Nov 16, 2011

CERN: Stop Representing Anti-Science!

Posted by in categories: existential risks, particle physics

CERN’s refusal to quote scientific criticism for years represents anti-scientific behavior. The obvious explanation: a military-like obedience. All German university professors can be dishonorably discharged five years into the past while having to pay back their gross salaries for telling the truth, as happened to my wife, an endocrinologist. A similar obedience law is manifestly effective in the German-led European mini-state of CERN.

All 10.000 CERN scientists obeyed the order not to quote my results but proceed with the experiment in defiance. They thereby shut themselves out of the scientific community, a fraud that is bound to cost CERN the privilege to grant PhDs. But this academic consequence is negligible by comparison.

My danger-proving results were first sent to Dr. Mangano in early 2008, to be published in July the same year (long before his in this respect mute ”Safety Report” appeared). They survived a discussion with the Max-Planck-Institut für Gravitationsphysik in March 2009 and got since sharpened into the “Telemach” theorem on the Internet. Telemach remains un-contradicted by all colleagues while confirmed independently by professor Richard J. Cook, Air Force Academy, whose arxiv paper “Gravitational space dilation” arrived independently at T, L, M (the Time, Length, Mass change of Telemach) and was followed by an explicit confirmation of number 4 (the charge change, Ch) which I was asked to make public.

If our joint result stays un-disproved, then the implications are unprecedented: a new situation brought upon every earthling – not to survive the next 5 years with an apparently percentage-range probability. By inflicting such horror, Europe makes itself an enemy of every person on the planet.

I asked Shimon Peres’s help 4 years ago, as well as the pope’s (who had written me a kind letter while still a cardinal when Ezer Weizmann and Saudi Arabia were busy to found Lampsacus hometown of all persons on the Internet). I am the only member of the Third Order of Saint Francis of Jewish faith – I hope I will not be expelled for that. Religion has the mission to save lives in reflecting the goodness of the DOLGI (dream-of-life giving instance) whose real name be blessed.

The development brought about by CERN during the last 4 years – a trillion maximum-energy proton-proton collisions performed with detectors proven to be blind to the most hoped-for outcome, black holes — is without precedent. It represents living proof that there is no genuine science left on the planet. While the LHC experiment of CERN is potentially grandiose, it is unscientific for the risk incurred by skipping the scientific safety conference necessary in view of the new properties of the hoped-for black holes. There exists a second big profession on the planet – the biomedical one – that is exclusively devoted to saving lives. The doctors have no idea that their non-Hippocratic colleagues are playing with the lives of all. The fact that the trespassers take their own families hostage testifies to the same “courage” as shown by the evil-doers of the last century.

A new “Anti-Einsteinism” lies at the root (compare the recent “faster-than-light” campaign by CERN). The most intelligent person of history was Jewish and proudly so. I therefore ask the government in Jerusalem to apologize for its early refusal to act — by convoking the “safety conference” requested in vain from the German government by the Cologne Administrative Court on January 27, 2011.

The urgent tone in my voice is only meant to pledge, not to assault. I hope that the refused safety conference does not strike you as a crime worth punishing but as a chance for repair. The brotherhood of all persons implies planet-wide non-cruelty, as my late friend Emmanuel Lévinas proved.


Comments — comments are now closed.

  1. One of the modern challenges is to bring the spirit of democracy to science, which is currently run a bit like the Church before the reformation by a college of Cardinals taking advice from corporate interests which do not always serve the common good…

  2. J W Gacy says:

    Looks like Robert Houston and Rossler were able to answer TRMG and Hansel’s “refutation” of Telemach (see the “Stupi-CERN” post)…could it be that Otto Rossler is actually right? Looks like Rossler posted equations with consistent units — that are valid — how do Hansel and TRMG answer this…?

  3. And how about the American scientists shamelessly running the RHIC and also completing ignoring this blog — isn’t that exactly the same issue?

    Why is the rage here always directed at CERN?

  4. Dear Steve: Thank you for asking. It is the energy record that CERN inherited from the scrapped supercollider.

  5. Thanks Otto — I may have misunderstood your post to be suggesting that there were (allegedly) anti-semitic influences operating with European bureaucratic structures. I am pleased to hear if that is not what you were alleging.

  6. Is an attempt at everyone’s life (if my results are correct) not in a very sad tradition, dear Steve?

  7. PassingByAgain says:

    Some posters here believe that Rossler has “answered TMRG’s refutation of Telemach” (JW Gacy above) or “clarified precisely the term T” (AnthonyL in the “Stupi” thread). This obviously means that they know what Rossler means by “temporal wavelength”. JW Gacy, AnthonyL, would you please be so kind as to enlighten the rest of us, and provide a physical definition for that latest specimen of Rossler’s sciencey-sounding buzzwords? Your hero consistently avoided to do so, e.g. when prompted by Hansel in the “Never defamed” thread.

  8. steve nerlich says:

    “Is an attempt at everyone’s life (if my results are correct) not in a very sad tradition, dear Steve?”

    That’s a mighty big ‘if’ Otto ;-)

    And no, alleging ‘an attempt at everyone’s life’ is not the same thing as alleging anti-semistism. The latter is alleging racial prejudice.

  9. AnthonyL says:

    This obviously means that they know what Rossler means by “temporal wavelength”. JW Gacy, AnthonyL, would you please be so kind as to enlighten the rest of us, and provide a physical definition for that latest specimen of Rossler’s sciencey-sounding buzzwords? — PassingByAgin

    But Houston has explained this very well, PBA, according to his novel mathematical algebra drawn from the very first pages of a textbook, and endorsed by the Professor. Temporal means related to time, and wavelength means distance between tick and tock of a cesium clock, so what we have here is a tick tock downstairs which is longer than the tick tock upstairs in the rocket, so that the clock downstairs take longer to tick tock than the clock upstairs, so it registers a shorter time downstairs in that tick tock than the one upstairs.

    I am amazed that you haven’t cottoned on to this PassingBy. TRMG apparently has, since he has registered no objection despite the fact that earlier he was aiming to bat every ball bowled by Rossler over the boundary for a six (my metaphor is drawn from cricket) but complaining that they were all googlies which travel in a corkscrew path like a knuckleball and are very hard to hit,

    If you have an objection to this, PBA, please register it in chapter and verse, unless you are waiting for TRMG to return from whatever has pulled him away.

  10. PassingByAgain says:

    AnthonyL, let me ask you again: what is the physical definition of “temporal wavelength of the light waves emitted by the equal clocks in question”, as the new and improved version of “telemach” reads?

    From your hopelessly vague words above: “Temporal means related to time, and wavelength means distance between tick and tock of a cesium clock”, you seem to think that this “temporal wavelength of the light waves” is the period (= the time between “tick” and “tock”) of the clock. Rossler would agree with you from time to time (except when he claims that T is a frequency or some sciencey-sounding baloney such as “temporal wavelength”).

    However, how do you measure this “tick tock” of yours? If you measure it in local proper time, then the “tick tock” downstairs (in units of proper time downstairs) is just as long as the “tick tock” upstairs (in units of proper time upstairs), because that is the definition of equal clocks. If you measure it in different units, please state which ones.

    Anyway, this is just one more rehash of the “longer seconds” nonsense that we’ve been having on this blog for months, and I have by now lost interest in arguing about it with Rossler (I presume that the same happened to TRMG). I have more of an anthropological interest — if you want — in understanding what drives Rossler’s toadies. For example, when you state so assuredly that Rossler “has clarified precisely the term T”, I see two options:

    1) it is precisely clear to you what he means by “temporal wavelength of the light waves”. In this case you should be able to provide a physical definition for it (no “tick tock”, please);

    2) you have no idea what it means, but you are impressed by it because it sounds difficult and sciencey, then it must be right. In this case… well, you see where I am going ;-)

    P.S. I hope you were being ironic about Houston’s “novel algebra” of pints and quarts (but nothing is granted at this stage… ;-)

  11. Robert Houston says:

    CERN scientists are regimented into obedience to anti-scientific attitudes based on wishful thinking and a disregard for contrary information. It’s a form of magical thinking: the LHC is safe because we say it’s so. A striking example of this authoritarian attitude was uncovered by the New Yorker magazine (May 14, 2007) in an interview with Dr. Jos Engelen, CERN’s then chief science officer.:

    “Engelen said that CERN officials are now instructed, with respect to the L.H.C.’s world-destroying potential, not to say that the probability is very small but that the probability is zero.’”

    PBA asked the meaning of “temporal wavelength”. As he surely knows, the wavelength is the period between comparable points in a cycle, e.g., crest to crest, or blip to blip. In a slowdown the frequency of cycles is reduced and the temporal wavelength is increased, e.g. the period between blips becomes relatively longer — even if seemingly normal to the “locals”.

  12. Hansel says:

    So you have less ticks that are longer, both changed with the factor (1+z)? Thats exactly what TRMG has proven as leading to wrong results/conclusions.

    By the way, repeating non-defintions instead of giving a clear definition is not a definition.
    So again PBAs question:

    1) it is precisely clear to you what he means by “temporal wavelength of the light waves”. In this case you should be able to provide a PHYSICAL DEFINITION for it (no “tick tock”, please);

    And, again, what is the connection between Einsteins equation tdown=tup/(1+z) and Rösslers? So far he could never give a mathematical and physical clear connection.…

  13. PassingByAgain says:

    Houston, you seem to believe — just as AnthonyL — that Rossler refers to the period of the clock. Then read my post above — it applies to you as well. And FYI, “wavelength” (for a wave) is a length in space; “period” (for a clock) is a length in time; “temporal wavelength of the light waves emitted by the clock” is just some jumble that Rossler made up and you bought because it sounded sciencey. You should go back to your textbooks and try to read past the very first pages… ;-)

  14. Hansel says:

    There must be a reason why Rössler never defined anything or gave the connection between his “quantities” and the equations of general relativity.

  15. Otto E. Rossler says:

    Anonymous kids make meek claims of inability to understand. Maybe a real scientist — with a name to him or her which is the defining difference — can fulfill the expectations of the lay people on the world at large and come up with a counterproof to Telemach?

    Or else at long last a medium of stature like Herald Tribune or Time Magazine or Sciam can muster the courage to interview professor Hermann Nicolai or professor Gerard ‘t Hooft? Or else report on the fact that these eminent colleagues by virtue of their being CERN members are bound by the order to keep their mouths shut regarding indexed scientific literature – like this was today exhibited by the Gran Sasso-CERN cooperation — ?

    The most competent man to ask is professor Robert M. Wald. And, in the upper age bracket it is, of course professor Wolfgang Rindler who had responded kindly to Telemachus on his first contact with the lad. I feel the planet has a right to learn what the best scientists of the world have to say, has it not?

  16. Hansel says:

    Blabla, Rössler. Meaningless blabla.

    The answer of a real scientist would look different. But we all know, you are not a real scientist.

  17. Free says:

    There is one incontestable fact of globalisation: CERN corporation – last and most powerful scientific Dictatorship in Europe.