Obscurity in Electroanalytical Chemistry

Comments to "Electroanalytical Obscurity: An Alternative View" by Robert de Levie

“…The English version was published next year [3]. The expression in the third line of Introduction in [1], " [2] on my review [3]" (" [2]" and " [3]" in the quotation in the present communication are [3] and [4], respectively), is hence inappropriate: my reflection [2,3] is not aimed to make all-out criticism of the view of Prof. de Levie detailed in [4]. I rather tried to reveal obscurity frequently seen in contemporary textbooks of electroanalytical chemistry, as well as relevant chapters of analytical chemistry textbooks, in introducing "Nernst equation".…”

“…During my stay at the J. Heyrovsky Institute in Prague in October 2014, Prof. Z. Samec kindly made me aware of the presence of [4]. After looking through the article, I felt that what I wrote in [2] was still meaningful for readers of Rev. Polarogr.…”

“…My reflection originally published in Japanese in September 2014 [2] is not my response to Prof. de Levie's article in 2014 [4], but to his lecture in the Prague ISE meeting in 2012, and also on his paper published earlier [5]. When I was writing [2] in August 2014, I was not aware of Prof. de Levie's article [4] that had been published in July 20, 2014, and had been available online even earlier since April 18, 2014. During my stay at the J. Heyrovsky Institute in Prague in October 2014, Prof. Z. Samec kindly made me aware of the presence of [4].…”

“…Polarogr. to get an insight into the very essential points concerning the single ion activity, pH, and the nature of electrochemical systems, and rendered my reflection [2] into English during my stay at the J. Heyrovsky Institute in October 2014. The English version was published next year [3].…”

“…In that sense, the article, "Electroanalytical obscurity: an alternative view," by Prof. de Levie [1] which is written in response to my reflection, or essay or note, entitled" Obscurity in Electroanalytical Chemistry " [2,3], is highly welcome. Unfortunately, however, his comments in [1] miss the main points I raised in my reflection [2,3].…”