It's impossible sometimes to know what is legit, now. I've never been awarded anything at all, and never will, but because I have papers on vixra.org, the "alternative" (aka: notorious) physics pre-print server, do I get nice emails every other week telling me (addressed to "Prof.", as if!) that their journal wants to publish something of mine! Flattering, but not too sure of the legitimacy, or what it could possibly do for me to have papers already available (and ignored by string theory mainstream persons), printed or hosted on some "journal". I've already been there, decades ago, anyway, with no joy.
Journal of ARCHIVES OF PHYSICS RESEARCH (APR) (ISSN: 0976-0970) are happy to invite you to submit your next article of your research/review/study in any non-medical research area for publication in the current issue. ...
The "proper and correct" physics paper pre-print server is arxiv.org, originally set up by Cornell Uni string theorists. I uploaded a key research there using a uni email address for accredation in 2002-3, only to have papers disappear a few seconds after appearing. Other people (specific examples are Danny Ross Lunsford, Tony Smith, Peter Woit and lately even the famed Dr Lisi of E_8 theory of everything fame) have complained on line they have also either had papers deleted for not following fashion, or in the case of Dr Woit and Dr Lisi, blog "trackbacks" debunking bad stuff on arxiv.org have been blocked, or new papers have been delayed for weeks and weeks from appearing!
vixra.org, an alternative set up initially in the UK (but now located in the USA to avoid all the EU data protection act red-tape, which persists even after Brexit) by Dr Phillip Gibbs over a decade ago, at least allows a time-stamped version of new ideas to be recorded and made available to all. But is it really an alternative to "peer review", which is supposedly the cornerstone of "science"? No idea. All I know is that even friends who are fellow applied mathematicians or theoretical physicists, don't have time to discuss, review, or develop radical new ideas. So the whole basis of scientific collaboration is really restricted by money, like everything else. Maybe paying "page charges" for publication is necessary and weeds out a lot of junk. But the really high impact journals needed to hype up a major breakthrough aren't interested in anything unfashionable (Nature, PRL, Classical and Quantum Gravity, etc.), i.e. non-stringy. I'm not going to bother paying to get a duplicate to what's on vixra.org duplicated by some journal nobody's every heard of.
Now I just hope I can solve a thousand bits of technical trivia and straighten out enough facts into the correct order, to get a manuscript assembled for your editing soon!
Deleting and delaying papers! That all sounds a bit dubious. What a minefield. Really doesn’t help with collaboration as you say.
Did you see this story about the artist Henry Orlik? Really cheered me up! These paintings are stunning - what a talent. He had a strong interest in physics and it shows. I hope they find the rest of the paintings - be fantastic to see some. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gdnwzn3qyo
It's impossible sometimes to know what is legit, now. I've never been awarded anything at all, and never will, but because I have papers on vixra.org, the "alternative" (aka: notorious) physics pre-print server, do I get nice emails every other week telling me (addressed to "Prof.", as if!) that their journal wants to publish something of mine! Flattering, but not too sure of the legitimacy, or what it could possibly do for me to have papers already available (and ignored by string theory mainstream persons), printed or hosted on some "journal". I've already been there, decades ago, anyway, with no joy.
The latest email is dated 20 September 2024:
Archivesof physics<archivesofphysics@gmail.com>
nigelcook@quantumfieldtheory.org
Dear Prof. Nigel B Cook ,
Greeting from APR
Journal h-index: 18
Journal cite score: 6.32
Journal impact factor: 4.13
Journal of ARCHIVES OF PHYSICS RESEARCH (APR) (ISSN: 0976-0970) are happy to invite you to submit your next article of your research/review/study in any non-medical research area for publication in the current issue. ...
This seems to be located at https://www.scholarsresearchlibrary.com/journals/archives-of-physics-research/ but I don't see the point, really.
The "proper and correct" physics paper pre-print server is arxiv.org, originally set up by Cornell Uni string theorists. I uploaded a key research there using a uni email address for accredation in 2002-3, only to have papers disappear a few seconds after appearing. Other people (specific examples are Danny Ross Lunsford, Tony Smith, Peter Woit and lately even the famed Dr Lisi of E_8 theory of everything fame) have complained on line they have also either had papers deleted for not following fashion, or in the case of Dr Woit and Dr Lisi, blog "trackbacks" debunking bad stuff on arxiv.org have been blocked, or new papers have been delayed for weeks and weeks from appearing!
vixra.org, an alternative set up initially in the UK (but now located in the USA to avoid all the EU data protection act red-tape, which persists even after Brexit) by Dr Phillip Gibbs over a decade ago, at least allows a time-stamped version of new ideas to be recorded and made available to all. But is it really an alternative to "peer review", which is supposedly the cornerstone of "science"? No idea. All I know is that even friends who are fellow applied mathematicians or theoretical physicists, don't have time to discuss, review, or develop radical new ideas. So the whole basis of scientific collaboration is really restricted by money, like everything else. Maybe paying "page charges" for publication is necessary and weeds out a lot of junk. But the really high impact journals needed to hype up a major breakthrough aren't interested in anything unfashionable (Nature, PRL, Classical and Quantum Gravity, etc.), i.e. non-stringy. I'm not going to bother paying to get a duplicate to what's on vixra.org duplicated by some journal nobody's every heard of.
Now I just hope I can solve a thousand bits of technical trivia and straighten out enough facts into the correct order, to get a manuscript assembled for your editing soon!
Deleting and delaying papers! That all sounds a bit dubious. What a minefield. Really doesn’t help with collaboration as you say.
Did you see this story about the artist Henry Orlik? Really cheered me up! These paintings are stunning - what a talent. He had a strong interest in physics and it shows. I hope they find the rest of the paintings - be fantastic to see some. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gdnwzn3qyo
Have added the article voiceover now - love how this syncs to your podcast. Hoping the quality is better as it was muffled last time.