Factors
| Example
|
|
|
| Names of people | If a person is cited in the body of an article, it must include three things:
1. Full name (e.g. Albert Einstein (good) vs. Einstein (bad))
2. Nationality (e.g. German-born American)
3. Title (e.g. physicist)
The first time their name is mentioned, include: nationality (e.g. German-born American), first and last name (e.g. Albert Einstein), and title (e.g. physicist). This applies to every single person cited in the article. After the person is introduced, the first time, into the article, thereafter the surname (last name) may be use alone (e.g. "Hence, according to Einstein, energy and matter are equivalent.") |
| Title | Intellect-catching titles (e.g. Genome: the Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters) |
| Division of material | 23 rich chapters for a 344-page book (e.g. Genome), as an example, as compared to 6 bloated chapters for a same-sized book. |
| Artwork | The "visual" use of text-related diagrams, e.g. figures, images, drawings, etc., are encouraged; although not to the affect that the article becomes a picture book. |
| Conjunctions | Almost always never start sentences with a conjunction. For example:
WORSE: The conclusion here, in regards to the use of information theory in thermodynamics, is that sending text messages is not entropy. However, there is a role in which text messaging can be interpreted in human chemical thermodynamic terms, as a function of free energy (see: human free energy).
BETTER: The conclusion here, in regards to the use of information theory in thermodynamics, is that sending text messages is not entropy. There is, however, a role in which text messaging can be interpreted in human chemical thermodynamic terms, as a function of free energy (see: human free energy). |
| Third person | Always write in the third person. |
| Run-on paragraphs | Try to avoid run-on paragraphs. Certainly, there are a few exceptions where an author seems to have mastered the art of extended length sentences that employ dashes and colons to created paragraph length or page length chains of thought in the form of one connective sentence (William James comes to mind here), but, in regards to JHT articles, assume one is not a master and aim to facilitate the mind of reader not the writer. This means breaking up complex thoughts into digestible sentences. |
| Parentheses | Try to avoid overuse of “parentheses” in paragraphs. The article submissions of Georgi Gladyshev come to mind here. The following, for example, is 19 Apr 2006 email message sent to Libb Thims by Gladyshev, similar in style to the types of articles that Thims had to repeatedly spend time on converting parenthetic- structured sentences, such as shown below (wherein we see parentheses with in parentheses), into comma-structures sentences:
“For decades, many scientists have looked at the increase of specific chemical tissue component of the Gibbs free energy during biological evolution (aging) of living systems (the biological evolution (aging) goes from water to organisms which contain many organic substances). They believe that the living systems spontaneously move away (run away) form chemical equilibrium. That is why IIya Prigogine proposed his theory, etc.! I understood that this effect is a secondary effect. It is connected with the thermodynamics of spontaneous supramolecular interactions that correspond to the second law! The law of temporal hierarches helps me to do this. Thus it was the principle point.”
Certainly there is a difference, e.g., between the choice of the terms "move away" versus "run away", just as there is a subtle difference between Gilbert Lewis' term "freely-running" (1923) versus "freely-going" (semi-modern) (see also: "What's the go o' that? | Maxwell), but this difference needs to be addressed in the article, or else layers upon layers of ambivalence are created, which thus works to detract the new reader from seeing exactly what is in the author's mind. There are important semantic difference, for example, between something that is "going" as compared to something that is "running".
To exemplify further, in his In his 1925 Anatomy of Science (§7: Non-Mathematical Sciences), Lewis delves into the at-the-time tricky question of evolution of the animate things/living things, terms which he rotates usage of. Rotation of term usage is indication that one is "undecided" in regards to which is the correct term to use. |
| Neologisms | Do not submit JHT articles filled with neologisms and vocabulary that is peculiar to your own personal thoughts and notes. The main meaning of “neologism”, according to Merriam-Webster, is “a new word, usage, or expression”; the second meaning, according to Merriam-Webster, is “a meaningless word coined by a psychotic”. One must always keep this in mind, particularly when writing in the hmolsciences, as over-zealousness and mania are common in the new stages of theory development, particularly because hmolscience theories tend to take decades to develop, hence in the going public stage of theory launch, there is a certain fuel that tends to encourage inflated over-importance to certain things over that of reflective reserve, the latter which requires a time-delayed reflective stage of processing, and digestion of peer feedback.
New words are certainly a step in the process of scientific writing, but if they are to be done in JHT article, they must be accompanied by a full and clear definition of the newly introduced term. Hence, for example, do not start off an abstract with the sentence:
“Psychic neuroentropic bioenthalpy is argued to facilitate post-human chemistry apertures involved in soulatrophic pathways of entropmorphic atoms.”
The writings of Mark Janes and Peter Baofu come to mind here. |
