Two papers by Nobel Prize-winning physicist Max Planck were quietly removed from the journal Naturwissenschaften, now called The Science of Nature, with little explanation. The retractions, marked only as “withdrawn due to article violation,” left historians baffled given Planck’s unblemished reputation. A foundational figure in quantum mechanics, Planck received the 1918 Nobel Prize in Physics for his discovery of quanta, and his lifelong work had never faced any allegations of misconduct or error.
Related: China Eyes Rocket Booster Landings Soon
The papers—“Meaning and Limits of Exact Science” (1942) and “Natural Science and the Real External World” (1940)—were philosophical essays, not flawed research. The first originated as a lecture delivered in Berlin in 1941 before its journal publication, reflecting Planck’s broader engagement with the epistemology of science. Physics historians Yves Gingras and Mahdi Khelfaoui traced the issue to a likely misunderstanding of past publishing norms, noting that Planck’s work had circulated in multiple legitimate forms without intent to deceive.
According to their preprint, the retractions stemmed from copyright concerns, not scientific errors.
Related: Security gap found in login verification process
Planck operated in an era when republication across journals was common, even encouraged. Early 20th-century scientists often republished lectures, essays, and conference proceedings in various venues to ensure access for colleagues separated by language, institutional barriers, or wartime disruptions. The scientific community then prioritized broad dissemination over strict copyright enforcement, with little distinction between journal articles, anthologies, or standalone pamphlets. Today’s standards, shaped by commercial publishing and academic metrics, treat duplication differently, as career advancement and funding increasingly hinge on publication counts.
The journal’s editor-in-chief, Suzanne Scarlata, admitted she was unaware of the retractions until contacted by a reporter. Scarlata and Khelfaoui argue that such retroactive enforcement not only misrepresents the past but also undermines the integrity of the scholarly record by treating historical norms as violations rather than products of their time.
Related: Google’s Secret AI Dictation App Goes Live: Revolutionary Offline Voice-to-Text Technology Unveiled
Springer Nature declined to comment, citing confidentiality. The empty PDFs remain available for purchase, though the papers are in the public domain in most countries. Both can still be found in the Internet Archive, where they exist as freely accessible scans of the original print versions. The persistence of paywalled empty files shows the absurdity of the situation, as the works no longer fall under copyright protection in most jurisdictions.
