Paper "General geometry and Geometry of Electromagnetism" by S. S. Shahverdiyev was submitted to "Journal of Geometry and Physics" in July 2002. The editor (Prof. Marco Modugno) writes "The referees had a look at this preprint. They say that in principle the subject of your paper might fit the area of JGP, but the development does not reach the high standard of our journal. They say that nowadays a deeper approach can be achieved."
This kind of general statements like "it does not reach the high standard of our journal" can be made for any paper. Nobody knows what is the high standards. In our opinion any new results must be published in any journal. Nevertheless, let see what the author writes. "For the referees opinion I can say that their opinion is not clear for me. What they mean that "nowadays a deeper approach can be achieved." I do not know about such deeper approaches except the one proposed in the paper. All attempts to geometrize electromagnetism are well known. And all they suffer from different difficulties."
From the editor's message, it is not clear if that "deeper approaches" are already achieved or will be achieved? If they are already achieved why the referee does not refer to them?
Later, the editor agrees to submit the paper to a further review. To our surprise referee states "The paper deals with a possible geometric unification of classical gravitation and electromagnetism..."
Even nonspecialist can realize that there is no consideration of any kind of unification. The abstract of the paper is
It is interesting to read what the author writes to the editor.
"After reading the referee's report I checked if I have sent you a different paper. The referee's report is absolutely irrelevant to the submitted paper. In this paper there is no attempt to unify electromagnetism and gravitation... The referee's report is obscure so I did not understand anything from that report... In summary, I consider the referee's report as a misplaced report. It is misplaced with a report to a different paper. This makes me to assume that the submitted paper is not reviewed at all."
The editor writes "I am sorry, but no misplacements occurred. Actually, your paper has been examined by two independent referees; both of them said that your paper is certainly not suitable for JGP. So, in spite of the details of the report, we regret that we are unable to consider your paper for publication. We suggest to submit the paper to a more suitable journal."
But where is the report of the second referee? The editor has not send the second report yet.Later, the paper have been submitted to J. Math. Phys. Unfortunately, the same referee wrote almost the same report, stating that the author considered unification of electromagnetism and gravitation. We will put it on this web site as soon as the author transfers us his correspondence.
William Soles
e-mail:[email protected]
04/23/03
******************************************************************************************
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 16:05:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Shervgi Shahverdiyev" [email protected]
Subject: paper submission
To: [email protected]
Dear prof. Modugno,
I would like to submit paper
Title: "General Geometry and Geometry of
Electromagnetism"
Author: Shervgi Shahverdiyev
Comment:hep-th/0205224
for publication in Journal of Geometry Physics.
Please let me know if this paper is appropriate for your journal. If it is appropriate can I submit it electronically? It is available in ps, pdf, dvi and LaTeX formats.
I am looking forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely yours,
Shervgi.
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:39:47 +0100
To: "Shervgi Shahverdiyev" [email protected]
From: "Journal of Geometry and Physics" [email protected]
Subject: Re: paper submission
Dear Professor Shaheverdiyev,
We have downloaded your preprint from the archive. The referees had a look at this preprint. They say that in principle the subject of your paper might fit the area of JGP, but the development does not reach the high standard of our journal. They say that nowadays a deeper approach can be achieved.
Thank you for considering our journal. Yours sincerely,
Marco Modugno
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 19:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Shervgi Shahverdiyev" [email protected]
Subject: Re: paper submission
To: "Journal of Geometry and Physics" [email protected]
Dear prof. Modugno,
Thank you for your letter.
To be precise I did not expect that the referees reviewed the paper. At first I simply wanted to know if there is possibility of submitting it electronically.
For the referees opinion I can say that their opinion is not clear for me. What they mean that "nowadays a deeper approach can be achieved." I do not know about such deeper approaches except the one proposed in the paper.
All attempts to geometrize electromagnetism are well known. And all they suffer from different difficulties.
In the paper geometrization of Electromagnetism done exactly and there is no drawbacks. All the results are new and deserve publication. I would like to remind that the problem had 80 years of its unsolved history.
I understand that from the first glance it might seem to the referees that something was wrong with the paper.
I decided to send you the revised version of the paper in pdf format. It is attached. Please choose referees who do not write irrelevant reports.
Please visit my personal page www.geocities.com/shervgis and read about history of the problem. I think that this may be helpful for the referees too.
I am looking forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely yours,
Shervgi.
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 14:34:36 +0100
To: "Shervgi Shahverdiyev" [email protected]
From: "Journal of Geometry and Physics" [email protected]
Subject: Re: paper submission
Dear Professor Shahverdiyev,
Thank you for the pdf file of your paper. I am sending it to a referee.
Best regards.
Marco Modugno
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 11:41:19 +0100
To: "Shervgi Shahverdiyev" [email protected]
From: "Journal of Geometry and Physics" [email protected]
Subject: JGP N. 1580
Dear Professor Shahverdiyev,
We have submitted your paper "General geometry and geometry of electromagnetism" to a further referee. We regret that after consideration of his report, we cannot publish your paper.
Thank you for considering our journal.
Yours sincerely,
Marco Modugno
Referee's report
The paper deals with a possible geometric unification of classical
gravitation and electromagnetism, by considering a non linear
connection of spacetime defined as the sum of the Lorentzian
connection and the electromagnetic field.
The mathematical exposition of ideas is unclear and insufficently
precise in many respect. The paper does not take into account the
modern geometric language of non linear connections.
The main result is quite simple and could have achieved and explained
in a few lines by using a better mathematical language. On the other
hand, an analysis of the further geometric and physical consequences
of this statement are missing.
Thus, the paper is not suitable for JGP, because it does not reach
its standard.
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 20:35:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Shervgi Shahverdiyev" [email protected]
Subject: Re: JGP N. 1580
To: "Journal of Geometry and Physics" [email protected],
Dear prof. Modugno,
After reading the referee's report I checked if I have sent you a different paper. The referee's report is absolutely irrelevant to the submitted paper "General geometry and geometry of electromagnetism". In this paper there is no attempt to unify electromagnetism and gravitation. All the results of the paper is stated in the abstract so I will not repeat them here. The referee's report is obscure so I did not understand anything from that report. I can guess that the referee probably has read another paper to which I referred in the submitted paper. Here is my detailed comments.
>The paper deals with a possible geometric unification of classical
>gravitation and electromagnetism, by considering a non linear
>connection of spacetime defined as the sum of the Lorentzian
>connection and the electromagnetic field.
In the paper there is no attempt to unify electromagnetism and gravitation.
>The mathematical exposition of ideas is unclear and insufficently
>precise in many respect.
It is impossible to find out what does the referee mean in this sentence. What is unclear and not precise.
>The paper does not take into account the >modern geometric language of non linear connections.
What is the modern language of nonlinear connections and what the referee mean by nonlinear connections? Are they nonlinear in coordinates or velocities?
>The main result is quite simple and could have achieved and explained
>in a few lines by using a better mathematical language.
I do not know what does the referee mean by better mathematical language and what main result he talks about. In the paper there are three main results
1. It is shown that Electromagnetism cannot be geometrized in the framework of Riemannian geometry.
2. General Geometry containing Riemannian and Geometry underlying Electromagnetism as special cases is constructed.
3. Electromagnetism is derived from so called Geometry of electromagnetism completely and exactly.
Of what statement?
In summary, I consider the referee's report as a misplaced report. It is misplaced with a report to a different paper. This makes me to assume that the submitted paper is not reviewed at all.
I am looking forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely yours,
Shervgi.
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 12:39:14 +0100
To: "Shervgi Shahverdiyev" [email protected]
From: "Journal of Geometry and Physics" [email protected]
Subject: Re: JGP N. 1580
Dear Professor Shahverdiyev,
I am sorry, but no misplacements occurred. Actually, your paper has been examined by two independent referees; both of them said that your paper is certainly not suitable for JGP. So, in spite of the details of the report, we regret that we are unable to consider your paper for publication. We suggest to submit the paper to a more suitable journal.
Yours sincerely,
Marco Modugno
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 23:39:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Shervgi Shahverdiyev" [email protected]
Subject: Re: JGP N. 1580
To: "Journal of Geometry and Physics" [email protected]
Dear prof Modugno,
The referee's report was certainly irrelevant to the paper. Also, I wanted to know what the second referee wrote as a report to the paper. If you are in such a mood I can think about submitting the paper to a different journal. Please let me know what journal is more appropriate to the paper in your and the referees opinion. Because, referees of a different journal wrote irrelevant reports to my paper on string theory, my friends want to put them and my comment in a web page making them publicly available. If you do not mind we can put there the report we have received from you too.
I am looking forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely yours,
Shervgi.