-3

This is the first time I am writing here and I hope not to be very repetitive with regards to similar topics already covered, so I will try to be as much specific as I can. Before all, I am an undergraduate in physics and I have an institutional email.

Some days ago I uploaded a paper related to the field of Number Theory. Specifically, trying to provide a solution to Riemann Hypothesis. The paper is well-structured, with neutral tone and using Lyx-AMS template. It has its references and I am solely the author of the paper.

As it may occur, my paper was rejected with the standard sentence "Our moderators determined that your submission does not contain sufficient original or substantive scholarly research and is not of interest to arXiv".

Then I appealed and I am waiting for a final decision but, according to other users' experiences I have been look at, it does not seem to be very likely to be succesful. The thing is that I have a real conviction that my paper could represent something important to this topic, and I have been looking around and I have the following options:

  1. I remain quiet and wait for their final answer without doing anything else.
  2. I start looking for new ways to let my paper be known to some scientific community in the area of Number Theory. That includes to submit to other journals, in which case, should I choose first conventional journals (any of them that I could manage to submit to) or pre-prints repository (and which ones would you recommend?
  3. Should I talk to someone from the area to get an overview of the paper if worth it (a bit risky)?

If the paper is wrong, I want to make sure that this is the case and that, therefore, could not go all along.

I thank you in advance for your constructive answers.

Miguel Seisdedos García
  • 3
  • 1
  • 3
  • How do you pay your bills (rent/food/electricity)? – EarlGrey Oct 10 '23 at 11:12
  • 2
    "If the paper is wrong, I want to make sure that this is the case and that, therefore, could not go all along." It's not clear what you are trying to say here ("could not go all along"). Also, it's not clear whether you are actually claiming to have proved the RH in the manuscript or not. – Adam Přenosil Oct 10 '23 at 11:15
  • 3
    Also read Terry Tao's advice on this topic: https://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/be-sceptical-of-your-own-work/ – academic Oct 10 '23 at 11:49
  • Yes, I am claiming to have proved RH but it is a preprint. You do not upload the manuscript to arXiv but the preprint. What I mean by "could not go all along" is that if it's wrong, it's not worth to move forward (unless someone can help me in something I overlook and then it can be fixable, but as it is known, no feedback is usually provided bu arXiv). – Miguel Seisdedos García Oct 10 '23 at 11:53
  • Thank you for providing me with Terence Tao guidelines, I highly appreciate it. – Miguel Seisdedos García Oct 10 '23 at 12:12
  • 5
    "no feedback is usually provided bu arXiv)." You already got the feedback - "your submission does not contain sufficient original or substantive scholarly research and is not of interest to arXiv ." – Nobody Oct 10 '23 at 12:16
  • "Should I talk to someone from the area to get an overview of the paper if worth it (a bit risky)" If you already have an established in-person relation with a mathematician (I imagine almost any mathematician will do, they don't have to be a specialist in number theory), such as one of your professors, then it makes sense to ask them for some feedback. On the other hand, sending out emails to people you don't know is very unlikely to be a successful strategy. Note that it is virtually impossible that you have proved the RH. – Adam Přenosil Oct 10 '23 at 12:18
  • 14
    On the balance of probabilities, given the fact that you're a physics undergrad and that you yourself do not seem to be entirely sure whether or not your proof is valid, my best guess as to what's really happening here is that you don't yet have a solid grasp on the "rules" of mathematics and on what constitutes valid proof in mathematics. This is not meant as an insult: I do not think there's anything to be ashamed of if it turns out that a physics undergrad does not yet have an entirely solid grasp on how things are proved in mathematics. – Adam Přenosil Oct 10 '23 at 12:20
  • Thank you for that, before closing, should I then post it there in the same way? – Miguel Seisdedos García Oct 10 '23 at 12:30
  • 21
    @MiguelSeisdedosGarcía You are an undergraduate, presumably without extensive math background, claiming to have proved the most famous open problem in the entire subject. I'm afraid that no one outside your university will believe your claims, take you seriously, or read your paper. Seek mentorship where you are, from faculty at your own university. I recommend that you approach them with humility: you are sure that your paper must be wrong somehow, but you can't figure out why. Good luck. – academic Oct 10 '23 at 12:31
  • @academic " no one outside your university " on what ground do you state this? – EarlGrey Oct 10 '23 at 12:35
  • @MiguelSeisdedosGarcía you should look for similar questions and/or ask for a canonical answer. From comments to my answer it seems that proving the Riemann Hypothesis is a magnet for novices, so you are not the first claiming to have found a solution and I expect there are questions about that. As far as I know, you may be the last, but I am a random stranger on the internet and no, I am not a mathematician. – EarlGrey Oct 10 '23 at 12:37
  • Did you have a number theorist, or any mathematician, at your university review your paper and provide feedback? If not, why not? – Ghoster Oct 10 '23 at 16:59
  • 2
    Here is an analogy of this situation in the world of physics: Imagine that you are an editor of a physics journal and you received a well-written paper from an undergraduate engineering major with a proposal of a perpetual motion machine. Sure, there is a tiny chance that the student had disproven the 2nd law of thermodynamics. However, would you spend time reading the submitted paper and then writing an explanation of where the mistake is, or just reject the paper? ... Right... This is exactly how a professional mathematician will react in the situation described in the post. – Moishe Kohan Oct 11 '23 at 03:17
  • Option 3: Why is it 'risky' to ask someone from the field to tell whether or not your idea has some worth? Option 2: you can always make it available somehow on Academia.edu for example (I don't think there is any form of moderation there). Option 1: Yes you could just wait and see. That probably won't be long. Option 4 (mine): you could submit to a mathematics journal that uses double blind peer review. That would avoid the prejudice of being rejected just because you're undergrad in physics. – gatsu Oct 11 '23 at 08:01
  • If you seriously believe your solution is correct or are looking for feedback, I'd recommend you submit a pre-print to researchgate and then submit to an undergraduate journal in the relevant field. I've got a paper under review myself, and that will get me back in depth feedback once the review is completed. – Guthrie Douglas Prentice Oct 11 '23 at 19:08

1 Answers1

-7

EDIT: This answer is wrong for the specific mathematical problem under discussion (RH hypothesis).

It seems you are doing your work without any affiliation, and that you are ready to invest time & money on it.

Look for a suitable conference close to you (close as in geogrpahically and regarding the topic), send a contribution (I would suggest a poster contribution), upon acceptance explain briefly your situation to the conference organizers (briefly as "I have no money, no funds, I am a young scholar and I would like to share some results with the community").

Good luck and do not be take down by the arXiv rejection. Editors and curators work on a voluntary basis, they may be a bit uptight with respect to unaffiliated unknown researchers, you may have better luck with local/national mathematics venues.

EarlGrey
  • 17,959
  • 2
  • 28
  • 79
  • Thank you for your answer. I am undergraduate in physics and I have institutional email (I also hold a bachelor's and master's degrees in areas not related to the topic). I have been diving into this topic profoundly and I think the paper worth it. – Miguel Seisdedos García Oct 10 '23 at 11:18
  • please add the information "I am an undergraduate in physics and I have an institutional email" to the question., Do you expect that the paper is not desk-rejected because of that? add that information as well. – EarlGrey Oct 10 '23 at 11:22
  • In principle, authority principle is a sin in science, but unknown authors without traceable publication track in a certain topic are usually facing an uphill struggle to publish their first paper. On a parallel note, can you give the name of 5 possible reviewers of your paper? If you are not able, it may be true you miss some of the people working on the topic and/or the latest advancements on the topic. – EarlGrey Oct 10 '23 at 11:24
  • 13
    Please do not encourage people to submit their "proofs of the Riemann hypothesis" to conferences. Firstly, it wastes people's time. Secondly, the answer that the OP is going to get will not be any more encouraging that the answer they got from the arXiv. Thirdly, it encourages the OP to believe that they may have actually proved the RH. – Adam Přenosil Oct 10 '23 at 11:59
  • My belief will not change as long as I can get a clear and unambiguous answer related to one of the three points stated above and not getting answers to subcomments that beat around the bush. – Miguel Seisdedos García Oct 10 '23 at 12:11
  • @AdamPřenosil as long as it is an issue limited to Mathematics, please ask for the question to be moved to the specific Mathematics:SE . Correct until proven wrong is the right attitude in science. But I agree one has to try very hard to prove onself wrong, being right is very easy! – EarlGrey Oct 10 '23 at 12:30
  • 10
    This answer is wrong, for mathematics-specific reasons. Replace "Riemann Hypothesis" with a more modest claim, and I would agree, but a claim to have proved RH will (I'm sorry to say) be instantly dismissed by any mathematician. – academic Oct 10 '23 at 12:35