I know, it's just a bit presumptuous to offer such "helpful" advice unbidden. He came here for specific advice, he didn't ask for summary judgment. Just my 0c (here in Canada we round to the nearest nickel)
Yeah, I know. I think you seem like a good and decent guy, but I won't hold it against you. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
May be you are right but I only made an attempt to develop some theory. Submitting a paper/thesis in the copyright office - Is it pretension?
Well, the OP asked for help with the references he should include in his paper. It seems to me that he was misunderstanding the purpose of references, thinking they were used as "additional sources of information" for the reader....when in fact, they are just a list of the outside sources of information used within the paper, used to give credit to other authors, so you're not plagiarizing their work. We can't help him with that, as we don't know what other sources of information he used to write the paper.
Actually I wanted to show that texts available so far on "success" are all qualitative and not mathematical. I could not find any journal paper on success, though there are plenty of books on success. In my OP, I also mentioned some other terms for which i want to give references.
Copyright isn't concerned about whether what is written is right or wrong. It only has to be original.
This should probably go into the "introductions" section of the paper. It explains to the reader WHY you writing this paper. You should probably look at this: https://www.elsevier.com/connect/11-steps-to-structuring-a-science-paper-editors-will-take-seriously There's a pretty good reason why you can't find other mathematical papers on success. That's because abstract concepts like success, or love or beauty can't be defined with numbers. They are just products of our emotions, and by their very nature are not numerically definable.
You are right. My copyright consultant/agent must have checked the originality/novelty of my paper before submitting it to the copyright office.
Its a good suggestion. Thanks. I will make references for other mathematical/physics terms used in my paper.
Yaa, I already made that statement in the introduction. Thanks for this. You are right, success is an abstract concept. I made a general definition of it. Then through analytic study developed its math.
The performer has to perform some action to get the desired result. His every action will give him some result. He has to check whether this result is desired result or not. So, success basically is the result of his action. Here i considered Newtonian concept of force as variable.
I have uploaded my paper entitled, "A Mathematical Theory of Success" at academia.edu. This can be seen here https://www.academia.edu/31457696/A_Mathematical_Theory_of_Success .
I am not sure what the OP considers "success", but if it's more involved than pushing a particle from A to B, he may have a bit** more work to do on his paper. **a tad, a scooch, a modicum, a perfunctory effort, a smattering, a smidge
Thanks, for your views. Success is as defined in II.1 of my paper. Success basically is moving a particle from A to B. I dont think there is any thing more to it as far as Physics of success is concerned.
I've changed my mind. You should hold it against me. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! This is ... bizarre.
LOL Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!