Australian amateurs published in the Journal Nature today.

Quark (Trevor) · #1 07-07-2011, 11:13 AM

Hi All,

Today in Nature two separate papers on the current Giant Storm on Saturn were published in Nature, both papers feature Australian amateurs as co-authors. How about that!!!!!!!

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v475/n7354/full/nature10203.html
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v475/n7354/full/nature10205.html
Regards
Yep I'm excited.
Trevor

jjjnettie (Jeanette) · #2 07-07-2011, 11:16 AM

Excellent! Thanks for the heads up Trev.

Dennis · #3 07-07-2011, 11:24 AM

Congratulations Trevor Barry (Quark), Anthony Wesley, John Hotershall and S. Buda who all hail from Australia. I hope I haven’t missed anyone!

Cheers

Dennis

michaellxv (Michael) · #4 07-07-2011, 11:38 AM

Congratulations to all involved, an excellent effort.

SkyViking (Rolf) · #5 07-07-2011, 11:43 AM

Congratulations to all, that's awesome!

renormalised (Carl) · #6 07-07-2011, 12:04 PM

Good stuff

Keep up the good work, guys

Suzy · #7 07-07-2011, 12:08 PM

Wow, what a proud moment.
Congratulations to all involved.

CraigS · #8 07-07-2011, 12:13 PM

Well done guys !

Congratulations !

Cheers

AstralTraveller (David) · #9 07-07-2011, 12:17 PM

Wow! I know some people who have had papers in Nature and some who have tried and failed. I shared a room with someone whos paper was rejected as not being quite significant enough (though I can't understand why) so I've seen the work that goes into even getting considered. Trust me kiddies - it's harder than it looks. It's obvious that the term 'amateur' astronomer refers only to their income status.

I'll be mentioning this to a few professional scientists.

renormalised (Carl) · #10 07-07-2011, 12:30 PM

Nature has a reputation for being rather elitist and snobbish, David. A lot of new ideas coming from young researchers never get published there (or didn't in the past) because the editors of the journal were known for their ultra-rigid, orthodox scientific views. Some people didn't get published simply because the editors didn't like them and in a number of cases had their noses put out of joint by some people. The editor in chief at one stage was an old timer who was particularly pig headed and oafish when it came to who was published or not....this was back in the 70's to mid 90's. Some old fart from Oxford or Cambridge Uni, he was.

Ric · #11 07-07-2011, 12:39 PM

Congrats to all concerned.

Excellent work for sure.

DavidU (Dave) · #12 07-07-2011, 01:28 PM

A big pat on the back for the fellas. Well done !

iceman (Mike) · #13 07-07-2011, 01:35 PM

Well done to the Aussies! Great news.

gary · #14 07-07-2011, 01:44 PM

Thanks Trev. Well done and another great showcase for the co-operation between
full-time professional astronomers and those whose don't come from that
background but who nevertheless make considerable contributions.

[1ponders] (Paul) · #15 07-07-2011, 04:09 PM

Well done guys

Top effort!

RobF (Rob) · #16 07-07-2011, 07:46 PM

Congrats Trever, Anthony and all for such a milestone. You have every right to be very proud. Way to go!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by renormalised

Nature has a reputation for being rather elitist and snobbish, David. A lot of new ideas coming from young researchers never get published there (or didn't in the past) because the editors of the journal were known for their ultra-rigid, orthodox scientific views. Some people didn't get published simply because the editors didn't like them and in a number of cases had their noses put out of joint by some people. The editor in chief at one stage was an old timer who was particularly pig headed and oafish when it came to who was published or not....this was back in the 70's to mid 90's. Some old fart from Oxford or Cambridge Uni, he was.

I guess in a perfect world it would be good if all papers could be pulished in any suitable journal Carl, but the reality is that top flight journals like NEJM, Nature, etc really can afford to pick and choose what they publish - because they're the best.

AstralTraveller (David) · #17 07-07-2011, 08:11 PM

Take a look at Fig 3 in the Fischer et al. paper. There are images by C. Go (sorry, I should know his first name), Anthony Wesley and the Cassini spacecraft. Seeing them side by side makes you realise just how good the terrestrial images are.

By my count there are 31 amateurs on the author list. I presume they are all there for their images, especially as none of them is credited in the 'Contributors' section. So not only do these papers highlight the quality of 'amateur' imagers it also shows what a co-operative effort science is.

I didn't realise until I got home that most of you aren't seeing the whole article. In the full version, apart from the text, the figures are larger and can be downloaded as a powerpoint slide. All very nice but at $US32 a pop I wonder how many takers there will be?

renormalised (Carl) · #18 08-07-2011, 12:51 AM

That's why the rest of the guys here rely on us, Dave, to get the articles...since we have access to them through our respective unis.

ballaratdragons (Ken) · #19 08-07-2011, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AstralTraveller

. . . There are images by C. Go (sorry, I should know his first name),

Christopher Go

Paul Haese · #20 08-07-2011, 09:41 AM

Well done guys, I don't contribute to the IPOW site so I am not in the list. Nature is very prestigious, my sister has had an article or two published for her work in cancer pathology in the past. So I too know how hard it is to get into the journal.

Well done guys, being co-author is for the images though, not writing the article.