Unified Field Theory: Presenting a Mathmatical Formula

Click For Summary
A user claims to have a mathematical formula linking gravity to electromagnetic force and seeks advice on presenting it without losing credit. Suggestions include submitting the work to a physics journal for peer review, as this is a more credible route than self-publishing a book. Concerns about copyright and the potential for idea theft are discussed, with the consensus that formal submission to a journal provides some protection and validation. The discussion emphasizes the importance of peer review to ensure the work's credibility and to avoid being dismissed as unscientific. Ultimately, submitting the formula to a journal is deemed the best course of action for gaining recognition and feedback.
  • #31
inflector said:
"Would" be a wake-up call or "Should" be one?

I'm really open to whacky ideas and the possibility that even a crackpot might have a germ of a new idea that might be useful. So I probably dig more into obviously wrong ideas than most, and spend a lot of time learning to understand the rebuttals of experienced scientists.

I've been looking around the net researching for the last several years, and from what I've seen, crackpot's have the faith of a religious fundamentalist and don't listen to anyone. Even if Einstein, Wheeler, and Feynman arose from the dead to show how a pet crackpot idea was wrong, I don't think many would listen.
I agree that a true crackpot will not likely give up, I was just responding to arkajad's post.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Evo said:
As in prevented from submitting papers to a journal? If a person became such a notorius crackpot that submissions were routinely rejected, it would be a wake up call to the submitter, no?

I guess so. But from the fact that several papers have been rejected does not follow that the next paper is not a real pearl. As Wikipedia is warning us:

Inductive reasoning, also known as induction or inductive logic, or educated guess in colloquial English, is a kind of reasoning that allows for the possibility that the conclusion is false even where all of the premises are true.

All of the ice we have examined so far is cold.
Therefore, all ice is cold.

or,

The person looks uncomfortable
Therefore, the person is uncomfortable.

From the probability theory we are learning that rare events are now being taken into account in insurance, finance, engineering, hydrology, in risk analysis (the law of small numbers). Perhaps they should also be taken into account in the administrating of science?
 
  • #33
What I meant about imaginary numers is that you must use a J, I'm sorry to say that my mind is now fogged by pain and powerful pain killers
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K