[abdullahkhalids]

> The easiest way to do this is to write it in such a way that makes it hard to read, but not in such a way that makes it obvious it's gibberish.

I am not sure where these weird beliefs come from. Scientific papers are difficult to understand because it's incredibly difficult to explain things that have never been explained before [1]. I encourage anyone who has the above view to spend two years solving a difficult scientific problem, and then do a comprehensive summary in 10ish pages.

A more direct criticism of the above comment is that publication pressure is a very post-world war 2 thing. But you can pull random papers from earlier and find many of them extremely difficult to understand. Here is the 2nd most cited paper by Pauli from 1939 [2]. Try understanding what it truly says. This is one of the smartest humans to ever exist.

[1] To your knowledge at least. People who write bad papers, or do stuff similar to what has been done before often do it because they don't understand the work of others fully.

[2] https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rspa.1939...