You must log in or # to comment.
Easy. First you survey the existing literature for your theory. Chances are, somebody already came up with it, or, more likely, debunked it. If that’s not the case, you write up a paper, presenting your theory together with its supporting evidence and submit it through the usual channels. I know that sounds pretty discouraging, but the chance of some rando contributing something meaningful are pretty close to zero
Nothing kills my motivation more than discovering something new in math and then finding out some dead guy beat me to the punch by several centuries lol
Then again sometimes it’s worse when I expect there to be literature on a topic and then discovering there isn’t even a wiki page for it.
Hell, most recently it was bi-intuitionistic logic. Originally studied in the 40s by one German guy who took bad notes. Main body of work done by a single math grad in the 70s (Rauszer) culminating in her PhD. Turns out there were errors discovered in her proofs and it was proven inconsistent in 2001. Only for two relatively young mathematicians to clear up that there are two separate versions of bi-intuitionistic logic which are consistent. This discovery and proof are found a paper that was published only this fucking year.
I asked a simple question about dealing with uncertainty in a logical system and instead of finding a well studied foundation of knowledge I was yeeted to the bleeding edge of mathematics.
Edit: in case it isn’t clear, by “new things” I mean new to me not new to the world; hence the aforementioned dead guys with published works on the topic. And when I say I was yeeted to the edge of math, I should mention that edge is well beyond my capacity to further. I had to learn a lot about notation for logic just to parse the paper, and I’m sure I still don’t fully understand it.
Oh I remember you! You’re the guy who claimed to be an engineer working with “ocular algorithms” when it turned out you were an undergrad who read a Wikipedia article about cuttlefish.
Now you’re discovering “new things” in math because you were thrust to the bleeding edge of mathematics. Incredible stuff. Completely 100% real stuff.
Please do future you a favor and stop presenting yourself as some intellectual giant. It’s not only cringe, but harmful to your actual academic growth. Some of the things you write are identifiable, what would happen if a professor for an undergrad lab you work at saw the way you write?
Edit: Tl;dr this is a child doing a Mutahar and isn’t handling being called out very well. Zero accountability and everything you’d come to expect from a budding charlatan. Saved by mods for “civility”.
I didn’t get the impression reading that that they’re presenting themselves as an intellectual or a researcher, just that they’re a nerd going down rabbit holes.
That’s because you haven’t worked in academia and haven’t seen undergrads fantasize like this with regularity.
Ah yes my wildest fantasy: to find out that the ideas I think are new and original have been studied well beyond my level of understanding by other people lol
I hope you’ve never worked in academia. You sound like you really like discouraging people from enjoying science unless they meet your arbitrary education standards.
Anyone can do science. Sure, sometimes people who don’t know a lot learn a little and think they know a lot, but you shouldn’t just shut them down. If someone has a passion for exploration you should encourage them to keep going, catch their mistakes sure, help them question their thought process, but remind them that making mistakes or thinking an idea is novel when it isn’t is something everyone does and they shouldn’t be ashamed for it.
I’m shaming you for being a liar who misrepresents himself.
You sure you’re not just oversensitized to it? This feels like a false positive.
When an undergrad says “I’m an engineer” there is no debate, it’s a case of lying. Nobody can begin their studies and skip to titles. Nobody starts law school and calls themselves a lawyer. Nobody starts an undergrad and calls themselves a scientist.
The only people who do this are children who wickedly mispurport themselves to facilitate authority and look smart. It’s the definition of being a charlatan.
Are you sure you’re not under sensitive to people straight up lying and denigrating an entire, important industry full of folks who actually waited to graduate and work in the field before dubbing themselves a professional?
