New Quantum Physics Theories by 18-Year-Old: Seeking Safe Publication Help

  • Thread starter Thread starter marcgrissz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theory
marcgrissz
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Hello guys, don't frick out...
I am a 18 years old guy who is in love with Physics. I came out with some theories regarding quantum physics. I don't pretend to say they are right, and they are probably not. But i really want to publish them so even if they are not I will have some good reasons given by real physicists. I tried to publish them in this forum but one of the rules is that it is illegal to publish personal theories and I understand it.
If you can please help me to find a way to safely publish and take the merit of them, even if they sound all messed up to you.

Can anybody please help me? thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One possibility is to make the title "What is wrong with my understanding of quantum physics?". Then, under this title, you can write how you understand it, with expressions such as "my new theory" replaced by "my naive picture", or something similar.
 
Demystifier said:
One possibility is to make the title "What is wrong with my understanding of quantum physics?". Then, under this title, you can write how you understand it, with expressions such as "my new theory" replaced by "my naive picture", or something similar.
Is it safe? I don't want people to steal my stupid thinkings :frown::nb)
 
marcgrissz said:
Is it safe? I don't want people to steal my stupid thinkings :frown::nb)

Without exceptions, all revolutions / innovations in any field have been brought by people who were extremely well-versed on the previously established ideas. Even if your ideas have some good intuitions, most of them will be naive and thus wrong: you're asking someone else to correct them, so they would automatically take a lot of credit anyway. Study physics on your own until you can correct them yourself if you're so sure about them: so even if you find out they were wrong, at least you will have gained a lot of knowledge anyway. Win-win.
 
  • Like
Likes craigi
I'll be very direct:
marcgrissz said:
I came out with some theories regarding quantum physics.
No you did not.
If you have questions, feel free to ask them, but there is no point in opening the 2126th thread "I don't understand quantum mechanics but I think nature is like this". Seriously, no physicist is interested in reading the same misconceptions as "theory" over and over again. I am a physicist and I know how those threads look like.
I closed this thread.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
41
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
991
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
75
Views
9K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Back
Top