A universal way of critiquing in science is recognized by most
scientists, which was followed in this case. Arata was given a chance to
respond, as he would be given by any journal when a paper critical of a
person's work is submitted. We can not know why he did not respond and
it does not matter. Hopefully, he will supply the missing information in
the future now that the need has been made clear.
Ed
Harry Veeder wrote:
On 11/7/2008 4:19 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Steven Krivit wrote:
I should also ask, have you submitted this to one of the journals in
which Arata has published his papers?
Nope.
The only thing we did was send it to Arata a couple of weeks ago, in
case he wanted to comment. He did not respond. We sent a copy to
Takahashi as well, but he had nothing to say either.
- Jed
Is Arata's lack of responsiveness a result of cultural differences or
personal differences?
In other words, is there a "Japanese way" of criticising?
Harry
