/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9504626
My condolences

>>9504626
https://www.sciencealert.com/these-8-papers-were-rejected-before-going-on-to-win-the-nobel-prize

>>9504626
>>9504636
There's still hope OP.

>muh... muh papers
>muh.. muh publish or perish

To try and convert this to a less cancerous thread, can you tell us what's your paper about?

publish here

should have got a woman co-author you shitlord

>>9504626 Your paper was probably a load of crap anyway, statistically speaking.

Sorry to hear that. I am sure you will make it. Believe in yourself.

Where did you submit?

>>9504679
Cluster analysis

>>9504626
Thats normal.

Lol OP. I have already had like 8 rejections or something in total

Get used to it.

Academia is fucked beyond recognition. You need to be very cunning. Don't express your ideas too colorfully as if they were brand new (even if they effectively are)

Become a tranny and you'll be accepted in no time

>>9504626

Send it somewhere else you spineless faggot.

>>9504678
This. Academia is hell.

>>9504626
can someone explain to me why you would want your paper published in some paywalled journal? post the shit on the internet for free. stop being a cuck and letting the journal jew use you to make shekels

I am a brainlet too.
I once paid a fucking Indian medical pay to play journal $500 to publish a paper I wrote about the cancer causing properties of telescope use. I had worked on the paper for years by observing elderly men at the local astronomy club, of whom 2 got cancer. Had graphs, charts etc.

It got fucking REJECTED because it was so shitty. No refund either and he paper no longer exists.

fuck the 'scientific method' it represses new views

>>9505004
Recognition maybe? I agree with you though.

>>9505006
>I am a brainlet too
This should be your conclusion from this story too

>>9504626
>he fell for the academia meme
*breathes in*

>>9504626
Change one word and send it back, end your name with "berg" or "stein" for instance

>>9504626

Don't worry anon, everyone knows peer review is literally complete bullshit and anti-scientific, anti-philosophical, anti-rational, etc
You will not suddenly be respected in sciences if you publish your paper, remember that.
You will not suddenly be successful in any academic field if you get your paper published.
You won't even prove anything by getting your paper published.
And now you think that not getting your paper published means that you're unintelligent? Don't fall for that meme, anon. Those journals are completely biased, and I'd challenge anyone who would foolishly want to argue otherwise. You just didn't fit the bias of the people reading your paper. It's cool, you're a better thinker than them.

>>9504781
he's got a point

Can't you just upload it online and put the link on your resume ? I'm sure people will care more about the content of your article than it being published or not.

so sorry we had to reject your paper SIIIIRRRR

>>9505006
Good post

>>9505006
Using telescopes is a risk factor for cancer? Care to elucidate?

>>9504626
Then someone will copy your work, put his name on it and publish in the same journal.

>>9505004
Unfortunately that’s not the best method for obtaining recognition and securing funding. NIH, NSF, and private institutions want to be see publications in journals not your blogspot or tumblr posts anon.

>>9504626
Keep working at it. In time, your work won't be rejected, you just need to refine it and keep on writing

>>9506646
Beta radiation

ITT: we pretend arxiv (or vixra, depending on the quality of OPs work) isn't a thing

>>9506693
does no one respect arXiv?

>>9506894
I sure as fuck don't

>>9506844
see >>9507088
it depends on if arXiv bans your high quality work too

BANNED, PDF ARXIV SUBMISSION STAMP:
>The General Relevance of the Modified Cosmological Model
>http://vixra.org/abs/1712.0598

>>9505006
Strong bait

Don't lose hope OP, keep at it and you'll succeed eventually.

>>9505006
Kek

>>9507096
I can see why this sort of stuff gets rejected.
>200 pages of badly explained drivel
>no proofs anywhere
>all these meme-concepts

>>9507088
>>9507096
>http://vixra.org/abs/1712.0598
Holy shit, this is a thing of beauty. I can't believe ArXiv would reject such a masterpiece.

A real masterpiece.

>>9507088
>>9507096
>>9507304
>>9507315
Jon, you are such a faggot. I hope you die very soon.

OP, was it rejected before going out for review? Also, where (read: impact factor of journal) was it rejected?

>>9507315
>Literally taking figures from wikipedia and not creating them himself
>A real masterpiece
U stupid?

>>9507343
Why the hate. Explain it please.

>>9507523
>Why the hate. Explain it please.
He gets like this when he's hungry. Just ignore him.

>>9504626
send it to another journal. Francis Mojica, the discoverer of CRISPR had his paper rejected more than 3 times

>>9506793
chad particles kill beta cells

>>9507523
Hate? It is not hate.
Jonathan Tooker is just an annoying crank that spams his shitty nonsense "research" around everywhere.

Maybe your paper got rejected because your writing is horrible, not because of the technical content behind it or because peer review is a jewish nest

>>9507550
Could you explain to a brainlet why his research is shit/fake?

Also, the bible quote in the beginning makes a good comeback IF his paper would get a Nobel prize. That's how he meant it right? I hope

>>9505004
We always pay the extra, $500 to make it open access. And the unofficial rule in our lab is not to cite paywalled articles.

FYI, PeerJ is a bretty gud open access peer reviewed journal, with super cheap prices

>>9508946
What if an article critical to your argument is paywalled?