Search

Even in the best of times, 95% of Jan Hendrik Schon's experiments fizzled out. It's the other 5% that made him one of nanotechnology's brightest stars and the envy of [...]

Gravitational lensing, now taken as an important astrophysical consequence of the general theory of relativity, was found even before this theory was formulated but was discarded as a speculative idea without any chance of empirical confirmation. Reconstruction of some of Einstein's research notes dating back to 1912 reveals that he explored the possibility of gravitational lensing 3 years before completing his general theory of relativity. On the basis of preliminary insights into this theory, Einstein had already derived the basic features of the lensing effect. When he finally published the very same results 24 years later, it was only in response to prodding by an amateur scientist., Sixty years ago, Einstein published a short note in Science entitled 'Lens-Like Action of a Star by the Deviation of Light in the Gravitational Field' (1). The note is often [...]

For more than a year, a study claiming to show that transgenic potatoes may make rats sick was at the center of a furious debate, even though its findings had [...]

Flat panel displays used in laptops and personal organizers are increasing both in resolution and in size, but, for applications requiring larger areas, such as newspapers, these expensive technologies are [...]

In an exhibition hall at the 2005 World Exposition in Aichi, Japan, a gigantic newspaper covering more than 5 square meters delivers the news to passersby in crisp black and [...]

Recent discoveries at Bell Laboratories--the research arm of Lucent Technologies in Murray Hill, New Jersey--said to be of Nobel quality suddenly became mired in questions last week. Outside researchers presented [...]

The heat from the controversy alone is nearly enough to trigger a nuclear reaction. This week in Science (p. 1868), scientists led by nuclear engineer Rusi Taleyarkhan of Oak Ridge [...]

Atlanta - Twenty two years ago, Alfred Steinschneider made a splash in the medical community with a landmark paper detailing multiple cases of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) in a [...]

Veteran physicists know that if you ask a simple question, nature by no means guarantees a simple answer. But even the most case-hardened researchers may be taken aback by the [...]

Arturo Casadevall, an expert on infections that prey on people with weakened immune systems, says he has worked with a 'wonderful compound' made at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). [...]

Amsterdam--LAST SPRING, HENK BUCK AND Jaap Groudsmit were the darlings of the Dutch media. buck, an organic chemist at Eindhoven Technical University, and Goudsmit, a retrovirologist at the University of [...]

New questions about scientific validity are dogging South Korean cloning researcher Woo-Suk Hwang and his colleagues. On 4 December, Hwang notified Science editors that a figure in online material that [...]

May 2003 was an up-and-down month for Daniel Klessig. On 7 May, he resigned as president of the Boyce Thompson Institute (BTI) for Plant Research in Ithaca, New York, for [...]

The furor continues over a legally embattled study of cancer risk among former IBM workers. Last week, 13 authors withdrew nine articles from a special issue of a journal on [...]

Last year scientists at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine created a stir with a report in Science suggesting that people who use the party drug ecstasy may damage their [...]

The Big Problem of Brittle Books ALONG the corridor of chemical plants east of Houston, where the production of petrochemicals and plastics is the norm, the Library of Congress is [...]

Cincinnati -- For a modest set of test-tube experiments, a study published in Science last summer made quite a splash. It was part of a rush of work looking into [...]

The nascent "open-access" publishing movement got a qualified, but high-profile, endorsement this week. After a 7-month investigation, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee of Great Britain, concluded that "the current system of scientific publishing is not providing the access needed for the progress of science," says committee chair Ian Gibson. In a 114-page report, the committee recommends that papers produced by publicly funded research be put in repositories at universities and research institutions, where they would be open to all, free of charge, soon after publication. It also says that online journals that have authors pay the cost of publication and that allow free access to all "could be viable," and it calls for a major study of the idea.

Harvard Researchers Retract Data in Immunology Paper Last spring, researchers from Harvard's Dana-Farber Cancer Institute reported the discovery of a potentially exciting new molecule that appeared to amplify the vital [...]

Presents a list of papers and research reports authored by Chinese scientists most cited as references for other papers and research. Author; Institution; Journal where published; Topic.

Reports that the number of multiauthor research papers in the fields of life sciences has increased according to the study by the Philadelphia-based Institute for Scientific Information. Number of life science papers submitted in 1994; Nature of life science researches; Results of clinical trials; Emphasis on the recognition of people who contributed to the study; Comparison with other areas of studies.

Presents a chart of the top ten research topics for scientific papers in 1997. Dominant theme of apoptosis; Most cited researcher being Ronald M. Evans.

Lists the top four most cited research papers for 1994 according to the Institute for Scientific Information. Most cited scientist; Originating publications; Publication of rankings in ScienceWatch magazine.

In the News of the Week article 'Just how bad is dioxin?' (16 June, p. 1941) about the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) reassessment of the risks of dioxin, Jocelyn Kaiser [...]

This paper examines the relationship between scientific research and public policy. After explaining why the simple conversion of research into public law is unlikely, several factors are identified that can promote the use of research by public officials. Examples of use and non-use are cited from early childhood education, where empirical evidence on program effects is relatively strong. Some specific suggestions are offered for improving the connection between science and public policy.

We have used 19.9 million papers over 5 decades and 2.1 million patents to demonstrate that teams increasingly dominate solo authors in the production of knowledge. Research is increasingly done in teams across nearly all fields. Teams typically produce more frequently cited research than individuals do, and this advantage has been increasing over time. Teams now also produce the exceptionally high-impact research, even where that distinction was once the domain of solo authors. These results are detailed for sciences and engineering, social sciences, arts and humanities, and patents, suggesting that the process of knowledge creation has fundamentally changed.

Field research with vectors is an essential aspect of vector biology research and vector-borne disease prevention and control. This type of research, which brings experimental vector manipulations into endemic areas, can present risks to human populations. This paper seeks to stimulate a full discussion within the medical entomology community of the risks associated with vector field research. Such discussions will promote development of a consensus, among investigators, sponsoring agencies and the communities within which the work is done, so that appropriate steps can be taken to minimize and manage the risks, and adequate oversight can be maintained.

The article informs that immediately, the journal "Science's" editors recognized a submission of potentially explosive importance. A group in South Korea was describing 11 embryonic stem cell lines created from the DNA of ailing patients. Little did the journal's editors, or the nine outside researchers who would examine the paper with varying degrees of scrutiny, realize just how explosive the paper would be. The journal has also not instituted certain policies, such as requesting that authors detail their contributions to a paper or performing independent analyses of images, that some believe might deter fraud. The latter will change in January, when certain images in papers near acceptance will be enlarged and scrutinized by the journal staffers, a plan in place prior to the Hwang debacle. In fact, a number of the images purporting to be of distinct stem cells garnered from patient cells were neither distinct nor from patients. The cells had been extracted from fertilized embryos, the SNU committee alleged, and, in the published version now being analyzed, supposedly different colonies were duplicated or overlapping members of the same one.

Albert Einstein postulated the equivalence of energy and mass, developed the theory of special relativity, explained the photoelectric effect, and described Brownian motion in five papers, all published in 1905, 100 years ago. With these papers, Einstein provided the framework for understanding modern astrophysical phenomena. Conversely, astrophysical observations provide one of the most effective means for testing Einstein's theories. Here, I review astrophysical advances precipitated by Einstein's insights, including gravitational redshifts, gravitational lensing, gravitational waves, the Lense-Thirring effect, and modern cosmology. A complete understanding of cosmology, from the earliest moments to the ultimate fate of the universe, will require developments in physics beyond Einstein, to a unified theory of gravity and quantum physics., Einstein's 1905 theories form the basis for much of modern physics and astrophysics. In 1905, Einstein postulated the equivalence of mass and energy (1), which led Sir Arthur Eddington to [...]

Let me recapitulate. I am not happy with developments in the behavioral sciences. I wonder whether science does actually stand divorced from the intention, motive, and character of the scientist. I suspect that some of our current philosophies in science, whether so conceived or not, encourage and abet a science of the trivial. I believe we should recognize that, as epistemology, the empirical rule cannot stand alone. The great advances in science are associated with its grand conceptions even more than with its discoveries. We often mistakenly assume that the rule of objectivity has traditionally divided the character of science from that of the scientist. This is far from true. The objectivity of 18th- and 19th- century science was believed to be a function not so much of methodology and procedure as of the honesty and integrity of the scientist. Michael Faraday had this to say about the matter (3, p. 233): It puzzles me greatly to know what makes the successful philosopher [scientist]. Is it industry and perseverance, with a moderate proportion of good sense and intelligence? Is not a modest assurance or earnestness a requisite? Do not many fail because they look rather to the renown to be acquired than to the pure acquisition of knowledge, and the delight which the contented mind has in acquiring it for its own sake? I am sure I have seen many who would have been good and successful pursuers of science, and have gained themselves a high name, but that it was the name and the reward they were always looking forward to-the reward of the world's praise. In such there is always a shade of envy or regret over their minds, and I cannot imagine a man making discoveries in science under these feelings. As to Genius and its Power, there may be cases; I suppose there are. I have looked long and often for a genius for our own laboratory, but I have never found one. But I have seen many who would, I think, if they submitted themselves to a sound self-applied discipline of mind, have become successful experimental philosophers. Are these issues native only to behavioral science? Earlier, I laid at Skinner's door much of the blame for an unreasonable complacency regarding the disposition of modern behavioral science. In all fairness to Skinner, however, it is only correct to acknowledge that the same problem is evident in other areas of science. Skinner appears to be a spokesman, in the behavioral sciences, for one of those famous "Zeitgeists." Let me quote a series of observations by Paul Weiss, a biologist at the Rockefeller Institute, New York City, from a paper entitled "Experience and experiment in biology" (5): Without imagination one can contrive infinite variations of experimental set-ups, all of them novel, yet utterly uninteresting, inconsequential, insignificant. The mere fact that something has not been done or tried before is not sufficient reason for doing or trying it. . . . But is not scientific history full of instances of accidental discovery of the unexpected? True again, but he who does expect something will be on the alert even for the unexpected, while he who just ambles, looking for nothing in particular, is prone to miss even the obvious. . . . We see instruments turning from servants into tyrants, forcing the captive scientist to mass-produce and market senseless data beyond the point of conceivable usefulness-a modern version of the Sorcerer's Apprentice. . . . Finally, I recommend study of N. W. Storer's article "The coming changes in American science" (6). Storer, a sociologist at Harvard University, feels that prior to 1940 the basic currency in science was professional recognition. This in turn reinforced certain fundamental values-a high emphasis on communication; dedication of the individual and a tendency to work in small, select groups; a spurning of worldly gain and a proclivity for basic research. Today, professional recognition is being replaced by more common currencies-money, power, and worldly prestige. The result is a shift of values in science: numbers are no longer small or groups select; communication and professional recognition are viewed as means to gain money, power, and prestige rather than as ends in themselves; basic research is giving way to a kind of imposter with a thinly disguised commercial goal. I do not know how to resolve the issues in modern science. It seems to me we may be troubled by the embarrassments of too much success. Will we continue to succeed if we do not change our ways? Maybe, but not as magnificently I am sure as we could if we did change them. We cannot do anything about our numbers-nor would I want us to forswear all worldly possessions. We can examine critically and revise certain of our guiding philosophies. We can follow a suggestion of P. H. Abelson (7) and alter granting procedures so that institutions, as well as individuals, are given support. In the end, however, the major force for change resides in the minds and hearts of scientists who share a concern about science.

Discusses the discovery of two peaks at the Organization for Heavy-Ion Research laboratory in Germany, between 1983 and 1987. Number of experimental papers that were published on the phenomenon; View that the phenomenon was non-existent before 1983; Response of the discovers to claims of scientists from the decade of the 1990s; Detailed examination of the discovery, and experimentation into the phenomenon.

Basic and clinical researchers are finding ways to overcome the challenges to storing, analyzing, and sharing large collections of data. Techniques for capturing images of the human brain in action fill the pages of neuroscience journals with colorful pictures. It has prompted some neuroscientists to begin to store, organize, and share their brain-image data in easily accessible archives. Free access to this raw imaging data will enable researchers to use existing data to address several research questions. These databases can also serve as supplements to published papers. Imaging experiments generate three-dimensional representations of activity throughout the brain, but authors usually publish just a few cross-sectional brain views of the areas most relevant to their work. Access to the complete set of images generated by an experiment would allow those interested to select the views they wish to see and even change parameters that affect how the data are displayed.

Describes international trends in stem cell research. Papers highlighting the personality-switching abilities of stem cells in mice; Versatility and compatibility with adult bone marrow cells; Exploration of the potential uses of stem cells obtained from a variety of sources. INSET: Stem Cell Scorecard..

The article reflects on the misuse of the impact factor in determining the quality of research papers published in science journals. It discusses the criticisms about the use of this factor as a measure of the quality of individual research papers and explains the importance of the impact factor to the scientific community.

The article reports on the scientific misconduct shown by Rusi Taleyarkhan, the bubble fusion pioneer at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana. After two previous investigations, a third panel has cited Taleyarkhan for two cases of misconduct. He has first appeared to be controversial after he and his colleagues have reported that they have generated nuclear fusion with a simple tabletop setup in 2002. In a separate issue in early 2005, he has asked Adam Butt, a master's degree candidate in his laboratory to proofread the paper and check some of its numbers. The panel has insisted that his name is added as an author of the paper, which is submitted and accepted by the Nuclear Engineering and Design (NED).