As long as my papers are relevant, have a nice structure, cite relevant literature, are characterized by lucid writing, and solve mathematical problems that interest many in my field, then it's just fine. I have never been subjected to a wish from an editor to perform physical experiments, only numerical ones.

I agree with you.

Sometimes yes but other times experimental data is not available to corroborate a computer simulation hence the simulation should not be discarded entirely if the reason for lack of experimental data can be substantiated.

However, complex and useless models without providing better fits to experimental data should be discouraged. it depends on the situation really.

Mathematical models may be used to perform virtual experiments and can complement traditional approaches to research. The difficulty lies in determining when we cross the line from the model being "useful" to simply playing around with the model.

Not true, at least not where I tend to publish.

Strongly recommend such style.

Theoretical papers are still necessary to increase our knowledge.

I haven't noticed this trend. My suspicion is that whatever is happening is, to some extent, discipline-dependent.

@ Majid Allahyari

" Experimental measurements are very expensive or not applicable for wide range of practical engineering problem. However, we could verify the method with experimental measurement "

I agree with you, thanks for your comment

@ Temitayo Bankole

"useless models without providing better fits to experimental data should be discouraged. it depends on the situation really. "

Of course, the selected models should express the real physical system.

Joanna Sooknanan

I agree with you that

"Mathematical models may be used to perform virtual experiments and can complement traditional approaches to research."

Sometimes, this virtual experiments can not be carried out in the real world.

Michael Patriksson

Thanks for sharing your openion with us.

Emad Kamil Hussein

Thanks for sharing your openion with us. So you agree with me?

Jesus Garcia Laborda

I agree with you. Theoretical work still has its importance.

D. Andrew S. Rees

Thanks for sharing your openion with us.

Yes it highly recomended, but it can't be always applied...some projects/topics are very huge and experiment results need a heavy funds too..

This is my opinion.

Good luck

@Kouider Khaled

Yes, sometimes experiments needs big funds which may not be affordable.

Yes, I agree with you.

When it is relevant, mathematical modeling is often an important source of inspiration for experimentalists. Both approaches are complementary but do not have to be published jointly, in my opinion.

@Oluwasegun Micheal Ibrahim

Thanks for sharing your openion with us.

anyways we need to start by zero . tge morning is lighter than the night

1. The word is "opinion".

2. Why the "Thank you" spam? Can't we just exchange our ideas? I am not angry or anything, I just think it takes up too much space. :-)

Yeah, I am also having the same experience now. Since such a theoretical work is hard to be accepted, it is more appreciated in academia, I think.

@Javad Ahmadnia Thank you for sharing your opinion.

@ Michael Patriksson

Thank you for sharing your opinion.

Yes, Claire Su-Yeon Par

But sometimes it is hard to carry out the experiment, Sometimes experimental facilities are not available.....

Simulation and theory should be accepted as long as they are verified.

Theoretical works are needed to precipitate experimental research especially in areas where funding and facilities are scarce. Sometimes I think research of such nature are rejected because editors and reviewers doubt the theoretical framework adopted for such simulation /theoretical calculations otherwise I see no reason why they are unpublishable. Furthermore, I suspect if such simulations are common, the editor feels publishing such research does not add much value to knowledge.

As long as my papers are relevant, have a nice structure, cite relevant literature, are characterized by lucid writing, and solve mathematical problems that interest many in my field, then it's just fine. I have never been subjected to a wish from an editor to perform physical experiments, only numerical ones.

Michael's experience is precisely the same as my own.

@ Oyeleke Olarinoye

I agree with you that editors and reviewers sometimes have some doubt about the theoretical framework adopted for simulation /theoretical calculations but also the situation is the same for the experimental work in terms of accuracy and reliability. So, doubts are always there

Thanks for sharing your openion with us.

@ Michael Patriksson

Thank you for sharing your opinion with us.

@D. Andrew S. Rees

Thank you for sharing your opinion with us.

Computational treatment and theoretical analysis need to be supported by another solution based on different technique or mathematical trend(as a verification) based on simplification of the case study or experimental measurements as a validation to the predicted results from the numerical solution.However, experimental measurements are considered as real answer.

Ahmed Abdelhameed I agree with you Prof. Ahmed.

But whenever the experimental validation is not allowed, another simulation results could be acceptable validation of the numerical results.

Do you agree?

Dear....Mostafa A. El-Nasser

Thank you so much for your response. When the experimental measurements are not available theoretical representation will be ok but with different treatment and is called a verification of the numerical solution.

Regards

Thank you Prof. Abdelhameed for sharing your thoughts with us.

Best regards