New person here, where do I post my own personal hypothesis?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Legodudelol9a
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a new member's inquiry about sharing personal hypotheses in astrophysics that challenge conventional science. Participants address the appropriateness of posting such content on the forum and suggest alternative platforms for sharing personal theories.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • A new member expresses interest in sharing personal hypotheses that challenge conventional science.
  • Some participants assert that the forum does not accept personal hypotheses and suggest looking elsewhere.
  • Others provide links to the forum's guidelines regarding non-mainstream and speculative theories.
  • One participant questions the validity of the new member's hypotheses, suggesting that a lack of foundational knowledge is evident in their inquiry.
  • There are mixed responses regarding how to guide the new member, with some advocating for a more supportive approach while others criticize the idea of sharing unverified theories.
  • One participant mentions a specific site (viXra) as a potential outlet for the new member's ideas, albeit with reservations.
  • Some participants reflect on the nature of discussions around "dissident" scientists and the challenges they face in being taken seriously.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the forum is not the right place for personal hypotheses, but there is disagreement on how to address the new member's inquiry and the tone of the responses given. Some advocate for constructive guidance, while others express skepticism about the validity of the new member's approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the forum's guidelines, which outline restrictions on non-mainstream theories. There is also an acknowledgment of the challenges faced by individuals attempting to contribute unconventional ideas to the scientific discourse.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in the dynamics of sharing personal scientific theories, the reception of unconventional ideas in academic communities, and the guidelines governing discussions in online forums may find this exchange relevant.

Legodudelol9a
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
I've been studying astrophysics for fun for most of my life and have a ton of hypothesis that challenge conventional science that I'd like to share. Does this website accept that kind of thing, and if so where would I post them?
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy
Physics news on Phys.org
Legodudelol9a said:
I've been studying astrophysics for fun for most of my life and have a ton of hypothesis that challenge conventional science that I'd like to share. Does this website accept that kind of thing, and if so where would I post them?
No, not here.
 
  • Agree
Likes   Reactions: Bystander
welcome @Legodudelol9a. There are plenty of sites on the innertoobs that will entertain personal hypotheses. This is not one of them.

But feel free to come in, look around, kick the tires.
 
See our Global Guidelines:


also accessible from the top menu, under Info --> Terms and Rules.

Note the sections about "Non-mainstream theories" and "Speculative or personal theories".
 
Last edited:
DaveC426913 said:
welcome @Legodudelol9a. There are plenty of sites on the innertoobs that will entertain personal hypotheses. This is not one of them.

But feel free to come in, look around, kick the tires.
Been kicking around for a while, any suggestions as to what websites I should try?
 
jtbell said:
See our Global Guidelines:


also accessible from the top menu, under Info --> Terms and Rules.

Note the sections about "Non-mainstream theories" and "Speculative or personal theories".
Any idea where I can put forwards my personal hypothesis based on my own observations in science? Tried a few sites to no avail.
 
No website that accepts this is worth a recommendation. You are not the first who thinks they can revolutionize physics based on some popular science descriptions and (more recently) AI tools praising everything you feed them. If you had the required knowledge to contribute anything useful, you wouldn't ask these questions here. Learning where to contribute to science comes years before producing something worth contributing.

https://xkcd.com/675/
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby, Bystander, russ_watters and 2 others
Why are you wasting your time doing this instead of just learning what is already known?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre, russ_watters, phinds and 2 others
mfb said:
No website that accept this is worth a recommendation. You are not the first who thinks they can revolutionize physics based on some popular science descriptions and (more recently) AI tools praising everything you feed them. If you had the required knowledge to contribute anything useful, you wouldn't ask these questions here. Learning where to contribute to science comes years before producing something worth contributing.

https://xkcd.com/675/
In a DM I made the OP aware of viXra with all the reservations I could think of. Unsurprisingly he was not impressed. Conclude from that from you want.
 
  • #10
sbrothy said:
EDIT: Nah that was kicking down. Sorry.
This whole thread is kicking down.

A young, enthusiastic science buff should be guided toward learning, not pantsed and wedgied.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Hornbein and sbrothy
  • #11
I agree. The OP should be properly explained what is wrong with his approach rather than made fun of. FTR I didn't make fun of him in my DM. I think sincerely hope he'll agree.
 
  • #12
And FTR again I was kicking down at viXra!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DaveC426913
  • #13
sbrothy said:
And FTR again I was kicking down at viXra!
I know.
 
  • #14
This may be enlightening...

robphy said:
(my post on Edwin F. Taylor)

  • A Call for Give and Take (The Scientist, Mar 17, 1996)
    As former editor of a physics education journal and coauthor of two relativity texts, I have had a lot of contact with what your article [B. Goodman, The Scientist, May 15, 1995, page 3] calls "dissident" scientists, many of whom attack special relativity. In my experience, most are extremely intelligent and inventive. Their arguments are ingenious, and any errors are often difficult to find. Still, there are two characteristics that I have found in many dissidents with whom I have communicated.
 
  • #15
Thread closed for Moderation.
 
  • #16
After some cleanup, the thread will remain closed.

Legodudelol9a said:
Been kicking around for a while, any suggestions as to what websites I should try?
@Legodudelol9a -- I will send you a DM with some possible forums you could try for posting your speculative ideas.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K