Hi all, I was wondering: how do you know or find out if something is a good idea to publish? For instance: in an attempt to make quantum mechanics more physically-graspable, I feel (whimsically, at present) inspired to write a side-by-side comparison of the derivations of the matching-results of the Bohr theory of the atom to the results of quantum mechanics. I also feel like I want to stress the matrix and linear-algebra aspect of quantum mechanics, and publish something that puts the parts of undergraduate quantum mechanics textbooks that solve the infinite potential well, finite potential well, and step-potentials where transmission/reflection occur (where you happily and naively match boundary conditions and chunk out wavefunctions, happily normalizing them and, in my opinion, don't get a feel for the true "first principles" from which the "weirdness" of quantum mechanics comes from). I feel like these are good ideas to "get out there" in journals like a physics-education-journal, but they may have been done already. Are those good ideas for publication? Or, have they been so "done to death" that it wouldn't be worth it?