Publishing as a citizen scientist

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the challenges and considerations for citizen scientists seeking to publish their discoveries while retaining credit. It explores the publication process, the likelihood of making significant contributions, and the concerns about intellectual property theft.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks advice on how to publish a groundbreaking discovery while protecting their ideas from being stolen.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the likelihood of citizen scientists making genuine groundbreaking discoveries, suggesting that such occurrences are extremely rare.
  • A participant questions the historical examples of citizen scientists making significant contributions in the last century, noting that most advancements require substantial funding and collaboration.
  • Some participants differentiate between fields, arguing that while individual contributions in mathematics may be possible, physics often requires large teams and resources.
  • Concerns are raised about the rationality of fearing idea theft, with some suggesting that it is more common for multiple individuals to arrive at similar discoveries independently.
  • A participant emphasizes the importance of verifying one's findings with knowledgeable experts before publication, highlighting the potential pitfalls of self-evaluation.
  • Another participant suggests that the internet allows for instant publication but questions the recognition that such platforms would garner from the scientific community.
  • There is a discussion about the necessity of presenting ideas clearly and seeking independent evaluation to avoid the pitfalls of self-delusion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some agreeing on the challenges faced by citizen scientists, while others contest the feasibility of making significant discoveries without formal training or resources. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the potential for citizen scientists to contribute meaningfully to scientific knowledge.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in self-assessment of knowledge and the need for external validation, as well as the dependency on funding and collaboration in modern scientific research.

  • #61
@bugs007, have you heard of vixra.org? It is like arxiv.org, the preprint server that academic physicists use, except that anyone can post there. If you write something, and don't want to host it on a personal website, you can place it there. Your name, and the time you uploaded the essay, will be preserved there, and meanwhile you can go about submitting to journals.

I agree with the skeptical response you are getting, and I would add that there is already a vast literature of people proposing alternative explanations of quantum mechanics; if your idea is so simple, it has probably been anticipated decades ago e.g. in a "Foundations of Physics" paper, or possibly even a philosophy paper if it doesn't involve calculation. However, if you are still determined to just get it out there, then vixra is the simple answer.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
mitchell porter said:
@bugs007, have you heard of vixra.org? It is like arxiv.org, the preprint server that academic physicists use, except that anyone can post there. If you write something, and don't want to host it on a personal website, you can place it there. Your name, and the time you uploaded the essay, will be preserved there, and meanwhile you can go about submitting to journals.

I agree with the skeptical response you are getting, and I would add that there is already a vast literature of people proposing alternative explanations of quantum mechanics; if your idea is so simple, it has probably been anticipated decades ago e.g. in a "Foundations of Physics" paper, or possibly even a philosophy paper if it doesn't involve calculation. However, if you are still determined to just get it out there, then vixra is the simple answer.
@bugs007 Just be aware that vixra is considered a depository for crackpottery, that's what happens when "anyone" can post there. But it would definitely be a place for your work.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and Klystron
  • #63
There is more to publishing a paper than just writing down the idea. You need to review current thinking, which requires references. You need to show the shortcomings of current thinking. Then you need to explain your idea, and how it explains all experimental results. Then you need to put it all into the appropriate format. It is far better to team up with somebody that knows how to do all that, and has the background to understand your idea and how to get it published.

I am doing exactly this. I retired two years ago. Last summer, I met a research scientist working in the area of water budgets in inland lakes. I had zero experience in that area, but I did have a solid background in instrumentation and design. We (he, me, and two other authors) are right now finalizing the draft of a paper to be submitted to a peer reviewed journal within the next 2 or 3 weeks. It appears that I will be the second author. And it sure beats sitting around in a rocking chair watching TV, playing golf, playing sheepshead, or other retirement time wasters.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman, Evo, jim mcnamara and 1 other person
  • #64
This thread has run it's course, there is really no more information to give, so thread closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Bystander, Tom.G and Dale

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
332
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K