Mixed Reactions to ‘No New Einstein’

To the Opinion piece by Lee Smolin I would add a note on a related problem with the present system: Editors of the principal journals reject manuscripts that challenge prevailing theories or fall outside mainstream research. This practice eliminates new ideas in fundamental physics and encourages routine articles in established fields. The editors protect themselves from many crackpot submissions, but also from the few potentially great concepts. An organization or journal that screens original articles specifically to identify great ideas would be a valuable asset.

Another part of the equation is that original ideas can come from physicists who, like me, are retired. We no longer have a career to worry about, and may have received graduate training in broader, more fundamental physics. We do not have the pressure of publishing papers. The search for new Einsteins should not be limited, as Smolin suggests, to a few young scientists who are set aside to develop creativity. There are greater numbers of retired scientists, many having proven their creativity in diverse fields.