1

I want to ask a question, but I'm wondering if it's on topic here. It's a question about if I should even bother writing up a paper, but the work is in Abstract Algebra, so maybe MathOverflow would be a better fit? Or if anyone can refer me to duplicates that I might have missed.

Let's assume I've built a probabilistic non-determinant model. I've developed my own notation, described my own objects, and shown some properties to be true about these objects.

My work isn't based on any previous work, so I have no citations. It isn't ground breaking, and I'm under no illusions that I'm the next Euler. But I do think it might eventually be a useful tool for others, if they see it and possibly draw similarities between my work and other fields. I would certainly like to see it extended by others, and see where it might lead.

I'm wondering if it would be worthwhile to put work into actually writing up my model and results into a paper to try to submit somewhere? It would basically be a paper full of definitions, plus proofs of a few properties resulting from those definitions.

NOTE: I don't think this is a dupe, I'm not asking if an independent researcher can submit a paper, or where such a paper could be submitted. Nor if such a paper or the work might help later in my career. I just want to know if such a paper would even be read, anywhere, by anyone. Should I bother taking the time to write it up, or just keep working on it by myself.

2nd NOTE (before anyone asks): It's mathematical work. I've built up notation and a probabilistic system of objects, defined their relations, and shown certain classes of these objects are a Group, and possibly a Ring, under certain constraints. I'd like to see if others can extend my work further into Algebra, Topology, or Geometry.

5

Academia.SE is not intended to answer if questions about specific research subjects are publishable. If that is your primary concern, you need to use one of the subject-specific groups.

As a rule of thumb, if you can generalize your concern so that a future visitor can have her question answered as well, it belongs here.

  • I think math SO doesn't like questions about publications either. I'm not sure where to take this question. – CDspace Jun 23 '18 at 23:11
  • My primary concern is if I should work on writing a paper of foundational work, with no real results. Shouldn't that apply to all academia? So then my question becomes, how can I generalize this enough to be applicable to this stack? – CDspace Jun 23 '18 at 23:12
  • Then focus on the question you just asked. That is definitely an on-topic question, and we can work to get it into something answerable. – aeismail Jun 23 '18 at 23:18
  • That is the point of this meta question, how to get my question on topic? What should I adjust? – CDspace Jun 23 '18 at 23:37
  • The question might be titled something like: “how do I introduce the needed background info for a new field in a publication if I don’t have any results?” But otherwise the basis of your question seems OK—just try to prune details that aren’t essential. – aeismail Jun 23 '18 at 23:40
  • I've seen many questions where the answer is "it depends on the subject", so I included that as a note, not part of the question – CDspace Jun 23 '18 at 23:41
  • You could mention “math” as a tag. – aeismail Jun 23 '18 at 23:42
  • I'll try that with the title and content. Thanks. – CDspace Jun 23 '18 at 23:45
  • It's not a new field though, just possibly new tools in an established field. Any recommendations on how to title that? – CDspace Jun 23 '18 at 23:47
  • “New framework?” – aeismail Jun 23 '18 at 23:48
  • I'll wait until tomorrow to see if I get any more answers to this meta question, and I'll rephrase and post on the main site then – CDspace Jun 23 '18 at 23:55
  • As a comment on your intended question: it will be up to you to place your work in the context of the field. You will have to understand the field, and cite relevant works. – Jon Custer Jun 25 '18 at 20:27

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .