Publication advice for Born Rule paper

[Jazzdude]

Dear everyone,

I know this is not exactly on topic here, but I thought it was even more off topic in the other sub-forums, so please forgive me for posting it here.

I'm looking for some advice and maybe some help. Recently I have finished my work on a paper about the emergence of the Born rule from observations with limited information. It's very different from anything out there and comes without artificial assumptions. I'm quite confident that it can contribute to the understanding of quantum theory and want it to get published as soon as possible, but also with the greatest impact possible.

Now here's the problem: I'm not well connected in the academic community, since I left academic life 7 years ago. And my old work group leader is retired now and knows little about modern publishing strategies.

So there are two things that I'm considering. First I'd like to get it on Arxiv rather soon. For that I would need an endorsement (quant-ph) which I hope someone here is able and willing to provide. Of course I will share the paper with potential endorsers before.
Secondly, I'm thinking about which journal would be best suited for publishing it. Now my paper is 13 pages in two column PRL style print, and that probably reduces my options significantly. Currently it looks like Foundations of Physics could do it. But then again they ask for 3000 Euros for an open access publication (which is relatively important to me), and while I could afford that, I would still like to see if there are better options out there. Also Foundations of physics only has a 2010 impact factor of just below 1, so it's not immensely attractive. It's also important that a prior arxiv 'publication' be tolerated by the journal.

So, if any of you has advice on this or can help me with the endorsement I would be very thankful. Also, if you're just interested in the results I have and are willing to keep it confidential until it has been officially published, let me know.

Thank you,

Jazz

EDIT: I thought I might as well share title and abstract.

A Theory of Quantum Observation and the Emergence of the Born Rule

The universe we observe requires a twofold concept of locality. On one hand there are the strictly Einstein-local interactions that generate the time evolution, on the other hand the quantum state space requires a non-local description of multiple particle correlations.
This article demonstrates that an observer in such a universe has to rely on local interactions to learn about his environment. He is therefore severely restricted in his ability to reconstruct the local physical universe. We argue that this reconstruction is the defining process of observation. The reconstructed quantum dynamics are shown to be non-unitary and non-linear in general, even if the system evolves unitarily on a global scale.
Interactions with massless free particles are found to have great influence on observation. The special case of a scattering process with an uncharged massless vector boson can result in a stochastic process conforming to the Born rule. Based on this result, a theory of quantum measurement, that describes a measurement device as a cascade of certain scattering events is formulated.

 

[Demystifier]

Why open access is important to you? If you upload it at arXiv too, most physicists will see it anyway.

 

[Jazzdude]

Why open access is important to you? If you upload it at arXiv too, most physicists will see it anyway.

Well, for one thing it's what I believe in. Open access is the only right thing to do in my eyes. Arxiv is nice, but it's not a real solution to the problem. Even if it is on Arxiv, the journal will likely edit the article in some ways, and I would like the final version to be available to everyone without restrictions.

I am without academic affiliation, and getting hold of publications is very painful most of the time. And I'd like to be able to cite the journal version of a paper and not only the arxiv preprint.

That said, I could live without open access publication in this case, but if it's possible I'd still like to do it. But if I find out that it's unpractical to go this route I might just sell my soul and go for personal advantage over idealism.

Thanks,

Jazz

 

[Jazzdude]

Sorry, but I have to ask again. Is nobody able to give me a quant-ph endorsement and willing to have a look at my paper? Or is the general perception that I'm a crank because I don't have an academic affiliation anymore?

Please, give me a chance.

Cheers,

Jazz