Every April 1st, astronomers world-wide submit to the prestigious Acta Prima Aprilia journal. These extremely real and very serious scientific papers are posted to the official preprint archive arxiv.org, but there was no official peer-review process…
…until we started doing it. (2024, 2023, 2022)
We here at Astrobites are pleased to act as the official peer reviewers for the APA journal. To highlight this year’s submissions, here are our reviewer comments from the 21 April Fool’s papers in 2025.
Authors: Connor Hainje, David W. Hogg
Authors’ affiliations: New York University, Max Planck Institute for Astronomy, Flatiron Institute
Paper title: A formula for the area of a triangle: Useless, but explicitly in Deep Sets form
Dear (future) Dr. Hainje and Dr. Hogg,
It is often said that mathematics is the purest STEM discipline, unfettered by concerns of practicality or complicated real-life effects. In that light, we are pleased to accept your submission, which expresses this elegantly and simply by deriving a formula for the area of a triangle that has no practical application whatsoever. While most applications may be content with the plebian ½ (base) (height), this work goes above and beyond in its complete and utter uselessness. Beautiful.
Reviewer 1: Given the authors’ stated motivation of deriving computationally efficient ways to compute cosmological clustering statistics, it is impressive that they ended with something which so singularly lacks practical applications. While Deep Sets form is genuinely useful for reducing the computational complexity of permutationally invariant (or partially permutationally invariant) problems, it is completely unnecessary to calculate the area of a triangle, and thus illustrative of a deeper internal truth that only numbers can show. I recommend this paper for publication without revision.
Reviewer 2: I have deep concerns about conflicts of interest in this work. This is a paper about finding the area of a triangle. Why, then, do the authors reference a contribution from a colleague at Perimeter? I smell a rat.
Authors: Jane C. Bright
Authors’ Affiliations: Department of Physics, Grinnell College, Grinnell, IA
Paper Title: The Eras Tour: Mapping the Eras of Taylor Swift to the Cosmological Eras of the Universe
Dear Dr. Bright,
This paper takes on the most fundamental question of our time: not just what the universe is made of but who is responsible for its trajectory. Your mapping of Swift’s album eras to the great epochs of the cosmos is nothing short of mastermind behavior. The insight that TS13 might hold the answer to the fate of the universe? Galileo and Newton could never. As the Swiftian multiverse expands, we fully endorse further research in this area.
Reviewer 1: This paper is a groundbreaking fusion of astrophysics and cultural studies, making complex cosmological concepts accessible through a widely recognized musical framework. The mapping between eras is well thought out, and the paper provides a compelling case for Swift’s artistic evolution mirroring the fundamental transformations of the universe itself. A particular strength of this work is its predictive component—using the trajectory of Swift’s discography to speculate on the fate of the cosmos is both innovative and, in its own way, rigorous. Given her proven ability to redefine musical landscapes, I find it entirely reasonable to suggest that TS13 could provide insights into dark energy, entropy, and possibly the heat death of the Universe.
Reviewer 2: The paper presents a compelling theoretical framework, but it would benefit from empirical data to back up the idea of clear “era transitions” in Swift’s discography. For example, streaming data, album sales, or even social media analysis could help quantify the shifts between her eras and draw a clearer line between these transitions and cosmological turning points. To strengthen the claim that TS13 will hold the answer to the fate of the Universe, such as Big Rip or the Big Freeze, I recommend referring to Newman & Sainz de Murieta (2025), which quantify recurring themes in Swift’s lyrics and their correlations with astrophysical concepts. By applying a similar methodology to Swift’s discography, this paper could provide a more objective analysis of how themes like cosmic expansion or contraction are represented in her lyrics over time, helping to solidify the connection between Swift’s artistic evolution and the cosmological eras of the Universe.
Authors: Sophie L. Newman, Ana Sainz de Murieta
Authors’ affiliations: Institute of Cosmology & Gravitation, University of Portsmouth, UK
Paper Title: A Swift analysis of the Eras tour set list and implications for astrophysics research (Taylor’s version)
Dear (future) Dr Newman and (future) Dr Sainz de Murieta,
We were not …ready for it. The meticulous analysis, and the lyrical connections; it’s giving academic slay. It’s like you knew all too well that Swifties and astrophysicists alike have been waiting for a paper like this. Your findings are nothing short of bejeweled. We especially appreciate the use of a Taylor expansion to predict the use of astrophysical terminology in Swift’s future albums. We fully endorse further research into this intersection, and frankly, we can’t stop thinking about what the next tour setlist or album might reveal about the evolution of the cosmos.
Reviewer 1: This work is a triumph of interdisciplinary research, seamlessly bridging the gap between astrophysics and pop culture. The authors’ innovative approach highlights the cosmic significance of Swift’s lyricism in a way that is both illuminating and engaging. The statistical analysis is robust, and the categorization of astrophysical themes across albums provides a new lens for science communication. I strongly recommend publication and eagerly await a follow-up study exploring the gravitational pull of *Folklore* and *Evermore* on listener emotions.
Reviewer 2: While the authors’ enthusiasm for Swift’s discography is undeniable, I must raise a few concerns. While I appreciate the inclusion of a Taylor expansion, I must point out that such a technique is typically used for approximations—does this imply that Swift’s relationship with astrophysics is only a first-order effect? I would prefer the 10-minute expansion instead. Additionally, the absence of Reputation (Taylor’s Version) remains a fundamental limitation in this study. Without Rep TV and its vault tracks, we are left with an incomplete picture of Swift’s astrophysical influence. Who’s to say what cosmic revelations remain locked away, waiting to be unearthed? For the sake of science (and our own peace of mind), we eagerly await its arrival. Any reports of me whispering, “This is why we can’t have nice things,” while reviewing this manuscript should be ignored.
Authors: Lu Li, Zhengyi Shao
First author affiliation: Shanghai Astronomical Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China.
Paper Title: On the structure of open clusters: geometric vs geomantic
Dear Drs Li and Shao,
Thank you for your brilliant work exploring the morphologies of star clusters. It is incredible to see how nearby clusters are preferentially oriented towards us, proving the universe points towards our solar system. As it’s always nice to feel special, we are pleased to accept your manuscript for publication.
Reviewer 1: This work provides a clever analysis of open cluster structure which is well thought out and aptly summarized. The discovery of geomancy or feng shui in the universe itself is a triumph of anthropocentrism.
Reviewer 2: While I can find no flaws in the analysis or consideration of uncertainties in distance measurements, I am curious as to why the authors failed to cite prior groundbreaking work exploring our special place in the universe. The introduction provides a nod to the historical context, but I would hope to see specific citations such as Ptolemy et al. 150, Tycho Brahe 1588, and The Catholic Church 1616. In future work I would also like to see a comparison between your results and their highly accurate and successful models.
Author: Chun Huang
First author affiliation: Physics Department and McDonnell Center for the Space Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis
Paper title: The Cosmic One-Eyed Smile: Revealing the Hidden Face of Mike Wazowski
Dear (future) Dr. Huang,
Thank you for the submission of your article for consideration in our journal. Your detailed modeling of X-ray observations of the pulsar PSR J0437–4715 has helped to reveal the usefulness of your proposed Wazowski Configuration method for hotspot modeling. The resulting structure of a brighter “University Time Wazowski” and a second larger “Monsters Inc Wazowski” is enlightening to the nature of these hotspots. We are happy to accept this manuscript for publication, and anxiously await the promised future analyses.
Reviewer 1: I commend the author for their rigorous method fitting hotspot parameters to the form of Mike Wazowski. While some may argue that 11 parameters to describe a pulsar as Mike Wazowski is excessive, they could not be more wrong. Both the Bayesian and Maximum Likelihood methods presented in this paper provide essential information to understanding pulsar X-ray emissions using the Wazowski Configuration. If anyone pulls out their pen to disagree, I’ll tell them to put that thing back where it came from, or so help me…
Reviewer 2: After reading this manuscript, I am struck by more questions than I have answers. If there are hidden layers of Mike Wazowski in our universe, what other astrophysical bodies could be accurately represented by beings from the Monsters, Inc. and Monsters University franchise? A truly foundational analysis of this method ought to address such important outstanding questions. In particular, where is Sulley? The paper should address these important questions prior to publication.
Author: Sophie Rosu
First author affiliation: Department of Astronomy, University of Geneva
Paper title: All about Cookies: The perfect compromise between softness and crispiness
Dear Dr. Rosu,
We want to thank you for your submission of this new classification of sweet treats. As you say, cookies occupy a truly unique region of parameter space due to their combination of crispness and softness and cannot be classified as either biscuits or cakes. Through the detailed analysis of participants’ responses to the author’s cookies, it is clear that good cookies are both soft and crisp. We are happy to accept this manuscript for publication, thanks to its novel results with great impact for the field.
Reviewer 1: This manuscript answers a question that has long been at the forefront of the field of sweet treats: what is the optimal combination of softness and crispness to make up the best cookie? I commend the author on the quality of the work, and especially the contained cookie recipe! (Please disregard any smears of chocolate on the scanned pages, as the reproducibility of the cookie recipe was a necessary part of this review).
Reviewer 2: While I agree with the essential nature of the work, I find some of the results suspect. In particular, in the enjoyment histogram (defined as a quantity between 0-10) there is one entry at a value of 20. As I personally prefer cake to cookies, this result seems unphysical to me and requires further discussion in the results of the paper. That’s just how the cookie crumbles, I’m afraid.
Authors: PASTA Collaboration, L. Rosignoli, A. Della Croce, E. Leitinger, L. Leuzzi, G. Papini, A. Traina, S. Sartori, N. Borghi, and E. Ceccarelli
First author affiliation: Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Bologna
Paper title: pastamarkers 2: pasta sauce colormaps for your flavorful results
Dear (future) Dr. Rosignoli,
We were extremely pleased to see a follow-up to the previous submission from the PASTA collaboration, and are delighted to accept this work. The pastamarkers package addresses an urgent need for effective visualization tools in astronomical papers, and has been widely adopted by the community. We are happy to see you build on this success, to delicious effect.
Reviewer 1: The authors of this work are to be commended for their introduction of a variety of delicious sauces to the pastamarkers package, as well as their simple explanations of each sauce’s ingredients and provenance. The code’s open-source nature and the authors’ thoughtful notes indicating which of their colormaps are colorblind-friendly are indicative of a commitment to inclusivity in the field. Astronomy truly is for everyone, regardless of pasta preferences.
Reviewer 2: While the merit of the authors’ previous contributions to the field of astronomy are undeniable, I have reservations about the trend towards increasing realism that this paper represents. Namely, if every plot begins to look more and more like a mouth-watering pasta dish, the course of scientific progress will halt entirely as researchers devote themselves less to their research and more to their lunches. On that note, I believe I will end this review in order to enjoy a delectable farfalle with cacio e pepe sauce. Perhaps with a scattering of parmigiano on top.
Authors: Rae J. Holcomb, Christopher Lam
Authors’ affiliations: University of California, Irvine; University of Florida; Flatiron Institute
Paper title: Catsteroseismology: Survey-based Analysis of Purr-mode Oscillations Suggests Inner Lives of Cats are Unknowable
Dear (future) Drs. Holcomb and Lam,
While cats remain mysterious creatures moved only by pets, treats, and some inscrutable internal logic, your study represents an important step forwards in our understanding of humanity’s relationship with those fuzzy little guys. The novel methodology of catsteroseismology will, we’re sure, enable many future studies, and we therefore recommend your paper for publication without revision. Congratulations! (Con-gato-lations?)
Reviewer 1: This work is both scientifically interesting on its own merit and opens up a plethora of interesting questions for further study. How might stellar oscillations impact the happiness of their environments, as feline oscillations do their humans? What correlations may exist between cat purrameters and the hitherto unstudied purr-mode frequencies? How could growl-modes be more safely researched? (Perhaps we could look to studies of other cat species, e.g. Mr. Murderbritches.) The inner workings of our feline friends remain unconstrained for now, but not fur long!
Reviewer 2: I read this paper while petting a cat, and can confirm that he is a little baby man and an attention fiend. However, he got mad at me for reading this work instead of petting him, and started biting my phone to get me to stop. Potential readers be warned! Allegations that he bit my phone specifically while I was reading sections 4 and 4.1 should not be taken seriously. The cat conspiracy is not real.
Authors: Vito Squicciarini, Irina Mirova (Ирина Мирова), Francis D. Anderson, Zhiyuan He (和智远), Wahmān al-Khwārizmī (َوهماني الخوارزمي)
First author’s affiliation: University of Exeter, UK
Paper title: Orlando’s flask: detection of a lost-and-found valley on the Moon
Dear Dr. Squicciarini,
We want to thank you for pointing out an extremely prescient problem, relevant not only to the field of astronomy but to the world as a whole: the increasing accumulation of human wits on the Moon. The ongoing loss of human sanity, especially that of reviewer 2, is concerning on many levels, and increasing world levels of delusion endanger us all. We had wondered where our collective faculty of reason had gone, and throw our support wholeheartedly behind the development of the ASTOLFO mission to go get it back.
Reviewer 1: I find no fault with the methodology or the conclusions of this paper. Admittedly, I skimmed the algorithm description, but it seems good to me. Looking forward to the upcoming paper mentioned in section 2.1, in which the authors totally promise to release their code to the public.
Reviewer 2: While I can frib-frab with the best of them, my horse says that the zone of frequency endowment is not blue. O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay! I mustn’t rush. Ingen dårlig vær, bare dårlige klær. The birds may not taste like rowan yet, but ich fahre zum Bahnhof uansett.
Authors: Dominick M. Rowan, John D. Roberts
First author affiliation: The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
Paper Title: PromoPlot: Covering open-access fees by filling wasted space in corner plots
Dear (future) Dr. Rowan and (future) Dr. Roberts,
We would like to thank you for your submission rectifying the deplorable waste of space found in corner plots. It is important to maximize scientific output and efficiency, and we find your suggestion to use that space for advertising absolutely brilliant. We also appreciate the effort to develop a widely accessible package to insert advertising into corner plots. However, we at Definitely Not a Predatory Journal disagree with your implication that high publication fees are a problem, and given that key flaw in the premise of your work we are unfortunately unable to accept your manuscript for publication.
Reviewer 1: This work addresses two key questions in the field: how can we reduce publication fees and how can we better format papers? The proposed python package (PromoPlot) provides a user-friendly way to support financially struggling academics. This also has wonderful implications for improving public interest in the field, especially through the offering of promo-codes and discounts explored in the last section.
Reviewer 2: While I appreciate the attempt to find a use for the empty space in corner plots, I am concerned about the neglect of other key unused spaces in manuscripts such as the margins, headers and footers, in between axis labels and the axis, and in between lines of text. We would suggest that you modify your package to explore the full range of wasted space in manuscripts.
Editor’s Note: Stay tuned for an exciting announcement regarding the inclusion of advertisements in future editions of Definitely Not a Predatory Journal! This of course would support our mission to make more research open-access and definitely has nothing to do with potential financial gains for the publishing company.
Author: Michael Lund
First author affiliation: Caltech/IPAC-NExScI
Paper title: Astronomers Getting Less Creative Over Time Is Why This Title Isn’t Better
Dear Dr. Lund,
We thank you for your insight on this very pertinent issue in astronomy. As much as we hate to admit it, it is absolutely true that we lack the imagination and je ne sais quoi that was characteristic of the ancient geniuses and formed the essence of their creativity. We appreciate the example that you gave to illustrate this point– it truly is interesting how, for the lack of a better word, boring constellations have gotten in recent years. We acknowledge the importance of this problem and hereby recommend your work for publication, subject to a few suggested clarifications.
Reviewer 1: The choice of constellations for your complexity analysis to address issues in dwindling creativity is good. However, one must also keep in mind that constellations are becoming increasingly difficult to discern due to the increasing amount of light pollution. Perhaps this could also explain why constellations are decreasing in complexity, a point I think should also be addressed. This could also raise a question on how we need to get more creative to appreciate the night sky, which could be left as an exercise for the reader, as all great textbooks do.
Reviewer 2: This work has made us realise that for all the shebang on how astronomers have revolutionized knowledge of the universe, we still can be plain old dullards in many respects. However, the approach of studying constellation complexity still seems creative in its own regard. Adding an explanation for this apparent contradiction could better help drive home the titular idea. It would also be great to expand this paper to include constellations from other cultures to see if there are different regional trends in creativity, or how these trends correlate to work-life culture around the world. I blame this decrease in creativity on the lack of work-life balance.
Author: Emmanuel Jacquet
First author affiliation: Jacquet Institute of Eclectic Science in Buc
Paper title: Jacquetium, a new, naturally-occurring chemical element
Dear Dr. Jacquet,
We thank you for your revised submission with the important classification of the element Jacquetium. It fills the important gap of a Z=0 element, long overlooked in the literature. The element has no protons and one neutron, and the authors suggest it be added to the noble gases on the periodic table. We are happy to accept this novel manuscript for publication in our journal.
Reviewer 1: It baffles me that such an essential element remained undiscovered for so long. Such an important contribution cannot be overstated, and naming the element after its discoverer in recognition of this feat is definitely the right call.
Reviewer 2: I am confused by the concept presented in this paper. Is this not just a neutron? I am, however, intrigued by the concept of jacquetium-0, which has no protons and no neutrons. Further study of this isotope is needed to qualify its existence.
Author: Joanne Tan
First author affiliation: Earth, Maybe. Perhaps an Extragalactic Existence, or the Equivalent of a Hocus-pocus (EMPEE-EH)
Paper Title: Written in the Stars: How your (pens and) papers decide the fate of the arXiverse
Dear Dr. Tan,
We thank you for the meta insights into a novel discovery of the non-uniform expansion of the arXiverse. Quantifying the consequences of astronomers mindlessly yeeting papers into the void of arXiv, revealing an arXiv constant tension and indicating that the end of arXiv will be in an arXiv crunch is vitally important work that should provoke the reader to question their reality as a part of the arXiverse.
Reviewer 1: This is absolutely incredible work that reveals a complex structure behind the arXiverse that many researchers have not realized they’ve contributed to upon “yeeting their work into the void”. Though this paper humbly draws parallels between the newly coined a0 and the well-known Hubble constant, H0, I strongly believe that the arXiverse constant tension will soon become the most important problem to solve in all of physics. I look forward to seeing further work on this topic and am intrigued to see how the void of arXiv evolves after the influx of papers we’ve received today (April 1st).
Reviewer 2: I am somewhat hesitant to jump to the conclusions of an “arXiv crunch” based on the analysis that you’ve conducted. I believe it is important to consider the underlying assumptions that may cause a simple linear regression model to fail to capture the true rates at which astronomers are able to yeet their research into the void. However, I appreciate that this is important initial work that will surely lead to further critical work on this topic.
Authors: Shiyin Shen (沈世银) and Nan Li (李楠)
First author affiliation: Shanghai Astronomical Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences
Paper Title: The Universe is Odd
Dear Dr. Shen,
We thank you for submitting this incredibly robust and insightful work. Showcasing that galaxy clusters tend to have an odd number of members displays the Universe’s preference for odd numbers in a very concise manner. Your method of simply counting the number of galaxies in a given cluster is very thorough, and truly exhibits the power of modern computing resources.
Reviewer 1: This work is both robust and highly revolutionary. Challenging long-established cosmological models is difficult, yet this paper dismantles the mainstream ΛCDM paradigm beautifully. Overall, I am impressed by the methodology and context of this work. I am especially impressed by the complex algorithm shown, and your concise description of the high-level methods you apply. Your impeccable data visualization is also nice. I would like to commend you on finally breaking ΛCDM, and urge you to consider mentioning Reviewer 1 in your Nobel acceptance speech.
Reviewer 2: While the methods you employ are statistically robust, I have issues with several other aspects of the paper. I believe a second check should be done by counting each cluster member by hand, instead of using automated methods. This will ensure that machine errors are not influencing your results in any way (just to be safe). You should also consider including clusters with < 3 member galaxies in your analysis, as I believe this limit may be influencing your results.
Authors: J. Josiek, M. Bernini-Peron, G. González-Torà, R. R. Lefever, E. C. Schösser
First author affiliation: Technical University of Lurenberg, Département des Heureux, Lurenberg, Listenbourg
Paper Title: Resolving the baryon asymmetry with RATS
Dear Dr. Josiek,
We are pleased to accept your manuscript for publication. We feel that this work is a thorough and useful exploration of what would happen if the sun was made of antimatter. It is also reassuring to learn that the melting of polar ice caps is in fact a global-scale experiment on what would happen if there was a large energy dump at the poles due to interactions with an antimatter solar wind. We were frankly getting a bit worried about having to deal with that, but it sounds like your research group has it under control. Additionally, we believe that RATS (or the Reasonable Antimatter Theory of Stars) provides a solid foundation for explaining where the universe’s antimatter has gone. We hope to see more RATS in the astronomical literature going forward.
Reviewer 1: This work is extremely thorough and addresses a key question considered by many stoned college students who have taken Astronomy 101. I would particularly like to commend the authors for their brilliant solution for Mars terraforming-namely converting the sun to antimatter. I hope to see this endeavor become an immediate priority for the scientific community. I am also generally impressed by the quality of visualization in the paper, as shown in Figure 11.
Reviewer 2: Before publication, I would like to suggest that the authors expand this work to consider what would happen if the Earth was made of antimatter. In fact, I find it troubling that the authors don’t even try to address the still open question of what if matter is actually antimatter, and that the baryon asymmetry is really an excess of antimatter, as opposed to an excess of matter. Please address this in your final draft.
Authors: C. Lovell, M. Lee, A. Vijayan, T. Harvey, L. Sommovigo, A. Long, E. Lambrides, W. Roper, S. Wilkins, D. Narayanan, N. Adams, D. Austin, M. Maltz
First author affiliation: Institute of Cosmology and Gravitation, University of Portsmouth
Paper Title: ALMA Band 3 Selection of Ultra-high Redshift Dropouts: The final challenge to ΛCDM
Dear Dr. Lovell,
We were delighted to receive your manuscript providing a shockingly robust analysis of the candidate z=40 (or maybe z=21380) galaxy. Your exhaustive consideration of factors such as dust and AGN activity has convinced us that you have indeed discovered the highest-redshift galaxy. It is clear that modern instruments like JWST will continue to push the boundaries of our understanding, and our journal will immediately accept your suggestion to use the FOOD nomenclature to classify future ludicrously-high redshift galaxies. While we are happy to accept your work for publication, we would like to change the title slightly to emphasize your skill with acronyms (which as we all know astronomers love). So ABSURD: The Final Challenge to ΛCDM will be in print soon!
Reviewer 1: I find this work to be statistically robust and quite groundbreaking for the field. The authors’ ability to do SED fitting of 5 free parameters with only one ALMA data point is remarkable and demonstrates great analytical skill. I am particularly intrigued by the presence of dust with negative temperatures, which highlights just how little we know about the high-z Universe. I look forward to follow-up observations of this record-setting target.
Reviewer 2: While this work is very thorough and groundbreaking, and I am convinced of your detection of this high-redshift galaxy, I urge caution in the claims that this is in tension with ΛCDM. I personally see no issue with the formation of a massive galaxy prior to recombination, as we can’t see past the CMB and so we really can’t say anything about what was and wasn’t possible. I am, however, excited about the clear evidence for Pop III stars, as shown by the brilliant analytical thinking in your statement: “if they are going to exist anywhere, it’s probably here.”
Author: E. G. Pottebaum
First author affiliation: Department of Physics, Yale University
Paper title: What is the Funniest Number? An investigation of numerical humor
Dear Dr. Pottebaum,
We are delighted to accept your work for publication, which is truly multidisciplinary, combining mathematics, psychology and sociology into a highly anticipated result – what is the funniest number? We had concerns that this would simply be what you refer to as “mimetically funny numbers”, such as 69 or (531)8008, which lack the scientific rigour of finding a number that is truly funny only for its numerical properties. In reviewing your manuscript, some of us did truly laugh out loud at your findings and hope that this methodology can be used in further studies to find the absolute funniest number.
Reviewer 1: I appreciate that the author acknowledges the immense responsibility of finding – in the infinite amount of numbers – which is the single funniest. Though this is a seemingly impossible task, this work clearly outlines a methodology of conducting this numerological survey in a way that is statistically robust and has yielded pertinent participant testimonials, such as “even numbers are boring”. The conclusion in favour of the “Perceived Specificity Hypothesis” – that more oddly specific numbers are funnier resonated with me deeply and I hope that this work provokes deeper studies on the subject.
Reviewer 2: Although the methodology and bias in this study are well-described (and well documented in the paper’s GitHub repository), I am a bit concerned about the ability to quantify what exactly makes a number “funny”. I would imagine there are many individuals who lack the sense of humour to be capable of perceiving a number as funny or not funny (though I cannot imagine this personally, and find the number 1000 absolutely hilarious, in contradiction to your findings). I recommend the article for publication with the condition that these sociological biases are expanded upon.
Authors: Frederic V. Hessman, Andrew Collier Cameron, and Keith Horne
First author’s institution: Institut für Astrophysik und Geophysik, University of Göttingen, Friedrich-Hund-Platz 1, Göttingen, Germany
Paper Title: Detection of an extraterrestrial technical civilization on the extrasolar planet GJ 1132 b
Dear Drs. Hessman, Cameron, and Horne
Thank you for your submission. It is a very insightful take proving the presence of an extraterrestrial civilization. The detection of whisky in the atmosphere is one of a kind, and has several implications on the direction surveys like SETI should take. Your conclusion is quite plausible, with the Gliesian civilisations’s apparent Dionysian priorities lining up with the Fermi Paradox. We hereby declare a toast to celebrate the acceptance of your paper to our prestigious journal!
Reviewer 1: It is very interesting to think about what the physique and biochemistry of other organisms are like. While they may be serious alcohol connoisseurs, it is possible they have enhanced metabolisms compared to the human race, allowing them to break down the alcohol faster and get less drunk than an average human of similar build and state of health. That does open up the issue of why they haven’t tried to contact us yet. Perhaps the whisky in the air is some kind of smoke signal that’s left to our interpretation? That interpretation could be considered in the paper.
Reviewer 2: My main concern is how can you be so sure it’s whisky? We don’t know enough about agriculture on GJ 1132b to know what is being fermented. For all we know, it could also be rum. If so, heavy rum vapours could come up if the planet has a massive oven that’s baking a rum cake on a global scale. I think further evidence is required to confirm that it is whisky. For all we know, it could be an alcoholic ambrosia humanity hasn’t concocted yet!
Author: Benjamin V. Lehmann
First author’s institution: Center for Theoretical Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Paper title: Higher multipoles of the cow
Dear Dr. Lehmann,
Thank you for your submission of this pivotal work improving the time-honored spherical cow approximation. Your in-depth analysis of higher-order bovine multipoles helps to solve essential questions spanning gravitational radiation from the spinning spherical cow to the physical mechanics of the tipping cow problem. This work is certainly high impact, as the spherical cow approximation is foundational to introductory physics. We are thus mooved to immediately accept your manuscript for publication in our journal.
Reviewer 1: At last, the upgrade to the spherical cow I have been looking for! For years I have taught my students using spherical cows, milking the approximation for all its worth, but there remained a cloven-hoof-shaped hole in my heart. No longer! Now I look towards greener pastures, udderly exhilarated by this new discovery.
Reviewer 2: I appreciate the author’s attempt to improve the spherical cow approximation, although I have some remaining questions after reading the manuscript. In particular, although the gravitational radiation from one spinning spherical cow has been computed, I am curious about the impact of an entire herd of spherical cows. Could some or all of the stochastic gravitational wave background be explained by spinning spherical cows, comparable to the Chicken Meat Background proposed by Losacco and Claytor (2023)? I suggest analysis of this possibility be added to the manuscript.
Authors: Anne E Blackwell, David L Moutard, Jake A Miller
First author affiliation: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Dear (future) Dr. Blackwell,
We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been accepted for publication. Our editorial team was generally unfamiliar with the slang terms presented, but will be making an active effort to incorporate them in our own communications. We are high-key impressed with the lore you present, and are excited to let you cook more in the future..
Reviewer 1: This work is a brilliant effort to modernize the field. I have great appreciation for the thorough overview of slang terms and their meaning. It is especially intriguing that if we begin incorporating slang now, by 2052 100% of our papers can be slang terms. I am eagerly awaiting the day all papers become unintelligible. I believe it will make my morning reading of the arXiv much more enjoyable, on-god.
Reviewer 2: While I appreciate your effort to modernize scientific communication, the reading of this manuscript has caused me great distress. Apparently my students comparing me to Ohio is not a compliment referring to my alma mater (THE Ohio State University), but instead an insult. Likewise, being called an ‘opp’ is not a reference to the opportunities for education and growth that I present them, as I had believed. I fear this work will result in significant emotional harm to senior members of the field, and hence cannot recommend it for publication.
Authors: The Gigantic Supernova Pile (GSP) Collaboration, Joseph Farah, Yuan Qi Ni, Liam Brennan
First author’s institution: Department of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara
Paper Title: A multi-modal infant-based metric for choosing the best supernova
Dear (future) Dr. Farah,
Thank you dearly for your submission; we are happy to tell you that your work has been accepted for publication. Ranking supernovae based on energy output, AI-generated humanized appearance, and infant-selection criteria is a truly cutting-edge approach. Your novel neural-network ranking approach using an infant is very impressive, and your in-depth explanation of your rigorous mathematical methodology is appreciated. We are impressed with your work and eagerly await the impact that Claud.IA will have on future work in the field.
Reviewer 1: This work is a wonderful example of the cutting-edge research that AI methods enable. The abstract is beautifully written, and your methods are appropriately rigid in providing absolute rankings of your sample. The inclusion of jeff in Figure (1) is also a welcome sight; it often feels like most people forgot about him. Please pass along my best wishes to him, and let me know if Claud.IA is ever in need of a babysitter.
Reviewer 2: While I appreciate your submission, I unfortunately feel that the submitted work is another case of inappropriately applying ML methods. While your novel Claud.IA approach is certainly interesting, it seems the model would allow for too much variance. For example, did you have Claud.IA perform the ranking on both an empty and full stomach, or before and after nap time? I recommend including these tests in an appendix before publication. Also, your mention of jeff in Figure (1) is inappropriate. You know how much I dislike him.
Finally, the editors of this review would like to end by acknowledging that Thomas Meier et al. had the most April Fools sounding title for an actual contribution to the arxiv on April 1, with On the origin of Jupiter’s fuzzy core: constraints from N-body, impact and evolution simulations. They are joined in this honor by Giovanni Lacopo et al. with Green computing toward SKA era with RICK, which convinced one editor that they were about to be rickrolled.
Astrobite written and edited by Kat Lee, Sowkhya Shanbhog, Skylar Grayson, Jessie Thwaites, Maria Vincent, Drew Lapeer, Samantha Wong, and Sarah Stevenson
Featured image credit adapted from History. com
