Unifying gravity and EM
I will try to meet the terms of the 8 guidelines.
I will try to meet the terms of the 8 guidelines.
Last edited by a moderator:
We are not modifying anything. You submitted it to the WRONG forum. Submit it to the IR forum, not THIS forum.sweetser said:Hello ZapperZ:
Please consider modifying the start of this forum, "Outside the Mainstream". I wrote my post based on those 8 guidelines, which are also the ones in the Independent Research Forum. My post was delete because it did not match the more general guidelines, "Physics Forums & mkaku.org Forums Guidelines".
I think you're confused about terminology. "Outside the Mainstream" is not a forum. It is a thread within the forum "Physics Forum Feedback and Announcements."sweetser said:Please consider modifying the start of this forum, "Outside the Mainstream".
Hi,sweetser said:Thanks JTBell, that clarifies my error.
I've looked over the PF & MKaku policy, and from the wording it seems that if copyrighted material is posted here the copyright does not transfer to PF. I've PM'd Greg about this just to make sure. Our guidelines forbid posting copyrighted material in excess without citing the source, but if the copyright holder is the author then I don't see a problem with you posting your stuff at PF and retaining the copyright. Let's wait until I hear back from Greg to make sure though.Zanket said:Any news on this? I can discuss my "outside the mainstream" idea on many physics sites, but not here on PF. On the other sites I've linked to the paper;
CarlB brought this up too. Another concern is derivation of equations. Posts with lots of LaTeX tend to make PF choke when the "send" button is hit. I am proposing the following modification to the guidelines: Derivations and figures will be allowed in external links, but the rest of the discussion should be posted here at PF. The external links should be placed at the appropriate places in the post so that they can be viewed in the flow of the discussion.Also I was thinking: what about images? If a paper is put into a post, images will still be a link, won’t they?
Suggestion for the cautious: print the page on which Tom's statement appears, have it notarised (as I believe the practice is called in the US), make copies, keep one with your off-site backup.Tom Mattson said:I've heard back from Greg. PF's claim to copyright on what is posted here is actually been rescinded. There is no risk of losing any of your ideas.
I was just curious concerning any resent submission I didn’t not receive some kind of reply. I suspected some kind of reply saying was being reviewed and is pending approval or some kind of confirmation. I submitted twice to the forum because I sent the moderator an email requesting conformation and didn’t receive a reply. Any information concerning its status would be appreciated.Tom Mattson said:You're not off the subject at all. You can submit your work to the Independent Research Forum, which is the subject of this thread.
The forum is located here:
Please do read the guidelines and make sure that your submission conforms to them. If you have any questions about that you can ask me.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=765493Tom Mattson said:Note: The Guidelines were updated today.
Guideline 2 was updated to accomodate submitted theories that are empirically equivalent to existing theories.
Guideline 4 was updated to allow equations that were not typed in LaTeX, provided that they are legible (eg: "E=mc2" is acceptable).
Guideline 9 was added to allow external links for limited purposes.
As an example of this, take a look at what happened to this thread:CarlB said:My only problem with coming over here is that there is no restriction on who can post. That makes threads on PF tend to fill up with garbage posts by random people.
That should have been split off into a separate thread. You do have control of your thread, to a certain extent. When something like this happens, notify a mentor, either via the "report post" button or pm that your thread has gone off topic and you would like the posts removed. The mentor can then decide if the posts should be deleted or if they are worthy of becoming a separate thread.CarlB said:As an example of this, take a look at what happened to this thread:
It would really be an improvement to physicsforums if the person who starts a thread were allowed to restrict who can post to it. I hoped to learn a little about density matrices. What I got was a fairly useless discussion between two individuals that eventually degenerated into SHOUTING, followed by sliding into pseudo-science.
I've just taken care of it. Carl, I'm sorry that we missed that abuse of your thread. PF is getting so big that it makes it difficult for the Staff to read every thread. Also, we've recently lost one of our resident physicists from the Staff (Gokul), and we are presently working on bulking up our moderation team.Evo said:That should have been split off into a separate thread.
Absolutely. Carl, your idea of self-moderated threads is interesting to me, and we can certainly look into it. But at the moment that is not a feature that we have. So if you want to avoid this type of thing in the future, you need to use the features that we do have, which is the "Report Bad Post" key. If you had reported the first post that started to get the thread "going south" then it would have been stopped before it got started.You do have control of your thread, to a certain extent. When something like this happens, notify a mentor, either via the "report post" button or pm that your thread has gone off topic and you would like the posts removed.
You lost him?! Have you looked everywhere? Maybe he's just hiding under the bed or in a closet. I guess he didn't have enough time to juggle PF and grad school? Sorry to hear that he no longer moderating...I hadn't even noticed he faded from green to yellow; I guess he blended in with the fall leaves turning color.Tom Mattson said:Also, we've recently lost one of our resident physicists from the Staff (Gokul), and we are presently working on bulking up our moderation team.
Then I gave examples of yahoo forums that "real" physicists ran in order to discuss new physics ideas and he responded:I disagree. Arxiv has NO refereeing. I could post a paper on there tomorrow and it'll get through since I have already submitted several of them. I could cite the National Enquirer in my references and it will still be online.
I continued to think about Koide's formula. Around March 2006, I figured out how to generalize his formula to the neutrinos. This was an extension to the knowledge in the field because it was previously believed that Koide's formula could not be used with the neutrinos. I published the equations here:However, I haven't seen ANY of them produced anything to expand the body of knowledge of the field. Can you point to important published paper that actually CAME out of such discussion?