While I share your disappointment in the quality of the press release, Nature is by no means the bar for measuring significance. I've been both accepted and rejected by Nature, I've seen colleagues accepted and rejected by Nature, and I've found results published outside of Nature, Cell, Science more reproducible!
I fully agree. But I still think if you could show violation of 2nd maw of thermodynamics and potentially solving all of human energy needs, I believe you would submit it to nature (or science). At least as signaling for getting funding for your trillion dollar startup commercializing the result.
Comments
If the title of this post were true, the paper would have been published in nature instead.
While I share your disappointment in the quality of the press release, Nature is by no means the bar for measuring significance. I've been both accepted and rejected by Nature, I've seen colleagues accepted and rejected by Nature, and I've found results published outside of Nature, Cell, Science more reproducible!
I fully agree. But I still think if you could show violation of 2nd maw of thermodynamics and potentially solving all of human energy needs, I believe you would submit it to nature (or science). At least as signaling for getting funding for your trillion dollar startup commercializing the result.