News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Flux Pinning in sample of LK-99. Parent comment

Re:Flux Pinning in sample of LK-99 by Qem on Saturday August 05, 2023 @10:25AM (#37012304)
It's not cynism. The disagreement about authorship apparently was motivated by someone in the original team being pushed aside to open a slot for the well connected "10k citations" guy. It's a old problem academia still fails to address. See:

https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/jou...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-colonial_science

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Flux Pinning in sample of LK-99 by Facemelters on Saturday August 05, 2023 @11:52AM (#37013222)
No one knows if this version of events is true
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Flux Pinning in sample of LK-99 by Qem on Saturday August 05, 2023 @12:06PM (#37013392)
Indeed. But if further investigation reveals the situation to be what it appears to be, this would follow a long list of similar occurrences, the likes of César Lattes and Jocelyn Bell.
[ Parent | on HN ]