Continue to Site

Welcome to EDAboard.com

Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronics Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more! To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

Register Log in

where to publish with no practical results

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

suh

Junior Member level 2
Junior Member level 2
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
23
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,281
Location
Iraq
Activity points
1,441
Hi every body
I have a new good idea which is to make one 3D frequency selective surface active but i can not implement it due to complicated DC feed for the diode
I would like to ask where do you think I could publish with out practical results in the IEEE ot IET or dose any body has this experience in publishing only simulation
thanks for giving your opinion
s
 

Since someone else might be in the possession of the knowledge and/or technology required to implement your idea, you should definitely consider publishing it as a concept which may or may not be proven theoretically feasible.

Personally I have good experiences with publishing done at IJEIR (https://www.ijeir.org), and can highly recommend them if you're looking for a decent review of your idea.
 

A publication purpose is to discuss a new idea with others having some experience in the field. {Practical results can support your idea.
With no such results you have no support to expect.
Always try hard to get results of experiments, otherwise others can deny your idea on the basis of no real results.
 
jiripolivka said:
Always try hard to get results of experiments, otherwise others can deny your idea on the basis of no real results.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that a lot of scientific principles have been theoretically predicted long before they were experimentally verified, the Higgs boson for example. Therefor I'm not supporting that point of view.
 

The theoretical physics is one example, there is a lot of speculative ideas, only less than one per cent turns out to be true in reality.
If you wish to belong there, go on. The serious science includes experiments and supporting results. Lazy authors do not want to get hands-on results as they are afraid of them. Right?
 
jiripolivka said:
The serious science includes experiments and supporting results.
Click to expand...
That is true, but it doesn't mean that everyone with a good idea has the time, infrastructure or money to set up and execute the necessary experiments to validate his/her ideas. For example, hobby enthusiasts can have great ideas for innovative integrated circuits, but only few of us have the budget to actually have an ASIC of their own design manufactured, packaged and tested.

But that doesn't mean it's not a good idea worth publishing.
 

In my field it's quite common for reputable journals to publish based on simulation results alone. But this is usually only done where experimental verification is simply not feasible, and only accepted when the results actually make sense.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top