A Question about a research result: Feedback on whether the result is publishable

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Mainframes
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Research
Mainframes
Messages
17
Reaction score
3
I'm currently exploring a theoretical concept. My research leads me to a hypothetical method leads to what I believe is an interesting result: It is theoretically possible to fuse two ions for an energy cost that is less than the expected energy of bringing the ions closer together.

Note, this is different to quantum tunnelling which shows that particles can overcome potential barrier larger that they would not be able to classically.

This approach, while not feasible with present-day technology, raises some intriguing questions about our understanding of ion fusion processes, which I was hoping might stimulate further research. I’m currently thinking of the best way to frame the result and wanted to gauge if the result in itself is of interest.

I'm aware of the speculative nature of this inquiry, however, am interested in answers that might be of the form. “The result is interesting, even if theoretical”, “The result is not that interesting”, “The result might be of interest in specialist theoretical journals”

Thank you in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mainframes said:
...gauge if the result in itself is of interest.

We do not do prepublication review, so we can't help you with that.
The best way to judge interest is to write it up and submit to a journal that publishes other work relevant to your field.

Aside from that piece of general advice, this question is out of scope for this forum so this thread is closed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Mainframes
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
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
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...

Similar threads

Back
Top