0

I have what I feel is a novel and potentially helpful observation in the field of neuroscience, which connects it to another field, but it is just that - an observation. If this needs to become publishable, do I need to develop an entire theory around it (which is difficult, given that neuroscience isn't dealing with the relatively "simpler" objects that we see in physics or mathematics). The other alternative is to gather as much evidence from prior studies as possible that point to the observation being valid.

How does someone who is theoretically inclined go about this?

Improve this question
5

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

It's possible. Your observation will need to be novel and interesting. From your description, it might also need some preliminary calculations to back it up.

The original paper describing the flyby anomaly is an example.

Improve this answer
2
  • Just curious, would arXiv be a good place for this? I'd ideally like to elucidate the basics of the idea and continue working on it and add evidence/justification as I make progress.
    – Joebevo
    Commented Jul 20, 2022 at 9:13
  • @Joebevo I'm not familiar with neuroscience, but I'd guess no, because it doesn't look like the arXiv has much neuroscience.
    – Allure
    Commented Jul 20, 2022 at 9:30

You must log in to answer this question.

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