Proving a Theorem and Publishing It

[sutupidmath]

Advice Needed!

Hi all,

I think i have managed to prove a theorem in a completely different way compared to the other proofs i have seen so far. I checked up in some books and there is no similar proof of this theorem in non of them. There is only one book that suggests that this theorem can be proven the way i did, but it gives nothing more than this suggestion, no hints how to do it, nothing else. I also have managed to prove almost all consequences of this theorem, using my way of proof.
Since we are on spring break right now, i haven't yet disscussed this with my academic advisor, who is also my prof. in three math courses.
After i discuss it with my professor, i also am going to post the entire work of mine here, and have it judged by you.
At this point i would like to know, that how original does something have to be, in order to be acceptable for being published in any magazine? In other words, i am sure that somewhere(in some upperdivsion books) this theorem should have been proven in a similar manner to this of mine, but since i did it with no reference at any othe book, is there a possibility that i may have it published somewhere. It doesn't really make any difference whether i publish it or not, but i was just curious asking?

Any comment on this will be highly appreciated.

Me!

 

[Andy Resnick]

Other than your proof being 'different', is there any utility? Are any new insights gained?

Certainly you can get it published *somewhere*... there's thousands and thousands of journals out there. Don't expect a top-ranked journal to be interested, unless you can clearly show the utility, applicability, and *usefulness* to a broad audience.

 

[sutupidmath]

Other than your proof being 'different', is there any utility? Are any new insights gained?

Certainly you can get it published *somewhere*... there's thousands and thousands of journals out there. Don't expect a top-ranked journal to be interested, unless you can clearly show the utility, applicability, and *usefulness* to a broad audience.

Well,the only utilities that i have noticed so far are that many things are easier to prove this way, also it uses some completely other definitions to prove these things and also gives some insights to some not so common topics. The theorem is easy, and is well known. I mean the theorem to which i "found this new proof".

 

[leon1127]

well depends on the importance of the theorem. If you give some simpler proof of fermat's last theorem, i think you should publish it. However if you give alternative proof of some rather unimportant theorem. I think you should keep it for the moment and find more application of the method you used.

 

[sutupidmath]

Other than your proof being 'different', is there any utility? Are any new insights gained?

Certainly you can get it published *somewhere*... there's thousands and thousands of journals out there. Don't expect a top-ranked journal to be interested, unless you can clearly show the utility, applicability, and *usefulness* to a broad audience.

Can you give me some names of those journals, that are not top-ranked at all. I mean just some really low-ranked journals, that would probbably be interested in this.Because, this is not that important at all, it might be for me, since i am a novice at math, but i do not think it will be of such a great importance for the others.So if you could just give me some suggestions on how to start looking for them, for i have no idea where to start!

Should i first consult with my professor, and see what she says, before i contact any of these journals, or is it okay if i start making contacts with these journals, just to see in case they are interested?
what would be best to do?
thnx

 

[CPL.Luke]

what is the theorem that you proved in an alternate manner? I ask mainly out of curiosity, but it may motivate some more responses.

really the bet thing is to talk to your professor, it may come out then that you missed something, or he could tell you thebest thing to do with it. I know that as a physics major Ihave shown many results to be true on my own, however I would highly doubt any of them would be worth publishing.

 

[cristo]

Talk to your professor before you think about trying to publish this; it would be a pretty bad start to an academic career if you publish something that someone else published 30 years ago! You say that you have not seen this proof anywhere in textbooks, but that does not mean that the proof has not been published in a journal.

 

[Cyrus]

Hi all,

I think i have managed to prove a theorem in a completely different way compared to the other proofs i have seen so far. I checked up in some books and there is no similar proof of this theorem in non of them. There is only one book that suggests that this theorem can be proven the way i did, but it gives nothing more than this suggestion, no hints how to do it, nothing else. I also have managed to prove almost all consequences of this theorem, using my way of proof.
Since we are on spring break right now, i haven't yet disscussed this with my academic advisor, who is also my prof. in three math courses.
After i discuss it with my professor, i also am going to post the entire work of mine here, and have it judged by you.
At this point i would like to know, that how original does something have to be, in order to be acceptable for being published in any magazine? In other words, i am sure that somewhere(in some upperdivsion books) this theorem should have been proven in a similar manner to this of mine, but since i did it with no reference at any othe book, is there a possibility that i may have it published somewhere. It doesn't really make any difference whether i publish it or not, but i was just curious asking?

Any comment on this will be highly appreciated.

Me!

There is a reason why he said it could be proven that way, it has been proven that way. You are simply rehashing a known result, there is nothing worth publishing. Sorry.

BUT, it was a good learning exercise!

 

[sutupidmath]

Yeah, i also think that this should have been proven somewhere, although like i said i have not seen that kind of proof in the books i checked, nothing even similar to it. It also would have been a shame if no one had proved this theorem this way before. That's why i asked how original sth should be in order to get a chance to get published. I thought that there might be some kind of journal, for example, for undergrad students who could publish things similar to what i have done.But i will check it with my prof anyways, just to see what she thinks.
Thnx for your suggestions guys.