Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is the complete paper: http://www.nature.com/articles/srep39654

I wonder why they almost never linked to the source.



Because it's easier to garner clicks for ad impressions by making bold claims about the amazing (unproven) future benefits of a minor scientific discovery than by presenting readers with the actual science.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: