Publishing Physics Without Institution: Any Tips?

[axiom]

[Mentors’ note: This thread has been moved from the Academic Guidance section as it’s mostly about whether it is possible to contribute from outside]

Hey all,

I’m an independent researcher with a cosmology paper (~20-25 pages, Monte Carlo sims, CMB/GW predictions). It’s a novel pre-geometric model with testable outcomes—no institutional backing.

Aiming for arXiv then journals or a similar route

Questions:
1. What are the common hurdles independents face getting arXiv endorsement, and how do you overcome them - other methods for independent paper review?
2. Best practices for protecting intellectual property when sharing new physics ideas pre-publication?
3. Which journals, including open access, welcome indie submissions, and what are their costs?
4. Any indie success stories, pitfalls, or general advice for the publication grind?


Thanks—happy to chat more without spilling the full model yet!

 

[Orodruin]

1. You will need an endorser to essentially sign off on having you post whatever to arXiv. First of all, you need to find an appropriate endorser and then you will have to convince them you are not the typical ”independent researcher” who just wants to post their own speculative idea without any actual basis. There are a lot of those, so priors will be stacked against you.

2. That’s not really a thing.

3. What are your thoughts. What journals have you read to keep up to date with the latest developments in the field?

4. None. After 20+ years in the game I have not encountered a single ”independent researcher” that actually had something worth publishing.

 

[WWGD]

Re #2, write your idea up, send it to yourself through certified(dated) mail, obviously don't open it up.

 

[Tom.G]

Re #2, here in the US, Copyright gives you legal leverage for stopping unauthorized publication. Filing fees are pretty low. Many (most?) publications will require you assign any copyrights to them, in addition to charging $,$$$ in 'publication fees'.

To enforce a Copyright though, may still cost you Lawyer fees upfront.

Good Luck,
Tom

 

[Paul Colby]

If you’ve an advanced degree from a university, perhaps contacting them? Also, journals have review processes. Some may even waive publication costs. However, if the paper is not of interest to an active community, you’re likely out of luck. One quick check of this will be the papers you’ve referenced.

 

[Yaroslav Granowski]

Hey all,

I’m an independent researcher with a cosmology paper (~20-25 pages, Monte Carlo sims, CMB/GW predictions). It’s a novel pre-geometric model with testable outcomes—no institutional backing.

Aiming for arXiv then journals or a similar route

Questions:
1. What are the common hurdles independents face getting arXiv endorsement, and how do you overcome them - other methods for independent paper review?
2. Best practices for protecting intellectual property when sharing new physics ideas pre-publication?
3. Which journals, including open access, welcome indie submissions, and what are their costs?
4. Any indie success stories, pitfalls, or general advice for the publication grind?


Thanks—happy to chat more without spilling the full model yet!

I'm an independent researcher myself, I feel you.

>getting arXiv endorsement
There are other preprint servers, which don't require endorsement. You could publish your paper there first and feel safer while looking for endorsement for arXiv. Any endorser would anyway want to take a look at your paper first.

>Best practices for protecting intellectual property when sharing new physics ideas pre-publication?
Actually, I think, even an online post in several independent places, like a blogpost or this forum, will do. Even if someone stole your paper and publish under his name, you could complain with proofs. And no decent publisher likes such scandals.

>Which journals, including open access, welcome indie submissions, and what are their costs?

Pay-to-publish, I believe, is a stupid idea. Usually, it is opposite: decent journals pay their authors.
Their readers see the journal as a trusted middleman, which picks up the best from the best.
A journal, which makes money from authors simply doesn't care about audience.

The biggest challenge nowadays is to motivate people take a look at your paper. Don't get easily frustrated from the cold reception. You've spent several years for it, and you are kind of biased. For public - this is just another paper from a noname author.

 

[berkeman]

Usually, it is opposite: decent journals pay their authors.

Do you have a reference for this? I think there are some circumstances where the author may not have to pay to publish, but I'm not familiar with authors getting paid by the journal for publishing in peer-reviewed journals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_processing_charge

 

[Yaroslav Granowski]

Do you have a reference for this? I think there are some circumstances where the author may not have to pay to publish, but I'm not familiar with authors getting paid by the journal for publishing in peer-reviewed journals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_processing_charge

Sorry, perhaps using word "usually" was incorrect in the context of peer-reviewed journals.
This is usual practice for general reader magazines, e.g. http://whopayswriters.com/

 

[Yaroslav Granowski]

Do you have a reference for this? I think there are some circumstances where the author may not have to pay to publish, but I'm not familiar with authors getting paid by the journal for publishing in peer-reviewed journals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_processing_charge

Wow, up to $10K to publish your work.
This I completely don't understand. You've invested a lot of effort into your work and instead of reward, again have to pay for publishing.
Well, may be before internet it had sense. But why people keep paying these journals both for publishing and reading.

 

[Orodruin]

Usually, it is opposite: decent journals pay their authors.
Their readers see the journal as a trusted middleman, which picks up the best from the best.

This is just false.

I have around 70 peer reviewed papers in various respected journals in my field: PRD, JHEP, EPJC, NBP, among others. Never once have I been paid to publish a paper. It is simply not how things are done.

I have also never paid to publish either personally or from my institution. Universities tend to have agreements in place with the journals, such as the SCOAP3.

Paying a journal to publish ”independent research” is a really bad idea. Journals that accept such contributions are generally predatory and with little or no impact.

 

[mathwonk]

#4:
"In 1905, when Albert Einstein published his first relativity paper, he was working as a class 3 clerk at the Swiss Patent Office in Bern."

my takeaway: try to insure the content of the paper is strong.

 

[andresB]

4. None. After 20+ years in the game I have not encountered a single ”independent researcher” that actually had something worth publishing.

I suppose that depends on what "independent researcher" means. While I teach some introductory courses at a University, my research is entirely my own, with no support from any source. If I were to work at a bakery instead, the quality of my published research would have been the same.

 

[weirdoguy]

While I teach some introductory courses at a University

So you're not independent, you have a facility that can back up your knowledge

 

[Yaroslav Granowski]

my takeaway: try to insure the content of the paper is strong.

Indeed. The more revolutionary one's theory, the more accessible and convinsing the paper has to be.

While, on the other hand, independent researchers often work without any feedback and tend to loose the sense of audience. Even if the theory itself is good, it's presentation may be incomprehensible for others.

Some years ago I was participating in innocentive challenges without much success. Then I tried myself in writing for some time, also without success with journals. Decided to practice by sending several more submissions to innocentive, focusing on writing rather than solving problems, and suddenly won the prize. :)

 

[andresB]

So you're not independent, you have a facility that can back up your knowledge

I most definitely don't. I do all my work at home, on my PC, with no resources from anywhere else. The university I work for doesn't even know that I publish things.

 

[pines-demon]

1. What are the common hurdles independents face getting arXiv endorsement, and how do you overcome them - other methods for independent paper review?

You either have worked with the scientific community and know somebody that can endorse you into arXiv or you have not. If you have not, avoid trying to force yourself in. It would be unconventional to endorse somebody just because you asked politely and just because you managed to publish in arXiv does not mean it is prestigious or relevant.

2. Best practices for protecting intellectual property when sharing new physics ideas pre-publication?

Publish them online, create a website. You can also go to the alternative: viXra.org (it is pun on arXiv), it allows anybody to upload. Your paper will get lost between a lot of bad takes but at least it will be dated and you can update it from time to time. Another possibility is to use github.

If you do not have your work out there is hard for people to notice it and if it is not good enough they will tell you right away when you send them the link.

 

[Muu9]

I most definitely don't. I do all my work at home, on my PC, with no resources from anywhere else. The university I work for doesn't even know that I publish things.

I think what they mean is that you include the name of the university you work for in your papers, which puts you in the "legitimate professor" mental box rather than the "crazy unaffiliated crank" mental box of any would-be article reviewers. Or maybe they mean you did your PhD somewhere, which means that place has given you a valuable credential as a researcher.

 

[weirdoguy]

which puts you in the "legitimate professor" mental box rather than the "crazy unaffiliated crank" mental box of any would-be article reviewers.

Yep. Most (all?) of those "independent reaserchers" don't have a degree in physics, quite often in anything physics related. We have two brothers here in Poland, who have phd's in computer science, and who decided to write an anti-relativity book and do a tour around the country to promote their ideas. One of them even wanted to do a habilitation at my faculty at Warsaw University. He didn't get it, but at uni webpage there are documents related to that, including reviews. In one of these one profesor was "a little" impolite and was reprimended later during the proceedings. But he's very old, so he didn't give a flying f He said what everyone was thinking.

 

[pines-demon]

Yep. Most (all?) of those "independent reaserchers" don't have a degree in physics, quite often in anything physics related. We have two brothers here in Poland, who have phd's in computer science, and who decided to write an anti-relativity book and do a tour around the country to promote their ideas. One of them even wanted to do a habilitation at my faculty at Warsaw University. He didn't get it, but at uni webpage there are documents related to that, including reviews. In one of these one profesor was "a little" impolite and was reprimended later during the proceedings. But he's very old, so he didn't give a flying f He said what everyone was thinking.

That reminds me of the the Bogdanoff brothers. They started doing popular science on TV and selling books but they were not taken seriously most of the time as they did not have a PHD. So they forced themselves into having one. Up to this day it is unclear how a jury allowed it.

 

[Yaroslav Granowski]

That reminds me of the the Bogdanoff brothers. They started doing popular science on TV and selling books but they were not taken seriously most of the time as they did not have a PHD. So they forced themselves into having one. Up to this day it is unclear how a jury allowed it.

In certain countries many high-ranking officials arrange PhD for themselves, and some even boast dozens of publications. I doubt that they themselves would understand those if tried to read.
In other countries due to the policy of diversity and such things you can also find poorly educated PhD holders with utterly garbage papers.
In third - in some rural university you may find a tenured professor in quantum physics. His papers may be garbage as well but nobody around can understand what is written there but they are proud to have the box checked.

So, what I'm trying to say: there is, indeed, correlation between degree and the value of the holder but it is not absolute. There are exceptions.

 

[andresB]

I think what they mean is that you include the name of the university you work for in your papers, which puts you in the "legitimate professor" mental box rather than the "crazy unaffiliated crank" mental box of any would-be article reviewers. Or maybe they mean you did your PhD somewhere, which means that place has given you a valuable credential as a researcher.

Well, then yes. I considered trying the "independent scholar" approach to publishing, but I don't think it works for physics
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/viability-of-publishing-as-an-independent-researcher.1006876/

 

[fluidistic]

4. None. After 20+ years in the game I have not encountered a single ”independent researcher” that actually had something worth publishing.

Ok, so you don't know about Viktor Toth, one of the dudes who solved Pioneer's anomaly, who still continues to publish up to this day.

You don't know about several other people I would rather not cite to keep my privacy/anonymity.

It's not too hard to fall over one of these lone geniuses.

 

[bigfooted]

Ok, so you don't know about Viktor Toth, one of the dudes who solved Pioneer's anomaly, who still continues to publish up to this day.

You don't know about several other people I would rather not cite to keep my privacy/anonymity.

It's not too hard to fall over one of these lone geniuses.

Viktor Toth is affiliated with Carleton University: https://crisp.sce.carleton.ca/index.php/people/vttoth
And he was definitely not 'lone', he collaborated with Turyshev from NASA-JPL on the Pioneer anomaly for instance. Sure, he was not on NASA's payroll, but he didn't do this work just for fun in his parent's basement either. It was part of his job to do this research and write the paper.

I'd say it *is* hard 'to fall over one of these lone geniuses', because they are 'lone'. It is incredibly difficult to publish stuff as an independent researcher without being affiliated to a university or other research institute. Just getting your hands on research papers is difficult, it's either expensive or illegal. Going to conferences is expensive if you have to pay for it yourself. Keeping in contact with other researchers in the field is difficult when you do not work with them professionally or casually meet them at the coffee machine. Just keeping up to date with the research in your field will cost you several hours a week. That is also why I think that this statement:

If I were to work at a bakery instead, the quality of my published research would have been the same.

is not true.

 

[fluidistic]

Viktor Toth is affiliated with Carleton University: https://crisp.sce.carleton.ca/index.php/people/vttoth
And he was definitely not 'lone', he collaborated with Turyshev from NASA-JPL on the Pioneer anomaly for instance. Sure, he was not on NASA's payroll, but he didn't do this work just for fun in his parent's basement either. It was part of his job to do this research and write the paper.

I'd say it *is* hard 'to fall over one of these lone geniuses', because they are 'lone'. It is incredibly difficult to publish stuff as an independent researcher without being affiliated to a university or other research institute. Just getting your hands on research papers is difficult, it's either expensive or illegal. Going to conferences is expensive if you have to pay for it yourself. Keeping in contact with other researchers in the field is difficult when you do not work with them professionally or casually meet them at the coffee machine. Just keeping up to date with the research in your field will cost you several hours a week. That is also why I think that this statement:

is not true.

I do not think so. He still does physics thanks to Patreon, and when he published the pioneer's anomaly his affilation was just a postal code, no university. He had also not used a university email address. Similar as of his most recent works. His job is in software engineering. I don't think his university helped him monetarily, or if it did, it was so insignidicant that he doesn't seem to have acknowledged it.

 

[andresB]

is not true.

do please elaborate

 

[Muu9]

do please elaborate

You can run a test - try to get a paper published under an anonymous pseudonym with no university affiliation or listed graduate degree and see how much scrutiny your paper gets relative to how much you would ordinarily expect.

 

[fresh_42]

As I see it, there are three main obstacles:

• you have to speak physics, which usually requires a study of physics,
• you have to embed your work into existing science, which usually requires access to a scientific library,
• you have to find professionals who want to read your paper, which is almost impossible.

There is a reason that such a thing as the Erdös number exists.

 

[fluidistic]

Viktor Toth is affiliated with Carleton University: https://crisp.sce.carleton.ca/index.php/people/vttoth
And he was definitely not 'lone', he collaborated with Turyshev from NASA-JPL on the Pioneer anomaly for instance. Sure, he was not on NASA's payroll, but he didn't do this work just for fun in his parent's basement either. It was part of his job to do this research and write the paper.

Well, I have done a quick research, and V. Toth answers some questions related to this. He is, and was, an independent researcher, who is self employed and has had a lot of luck (moving from communist Hungary to Canada and having enough money not to worry too much about it).
His curiosity is what drove his research. He has no university degree (not even a Bachelor!). He was certainly not paid by any university to do any of his research.

On Quora (he is/was an avid participant there, apparently), he gives tips to independent researchers, and he explains how he does his research, from his home. Nowadays people are paying him so that he can focus and give more time to research, I see he gets about 1.3 k euros a month.

So Toth would fall into the category of a "genius" outside of academia, with no university title. Very rare, yes. But he is still famous.

One thing an independent researcher has, in my opinion, is the 0 pressure to publish intermediate result if the idea is so revolutionary that no one will take the lead if he doesn't do it. The independent researcher can focus on deeper problems that would never get any funding, or at least would be very hard to get funds for. Sure, there are big downsides, too, such as not being able to actually run an experiment, unless there are ties with researchers who can do those (usually easier than to get funding to pay a researcher as tenure). The downsides very likely far outweigh the good sides of being in academia, I would agree with this. But still, there are some "geniuses" independent researchers who solve stuff no academic people would tackle.

 

[andresB]

You can run a test - try to get a paper published under an anonymous pseudonym with no university affiliation or listed graduate degree and see how much scrutiny your paper gets relative to how much you would ordinarily expect.

Well, of course. That is why I said that I reluctantly use an institutional affiliation so it doesn't get rejected for that only.

However, my statement was different; I said that the quality of my work would be the same if I were to work in a bakery. And I stand by it. Much harder to publish, yes. But the same quality.

 

[berkeman]

However, my statement was different; I said that the quality of my work would be if I were to work in a bakery. And I stand by it. Much harder to publish, yes. But the same quality.

But how do you afford to pay for access to technical publications to keep up with the current work of others if you have only a baker's salary?

you have to embed your work into existing science, which usually requires access to a scientific library,

 

[andresB]

But how do you afford to pay for access to technical publications to keep up with the current work of others if you have only a baker's salary?

Well, the same way I'm doing right now. I use exactly zero resources from the university, not even a library to access technical publications. Except for some obscure russian articles from the 70s, I think I've never had an issue finding the paper I want to read.

 

[berkeman]

I use exactly zero resources from the university, not even a library to access technical publications.

Interesting. Do you think it might be different for your field (mathmatics) versus physics? Are you able to access the math journals in your field for no charge, or do you make that investment on your own?

 

[andresB]

Interesting. Do you think it might be different for your field (mathmatics) versus physics? Are you able to access the math journals in your field for no charge, or do you make that investment on your own?

I...work in physics. Journals do charge for papers, but most authors nowadays publish preprints. Also, most people are willing to share a copy of their work if you ask them nicely. Worst case scenario, I have to ask around with friends and online groups if anyone can download the paper for me.

I would never pay a journal for a paper that authors gave them for free, of course.

 

[berkeman]

I...work in physics.

Oops, sorry. My mistake.

 

[mathwonk]

ok, just a suggestion.

1) establish priority by publishing in a self issued or easy access journal, then

2) send it to a university professor you know for advice on quality.

then you will know whether you have reason to send it to a standard journal.

good luck!

 

[WWGD]

ok, just a suggestion.

1) establish priority by publishing in a self issued or easy access journal, then

2) send it to a university professor you know for advice on quality.

then you will know whether you have reason to send it to a standard journal.

good luck!

3)? Be particulary respectful of them, their time and keep fully in mind they're doing you a favor by choosing to read/review your paper.

 

[Hornbein]

That reminds me of the the Bogdanoff brothers. They started doing popular science on TV and selling books but they were not taken seriously most of the time as they did not have a PHD. So they forced themselves into having one. Up to this day it is unclear how a jury allowed it.

John Baez interviewed the professors that granted the PhD. They said the brothers had been around long enough and it was time for them to move on. Aren't you concerned about your institution's prestige, asked John. We haven't got any prestige was the reply.

 

[berkeman]

Thread is closed temporarily for Moderation...

 

[berkeman]

After getting rid of a spammer, this thread has been moved to the General Discussion forum and is reopened.

 

[frankinstien]

I posted my paper on ResearchGate just to have a reference for publishing the idea. I'm assuming that should work just as well as certified mailing to oneself?

 

[fresh_42]

I posted my paper on ResearchGate just to have a reference for publishing the idea. I'm assuming that should work just as well as certified mailing to oneself?

To get an insurance policy that it was your idea, yes. To be referenced in serious papers, no.