How to challenge a well established theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter abhijitp88
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Challenge Theory
Click For Summary
To challenge the Carnot theorem or similar established theories in physics, a solid theoretical framework must be accompanied by experimental support, as conjectures without evidence are generally disregarded by reputable journals. Many participants emphasize that without experimental validation, new theories are unlikely to gain traction or recognition in the scientific community. Suggestions for suitable journals that accept theoretical work include those that have previously published on the Carnot engine, highlighting the importance of adhering to established scientific norms and presentation styles. The discussion also touches on the challenges faced by dissenters in science, noting that while non-conformist ideas can drive progress, they often encounter significant resistance. Ultimately, a well-structured approach and rigorous peer review are essential for any new theory to be taken seriously.
  • #31
NileQueen said:
Referring to an informational post as "garbage".

I refer to the reference as "garbage" because it really has nothing to do with the OP! And not only that, I've countered it sufficiently with Dan Koshland's article.

Not understanding the concept of paradigm shifts

I understand paradigm shift very well! I've seen it first hand. If you don't think the discovery of High-Tc superconductivity was a paradigm shift, then you don't know physics.

Calling the original poster a crackpot, without even knowing
anything about his "theory". He is just asking for advice.
What kind of mentoring is that? It's NOT.

You need to pay attention to what you read. This is EXACTLY what I said:

ZapperZ said:
you are exhibiting the same symptoms of a crackpot

I called no one a crackpot. I pointed out similar characteristics of a crackpot. I even gave a link where others have also encountered similar traits.

It is my personal experience, having been on the 'net since 1987, that people who can't even figure out what journals are what, and suddenly claim to have discovered the next best thing since sliced cheese, 100% of the time have such characteristics. The number of years I've been on this forum only reinforced such a view, because I haven't seen anything to the contrary to change my mind.

Zz.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
abhijitp88 said:
hi all, thank u for all the responses, this theory I am proposing is serious and in the system that is proposed, the entropy of the universe increases, so the system is totally possible. The only obstacle in the actual construction is the availability of suitable materials. If this theory is published, then research would lead us to an actual working system eventually. I have sent the abstracts to the popular journals. Most of them aren't commenting anything. If anyone is aware of theoretical journals that publish such papers, then pls help me out here.

So this is a system you can build, but you don't have the suitable materials.

Perhaps what I'm working on is something similar. It's an energy storage device which almost completely circumvents the second law of thermodynamics. Though I wouldn't characterize it as contradicting anything. Carnot still comes into play, but just barely. Kind of like a spring, only with a much better energy/kg ratio. (no magnets involved!)

I've not submitted a paper as it is much too simple a device, and I'll simply just patent it.

What kind of suitable materials does you system require? Or would letting us know that divulge too much of your secret?
 
  • #33
abhijitp88 said:
Hi all, need some help here. If I wish to contradict a well established theory in physics (namely the Carnot theorem), then what would be a suitable platform? I've tried a few journals but most of those publish experimental papers & won't accept my paper because it’s theoretical. Pls suggest a suitable platform (journals, conferences etc.) where new theories can be forwarded for scientific criticism. Thanks in advance.

Why does the Carnot theorem need to be changed?? Why do you think it does not accurately describe reality?? Remember, that question needs to be answered with experimental data. Some philosophical explanation is not sufficient.
 
  • #34
I don't mean to derail this thread more than it already has, but why is it everyone immediately jumped to the idea of a perpetual motion machine? The OP never made such a claim and divulged no information about the details of his hypothesis. For all we know, his idea mandates an even lower limit to the amount of energy a thermal engine may be allowed to convert. Has the scientific community really become that aporetic to new ideas?
 
  • #35
This thread should have been put to rest long before. OP got his answer in 8th posts or so.
 
  • #36
Here are some options:

International Journal of Thermal Sciences
http://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-thermal-sciences/

Springer
Journal of Thermal Science
International Journal of Thermophysics

http://www.epower-propulsion.com/epower/pages/j_midpages/int_j_thermal_sci.htm
International Journal of Thermal Sciences
International Journal of Thermophysics

List of scientific/academic publishers
http://www.epower-propulsion.com/epower/pages/EPowerpublishers.htm
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
47
Views
8K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
8K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 91 ·
4
Replies
91
Views
8K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
15K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K