《关于杜冰蟾的汉字全息码》一文,推崇全息码可与俄国大化学家门捷列夫的元素周期表媲美,希望有关方面给予政策支持,国内信息产业集团迅速采用全息码……云云。笔者读后疑窦丛生:这是科学的论证?还是主观的臆断? 众所周知,曾首先发表杜氏论文的《自然杂志》,早在1991年第4期就公开反思“在未经有关科研机构鉴定或专家审核的情况下,就轻易地决定发表,并且还作了不恰当的评论,这不能不说是一个严重的失误”。同年11月24日的《光明日报》公布了专家关于全息码“一无特色,二无创新,不值得推广”的评审意 “On the ice captive Han hologram” article, respected hologram code with the Russian chemist Mendeleev’s periodic table comparable to the hope that the parties concerned to give policy support, the domestic information industry group quickly adopted the holographic code ... ... and so on. It is a scientific proof or a subjective guess. As we all know, the “Nature Magazine”, first published in Du’s thesis, made an open rethought as early as the fourth period in 1991 that “without prior appraisal by experts in related scientific research institutions or experts In the case of an audit, it is easy to decide to publish and make inappropriate comments, which can not but be a serious mistake. ” In the same year on November 24, “Guangming Daily” announced the experts on the hologram code “no distinctions, two non-innovative, not worth promoting” review Italian