Unified Field Theory: Presenting a Mathmatical Formula

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the challenges of presenting a mathematical formula that connects gravity to the electromagnetic force while ensuring proper credit is received. Participants emphasize the importance of submitting the work to a peer-reviewed physics journal rather than self-publishing, as journals provide a structured process for validation and protection against idea theft. Copyright laws in the U.S. automatically protect written works, but formal registration is recommended for legal recourse. The consensus is that engaging with the scientific community is crucial for credibility and advancement in the field.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic physics concepts, particularly gravity and electromagnetic force.
  • Familiarity with the process of submitting academic papers to peer-reviewed journals.
  • Knowledge of U.S. copyright laws and their implications for original works.
  • Basic writing skills for scientific communication and presentation.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the submission guidelines for reputable physics journals such as "Physical Review Letters" or "Journal of Physics."
  • Learn about the peer-review process and how to prepare a manuscript for submission.
  • Explore copyright registration procedures through the U.S. Copyright Office.
  • Study effective scientific writing techniques to enhance clarity and impact in your work.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, researchers, and anyone interested in publishing original scientific theories or formulas.

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