A Caution to Theorists

Abstract

We reprint below, by permission, a letter we recently received from one of our referees, unaltered except for the deletion of a name. Written by a prominent theoretical physicist, it was sent as the cover letter with a manuscript he had reviewed. The case involved may have been extreme; but the point is one that we feel is too often forgotten."This note by --- is typical of many he has circulated (and published) in the last year. I would characterize them by the description `qualitative suggestions' or `thinking aloud.' Of course there are journals which do habitually publish such `qualitative remarks.' Perhaps a case can be made for this: Some people might say that the idea is after all the important thing, that such notes may stimulate other people to think about the suggestion and to test it quantitatively. My own conviction is that physics is a quantitative subject and that it should always be the responsibility of the author to back up his qualitative suggestions by quantitative calculations as far as he is able, even if only for the purpose of illustrating his remarks. I do not feel that The Physical Review or Physical Review Letters should give up its policy of restricting its pages to contributions with solid content. To accept such qualitative contributions would invite a flood of such notes, I believe, for it is obviously an easy thing to write inconclusive or speculative notes of this type about a variety of topics."