Easy. First you survey the existing literature for your theory. Chances are, somebody already came up with it, or, more likely, debunked it. If that’s not the case, you write up a paper, presenting your theory together with its supporting evidence and submit it through the usual channels. I know that sounds pretty discouraging, but the chance of some rando contributing something meaningful are pretty close to zero
These people went through the process I described above. I’m not saying you need a degree to do scientific work. I’m saying you need to do scientific work to achieve scientifically relevant results.
Also, people seem to have this idea that you’re going to come up with an idea or model of physics or an invention and you’re just going to get a knock on the door from people in white coats with a briefcase of cash based on the pure beauty of your stoner idea about the shape of the universe or something.
You are literally more likely to win the lottery.
Bruh, you gotta work in life, even being smart you still have to work. You have to not only have your ideas, but you have to do the work to test your models, to prove your ideas and connect those ideas to other working systems. If you develop a new idea, it has to fit into existing science, and that combination becomes a “model” and then you have to prove your model works and that nature behaves as it predicts. This can take a lifetime, it involves not only being active and social and navigating your field, but also reaching out and being open and self-critical and humble. You cannot do it alone, especially as someone who hasn’t spent their life making connections and navigating the academic world.
Easy. First you survey the existing literature for your theory. Chances are, somebody already came up with it, or, more likely, debunked it. If that’s not the case, you write up a paper, presenting your theory together with its supporting evidence and submit it through the usual channels. I know that sounds pretty discouraging, but the chance of some rando contributing something meaningful are pretty close to zero
Pretty close to zero multiplied by billions of people yields results sometimes.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/this-17-year-old-scientist-is-making-an-acetaminophen-alternative-that-is-less-damaging-to-the-liver-180986331/
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/two-high-schoolers-found-an-impossible-proof-for-a-2000-year-old-math-rule-then-they-discovered-nine-more-180985357/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-teen-mathematician-hannah-cairo-disproved-a-major-conjecture-in-harmonic/
These people went through the process I described above. I’m not saying you need a degree to do scientific work. I’m saying you need to do scientific work to achieve scientifically relevant results.
Also, people seem to have this idea that you’re going to come up with an idea or model of physics or an invention and you’re just going to get a knock on the door from people in white coats with a briefcase of cash based on the pure beauty of your stoner idea about the shape of the universe or something.
You are literally more likely to win the lottery.
Bruh, you gotta work in life, even being smart you still have to work. You have to not only have your ideas, but you have to do the work to test your models, to prove your ideas and connect those ideas to other working systems. If you develop a new idea, it has to fit into existing science, and that combination becomes a “model” and then you have to prove your model works and that nature behaves as it predicts. This can take a lifetime, it involves not only being active and social and navigating your field, but also reaching out and being open and self-critical and humble. You cannot do it alone, especially as someone who hasn’t spent their life making connections and navigating the academic world.