Is it alright for the main body of my paper to not contain any references? I have been working on a few set of ideas, and while I can give references on the introduction, about the general idea, and the problems that my ideas can possibly solve in other fields, but unfortunately for me, the work is a little out of the box, and the main body cannot contain references.

I wanted to know if this is against norms or even considered unusual?

Also, some of the work is very old, for example, Descartes, and Tarski.
I was wondering how to get references for that work, and how it could work out, since I am not sure if they ever published papers or how discussion around very old topics tends to go.

The situation is a bit unusual for me, and I want to find the best way to be read and accepted in the community, following all the proper norms, rules and regulations regarding writing a proper academic paper.

The work is all application of informal logic to various other fields. Some of it is philosophical, some of it relates to maths and physics as well. I am just trying to get it read at the moment. I will try to submit it to a journal, but at this point, I am having a hard time finding such a journal.
Not having references in the main body of a paper isn't necessarily a problem, but it can be a major symptom of other factors that will cause you to have difficulty publishing a paper. You may be having trouble finding references because you haven't narrowed down what you are doing enough to find out which other people will be interested in it. 

"Some of it is philosophical, some of it relates to maths and physics as well."
This sounds like you are writing about the philosophy of science, which is a field with a pretty active literature. Perhaps you can read more in that field, and see if any of it sounds like what you are doing?

"the problems that my ideas can possibly solve in other fields": if you think your work can solve important problems in other fields, then there are probably useful references where someone else has attempted to solve the same problem. Explaining how your work differs from these attempts, and where it can improve on them, would be a standard place to include references in the main body. If you cannot find this, you may not have that well-defined a problem yet.

Even if your work has wide applications, it is often useful to choose one specific problem and address that first - this forces you to be specific, address the questions of one field, and make sure that you deal with what other people have done before.