Klaynos

What is the distribution of the data? What can you say about your sample size? I'm a big fan of error analysis, to the point where I have two papers that rely heavily on it and used to teach it to physics undergraduates. I'd highly recommend introduction to error analysis by John R Taylor.

This is why I think trying to find someone to work with is still sensible advice. As a start academics who taught you during you had or who studied with you who are now academics.

You put too much store in such things. Friends and colleagues of mine have published in them. Personally I have not but i have published in several other journals. I'm a working physicist with a PhD in physics and a member of the iop.

Yes, I have done experience of IEEE and nature journals. And just to be clear I wasn't necessarily referring to you as a crackpot. I don't think you've presented enough information to decide either way.

I don't really see the science or IEEE are under any obligation to reply to you at all. You have to remember that they receive a great number of emails from both legitimate scientists and crackpots, they therefore are probably quite selective about responding. I'm surprised that nature got back to you so quickly. I don't think you should concentrate too heavily on just IEEE conferences, find a conference run by a proper organisation that matches the content you wish to present and apply to that. You will be expected to answer questions on the day about your work.

! Moderator Note I'm pretty sure I said to not reintroduce the topic. Do not do it again.

Depending on where you live you can probably broadcast low power on some limited frequencies. An easy way to interface with a computer is via an arduino or rasp pi. Google arduino 446mhz... Do you have a source for where in the world this is true?

! Moderator Note No. That's not how we debate here. You need some evidence not vague guesses and insults. Thread closed don't reintroduce this topic.

I've just remembered something, there's an R package that gives éd graphics using opengl, called rgl, no idea if it works on windows as I don't use it. And no I meant scatter3dplot. Quick google suggests it should have been scatterplot3d, a lib and function.

You can do it in R. Try googling. Off the top of my head scatter3dplot might be the function you want depending on the type of 3d plot you want.

I often nuke a few when I log in first thing in the morning. The must annoying thing for me is that I don't get time to read any proper threads.

This and more work for the volunteer staff. Please report spam when you see it especially when the title might look legit.

! Moderator Note Moved to speculations. Also this isn't how we work here. Drop the claims or pony up the evidence. Do not reply to this modnote.

It is my view that your last post supports my position. Sending abstracts to journal editors I'd certainly not the done thing in any of the fields I'm most familiar with

I would suggest you currently do not have the background knowledge of the subject or processes to achieve publication. ajb suggested a while ago that you sight the mentorship of an academic and provided your manuscript to them you rejected this out of hand which is not a good sign.

The expert was basing his view on some evidence you presented. It's true he won't have known everything about you, but your personality doesn't really matter, the quality of the work does. I've read almost every post you've made in this forum and it is my view that you're unlikely to get published without many years full time study.

If the expert in the field suggested you didn't have a good enough background to understand how your idea fits in and you should do some background reading I would recommend following that advice. Your last post raised done significant flags for me, including ignoring experts, thinking you're special, comparisons to past scientists.

I'd agree with this. Pick a journal and poke through the most recent articles look for some maths. You know that there are loads of interdisciplinary fields in modern science right? That in itself isn't terrible new or interesting.

There's so much wrong I don't know where to start. Einstein wasn't religious. Star formation is well understood. If dead stars didn't lead to new stars and solar systems there would be no earth. The units are not variable, but measurements are frame dependent. That's true to a certain extent in Galilean relativity so not earth shattering. You've not provided any physics but I feel some of your incorrect statements must be addressed incase other people stumble across this thread and don't realise you're just making up rubbish.

My last failed desktop was because the heatsink on the northbridge feel off... started to fail weirdly as it moved away from the motherboard then one day there was a loud bang as it bounced off the bottom of the case and the computer turned off....

In addition to the above... A case fan blowing air out of the top with vents near the bottom is probably a good addition. I cannot stress the importance of keeping it all dust free as well. I have a dust cover I put on my desktop case when I'm not using it. The ambient room temperature is also important.

hypervalent_iodineisstupid has been banned for abusive behaviour.

! Moderator Note Only one post per topic. We also don't allow advertising. You need to provide enough content for a discussion to happen here. Also, is this your first time here I remember someone with similar claims. They turned out to be false.

! Moderator Note Only one post per topic. We also don't allow advertising. You need to provide enough content for a discussion to happen here. Also, is this your first time here I remember someone with similar claims. They turned out to be false.

There's a good book on errors. An introduction to error analysis by John R Taylor. Is your systematic error varying each time? If so, is the distribution of the systematic errors a normal distribution around 0? If the answer to either of those two questions is no then error propagation is (probably) not the tool you're looking for. Probably because I'd need to understand a lot more about what you're measuring and trying to achieve. Really I'd recommend anyone studying or trying to do science to read the book.