 |
There are currently, 340 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
| |
| |
PLAGIARISM: law suit against Nature, European Physical Journal, Argonne Nat Lab
Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2014 @ 11:00:13 UTC by vlad
|
|
WGUGLINSKI writes: Dear Andrea Rossi
I decided to suit in Law the journals Nature and European Physical Journal
by plagiarism of my QRT, because I had warned the two editors of the
plagiarism commited by their journals, and I had asked to them to quote my
theory in the papers, and they did not attend my request. So they are
colluding with plagiarism, and that’s why I decided to suit the two journals
in law.
I also decided to suit in law the Argonne National Laboratory, and I
explain the reason ahead.
Along several years I had discussion with
physicists in many foruns of physics, and they used to call me crackpot,
charlatan, and they claimed that my theory is pseudoscientific, as you may
realize by looking at some reviews in the site
Amazon.com:
======================================================
Not
even a theory March 2, 2009
By Daniel Lopes
This book is a great example of
pseudoscience.
======================================================
======================================================
It
is not a scientific book March 2, 2009
However now, after the two plagiarisms by the Nature and the EPJ they use
to be silent (after all, a serious journal would never do a plagiarism of a
theory without scientific merit).
Unfortunatelly Mr. JR (here in this blog) tried to suggest that I am an
idiot, as we realize from his latest two
comments:
======================================================
JR
December
15th, 2013 at 12:33 AM
Wladimir,
Actually, Martin Freer and I gave the same argument, you just
didn’t understand it. And it’s not exactly an argument, it’s part of the
definition of the quadrupole moment, which is taken as the measure of the
deviation from spherical symmetry. That is why I was explaining that
the nucleus is spherical, in the standard meaning of the phrase, even
though it has structures as shown in Freer’s
work.
======================================================
======================================================
JR
December
14th, 2013 at 6:50 PM
I think that most nuclear physicists would disagree with the idea that
there is no physical picture of what’s going on in low energy nuclear
physics.
Whether or not a nobel prize winner said something is not the way
one establishes truth, it focuses on the people and not the physics questions.
Also, these nuclei are spherically symmetric, in the conventional meaning of
that phrase, because they are spin zero and one typically talks about
non-spherical structures relative to the spin axis. The type of non-spherical
structure you’re talking about has a specific and different meaning, but the
nucleus is still spherically symmetric in the traditional sense. So
‘non-spherical’ means to different things when you say that conventional theory
requires spherical symmetry and when you say that the clustering structure
shown in the paper you cite yields non-spherical
components.
====================================================
So, we have the following situation:
1- The experiments had detected that light even-even nuclei with Z=N have
non-spherical shape.
2- By considering the principles of the Standard Nuclear Physics, the
nuclear theorists used along 60 years to consider that light even-even nuclei
with Z=N must have spherical shape.
4- However, Mr. JR continues insisting that light even-even nuclei with Z=N
have spherical shape, as we see in his comment of December 15th.
As I already said in this blog, I suspect that Mr. JR is a fake name of Dr.
John Arrington, a researcher of the Argonne National Laboratory.
So, dear Andrea Rossi,
I would like you help me, in order to
identify the IP of the computer used by Mr. JR, in order to discover if it
realy comes from the Argonne National Laboratory.
I would say that I very much regret this decision. However
I hope you and the readers of the JoNP may understand my
frustration.
Because:
1- Along 20 years I was hearing the physicists calling me charlatan,
crackpot, and claiming that my theory is pseudoscientific.
2- Now, when finally the experiments are corroborating my QRT , and two the
most important journals of Physics had published plagiarisms of my theory in
2012 and 2013, I would like the physicists would recognize the merit of my
work.
3- However, instead of to accept scientific facts detected by
experiments, unlike Mr. JR actually continues trying to suggest to
everybody that I am a charlatan, and he uses a dishonest way of
argumentation, by rejecting the results of the experiments which
detected the non-spherical shape of the even-even nuclei with Z=N, and
suggesting to be idiots the autors of the paper How atomic nuclei
cluster and also the editor of the journal Nature, suggesting that
they did not understand the results of the experiments (also suggesting that
I did not understand), because he insists to claim that those light
nuclei have actually spherical shape.
So, I hope you and the readers may undersand my reasons and why I decided
to suit in Law the Argonne National Laboratory.
Regards
wlad
|
| |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
| |
|
| "PLAGIARISM: law suit against Nature, European Physical Journal, Argonne Nat Lab" | Login/Create an Account | 4 comments | Search Discussion |
|
| | The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. |
|
|
|
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
Get used to it - it's a Madoff world. (Score: 1)
by Kadamose on Saturday, January 11, 2014 @ 16:17:54 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | If you haven't realized by now that this world is completely ass backwards, then you haven't been paying attention. Education makes people stupid instead of smart; health care kills instead of restoring health; no good deed goes unpunished. The list goes on and on. The only way any of this will ever change, sadly, is, if by some great miracle, the majority of mankind gets wiped out. (With how much radiation Fukushima is dumping into the ocean, the chances of that scenario are very likely. And that, in my humble opinion, is a good thing -- humans have proven, time and time again, that they are not worthy to live on this planet or any other for that matter. Mankind, in general, needs an enema.)
The only way you're going to get the justice you seek is if the above scenario happens. Sorry.
|
|
|
Re: PLAGIARISM: law suit against Nature, European Physical Journal, Argonne Nat Lab (Score: 1)
by ElectroDynaCat on Monday, January 20, 2014 @ 07:04:11 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | Poor Vlad, making an attempt to create serious dialog on the scientiifc basis for energy generation and all he gets for the most part is a platform for fraudsters.
Most of the stuff posted on this site is baloney by people that think they can fool investigators and make a fast buck.
|
Re: PLAGIARISM: law suit against Nature, European Physical Journal, Argonne Nat Lab (Score: 1)
by vlad on Monday, January 20, 2014 @ 23:50:53 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com | Yes Electro, I "poor" myself quite often these days! Mostly about why am I so naive to continue to hope that what I'm doing is better than doing nothing ... and is worth of my time taken from doing something else, for me and my family, like most people do these days, enjoying the little things in life.
I often feel a sucker continuing to believe the real smart people will come here and engage everybody in a serious dialog on the scientific basis for breakthrough ideas in energy generation, as you say ... so the fraudsters have no chance to fool anybody, since the truth will always come out, if relentlessly pursued with scientific and logical arguments.
I realized from the beginning that my own level of knowledge is not enough to spot the real baloney, which can often be so well "disguised" to the average person ... but I was and still am counting on the honest experts out there that can spot the diamond in somebody's theory and, make it shine in the name of progress in this energy field (so badly needed). I only promised to my readers I will be honest, open minded and give everybody a chance to prove their argument.
Of course, I knew that proving such a controversial argument theoretically will be a never ending story, and I proposed something much more clear cut and practical: my Extreme Science Foundation concept, which I was, and still am convinced could be the sword to cut the Free Energy Gordian node!
Unfortunately, those smart people who should have understood quickly that that idea makes sense, and can make a real difference, are still asleep or prefer to remain idle (for who knows what vested interests) like most of the public ...and so we, ElectroDynaCat, Kadamose and many others, continue to remain impotent!
The day my efforts will cease may be very near but remember, I loose, we loose.
^V^
|
]
Re: PLAGIARISM: law suit against Nature, European Physical Journal, Argonne Nat Lab (Score: 1)
by Kadamose on Tuesday, January 21, 2014 @ 07:39:44 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | All I can say to you, Vlad, is that your efforts are very much appreciated -- at least by me. When this site does go dark, and it will, you will not only be remembered by people like me, but you will also be sought after. The main problem with this site, and others like it, is that it relies on others (Blacklight Power etc) to make up the content -- even though, we all know that it's a pile of hogwosh. And even if it isn't hogwash, it will never see the light of day due to the vested interests. No, the problem is, 'we' are the ones not doing anything. We simply observe and hope that one day someone will have figured it all out. This shit needs to end if any of us, me included, want to see the change we are all seeking.
With that said, I believe that we need to change the mission statement of this site. Instead of promoting all of the new so-called aether technologies coming out of the woodwork, we should only support those we know will work. This is very easy to spot, too. If the invention doesn't rely on frequency or vibration to run, then it's not the real deal and shouldn't even be considered as a possible alternative.
With that said, Zpenergy should be a site about CONFIRMING the existence of these technologies. I know the X-Prize, that you put a lot of your time into, was meant to serve in that capacity; unfortunately, the X-Prize has too many problems associated with it -- a monetary prize being the main culprit. I will tell you why your X-Prize idea failed and its really simple -- it was not feared or respected by anyone. To be respected, it must be FEARED by those who have ill-intent (and, yes, they are the overwhelming majority). If you instill fear into the hearts of these fraudsters, they will go and hide, like the cowards they are, and the real technologies, few as they may be, will be revealed.
So now that you know what's wrong with the X-Prize, how does one go about instilling fear into the hearts and minds of everyone in this field? It's easy, really. You acquire a 'dream team' of people who know what they are talking about and have specialties in multiple different fields and travel across the world, making documentaries and confirming every aspect of these inventions -- once confirmed, you can give the Vlad seal of approval and the world can rejoice. But you can't be nice during the confirmation process - you must be a tyrant and a dictator and you must be feared because you are the gatekeeper.
Until any of that happens, Zpenergy and the long-dead Xprize, will forever remain sterile.
Anyway, that's my two cents on this whole thing.
|
]
|
|
|
|
