Why do physicists publish preprints on arXiv before journals?

[ArmanCham]

I want to write an article in arXiv. Let's suppose I made I mistake.Is there a chance that somebody can fix that mistake and publish it in scientific journal. And why people write their articles in arXiv? Is it a short way to peer review stage?

 

[Vagn]

I want to write an article in arXiv. Let's suppose I made I mistake.Is there a chance that somebody can fix that mistake and publish it in scientific journal. And why people write their articles in arXiv? Is it a short way to peer review stage?

Publishing someone else's work as your own would be plagiarism and is the sort of misconduct that would cost any committing it their career. ArXiv is a pre-print server, so that you can get your results out to the community before it is published in a journal, as getting a paper through peer review can take months. Publishing on arXiv is not a requirement and many academics don't bother.

 

[jtbell]

Papers on arXiv are generally understood to be preliminary versions that will probably change during the peer-review process. It's common for reviewers to suggest changes and clarifications. The definitive version of the paper is the one that actually gets published.

If a paper sits on the arXiv for a long time without ever being published in a journal, people probably tend to not take it seriously. They would suspect that something must be very wrong with it, if it didn't make it through the peer-review process.

 

[ArmanCham]

"So, preprint process is not common and not necessery.The best way to publish an article is sending it to journal.If I send my paper to journal directly,that will be more rational.In Journal peer review process will start and then months later They will going to publih my paper."
Is this correct ?

 

[atyy]

Whether you need to publish in a peer-reviewed journal depends on your professional goals. Publishing on the arXiv is sufficient to establish priority. Of course, if you make a mistake and fail to establish the result you claim, someone else is allowed to publish the correct version and claim credit for the result. I think http://arxiv.org/abs/0907.2939 has not been published in a peer-reviewed journal, but it is taken seriously. Another famous exception to the general rule that publication on the arXiv should be followed by publication in a peer-reviewed journal is this set of papers which appeared only on the arXiv are http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0211159, http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0303109 and http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0307245.

 

[ArmanCham]

Of course, if you make a mistake and fail to establish the result you claim, someone else is allowed to publish the correct version and claim credit for the result.

I can't take that risk.I need to guarantee my idea.
My theory about cosmology.What should I do ? Its not necesseery to be arXiv it can be any preprint site.What's the best way to publish cosmology theory ? But when you thinking this way please keep in mind that I need to guarantee my idea.
Thanks

 

[ZapperZ]

I can't take that risk.I need to guarantee my idea.
My theory about cosmology.What should I do ? Its not necesseery to be arXiv it can be any preprint site.What's the best way to publish cosmology theory ? But when you thinking this way please keep in mind that I need to guarantee my idea.
Thanks

Then you are in the wrong parallel universe, because in this one, there is no absolute guarantee.

This is getting to be rather silly. If you think you have such a wonderful idea that someone might steal it, then send it into a peer-review journal! Otherwise, this is going nowhere fast.

In my experience in this forum, whenever we see someone posting something similar to this (and yes, you are NOT the first person to do this), it always a delusional sense of discovering something that didn't go anywhere.

Zz.

 

[Vanadium 50]

and yes, you are NOT the first person to do this

Not even the first person to do this this week.

I am getting annoyed. The idea that one can contribute to the scientific literature without reading it themselves is a statement that the scientific community to listen to them, but that they don't have to listen to the scientific community in return. Not only is this misguided, it is insufferably rude and arrogant. Why does PF pander to them?

OP, you need to learn about cosmology. Then and only then you can think about teaching it to the experts.

 

[ArmanCham]

Thanks for your comments