Where Can I Share My Scientific Theory on X for Maximum Exposure?

[woody stanford]

Ok this just me venting a bit but I am serious about this.

Lets say I have a theory...on X. I've writttenn papers on it, pdf format and everything but I just can't seem to get anyone interested in it. At first, I got a bunch of downloads but now that I have the theory encoded programatically, I am down to zero hits?

Can someone tell me the order of places I should go to get some type of exposure on this? I really think it would do the world some good if they knew about some of my findings.

Thoughts?

 

[Orodruin]

Lets say I have a theory...on X. I've writttenn papers on it, pdf format and everything but I just can't seem to get anyone interested in it.

Did you publish these paper in a reputable peer reviewed journal? If not, you have not written papers on it.

Can someone tell me the order of places I should go to get some type of exposure on this? I really think it would do the world some god if they knew about some of my findings.

The answer here is the same. You need to publish in a peer reviewed journal. Now, if you do not know which journal to publish in, you are already in trouble. Not knowing this indicates that you do not have knowledge of the state of the art in the field and your theory is likely based on misconceptions and likely already ruled out by experiments - or so vague that no experiment can falsify it, which would make it non-scientific.

 

[Dream Relics]

Okay so I have been informed that my suggestion to publish it here is actually against the rules. So disregard that. But hopefully it is not against the rules to suggest that at least as you ask this question you give a bit more specifics about your background, field of study and what the theory is about generally. Like is it physics, engineering, brontosaurus - this theory that you have, that is yours, that you have. ?

Or maybe the thing to do is make a youtube video about it. Or if the theory is workable than do or build whatever the theory may suggest and see if it works.

 

[Orodruin]

Or maybe the thing to do is make a youtube video about it.

Definitely not, this will go right into the bin of "crazy people who put their personal theories on youtube". If you want to be taken seriously by the scientific community you need to publish in a reputable peer reviewed journal. Thats it. In order to get there, getting a university degree in the relevant subject is a good start.

The more pressing issue is: Why would you think your theory holds any merit unless you already know the state of the art. You are not going around claiming to have found revolutionary new techniques for brain surgery, yet getting to the level of expertise required to contribute in either field takes similar effort.

 

[chiro]

Hey woody stanford.

Have you ever gone to a university or facility of higher education before?

You can publish things but as has been mentioned, it's often a pre-requisite for others to check your work before they give their approval and that involve a lengthy process including editing, external review and validation and a lot of the other "scientific" attributes that help validate any sort of scientific and/or mathematical "claim".

I would suggest you focus on this scientific aspect if you want to get people to take a closer look at it.

 

[micromass]

Ok this just me venting a bit but I am serious about this.

Lets say I have a theory...on X. I've writttenn papers on it, pdf format and everything but I just can't seem to get anyone interested in it. At firat, I got a bunch of downloads but now that I have the theory encoded programatically, I am down to zero hits?

Can someone tell me the order of places I should go to get some type of exposure on this? I really think it would do the world some god if they knew about some of my findings.

Thoughts?

Unless you publish in a reputable journal, nobody will take your theory seriously.

 

[berkeman]

Can someone tell me the order of places I should go to get some type of exposure on this? I really think it would do the world some good if they knew about some of my findings.

https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/wont-look-new-theory/

 

[woody stanford]

https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/wont-look-new-theory/

Great article. Thank you for the link. Agreed with most of it as well. Thank you.

 

[woody stanford]

Have you ever gone to a university or facility of higher education before?

I only got to my junior year of my BSE-EE back in the day.

I've noticed that these days you can't do much without letters after your name so its frustrating. It wasnt quite like this even a few years ago. An opinion.

And I agree with your point of view. Thanks.

 

[Orodruin]

I've noticed that these days you can't do much without letters after your name so its frustrating. It wasnt quite like this even a few years ago. An opinion.

It is not the letters themselves, it is the knowledge they represent. I have those letters and would not dream of making theories outside my field of expertise (without the proper collaboration with people who do have it). It has been like this for a very long time - you need to know the field before you can contribute to it. Many people seem to have the misconception that people like Einstein did not know the fields and that their theories appeared out of thin air. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[ZapperZ]

I only got to my junior year of my BSE-EE back in the day.

I've noticed that these days you can't do much without letters after your name so its frustrating. It wasnt quite like this even a few years ago. An opinion.

This complaint makes very little sense. That's like complaining that you need an "MD" next to your name to be able to perform surgery. Would you let someone without such such qualification perform heart surgery on you?

Zz.

 

[woody stanford]

This complaint makes very little sense. That's like complaining that you need an "MD" next to your name to be able to perform surgery. Would you let someone without such such qualification perform heart surgery on you?

Zz.

Yes, but this is just physics. ;)

 

[woody stanford]

Many people seem to have the misconception that people like Einstein did not know the fields and that their theories appeared out of thin air. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Yes, I understand but does academia have the market cornered on truth, is my point.

Bringing up Einstein, just how did a member of a minority working as a clerk get his ideas taken seriously. I really doubt if he had a lot under his belt at 26 yrs old.

Xerography another great example in point. It was invented in someone's garage.

 

[ZapperZ]

Yes, but this is just physics. ;)

But that shows your disrespect for the field.

Zz.

 

[ZapperZ]

Yes, I understand but does academia have the market cornered on truth, is my point.

Bringing up Einstein, just how did a member of a minority working as a clerk get his ideas taken seriously. I really doubt if he had a lot under his belt at 26 yrs old.

But this is EXACTLY the point! It has nothing to do with all those institutions. It has everything to do with the KNOWLEDGE that a person has!

Einstein wasn't a Johnny-come-lately in terms of physics. He can't be to be aware of the problem of non-covariance in Maxwell equation at that time! Do you think someone of your caliber, during that time, would have recognized that problem? How many members of the general public before 1905 even knew of such a thing?

I challenge you to claim that you are fully aware and understood of the state of knowledge of whatever field your "theory" is in, and that you have kept up with all the publications and advancements on that field. Till you can do that, you have no grounds to bring up Einstein as an example.

Zz.

 

[woody stanford]

But that shows your disrespect for the field.

Zz.

lol No I'm just saying I'm not going to kill anyone if I mess up is all.

Sorry I am being facecious. Just a joke...just joking around.

 

[woody stanford]

I challenge you to claim that you are fully aware and understood of the state of knowledge of whatever field your "theory" is in, and that you have kept up with all the publications and advancements on that field. Till you can do that, you have no grounds to bring up Einstein as an example.

Zz.

I respectfully decline that challenge. I will have you know that many of my friends know that I am a complete idiot in various areas.

 

[ZapperZ]

I respectfully decline that challenge.

Then you have no business in bringing up your Einstein example, because it doesn't apply to anything here.

Zz.

 

[Orodruin]

Yes, but this is just physics. ;)

This statement is irrelevant. You should trust the physics theories of people without the proper credentials as far as you trust the medical skills of people adequately prepared to practice medicine. You seem to be under the false impression that physics somehow is simpler or less rigorous. Physics is a very demanding empirical science and you need to keep up with the latest developments in order to contribute in a meaningful way. Just as a medical doctor needs to keep up with the latest treatments and medical research. Popular science generally dumbs things down and does a very good job in convincing people that this is not the case.

Yes, I understand but does academia have the market cornered on truth, is my point

You have the wrong impression here. People in academia generally know what has been done and what have been tried and, more importantly, what does not work. You can theorize all you want - but if you are not familiar with the state of the art you are like a blind hen looking for a worm on an asphalt road.

Bringing up Einstein, just how did a member of a minority working as a clerk get his ideas taken seriously. I really doubt if he had a lot under his belt at 26 yrs old.

Again, a common misconception. Einstein had the proper credentials. His patent office job was essentially a temporary thing while he was examining his carreer opportunities. He was very well aware of the current state of art and open problems. He published his work in reputable journals as was the practice and continues to be the practice.

 

[OmCheeto]

Unless you publish in a reputable journal, nobody will take your theory seriously.

I would.
Unless, of course it was rubbish, and then I would say so.

I only got to my junior year of my BSE-EE back in the day.

That's exactly as far as I got.
Interesting.
hmmm... I have many theories outside of EE that I'm not allowed to share here at the forum.
Doesn't bother me a bit, as, like you, I post them on my own website.
My website get's about one view per year, and no one in 20 years has commented on my theories.
I took that as a clue.

 

[axmls]

No journal will care about your degree or lack thereof if your theory has substance to it, but it's not a coincidence that the people who are able to develop theories with substance have advanced degrees in their fields.

 

[berkeman]

I think we are done here. @woody stanford -- Please read as much as you can in the relevant peer-reviewed scientific journals to learn more about the field. And please consider taking more classes. It definitely sounds like you are more motivated now to learn and contribute.