Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2021 February 6
| Science desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < February 5 | << Jan | February | Mar >> | February 7 > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
February 6 edit
Why would black holes emit Hawking radiation? edit
Even light can't escape black holes, then how it can emit Hawking Radiation? Rizosome (talk) 01:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- The second and third paragraphs of the overview section of the article you linked explain it. Matt Deres (talk) 04:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Melatonin research journal edit
Does the journal "Melatonin Research" (example article) look any good? Not necessarily for Wikipedia RS purposes but as a research outlet? Thanks. 2602:24A:DE47:BB20:50DE:F402:42A6:A17D (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- It seems to be a new journal. The website design is... basic, but a quick scan of the author guidelines looks reasonable. Having say that, it's not in Medline, or has an impact factor yet. Also, most of the papers seem to be from developing countries. That in itself is not an issue, but when you see that exclusively it becomes a warning sign. (Note: this is not to say there is anything wrong with science from developing countries, but it is a hallmark of many a dodgy journal.) Many of the authors do not have institutional corresponding addresses. Another warming sign. A quick scan of randomly selected papers shows acceptance is universally within 3-6 weeks of submitting, suggesting the peer review is likely to be perfunctory (you'd expect some papers to have been sent back for extra work and several months between submission and acceptance). I can't judge the science, it's not my field. But at best I'd classify it as a new start-up journal which has yet to prove itself. Nothing I would sent any serious work in to. Fgf10 (talk) 19:55, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, yeah, I had similar doubts, though I didn't spot nearly as much as you did. What do you think of the entire concept of a melatonin journal? Is that something like a Vitamin C journal? 2602:24A:DE47:BB20:50DE:F402:42A6:A17D (talk) 20:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
I have been eating kiwifruits more or less regularly the last 30 years, but cannot recall ever having seen a kiwifruit with a hollow – or missing – core. But in the box of kiwifruits I bought the other day I have so far seen two such fruits. See image. Is this normal? Are these fruits edible? --Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 19:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Did you ask your grocer? And remember this motto: "If in doubt / Throw it out." ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- One of the pics on the article you linked is also hollow. Perhaps it's a varietal thing? The rest of the fruit seems pretty normal to me; I'd just eat it (assuming it tastes/smells normal and is not otherwise moldy/mushy, etc.) Matt Deres (talk) 03:15, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Google finds a few other examples like this Reddit post. One suggested cause was "Suboptimal growth conditions probably, maybe it was too arid". Alansplodge (talk) 14:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC)