Finally after long time I have all parts together and I have to write it down and publish. My major problem is that for some sophisticated paper which would at least at first look pass the standard for publishable paper I dont have the needed time and energy. To make it look like proper paper I would need some polished "scientific style" paper with at least 30 pages including around 15 pictures, tables and graphs. Unfortunatly my spare time is very limited, because I have demanding full time job and family. Even if I would make it so, it is questionable if it would be published in arxiv and later in some journal, due to extremely controversial ideas included in the theory. So Im thinking to do it in some alternative way. At first publish some basic info in textbook style on around 12 pages on vixra and then discuss it here in this forum. Based on how people are reacting I would improve the sections which are not understood and then I would produce around two or three improved versions and publish it also on vixra. Then I would try to submit the latest version on arxiv. It will be probably rejected because I have no academic affiliantion and Im not ready to begg somebody to endorse it. Then I would submit it to respectable journals. Generally it is not advisable to submit it to more than one, but I await broad rejection, so Im considering to sent it to around 10 journals. Even when I await rejection, I think it is important step which could show in future, how is the standard journal peer review process corrupted and flawed. This would be highlighted in case when my theory would be proved right over time. Im considering also some alternative publications like on academia.edu, but Im not sure if it is somehow limited or not. Lets just consider it from the purely theoretical point of view, that my theory is correct, what is your opinion of my plan?
Sure that sounds like a plan. If your ideas have merit then publishing it anywhere will allow you to get the credit. There are enough educated and smart people on this site to allow you to get feedback that will tell you if you idea is worth pursuing.
Extremely controversial ideas? Alternative publishing to avoid the peer review of legitimate scientists? Where have I seen that before?
Im not trying to avoid peer review, maybe you have read only the introductory part of the OP and missed the part where Im writing about planning to submit it to journals with peer review.
Anyone who self-publishes on vixra is choosing to lie down with pigs. http://www.answers.com/Q/What_is_th..._lay_down_with_pigs_all_you_ever_get_is_dirty Textbook style is completely useless to scientific correspondence. Textbook authors are making authoritarian statements on the basis of the contributions of the whole of the scientific community. Scientific correspondence is persuasive writing about the behavior of observable phenomena. Question: 1) What is the field of physics that your proposed paper relates to? Is it philosophy? Is it an experimental report? Is it a mathematical technique to get concrete predictions with less work from existing physical theory? Does it make concrete predictions in an area well covered by the Standard Model of particle physics, QFT of point particles in flat spacetime, QFT of point particles in curved spacetime, or General Relativity of classical matter? If none of the above, by what reasoning is it a concrete framework for making precise predictions of the observed behavior of a domain of phenomena? 2) What person do you have correspondence with who is in that field? If none, do you have a friend of a friend who could read your paper?
I have clearly stated why is publishing on vixra one of the few if not the only viable interim solution for me. I understand that overwhelming majority of papers on vixra are rubbish, but this doesnt change it for me as the most viable option. But if you know some better way, dont hesitate with your suggestions. With textbook style I mean something which is explained very clearly and in most basic possible form, compared to very compressed and hard to understand "scientific style". Other questions are out of topic, because I would like to focus on the publishing process, not on the theory itself.
The good thing about your plan is that you have a plan. Maybe you also want advice of how to simply break the publication barrier? Based on your threads, I think your topic will include some alternative views about dark matter, reference frames or SR/GR, and/or various cosmological topics. Look over the following website. It is affordable, you will get peer review and feed back, at a very reasonable price, and there is a reasonable chance, if there is any merit to your ideas, you will get published in their on-line journal. That in itself would not be a claim to fame, but if your plan is open to suggestion, you might want to have that kind of credit along with your credentials: http://journalofcosmology.com/About.html Good luck, and let us know how you decide to proceed.
I have published it according my plan, but Im kind of missing the educated and smart people who would write some feedback. http://sciforums.com/threads/my-new-theory-offering-new-view-on-inertia-gravity-relativity.157896/
