What is the process for publishing a math paper?

[phoenixthoth]

I thought I'd post this under GD, but maybe there are some things specific to math papers that don't apply to other scholarly articles as well as things of other scholarly journals that don't apply to math ones.

I'm wondering how to go about publishing or even submitting a paper.

I'm fairly sure that apart from the research on the paper, one must be sure that no one has published an article or thesis on that exact subject. This much, I think I've accomplished.

I'm not sure that what I did was all 100% correct and I know I should know that. It seems okay to me but I was hoping that the editor would work with me since this is my first time and not reject me permanently for having a flawed work; maybe even tell me what to fix before I can submit it. Maybe I might as well keep dreaming on that regard.

I think the second step would be to find a journal with similar interests. I believe the Journal of Symbolic Logic would be the right journal for me, though there are definitely more than one out there where my paper would belong.

And what about arxiv.org? What's up with that?

I'm specifically looking for feedback from those who have successfully written and published papers before; I dunno, maybe mathwonk, matt grime, or hurkyl (in no order). Any feedback is definitely appreciated.

Thank you.

 

[Tide]

Before you submit your paper you should consider having some of your colleagues review your manuscript.

 

[phoenixthoth]

I unfortunately don't have any colleagues who'd be interested in reading it (I work at a 2-year school). I tried to email someone in the field. It would be really cool to get feedback off this paper just so I can try to submit a really good version.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Werg22]

What subject is the paper on?

 

[phoenixthoth]

What subject is the paper on?

That would be helpful. I should have posted that at least on the off chance someone here would want to read my 7 (or so) page paper.

In short, it is a set theory using non-classical logic. Perhaps a not too popular field. It's pretty elementary though compared to what's out there. I tried to make it quite accessible for the non-logician (which is what I consider myself to be!).

I'll give my rough abstract which has gone through zero revision.

In this paper, I review a three-valued logic and develop semantics using this non-classical logic. The paper is written in binary logic so that modus ponens and other rules of inference will apply even if a sub-formula has the third truth value. The main goal is to develop a set theory with a universal set within the context of ternary logic. I accomplish that by showing relative consistency of the new set of axioms to standard ZFC. The new set of axioms is virtually the same as ZFC, except that a universal set axiom has been added as well as the foundation axiom dropped. Finally, I move towards a few theorems about the universal set. I show that it equals its powerset, that no "smaller" set's powerset equals the universal set, that sets which can be mapped onto their powerset must contain "fuzzy" sets, I illustrate how Russel's paradox is not a paradox, and I show how Cantor's diagonal argument does not apply to sets with fuzzy elements.