What should I do if I found a paper with same result as mine?

[Bishal Banjara]

Yesterday, 9/5/2025, when I was surfing, I found an article

The Schwarzschild solution contains three problems, which can be easily solved - Journal of King Saud University - Science
ABUNDANCE ESTIMATION IN AN ARID ENVIRONMENT
https://jksus.org/the-schwarzschild-solution-contains-three-problems-which-can-be-easily-solved/
that has the derivation of a line element as a corrected version of the Schwarzschild solution to Einstein’s field equation. This article's date received is 2022-11-15, while I have the same line element derivation formally with different and more conforming deductions included (still in process for preparation), posted as a preprint on researchgate as a private file in July of 2023 as

https://www.researchgate.net/public...w_type_of_solution_of_Einstein_Field_Equation
. In the meantime, I have asked many questions, and the line element was exposed (differently) before on social media platforms like physicsforum, physicsstackexchange, etc. Now, I'm paused seeing this paper. And I am here to ask what I should do now. Any suggestions, please!

 

[Haborix]

Suggestions about what? Are you asking should you stop working on whatever it is you're working on?

 

[Bishal Banjara]

Suggestions about what? Are you asking should you stop working on whatever it is you're working on?

Yes! I found the paper has different motive in comparison. It was published on december on the same year, about 5 month later my preprint was uploaded then, who will be credited for this work?

 

[Dale]

who will be credited for this work?

They will.

Does your paper provide something that the first one does not? If so, you should cite the first paper in your introduction, explain what is different, and edit the rest of the paper to focus on what is novel and remove what is not.

 

[Demystifier]

They will.

Not necessarily. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler's_law_of_eponymy

 

[Choppy]

Unfortunately one of the challenges with research is that when you're working on a problem, particularly when it's a problem of significant interest in the scientific community, (a) other groups are also working on it and (b) someone might publish their results before you.

I can't speak to the details of your field and your specific work, but more generally there is some flexibility with respect to novelty when it comes to publication. Referees do look for the results to be novel of course, but if you honestly arrived at the result independent of another group that happened to publish prior to you, it could still be considered an independent confirmation of the result. And that's tremendously important.

If nothing else, as a researcher you can also take comfort in the fact that you're doing good work.

 

[martinbn]

Not necessarily. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler's_law_of_eponymy

• The Arnold Principle: If a notion bears a personal name, then this name is not the name of the discoverer.
• The Berry Principle: The Arnold Principle is applicable to itself.