My Theory

origin said:
I wasn't responding to the OP. I don't think encouraging a person to waste their time on delusions is being kind.
Click to expand...
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)
 
DaveC426913 said:
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)
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know. I think you seem like a good and decent guy, but I won't hold it against you. :wink:
 
origin said:
Really, do you actually believe that? You have no chance of contributing anything to physics or science. I am not being mean, I am just stating a fact. I won't contribute anything either, that is just the way it is. If you really want to contribute, you will need to devote 8 to 10 years of your life learning physics - then maybe (but probaly not) you can come up with something that is a useful contribution.
Click to expand...

May be you are right but I only made an attempt to develop some theory.

origin said:
What you are doing is pretending to make theories and models, it is not real science. If pretending is good enough for you then 'have at it', otherwise go to school.
Click to expand...

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.
 
MacGyver1968 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Then you should add a "suggested reading" section. References are used for something else.
 
hansda said:
I applied for the copyright through a copyright consultant. He did not find anything wrong with my copyright material.
Click to expand...
Copyright isn't concerned about whether what is written is right or wrong. It only has to be original.
 
hansda said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
James R said:
Copyright isn't concerned about whether what is written is right or wrong. It only has to be original.
Click to expand...

You are right. My copyright consultant/agent must have checked the originality/novelty of my paper before submitting it to the copyright office.
 
MacGyver1968 said:
This should probably go into the "introductions" section of the paper. It explains to the reader WHY you writing this paper.
Click to expand...

Yaa, I already made that statement in the introduction.

MacGyver1968 said:
You should probably look at this:
https://www.elsevier.com/connect/11-steps-to-structuring-a-science-paper-editors-will-take-seriously
Click to expand...

Thanks for this.

MacGyver1968 said:
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.
Click to expand...

You are right, success is an abstract concept. I made a general definition of it. Then through analytic study developed its math.
 
Then please tell us here how you defined success. I'd be interested in knowing.
 
From post#27

hansda said:
Well success can be considered as: When the performer achieves 'desired result' from his action, this can be considered as a success for him.

So you can check, whether your result is the 'desired result' or not.
Click to expand...

So what variables do you use to determine whether an outcome has a "desired result"?
 
MacGyver1968 said:
So what variables do you use to determine whether an outcome has a "desired result"?
Click to expand...

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 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.

DaveC426913 said:
I am not sure what the OP considers "success",...
Click to expand...

Success is as defined in II.1 of my paper.

DaveC426913 said:
... 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
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top