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

Not recommended for publication in the 'Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society'. Reviewer has heard that the author considers the remarks and criticisms of the reviewers to be 'unfair'. Reviewer encloses a report [RR/2/257] outlining his criticisms, giving his reasoning.

Subject: Physics and Chemistry

[Published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society]

Reference number
RR/2/256
Earliest possible date
19 April 1853
Physical description
Letter on paper
Page extent
1 page
Format
Manuscript

Creator name

William Hallowes Miller

View page for William Hallowes Miller

Use this record

Citation

William Hallowes Miller, Third referee's report by William Hallowes Miller, on a paper 'On a general law of density in saturated vapours' by John James Waterston, 19 April 1853, RR/2/256, The Royal Society Archives, London, https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/items/rr_2_256/third-referees-report-by-william-hallowes-miller-on-a-paper-on-a-general-law-of-density-in-saturated-vapours-by-john-james-waterston, accessed on 20 May 2024

Link to this record

Embed this record

<iframe src="https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/embed/items/rr_2_256/third-referees-report-by-william-hallowes-miller-on-a-paper-on-a-general-law-of-density-in-saturated-vapours-by-john-james-waterston" title="Third referee's report by William Hallowes Miller, on a paper 'On a general law of density in saturated vapours' by John James Waterston" allow="fullscreen" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>

Related Publications

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