Skip to content

Please be aware that some material may contain words, descriptions or illustrations which will not reflect current scientific understanding and may be considered in today's context inaccurate, unethical, offensive or distressing.

Description

Sectional Committee: Physics and Chemistry

Not recommended for publication in the 'Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society'. Suggests the author be asked to submit an abridged version for the Proceedings. As it stands, the facts in the paper need revision if they are not to give 'unnecessary trouble' to any reader ' who might wish to gain information about the phenomena referred to'. Reviewer offers to point these facts out if required.

[Not published]

Endorsed on verso as received 4 July 1906.

Reference number
RR/17/57
Earliest possible date
03 July 1906
Physical description
Standardised form (type A)
Page extent
2 pages
Format
Manuscript

Creator name

Hugh Frank Newall

View page for Hugh Frank Newall

Use this record

Citation

Hugh Frank Newall, Referee's report by Hugh Frank Newall, on a paper 'On the total solar eclipse, August 30, 1905' by Joseph Norman Lockyer, 03 July 1906, RR/17/57, The Royal Society Archives, London, https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/items/rr_17_57/referees-report-by-hugh-frank-newall-on-a-paper-on-the-total-solar-eclipse-august-30-1905-by-joseph-norman-lockyer, accessed on 16 April 2024

Link to this record

Embed this record

<iframe src="https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/embed/items/rr_17_57/referees-report-by-hugh-frank-newall-on-a-paper-on-the-total-solar-eclipse-august-30-1905-by-joseph-norman-lockyer" title="Referee's report by Hugh Frank Newall, on a paper 'On the total solar eclipse, August 30, 1905' by Joseph Norman Lockyer" allow="fullscreen" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>

Related Fellows

Explore the collection

  • Referee Reports

    Date: 1832-1949

    This collection contains reports on scientific papers submitted for publication to the Royal Society. Started in 1832 when the system was formalised, it is a record of the origins of peer review publishing in practice.

    View collection