)

23T is a big magnet. Were you at the high field lab in Tallahassee?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Scientific Papers That Were Rejected Before Going on to W... by dekhn on Thursday October 10, 2019 @10:29AM (#21214904)

Ah, no, I was just quoting the field strength of what used to be the largest magnet. Personally I used a 600MHz. It's still weird to have your head below a massive magnet and have to tune analog electronics for impedence matching because there aren't any shielding techs for digital electronics that can survive the field strength.

[ Parent | on HN ]