Belgian priest Lemaitre apparently got the idea, which “underpins modern cosmology,” two years before Edwin Hubble: The International Astronomical Union (IAU) recommends that the law now be known as the Hubble–Lemaître law. In the 1920s, the Belgian described in French how the expansion of the Universe would cause galaxies to move away from Earth at speeds proportional to their distance. He did this two years earlier than US astronomer Edwin Hubble used his own data to establish the same relationship. Of the 4,060 astronomers who cast votes (out of around 11,072 eligible members) 78% were in favour of the change.Elizabeth GIbney, “Belgian priest recognized in Hubble law name change” at Nature These name changes, like the downgrading of Pluto to Read More ›

Not in principle, according to Ann Gauger, of the Biologic Institute. A reader wrote to ask, “I was just wondering why some fellows at Discovery believe in ID but still hold to common descent. Science knows that the genetic code is not universal.” From her reply: I first need to make clear that living things can be the product both of intelligent design and of common descent. If the designer chose to guide the process of gradual change from species to species, that would be both common descent and intelligent design. In other words, intelligent design theory does not require that common descent is false. Neither does intelligent design require that common descent is true. All that intelligent design theory Read More ›

Dark matter was first theorized a century ago and yet “ super-sensitive underground labs that can detect a particle just one-trillionth of one-trillionth of a square centimeter” haven’t found it. Some now think that the problem is that two different approaches to the search are in conflict: There are two methods that physicists use to discover dark matter, and they differ greatly. Particle physics focuses on the small-scale world — the subatomic properties of matter — whereas astronomy focuses on the large-scale world — faraway areas of the universe that we can probe with telescopes and signal detectors. Naturally, they use different approaches. “The language and tools we [physicists and astronomers] use tend to be quite different,” Peter, an assistant Read More ›

For decades, researchers have complained that one of the problems that compromises research today is null findings – that is, if you don’t prove your point, you’re a failure, so you bury it (the file drawer problem). But that attitude shows poor collective reasoning skills. Showing which answers are wrong is, logically, a step on the road to right answers. A proposed reform has been registering studies and peer reviewing the protocols, so that whatever the researchers find will count as a finding. They don’t have to find something when there’s nothing, as long as the hunt is agreed to be worthwhile in principle, justifiable. What happened when it was tried? To see whether registered reports increase the frequency at Read More ›

A tenfold increase in retractions around the turn of the millennium prompted action and study, including the project by Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus, founders of Retraction Watch, to list and study retractions. Overall, improved vigilance has slowed the trend, but key problems remain, including: A disturbingly large portion of papers—about 2%—contain “problematic” scientific images that experts readily identified as deliberately manipulated, according to a study of 20,000 papers published in mBio in 2016 by Elisabeth Bik of Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, and colleagues. What’s more, our analysis showed that most of the 12,000 journals recorded in Clarivate’s widely used Web of Science database of scientific articles have not reported a single retraction since 2003. Jeffrey Brainard, Jia Read More ›