Presenting Scientific Theory

[Anilkumar]

Hello Sir,

 

I am not sure whether I should start this here?

 

I just wanted to know how scientific theories are presented. About legal issues, copyright issues, the platform for the presentation, procedure involved, and any other things concerned. Any information fellows?

 

Thank you.

 

 

 

 

[timo]

The mainstream way to publish research results is writing them up in a proper format and then offering them to a scientific journal (a publisher) for printing and distribution. In principle, scientific ideas (or "theories", if you prefer that word) would probably go the same way, but in practice, the science community is more interested in results than in ideas. If you are a professional researcher, there is pretty much no way around this standard procedure, and you can be pretty sure that at least some people will read the title of your writing, then. For non-professionals, optional alternatives are writing a book, creating a page on the web, or discussing in forums. The procedures depend on the medium, of course. For professional publishers, it is listed on their homepages. For books, you have to find a publisher or self-publish and self-distribute. For discussion forums, it would be nice to read their board rules, too .

 

About legal issues and copyright issues: First off, I consider it a perversion to desire presenting a scientific idea and at the same time wanting to deny people profiting from it - just don't present it, then. That said, in the mainstream way of publication you usually transfer the copyright of your writing (in its final version after it's been typeset by the publisher) to the publisher. Copyright in this case does, and I think that is a point that most laymen do not properly understand, refer to the text in its final form. It does not affect the content of the work. Say I'd write something about a great algorithm how to speed up some standard computer calculation, and say I'd hold the copyright. You'd then not be allowed to make copies of that publication or distribute it. You could still implement and use the actual algorithm as you please, since this is not affected by the copyright on the publication. What you possibly meant with copyright is a patent. About other legal issues: you basically don't have to worry to run into problems by accident. Of course, copy-pasting from a copyrighted text is no ok. But if you write something without being aware that someone else wrote the very same thing long ago, you wouldn't run into legal trouble. Properly referencing the relevant sources is required as proper style, but not by law.

Edited November 27, 2010 by timo

[Anilkumar]

Hi Timo,

 

Thanks for the post.

 

No, I didn't mean patent. And I didn't mean to deny people profiting from it either.

 

I was contemplating about securing the credits.

 

Is there any proven and established channel for doing that?

 

Thank you.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

By "securing the credits," do you mean verifying that you receive credit for your idea, rather than others?

 

The typical way to do that is to publish your work in a journal or other medium that has a date attached. If your work is in the March 2011 issue of a journal, you'll receive credit over someone who publishes the same work a few years later. If you don't receive credit, you can point to that March 2011 issue as evidence that you should.

[timo]

In the field of professional science, this is not really a problem since you can trace who wrote what and when. Beyond the time stamp on your publication, there is no mechanism for ensuring people get the recognition they consider appropriate. In my experience, professionals tend to worry less about such things than amateurs. In practice, getting people to bother about your idea at all is usually the bigger problem.

[Anilkumar]

Hi there,

 

Thanks for attending.

 

In my experience, professionals tend to worry less about such things than amateurs. In practice, getting people to bother about your idea at all is usually the bigger problem.

Yeah,

 

But if one happens to be right. He/She may get rewarded. So the hardwork and sacrifice gets paid.

 

Apart from publishing, I am informed there are authorised agencies which take care of this. But don't know where and which.

 

Thank you.

[ajb]

In the field of professional science, this is not really a problem since you can trace who wrote what and when. Beyond the time stamp on your publication, there is no mechanism for ensuring people get the recognition they consider appropriate. In my experience, professionals tend to worry less about such things than amateurs. In practice, getting people to bother about your idea at all is usually the bigger problem.

 

Coupled with that is it is not always obvious who had the initial idea and some reference seem to get "lost" or "forgotten" somehow. I am sure I have been guilty of missing out references simply due to ignorance.

 

Back to the opening post: do some work, get a preprint send it about get feedback, then get a paper published. The first bit is often the easiest, writing papers I find hard.

[Anilkumar]

Hi there,

 

Back to the opening post: do some work, get a preprint send it about get feedback, then get a paper published. The first bit is often the easiest, writing papers I find hard.

 

I didn't understand. What is a preprint? . . . . Get feedback? . . . . Which is easy?

 

Thank you.

[ewmon]

To avoid controversy regarding scientific ideas, mostly for patents (but also for copyrights), you'll want to document it properly.

 

This means recording with indelible ink in a permanently bound notebook, signing/dating each page etc, and having someone knowledgeable on the subject to read and witness your work -- that is, also sign/date each page as a witness, etc. Your classmate or professor or boss might be a good witness, but your mom or the guy next door might not (unless they're knowledgeable on the subject).

 

You lose all patent rights if you make public (give a lecture, talk, publish the intellectual property, or display/sell/give away the product, etc) your intellectual property without first obtaining a patent.

 

Publishing on your own with a copyright notice does offer some copyright protection (about you knowing/discovering something at a particular time), but it would be best to file for an official copyright, or let a publisher do it.

[Anilkumar]

Thank you Ewmon,

 

That was concrete illumination.

 

but it would be best to file for an official copyright, or let a publisher do it.

 

How the 'Filing for official Copyright' process works? Is the process thoroughly assured?

 

After Copyright, what is the next stage? How to bring it up for scrutiny by the bonafide scientific world?

 

Thanks.

[ajb]

What is a preprint?

 

A draft of a paper that should be near suitable to be published.

 

Get feedback?

 

Send the preprint to people and place it on the arXiv (if it is in mathematics or physics). Invite experts to comment on it. I have been fairly successful in doing so before. These comments and suggestions can be very useful, as can the remarks of the referees when you seek publication.

 

Which is easy?

 

Doing the work can be a lot easier than getting preprints and papers ready. You have a lot more than just the results themselves to think of.

 

Some pointers would be

 

• Pick a nice title and a short concise abstract
  Tell us quickly what your paper is about. Be honest and to the point in the abstract. Quacks fail miserably here by writing a huge abstract usually full of self-promotion. There is a general rule: The importance of a paper is inversely proportional to the length of the abstract. Most people may not get past the title and abstract. Make sure it "hooks" the people who could benefit from reading the paper.
  
• Have a good introduction
  No one will read the rest of the paper unless you have a good solid introduction. Tell us what you have done and why. This is a good place to point to the literature. After reading the introduction I should have a good idea of what the paper is about. It maybe the case that many readers will not go past the introduction. So make sure you use this opportunity to convey the information and main points of the paper. Don't risk the reader missing the point of the paper.
  
• Be kind to your readers
  Pick standard notation and nomenclature as much as possible. Introducing too many new ideas, nomenclature and notation will confuse people rather than inform them. Don't be afraid to use analogies, simplifications and toy examples. However, make it clear when you are being loose rather than rigorous. Use standard English. (I would be very careful with any humour.)
  
• Set the context of the work
  As part of the introduction, along the way, in a final summery or conclusions section make it clear how your work fits in with the bigger picture. In short, tell me why I should be interested in the paper. Doing so may well be helpful to you also. It can help you find new directions to investigate and give you a better view of the bigger picture.
  
• Be aware of the shortcomings
  If a method or a theorem etc. does not hold for the most general thing you could consider don't be afraid of saying so. This is not a problem and shows you are thinking. Asking for the comments of others may help you here. Being honest here is important. Also, being clear here may give you further directions to tackle.
  

 

The final thing is enjoy writing, as best you can

[Anilkumar]

Thank you AJB,

 

For the compassionate & informative discourse.

 

That accomplished, how to keep it in a place where the proficient could see it and assess?

 

Regards.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Anilkumar

[ajb]

That accomplished, how to keep it in a place where the proficient could see it and assess?

 

If it is mathematics, physics, computer science, nonlinear science, qualitative biology, quantitative finance or statistics, then I recommend the arXiv. You will need to find someone to endorse you on your first post. Find an expert in the subject you are working on and ask them to help.

[Anilkumar]

Hello AJB,

 

Thanks man.

 

Are there other proven venues?

[ajb]

Are there other proven venues?

 

Blogs are becoming more and more important as a method of dissemination.

 

Really nothing beats a publication in a good journal and a preprint on the arXiv.

[Mr Skeptic]

Actually, I think the most important step is making sure you have a theory. Making sure it is new would also be good, but that will happen sooner or later even if you don't want to check for yourself. To make sure you have a theory, you want it to be able to make very specific predictions, which if they turn out not to be true will disprove your theory. And then show that the predictions are accurate. The only reason I say this is because by far the majority of people wanting to talk about their new theory don't actually have one, or it is obviously false, and on rare occasions they manage to think up of a well-known theory. These problems are also compounded by their not wanting to tell people about their "theory" because they're afraid someone will steal the credit. In fact, I've never seen anyone asking about their new theory that had anything significant to share. Anyhow, just publish it somewhere that has a verifiable date attached, a journal would be the best but there's plenty of ways you could do it that won't require nearly as much effort on your part.

[timo]

While we're trying to be realistic: has anyone ever heard of an amateur whose great idea was stolen by an evil scientist? See, ... we are that good .

[ajb]

While we're trying to be realistic: has anyone ever heard of an amateur whose great idea was stolen by an evil scientist? See, ... we are that good .

 

True, but is know for graduate students to get their ideas stolen by their supervisors!

[timo]

<post removed>

Edited November 30, 2010 by timo

[Anilkumar]

AJB said:

Blogs are becoming more and more important as a method of dissemination.

 

Really nothing beats a publication in a good journal and a preprint on the arXiv.

 

Any imperative journals and databases that give access concerned about the article than the author?

Edited November 30, 2010 by Anilkumar

[ajb]

Any imperative journals and databases that give access concerned about the article than the author?

 

I am not sure. However, it is quite normal to simply "google" and authors name to find his/her homepage, any blogs and where they have been invited to talk etc.

[Anilkumar]

Hi AJB,

 

I am not sure. However, it is quite normal to simply "google" and authors name to find his/her homepage, any blogs and where they have been invited to talk etc.

 

 

I am Googling and assessing things. Meanwhile I thank you a lot for the valuabe practical information you gave. I appreciate your compassion.

 

Best wishes and regards.