Timeline for Clarification about off-topic questions
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 3 at 20:13 | comment | added | Jean-Pierre Laflamme | Thanks, that's a start. My email address is on the article. I've made a simplified summary here: a3branestructurefortheuniversejplaflamme.quora.com | |
| Sep 3 at 20:07 | comment | added | Ghoster | No one asked me for the article I wrote on this subject. That’s because we don’t review articles here, as you’ve been told multiple times. But it’s easy to find on viXra if anyone is curious. Our rules don’t prohibit reading users’ personal theories. You judge before even reading the article. I assessed your article after reading it. | |
| Sep 3 at 15:18 | comment | added | Dale | @Jean-PierreLaflamme this isn’t a scientific journal. We don’t do peer review here. Do you also consider it unfortunate that when you go to the library they won’t sell you spaghetti? I personally am not qualified to review your article. The people who are qualified are the reviewers for professional scientific journals. Particularly the prestigious ones that should have formed the bulk of your >2000 hours of study in this field. Those journals, which you should know well by now, are where you should go. | |
| Sep 3 at 14:55 | comment | added | Jean-Pierre Laflamme | The first point is in the previous post. 2. No one asked me for the article I wrote on this subject. You judge before even reading the article. The guy arrives, he's new, not a physicist, so his article is obviously not good! | |
| Sep 3 at 14:53 | comment | added | Jean-Pierre Laflamme | What's unfortunate about what I'm hearing here is that: 1. No one has even attempted to answer the simple question I initially asked. If a void exists around a finite universe, how does that universe deal with that void? No one, absolutely no one, can confirm or deny that this void is possible, no matter how knowledgeable they are. I'm not saying that this void absolutely exists; what I'm saying is that if I consider it, it leads to the reflection I humbly present here. The second point is in another post. | |
| Sep 3 at 14:28 | comment | added | Dale | @Jean-PierreLaflamme everything I described can be done by ordinary people. If you are an extraordinary person you might be able to do without a coauthor. But even an extraordinary person would require at least 2000 hours studying the relevant literature. It took me more like 3000 hours of studying just to finally come up with an idea that was actually novel. Without at least 2000 you would not know the literature well enough to even be able to judge if your idea is novel. | |
| Sep 3 at 4:33 | comment | added | Ghoster | @Jean-PierreLaflamme If your paper is truly deserving of attention, then a reputable physics journal will publish it regardless of your lack of credentials as a physicist. Conversely, if you can’t get it published in any reputable physics journal, then you should conclude that it lacks merit. | |
| Sep 3 at 0:40 | comment | added | Jean-Pierre Laflamme | You know, there are ordinary people in the history of science who have come up with ideas that have proven revolutionary. In my field of engineering, I can mention Lester Allan Pelton, who was just a simple mechanic-carpenter and who invented the wonderful turbine that bears his name, which was quickly accepted by engineers. With a little digging, you can find plenty of people who started from nothing and made a huge contribution. I'm not claiming to be a genius. I'm just trying to put forward an idea I've thought and written about a lot and which I feel deserves more attention. | |
| Sep 3 at 0:26 | comment | added | rob Mod | A number of comments removed. Be kind, friends. | |
| Sep 2 at 16:10 | comment | added | Dale | @Jean-PierreLaflamme first, you should read the existing literature on the topic. Spend a minimum of 2000 hours reading a minimum of 500 professional scientific papers and at least 2 textbooks on the topic. Be sure to do the exercises in the textbook and replicate the math in several of the most relevant papers. Then you should attend a scientific conference on the topic. Listen to talks by several authors on related topics and afterwards speak with them. Invite them to be a contributing coauthor on the paper. Select a journal, one from which you read about 100 papers. Submit to that journal | |
| Sep 2 at 14:17 | comment | added | Jean-Pierre Laflamme | I'll explain my dilemma better here. First, I'm not a physicist. However, I am an experienced engineer recognized by his peers. I am interested, like many others, in physical questions. By asking myself the simple question submitted here, it opened me up a whole path of physics that seems very promising. For the moment, and it's a shame, the article rests in the shadow of VixRa, because not being a physicist, many doors are closed to me. I'm not saying that this article is perfect, and I would like to have the collaboration of a physicist to bring it to fruition. How can I do this? | |
| Sep 2 at 4:13 | history | edited | Dale | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 129 characters in body |
| Sep 2 at 4:06 | history | answered | Dale | CC BY-SA 4.0 |