A new paper on sex
I'm quite happy that another paper I have written on the problem of sex has just been accepted (by Biology Letters) for publication.
Two things are special for me in this case:
1. The paper does not contain a novel, constructive idea, but rather a criticism of two papers published in Nature a couple of years ago. Initially, I was wondering whether that was enough to write a paper - shouldn't a good paper make an novel contribution, even if only marginal? Is criticism enough justification for a publication? I had my doubts, although I've always known that science proceeds by falsifying ideas (the old Karl Popper argument). In that sense, falsifying old ideas is equally important as proposing new ideas.
2. I am the sole author of this paper. Kind of a strange feeling. I alone am responsible for what I wrote. Sure, one is also responsible for the content of a multi-author paper, but still, it makes me feel a little more relaxed to know that others sit in the same boat.