Physicist Loses Degree for Data Falsification 426
cheese_wallet writes "Jan Hendrik Schoen was stripped of his doctoral degree by his university for fabricating data in his research. From the article: 'Schoen, now 34, was fired by Bell Laboratories in New Jersey in September 2002 after an outside review committee concluded that he made up or altered data 16 times while working in the hot fields of superconductivity and molecular electronics'."
The merits of pHDs (Score:4, Interesting)
If pHD is meant to be a sign of knowledge in the subject then this shows i surely
the counter example show this is not the case.
I mean that You can't strip someone of knowledge. It's true that he may have faked data but he certainly had
detailed knowledge of the field and I strongly suspect his thesis did not contain any errors. His thesis would have
demanded more critical examination than a research paper. So i think it's fair to say that he earned that pHD
Is it right for a discredited man to have his pHD removed? Is it right that popular opinion can determine how
qualified someone is to make a statement in their field?
These are questions I find hard to answer.
Simon.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
If he really knew his stuff he'd not have had to fit the results to his conclusion. He would have explained how his original hypothesis was wrong, and used the correct data to explain what actually happened.
I think he demonstrated just how little knowledge he actually has.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:4, Insightful)
If publishing a paper the "hey the star trek like replicators can exist" is way more career enhancing than "i thought star treck replicators could work, but i was wrong"
Cheating is not a sign of someones lack of skill. If you took that approach you'd have to Micheal Schumacher, Senna and Prost are a poor racing driver due to trying to knock other racing drivers off the road, infact they have something like 12 F1 world championships between them. If that doesn't prove that cheating comes from the desire to win not the lack of skill nothing does.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree that if they were so sure of being the best, they could surely have done it the 'proper' way, and I think in the majority of races they won on skill, not by cheating.
I agree that in some circumstances, the urge to succeed overrules the will to play fair, especially when the reward is sufficiently large. I don't suppose anyone has not cheated on something at some point of their lives. The difference is that success for most people is built on what they do 95% of the time, and only 5% when 'help' is required.
Personally I think that falsifying evidence/data is a BAD thing, regardless of whether it's a scientist or an officer of the law or a financial analyst. Making conclusions based on faulty input is going to lead to trouble for someone later down the line, and that's something I woudn't want on my conscience.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
Employers don't want walking encyclopedias they want projects finished on time and on budget for their clients. What I am trying to say is a degree is more than a cert in knowledge it is a cert in the abilities to get the job done and done right. A professional and ethical attitude and behavior.
please excuse any typos and such. It is very late and I have had very numbers of beers
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are hiring an engineer, generally, you want a certified engineer, a degree is not enough (or even strictly necessary). You want someone who has passed the local (regional, whatever) professional engineering exams, and is certified by the local professional engineers association. THAT is an engineer. Someone who just has a degree in engineering is someone who studies engineering, but not an engineer.
Similarly, if you want a lawyer, you want someone who has passed the local Bar exam, and is recognized by all the other lawyers (and the legal system) as a lawyer.. NOT simply someone who has a PhD in Law.
The same goes for Doctors, etc.
There is NO WAY a university can know that a person will, later in life, cheat. If the person is competent enough to get through the process at the university, then the university should stand by their original decision. The person's own record will speak for itself.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:3, Insightful)
Just imagine the scores of researchers and man hours devoted to tracking down the problem.
It would be like not firing Jayson Blair of the New York Times for making up stories.
I think it's highly appropriate for this guy to lose his doctorate.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you are missing the point. He wasn't stripped of the degree because he pissed someone(s) off through his fraud. He was stripped of his degree (pending his appeal) because he faked his data and that reflects badly on the institution that bestowed that degree, and by extension, cheapens others who have degrees from that institution. Not that I agree that its right, but that's the logic.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:3, Insightful)
You're saying that it's a bad practice to punish someone for fraud? What if he had falsified the data on his income-tax return? Should he get to keep the money?
More importantly, and bigger than a single institution, we don't want th
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:3, Interesting)
Except that this begs the question: what if demons actually made the person sick? By his a priori rejection of the possibility, the scientist misses what really happened in such a case. I'm not saying that demons actually cause illness, mind you; I'm simply addressing your example.
The existence and operations of the cosmos and of man must be explainable in purely naturalistic terms because only naturalistic explana
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean that You can't strip someone of knowledge
Indeed but if you are fabricating data you are proving that you didn't have that knowledge in the first place.
I strongly suspect his thesis did not contain any errors
Fabricated data is very likely to mean data he made up = errors
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:2)
>Fabricated data is very likely to mean data he made up = errors
RTFA. The university is not suspecting that he cheated in his thesis. He has only been cheating at Bell Labs.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Informative)
Um, no... (Score:2)
This seems like a rather underhanded attempt on the part of the school to save face for handing out a phd to someone w
Re:Um, no... (Score:3, Insightful)
A degree isn't something you should be able to take away, unless it's proven you cheated to get the degree
This is total BS. Read the text of your degree and you'll notice a few things. "University Name" admits "Student Name" to the degree of "Whatever" with all the rights, privileges, duties and responsibilities thereof.
It can be very easily, and quite rightly, argued that faking data violates the duties and responsibilities of his degree. You can't have the one without the other. If he wants to benefit
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
Not quite the same. What he would stripped of then would be his license to practice medicine, not his M.D.
I mean that You can't strip someone of knowledge
Indeed but if you are fabricating data you are proving that you didn't have that knowledge in the first place.
I disagree. The knowledge he received his PhD for the "knowledge" he fabricated are two different things.
Oh, don't get me wrong. His scientific reputation is, and should be, in the toilet permanently. He should never work in academia again. Period.
But trying to withdraw a PhD sends a misleading message about what a PhD means. It's a certification of having fulfilled certain requirements, not a grant of endorsement.
We cannot pretend to alter the past, and say someone did not accomplish what they did, even if we later decide we do not like him. It sets the troubling precedent that we may strip people of their academic credentials at will. That's a bad idea, even our reasons for doing so would be good ones in this particular case.
They should have stuck with an announcement censuring him.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:3, Insightful)
Wouldn't one of those requirements have been collecting real data?
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
Frankly, I agree wholeheartedly that the university should have publicly dissociated themselves from him, censured him, held a big press conference where they denounced him as a big fat jerk, taken away his library card, egged his house, given his email address to the Spammer's Union Local #97, sent him dead flowers, whatever.
But a PhD is a certificate of an accomplishment. It doesn't make sense to say it's rescinded unless it turns out that his actual dissertation had falsified data.
Frankly, I feel somewhat sorry for him. Reputation is everything in academia. We have a status system that makes Hollywood look like a socialist commune by comparison. I am just starting my own scientific career, and I can tell you, when you are considered "hot talent", you are treated quite well, but the pressure to produce is tremendous. Everyone is expecting great things of you, and when the promising lead you were chasing doesn't pan out, it can feel like *you* have failed.
Masters = mastery, PhD = contribution to field (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the part that is unclear to me. Did the uni actually find that he had falsified data on his dissertation? Even if not, I think the point could be made that the later falsification cancels out the previous contribution, especially if much time and resources were devoted to testing and reproducing his claims. In that case he actually hurt the field and impeded progress
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, you don't know what you are talking about. You defend your thesis based upon the results you have gotten during research. This person appears to have defended is thesis based upon falsefied results. Of course he should be stripped of is PhD.
He is not the first, nor the last person to have done this, be it PhD thesis or not.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:2)
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Informative)
Faking data is not to be taken lightly - scientists rely on the quality of previous work. If several other scientists have wasted years of their time because of this, that's a lot of damage done.
Some links: The article in german [tagesschau.de] and Google's attempt at translating it [google.com]
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Informative)
For example, the RWTH Aachen does this. Here's [rwth-aachen.de] the relevant text (Promotionsordnung der RWTH, see 19, "Verlust des Doktorgrades") Sorry, German only.
Re:The perils of machine translation (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:2)
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Interesting)
But you can strip away the university's confidence in an individual thereby making the degree invalid.
See that little stamp on the corner of your degree? Thats merely saying the University Council thinks that you're good enough for the degree in question. The uni can also decide to take away their approval and you're left with a worthless bit of paper.
A degree is merely a university's endorsement of your knowledge. Nothing more, nothing less.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Funny)
A degree is merely a university's endorsement of your knowledge. Nothing more, nothing less.
I always thought it was a receipt for $120,000 paid to my university (i.e. the most expensive piece of paper I'll ever buy)
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Funny)
I take it you don't have a marriage certificate then ;-)
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
A PhD is a Philosophical Doctorate. It says that you can think intelligently and help progress the knowledge of mankind.
Is it right for a discredited man to have his pHD removed?
It most certainly is. If it has been proven that he's fudging scientific data, then he's clearly not helping to progress the knowledge of mankind, and is indeed hindering progress. False answers to justify hypothesis is never right. Anyone who plagerizes material or makes up their own science has no right to be called a doctor of philosophy. It's about using your knowledge, not about bragging rights for having been in school for n years.
Is it right that popular opinion can determine how qualified someone is to make a statement in their field?
Popular opinion? You mean a review board at the institution which granted him the degree? Did you even read the article? It wasn't about public outcry or bad publicity. "A committee of 12 professors at his alma mater in southern Germany decided after its own review to strip Schoen of the doctorate in physics he earned in 1998." It was his peers who revoked his degree, not the public.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:3, Insightful)
So if he
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
Which is not much. Nowadays, there is such a number of research papers (most of which don't actually contain earth-shattering results) that they are not actually examined with that much detailed attention. Reviewers pay more attention to stylistic aspects (is it readable? understandable without too much efforts? are my buddies, who did research in the same field appropriately credited in the bibliography?) than to contents.
Same thing goes for thesis, and I've heard of a thesis where the candidate "managed" to prove that sin(x)+cos(x)=1. Which is obviously false (... it lacks the square...), but this error escaped the attention of the doctorand's of his adviser and of his reviewers!
Thesis are rather large (> 100 pages), and reviewers have to read them in a limited amount of time (in France, it's just 2 or 3 weeks in bad cases, and some reviewers may be on the boards of more than one thesis!), so it's entirely plausible that even relatively gross errors go unnoticed.
And probably the only reason why this guy got caught was that his papers were of the rare kind that did indeed contain earth-shattering results (high temperature superconductors) which drew the attention of the crowd. If "exposed" papers contain such errors, how much worse must be the situation with the many dull and uninteresting papers?
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:4, Insightful)
if someone is writing papers of little importance, or that do not contain any really shocking info, then you are probably safe (assuming you reference everyone who ever breathed the subject so that no one gets a feather up their ass and tries slandering you). so thats what most grad students do, because they dont want to spend 10 years getting their PhD.
but this process doesnt end once someone has gotten their PhD...in fact this constant fear of being found "uncredible" has caused scientific research to become marred by political bs. fellows like this guy from the article are meant to be examples for everyone else, and to solidify this notion through fear.
Oh, come on! ;-) (Score:2)
In The Real Life (TM) degrees are needed to a) make yourself/your parents proud and b) get employment in certain places/positions which do require this IF they like you otherwise.
Do you think anyone will be hiring THE guy any time soon on a position like this (even if he would formally have his degree)?
It is more of a sym
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:4, Informative)
The Dr.rer.net (Doctorus rerum naturae) he got from the University of Constance. And this university has written down in their regulariae, that a Dr. can be removed, if the person who got the title awarded, proved itself unworthy to have the title. Mr. Schoen proved unworthy in his scientific life, faking or completely making up results, erasing all evidence (There is no raw data available from his experiments, he erased it 'because space was running out on his computer') and knowingly publishing false results.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:3, Insightful)
But can you strip the moderators of their ability to mark shit like this +5 (well, maybe "Funny", but it was "Interesting" when I posted this)?
I mean, really... you can't have RTFA'd. The guy most likely did massive damage to himself, his university's reputation, the Scientific community that relied upon his results, and possibly his employer.
A PHD is given in exchange for the proper work done, knowledge demonstrated, and contribution made to the rele
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Informative)
The university he got his degree from was the University of Konstanz [uni-konstanz.de] in Germany. Here's a German article [spiegel.de] (babelfished [altavista.com]) on the whole thing. The educational laws of the German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg state that a PhD title can be removed if "through his behavior at a later point in in his career, the owner has proven unworthy of the title."
From Bell Labs' summary [lucent.com], we can find more about what he was charged with:
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:5, Insightful)
Probably something like the -log [deuterium].
Ph.D. = doctor of philosophy.
Re:The merits of pHDs (Score:2, Informative)
How can they revoke a degree...? (Score:5, Interesting)
Even Dr. Evil gets to keep the "Dr." in his name, regardless of how many meteors he's tried to pull towards the earth with tractor beams.
Re:How can they revoke a degree...? (Score:5, Insightful)
This guy was an extremely intelligent man; I work in his field and could not hope to understand the problems well enough to be able to fabricate data that fooled the academic community for years, and then provide a perfectly reasonable (and quite sexy!) explanation. You have got to remember he published this in the top journals in the world; their peer review process is extremely rigorous. He some how managed to work out what we wanted to hear, and produce the data to give us the answer. It is just a shame his efforts and ability was so misguided.
Re:How can they revoke a degree...? (Score:5, Insightful)
If your thesis is based on forged results, the merit of your contribution may be nothing, or even negative. Moreover, it casts doubt on your ability to carry out research. Honesty is a necessary requisite of doing research, and your reputation counts for a lot in academia.
Your highschool diploma means that you have completed all your highschool courses. If someone were to find that you passed all your courses by shoulder-surfing or bribing the teachers or whatever, I fully expect that the institution should be able to revoke your degree.
If you drive drunk (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How can they revoke a degree...? (Score:4, Interesting)
In Germany a doctorate is not a degree in the same sense as a diploma. A diploma allows you to enter certain professions related to that degree. A doctorate, however, does not grant such rights.
The university law of the state of Baden-Württemberg (where he got his degree) says that any degree can be revoked if a person acts "unworthy" afterwards. It is important to note that Schön did not manipulate his doctoral thesis but the descision was based on the forgeries he committed later. However, he can sue against the decision.
This is bad for the university... (Score:5, Insightful)
I suspect the university is simply grandstanding. "We are ethically pure, so much so that we rescind doctorates from people who later on turn to the dark side."
On the other hand, it probably feels good to pull the rug out from under this guy.
-Adam
Re:This is bad for the university... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This is bad for the university... (Score:3, Insightful)
The university has a moral responsibility to ensure that graduates respect the rules and ethics of scientific research. If this is not the case, I find it perfectly reasonable to revoke someone's PhD.
Re:This is bad for the university... (Score:3, Insightful)
The Ph.D. is a statement that you are qualified to do scientific research. Schoen has demonstrated that he isn't, and therefore, one can argue that his Ph.D. was awarded in error.
Whether he actually falsified data on his Ph.D. or not is secondary to that analysis: even if he didn't falsify data in his Ph.D., he still has demonstrated r
Re:This is bad for the university... (Score:3, Interesting)
Only 16 times??? (Score:4, Funny)
So when... (Score:4, Interesting)
Indeed. A very good question. (Score:4, Informative)
Academia is far from as pure as the public might imagine. It is troubled with the same problems as the rest of society.
For those who don't know of him, George Ricaurte is the NIDA [nih.gov] scientist which recently had to retract a severly flawed paper on MDMA neurotoxcity [mdma.net]. Part of the problem is that NIDA is in the business of sustaining the War On Some Drugs, a multi billion business [drugsense.org]. It is in their interest to sustain funding for research that confirms the basis for this "war". Researchers which come up with results that are contrary to this cause (ie. which debunks common myths of toxicity and other perceived dangers) are committing career suicide.
The MDMA neurotoxcity paper by Ricaurte came under heavy fire for flawed methods when it was first released (mostly from partisan researchers with nothing to lose). The paper has since been used to push anti-MDMA legislation (like the RAVE act), both in the US and in other countries. The main reason the paper was retracted was the discovery that Ricaurte and his team hadn't even used MDMA in their animal toxcity experiments, but a completely different chemical. A small error (as Ricaurte claims) or evidence of very foul play? The company which supplied the chemicals claim that such a mixup is absurd and extremely unlikely.
Still, this has only put a small dent in Ricaurte's reputation, since he is working for the "good cause". The science behind it doesn't seem to be important, it's the underlying goals. He is now involved in new NIDA research with the same goals as before, to "prove" that MDMA is an inheritly dangerous and evil chemical.
For more information about the retraction, see the retraction itself [mdma.net] and the response from MAPS [maps.org].
Science is the a very good method to make the world understandable, but the public would do well to be a tad more sceptical and understand that a scientific degree is no automatic proof of pure intentions or valid results, there is almost always bias. Especially when there are large sums of money involved.
A Degree is a symbol of Trustworthiness (Score:4, Insightful)
If he claims to have the doctorate, and someone calls to verify, the Uni can say 'we revoked it for he does suck'.
Dry-labbing (Score:5, Funny)
If i were older than the guy I'd be saying something along the lines of "What are they teaching kids these days?"
Re:Dry-labbing (Score:3, Insightful)
I would not fudge data with any equipment that was not my own. I probably still wouldn't, but... If by chance the prof is giving you equipment that he knows is dodgy and is expecting you to (properly) mark down t
Re:Dry-labbing (Score:3, Funny)
As a professor (and former grad student)... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now if you got the degree through academic malfeasance, that's a different matter -- but I checked the article and all of this guy's sins seem to have been post-graduation.
Re:As a professor (and former grad student)... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:As a professor (and former grad student)... (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreed, but.
Nothing definitive in the article, but the overall sense of it seems that it would be unlikely for him to start falsifying data when he got to Bell Labs. I am assuming that his work at Bell Labs was a continuation of the work he did in preparation for the degree.
FYI (Score:5, Informative)
Since the PHD is a certificate that you are able to conduct scientific research, falsifying your data would certainly contradict this ability.
Re:FYI (Score:2)
As to the prove, their is a commitee that will decide if they can and will revoke the PhD, this has nothing to do with the jurisdiction, it has something to do with ethics. I guess they would also revoke a second PhD if he had one. And I guess he won't be able to get a second PhD in the same field after the revoc
strange (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that I'll never understand what is the purpose for data falsification. Every, I say EVERY, scientist knows, that experiment that yields unexpected/bad results is a GOOD experiment. It gives new insight into how things work, it forces you to revise your model and change it. It leads you to change your model into a better one, and also it helps you in learning how to conduct scientifically correct experiments. Without failures and mistaken indeas humanity wouldn't learn anything.
Lust for changing results moves science BACKWARD instead of forward. is of course childish, on no-one benefits from that, even the lier does not benefit.
sorry about the rant, but I was really upset, and had to say that.
Re:strange (Score:2, Funny)
Or, in the case of undergraduates, it means your instruments weren't properly calibrated, or you were jiggling the table with your knee, or you messed up the experiment in any of a thousand ways.
Re:strange (Score:3, Informative)
You are right, of course
Re:strange (Score:4, Interesting)
There's a novel written by Carl Djerassi called "Cantor's Dilemma" [djerassi.com]. It touches the subject of motives behind data falsification, and also it is the very good literature.
alternative careers (Score:5, Funny)
Re:alternative careers (Score:3, Funny)
Degrees with an expiration date (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Degrees with an expiration date (Score:3, Informative)
Exactly. He was manipulating results. I don't have all the details in my head but reportedly, he used identical graphs to visualize results... problem was, there were very different tests which could not have produced those same results.
Do degrees "expire"?
Not AFAIK. But a academic degree basically shows your ability to
Doesn't this guy know... (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, and please don't tell my physics teacher I said that...
Data falsification in science is useless (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason why it's foolish to do so is:
1. The premise of experimental oberved science is that it should be reproducible. At some point of time - and especially if your work gets noticed - someone, somewhere will duplicate your experimental coniditions and figure out that the results aren't there.
2. This is more of a personal thing, but the fun of research is really the process not the results. If you're in it for the fame alone, buddy, you're in the wrong job!
When does (Score:3, Insightful)
How about business administration? (Score:2, Interesting)
How many of them lost their academic status?
I rest my case.
a philosophical point/counterpoint (Score:4, Insightful)
So its acedemia? (Score:4, Insightful)
The scary thing is what happens when your PhD advisor happend to do his papers on this subject.
A reverse scenario (Score:5, Interesting)
So of course, about 10 years later, the dome starts to crack. The architecture faculty digs up the guy's thesis, he was proven correct, and they award him the PhD he sought, and conduct repairs according to his recommendations.
Now there was only one detail missing in this story as I heard it, what happened to the guy who designed the original plans? If there was any justice, he would have his PhD revoked.
doubt it (Score:3, Interesting)
I like to believe Civil Engineering is a field that tries its best to bridge the gap between RL and science. Its really really hard to predict a structure's behaviour, and even more so to predict how that behaviour will change over time. Civil Engineering deals with alot of uncertanties, so anything one says about the expected behaviour of a given structure should always be considered as a "rough estimate", nothi
Re:A reverse scenario (Score:3, Informative)
The building is Kresge Auditorium. [greatbuildings.com] It was designed by Eero Saarinen, one of the most famous architects of the 20th century. He also designed (e.g.) the St. Louis Arch [greatbuildings.com] and the TWA Terminal at JFK Airport. [bluffton.edu]
A somewhat biased but detailed view of Kresge Auditorium is available here [psu.edu]. As you can see, no PhD theses are mentioned.
The building's roof is a single thin concrete shell. The original design was very ambitious, such that
Publication pressure: publish or perish (Score:5, Interesting)
While this person commited a "crime against science" that cannot be justified in any way, I think two comments are in order.
First, there is an enormous pressure to publish in the academic world: the phrase publish or perish is heard a lot. The main reason for this is, that at a certain moment, people higher up in the management and funding chain wanted to know whether their money is spent well (or, equivalently: whom to give the money to).
So, what people do to grade the quality or research, is to count publications. Generally, this count is weighted by the "impact factor" of the journal you publish in (if you publish in Science or Nature, the impact is much higher than when publishing in the Local Journal on BlaBla). Now, counting publications is of course a hideous way to grade science. But it gets worse: a whole new field of research (that is not worthy of the name) has been founded: Citation Analysis. Basically, a database is made of who references whom, and the quality-estimate for your research is based on that.
Now, since the amount of money a professor gets depends on the publication-"score", he will put pressure on his people to publish. Again: publish or perish. This has given rise to the practice in which to try to smear one or two ideas over two or three publications: two or three low-impact pubs score higher than one medium-impact one. This, in turn, has given rise to a many many (very) low-pact journal that, frankly, contain mostly rubish; only to satisfy the bean/pub-counters and the funders.
All this, is in no way whatsoever, reason enough to falsify data. But to all the people that started shouting about "hey, this guy broke the scientific rules so he's a piece of shit", I'd like to say: This publication pressure, rather than the person's ethics, likely is the problem.
The second point I'd like to make is about the stripping of the doctoral degree: Even though it might be just, it's not necessary whatsoever; This guy is not getting a job in science anymore, degree or not. There are two things that spell doom on any scientific career: Faking, and Plagiarism. That's the end of your career, regardsless of the number of degrees you hold.
Re:Publication pressure: publish or perish (Score:4, Insightful)
long day in the fields... (Score:4, Funny)
Better to bust your ass all day in the fields of superconductivity than the mines of gravity or the factory of photons...
(It's 6:45am and i haven't gone to bed yet. be kind)
Tattoo "loser" on his forehead, too (Score:4, Insightful)
Being incorrect in your hypothesis is a step that takes you toward your ultimate goal. If you can't grok that, you're in the wrong line of work.
You can't just forge ahead in the face of data to the contrary. That's the dark ages. You may as well start believing that the sun orbits around the earth purely because it suits you for it to do so.
Bell Labs should sue him for fraud in addition to firing him. It's disgusting. It's an insult to humanity.
Kick his ass, then send him to some country where they like pseudoscience.
Re:Tattoo "loser" on his forehead, too (Score:3, Interesting)
Admittedly, we're running out of them, but I'm sure there's probably somewhere in the southern hemisphere that's just aching for cutting edge physics that just can't be replicated outside of one man's notebooks.
My doctorate (Score:3, Interesting)
Ok... "true" story here: I got my doctorate degree from the once fine institution, the University of Massachusetts (no longer, thanks to our awful Republican governor... that's a different point).
Once I got the diploma itself, I did the following. I printed out my name (David Q. Mertz) in almost-but-not-quite the same Olde-English-ish font that was on the diploma from the school. I printed on white paper, rather than the beige of the school document; and used temporary tape to attach my trimmed printout onto the face of the document.
At my local copy shop, I made a color photocopy of the diploma, making sure that you could discern the color difference between the source paper stocks on a moderately close examination (but perhaps not at a passing glance). Then I sent the school diploma to my dad, who is somewhat sentimental about such things. And framed the copy in a frame, under glass... and that copy is hanging on my wall, right here in my home office.
I kinda wish, from time to time, that I wasn't a freelance at-home writer... then I could hang my framed diploma at a work place or the like. Ah well...
Physicist Loses Degree for Data Falsification (Score:3, Funny)
Well, I wouldn't want to lose my Degree for Data Falsification either... because then I wouldn't be able to go around making right data, well, wrong. Maybe it's a degree field dealing with random numbers or encryption?
Second thought was: "He probably got his degree from one of those d1pl0ma spammers..."
The university was right (Score:3, Insightful)
The PhD is more than just a 'rating' given to a person on completion of the required work, but is a 'stamp of quality' given to the person by the uni, and a direct reflection on the uni.
If they were to just laugh and not do anything, it could (and should) affect how others view the 'quality' of a doctorate from that institution. Their 'correcting' their bestowal of the doctorate on this person by removing their 'stamp of quality' should also reflect on how people view the quality of a doctorate they issue.
One last thing I'd like to mention is that my opinion(s) [slashdot.org] from the original SlashDot article [slashdot.org] in 2002 haven't changed.
Tomas
Based on the previous story... (Score:3, Insightful)
What if was in the field of pharmaceuticals and the data would be falsified? What would you do if you, family, friend, etc. were subjected to a medication which was passed as a product because of falsified data and severe problems developed? (How early would you go to wait in line to be the first one to sue?)
Along the same lines, what if your "doctor" cheated on a critical test, boards, etc. and you (et al) were diagnosed and treated incorrectly (and painfully)? What if your "mechanic" managed to get a job (by whatever means) and something was either overlooked or he mistakenly broke something which he didn't mean to do because of incompetence?
It can't matter in some situations and not in others.
We had a friend in high school who lacked practically all common sense. He wasn't retarded, feeble, or whatever adjective(s) you want to use. Working the usual fast-food joints, problems would ensue. Drop a piece of meat on the flooor, "oops!", pick it up, and finish making the sandwich. Accidentally drop plastic-handled tongs in the french-fryer. "Jack, where are the tongs?" "oops!". The grease melted the plastic and the plastic ended up clogging some of the conduits. Time to bring in a repair crew, yank everything out & figure out what happened & repair it. Not a cheap process.
"Not that big a deal."
It doesn't matter in some fields and not in others
Re:This is news worthy of a slashdot article? (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, it probably merits a mention due to the nature of what the guy did. His work was exciting, the results he posted were exciting - exciting enough to dupe a lot of very qualified people. How many times was he published in Nature?
When the falsification claims surfaced there were an awful lot of mightily disappointed (and angry) people out there. Speaking personally, I'm happy that his Doctorate has been stripped, and I'm glad that someone took the time to post it here, as otherwise I don't think I'd hav
Re:This is news worthy of a slashdot article? Yes! (Score:5, Informative)
AT THE height of his career in 2001, Hendrik Schön was producing papers at the remarkable rate of one every eight days" New Scientist: With hindsight, it was a hell of a lot of papers [t-online.de]
The Hoaxes of Jan Hendrik Schoen [t-online.de]
This is news worthy of TWO slashdot articles... (Score:4, Informative)
The bad Dr. Schön (aka Schoen) and his forged data were discussed on /. two years ago [slashdot.org], when Bell Labs sacked him for the same reason.
Re:This is news worthy of a slashdot article? Yes! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is news worthy of a slashdot article? (Score:5, Funny)
If he moved to politics, he'd probably have a successful career.
Re:This is news worthy of a slashdot article? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:This is news worthy of a slashdot article? (Score:3, Insightful)
Actual background information (Score:2)
Comprehensive background information [t-online.de]
Re:Embarrasment, not valid revocation... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Embarrasment, not valid revocation... (Score:3, Interesting)
However long before this appeared I had a discussion with german colleagues, who said that in Germany a PhD is *also* an indication of moral worth. For example, people with criminal convictions cannot get PhDs
I understand all the
Re:No big deal... (Score:3, Informative)