How can an average joe publish a scientific breakthrough?

First, said average joe must know the field, since it&#x27;s otherwise difficult to know that something is a breakthrough - it could have been considered and rejected some decades previous.<p>Second, use a site like Google Scholar to find similar work in the area, or go to the library and do the same. This gives average joe an idea of which journals are relevant to the field.<p>Third, pick an appropriate journal, go to its web site, and follow its instructions to the authors when writing the paper. It&#x27;s a good idea, though not required, to read some of the recent publications in that journal to get a sense of its style.<p>Another concern here is that some papers require a publication fee, and others don&#x27;t. Some of the ones which require a fee are also disreputable, and will publish essentially anything in order to get the fee. See <a href="http://www.biosciencewriters.com/Selecting-a-Target-Journal-for-Your-Scientific-Manuscript.aspx" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.biosciencewriters.com&#x2F;Selecting-a-Target-Journal-...</a> for more details about how to select a journal.<p>Fourth, send in the paper, or as that previous link suggests, send in the abstract and ask the editor if the journal is interested in a paper of that sort. The paper (or abstract) submission might be rejected by the editor or reviewers, in which case it&#x27;s a matter of picking another journal or improving the paper based on the comments. Or it might be accepted with some changes needed, or it might be accepted outright. In which the paper is published.<p>There are many resources on &quot;how to write a scientific paper&quot;, such as <a href="http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/paper.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.phys.unsw.edu.au&#x2F;~jw&#x2F;paper.html</a> and even a book with the title &quot;How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper&quot;, which you can get from your library either directly or through InterLibrary Loan.<p>To increase the chances of recognition, average joe could also do a good job of making the paper readable and reproducible, with details that are cognizant of the history of the field and the reasons why the new discovery should be considered &quot;breakthrough&quot; rather than &quot;novel.&quot; Said joe could also attend relevant meetings and talk with others who are interested in the topic, and even present that information.

A couple of points:<p>1. Even experienced academics &#x2F; researchers have difficulty in getting published. Especially if their discovery contradicts any widely accepted theories.<p>2. How do you know that yours is a breakthrough discovery? Have you read up on all the publications in the relevant field(s)?<p>3. As a general rule, anything you write for publication needs to cite the relevant existing knowledge and then show how your contribution builds upon that, extends it, etc.<p>I assume that announcing your discovery is time-critical. Then I would suggest that you setup a website, that you own and control. Publish the material on that site. Doing so establishes that time of release and the facts. Then you could push your material to <a href="http://arxiv.org" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;arxiv.org</a> - that might require some seeking out of connections, but you have protected yourself by publishing on your website. Finally, submit to Hacker News, Reddit, etc so that the &quot;news&quot; gets picked up.<p>If your discovery is a breakthrough you will generate some interest. Of course, be prepared for the trolls and all those who are protecting the status-quo.

I think Schneier&#x27;s &quot;Memo to the Amateur Cipher Designer&quot; (<a href="https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-9810.html#cipherdesign" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.schneier.com&#x2F;crypto-gram-9810.html#cipherdesign</a>) is relevant to most fields.<p>In it he forcefully makes the case that unless you really understand all the science at hand you can&#x27;t possibly expect that you&#x27;ve actually invented anything worthwhile. He also lays out how you can make a credible case for your breakthrough -- it&#x27;s hard, but if you do it clearly you&#x27;ll be able to get someone&#x27;s attention.

Yes.<p>Example: &quot;A scientific experiment performed by a high school student, later published in The Journal of Medical Toxicology, suggested that a domestic electric iron at its hottest setting (at least 400 °F (204 °C)) used for at least 5 minutes should destroy all anthrax spores in a common postal envelope&quot;. - From wikipedia. Source contained within the article.<p>Now did this student probably have help with a formal publication? Most likely. But the answer to your question is yes.

The same way all scientists do.<p>Except when you submit to the journal just put &quot;No affiliation&quot; in the institution field.

A trick Tim Ferriss (4HWW) employed was to befriend very specific bloggers and targeted authors who frequently wrote about aligned subject matter. He would very causally offer to share tidbits of what he was working on, sensing it would pique their interests. Steadily he was able to build buzz and street-cred via a non-traditional route. Quite brilliant strategy actually.

You could also start by contacting a professor that does research in the field. Not all of them would be interested in helping, but I think my advisor would entertain the idea if someone off the street approached him with something interesting. Having a second author that is respected can go a long way to getting a paper published and recognized by a wider audience.

In a respected academic journal in the field.