沈惠川译： Albert Einstein 给 Hugh Everett III 的一封信 Albert Einstein 沈惠川譯：Albert Einstein給Hugh Everett III的一封信 1943年6月11日 亲爱的Hugh: 人不可能是万能的和常胜的。但人可以通过坚持不懈的努力，克服重重困难以达到胜利的目的。 忠实于您的 A.Einstein AlbertEinstein给HughEverettIII的信的原文 AlbertEinstein给HughEverettIII的信的原文 June 11, 1943 Dear Hugh: There is no such thing like an irresistible force and immovable body. But there seems to be a very stubborn boy who has forced his way victoriously through strange difficulties created by himself for this purpose. Sincerely yours, A. Einstein Hugh Everett III 注：“There is no such thing like an irresistible force and immovable body. ”亦可译为“决不可能有体积（质量）力和固定物体这样的东西。”或“绝无可能存在无所不在的神力和一成不变的东西。”
沈惠川译： Albert Einstein 给 Louis de Broglie 的两封信 Albert Einstein Einstein的第一封信 1953年5月 亲爱的deBroglie： 您建议以如下形式来表示物理学中的实在（完备描述）： 在此乘积中，一个因子代表粒子的结构，另一个代表波的结构。毫无疑义，其中包含着的双重结构的观念是令人满意的而且是我们在实验上可以接受的。这才真正是一个新的理论，而不是对旧理论的修修补补。我不明白的是，您是否认为，是整个乘积满足Schrodinger的原始方程式，抑或仅仅是该乘积中的“波动”因子或者两个因子都应当具有这种属性？ 如果这一乘积被换成是某种函数的和的话，您的目标仍可达到。用一个唯一的函数（一个组成部分）来最后表示一切只是必要的，因为也可以用几个组成部分的和来表示这一切。 您很清楚，这种选择上的任意性对于理论家来说是很大的不幸，因为它会使我们忐忑不安，所以我要寻找一种原理在形式上来约束它。现在我已顺利地克服了这种复杂性，也许用的是完全人工的方法。 但是，我们两人都持这种观点，即应当尽可能地捍卫对物理学中的实在的充分客观的诠释。 致以 友好的敬礼！ 您的A.Einstein 译注：此信中部分内容已被沈惠川的“德布罗意的非线性波动力学” 所引用。 Einstein的第二封信 1954年2月15日 亲爱的deBroglie： 昨天我读到了我久仰的您的那篇题名为“量子物理是非决定论的吗？”文章的德文译文，您的思想的鲜明性使我尤为高兴。令人惊讶的是，当我看到一切都是用母语表达出来时，我仍觉得它是那么地优美和生动！ 今天我给您写这封信，是源于一个特别的原因。我想与您扯一下，是何事情形成了我的方法论。确实，我可能仿佛是沙漠中的一种鸟——鸵鸟，总是将脑袋埋入相对论的沙土中，以避免与可恶的量子打照面。事实上，我与您一样，深信有必要探索一些基本的东西；然而眼下采取统计形式的量子力学却将这一必要性巧妙地掩盖了起来。 但是，我很久之前就已确信，不可能根据从经验得来的物理学对象的某种运动，用思辨的方法取得这些经过脑力劳动后便可提升人类智力的基本东西。这并非是我的无所作为之说，而是根据我多年努力对引力论的实践得到的结论。引力场方程式的发现只是基于纯粹形式上的原理（一般协变性），亦即基于自然法则赖以建立的有最大可能的逻辑简单性。由于，显而易见，引力论只是迈向发现包括磁场在内的更一般的最简单定律的第一步；所以，开始我认为，在获得解决量子问题的希望之前，应当沿着这条逻辑路线走到底。正是源于如此，我才成了“逻辑简单性”的狂热信奉者。 的确，现代物理学家们大多认为，通过这种途径是不可能到达原子和量子结构理论的。也许他们在这一问题上是正确的。可能根本就不存在量子场论。在这种情况下，我的努力就不可能解决原子理论的问题，或许甚至连我们接近它们也不可能。然而，这种否定论在其本身的结构上只有直观的根据，而无客观的根据。此外，我看不到除了逻辑简单性还有任何一条阳光大道。 这只是为了说明鸵鸟政策。我想，过去的一切从心理学的观点来讲可能会使您感兴趣，更何况您已再次丧失了对统计学方法终极价值的信念。 致以 诚挚的敬礼！ 您的A.Einstein 译注：“量子物理是非决定论的吗？”的法文原版题名为“Laphysiquequantiquerestera-t-elleindeterministe?”（Revued’histoiredesSciencesetdeleursapplications，V，1952，p289）。后，deBroglie又与J.-P.Vigier合作，仍以“Laphysiquequantiquerestera-t-elleindeterministe?”为书名，于1953年在Gauthier-Villars出版社出版。 Louis de Broglie
沈惠川译： Louis de Broglie 给 Albert Einstein 的信 Louis de Broglie 1954年3月8日 尊敬的Einstein先生： 拜读和回味您的来信是我深感兴趣的事。来信支持我继续更加深入研究我早在1927年就已提出的那些模糊的设想。您知道，现在我正在同几位青年助手共同研究，如何更加准确地说明和拓展这些概念；而且在这方面业已取得某些我认为是鼓舞人心的成果。 但是，您十分清楚，依然还有一些远未解决的重大难题。然而，我仍然认为，目前采用的统计诠释是“不完备的”，应当探索能够证明在量子力学中由统计规律造成的“波粒”二象性的精确的时空形式。 您在来信中谈到您对量子问题的态度和对“逻辑简单性”方法的信念，这引起了我的深思。确实，我认为，那些使您取得广义相对论和统一场论辉煌成就的普遍逻辑关系，在将来可以使人们更好地理解量子和波粒二象性的意义。 在我当前的研究工作中，我产生了这样的想法，即为了取得波粒二象性的概念，应当发展建立在非线性方程式上的量子力学，其中通常的线性方程式只是在一定的条件下才是近似正确的。然而，为了在这方面取得进展，必须在准确地说明这些未知的非线性方程式的类别上得到顺利的发展。这是一个非常困难的课题；而我看不出，仅仅依靠物理学的成果，怎样能够来解决它。我同意您的看法，解决这一课题，只能采取类似您取得广义相对论方程式的方法，即运用逻辑简单性的思想…… 我再次万分感谢使我受益匪浅的您的珍贵来信，感谢您对我的最新工作所给予的巨大支持。 Einstein先生，请接受我诚挚的敬意。 LouisdeBroglie Albert Einstein
因为经常会写一些SCI论文，不免经常专家和编辑间信件来往，所以特意分享SCI投稿全过程信件模板，供参考！ 一、最初投稿Cover letter Dear Editors: We would like to submit the enclosed manuscript entitled “Paper Title”, which we wish to be considered for publication in “Journal Name”. No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and manuscript is approved by all authors for publication. I would like to declare on behalf of my co-authors that the work described was original research that has not been published previously, and not under consideration for publication elsewhere, in whole or in part. All the authors listed have approved the manuscript that is enclosed. In this work, we evaluated …… (简要介绍一下论文的创新性). I hope this paper is suitable for “Journal Name”. The following is a list of possible reviewers for your consideration: 1) Name A E-mail: ××××@×××× 2) Name B E-mail: ××××@×××× We deeply appreciate your consideration of our manuscript, and we look forward to receiving comments from the reviewers. If you have any queries, please don’t hesitate to contact me at the address below. Thank you and best regards. Yours sincerely, ×××××× Corresponding author: Name: ××× E-mail: ××××@×××× 二、催稿信 Dear Prof. ×××: Sorry for disturbing you. I am not sure if it is the right time to contact you to inquire about the status of my submitted manuscript titled “Paper Title”. (ID: 文章稿号), although the status of “With Editor” has been lasting for more than two months, since submitted to journal three months ago. I am just wondering that my manuscript has been sent to reviewers or not? I would be greatly appreciated if you could spend some of your time check the status for us. I am very pleased to hear from you on the reviewer’s comments. Thank you very much for your consideration. Best regards! Yours sincerely, ×××××× Corresponding author: Name: ××× E-mail: ××××@×××× 三、修改稿Cover letter Dear Dr/ Prof..（写上负责你文章编辑的姓名，显得尊重，因为第一次的投稿不知道具体负责的编辑，只能用通用的Editors）: On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “Paper Title”. (ID: 文章稿号). We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made revision which marked in red in the paper. We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration. We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you and best regards. Yours sincerely, ×××××× Corresponding author: Name: ××× E-mail: ××××@×××× 四、修改稿回答审稿人的意见（最重要的部分） List of Responses Dear Editors and Reviewers: Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Paper Title” (ID: 文章稿号). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing: Responds to the reviewer’s comments: Reviewer #1: 1. Response to comment: (……简要列出意见……) Response: ×××××× 2. Response to comment: (……简要列出意见……) Response: ×××××× 。。。。。。 逐条意见回答，切忌一定不能有遗漏 针对不同的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可适当用用： We are very sorry for our negligence of ……... We are very sorry for our incorrect writing ……... It is really true as Reviewer suggested that…… We have made correction according to the Reviewer’s comments. We have re-written this part according to the Reviewer’s suggestion As Reviewer suggested that…… Considering the Reviewer’s suggestion, we have …… 最后特意感谢一下这个审稿人的意见： Special thanks to you for your good comments. Reviewer #2: 同上述 Reviewer #3: ×××××× Other changes: 1. Line 60-61, the statements of “……” were corrected as “…………” 2. Line 107, “……” was added 3. Line 129, “……” was deleted ×××××× We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript.These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper. We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. 五、文章接受后可以考虑感谢一下负责你文章的编辑或主编（根据需要） Dear Prof. ××××××: Thanks very much for your kind work and consideration on publication of our paper. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers. Thank you and best regards. Yours sincerely, ×××××× Corresponding author: Name: ××× E-mail: ××××@×××× 六、询问校稿信件（如果文章接受后时间较长） Dear ×××: Sorry for disturbing you. I am not sure if it is the right time to contact you to inquire about the status of our accepted manuscript titled “Paper Title” (ID: 文章稿号), since the copyright agreement for publication has been sent to you two months ago. I am just wondering that how long I can receive the proof of our manuscript from you? I would be greatly appreciated if you could spend some of your time for a reply. I am very pleased to hear from you. Thank you very much for your consideration. Yours sincerely, ×××××× Corresponding author: Name: ××× E-mail: ××××@×××× 七、文章校稿信件 Dear Mr. ×××: Thanks very much for your kind letter about the proof of our paper titled “Paper Title” (ID: 文章稿号) for publication in “Journal Name”. We have finished the proof reading and checking carefully, and some corrections about the proof and the answers to the queries are provided below. Corrections: 1. In ****** should be **** (Page ***, Right column, line***) 2. In **** the “*****” should be “****” (Page ****, Right column, line****) Answers for “author queries”: 1. *********************. 2. ********************** 3. ********************** We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. Thank you and best regards. Yours sincerely, ×××××× Corresponding author: Name: ××× E-mail: ××××@××××
网上收集到的SCI投稿信件的一些套话，不知是否很有用？ 一、投稿信 1. Dear Dr. Defendi ML: I am sending a manuscript entitled “” by – which I should like to submit for possible publication in the journal of - . Yours sincerely 2. Dear Dr. A: Enclosed is a manuscript entitled “” by sb, which we are submitting for publication in the journal of - . We have chosen this journal because it deals with - . We believe that sth would be of interest to the journal’s readers. 3. Dear Dr. A: Please find enclosed for your review an original research article, “” by sb. All authors have read and approve this version of the article, and due care has been taken to ensure the integrity of the work. No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and we have attached to this letter the signed letter granting us permission to use Figure 1 from another source. We appreciate your consideration of our manuscript, and we look forward to receiving comments from the reviewers. 二、询问有无收到稿件 Dear Editors, We dispatched our manuscript to your journal on 3 August 2006 but have not, as yet, receive acknowledgement of their safe arrival. We fear that may have been lost and should be grateful if you would let us know whether or not you have received them. If not, we will send our manuscript again. Thank you in advance for your help. 三、询问论文审查回音 Dear Editors， It is more than 12 weeks since I submitted our manuscript (No: ) for possible publication in your journal. I have not yet received a reply and am wondering whether you have reached a decision. I should appreciated your letting me know what you have decided as soon as possible. 四、关于论文的总体审查意见 1. This is a carefully done study and the findings are of considerable interest. A few minor revision are list below. 2. This is a well-written paper containing interesting results which merit publication. For the benefit of the reader, however, a number of points need clarifying and certain statements require further justification. There are given below. 3. Although these observation are interesting, they are rather limited and do not advance our knowledge of the subject sufficiently to warrant publication in PNAS. We suggest that the authors try submitting their findings to specialist journal such as – 4. Although this paper is good, it would be ever better if some extra data were added. 5. This manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal of – because the main observation it describe was reported 3 years ago in a reputable journal of - . 6. Please ask someone familiar with English language to help you rewrite this paper. As you will see, I have made some correction at the beginning of the paper where some syntax is not satisfactory. 7. We feel that this potentially interesting study has been marred by an inability to communicate the finding correctly in English and should like to suggest that the authors seek the advice of someone with a good knowledge of English, preferable native speaker. 8. The wording and style of some section, particularly those concerning HPLC, need careful editing. Attention should be paid to the wording of those parts of the Discussion of and Summary which have been underlined. 9. Preliminary experiments only have been done and with exception of that summarized in Table 2, none has been repeated. This is clearly unsatisfactory, particularly when there is so much variation between assays. 10. The condition of incubation are poorly defined. What is the temperature? Were antibody used? 五、给编辑的回信 1. In reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that – One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1. This has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3, paragraph 1 (line 3-8) and 2 (line 6-11). These do not affect our interpretation of the result. 2. I have read the referee’s comments very carefully and conclude that the paper has been rejected on the sole grounds that it lake toxicity data. I admit that I did not include a toxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission. 3. Thank you for your letter of – and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “”. We have studied their comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with their approval. 4. I enclosed a revised manuscript which includes a report of additional experiments done at the referee’s suggestion. You will see that our original findings are confirmed. 5. We are sending the revised manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised portion are underlined in red. 6. We found the referee’s comments most helpful and have revised the manuscript 7. We are pleased to note the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence. 8. Thank you for your letter. I am very pleased to learn that our manuscript is acceptable for publication in Cancer Research with minor revision. 9. We have therefore completed a further series of experiments, the result of which are summarized in Table 5. From this we conclude that intrinsic factor is not account. 10. We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper. 11. I feel that the reviewer’s comments concerning Figures 1 and 2 result from a misinterpretation of the data. 12. We would have include a non-protein inhibitor in our system, as a control, if one had been available. 13. We prefer to retain the use of Table 4 for reasons that it should be clear from the new paragraph inserted at the end of the Results section. 14. Although reviewer does not consider it is important to measure the temperature of the cells, we consider it essential. 15. The running title has been changed to “”. 16. The Materials and Methods section now includes details for measuring uptake of isotope and assaying hexokinase. 17. The concentration of HAT media (page12 paragraph 2) was incorrectly stated in the original manuscript. This has been rectified. The authors are grateful to the referees for pointing out their error. 18. As suggested by both referees, a discussion of the possibility of laser action on chromosome has been included (page16, paragraph 2). 19. We included a new set of photographs with better definition than those originally submitted and to which a scale has been added. 20. Following the suggestion of the referees, we have redraw Figure 3 and 4. 21. Two further papers, published since our original submission, have been added to the text and Reference section. These are: 22. We should like to thank the referees for their helpful comments and hope that we have now produced a more balance and better account of our work. We trust that the revised manuscript is acceptable for publication. 23. I greatly appreciate both your help and that of the referees concerning improvement to this paper. I hope that the revised manuscript is now suitable for publication. 24. I should like to express my appreciation to you and the referees for suggesting how to improve our paper. 25. I apologize for the delay in revising the manuscript. This was due to our doing an additional experiment, as suggested by referees. 还请科学网上常发SCI或者对此比较有经验的前辈们多指点！ 或者有相关投稿经验的童鞋也请谈谈看法哈
标签: 信件
