Sunday, February 22, 2009

That SCIAM comment archive

UPDATED: As of April 21 SCIAM has deleted about 150 posts so far from the original 650. So the count of posts on SCIAM is no longer relevant. It's best to just look at the last few over there and see if I've got them here if you doubt I'm up to date. I'm not deleting them from here of course. They're treasure!

Order of comments is not exactly as on the site as an artifact of how I scraped them, but all the material is there, and the logical flow from one to the next was so chaotic that it doesn't matter at all.

Not everyone is familiar with old American movies, so I should perhaps explain my photoshop, saving you a Google or two. In Rodgers and Hammerstein's quadruple-Oscar-winning movie The King and I (1956), Yul Brynner played the male lead: the king of Siam. I put El Naschie's head on him, and made it SCIAM instead. That's the entire joke. [apologetic shrug] Click for bigger pic.



INTRODUCTION

We have archived here for your enjoyment the comments from the SCIAM article "Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime" (only the comments, not the article) by Jerzy Jurkiewicz, Renate Loll and Jan Ambjorn. I have no opinion as to the correctness of their work. I'm a math guy, not a physics one, and didn't read the article very carefully. As regular readers of this blog will know, this isn't a science blog; it's a humor one! And what makes this humorous?

Well, El Naschie apparently thinks he and his colleagues Garnet Ord and Laurent Nottale are being plagiarized. Some of us happen to think anything having to do with El Naschie is intrinsically funny; but the idea of anyone plagiarizing him is so outré, that I had better pee before considering it.

Here's a picture of them from his Journal:


The string "Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime" that you see so frequently in the text remains and was useful for me in telling where one post ends and the next begins. The fact that some of the nearly 500 posts are extremely long and others nearly empty made it trickier than you might imagine to analyze the situation at a glance. Man, this is a lot of material. 213 pages of 12-point in Word. Novel length! That's without the article.

As in earlier commentary, I am making the most interesting material green so that you can identify it quickly. The basic rule is that it has to be pro El-Naschie; or appear sock-puppetesque; or funny.

Thanks to Martin Klicken for providing this material, and indeed for providing a customizable macro that downloaded what I needed the way I needed it. I was desperate, since the stupid SCIAM site wouldn't even let me see more than a couple dozen comments.

But finally the El Naschie Watch blog is ready to give you what you want. Thanks for waiting, and don't bust a gut laughing.

E0440003BA414B7F", null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","
SRT.
==========================..
It began in 1905 when Einstein created SRT,
(theory of photon/electron s behaviour).
Minkowski, tried to understand SRT using 4D space.
Poor young Einstein, reading Minkowski interpretation,
said, that now he couldn t understand his own theory.
Einstein, you are right, it is difficult to understand SRT
using 4D space. But it is possible using my 5D space"
- said Kaluza in 1921.
This theory was tested and found insufficient.
"Well", said another mathematicians, - "maybe 6D, 7D,
8D, 9D spaces will explain it". And they had done it.
But the doubts still remain.
"OK", they say, "we have only one way to solve this problem.
We must create more complex D spaces".
And they do it, they use all their power, all their super intellects
to solve this problem.
Glory to these mathematicians !!!!
But&&&.
But there is one problem.
To create new D space, mathematicians must add a new parameter.
It is impossible to create new D space without a new parameter.
And the mathematicians take this parameter arbitrarily
(it fixed according to his opinion, not by objective rules).

The physicist, R. Lipin explained this situation in such way:
"Give me three parameters and I can fit an elephant.
With four I can make him wiggle his trunk&"
To this Lipin s opinion it is possible to add:
"with one more parameter the elephant will fly."
The mathematicians sell and we buy these theories.
Where are our brains?
===============.
The SRT is a real theory.
But " 4-D Minkowski space " is an abstract theory.
There isn't any proof of its existence.
And if we mix these two theories then we are
surprised with its paradox.
What does the man usually do in such situation?
It is clear, he must understand
what 4-D Minkowski space " is. I say, it is Vacuum.
But somebody can say: You are wrong,
4-D Minkowski space is only a part of 11-D space.
Maybe this argument is correct. Then we must suppose
that the 11-D space will be a part of some 47-D space
in 50 years. And who knows where its end is.
Perhaps in 123-D space the physicists will find the God there.
And if we don't know what 1+1 = 2
how can we know what 5+4 = 9 ?
And if we don't know what is 4-D negative space
( 4-D positive Minkowski space )
how can we understand 11-D space ( string theory) ?
In another words, if we don t know what 4-D Minkowski
space " is, so it is impossible to take SRT as a finished one.
The proof of SRT isn t over yet. We must give a real
interpretation to 4-D Minkowski space ". I only hope that
a simple, usual logic will help a man to understand its essence.
====== =========
If I were a king, I would publish a law:
every mathematician who takes part in the creation
of 4D space and higher is to be awarded a medal
"To the winner over common sense".
Why?
Because they have won us over using the
absurd ideas of Minkowski and Kaluza.
==============..
I think this 4-D negative space is a real one.
I think this space is Vacuum.
Why?
1. Minkowski space has no gravity field, but negative parameter.
2. Only pure Vacuum space has no gravity
but negative parameter : T= - 273.
3. And this negative parameter is united with space/ time ,
which are joined together absolutely .
4. And the second SRT postulate tells about moving
light quanta in Vacuum.
5. It is impossible SRT to be the right theory
and space around SRT to be an abstract theory.
6. If in our brain abstract and real ideas are mixed together
then the interpretation of physics must be paradoxical.
====== ======
P.S.
Sorry.
I forgot that all Universe began from " apparent big bang ".
So I must add the " apparent big bang " to " D-space"
&&&&..or to " the God "......................
Then ...............
The atheist will say : " There isn t any God. There is only
big band which destroyed all D- spaces and therefore
we see background radiation T=2,7K now."
And religious man will say: " The God exists.
He sits at his D- home and plays with all things.
For example.
The action, when the God compresses all Universe
into his palm, we have named " a singular point".
And action, when the God opens his palm,
we have named the "Big Bang".
I don t know who is right.
But I came to conclusion:
" If I, as a peasant, think like modern physicists,
I will never gather my harvest . "
======= ======..
If mathematician makes a small mistake in the
beginning of his calculations then after some
operations it grows into a big one.
And if in the beginning of sciences birth (Newton )
the abstract ideas were put into its fundament ,
then now we are surprised with its paradoxes&&&
&&&&&&&&&..
&&and we can create new and new theories for 1000 years
but the result will be the same - paradoxical.
=============&
Best wishes.
http://www.socratus.com
http://www.wbabin.net/","June, 17 2008 04:08:08","04:08 AM on 06/17/08","50FBC5F7-0A25-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","socratus",460,1,null],[2,"50FCE16E-E4B5-4839-E0440003BA414B7F",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Two views on the space and time.
===========..
1.
Is it hard to see the three dimension. . .???
No.
There are an independent space and independent time:
We notice it on our planet Earth. It is a 3D space.
The space (Newtonian) around us is 3D,
and our eyes allow us to see this 3D.
If we take Descartes coordinates plus time,
when it is possible to say:
4D = 3D space + 1D time.
We live in this 4D and are aware of it.
2.
Is it hard to see the fourth dimension. . .???
No.
There is simultaneous union of space and time
(negative four-dimensional /Minkowski / space).
Herman Minkowski :
Henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself,
are doomed to fade away into mere shadows,
and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality.
Question. What is the a kind of union of the two ?
The answer. It is Vacuum. T=0K.
It is the space between milliards of billions Galaxies.
And only this space has negative quantity - negative
temperature. And it is negative four-dimensional
/Minkowski / space .
=====================.
Why we say :
" that it is impossible to see the fourth dimension.. ."
Maybe it is "special kind of intelligence is variably called
schizophrenia. "
=======================.
Einstein said,
"remember gentlemen, we have not proven
that the Aether does not exist, we have
merely proven that we do not need it (for computations)"!
==============","June, 17 2008 14:49:19","02:49 PM on 06/17/08","50FBC5F7-0A25-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","socratus",460,2,null],[3,"50FCE16E-E4F1-4839-E0440003BA414B7F",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Perhaps you could elaborate a little about each slide: either as a voice or as some text. Not all are conversant with all the 'fractals' associated with it. Wish to see more plain version of these next time, thanks.","June, 22 2008 18:00:39","06:00 PM on 06/22/08","50FBC5F7-0D9D-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","scientifica",460,3,null],[4,"50FCE16E-E52C-4839-E0440003BA414B7F",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Sirs:

Huh?

Sincerely,

Jacomus

P.S. I have trouble keeping my yo-yo string from knoting in mid-yo. This is way over my head.

P.P.S. I had the occasion to view the Einstein exhibit in Bern last fall, and to see a copy of the article with the footnote E=MC2. I cannot claim to understand much of the theory, but wouldn't it have been an experience to be the first physicist or mathmatician to read the draft of this paper? I picture Gene Wilder's Doctor Frankenstein character, hair flying, dark circles under his eyes shouting, "This could work!"

--
Edited by jacomus d'paganus-fatuus at 06/26/2008 2:48 PM","June, 26 2008 21:43:49","09:43 PM on 06/26/08","50FBC5F7-0ED4-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","jacomus d'paganus-fatuus",460,4,null],[5,"50FCE16E-E50F-4839-E0440003BA414B7F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

this was a terrific article -
particle physics continues to be the most absorbing frontier of knowledge, precisely because so many opposing theories are competing for space (as it were) - makes for exciting reading for the layman - well done and please continue!","June, 30 2008 01:09:36","01:09 AM on 06/30/08","50FBC5F7-0E63-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","noonean",460,5,null],[6,"50FCE16E-E50B-4839-E0440003BA414B7F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

>This approach is way cool but I have to say that it reminds me somewhat of certain attempts at a Unified Field Theory of the 20's, 30's and 40's. Perhaps they were on the right track after all (incl. Einstein) considering the massive interest from the military both in America and Germany.","June, 30 2008 14:05:44","02:05 PM on 06/30/08","50FBC5F7-0B97-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","Geekster",460,6,null],[7,"E20CC8D4-F26E-FC2A-8C43802F1C00FBBF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have a question. Is the emergance of four dimensional space time continuum due to the assembling with the four sided triangular forms? (and of course the causality principle).

In other words, if 3 sided triangular forms - more correctly three simplices - instead of the four-simplices were the seed, would a 3D spacetime continuum result? Keeping the causal arrow concept in place, of course.","July, 02 2008 00:34:26","12:34 AM on 07/02/08","E202DB1B-DF4F-A782-9DC6FA28F87C8B25","Paul of Eugene",460,7,null],[8,"E2347189-02A6-36EC-5450DFF91CE57E3C","E20CC8D4-F26E-FC2A-8C43802F1C00FBBF",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have a question. Is it possible for a fractal to have many dimensions?","July, 02 2008 01:17:45","01:17 AM on 07/02/08","E234712B-FFFC-0EE3-4185347C18791812","EnGram",460,8,7],[9,"E4D55F88-AB9B-E5C0-D1E8E26A4724AABE",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This guy may be quite smart, but his English is frustrating. And there seem to be signs of using an old Mac computer, which often had to write out contractions instead of forming recognizable ones, as in his ","July, 02 2008 13:32:46","01:32 PM on 07/02/08","E4D55F49-E408-938A-B936B8788C13373C","stevekoke",460,9,null],[10,"EB248D42-FCA7-BC92-09E6DF6ABDA8F2D2","E2347189-02A6-36EC-5450DFF91CE57E3C",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Yes, it is possible for a fractal to be in many dimensions.

Page 48 of the July 2008 Scientific American shows you the Meger Sponge, a 3 dimensional fractal. It can be generalized to higher dimensions.","July, 03 2008 18:56:58","06:56 PM on 07/03/08","E202DB1B-DF4F-A782-9DC6FA28F87C8B25","Paul of Eugene",460,10,8],[11,"EC2E6658-0E18-3BC1-1B79741A24B25CC0",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

how do we know that the universe we exist in or rather the picture of the universe we have conceived ...is smooth and uniform?How do we know at all ,that it is four dimensional ?why not five? why not 7??","July, 03 2008 23:47:21","11:47 PM on 07/03/08","EC2E6614-E832-ABB1-86B0CFC18E209F9D","prometheus "god is biology"",460,11,null],[12,"EC8EF41D-F672-539E-CCFD4D68996F2383",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

If the fractal is multi-dimesional (self-existance) and "it is vacuum" could it not effortlessly "produce" a multiverse? And would'nt it naturally be "below" and "above" it's creation?","July, 04 2008 01:32:49","01:32 AM on 07/04/08","E234712B-FFFC-0EE3-4185347C18791812","EnGram",460,12,null],[13,"F6CD7692-9FB4-935B-4430A972B37CFB77",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Nice explanations of quantum gravity. Thanks much.","July, 06 2008 01:17:17","01:17 AM on 07/06/08","E4D55F49-E408-938A-B936B8788C13373C","stevekoke",460,13,null],[14,"FE160FFB-EE40-4BC6-F96B6B830F9E095C","50FCE16E-E4F1-4839-E0440003BA414B7F",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Please note that there are plenty of pages about fractals (not least my own) and a WIKI entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal

see also http://www.geocities.com/Omegaman_UK/fractal.html

http://www.geocities.com/templarser/complexity.html

http://members.fortunecity.com/templarseries/index1.html

http://members.fortunecity.com/templarseries/beffect.html

","July, 07 2008 11:13:56","11:13 AM on 07/07/08","50FBC5F7-1044-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","AmputatedSalamander",460,14,3],[15,"04BE8E6E-FFE6-324C-E5A2B89869002F71",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I think that the authors may have forgotten one surface that may contribute to their theory.

The 2D plane can be rolled into a cylinder which is locally flat. An area diagonal is the shortest distance between opposite corners. This diagonal becomes a helix on a cylinder. The diagonal splits a square or rectanguilar plane into two triangles.

Certainly in astrophysics, such helices are the trajectories of the planets about a moving sun. When the sun is held stationary, these trajectories are viewed as nearly circular ellipses. The helical angle of each planet in this solar system can be calculated by vector addition of the speed of the sun and the speed of each individual planet [Mercury fastest ~78 degrees, Neptune slowest ~98 degrees, of the 8 major planets].

This helical structure to the solar system trajectories may allow for solenoid-like gravity effect [wave?] of planets relative to the sun.

There will be some wobble since the sun is revolving about the galactic core and likely not moving in an infinite straight line, but rather a toric or solenoid curve.

This macro-view may be consistent with the quantum view of David Hestenes 'zwitterbewegung' of an electron motion about a proton.","July, 08 2008 18:15:41","06:15 PM on 07/08/08","04BE8E2E-AA1D-1321-EB3F0C41E27194AB","Doug",460,15,null],[16,"253318CB-9116-05C0-595365E234451E6C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity was a brilliant accomodation of the failure by Mikelson-Morley to detect a universal spacetime reference frame and that accomodation was extended to include non-inertial reference frames by the General Theory of Relativity. Then Einstein made his greatest mistake and the consequences are with us to this day.

Einstein's mistake was to assume that there was a Universe to which he could apply his equations. But if there is a Universe then there is of consequence a universal spacetime reference frame. And if there is a universal reference frame then Relativity Theory, both the Special and General, are undone for what is 'relative' in the theories are non-universal reference frames.

Both the Special and General Theories continue to accord well with observation of course as long as they are apllied to defined local reference frames. It is only when the General Theory is applied to the 'Universe' that things fall apart. According to theory now, something north of 90% of the 'Universe' is invisible or undetectable or both. This is not the hallmark of a successful theory but of a failed one.

The authors of this article repeatedly refer to the Universe as if its existence has been firmly established by some incontrovertible empirical evidence but there is no such evidence. 'Universe' is a vestigal concept that has somhow managed to survive and undermine the onslaught of the fundamental principle of relativity for a century. It is a prime candidate for
relegation to the dust bin of history, as quaint a notion as the earth-centric cosmos that preceeded it.

A lot of baffling issues become less so when the notion of a universal spacetime reference frame is set aside. With no mumbo-jumbo this approach explains the quantum conundrum of the double slit experiment as a consequence not of the dual nature of light but of the separate natures of the reference frames of light and matter. It is no longer necessary to associate a direction with time any more than we impute a preferred direction to space. Time is the fourth spatial dimension as perceived by matter which is not to say that time is somehow an illusion. We measure the motion of matter through the fourth dimension as time by measuring regularly repeatable physical processes. Physical processes themselves have a direction and it is these processes that give us the sensation that time has a direction.","July, 15 2008 01:30:50","01:30 AM on 07/15/08","25331881-D2FD-B907-99AED1E51E0A84E1","budrap",460,16,null],[17,"253667E7-F03D-1A41-EE5D5AF95A986443",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","


There is nothing to be lost by dispensing with the notion that we exist in a 'Universe' and much to be gained. A modern 21st century physics awaits.","July, 15 2008 01:34:27","01:34 AM on 07/15/08","25331881-D2FD-B907-99AED1E51E0A84E1","budrap",460,17,null],[18,"2837ECED-C434-DED1-E2A827BB75926691",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","


The expression fractal spacetime was coined decades ago by a Canadian Professor Garnet Ord. The French Astrophysicist Laurent Nottale wrote at least 3 books in French and one book in English on the same subject. There are countless articles published on fractal gravity, Cantorian spacetime, fractal cosmology and real mathematical derivation of the dimensionality of spacetime from first principle as opposed to computer simulation. From all that you mentioned only the 50 years old Wheeler spacetime foam. This foam is not even a fractal. It is a bad practise not to mention the contribution of the pioneers. This is particularly unacceptable when it comes from the leading quantum gravity group in Europe. Studying the literature carefully and giving credit where it is due would have enhanced this work.

","July, 15 2008 15:34:58","03:34 PM on 07/15/08","2837EC40-A085-A5BA-227DDA436988A254","olilimo",460,18,null],[19,"283E91F9-AA4C-F74D-182615D3D56FA769",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The connection between your paper and fractal spacetime is of course the most fascinating part. However what I find quite surprising is that you made no mention of the large body of literature on the subject. Somewhere in the paper you say you are making a derivation of the dimensionality of spacetime from first principles. You said this is the first time ever. This is of course a considerable claim. I am puzzled however by this claim because you have not made any derivation. You made an excellent computer simulation. You can hardly call computer simulation a derivation from first principles. Even worse than that, a derivation from first principles already exists since many years in the literature. I think you should rectify these claims and study the literature carefully. All the same, the idea of your work is excellent and it is a breath of fresh air in a stuffy old room full of stuffy old ideas. Good luck.
","July, 15 2008 15:42:14","03:42 PM on 07/15/08","283E918D-EA72-AB13-82C55F90FC673A06","S.Olson",460,19,null],[20,"286A99B8-C910-BECD-E2B918135F031ABD",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

You guys must be joking! A derivation from first principle using a computer? This is unheard of. Besides, where is the contribution of the fractal cantorian spacetime trio? Garnet Ord, Laurent Nottale and Mohamed El Naschie? This is the chronological historical order. Before that, it was Richard Feynman not Wheeler foam. You have to stand corrected. Nevertheless, it s a good paper in principle but could have been written more carefully. At least there are some truly new ideas here which do not usually come from Centers of Excellence. In all event best of luck.","July, 15 2008 16:30:19","04:30 PM on 07/15/08","286A996F-E1BC-1F5C-925184EA84A98AF8","Weber",460,20,null],[21,"2E82C5F1-AFF6-4BE5-59DC5AD65631BC6C","50FCE16E-E4B2-4839-E0440003BA414B7F",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is John Robert Manis Of Hudson Florida. I have replied to this subject a short while ago and in it I believe that overall undersstanding of everything that exists in space and time can simply be explained by simply knowing that there is no limit as to how small and to how large something can be; that is everything is infinite. We the humane race and everything that exists around us is simply at one stage of an infinite number of stages of the largeness and smalless of things from which our outlook comes about all things from say a certain stage of outlook. Then for instance if something of a size in time and space is smaller or larger and we are standing on a particle (The Earth For Instance Or Whatever) which is say a trillion of a trillion of a trillion of times smaller than that which a moment ago was a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth larger having traveled in time a trillion of a trillion of a trillion years of getting larger and there as we stand are trying to understand the infinite smallness of something of matter, then said matter would be and exist in exactly the same way as we see it right now in time and space in a size of which it (say the atoms of which we are all made a part of) work in exactly the same way as is then and now in the establishment of the laws of physics in our time and space which can be then or is now a trillionth of a trilionth of a trillionth of a size which is small or larger as given here as just exemplified.

Now then to further exemplify the coming into being of things which thereof are aleady infinitely already of things being such as is in the "Big Bang Theory" of the start of our universe which started from the spreading apart of infinite smallness (from a stage point of view) of particals, all of which matter of the universe about reached the point of all just being waveforms which at that instant a certain law of physics does not allow all matter to be made up of just waveforms of former ultimately small particals that at the said instant when the last partical of an old universe had become so small and had traveled at such a limit of speed to try and become also a waveform of energy within an infinite small space of being, the at that said instant of time and space all of the condensed energy of an old universe which at said instant of its last negative said paritical trying trying to become a positive waveform, then all of the old universes squashed together particals became a singularity releasing positive and negative particals of a BIG BANG repulsive force.","July, 16 2008 20:54:27","08:54 PM on 07/16/08","F648A067-DD4D-39BC-1733A63E9DE41A05","sinamj",460,21,1],[22,"30EDECA9-AD32-1F08-2FCEEE70C146848E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I was under the impression that an exact theoretical derivation of the topological and the Hausdorff dimension of our spacetime was made in 1998 in a paper entitled "Superstrings, knots and noncommutative geometry in E-infinity space". This paper is published in a highly reputed journal of theoretical physics "Int. J. of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 37, No. 12 1998, pp. 2935-2951". The Editor in Chief of this outstanding journal is Prof. David Finkelstein who is himself an authority on the subject, both from the mathematical and philosophical sides. Am I right or am I getting something wrong? Please correct me if I am wrong.

Furthermore an American lady scientist Susie Vrobel who seems to be originally from Germany also wrote scores of beautifully formulated papers on fractal time. If I am not wrong there is at least one site in Wikipedia discussing her work. Is that not related to what the Author has been discussing? I think it is but again I am happy to be educated on the subject.

And yet another point regarding diffusion. There is a paper in a nonlinear dynamic journal published by Elsevier and which seems to have the highest impact factor in the filed, namely 3.5 deriving the exact dimensionality of spacetime from first principle using renormalization semi groups and a diffusion limited aggregation model. The paper is by a scientist from the Dept. of Appl. Math. & Theor. Phys, Cambridge and is entitled "Renormalization Semi-groups and the dimension of Cantorian space-time", Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol. 4, No. 7, 1994, pp. 1141-1145.

The same Author, in the same journal asked a fundamental question in his paper entitled "Is quantum space a random Cantor set with a golden mean dimension at the core?, CS&F, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1994, pp. 177-179. He answered the question with yes. Our spacetime can be described by two dimensions, a Menger Uhrysohn dimension equal to the imbedding dimension 4 and a Hausdorff dimension equal to 4 plus the golden mean to the power of 3. Our classical world is obviously described by this 4 while quantum gravity and high energy physics lives in the Hausdorff dimension. This is all of course only very loosely formulated. To understand it we have to read the mathematics in these papers.

So I am asking again, am I correct or not? I will appreciate very much an answer from whom ever is interested in the scientific truth of things.

","July, 17 2008 08:10:43","08:10 AM on 07/17/08","283E918D-EA72-AB13-82C55F90FC673A06","S.Olson",460,22,null],[23,"32C27046-0C6E-56B9-4CDB18E7AF21CBC1",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","





I was present in a celebration held in Frankfurt on the 28th of June, 2002. The occasion was to honour a scientist for his exceptionally originally contribution to science. The Minister of Culture of Hessen was present and so a great number of famous scientist, some Nobel Laureate for instance Professor Horst Störmer, the discoverer of the fractional quantum hall effect. One of the most senior theoretical physicist of Germany Prof. Dr. Dr. Walter Greiner was the speaker. He said wordly in German the following to the honour of the said scientist: Herr Profesor Dr. Mohamed El Naschie entwickelte mit originellen Ideen eine Theorie der fraktalen Raum-Zeit.
Daher verleiht ihm der Frankfurter Förderverein für physikalische Grundlagenforschung der Johann Wolfgang Goethe Universität die Würde eines Distinguished Fellow.

To put it short in English, they honours Professor Mohamed El Naschie for successfully developing a theory for fractal spacetime.

I am a member of a community which has suffered in the past from many forms of discrimination. I am sure it was only an oversight that the name of Professor El Naschie was not mentioned in your Scientific American article. Nevertheless, I still find it unacceptable because the authors of the article are truly distinguished and come from a center known for excellence, such as the University of Utrecht and Niels Bohr Institute. It is never too late to acknowledge an oversight or a mistake. Think about the great Richard Feynman. He never hesitated to apologize and say I am sorry, you are right and I am wrong. That is why Richard Feynman is a truly great scientist.

","July, 17 2008 16:42:28","04:42 PM on 07/17/08","2837EC40-A085-A5BA-227DDA436988A254","olilimo",460,23,null],[24,"32E2E80A-A3C3-EF12-02768461CEFF1D71",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

An even earlier contribution to the derivation of the dimensionality of spacetime than that mentioned by S. Olson is a 1992 paper by the same author El Naschie. The paper is called Multidimensional cantor sets in classical and quantum mechanics. See Elsevier: www.sciencedirect.com. In fact there are many comments on the work of Garret Lisi and Mohamed El Naschie which you can find on the Telegraph site: www.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/11/14/scisurf114.xml.
Some have even suggested that Garret Lisi, Michael Green and Mohamed El Naschie should share the next Nobel Prize in Physics. Does this mean that the exceptional Lie symmetry groups are related to the article in Scientific American? If I understand what El Naschie has written correctly, then E8 Exceptional Lie symmetry group is the fabric of spacetime and therefore the dimension of spacetime and that of E8 must be derivable from each other. This exciting proposition seems to be what El Naschie has been writing about in the last 15 years or so.

","July, 17 2008 17:17:56","05:17 PM on 07/17/08","32E2E781-CEBD-BDC3-3A9BF26E109AF903","Flores",460,24,null],[25,"3D453C49-FBC8-3752-34FD9CE1B40F5A27",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am a post graduate student of theoretical physics. My thesis is on a new model for quantum spacetime using elementary Cantor sets in infinite dimensional space. I make a great deal of use of exceptional Lie group hierarchies, the subject which was developed by an Egyptian professor Dr. Mohamed El Naschie (the correct pronunciation is Al-Nashaiee). I was really confused when I read that the group from Holland and Denmark are searching for the atoms of the geometry of quantum spacetime. These atoms are well known - they are the elementary Cantor sets. In fact Prof. El Naschie made a rigorous mathematical derivation of both the Hausdorff dimension and the topological dimension of spacetime using these elementary Cantor sets. In fact by introducing randomness to these Cantor sets, the analysis becomes extremely simple as I have shown in my thesis based on El Naschie's work. I know a great deal about the history of Cantorian fractal spacetime and it is really not related that much to Wheeler's foam spacetime which is not a fractal. It is only an example of a multiply connected space. There are many inaccuracies in this paper when it comes to fractals. Many things mentioned are simply wrong. The Authors did not really use fractals, they just mention it maybe because it is an attractive new concept. But it is really not new. El Naschie and his school published papers about this subject for almost the last twenty years. In 1995 Prof. El Naschie with his colleagues Otto Rossler, well known for the Rossler attractor and his teacher and mentor, Nobel laureate IIya Prigogine edited a book entitled Quantum Mechanics, Diffusion and Chaotic Fractals. The book was published by Pergamon/Elsevier and contained many excellent articles about Prof. El Naschie's thesis. One article was from someone from Niels Bohr Inst. in Copenhagen. His name is S.E. Rugh and his article was called "Chaos in the Einstein Equations". Another article was by E. Alvarez with the stimulating title "The Quantum Dimension of Space-Time". Yet another was by Laurent Nottale called "Scale Relativity, Fractal Space-Time and Quantum Mechanics". Nottale, a French astrophysicist was the first to publish a book on Fractal Spacetime. His book is published by World Scientific in 1993. On page 193 Nottale acknowledged priority of the work of G.N. Ord and Prof. El Naschie.

Please do not misunderstand my intentions by these remarks. We have all the greatest respect for the Authors of the article in Scientific America. They are all outstanding scientists with a great scientific achievement. The article is written in a very nice, informal style which appeals to the non-specialist but as a specialist, I am confused at least with regard to some claims which I find hard to accept. For instance, and as noted on this site by others, a computer simulation cannot be equated with a mathematical derivation from the first principle, particularly when a real mathematical derivation of the dimensionality of spacetime from first principle was given long ago by El Naschie. I hope these remarks contribute to the clarification of the subject and I could not conclude my comments without congratulating the Authors as well as Scientific American for bringing to the fore an extremely important theory which has been ignored for quite a long time by the well established schools of theoretical physics. All in all the Authors had the courage to address the subject and had the foresight to realize the value of lateral thinking in the tradition of Einstein and Richard Feynman.

M. Ammar","July, 19 2008 17:41:32","05:41 PM on 07/19/08","3D42A68B-BFE6-199E-972E17A06509C61B","Ammar",460,25,null],[26,"411FD3E6-D44A-1A6F-A111DBB22207AE0D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","





A great deal of the criticism of this article centred around some unfortunate omission of previous contributions to the theory of fractal spacetime. I ´f we just forget the personal aspect then this article was really a great news for science. We have to thank the author for having brought to a wider attention the fundamental and path breaking idea that on the quantum scale spacetime is a fractal and can be modelled by Cantor sets. Please forget all other details. This is an important contribution for science in general and quantum gravity in particular. As for the historical background of fractal spacetime you do not need to search far. Those who overlooked the theory could not overlook a special issue of Elsevier journal Chaos, Solitons & Fractals which was devoted to the 60th birthday of arguably the most important theoretical physicist of our time, Nobel Laureate Gerardus `t Hooft. This issue with an editorial by the editor in chief, Professor El Naschie, entitled "On being a man who wants to know everything" include many contributions of the application of fractal spacetime to particle physics and quantum gravity. See Elsevier sciencedirect, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol 30 (2006) pp 257 - 508. For those who are not happy about the particle I say they should look to the positive effect of this particle on science as a whole rather than taking this or that remark personally. With best wishes to everybody including the courageous and forward looking young editors of Scientific American.
","July, 20 2008 11:39:09","11:39 AM on 07/20/08","411FD3A2-9B37-C689-8547351B01448AC5","w.hansen",460,26,null],[27,"458DB786-974E-6E43-29407B10A4388F71",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Is there a typographical error at the top of page 5? Quoting as the line reads in my Internet browser: "Down to a size of about 10 meter, the quantum universe at large is well described ...". Certainly that "10 meter" should be something considerably smaller, 10 to the power of -40 for example.

Forgive me if someone's already noted this.","July, 21 2008 08:17:40","08:17 AM on 07/21/08","458DB718-A15F-7D76-527AC8AECD30F705","vashpapa",460,27,null],[28,"463E6BC9-B066-B98C-068912D4EACA83A7",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","





A great deal of the criticism of this article centred around some unfortunate omission of previous contributions to the theory of fractal spacetime. I ?f we just forget the personal aspect then this article was really a great news for science. We have to thank the author for having brought to a wider attention the fundamental and path breaking idea that on the quantum scale spacetime is a fractal and can be modelled by Cantor sets. Please forget all other details. This is an important contribution for science in general and quantum gravity in particular. As for the historical background of fractal spacetime you do not need to search far. Those who overlooked the theory could not overlook a special issue of Elsevier journal Chaos, Solitons & Fractals which was devoted to the 60th birthday of arguably the most important theoretical physicist of our time, Nobel Laureate Gerardus `t Hooft. This issue with an editorial by the editor in chief, Professor El Naschie, entitled On being a man who wants to know everything include many contributions of the application of fractal spacetime to particle physics and quantum gravity. See Elsevier sciencedirect, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol 30 (2006) pp 257 508. For those who are not happy about the article I say they should look to the positive effect of this particle on science as a whole rather than taking this or that remark personally. With best wishes to everybody including the courageous and forward looking young editors of Scientific American.
","July, 21 2008 11:30:40","11:30 AM on 07/21/08","411FD3A2-9B37-C689-8547351B01448AC5","w.hansen",460,28,null],[29,"464064FE-DB7A-9C18-2788D0F55ECA649F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","





A great deal of the criticism of this article centred around some unfortunate omission of previous contributions to the theory of fractal spacetime. I ´f we just forget the personal aspect then this article was really a great news for science. We have to thank the author for having brought to a wider attention the fundamental and path breaking idea that on the quantum scale spacetime is a fractal and can be modelled by Cantor sets. Please forget all other details. This is an important contribution for science in general and quantum gravity in particular. As for the historical background of fractal spacetime you do not need to search far. Those who overlooked the theory could not overlook a special issue of Elsevier journal Chaos, Solitons & Fractals which was devoted to the 60th birthday of arguably the most important theoretical physicist of our time, Nobel Laureate Gerardus `t Hooft. This issue with an editorial by the editor in chief, Professor El Naschie, entitled "On being a man who wants to know everything" include many contributions of the application of fractal spacetime to particle physics and quantum gravity. See Elsevier sciencedirect, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol 30 (2006) pp 257 - 508. For those who are not happy about the article I say they should look to the positive effect of this article on science as a whole rather than taking this or that remark personally. With best wishes to everybody including the courageous and forward looking young editors of Scientific American.

","July, 21 2008 11:32:50","11:32 AM on 07/21/08","411FD3A2-9B37-C689-8547351B01448AC5","w.hansen",460,29,null],[30,"469D2FEE-C560-9408-5EBEFA59692897A5",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Fractal spacetime is not only in France. In fact there is a powerful school of fractal spacetime led by the outstanding Indian Physicist B. G. Sidharth. Prof. Sidharth is one of the first to realize the power of El Naschie's Cantorian spacetime. He also participated in several conferences in India and overseas where fractal spacetime and cantorian geometry were featured strongly. He has written many books and the last of which is a monograph titled: "The Universe of Fluctuations" in 2005 and was published by Springer, Heidelberg, Germany. Ominously on page 42, he reviewed both "Scale Relativity" of Laurent Nottale and "Cantorian spacetime" of M. S. El Naschie. About 6 years ago the Berla Institute in Hyderabad, India honored Prof. El Naschie for his outstanding achievement connected to particle physics and cantorian fractal spacetime.
In fact there is another book by Kluwer Academic, Published by Plenum titled "Frontiers of Fundamental Physics" and edited by Prof. Sidharth. The first paper in this book is by Nobel Laureate Gerardus 'tHooft and on page 65 there is a paper by Prof. Laurent Nottale, the French Astrophysicist, called "Scale relativity and non-differential fractal spacetime". There are also 2 papers by Prof. El Naschie in this same book. One is: " 'tHooft dimension regularization implies transfinite heterotic string theory and dimensional transmutations" and the second paper: "The cantorian gravity coupling constant 1/126.1803398".

From all of the above, I conclude that the theory of Fractal and Cantorian spacetime and from which Sidharth developed another version called "Fuzzy spacetime" , is a powerful theory and well-established since many years, although it is mildly ignored in Europe and the States. I really don't understand the reason for that? Some have advanced the theory that scientists from the developing world have simply the wrong names and addresses. This would be truly a sad time for Science. I only hope that Scientific American which represents everything that is excellent about America will prove these opinions wrong. We are sure that America will continue to lead the world and that a wonderful window of change will be coming in the form of possibly a most wonderful leader of America to come, Barrack Obama.

Kumar

","July, 21 2008 13:14:11","01:14 PM on 07/21/08","286A996F-E1BC-1F5C-925184EA84A98AF8","Weber",460,30,null],[31,"487EA98C-F583-3F23-07818FB29974BA1F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am Ph.D. candidate in China and I am interested in biology. In an Elsevier journal called Bio Systems I read 'Dimensional symmetry breaking, information and fractal gravity in Cantorian Spacetime' by M.S. El Naschie, 46, pp. 41-46, 1998. We are now using this theory in biology. In my recent paper (accepted), I applied fractal E-infinity Cantorian spacetime theory to wool structure in nano scale , and it seemed a great success. It seems to me that this theory is the basis of the paper in Scientific American called 'The Self-Organizing Quantum Universe' . In fact the same author, El Naschie wrote "The VAK of vacuum fluctuation, spontaneous self-organization and complexity theory interpretation of high energy particle physics and the mass spectrum", Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 18, pp. 401-420, 2003. In other words the concept of spontaneous self-organization and self-assembly was understood by El Naschie many years ago. Therefore I am at a loss to see why the work of so many dedicated scientists has been ignored. We have benefited in our research from El Naschie's publications. We always refer to his work. Science and true scientists do not recognise geographical or racial divisions. That is our strength. I hope the editor should pay special attention to this omission, in fact I am sure it is not intended. It is however still hurtful and it is also not expected from great European centers of excellence. I hope very much that there will be an appropriate action on behalf of those responsible to correct the situation. ","July, 21 2008 22:00:05","10:00 PM on 07/21/08","487DDECD-B265-15BE-2C413367AA6845D8","amelia",460,31,null],[32,"4E8E1EA1-E331-717C-24073FB407C1464A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am a member of a Chinese group working on fractal spacetime and its application in physics and biology. I read with great admiration the very readable article by Professors Jay Ambjorn, Jerzy Jurkiewicz and Renate Loll. However what I cannot understand if why the contribution of our group is not mentioned. We covered this subject from all points of view. We wrote papers elucidating the geometrical and the topological aspects. We followed Prof. Mohamed El Naschie in using higher dimensional Coxeter polytopes. We discovered a polytope in 10 dimensions with incredible properties. This polytope is now called He's polytope. We can deduce from this polytope the number of elementary particles in the standard model. In higher dimensional space there is only one type of polytopes and this is the generalization of the cube so the situation becomes very simple. In 6 dimensions the number of elements is exactly 496. This is precisely the dimension of the E8E8 exceptional Lie group of super strings so we are working very hard and obtained very nice results. China is now a very important country so I do not understand why our contribution is ignored. We find it slightly offensive as if we are not good enough to be counted. I sincerely hope that this is not the intention and I sincerely hope that the greatest scientific magazine in the world - Scientific American - would be fair enough to give us the same chance and opportunity as they gave others. Despite the hard feeling we are still objective enough to recognise the important contribution which the publication of this paper has made but I would like to ask all readers to just have a look at the beautiful paper by Prof. Ji-Huan He entitled "Twenty-six dimensional polytope and high energy spacetime physics", Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 33, No. 1, pp. 5-13. This can be found on Elsevier's website Science Direct.
","July, 23 2008 02:14:41","02:14 AM on 07/23/08","4E8E1E4E-E87F-C9A9-2D555BC9532BE869","heather",460,32,null],[33,"4FC577D2-FE59-E760-54FBCCE9E18DD9D9",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Sir, I would like to recommend a new book by Dr. Edi Billimoria titled "The Snake And The Rope" which deals with Evolutions of Life and contrasts the methods and philosophies of Western science with that of Occult Science and shows how the 'unexplained phenomenon' can be explained by Occult Science. Reference: www.SnakeAndTheRope.com","July, 23 2008 07:54:46","07:54 AM on 07/23/08","4F972AF7-F30A-EE43-CE85E539E392FA8B","eddy",460,33,null],[34,"50C80BA5-907F-2D82-06089E03E228840D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The ongoing discussion concerning the unfortunate omission to refer to the man first used cantor sets to model spacetime and derive the mass spectrum of elementary particle, namely Mohamed El Naschie is threatening to obscure a very important real issue which this paper has brought to the open. Far more important than the use of the word fractal spacetime in this paper is the use of causality. The author referred to their computer simulation as causal triangulation. As is well-known causality presupposes an arrow of time. It was the lifelong ambition of Ilya Prigogine incidentally also a Nobel Laureate to prove that irreversibility of time is something fundamental even in particle physics. Like many great scientists Prigogine had the right intuition but didn't have the mathematical skill. It was obvious that he was going to lose the battle. Quantum mechanics is manifestly reversible. An arrow of time and irreversibility seem to be something related only to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics. Prigogine was known for his pioneering work in nonlinear, non-equilibrium thermodynamics. It seems that this was the reason why he was so interested in deterministic chaos theory. At a certain point he got to know Mohamed El Naschie and I think this was in Tokyo some 18 years ago. El Naschie's idea was to build a bridge between the philosophical point of view of the highly philosophical Prigogine and the mathematical and pragmatic reality of high energy particle physics and here I recommend a paper to be read by everyone. It is called: Time symmetry breaking, duality and cantorian space time. It appeared in 1996 some twelve years ago. El Naschie must have been in Cambridge at this time because this is the address appearing on the paper, although I have seen him myself at the time in Tokyo with Prof. Ilya Prigogine writing this paper in close collaboration. The idea of El Naschie was that the fractality of spacetime is the cause for the arrow of time and irreversibility. This is really fundamental and ironically the confirmation for Prigogine and El Naschie's theory is coming now from the University of Utrecht. I say now ironically because I know that a very powerful personality in Utrecht who has long retired was always against Prigogine's ideas calling it idle philosophy. Now and here is the irony: a powerful group from the same University, whether they know it or not, are championing the idea of Prigogine. This is an unexpected turn of events. Of course particle physicists have all the right to refuse Prigogine's thesis but then again they could not have anticipated that spacetime on the quantum scale has a cantorian geometry or in modern language is a fractal. I think this is the most important aspect which the discussion of this paper should be concerned with. In very early papers which I have seen and some of my Chinese friends have drawn my attention to lately, I could see that in 1993 El Naschie has not yet discovered the utility of randomness and therefore he didn't know about the Golden Mean. His work from this period on was able nevertheless to drive a dimensionality for spacetime. But he used the Bose Einstein statistics. The result was 4.025. I could not believe my eyes when I saw on page 29 of the article in scientific American that their computer simulation gave 4.02 as the dimensionality of spacetime. This is a great confirmation for the point of view of El Naschie's as well as Ambjorn and his coauthors. So once again I don't think that we should dwell too much about who was first because we never live in a vacuum. Historically El Naschie's work predates the work of the Utrecht group by a decade if not longer. But this is not a calamity. Just the opposite and as Prigogine used to say, quoting Whitehead: It is an opportunity.","July, 23 2008 12:37:12","12:37 PM on 07/23/08","50C80B1F-A77A-A46F-DF6FDE785EFEADBA","Andreas Pankow",460,34,null],[35,"51DD4117-AB5B-ED0D-2A8851D5596CCC20",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

A few years back, during the prolific life of Nobel Laureat Illya Prigogine (1977), I had a rather interesting experience very much related to the debate above (and below) regaring Mohamed El Naschie's work and impact on his field. El Naschei was on a visit to the Free University in Brussels, and was presenting some of his work. To me, an engineer with interests in earthquake engineering and engineering seismology, it was all greek, as my Illinois colleagues would say. Professor Prigogine was sitting right next to me. Mid-stream, I heard him murmur something. I could not pick up what he said. A few minutes later he repeated what he said, or so it sounded to me. I could not get it still. I leant towards him as if I was just changing my sitting style, and tuned my ears to his Russian English. Then came the third time, he said 'If this was proven, this is a Nobel'. Coming from a Nobel Prize Winner, this made me try harder, and fail, to understand what El Naschie was describing. I eventually understood, in a sense, what this is all about by virtue of a personalized explanation by El Naschei himself; a faculty that he has in explaning complex physics even to an earthquake engineer. So, dear readers and commentators, this is a verdict from someone who knows what it takes to undertake ground breaking work that leads to the highest scientific recognition of our time. That others emulate, and deny emulating, El Naschie is no wonder. Fortunately, El Naschie is also prolific, not just brilliant, and he has presented his work to hundreds if not thousands, and has also written many papers. So, his claim to the fame that he deserves, and the eventual Nobel Prize, is well-documented and irrefutable. I close by borrowing a statement from a very dear friend in describing a portion of our profession. These are those physicists who can only express their opinions in equations that have two sides, right and left. When one examines the right side carefull, one finds that there is nothing right. Upon turning to the left side, and examining the left side carefully, one finds that there is nothing left. IN El Naschie's work there is tremendous vision and deep thought, expressed in equations or not. Lesser mortals struggle to develop equations that are often described as above.
","July, 23 2008 17:39:59","05:39 PM on 07/23/08","51DD104B-D06C-D9B1-E457F594136C8BB6","Amr Elnashai",460,35,null],[36,"553C7766-D4E8-80AF-59FA3C8C659F354F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Because of my interest in science and philosophy, I found myself in May 1991 in Paris, France attending the first International Symposium on Gödel's theorems held in the University of Pierre and Marie Curie and I was surprised that the guest of honor giving an opening talk was not a philosopher but an engineering scientist from the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics in the UK. The title of his lecture was: Gödel, Cantor and modern nonlinear dynamics. Let me give you the abstract of this paper: The work gives a broad outline of a way of looking at turbulence and quantum mechanics using ideas which were developed by G. Cantor and K. Gödel. What is suggested here is that micro spacetime maybe a cantorian structure with a natural informational horizon.
How could anyone overlook that the idea of modeling spacetime with cantor sets is due to El Naschie? Luckily for the history of science, the proceeding of this conference is compiled by an international publisher World Scientific and edited by Z.W. Wolkowski. The proceeding itself appeared in 1993 but still well ahead of the date given in the article of Scientific American as the beginning of their work which is 1998.
Far of wanting to accuse anybody of anything, I had to interfere because scientists have devoted their lives for the pursuit of truth not fame or success. Of course we are all human with all human frailties but then we have to remind one another of the real ideal of science so that we collectively can go in the right direction. The first paper in which the word fractal spacetime was used was in the year 1983 by an English Canadian Scientist Garnett Ord. The first book published was in 1993 by the French Scientist L. Nottale. The two together with M. El Naschie edited many volumes on fractal spacetime and now I learned from this site that the late Nobel Laureate Ilya Prigogine came up with the idea that causality and therefore the arrow of time must be given a fundamental position even in particle physics.
To my knowledge the article in Scientific American is the first article which comes from conservative circles confirming these avant-garde theories. So on the whole it did a good service to the scientific community at large. Tying the article however with the considerable effort done in the last 20 years could have been only the more beneficial to science. Incidentally the work on Cantorian spacetime was also published in traditional literature such as the American Institute of Physics.","July, 24 2008 09:22:50","09:22 AM on 07/24/08","553C7722-E3A7-F3A7-C520F16B24056D59","Andrew Sullivan",460,36,null],[37,"558AC29F-C932-2106-C9590A96918D6760",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Lets take the building blocks and make them pulsate at a "clock rate" such that the frequency (in seconds) times the distance across the block equals 186000. Movement from one block to the next can only occur at a particular point in the pulsation. We have the explaination for the lightspeed limitation.

Assume that particles with mass absorb the blocks so that there is an inward movement of blocks toward any massive particle. We have the gravitational field. Assume that radiation in space generates blocks by giving up energy. We have variations in gravity around galaxies according to the density of radiation which alters the rotational speed of stars around galactic centers and possibly explains dark energy and removes the need for dark matter.","July, 24 2008 10:48:21","10:48 AM on 07/24/08","558AC263-D4C2-85F1-B3FEC3C16AF166BE","needhamm",460,37,null],[38,"57048F4C-AF22-2C54-EBB11B2D7164EBCF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The use of Cantorian sets and fractals to model spacetime is well known to us. I feel I should draw the attention of whoever is interested to a paper
which I wrote on this subject and which is published by Springer Verlag ISBN-10 1-4020-4151-9 9HB. The book is Edited by B.G.Sidharth, F. Honsell and A. De Angelis, University of Udine, Italy. My paper is entitled "Cantorian Space in Nature and Dynamical Systems". It is page 183-190. In the same volume there is a highly interesting paper by Prof. G. 't Hooft called "Black holes and the information paradox". Another paper in this book is by G. Ord who invented the word fractal spacetime. I hope this information is helpful to the readers of this site.

Prof. Gerardo Iovane
University of Salerno - Italy
","July, 24 2008 17:41:01","05:41 PM on 07/24/08","57048EF5-A0D3-B45F-4998E4A33BC4A9A8","Gerardo Iovane",460,38,null],[39,"572B9C8C-E53F-C6DF-F5322E6A47C92989",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Because of my interest in science and philosophy, I found myself in May 1991 in Paris, France attending the first International Symposium on G? s theorems held in the University of Pierre and Marie Curie and I was surprised that the guest of honor giving an opening talk was not a philosopher but an engineering scientist from the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics in Cambridge University, UK. The title of his lecture was: G?, Cantor and modern nonlinear dynamics. Let me give you the abstract of this paper: The work gives a broad outline of a way of looking at turbulence and quantum mechanics using ideas which were developed by G. Cantor and K. G?. What is suggested here is that micro spacetime maybe a cantorian structure with a natural informational horizon.
How could anyone overlook that the idea of modeling spacetime with cantor sets is due to El Naschie? Luckily for the history of science, the proceeding of this conference is compiled by an international publisher World Scientific and edited by Z.W. Wolkowski. The proceeding itself appeared in 1993 but still well ahead of the date given in the article of Scientific American as the beginning of their work which is 1998.
Far of wanting to accuse anybody of anything, I had to interfere because scientists have devoted their lives for the pursuit of truth not fame or success. Of course we are all human with all human frailties but then we have to remind one another of the real ideal of science so that we collectively can go in the right direction. The first paper in which the word fractal spacetime was used was in the year 1983 by an English Canadian Scientist Garnett Ord. The first book published was in 1993 by the French Scientist L. Nottale. The two together with M. El Naschie edited many volumes on fractal spacetime and now I learned from this site that the late Nobel Laureate Ilya Prigogine came up with the idea that causality and therefore the arrow of time must be given a fundamental position even in particle physics.
To my knowledge the article in Scientific American is the first article which comes from conservative circles confirming these avant-garde theories. So on the whole it did a good service to the scientific community at large. Tying the article however with the considerable effort done in the last 20 years could have been only the more beneficial to science. Incidentally the work on Cantorian spacetime was also published in traditional literature such as the American Institute of Physics.
","July, 24 2008 18:23:40","06:23 PM on 07/24/08","553C7722-E3A7-F3A7-C520F16B24056D59","Andrew Sullivan",460,39,null],[40,"572D6A11-ED9F-B80A-293CE3590FF7F882",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Because of my interest in science and philosophy, I found myself in May 1991 in Paris, France attending the first International Symposium on Gödel's theorems held in the University of Pierre and Marie Curie and I was surprised that the guest of honor giving an opening talk was not a philosopher but an engineering scientist from the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics in Cambridge University, UK. The title of his lecture was: Gödel, Cantor and modern nonlinear dynamics. Let me give you the abstract of this paper: The work gives a broad outline of a way of looking at turbulence and quantum mechanics using ideas which were developed by G. Cantor and K. Gödel. What is suggested here is that micro spacetime maybe a cantorian structure with a natural informational horizon.
How could anyone overlook that the idea of modeling spacetime with cantor sets is due to El Naschie? Luckily for the history of science, the proceeding of this conference is compiled by an international publisher World Scientific and edited by Z.W. Wolkowski. The proceeding itself appeared in 1993 but still well ahead of the date given in the article of Scientific American as the beginning of their work which is 1998.
Far of wanting to accuse anybody of anything, I had to interfere because scientists have devoted their lives for the pursuit of truth not fame or success. Of course we are all human with all human frailties but then we have to remind one another of the real ideal of science so that we collectively can go in the right direction. The first paper in which the word fractal spacetime was used was in the year 1983 by an English Canadian Scientist Garnett Ord. The first book published was in 1993 by the French Scientist L. Nottale. The two together with M. El Naschie edited many volumes on fractal spacetime and now I learned from this site that the late Nobel Laureate Ilya Prigogine came up with the idea that causality and therefore the arrow of time must be given a fundamental position even in particle physics.
To my knowledge the article in Scientific American is the first article which comes from conservative circles confirming these avant-garde theories. So on the whole it did a good service to the scientific community at large. Tying the article however with the considerable effort done in the last 20 years could have been only the more beneficial to science. Incidentally the work on Cantorian spacetime was also published in traditional literature such as the American Institute of Physics.","July, 24 2008 18:25:38","06:25 PM on 07/24/08","553C7722-E3A7-F3A7-C520F16B24056D59","Andrew Sullivan",460,40,null],[41,"660CA8E0-DB58-369E-87F40A832F52675C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Why do Physicist always try to describ an 11 dimension universe with four dimensions. One can of beer does not make a six. pack. "Zooming in on Spacetime", page 49 has by far the best description of Infinity I have read to date. Tanks","July, 27 2008 15:44:10","03:44 PM on 07/27/08","660CA896-FC01-8911-A848544E4F6E0D74","joseph2237",460,41,null],[42,"66102523-D24F-97FE-68848650C9291C4B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Why do Physicist try to describe an eleven dimension universe with four dimenisions. "Zooming in on Spacetime" page 49 is by far the best description of Infinity I have read.","July, 27 2008 15:47:58","03:47 PM on 07/27/08","660CA896-FC01-8911-A848544E4F6E0D74","joseph2237",460,42,null],[43,"6C28977F-01FF-EF9D-F64AD2C485004A34",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The theory of fractal spacetime is well known in Japan and used intensively. It is known under the name of E-Infinity theory which was invented by M. S. El Naschie in England. As a specimen of the work done in Japan, I may mention one of the many contributions due to Prof. W. Tanaka from the Department of Physics in Kyoritsu University. I was surprised just as many others were that the article in Scientific American forgot to mention the contribution of the Japanese school. The paper in question is (The mass spectrum of hadrons and E-Infinity theory). It could be found on Elsevier sciencedirect, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, vol. 27, 2006, Pages 851-863. The article in Scientific American is good news in general. Niels Bohr Institute in Denmark and Spinoza Institute in Holland are two well-known Centers of Excellence in Theoretical Physics. The fact they are interested in fractal spacetime and are publishing papers on the subject is the good news. The bad news however is that they forgot to mention the originator and inventor of the beautiful theory.","July, 28 2008 20:12:24","08:12 PM on 07/28/08","6C289734-C07A-BBA0-A3696190D27F2D22","J. Nakatira",460,43,null],[44,"72CE40B8-AE93-1246-7A318D4D1D50C7C9",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The authors this article should notice that Fractal Cantorian nature of spacetime has been proposed firstly by M. S. El Naschie long times ago. Papers of this author in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals show the validity of this claim.","July, 30 2008 03:11:04","03:11 AM on 07/30/08","72CE4051-B90F-7964-DCC52F0D52919806","knozari",460,44,null],[45,"73D8F8EB-BB5A-E73C-27C118E4B5A1BD3C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am a system analyst and I am interested in modelling and simulation. I found a highly interesting paper in a journal published in Switzerland by Gorden & Breach USA. The journal is called Systems Analysis Modelling Simulation. In Vol. 11, No. 3, 1993 on page 217-225 there is a paper called ' On universal behaviour and statistical mechanics of multi-dimensional triadic Cantor sets'. The Author seems to be in Cornell University,Ithaca, USA. In table no. 1 he found the dimension of spacetime to be 4.025 for a Bose-Einstein statistic. This is extremely close to the value reported in Scientific American article called " The sefl-organizing quantum)

The Author M.S. El Naschie is probably the same author that some of the comments made here are talking about but I am not sure. It seems from the paper that he used a quantum ensemble because he was hoping to confirm some ideas regarding the arrow of time due to Nobel laureate Ilya Prigogine. I think a specialist might be interested in drawing connections between this paper in an engineering journal and the work of theoretical physicists working on quantum gravity.
","July, 30 2008 08:02:24","08:02 AM on 07/30/08","73D8F8BA-DF46-6C29-1FC575873AE2AD50","shiqian",460,45,null],[46,"742A952F-0711-1253-68E42E2BC9AF1434",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have a simple query. I was in a conference in 2005 in Shanghai dedicated to the honour of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. I even remember the poem dedicated to him by a Chinese professor written in Chinese and read both in Chinese and English translation. The reason was mainly his invention or discovery of the fractal Cantorian nature of quantum spacetime and for having been able to devise a theory based on an infinitely large but hierarchal Cantor set. My question is, why is there no mention of this fundamental work in this otherwise excellent review article? Thank you.
","July, 30 2008 09:31:32","09:31 AM on 07/30/08","742A94F5-EFFC-4476-4FBD1F1618F0AAC3","km_xwzhou",460,46,null],[47,"742BCA24-04BE-0B44-9E08A306C4B48E9D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have a simple query. I was in a conference in 2005 in Shanghai dedicated to the honour of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. I even remember the poem dedicated to him by a Chinese professor written in Chinese and read both in Chinese and English translation. The reason was mainly his invention or discovery of the fractal Cantorian nature of quantum spacetime and for having been able to devise a theory based on an infinitely large but hierarchal Cantor set. My question is, why is there no mention of this fundamental work in this otherwise excellent review article? Thank you.
","July, 30 2008 09:32:51","09:32 AM on 07/30/08","742A94F5-EFFC-4476-4FBD1F1618F0AAC3","km_xwzhou",460,47,null],[48,"74AB3550-B8CF-A657-7996B6FF7949A38F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I just mention here one reference which must be known to all, at least in Germany. This is a book titled: Sciences of the Interface, edited by H. Diedner, T. Druckrey and B. Weibel and published by the German Publisher Genista in Tubingen, Germany in 2001 (ISBN 3-930171-26-0). On page 53-57 and in figure 1 you will see a picture of M. El Naschie jumping from our Universe into the fractal space-time Universe, performing a macro two-slit experiment by passing with his skies, in the mountain near his winter home in Garmisch-Partenkirschen, Germany, around a Christmas tree from both sides simultaneously without breaking or hitting the tree.
It is strange that almost 20 years after he discovered that fractal space-time is the resolution of the two-slit experiment, a joint paper from two Centers of Excellence make the claim that they discovered that space-time on the quantum level is fractal? To understand that is beyond me particularly because they are nobody less than members of the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen and the Spinoza institute in Utrecht?
","July, 30 2008 11:52:02","11:52 AM on 07/30/08","74AB3502-9599-BCB6-8FA02FBCC6E54572","Sherif El-Eskandarany",460,48,null],[49,"74AD96A5-D3AC-598E-5F17C5E33FD63230",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I just mention here one reference which must be known to all, at least in Germany. This is a book titled: Sciences of the Interface, edited by H. Diedner, T. Druckrey and B. Weibel and published by the German Publisher Genista in Tubingen, Germany in 2001 (ISBN 3-930171-26-0). On page 53-57 and in figure 1 you will see a picture of M. El Naschie jumping from our Universe into the fractal space-time Universe, performing a macro two-slit experiment by passing with his skies, in the mountain near his winter home in Garmisch-Partenkirschen, Germany, around a Christmas tree from both sides simultaneously without breaking or hitting the tree.
It is strange that almost 20 years after he discovered that fractal space-time is the resolution of the two-slit experiment, a joint paper from two Centers of Excellence make the claim that they discovered that space-time on the quantum level is fractal? To understand that is beyond me particularly because they are nobody less than members of the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen and the Spinoza institute in Utrecht? Thank you

","July, 30 2008 11:54:38","11:54 AM on 07/30/08","74AB3502-9599-BCB6-8FA02FBCC6E54572","Sherif El-Eskandarany",460,49,null],[50,"75801C19-BA8C-4D53-94D76000EAFEB82C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have read most of the comments made on this site and I fully agree that Prof. El Naschie s name should have been mentioned in this article. After all he is not only the initiator of the idea of fractal spacetime together with his English and French colleagues but he is also the most prolific physicist on this subject. In fact some people have counted that he must be the most prolific physicist in history counting something like 1000 papers to his credit. It always mystifies me why when any negatives come from the Middle East, it is popularized as much as possible in the press? But when it comes to mentioning legitimately the name of an Arab scholar who has made fundamental contributions to fundamental physics, then somehow his name evaporates from the memory? Is there any scientific explanation to this curious phenomenon? ","July, 30 2008 15:44:34","03:44 PM on 07/30/08","75801B7B-EEEA-BE6A-A736527EB9834FAB","hgamily",460,50,null],[51,"7918F0C3-F3A4-C527-A471D2F66DE363DE",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

F","July, 31 2008 08:30:22","08:30 AM on 07/31/08","7918F07F-E1C4-4A82-C34CCD4DFD8456AE","Elisabeth Steinbach",460,51,null],[52,"79199EB1-956F-8D78-FD3B64DC1525D948",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","





Fractal spacetime is well known in Germany. I did hear long ago a lecture by Mohamed El Naschie in the University of Tübingen more than 10 years ago. He was invited to the department of physical chemistry. I remember the day before some comment by him on the theory of chaos appeared in the famous magazine "Der Spiegel" There was a vivid discussion and some not very fair questions by the right hand of a German Nobel Laureate from Tübingen. El Naschie was able to hold his ground and defended his point of view admirably . I have seen him again at the 60th birthday celebration of the very famous Chaos scientist Otto Rössler, it was in Karlsruhe. I have seen him also 6 years ago when the University of Frankfurt honoured him with the title "distinguished fellow". There is even an article in a book edited by Hans Diebner, Timothy Druckery and Peter Weibel with a paper by El Naschie of fractal spacetime and also a paper by Nottale on the same subject. Later on there was a celebration in Karlsruhe on the occasion of El Naschie `s 60th birthday. On this celebration the famous Professor Davbid Finkelstein attended and also Professor Dr. Walter Greiner arguably the most famous German Professor in Theoretical Physic. Needless to say I know Mohamed El Naschie very well personally. He does not know about this article yet but I know and I am very unhappy about it. AS far as I am concerned Mohamed El Naschie is as much a German as I am a German. But we are the German who learned tolerance and learned not to discriminated between anybody. We learned it the hard way after loosing World war II: I think those who won the war rightly won it should also learn now from us. Whatever the reason is that certain circle are giving Mohamed El Naschie always the shorter end of the stick they should know that it is unfair and unethical. It is the last thing which one expects from la crème de la crème of scientific establishment. I suggested to Mohamed jokingly that he should change his name but he answered politely but seriously no… never.
","July, 31 2008 08:31:06","08:31 AM on 07/31/08","7918F07F-E1C4-4A82-C34CCD4DFD8456AE","Elisabeth Steinbach",460,52,null],[53,"83A0824B-B1EF-0049-EF5FFDD3FC296C53",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To whom it may concern,

The article fails to reference well-documented work done for almost 25 years by El Naschie, Ord, Nottale, Marek-Crnjak , Tanaka, Goldfain, Castro and many others on fractal (Cantorian) space-time. Please refer to a large body of papers published in "Chaos, Solitons and Fractals" (Elsevier) for a convincing proof of this unfortunate omission.
","August, 02 2008 09:34:39","09:34 AM on 08/02/08","83A081EF-9459-E1CE-60748830AFCF4E04","ervingoldfain",460,53,null],[54,"94B0F810-E48E-2A56-D3055E618BE0EE4D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am PhD student in the field of complexity and physics. Certainly, the authors of this article are not the first to (derive) that the number of space-time dimensions to be =~ 4. Moreover, as some commentators already outlined, many distinguished physicists will not tolerate the use of the word (derive) to describe a result that was (calculated) using (numerical) simulations. A real (derivation) of the very same result was obtained much earlier by El Naschie.

Moreover, the authors astonishingly skipped referring to many pioneers who led the way in what can be called fractal cosmology or fractal space-time research. Again I can assure that none of the authors of the present article is justifiable to claim to be the (first) to point out the fractal nature of space-time.

Any one interested to unveil the truth of my claims can simply google for the key wards like (fractal space time), (derivation of the number of space time dimensions),..... to make sure that the present authors are merely introducing a new and comparatively premature approach to a problem that many others tackled several years ago.

We awe the authors an explanation why they did skipped referring all these names.

","August, 05 2008 17:06:10","05:06 PM on 08/05/08","94B0F7D0-A6C0-C3AA-66DBBB7B57CF6495","E. Ralph",460,54,null],[55,"A5EC1BE3-BE40-ADA7-EDC8262E386FFDD5",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear Sirs,
I can not believe my eyes when I have read the article titled "using causality to solve the puzzle of quantum spacetime" in the popular science magazine "Scientific American".
I read with a great deal of interest and a sizeable portion of disbelief the article published in the July issue of Scientific American. The subject is extremely interesting and many people working in topology of fractals like myself have been interested in this subject for some time. At least in the Middle East, if not in the whole world, this is due to the Egyptian scientist M.S. El Naschie. It was because of this that Prof. El Naschie was invited to Qatar about three years ago. He gave several lectures, one on nano technology and one on fractal Cantorian spacetime. At least the lecture on nano technology sparked a scientific revolution in the Middle East. However Prof. El Naschie's main real interest lies in high energy physics and his real contribution is in modeling spacetime using Cantor sets. He was able that way to derive exactly and from first principles, not only the dimensionality of spacetime but also the curvature of the manifold of quantum spacetime at the point of total unification of all fundamental forces. This is a point which has eluded scientists all over the world for the last 80 years at least. We have many Nobel laureates visiting Qatar on a regular basis but we have rarely had such stimulating lectures as those delivered by Prof. El Naschie.

In view of all the above I am at a loss of what to make from the fact that the said article in your Journal has totally ignored the contribution of Prof. El Naschie and his school. Not only that but they ascribe to themselves the honour of deriving for the first time and from first principles the dimensionality of spacetime which is historically blatantly untrue. The Authors may have indeed contributed in a non-trivial manner to the literature but they have committed a great scientific injustice to Prof. El Naschie and his colleagues.

I am both astonished and dismayed that the Authors of this article have obviously intentionally or unintentionally omitted to mention the name of the originator of the theory.
I sincerely hope that the Editorial Board of Scientific American will step in decisively and eliminate this injustice.

Yours sincerely,
Prof. S.I. Nada
Professor of Topology
University of Qatar, Doha, Qatar.


","August, 09 2008 01:24:19","01:24 AM on 08/09/08","A5EC1B82-F036-2096-246C96B2265CEF2B","snada",460,55,null],[56,"A5FAE6F0-A0D3-D721-44281CAF894E9539",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear Sirs,
I can not believe my eyes when I have read the article titled "using causality to solve the puzzle of quantum spacetime" in the popular science magazine "Scientific American".
I read with a great deal of interest and a sizeable portion of disbelief the article published in the July issue of Scientific American. The subject is extremely interesting and many people working in topology of fractals like myself have been interested in this subject for some time. At least in the Middle East, if not in the whole world, this is due to the Egyptian scientist M.S. El Naschie. It was because of this that Prof. El Naschie was invited to Qatar about three years ago. He gave several lectures, one on nano technology and one on fractal Cantorian spacetime. At least the lecture on nano technology sparked a scientific revolution in the Middle East. However Prof. El Naschie's main real interest lies in high energy physics and his real contribution is in modeling spacetime using Cantor sets. He was able that way to derive exactly and from first principles, not only the dimensionality of spacetime but also the curvature of the manifold of quantum spacetime at the point of total unification of all fundamental forces. This is a point which has eluded scientists all over the world for the last 80 years at least. We have many Nobel laureates visiting Qatar on a regular basis but we have rarely had such stimulating lectures as those delivered by Prof. El Naschie.

In view of all the above I am at a loss of what to make from the fact that the said article in your Journal has totally ignored the contribution of Prof. El Naschie and his school. Not only that but they ascribe to themselves the honour of deriving for the first time and from first principles the dimensionality of spacetime which is historically blatantly untrue. The Authors may have indeed contributed in a non-trivial manner to the literature but they have committed a great scientific injustice to Prof. El Naschie and his colleagues.

I am both astonished and dismayed that the Authors of this article have obviously intentionally or unintentionally omitted to mention the name of the originator of the theory.
I sincerely hope that the Editorial Board of Scientific American will step in decisively and eliminate this injustice.

Yours sincerely,
Prof. S.I. Nada
Professor of Topology
University of Qatar, Doha, Qatar.


","August, 09 2008 01:40:28","01:40 AM on 08/09/08","A5EC1B82-F036-2096-246C96B2265CEF2B","snada",460,56,null],[57,"AC75ECC5-EBDE-6BE7-436109E94100F0B9",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It was a little bit of a shock to see that the inaccuracy and omission of the name of Mohamed El Naschie, his colleagues and school is not restricted to the article in Scientific American. The same wrong claim was made by the same authors from Nils Bohr institute in Copenhagen and Spinosa Institute in Utrecht is named in Physic Review Letters. The article was renamed
Planckian birth of a Quantum de sitter universe March 7th, 2008. He author renamed Fractals by a more mathematical word foliation . In addition they claimed to have achieved one of the holy grail of theoretical physics namely determining the dimensionality of spacetime. I add my voice to that of many people on this site. This is totally wrong and misleading the educated public. The first person to make a derivation of the dimensionality of spacetime was Mohamed El Naschie. No amount of wrong statement and pulling strings here and there will change the truth. I personally find that this is very damaging to the reputation of both Nils Bohr Institute and Spinosa Institute and all the wonderful great scientists working there. The more the authors delay admitting their mistake the more this will avalanche to something truly embarrassing to the entire scientific community in the west. May I also add something before it is published under another name with similar wrong claims. Mohamed
El Naschie has also determined from first principles the curvature of quantum spacetime at the point of quantum gravity unification. This work is not published in Physic Review Letters but it is published. Looking forward to hear a statement without any qualification apologizing to the scientific community about misleading them. Nobody is above making a mistake but nobody is also above apologizing for his or her mistake.
Franz Vollrath
","August, 10 2008 07:52:34","07:52 AM on 08/10/08","AC75EC74-B5DD-7F22-71D3A17C5C7B84DE","franz vollrath",460,57,null],[58,"ACAA5771-F209-5D6B-43905E4DE932FA3C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To all that have voiced disapproval of the injustice done to Prof. El Naschie and the school of Cantorian space-time theory, I enclose here a copy of the letter I wrote to the Editor of Scientific American:

Dear Editor,

I am writing to you on behalf of many colleagues of mine involved in the field of nonlinear dynamics, chaos and complexity theory. As a scientist working for many years in this field, I am appalled by the fact that the recent article "Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Space-Time" fails to give proper credit to a well documented body of concepts and ideas developed in the last 20 years and known as fractal (Cantorian) space-time model. The main contributors to this model are El Naschie, Ord, Nottale, Marek-Crnjak, Goldfain, Tanaka, Iovane, Castro, He and others. There is by now a large volume of papers and a number of conferences dedicated to this topic, see for instance Elsevier's "Chaos, Solitons and Fractals" and similar resources.

The net effect of this regrettable omission is that the general public is given a false account on how scientific ideas take shape and evolve. In the interest of objectivity and fairness, I respectfully request a note of correction from your office or from the authors of the article. It will help setting the record straight and restore honesty in scientific reporting.

With best regards,

Ervin Goldfain
Photonics CoE
Welch Allyn Inc.

USA","August, 10 2008 08:49:49","08:49 AM on 08/10/08","83A081EF-9459-E1CE-60748830AFCF4E04","ervingoldfain",460,58,null],[59,"B191DC4F-FFF8-5FB4-0FF88F930B697518",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","



I also did hear about fractal spacetime and the use of cantor sets to model spacetime when I was present at a conference in TURKEY in Istanbul Kultur University. The lecture was the opening lecture by Prof. El Naschie from Frankfurt University who spoke about complexity theory in high energy physics and related subjects. A summary of Prof. El Naschie's lecture is in the proceedings on page 19. I am just like everyone else wondering why there is no mention of this fundamental work in this nice paper by Ambjorn and his co-authors.

","August, 11 2008 07:41:11","07:41 AM on 08/11/08","B191DC1B-DC30-1356-C8CAD6CF5090478A","ccs2008",460,59,null],[60,"B701F1C7-C978-9193-88FC06979094D8B3","E20CC8D4-F26E-FC2A-8C43802F1C00FBBF",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

quote: "..the number of dimensions came out as four (more precisely, as 4.02 ? 0.1). It was the first time anyone had ever derived the observed number of dimensions from first principles."
But are thet not starting from 4D simplices? then is it surprising they get a 4D universe? And why start with 4D simplices?","August, 12 2008 09:01:42","09:01 AM on 08/12/08","50FBC5F6-FF64-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","alphachapmtl",460,60,7],[61,"B709C325-9FBB-CCB9-55003B20666565CF","50C80BA5-907F-2D82-06089E03E228840D",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

quote: "The idea of El Naschie was that the fractality of spacetime is the cause for the arrow of time and irreversibility."
Can someone explain this to me? How does fractality of spacetime cause the arrow of time and irreversibility?","August, 12 2008 09:10:15","09:10 AM on 08/12/08","50FBC5F6-FF64-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","alphachapmtl",460,61,34],[62,"B7894472-0A42-845B-9D0E3CAE039DE42E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

As a Dutch national, I find it difficult to hide a sense of embarrassment expressing my opinion about this article. It is not only the respect I have for the Authors, but also the enormous respect and affection we have to the founding father and guiding light Gerrard tHooft who founded and led the physics institute at Utrecht where they work. He is not just a Nobel laureate; he is a gentleman of the highest scientific and personal qualities.

As far as fractals are concerned, this paper is littered with tens of elementary mistakes. It is also na?ve to think they have found any holy grail because they made a derivation of the four dimensionality of spacetime. Putting the computer simulation aside, it is still na?ve. Even Mohamed El Naschie s exact derivation which precedes that of Spinoza Inst. by some 14 years is na?ve. El Naschie used Witten s broken mirror symmetry to find a fuzzy K3 K?hler manifold. Fuzzy or crisp K3 K?hler will always have four dimensions plus a Hausdorff dimension which is slightly larger than four and another slightly smaller than four. Since the correct physics came out of this K?hler manifold, it follows that it has all the correct spacetime dimensionalities and you hardly need any desktop to confirm that. Using El Naschie s technique, the Authors paper in Classical & Quantum Gravity could be renamed The emergence of spacetime or Quantum gravity on your pocket calculator ! The paper could even have a sequel doing the same thing by counting on our ten fingers such is the simplicity of El Naschie s Cantor sets approach which my colleagues opted not to refer to and in the course of doing that ignored the lifelong work of deceased Nobel laureate Ilya Prigogine as well as many living relatively young scientists, notably Laurent Nottale, Garnet Ord, Ervin Goldfain and Ji-Huan He to mention only a few.

I think the sooner this story is closed in a way befitting the prestige of t Hooft, University of Utrecht and Holland the better it will be for everyone involved.

","August, 12 2008 11:29:31","11:29 AM on 08/12/08","B789443D-A317-DA8B-F4365B34D2689CE5","MSteffan",460,62,null],[63,"B7BA5366-FB0B-A0A4-B1CBF46577BDF4E1","B709C325-9FBB-CCB9-55003B20666565CF",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear alphachapmtl ,

In response to your question "How does fractality of spacetime cause the arrow of time and irreversibility?": It is believed that the fractal structure of space-time emerges at high energies, near or above the scale of the electroweak interaction (approx. 300 GeV). In this sector of particle physics one can no longer use traditional differential operators which, by definition, assume a "smooth" topology of the underlying space-time background. Instead one must employ fractal differential operators defined in the context of fractional calculus and non-equilibrium dynamics. This class of operators break the left/right spatial symmetry as well as the temporal symmetry. As a result, they describe irreversible dynamics. It is then possible to show that fractal operators can naturally explain breaking of parity (P) and temporal symmetry (aka CP violation) in electroweak interaction channels.
For additional informaton, please refer to the following articles:

E. Goldfain "Complexity in Quantum Field Theory and physics beyond the Standard Model" (Chaos, Solitons and Fractals)

E. Goldfain "Fractional dynamics and the Standard Model for particle physics" (Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation).

E. Goldfain "Fractional dynamics and the TeV regime of field theory"(Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation).

","August, 12 2008 12:23:06","12:23 PM on 08/12/08","83A081EF-9459-E1CE-60748830AFCF4E04","ervingoldfain",460,63,61],[64,"B89CFAEB-C055-A280-58ABA4C8ACC019FA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I define dimension as a simple concept, it is the degrees of freedom offered by nature for change of position or movement. Having said that, nature also restricts the number of degrees of freedom available. For example, it is obvious that we are free to select and roam at will any where in our familiar 3D space. But we do not have such freedom on the time dimension. We have to specify in advance, the time dimension if we are to achieve meeting an event. That is, time flows, and we have no control of that, nevertheless it is a real physical dimension. Why is there no other dimensions we can perceive? Or is it? may be extra dimensions do exist, but we cannot feel them or is out of bounds to us humans. Mathematically, we can invent any number of dimensions and manipulate them as we wish, as in super-string theories. They can also hide those extra dimensions mathematically by compacting them to a small enough dimensions, so that we cannot feel or see them. But eventually, they must face the reality of dimensions in nature.

I believe the new membrane/string theories are a step in the right direction, with no clear insight. According to what I comprehend, electromagnetic forces are confined to our good old 4D space-time
dimensions, they cannot travel into any other additional dimension if it exists. We and all matter are held together by electromagnetic forces alone. So there is no way we in turn can venture out and feel another dimension, because if we try to, electromagnetic forces will not be there to hold us together.

But gravity is a different beast. Gravity is able to not only live in the 4D space-time, but it can venture out to additional dimensions. I declare that there is at least one more additional extremely large closed 4th space dimension. Now gravity floods all 4 space dimensions at the onset from a gravitating body. Because gravity occupies all 4 dimensions, it is made very feeble compared to the electromagnetic force. So we see that there is another large dimension right under our nose, that we cannot feel(Let alone Newton and Einstein), but can be felt through gravity.

I have a comprehensive analysis of this and solutions to many problems hinted at my web site: http://cosmicdarkmatter.com/

K. Tissa Perera","August, 12 2008 16:30:40","04:30 PM on 08/12/08","B89BEE94-FFF6-7CB6-A589428926123609","ktperera",460,64,null],[65,"B998D724-EA99-2B80-3F8E9C9194256C76",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I continue to be deeply perplexed as to why neither the authors of "The Self-Organizing Quantum Universe" nor the editors of Scientific American have acted to swiftly rectify the failure to properly acknowledge the "extensive" published work of Mohamed El Naschie that bears directly on this issue. It seems to me that the integrity of both Scientific American and the authors necessitates proper and immediate action on this egregious omission. The authors of the paper either were aware of his work, or certainly should have been. On July 21st I addressed this with a letter to the editors. It follows verbatim: As a regular reader and subscriber to your magazine, I found the fractal spacetime article by Jay Ambjorn, Jerzy Jurkiewicz and Renate Loll, The Self-Organizing Quantum Universe most intriguing. As editors, you continue to choose some of the most fascinating developments in the world of physics. And you really need to be commended on the service you are providing our reading public, especially those interested in doing their very best to conceptualize developments which are otherwise extremely difficult to visualize.
However, in this particular instance, I frankly was stunned by the oversight of the authors in failing to acknowledge the work already successfully accomplished in this area by Professor Mohamed El Naschie, a former prot/f Nobel laureate Ilya Prigogine. El Naschie is the recognized originator of the idea of using Cantor sets to rigorously deduce the topological dimension and the Hausdorff dimension of spacetime. As it turns out, the Hausdorff dimension of a random Cantor set is equal to the golden mean, a truly wonderful number which renders an otherwise intractable computation very simple to perform even without a computer. In 2006 I wrote a compact little book on this particular subject, The Golden Section: Nature s Greatest Secret, published by Walker & Company, New York. In a brief appendix I summarized some of El Naschie s findings in regard to quark and subatomic particle masses. Beginning with his 1994 paper, Is Quantum Space a Random Cantor Set with a Golden Mean Dimension at the Core? Professor El Naschie has written numerous scientific papers developing the ramifications of his incredible insight. As a philosopher of science deeply interested in the creativity, novelty, and proper recognition of precedence in hypothesis formation, I for one believe very strongly that this oversight in an otherwise splendid article must not go unaddressed. Thank you.
","August, 12 2008 21:05:46","09:05 PM on 08/12/08","B998D6E1-B277-59C3-63DC7B98931E21B8","scottolsen",460,65,null],[66,"BBE47B5F-01A5-5D49-605A5E3D0455F59D","B7BA5366-FB0B-A0A4-B1CBF46577BDF4E1",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Thanks for the info and references!
","August, 13 2008 07:47:37","07:47 AM on 08/13/08","50FBC5F6-FF64-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","alphachapmtl",460,66,63],[67,"C090CD7F-9A17-1397-7F683979AA95C2E5",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Nobel Laureates are also just human being. They are subject to the same ambitions, temptations and greed like anyone else. I know Gerardus
t Hooft longer than all of you and he is no exception. My guess is that if he wanted to prevent Dr. R. Loll and her colleagues, J. Ambjorn and J. Jurkiewicz from committing this not easy to forgive oversight of the work of Ord, El Naschie and Nottale he could have.
W.Teinus

","August, 14 2008 05:34:20","05:34 AM on 08/14/08","C090CD38-DA69-FD57-FFCD465134FEE464","teinus",460,67,null],[68,"C5BCC637-DA90-1416-5C9527AAC16F131B",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Big deal!. &.Ambjorn and Loll start from four dimensional simplices tiling of spacetime and prove that it is four-dimensional.! Wow! We may as well say Penrose proved that the two dimensional plane is two dimensional using his two dimensional tiling.

I see little similarity to the work of El Naschie because he started with zero dimensional Wheeler like fractal dust and then proved at infinity that there are two types of dimensions: first, a Menger-Uhryson dimension equal to exactly four and second, a Hausdorff dimension, one slightly larger and one slightly smaller than four. El Naschie s work confirmed and generalized tHooft s dimensional regularization. Ambjorn and Loll by contrast prove the obvious.

","August, 15 2008 05:40:27","05:40 AM on 08/15/08","C5BCC5FE-C0C5-DB50-DF0718810830B92D","Vince",460,68,null],[69,"CD91033B-9C0E-EBDB-BC8A9AA9CD4E4DB8","E2347189-02A6-36EC-5450DFF91CE57E3C",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Fraction is how energy disapates from a chosen Octave. Each octave is a condition of our existance, because of it's energy value. Interacting Key's per Octave, and 'of Octaves' produce phenomenon such as light...ect...
A high Energy Octave, will effect all of the lower sympathetic frequencies, regardless of Octave, but a lower energy will have little effect on an upper Octave. Only if the combined sympathetic energies are numerous enough, will the effect a upper octave. If Mankind unite and one, only then will we advance.","August, 16 2008 18:09:37","06:09 PM on 08/16/08","CC70FD2F-0D91-8210-10EFBBEC4706E277","Terry K.",460,69,8],[70,"D0DFFC6C-A21E-72C3-9C6406D60EEE1EB4","B701F1C7-C978-9193-88FC06979094D8B3",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

http://focus.aps.org/story/v14/st13
Emergence of a 4D World From Causal Quantum Gravity
J. Ambjorn, J. Jurkiewicz, and R. Loll
Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 131301
(issue of 24 September 2004)
"The researchers added up all the possible spacetimes to see if something like a large-scale four-dimensional spacetime would emerge from the sum. That was not guaranteed, even though the tiny bits of spacetime were four-dimensional. On larger scales the spacetime could curve in ways that would effectively change its dimension, just as a two-dimensional sheet of paper can be wadded into a three-dimensional ball or rolled into a nearly one-dimensional tube. This time the researchers found that they could achieve something that appeared to have one time dimension and three space dimensions--like the universe we know and love."","August, 17 2008 09:34:44","09:34 AM on 08/17/08","50FBC5F6-FF64-4238-E0440003BA414B7F","alphachapmtl",460,70,60],[71,"D1C03E07-A047-1DD4-A166F311F5DA01D9","D0DFFC6C-A21E-72C3-9C6406D60EEE1EB4",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is a direct response to " alphachapmtl" 8/17/08

I am sorry this is not entirely correct.. Ambjorn, Loll and Jurkiewicz have indoctrinated the result by assuming 4 dimensional structure. They made the result biased to 4 dimensionality. In addition they did not mention genuine non-biased derivation of the 4 dimensionality of spacetime from first principle. I also had a look to the work of Ambjorn. The work in Scientific American is a rehash of his earlier work.. However this time he is using the fashionable terminology of fractal spacetime, Cantorian spacetime and the so called E-infinity theory. W.Teinus

","August, 17 2008 13:39:41","01:39 PM on 08/17/08","C090CD38-DA69-FD57-FFCD465134FEE464","teinus",460,71,70],[72,"D1FB8E3C-D7B6-EB5B-09B797BC0D03E8A9",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Big deal…Ambjorn and Loll start from four dimensional simplices tiling of spacetime and prove that it is four dimensional! Wow! We may as well say Penrose proved that the two dimensional plane is two dimensional using his two dimensional tiling.

I see little similarity to the work of El Naschie because he started with zero dimensional Wheeler-like fractal dust and then proved at infinity that there are two types of dimensions: first a Menger-Uhryson dimension equal to exactly four and second, a Hausdorff dimension, one slightly larger and one slightly smaller than four. El Naschie's work confirmed and generalized 'tHooft's dimensional regularization. Ambjorn and Loll by contrast prove the obvious.


","August, 17 2008 14:44:28","02:44 PM on 08/17/08","C5BCC5FE-C0C5-DB50-DF0718810830B92D","Vince",460,72,null],[73,"D7766313-BE7C-0CE7-73C7D074A6A70795",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It's easy to see negative energy. Again I will give you a example negative and positive energies. let's take a look at the rainbow. We have two rainbows, one above the other. You may notice that in between the two, there is a darkness, but towards the center, there is a brilliance.
Blackbody Energy is the harmonic that we get from our Sun. It has value and vector. If it were to collide with itself from an opposite direction (reflected), it becomes visible, in the form of white light. This is a half value of Blackbody energy (Quarter Octave). This is why the moon is mostly seen as white, except during a lunar eclipse. At this time it will appear to be orange. Light curves through our atmosphere, strikes the moon, and is reflected bach to earth. As the blackbody energy passes through our atmosphere, particle collisions ensue, and the energy value decreases from black, to violet, to indigo, to the blue that we see in the sky. It is this value that reaches the moon, and is reflected upon itself, towards us. this lower value cancelation results it the energy value of orange. It is said that we need all the colors of the rainbow to make white light,...that's wrong. The rainbow is actually of two parts,...negative and positive. Red, orange, and yellow are negative. Green, blue and violet are positive energies. The value that we call 'white', is positioned at the center of these. This puts white at the yellowgreen position. Now there are cancelation pairs, red and green (negative and positive), orange and blue (negative and positive), yellow and violet ( the 'hottest' neg. and pos). Any of these paired 'cancelations', will result in a yellowgreen value. Put two or more of these pairs together, and the value will increase to what we understand as whitelight. Remember the yellowgreen glass in the deserts of Egypt ? The only other place that it can be found, is at a necular blast site. There, the sands became 'white hot'. The result..., Yellowgreen glass. It's kinda like a visual of the thermal value. It's easy to 'see' negative energy once you understand it, and it's easy to understand through the Octave System.","August, 18 2008 16:16:44","04:16 PM on 08/18/08","CC70FD2F-0D91-8210-10EFBBEC4706E277","Terry K.",460,73,null],[74,"D782DD80-E760-476B-E9C8F505133BA415","B998D724-EA99-2B80-3F8E9C9194256C76",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The Golden Section is but an observation of adverages. It is not an absolute! It's like a carpenter using 17/12 as an angle ratio to a problem that he can't, or won't try to solved. The Golden Ratio is nothing more than a 'Rule of Thumb'.","August, 18 2008 16:30:22","04:30 PM on 08/18/08","CC70FD2F-0D91-8210-10EFBBEC4706E277","Terry K.",460,74,65],[75,"DA56EFDE-CA00-93F9-08B63CE66DE38FC6",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Big deal…Ambjorn and Loll start from four dimensional simplices tiling of spacetime and prove that it is four dimensional! Wow! We may as well say Penrose proved that the two dimensional plane is two dimensional using his two dimensional tiling.

I see little similarity to the work of El Naschie because he started with zero dimensional Wheeler-like fractal dust and then proved at infinity that there are two types of dimensions: first, a Menger-Uhryson dimension equal to exactly four and second, a Hausdorff dimension, one slightly larger and one slightly smaller than four. El Naschie's work confirmed and generalized 'tHooft's dimensional regularization. Ambjorn and Loll by contrast prove the obvious.


","August, 19 2008 05:41:15","05:41 AM on 08/19/08","C5BCC5FE-C0C5-DB50-DF0718810830B92D","Vince",460,75,null],[76,"DA7344AB-A391-C7F1-D2C9E428CA0AC2D6",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Nobel Laureates are also just human being. They are subject to the same ambitions, temptations and greed like anyone else. I know Gerardus
t Hooft longer than all of you and he is no exception. My guess is that if he wanted to prevent Dr. R. Loll and her colleagues, J. Ambjorn and J. Jurkiewicz from committing this not easy to forgive oversight of the work of Ord, El Naschie and Nottale he could have. W. Teinus
","August, 19 2008 06:12:12","06:12 AM on 08/19/08","C090CD38-DA69-FD57-FFCD465134FEE464","teinus",460,76,null],[77,"DCC8CE62-F0AC-9A18-2902E6196D45D0B6",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear Terry,
I fail to see any connection what so ever between your long remarks on the deserts of Egypt, negative energy and octave system and the subject matter of this site which is the papers on fractal spacetime and the relation between the work of Ambjorn and Loll to the work of Nottale, Ord and El Naschie. It is simple scientific courtesy not to discuss matters that are irrelevant to the main subject.
","August, 19 2008 17:04:52","05:04 PM on 08/19/08","DCC8CE10-0988-E786-F305F5AB01E99916","Kevin",460,77,null],[78,"E1373B1D-CB72-C724-BCBE399E28EE579E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The comment by Terry regarding the Golden Mean being an average of observation is really a very deep and correct statement. Of course he may have meant it in a derogatory way but that does not change the fact that it is a deep observation, correct and reflects the enormous importance of the Golden Mean in mathematical size. It is exactly what Mohamed El Naschie wrote explicitly in his article Multi-dimensional Cantor sets in classical and quantum mechanics published 1992 in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol. 2, Nos. 2, pp. 211-220. In appendix 2, p. 220 of this paper he wrote
Seen this way our choice of the Hausdorff dimension of a triadic set namely log 2 divided by log 3 is justified a postriori by its numerical proximity to the Golden Mean because the Golden Mean represents in some vague sense an average of all possible backbone Cantor sets lying in the unit interval .
It seems to have taken El Naschie a year or so to realize that a random triadic Cantor set possess with a probability equal 1 a Golden Mean as a Hausdorff dimension. He obviously did not know about the theorem of Maldine and Williams at that time. Had he known about it, it would have saved him a lot of work. The derivation of El Naschie started from scratch and proved the theorem of Maldine and Williams in four dimensions. That is how he was able to find out that the Hausdorff dimension of fractal spacetime is given by the inverse of the Golden Mean to the power of 3 which means 4.23606799. It then took him six years or so to derive the exact value of the corresponding spacetime curvature of a fractal spacetime manifold which turned out to be 26.18033989. Clearly the internal energy of such space is proportioned to the square of this number which is approximately 685.4. It was only one year ago that El Naschie was able to prove that this value is equal to summing over all the so called two and three Stein spaces. There are 17 of them corresponding to the 17 two dimensional crystallographic groups. The finite conclusion of this nice discovery was the E12 quasi exceptional Lie group of Munroe. The dimension of this group is 685.4. Such is the power of statistical averaging of observation invested in the Golden Mean. It should be noted that the Golden Mean appears in all branches of science and art. In El Naschie s theory it simply popped out from topological considerations and mathematical calculations. It was neither put in by hand nor was it indeed expected. Nature is clearly cleverer than all of us combined and we should learn from nature as opposed to making fun of it. In this sense and only in this sense we fully agree with Terry s remark.

","August, 20 2008 13:43:57","01:43 PM on 08/20/08","E1373AE2-D4F3-12DD-4E1C921006AE92C5","T. Magyar",460,78,null],[79,"E22D77E6-B7E6-590E-DD6C08221CB04500",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It is probably a sign of the the great depth of a concept, idea or theory that even when one attempts to denigrate it (as Terry K. appears to try to do in his 8/18 comment), the attack actually ends up supporting it. Terry's attempt to dismiss the Golden Mean as nothing but an average backfires (as correctly observed by T. Magyar in his insightful 8/20 response). Anyone who knows statistical mechanics and how it correlates natural processes must be aware that it is an observational average that makes it relevant. By calling the Golden Mean an observational average, Terry unintentionally reveals a profound "ontological" fact about why it appears so often throughout the fabric of nature, as well as, in pure and applied mathematics. There is good reason why, for example, the ideal divergence angle in phyllotaxis (leaf arrangement) is 137.5 degrees (360 divided by the Golden Mean squared or by 2.6180339...). [Note: as an important point of clarification re: the Golden Mean itself, I am here using the Golden Mean in its "greater" form, namely, 1.6180339.... El Naschie tends to prefer the Golden Mean in its "lesser" form or 0.6180339..., equally legitimate, and would therefore express the same 137.5 degree phyllotactic divergence angle as the result of multiplying 360 degrees by the Golden Mean squared or by 0.3819660...].","August, 20 2008 18:12:55","06:12 PM on 08/20/08","B998D6E1-B277-59C3-63DC7B98931E21B8","scottolsen",460,79,null],[80,"E234FCFD-C922-F235-7CE35CA5EDC6FD07",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

word "observational" inadvertantly deleted:
It is probably a sign of the the great depth of a concept, idea or theory that even when one attempts to denigrate it (as Terry K. appears to try to do in his 8/18 comment), the attack actually ends up supporting it. Terry's attempt to dismiss the Golden Mean as nothing but an "observational average" backfires (as correctly observed by T. Magyar in his insightful 8/20 response). Anyone who knows statistical mechanics and how it correlates natural processes must be aware that it is an observational average that makes it relevant. By calling the Golden Mean an observational average, Terry unintentionally reveals a profound "ontological" fact about why it appears so often throughout the fabric of nature, as well as, in pure and applied mathematics. There is good reason why, for example, the ideal divergence angle in phyllotaxis (leaf arrangement) is 137.5 degrees (360 divided by the Golden Mean squared or by 2.6180339...). [Note: as an important point of clarification re: the Golden Mean itself, I am here using the Golden Mean in its "greater" form, namely, 1.6180339.... El Naschie tends to prefer the Golden Mean in its "lesser" form or 0.6180339..., equally legitimate, and would therefore express the same 137.5 degree phyllotactic divergence angle as the result of multiplying 360 degrees by the Golden Mean squared or by 0.3819660...].
","August, 20 2008 18:21:08","06:21 PM on 08/20/08","B998D6E1-B277-59C3-63DC7B98931E21B8","scottolsen",460,80,null],[81,"E56929C0-E834-0923-98A19F370C9B43A1",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

As someone who has been working closely for many years on Cantorian Fractal
Spacetime, I find it rather difficult to either abstain from expressing my
opinion or to express my opinion on this site. The last thing I like in all my
scientific as well as personal life is controversy, allegation and counter
allegation. This is all too distasteful for me. However, I think science should
be an exception and one must be able to talk about facts without the
slightest embarrassment. I believe as a scientist, our only obligation is towards the
truth. In this sense I find nothing better to express the truth than to
refer to El Naschie s paper which dates back to the year 1991, almost 17 years
ago (link: _http://rapidshare.com/files/138459869/sdarticle.pdf.html_
(http://rapidshare.com/files/138459869/sdarticle.pdf.html) ). This paper is
published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, issue no 5 and is titled: Quantum Mechanics
and the Possibility of a Cantorian Space-Time. You need to read the paper in
full and it is very short exactly 2 pages and the references. For the
convenience of the visitor of this site, I would like to repeat the last four lines
of this paper verbatim: There are thus real reasons to hope that some
sophisticated mathematics, coupled with the present simplistic geometrical picture
may show that space-time is Cantorian and a Peano-like structure in the small
scale, while it recovers its Euclidian flat outlook on our scale only to
finally become Riemannian on the large scale [7]. It is remarkable that space
and time decouples only in our intermediate world .
I am sure the readers of this site are all highly informed and intelligent
to make up their minds without any help from anyone once they are offered the
facts. And here is another fact which I didn t initially know: In the first
issue of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals which appeared in 1991, the well-known
Polish scientist Thomas Kapitaniak from the University of Lodz in Poland wrote a
paper titled On Strange Nonchaotic Attractors and their Dimensions in which
he made extensive use of Mohamed El Naschie s theory of multi-dimensional
cantor sets. In addition, in this paper he made reference to published work by
El Naschie dating back to 1990. This is 18 years ago and El Naschie s theory
was also known in Poland. When you consider that a published paper in those
days takes at least two years to appear on average and that a research must
take two to three years to mature for publication, it becomes evident that the
theory of Cantorian Spacetime dates back to some twenty years ago. As they
say in England with this I rest my case.
Dr. Leila Marek-Crnjac University of Ljubljana, Slovenia

","August, 21 2008 09:16:59","09:16 AM on 08/21/08","E5692986-B9ED-5398-B14C174A71B6FBA4","Einfinity",460,81,null],[82,"E569D89C-A19F-1C9B-B3C1AA82F40D18C7",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

As someone who has been working closely for many years on Cantorian Fractal
Spacetime, I find it rather difficult to either abstain from expressing my
opinion or to express my opinion on this site. The last thing I like in all my
scientific as well as personal life is controversy, allegation and counter
allegation. This is all too distasteful for me. However, I think science should
be an exception and one must be able to talk about facts without the
slightest embarrassment. I believe as a scientist, our only obligation is towards the
truth. In this sense I find nothing better to express the truth than to
refer to El Naschie's paper which dates back to the year 1991, almost 17 years
ago (link: _http://rapidshare.com/files/138459869/sdarticle.pdf.html_
(http://rapidshare.com/files/138459869/sdarticle.pdf.html) ). This paper is
published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, issue no 5 and is titled: Quantum Mechanics
and the Possibility of a Cantorian Space-Time. You need to read the paper in
full and it is very short exactly 2 pages and the references. For the
convenience of the visitor of this site, I would like to repeat the last four lines
of this paper verbatim: "There are thus real reasons to hope that some
sophisticated mathematics, coupled with the present simplistic geometrical picture
may show that space-time is Cantorian and a Peano-like structure in the small
scale, while it recovers its Euclidian flat outlook on our scale only to
finally become Riemannian on the large scale [7]. It is remarkable that space
and time decouples only in our intermediate world".
I am sure the readers of this site are all highly informed and intelligent
to make up their minds without any help from anyone once they are offered the
facts. And here is another fact which I didn't initially know: In the first
issue of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals which appeared in 1991, the well-known
Polish scientist Thomas Kapitaniak from the University of Lodz in Poland wrote a
paper titled On Strange Nonchaotic Attractors and their Dimensions in which
he made extensive use of Mohamed El Naschie's theory of multi-dimensional
cantor sets. In addition, in this paper he made reference to published work by
El Naschie dating back to 1990. This is 18 years ago and El Naschie's theory
was also known in Poland. When you consider that a published paper in those
days takes at least two years to appear on average and that a research must
take two to three years to mature for publication, it becomes evident that the
theory of Cantorian Spacetime dates back to some twenty years ago. As they
say in England with this I rest my case.
Dr. Leila Marek-Crnjac - University of Ljubljana, Slovenia

","August, 21 2008 09:17:43","09:17 AM on 08/21/08","E5692986-B9ED-5398-B14C174A71B6FBA4","Einfinity",460,82,null],[83,"E725B61A-92E7-DE66-EA72E3F6643567F6",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

People will be excused to wonder what all the fuss about fractal spacetime is. Rather than getting involved in the somewhat heated priority discussion, I decided to look into the worth and value of this concept and why should it matter so much that two leading centres of quantum gravity in Europe decide to devote so much time to this subject although it was around for at least 23 years. I made some effort to read the publication of Ord, Nottale, Goldfain, Prigogine and particularly Mohamed El Naschie. If I am correct it turns out then this cantorial fractal approach must be the egg of the Columbus. Let me list some of the problems which this approach solved by one stroke.
1.\tFractal fuzziness blurs the demarcation line between classical spacetime symmetries and internal gauge symmetries. The result is an elimination of what physicists call gauge anomalies. This is a big problem in physics and occupies many physicists attempting to solve it. It is the reason behind the difficulties of unifying gravity with the other fundamental forces.
2.\tBecause a random cantor set which is the simplest form of fractals has a Hausdorff dimension equal to the golden mean calculation using this theory becomes ingeniously simple. Some may find it embarrassingly simple. It is of course a matter of taste and personal philosophy. One has to decide if the objective of science is understanding nature in the simplest of terms or demonstrating mathematical skills and overcoming horrendous amounts of calculation.

There is also a misunderstanding about the contradiction between integers and irrational numbers. Some physicists wrongly think that since statistical mechanics is all about counting then a fundamental theory must admit only integers at the end of the day so that we can count. However this is fundamentally flawed. We can count from zero to infinity objects which are unaccountably infinite. In other words in the fractal cantorian spacetime approach we have countably infinite numbers of cantor sets but the cantor sets themselves have uncountable infinitely many points. When introducing hierarchy then all these infinities sum up to a finite value. This was the great surprise I found in the work of Mohamed El Naschie. He gives two finite values for what is essentially unaccountably infinite, In other words, he found an expectation value for them. The two values are: a Hausdorff dimension equal 4.23606799 for the dimensionality of fractal spacetime and a curvature equal 26.180339899 for the spacetime manifold described by the dimensionality abovementioned.

The work on fractal and cantorian spacetime seems to me to be a successful implementation of the program of Lotfi A. Zadeh, the great Iranian-born American Professor of Engineering who invented fuzzy set theory and fuzzy logic. This work did not remain theoretical philosophical work; it was the basis for the invention of Kalman filter. Without the invention of Kalman filter half of our modern civilization would have disappeared. Somebody has recently remarked that El Naschie has given quantum field theory a Kalman filter. Such a statement is counter productive. It just invites controversy and let me be honest also jealousy. However, what we need is a cool detached debate. As far as I am concerned the cantorian fractal spacetime approach is worth the effort.

","August, 21 2008 17:22:33","05:22 PM on 08/21/08","E725B58A-F2A9-FC51-56D8029505C7139E","Goran Hajerdal",460,83,null],[84,"F1ED3A08-CC92-C8B0-0E80083275FC63EB",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Abosolutely the most fascinating article about quantum gravity I've read in a long time.","August, 23 2008 19:36:40","07:36 PM on 08/23/08","F1ED39CB-ACD8-3A35-CB509BBA423135B6","greuben",460,84,null],[85,"F1F19C8A-B157-FB54-33F9D99BDC4B7513",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is the most interesting article about quantum gravity I've read in a long time. I hope their theory is on the right track.","August, 23 2008 19:41:28","07:41 PM on 08/23/08","F1ED39CB-ACD8-3A35-CB509BBA423135B6","greuben",460,85,null],[86,"F20C9192-DCD2-1FC8-E3FCF797C63C480A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

In connection with the priority quarrel about fractal spacetime and cantorian geometry, I am reminded of two recent articles which I have read in Physics World. The first is an editorial with the title: Breaking Through, Physics World, Vol. 21, no 7, July 2008. The writer of the editorial conceded that those outside the mainstream can find it hard to make worthwhile scientific contributions. He cited as one example the case of Garrett Lisi. What I find even worse is that when non main stream scientists find a truly remarkable theory then they are not even cited when other scientists of the mainstream realize the value of their theories. It is a matter of record that the word fractal spacetime was coined twenty three years ago by Garnett Ord. Similarly it is a matter of record that M. S. El Naschie gave the first derivation not only of the dimensionality of fractal spacetime but also the curvature of the corresponding spacetime manifold. It is very bitter for those working in less famous institutes and universities particularly in the developing world to see a certain degree of exploitation of their scientific products. Many in the developing world feel that this is a continuation of the old colonial style economic exploitation carried on in modern times by different means.
In the second article by Jim Grozier in the same issue of Physics World titled: Breaking the Grey Ceiling, the author laments prejudice against those who obtain a physics degree at middle age by taking a second route to higher education. It doesn't matter how good such a physicist is, he is given always a less than fair chance. The author cites many people who are against such discrimination, notably Nobel Laureate Gerard 'tHooft. 'tHooft wanted people with different backgrounds and education to get interested in theoretical physics. Was it not Einstein's nonconformist and non-conventional career which ultimately led him to his new and great ideas? So again here I ask: Why is the remarkable discrimination against an unusual Engineering Scientist who after working himself to an applied mathematician became an original theoretical physicist?
When we start practicing what we preach I will start believing that the trouble with physics has ended.

","August, 23 2008 20:10:54","08:10 PM on 08/23/08","F20C915E-A2C1-AB35-E928BE9C5645AC00","Jacob Lumomba",460,86,null],[87,"F21A4DC2-FF17-63AF-AB382401FC735B66",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The remark made by Goran Hajerdal is a correct and informative but incomplete. One very important aspect of fractal cantorian spacetime is the time symmetry breaking. It explains irreversibility. Fuzziness is an important concept here. Therefore it is not only the removal of clashes between symmetries and the simplicity of working with golden mean binary but it is also irreversibility at a fundamental level which characterizes the power of fractal spacetime. This concept was taken over in the work of Ambjorn and Loll. Of course they should have mentioned the original sources of these ideas but this is not my concern at this point. What I would like is give a simple analogy which I heard in a lecture and was attributed to Mohamed El Naschie. Suppose you are running in a rainforest escaping from something and there are hundreds of thousands of similar trees in your way. You have at every junction to decide whether to go left or right depending on what you found easier at the spur of the moment where the trees are similar but not identical and they vary in size with the terrain. After half an hour or even much less you decide to go back. It is virtually impossible to find exactly your way back. The reason is the intrinsic randomness of your path from A to B. This is exactly what happened in a fractal spacetime. Exact irreversibility is fundamentally impossible. I think Goldfain explained the same effect in an earlier communication but in a more mathematical form and jargon which may have been difficult for some to comprehend. It is for this reason and many many others that I believe that the fractal cantorian spacetime is one of the most original and most promising proposals ever been made in theoretical physics in the last 50 years at least. A very great man once said that if he were able to see far, then that was because he was standing on the shoulder of giants. For the very same reasons, I think that fractal spacetime and E-Infinity theory are indebted in the same manner to string theory, loop quantum mechanics, non-commutative geometry, twistors theory, quantum field theory and more than anything else to the pioneering work in nonlinear dynamics and fractals. A true scientific revolution was made by Mitchell Feigenbaum, David Ruelle and Mandelbrot.","August, 23 2008 20:25:54","08:25 PM on 08/23/08","F21A4D62-E89E-EE11-F25A1F7A4E375F20","Sammy Cohen",460,87,null],[88,"F37625B6-F48C-7BC4-7113F8E38959C44A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear Sammy Cohen and Goran Hajerdal,

Thank you for your kind remarks, on behalf of all that contributed to the Cantorian space-time model. For an in-depth discussion on how the underlying fractal structure of space-time explains breaking of time and space reflection symmetries, please refer to:

doi:10.1016/j.cnsns.2006.12.007

doi:10.1016/j.cnsns.2006.06.001

doi:10.1016/j.cnsns.2008.07.017

I gave a condensed down-to-earth explanation of these ideas in my posting of 08/12/08.

Regards,

Ervin Goldfain","August, 24 2008 02:45:51","02:45 AM on 08/24/08","83A081EF-9459-E1CE-60748830AFCF4E04","ervingoldfain",460,88,null],[89,"F6A72BE1-E788-02F7-DEB06B9132BE305D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Could someone explain to me the difference between the work of Ambjorn and Loll and numerology? But when a computer comes with the same thing is it then respectable? I see slight difference but not much. In all events, I find the authors claims inflated and hard to swallow regardless whether they quoted Mohamed EL Naschie and Co. or not.","August, 24 2008 17:38:15","05:38 PM on 08/24/08","F6A72B85-AF06-58A8-EEBBD7C7EBBA510F","John Rabin",460,89,null],[90,"F6B7FCB4-F0F0-26BF-9F98ABB04CD2B536",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I fully agree that the work of Feigenbaum is a real scientific revolution. Superficial scientists in love with highly complicated algebra and complex exact solutions of non linear partial differential equations are not getting the real message. These guys who are applying non linear dynamics and chaos in quantum gravity as done in this article in Scientific American are not getting the point either. They are experts in quantum field theory and think they can pick up non linear dynamics along the way. They are mistaken. You must learn fractals seriously before attempting to apply it or else you will have these horrendous mistakes committed in the concerned article. Even the fractal images in this article do not correspond to what the authors want to explain. In fact they neither use fractals theory nor any of the novel techniques of modern non linear dynamics, complexity theory or deterministic chaos. Their work is a caricature of what Ambjorn has done many years ago but this time dressed as in a masquerade using fractal spacetime terminology. The work may look superficially to be related to Nottale and El Naschie's work but it is not. It is an extremely superficial article written mainly with publicity in mind more than anything else. ","August, 24 2008 17:56:37","05:56 PM on 08/24/08","F6B7FC7D-9375-DC10-6486260BD8CBBB10","Ernie Wayne",460,90,null],[91,"F6EC74FF-F888-0C70-32905E80FEA1A5CE","F6B7FCB4-F0F0-26BF-9F98ABB04CD2B536",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear Mr. Wayne, In connection to your comment, I mention that Feigenbaum's route to chaos has been extensively used by Goldfain and El Naschie to derive the spectrum of elementary particle masses and couplings. See for instance:

http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0295-5075/82/1/11001,

doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2006.08.014 ,

http://direct.bl.uk/bld/PlaceOrder.do?UIN=229708841&ETOC=RN&from=searchengine,

Regards, Ervin Goldfain
","August, 24 2008 18:53:56","06:53 PM on 08/24/08","83A081EF-9459-E1CE-60748830AFCF4E04","ervingoldfain",460,91,90],[92,"F724EB95-A3E1-7966-3580E39F86846861",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

If Ambjorn, Loll and their co-authors have overlooked so many contributions, this could not be only their mistake, or else what is the role and function if any of the so-called referees and peer review system.","August, 24 2008 19:55:36","07:55 PM on 08/24/08","F7016C0C-DC11-2701-897AA9D711CDD83F","John Maynard",460,92,null],[93,"F75EEE74-BF93-3F5C-60F1816025F47780",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

One thing I cannot understand is the reason behind the silence of the principal three scientists whose rights have been flagrantly violated. No comment from Nottale, Ord or El Naschie. I could understand to a certain extent that Nottale has given up after the vicious attacks on him in France by certain members of the so-called mainstream. I understand much less Garnett Ord who himself is a member of the mainstream group at the Perimeter Institute in Waterloo, Canada and a friend of a powerful figure such as Lee Smolin. However, upon my word, I have no understanding whatsoever for a strong, independent and articulate scientist as Mohamed El Naschie. He is almost invisible, preferring to duck or even let his students, friends and colleagues talk on his behalf. This is not what I would expect from a man with his stature. If he feels and he may have indeed a point that someone has snatched his work, he should stand up and say so. ","August, 24 2008 20:58:58","08:58 PM on 08/24/08","F75EEE3A-9DE8-D2DF-63C0AE453A450E77","Jonathan Higgins",460,93,null],[94,"F9FCDCC0-08F7-0621-EC49796B084D71B4",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

From reading all the comments in this site and reviewing facts and the published literature, I must in all honesty say the peer review system has fallen short of what it is supposed to do in this particular case. Vince","August, 25 2008 09:10:43","09:10 AM on 08/25/08","C5BCC5FE-C0C5-DB50-DF0718810830B92D","Vince",460,94,null],[95,"FADAD38E-D4B0-FB04-376C7FE132DCAE85",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I must admit to being impressed by the high scientific quality of this Scientific American site. Reading it is educational. Most comments are serious and to the point. I wish all the other sites and blogs were like this one and devoid of the nonsense we are subjected to elsewhere.","August, 25 2008 13:13:09","01:13 PM on 08/25/08","E1373AE2-D4F3-12DD-4E1C921006AE92C5","T. Magyar",460,95,null],[96,"FAF5C6D5-0768-8C2F-29756E7904B8E4B9",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Could the authors of this article be so kind so as to take a little time to answer at least some of the remarks and questions posed on this site. That would be very helpful for a better appreciation of the scientific value of this excellent new theory.","August, 25 2008 13:42:35","01:42 PM on 08/25/08","FAF5C69F-DB5F-D210-BB87120C75855307","Robert Kohne",460,96,null],[97,"FCBDBF4D-AC47-E28E-302D518078961D82",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

New Comments?","August, 25 2008 22:00:38","10:00 PM on 08/25/08","83A081EF-9459-E1CE-60748830AFCF4E04","ervingoldfain",460,97,null],[98,"009574C8-A639-7977-3113CCB0772493EF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Astonishingly the name of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie, the Egyptian Engineering Scientist appeared in Scientific American in connection with fractal spacetime in the September issue of 1995. It is not the regular scientific issue I am referring to but a French translation titled Pour La Science. It is the official French translation of Scientific American. Being originally from a North African Arab country, I am one of the very few people in Kuwait whose second language is French rather than English. Although Scientific American is translated in Arabic, I always find it much easier to read in French. The article I am referring to is written by the renowned French Astrophysicist, Laurent Nottale. The French title of the article is L'espace-temps fractal and it is on page 34-41. Nottale made clear reference to Garnett Ord as well as Otto Rossler and Nobel Laureate Ilya Prigogine. He mentioned of course Mohamed El Naschie as well as Feynman and Einstein. Therefore it is extremely difficult to explain the failure of Dr. Ambjorn, and Dr. Loll to cite and properly refer to an article published in Scientific American on fractal spacetime particularly when this article was published 13 years ago. Mohamed El Naschie is probably the most famous physicist in Arabia and appears regularly in a scientific TV program every week since several years. His program is regularly seen by scientifically interested lay people and he has spoken also about his own research in these very broad philosophical and artistic informal programs. I find it difficult to believe that he is a low-key person in the West. Such a high profile person is not easy to overlook unless the intention is to overlook him. I am not of the opinion of so many people here that it is a racially and ethnically motivated action not to cite his fundamental contribution. I think this would be a very far shot. The simple fact is that Garnett Ord is English-Canadian and Christian, Nottale is a Frenchman, Nobel Laureate Ilya Prigogine is from Russian Jewish ancestry while the famous chaos scientist Prof. Otto Rossler is German and M. El Naschie is a cosmopolitan Muslim. All these scientists are close friends and collaborated together for many years. For this reason I reject any theory about racial or religious discrimination. I am at a loss however at finding a good reason for what happened and how it did happen particularly because Scientific American policy is to always refer as much as possible to articles published in Scientific American. Do not ask me now how the author and the referee of this paper have overlooked the paper of Nottale published in Scientific American and titled simply fractal spacetime.","August, 26 2008 15:55:06","03:55 PM on 08/26/08","0095747C-D1C4-6264-737F82A68AC53179","A.Muhran",460,98,null],[99,"0672AC70-D206-C27B-439259E2AF1BBE70",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Initially the article seemed interesting. However as I read more carefully I started forming another opinion. It seems to me that Dr. Loll, Dr. Ambjorn and Dr. Jurkiewicz have been proving their assumption. They assumed four dimensional simplexes and proved that spacetime is four-dimensional. They also assumed orderly causal and sequential events and proved that their manifold is orderly. This is all really hardly surprising. But then out of nowhere fractals appear like a genie coming from Aladdin's lamp. The only excuse for using the word fractal is that the authors are using the word Hausdorff dimension. But what a Hausdorff dimension are they using? The authors seem to think that whenever they obtain a non integer value, then it is a Hausdorff dimension. This is grotesque for two reasons. First a numerical method and particularly a computer are well known for not giving an integer answer. If everything non integer would mean a Hausdorff dimension this would be the end of fractals as science. Second as well known a two dimensional Peano Hilbert curve has a Hausdorff dimension exactly two. In three dimensions the Hausdorff dimension is exactly three. In fact this was the starting point of the work of Mohamed El Naschie in the late eighties. My final verdict is that if I would be the Director of the Physics Institute in Utrecht, I would start thinking seriously about a reshuffle in my department. ","August, 27 2008 19:14:50","07:14 PM on 08/27/08","0672ABDC-A10E-449E-F0313F85BE34A55B","R. Hogan ",460,99,null],[100,"067F0D8D-CBB2-80DD-BB4EF77AC1090EAE",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The present dispute is very different from anything we have seen in the past. I do not know of any historical precedence. The reasons are as follows: One, Ambjorn and Loll express themselves in no ambiguous terms that they are the first to derive the dimensionality of spacetime from first principle. What one would think is that a scientist must research the subject thoroughly before making such a strong claim. The authors should have researched the subject with such intensity to match the intensity of their claim. So in other words it is not an ordinary case of omitting mentioning a reference. Second, the subject matter is not a run of the mill idea. It is something very fundamental and is on the cutting edge of research frontiers. Therefore you would think that people will research the subject in sufficient depth so that they do not omit mentioning the founders of the field. Garnett Ord, Laurent Nottale and Mohamed El Naschie founded Fractal Cantorian Spacetime theory. Again this is not an ordinary omission. This is a fundamental false claim. Third, Sometimes things are rediscovered almost simultaneously or with short intervals separating them. In the present case however, we are talking not about a year or two but a decade or two. Ord's paper on fractal spacetime was published in a Journal of the British Institute of Physics in 1983. Mohamed El Naschie's paper on the subject started appearing in the late 80's. Laurent Nottale's work appeared in 1995 in Scientific American. So how could anybody in the age of the worldwide web claim to have overlooked these fundamental contributions unless it is intentional? Four, the three main founders of the theory are not obscure scientists working in obscure places. Nottale is a high profile scientist, well-known nationally and internationally. Garnett Ord works in the Perimeter Institute which is one of the main Centres of excellence of quantum gravity in the whole world. Mohamed El Naschie is probably the best known engineer, scientist in Arabia and was for 11 years affiliated with the Department of Applied Mathematics and Physics in Cambridge, England and was honored for his contribution to science in Germany, China, India, Turkey and countless other places. In short it is very difficult to overlook these scientists. I even have read somewhere that Mohamed El Naschie has been lately many times in the University of Utrecht and hence he is not an unknown quantity. Five, the problem is of course aggravated and not made simpler by the worth and value of the authors of this Scientific American article. They are excellent people with excellent research records. They neither need fame nor recognition. Plagiarism is committed everywhere in the world almost every day. These people however are mostly obscure scientists in obscure places desperate for promotion, salary raises and funding. But in this particular case we are dealing with la crème de la crème of science. They are people who have simply everything.
We could say that the lure of being the first one to discover spacetime being a paradigm shift and probably a milestone in the history of physics prove too strong to resist. However, quite honestly I find this also difficult to believe because of the respect I have for all of these scientists.
I have worked in my Ph.D. thesis on fractal spacetime and fuzzy exceptional Lie groups. This is truly a fascinating subject. My deep hope is that this problem just evaporates in thin air. It would be wonderful if we find a simple explanation for all what happened and join forces to explore nature rather than spending time exchanging accusations.

","August, 27 2008 19:28:21","07:28 PM on 08/27/08","0672ABDC-A10E-449E-F0313F85BE34A55B","R. Hogan ",460,100,null],[101,"0D30A160-B5C2-DD38-2AB194064A82D583",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I read once a beautiful paper by the late Richard P. Feynman published in the International Journal of Theoretical Physics 1982 Simulating Physics with Computers . The ingenuity of the method employed by Mohamed El Naschies version of fractal spacetime is that he can simulate physics without a computer. It is a great pity that Prof. Ambjorn and Prof. Loll did not know about this approach.

J. O Connor
","August, 29 2008 02:40:02","02:40 AM on 08/29/08","0D30A11B-A82C-C832-03E1EEAD9F1BB876","O`Connor",460,101,null],[102,"10505D23-E475-99DB-C0DD3A93C8B6F1CB",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

An","August, 29 2008 17:13:34","05:13 PM on 08/29/08","10505CE7-C6C6-3A98-66AD0F7913521FC3","A.Mirza",460,102,null],[103,"1051F5B7-9054-0208-705D6F00979B6338",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

An unexpected turn of events and news for everyone is that it seems with a great likelihood that the first and I repeat the first systematic derivation of the dimension of spacetime from first principle is due to Prof. Dr. Saleh Al-Athel. His paper appeared in 1996 in a monograph published by the British Publisher Pergamon Press which meantime belongs to Elsevier Science Publishing in Amsterdam. His Excellency is well known to me as well as to every Arab scientist not only in Saudi Arabia, because he was until very recently the President of King Abdel Aziz City for Science and Technology in Riyadh, but also because he is one of the most distinguished scientists and astronautical engineers in Arabia. This City acronymed KACST is Saudi Arabia's Ministry for Science and Technology. His Excellency was therefore the Minister representing Saudi Arabia internationally in this capacity. Unlike other Ministers he reports directly to the King, such is his prestige. Prof. Al Athel got all his degrees from the United States and got his Ph.D. from Stanford University. He passed all his exams with distinction throughout his life and with highest honors. He decided however that serving his country is his first priority at that time. Prof. Al Athel could have had a Nobel Prize at least had he decided otherwise. I find therefore that it is totally inappropriate that the authors of the said article did not cite this important work which predated their paper in Scientific American by at least 12 years. Quite honestly I find it embarrassing to have to talk on behalf of such a great man but such is his modesty and generosity that he never cared about priority. Somewhere people have to draw the line and I felt compelled that I should say what I said here. ","August, 29 2008 17:15:18","05:15 PM on 08/29/08","10505CE7-C6C6-3A98-66AD0F7913521FC3","A.Mirza",460,103,null],[104,"1054911A-9371-76F2-CDF0103800C24609",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

An unexpected turn of events and news for everyone is that it seems with a great likelihood that the first and I repeat the first systematic derivation of the dimension of spacetime from first principle is due to Prof. Dr. Saleh Al-Athel. His paper appeared in 1996 in a monograph published by the British Publisher Pergamon Press which meantime belongs to Elsevier Science Publishing in Amsterdam. His Excellency is well known to me as well as to every Arab scientist not only in Saudi Arabia, because he was until very recently the President of King Abdel Aziz City for Science and Technology in Riyadh, but also because he is one of the most distinguished scientists and astronautical engineers in Arabia. This City acronymed KACST is Saudi Arabia's Ministry for Science and Technology. His Excellency was therefore the Minister representing Saudi Arabia internationally in this capacity. Unlike other Ministers he reports directly to the King, such is his prestige. Prof. Al Athel got all his degrees from the United States and got his Ph.D. from Stanford University. He passed all his exams with distinction throughout his life and with highest honors. He decided however that serving his country is his first priority at that time. Prof. Al Athel could have had a Nobel Prize at least had he decided otherwise. I find therefore that it is totally inappropriate that the authors of the said article did not cite this important work which predated their paper in Scientific American by at least 12 years. Quite honestly I find it embarrassing to have to talk on behalf of such a great man but such is his modesty and generosity that he never cared about priority. Somewhere people have to draw the line and I felt compelled that I should say what I said here. ","August, 29 2008 17:18:09","05:18 PM on 08/29/08","10505CE7-C6C6-3A98-66AD0F7913521FC3","A.Mirza",460,104,null],[105,"105602B6-BE3E-8E45-B11B007AC4F21EE5",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

An unexpected turn of events and news for everyone is that it seems with a great likelihood that the first and I repeat the first systematic derivation of the dimension of spacetime from first principle is due to Prof. Dr. Saleh Al-Athel. His paper appeared in 1996 in a monograph published by the British Publisher Pergamon Press which meantime belongs to Elsevier Science Publishing in Amsterdam. His Excellency is well known to me as well as to every Arab scientist not only in Saudi Arabia, because he was until very recently the President of King Abdel Aziz City for Science and Technology in Riyadh, but also because he is one of the most distinguished scientists and astronautical engineers in Arabia. This City acronymed KACST is Saudi Arabia's Ministry for Science and Technology. His Excellency was therefore the Minister representing Saudi Arabia internationally in this capacity. Unlike other Ministers he reports directly to the King, such is his prestige. Prof. Al Athel got all his degrees from the United States and got his Ph.D. from Stanford University. He passed all his exams with distinction throughout his life and with highest honors. He decided however that serving his country is his first priority at that time. Prof. Al Athel could have had a Nobel Prize at least had he decided otherwise. I find therefore that it is totally inappropriate that the authors of the said article did not cite this important work which predated their paper in Scientific American by at least 12 years. Quite honestly I find it embarrassing to have to talk on behalf of such a great man but such is his modesty and generosity that he never cared about priority. Somewhere people have to draw the line and I felt compelled that I should say what I said here. ","August, 29 2008 17:19:44","05:19 PM on 08/29/08","10505CE7-C6C6-3A98-66AD0F7913521FC3","A.Mirza",460,105,null],[106,"10B3C5B9-905F-E329-AF5D353668FCD6E3",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The comment by Mirza is correct but the readers of this site may want to know where to find this article. It is in a Special Issue with the title FRACTAL SPACE-TIME AND CANTORIAN GEOMETRY IN QUANTUM MECHANICS. It is edited by M.S. El Naschie, L. Nottale and G. Ord. It is Vol. 7, No. 6, June 1996, page 873-875.

Prof. Al Athel is indeed an outstanding scientist from one of the best families in Saudi Arabia. He built Saudi science almost from the datum. He is an astronautical engineer specialized in satellites but with strong interests in everything. He is a very moral and pious Moslem and everyone who met him loved and respected him. I saw him in Alexandria at a conference named Einstein in Egypt. It was a celebration of the Einstein century held in Bibliotheca Alexandrina, Alexandria. He was in a delegation from Saudi Arabia. The other person was Dr. Daham Alani, a famous Arabist who got a degree in biochemistry from France. I read the paper of Prof. Al Athel because I am working on this subject and many in the University of Alexandria are applying to do their Ph.D. on the subject. Unlike the Authors of the Scientific American article, Prof. Al Athel refers to everybody before him. For instance he refers to H.D. Nielson from Niels Bohr Inst. in Denmark where Dr. Ambjorn works and who has written a very nice article with the title Why do we live in 3 + 1 dimensions. He also refers to Finkelstein, K. Menger, M.S. El Naschie, J.A. Wheeler, K. Svozil, R. Mirman, J.D. Barrow and F.J. Tipler and the famous English mathematician J. Hemion. I can only add my humble voice to so many before me that disregarding the work of so many people is not acceptable. However disregarding Prof. Al Athel s priority is for us in Arabia unforgivable.

Ayman El-Okaby
Dept. of Physics
University of Alexandria, Egypt.

","August, 29 2008 19:02:09","07:02 PM on 08/29/08","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,106,null],[107,"131AD14A-BCA2-2363-3DECD715CD71B0FA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Adulation just as defamation is thoroughly foreign to the scientific thinking. Some of the commentators on the present subject must decide if they are writing to a scientific Journal or to the Holy Seal. Saying this research is led by a Nobel Laureate and is coming from a Center of Excellence is not a scientific argument and if anything it shows a certain degree of lethargy and mental laziness of someone unwilling to spend the time and effort to come to the right conclusion. The Logic in the paper of J. Ambjorn and R. Loll is deficient even though they work in a Center of Excellence led by a Nobel Laureate. Even a non-scientist will raise an eyebrow or even two at the proposition that the 3D clots in a glass of milk when lemon juice is added to it is a proof that the glass is three dimensional and the clots possess a Hausdorff dimension below or above three by a margin of the error of measurement.
Of course it is possible to give an exact mathematical derivation of the Hausdorff and topological dimension of spacetime from first principle and the modern mathematical physics literature is meantime abound with such derivations which have been inspired by El Naschie's reformulations of J. A. Wheelers Borel set conjecture. A particularly neat derivation of this dimension is due to a British topologist working in the University of Bielefeld in Germany, Geoffrey Hemion. His paper is titled: A Class of Partially Ordered Sets published in an Elsevier Journal and may be found in Elsevier sciencedirect. Those willing to spend the time and effort to learn could also look up a good paper in the same direction by the notable Spanish Theoretical Physicist E. Alvarez et al published in a book edited by Mohamed El Naschie, Otto Rossler and Ilya Prigogine or should I say Nobel Laureate Ilya Prigogine to give it more metaphysical weight. It is published in 1995 by Pergamon-Elsevier ISBN 0080420273, Oxford-UK. The author of this article concluded that a "three dimensional bum in the center and the border is fractal-like with fractional dimension 1.5" The authors thus used the scientific method and language. Their work is explicit and analytical not a computer-simulation. They said they found something fractal-like but not fractal and they said the fractal dimension of the surface is 1.5 and not that the Hausdorff dimension is 1.5. Thus they did not try to impress the reader with mathematical jargon. To call the computer simulation of the authors of the Scientific American article discovering fractal spacetime and call their result a Hausdorff dimension is at a minimum a painful stretch. By the way Dr. Loll published a paper in Classical and Quantum Gravity which is essentially the same paper of Scientific American with an addition of a very nicely drawn caricature showing Dr. Loll examining with a loop the fractal structure at the Planck length. What a pity that this nice caricature is wrong. If you are searching for fractal structure the last place you want to search for is at the Planck length. It was probably the mistake of Mandelbrot to have called one of his pictures fractal spacetime form. But Mandelbrot was very honest in his book and he gave the user a warning and wrote that he knows very little about quantum gravity and cosmology.
S. J. Rodriguez ","August, 30 2008 06:13:56","06:13 AM on 08/30/08","131ACDBE-E656-B8A5-3B9A8310D2B4D59E","Rodriguez",460,107,null],[108,"2521F33B-CAF3-4734-515F41F061F0E6D0",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Could we at least for a moment leave the question of who discovered Cantorian-fractal spacetime first and dwell a little more on the scientific content of the theory? For such a purpose the article in Scientific American is not ideally suited. It is the version published in Physical Review Letter which gives more scientific information on the subject. The article is called Planckian Birth of a Quantum de Sitter Universe, Physical Review Letters, PRL 100, 091304(2008). Already the introduction gives us an idea about the importance of the work and leaves very little space for misunderstanding what the authors see their work is all about. So let me quote the opening lines: "To show that the physical spacetime surrounding us can be derived from some fundamental quantum dynamical principle is one of the holy grails of theoretical physics." Subsequently, the authors stress that in their work: "The challenge is to obtain this from a
background-independent formulation where no background spacetime is put in by hand." In the next section titled Macroscopic de Sitter universe the authors set the stage for what they are intending to do. They will: 1. Use four-dimensional simplices. 2. Will respect global foliation in discrete proper time. 3. Will use Einstein-Hilbert action on piecewise linear geometries. 4. Using Monte Carlo simulation they will insist on a fixed four-volume and I am still quoting word by word from the said paper.

As a result the authors say that they obtained or observed again in their own words: "The emergence of a four-dimension universe."

Now let us look at a decisive point in the analysis leading to this result. In the Lagrangian involved in the action given by equation no 4 of their paper, the authors introduced a Lagrangian multiplier. Now anyone versed in the calculus of variations knows exactly the meaning of this Lagrangian multiplier. It is imposing an additional force to make the equation of motion respect an auxiliary condition. In the analysis of Ambjorn, Jurkiewicz and Loll this auxiliary condition is that the total volume should be a four-dimensional volume. I don't like sarcasm in the context of a scientific discussion and I definitely do not mean to be sarcastic when I genuinely ask: If you take four-dimensional simplices and an Einstein-Hilbert action with an auxiliary condition enforcing four-dimensional volume via a Lagrangian multiplier, is it the least surprising that you should retrieve a four-dimensional manifold for spacetime? I don't want to say that the authors
indoctrinated the result as some have remarked on various blogs worldwide but I would say the authors required four-dimensionality, did put it by hand and logically found it at the end. Ergo there is no question that the de Sitter Universe was born out of very simple or primitive assumption and giving a genuinely four-dimensional spacetime as the authors state at the end of the first column of the second page of their work.

I did not read the work of Mohamed El Naschie with sufficient depth to comment on it and on its relation to the work of Ambjorn et al. However, it seems to me that El Naschie is working with the simplest yet most complex structure known in geometry and topology. These are the elementary triadic but random Cantor sets. Somehow then he arrived at a topological dimension of 4 and a Hausdorff dimension equal to 4 + 0.23606. If his derivation is correct then this would be deriving the dimensionality of spacetime from elementary first principles.

Having said that I am of the definite opinion that the work of Ambjorn and Loll marks the beginning of a very important phase on the road to discovering the correct theory for quantum gravity and this conclusion will remain valid whether or not they have studied the literature with sufficient meticulousness.

","September, 02 2008 18:14:54","06:14 PM on 09/02/08","2521F2EA-989D-CC3C-668AFEB18D201A4F","John Tucker",460,108,null],[109,"25533BAD-08DA-748B-1399A29C121BB683",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Could we at least for a moment leave the question of who discovered Cantorian-fractal spacetime first and dwell a little more on the scientific content of the theory? For such a purpose the article in Scientific American is not ideally suited. It is the version published in Physical Review Letter which gives more scientific information on the subject. The article is called Planckian Birth of a Quantum de Sitter Universe, Physical Review Letters, PRL 100, 091304(2008). Already the introduction gives us an idea about the importance of the work and leaves very little space for misunderstanding what the authors see their work is all about. So let me quote the opening lines: "To show that the physical spacetime surrounding us can be derived from some fundamental quantum dynamical principle is one of the holy grails of theoretical physics." Subsequently, the authors stress that in their work: "The challenge is to obtain this from a
background-independent formulation where no background spacetime is put in by hand." In the next section titled Macroscopic de Sitter universe the authors set the stage for what they are intending to do. They will: 1. Use four-dimensional simplices. 2. Will respect global foliation in discrete proper time. 3. Will use Einstein-Hilbert action on piecewise linear geometries. 4. Using Monte Carlo simulation they will insist on a fixed four-volume and I am still quoting word by word from the said paper.

As a result the authors say that they obtained or observed again in their own words: "The emergence of a four-dimension universe."

Now let us look at a decisive point in the analysis leading to this result. In the Lagrangian involved in the action given by equation no 4 of their paper, the authors introduced a Lagrangian multiplier. Now anyone versed in the calculus of variations knows exactly the meaning of this Lagrangian multiplier. It is imposing an additional force to make the equation of motion respect an auxiliary condition. In the analysis of Ambjorn, Jurkiewicz and Loll this auxiliary condition is that the total volume should be a four-dimensional volume. I don't like sarcasm in the context of a scientific discussion and I definitely do not mean to be sarcastic when I genuinely ask: If you take four-dimensional simplices and an Einstein-Hilbert action with an auxiliary condition enforcing four-dimensional volume via a Lagrangian multiplier, is it the least surprising that you should retrieve a four-dimensional manifold for spacetime? I don't want to say that the authors
indoctrinated the result as some have remarked on various blogs worldwide but I would say the authors required four-dimensionality, did put it by hand and logically found it at the end. Ergo there is no question that the de Sitter Universe was born out of very simple or primitive assumption and giving a genuinely four-dimensional spacetime as the authors state at the end of the first column of the second page of their work.

I did not read the work of Mohamed El Naschie with sufficient depth to comment on it and on its relation to the work of Ambjorn et al. However, it seems to me that El Naschie is working with the simplest yet most complex structure known in geometry and topology. These are the elementary triadic but random Cantor sets. Somehow then he arrived at a topological dimension of 4 and a Hausdorff dimension equal to 4 + 0.23606. If his derivation is correct then this would be deriving the dimensionality of spacetime from elementary first principles.

Having said that I am of the definite opinion that the work of Ambjorn and Loll marks the beginning of a very important phase on the road to discovering the correct theory for quantum gravity and this conclusion will remain valid whether or not they have studied the literature with sufficient meticulousness.
","September, 02 2008 19:08:43","07:08 PM on 09/02/08","2521F2EA-989D-CC3C-668AFEB18D201A4F","John Tucker",460,109,null],[110,"255609BF-BC7D-04AC-EFF38447CE73E463",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Could we at least for a moment leave the question of who discovered Cantorian-fractal spacetime first and dwell a little more on the scientific content of the theory? For such a purpose the article in Scientific American is not ideally suited. It is the version published in Physical Review Letter which gives more scientific information on the subject. The article is called Planckian Birth of a Quantum de Sitter Universe, Physical Review Letters, PRL 100, 091304(2008). Already the introduction gives us an idea about the importance of the work and leaves very little space for misunderstanding what the authors see their work is all about. So let me quote the opening lines: "To show that the physical spacetime surrounding us can be derived from some fundamental quantum dynamical principle is one of the holy grails of theoretical physics." Subsequently, the authors stress that in their work: "The challenge is to obtain this from a
background-independent formulation where no background spacetime is put in by hand." In the next section titled Macroscopic de Sitter universe the authors set the stage for what they are intending to do. They will: 1. Use four-dimensional simplices. 2. Will respect global foliation in discrete proper time. 3. Will use Einstein-Hilbert action on piecewise linear geometries. 4. Using Monte Carlo simulation they will insist on a fixed four-volume and I am still quoting word by word from the said paper.

As a result the authors say that they obtained or observed again in their own words: "The emergence of a four-dimension universe."

Now let us look at a decisive point in the analysis leading to this result. In the Lagrangian involved in the action given by equation no 4 of their paper, the authors introduced a Lagrangian multiplier. Now anyone versed in the calculus of variations knows exactly the meaning of this Lagrangian multiplier. It is imposing an additional force to make the equation of motion respect an auxiliary condition. In the analysis of Ambjorn, Jurkiewicz and Loll this auxiliary condition is that the total volume should be a four-dimensional volume. I don't like sarcasm in the context of a scientific discussion and I definitely do not mean to be sarcastic when I genuinely ask: If you take four-dimensional simplices and an Einstein-Hilbert action with an auxiliary condition enforcing four-dimensional volume via a Lagrangian multiplier, is it the least surprising that you should retrieve a four-dimensional manifold for spacetime? I don't want to say that the authors
indoctrinated the result as some have remarked on various blogs worldwide but I would say the authors required four-dimensionality, did put it by hand and logically found it at the end. Ergo there is no question that the de Sitter Universe was born out of very simple or primitive assumption and giving a genuinely four-dimensional spacetime as the authors state at the end of the first column of the second page of their work.

I did not read the work of Mohamed El Naschie with sufficient depth to comment on it and on its relation to the work of Ambjorn et al. However, it seems to me that El Naschie is working with the simplest yet most complex structure known in geometry and topology. These are the elementary triadic but random Cantor sets. Somehow then he arrived at a topological dimension of 4 and a Hausdorff dimension equal to 4 + 0.23606. If his derivation is correct then this would be deriving the dimensionality of spacetime from elementary first principles.

Having said that I am of the definite opinion that the work of Ambjorn and Loll marks the beginning of a very important phase on the road to discovering the correct theory for quantum gravity and this conclusion will remain valid whether or not they have studied the literature with sufficient meticulousness.

","September, 02 2008 19:11:47","07:11 PM on 09/02/08","2521F2EA-989D-CC3C-668AFEB18D201A4F","John Tucker",460,110,null],[111,"257D2AE3-C3D3-8D45-6D2C16F446BD3829",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear John Tucker,

Regarding your analysis of the paper Planckian Birth of Quantum de Sitter Universe PRL 100, 091304 (2008).

You state: "Having said that I am of the definite opinion that the work of Ambjorn and Loll marks the beginning of a very important phase on the road to discovering the correct theory for quantum gravity and this conclusion will remain valid whether or not they have studied the literature with sufficient meticulousness"

I have to respectfully disagree. In addition to relying on a circular argument, the approach is built on many objectionable premises. It claims that causal dynamical triangulation enables a consistent regularization of quantum gravity. A quantum universe emerging from a non-perturbative sum over geometries is alleged to recover with high accuracy a four-dimensional de Sitter space-time .
However,
1)\tQuantitative models of space-time near the Planck scale, regardless of how intriguing and attractive they might be, are non-testable. One does not know if Quantum Field Theory (QFT) survives past the Cohen-Kaplan threshold of about 100 TeV, let alone what happens in close proximity to the Planck scale. The proposition that the linear size of the quantum universe is between 17 and 28 Planck lengths cannot be put to test.
2)\tPath Integral formalism and the Sum-over-Histories technique cease to be applicable in the deep TeV sector or beyond due to the likely onset of non-local interactions and chaotic dynamics of strongly coupled theories.
3)\tAppealing to cosmological models of space-time (such as the de Sitter model) to formulate or interpret dynamics near the Planck scale is an ad-hoc ansatz. There is simply no empirical evidence that supports linking the four dimensional manifold of General Relativity with physics on or below the sub-nuclear scale. Likewise, there is no empirical evidence that the behavior of Newton s constant near the Planck scale can be extrapolated from its properties in classical gravity.

Sincerely,

Ervin Goldfain
","September, 02 2008 19:54:32","07:54 PM on 09/02/08","83A081EF-9459-E1CE-60748830AFCF4E04","ervingoldfain",460,111,null],[112,"2DF99C42-0542-8BA7-E45A2F3E8F4CDFB9",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear Dr. Goldfain..I agree to a certain extent with what you are saying. Let me say first that John Tucker s remarks are very polite but they are acidly formulated. He said he is not making fun of Ambjorn and his colleagues but he made them look ridiculous regardless of what he said politely at the end. Of course he is right. Howe could you introduce an auxiliary condition and a Lagrangian multiplier forcing the equation of motion to admit four dimensionality then jump into the air shouting hurrah, hurrah I found four dimensionality.

When Tucker said that their paper marks the beginning of an important development I guess he only wanted to say in a subtle way that a centre of excellence is acknowledging the work done by whom they regarded in the past as renegades. I have read a lot of your work and I know that you are very close to El Naschie and his group but I don t agree with your over emphasis on empirical evidence.

Let me recall what Richard Feynman wrote to Garnet Ord in a letter published by Mohamed El Naschie: Feynman said do not disregard a beautiful theory just because it contravenes some experimental results. In the same time you should not take a theory seriously which flies in the face of well established experimental fact. According to Feynman there is a thin path to tread between the two extremes. Feynman judged string theory too harshly in my opinion. When you have a new theory in embryonic form you have to treat it very delicately and nourish it until it matures exactly as you do with a new born baby. You have to be tolerant and accept many drawbacks for the time being. I guess Tucker was giving the theory of Ambjorn and Loll the benefit of the doubt on certain aspects.

However and in full agreement with the sentiments expressed by so many people on so many blogs on this paper, there is an element reminiscent of American television commercials& too much fan fare and by comparison, much less substance. In my opinion it was intended not so much by the Authors but presumably more by the Institutions where they are working. How should I put it, shall I call it funding or simply money. There is too much undue pressure in my opinion put on scientists worldwide to get funding and money for their universities and institutions. I do not know what the solution is but I know for sure that this is the trouble with theoretical physics at least.


","September, 04 2008 11:27:25","11:27 AM on 09/04/08","2DF99BD3-F313-3B74-3F3CA7EC3057E5F8","S. Logan",460,112,null],[113,"2EF5CA11-EDC1-2034-36CB292EC697947F","2DF99C42-0542-8BA7-E45A2F3E8F4CDFB9",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear S. Logan,

Thank you for your thoughtful reply and clarifications.

Regarding the argument made in my previous posting: it is important to recall that physics is an experimental science. Unforunately, too many researchers in theoretical physics tend to forget this simple fact. At the end of the day, conceptual models find acceptance only if fully supported by objective evidence. We simply cannot take on faith the validity of any model, regardless of how aesthetically appealing it might be. Based on what is known now, physics on the Planck scale is not directly (or indirectly) testable and, as such, it is to be taken with a healthy dose of skepticism.

Yours,

Ervin Goldfain","September, 04 2008 16:02:52","04:02 PM on 09/04/08","83A081EF-9459-E1CE-60748830AFCF4E04","ervingoldfain",460,113,112],[114,"2F2DEE6B-053B-7111-D0340FFDF91E8DBC",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I must admit that I never imagined that Mohamed El Naschie's thinking about the dimensionality and fractality of quantum space was that advanced. In a paper published in 1998 he not only tackled the theoretical problem but went as far as making specific proposals for experimentally testing the Hausdorff dimension of the path of a quantum particle. He proposed some original ideas based on a technology transfer of methods developed in the realm of nonlinear dynamics to high energy physics such as a reconstruction of a quantum phase space using Ruelle-Packard and Takens theorem. Mohamed El Naschie is simply ahead of his time and that may indeed be a problem. The paper I mention is entitled The fractal dimension of spacetime - Remarks on theoretical derivation and experimental verification. See Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol. 9, No. 7, pp. 1211-1217 or Elsevier's Science Direct. This particular volume was Edited by the three principle discoverers of spacetime, G. Ord, L. Nottale and M.S. El Naschie and was entitled The impact of nonlinear dynamics and fractals on quantum physics and relativity. Such an impact was predicted some 20 years ago in a Nobel conference in Stockholm and it is over due that this subject is given prime time. I am told that the British Inst. of Physics is thinking about doing precisely that.
","September, 04 2008 17:04:11","05:04 PM on 09/04/08","411FD3A2-9B37-C689-8547351B01448AC5","w.hansen",460,114,null],[115,"327A9570-C086-65DD-794159E6B63CA94C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am inclined to agree with the balanced comments of John Tucker. I am still however deeply disturbed about what happened and that the Authors of the Scientific American article have not made the slightest move to correct the situation. With regard to Prof. El Naschie s derivation of the Hausdorff dimension of Cantorian-fractal spacetime, this is quite simple and purely topological and geometrical. For that one needs two equations. The first gives the effective total topological dimension and the second gives the effective total Hausdorff dimension. Requiring that both dimensions should be equal one finds the required parameter fixing both dimensions to be equal to the Golden Mean and that the corresponding dimension is 4 plus phi to the power of 3 which then amounts to 4.23606799. Let us derive the first equation. Taking all integer n dimensions from n equal zero to n equal infinity and giving each dimension a weight equal d to the power of n and adding all these weighted dimensions, we find a total dimension of one plus d all divided by 1 minus d. This is the effective total topological dimension as a function of the parameter d. Next we derive the second equation for the effective total Hausdorff dimension. Since El Naschie s Cantorian spacetime is made of infinitely many but hierarchal elementary Cantor sets, we take the Hausdorff dimension of each one to be a certain value to the power of n and add all these Hausdorff dimensions from zero to infinity. To find the magnitude of this dimension the total sum which is the reciprocal value of one minus the unknown Hausdorff dimension must be divided once more by this particular Hausdorff dimension. Now we have two equations and we set them equal. It is not possible to solve this equation unless we have only one unknown, therefore we set d equal to our unknown Hausdorff dimension. As a result we find a simple quadratic equation in d and the only positive solution is d equal 0.618033989 which is the Golden Mean. Inserting back in any of the two equations one finds that the total effective topological and Hausdorff dimensions of our Cantorian fractal space is 4 plus the Golden Mean to the third power.

That is actually all. A very nice property of the preceding value is reflected in its continued fraction representation. It looks like a four dimensional space surrounding a second smaller four dimensional space and so on indefinitely like a surrealistic Russian doll. If we do not open the first doll, then we have only 4 as a dimension and that is the topological dimension of our classical spacetime.

El Naschie has given many different ways of obtaining the preceAding result and connected his work with non-commutative geometry as well as von Neumann s continuous geometry. I related his work to knot theory as applied to wormholes in a recent paper which may be found on Elsevier s Science Direct website. The title of the paper is Knot wormholes and the dimensional invariant of exceptional Lie groups and Stein space hierarchies.

Ayman Elokaby
Dept. of Physics
University of Alexandria.

","September, 05 2008 08:26:46","08:26 AM on 09/05/08","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,115,null],[116,"376A380D-9769-5EBD-8BD8891654099977",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It is not only this paper in Scientific American. J. Ambjorn, J. Jurkiewicz and R. Loll advertised their derivation of spacetime dimensions on the blog Physical Review Focus. It seems to me to be a planned campaign to raise research funds. The reviewer, a free-lance science writer Adrian Cho did not spare his compliments, marveling at the unique discovery comparable only to Picasso's cubistic painting. Imagine this coming from a leading centre of excellence with a Nobel laureate in physics as a patron. Who knows, maybe the subject is Nobel prize worthy and therefore above our little heads.
P.Lang","September, 06 2008 07:27:00","07:27 AM on 09/06/08","376A37D3-F1AB-336E-96399F0DBE95DEA9","Peter Lang",460,116,null],[117,"38AD8708-D217-1B4E-9E15C17AC19EBF29",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It is surreal: to derive the dimensionality of classical, relativistic and quantum spacetime Mohamed El Naschie used J.H. Conway s surreal numbers. In one of the most enchanting papers ever written on the subject, El Naschie started from a sigma field and proved that the expectation value of the dimensions are 4.236067977 for quantum spacetime, exactly 4 for relativistic spacetime and 3 plus 1 for classical spacetime. The paper is part of a volume edited by M.S. El Naschie, L. Nottale, S. Al Athel and G. Ord. It can be found on Elsevier s Science Direct web site under the title On numbers, probability and dimension. It is published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals as long ago as 1996. I endorse the comments of W. Hansen that El Naschie is ahead of his time but I do not think it is a problem. It is wonderful to have people ahead of their time.
","September, 06 2008 13:20:08","01:20 PM on 09/06/08","E1373AE2-D4F3-12DD-4E1C921006AE92C5","T. Magyar",460,117,null],[118,"38ED185E-B704-2A30-056CFFE1E8C35962",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Chaired by Stig Lundqvist, the 1984 Nobel Conference held in the Swedish Royal Academy of Science in Stockholm to discuss past achievements and future development of deterministic chaos and fractal geometry was by any standard a truly extraordinary event.

Kadanoff, Haken, Wolfram, Procaccia, Frish, Ruelle, Arecchi, Gallub, Hohenberg, Bak, Bohr, Scalapino, Langer and Huberman are just a few of the big names who were present at the summary session. As recounted by Mohamed El Naschie and documented in Vol. T9 of the 1985 Physica Scripta, towards the end P. Hohenberg of AT&T Bell Laboratories, USA said that it is a time to list the bets and conjectures about the future of nonlinear dynamics, i.e. about chaos, fractals and complexity theory which were suggested by the participants in answer to a questionnaire which was distributed. They listed ten points. Nine of these points were pertinent to the field and completely expected. It is point ten which may have come as unexpected. This point states that:

Nonlinear dynamics and chaos will invade the foundations of quantum
mechanics and elementary particle physics.

This may have been a self fulfilling prophecy as can be seen for instance from Elsevier's Science Direct website with a large number of papers published on this subject. We all know the effect of the word Nobel on science in general and physics in particular, all apart from politics. There is a great deal of harm which the Nobel prize has caused but I for one see the good far outweighing the harm. I think the mere mention of a Nobel conference endorsing nonlinear dynamics as a mover and shaker of the very foundations of elementary particle physics must have electrified researches like Mohamed El Naschie to work feverishly on the subject. I hope I am not doing him or his colleagues an injustice by saying that as I find nothing wrong in being motivated by the highest honor which the scientific community can bestow.

It is in this positive light that I see the work of the Utrecht group, Niels Bohr Institute and Spinoza Institute. It would be wonderful indeed if an exceptional scientist like Nobel laureate G. 'tHooft could put his substantial weight behind a nonlinear dynamical fractal approach to quantum gravity. This effort must start by first awarding a Nobel prize in nonlinear dynamics proper. There are a few names in this area all worth of the highest honor.

","September, 06 2008 14:29:34","02:29 PM on 09/06/08","38ED182D-B9E2-F4D7-93276A7CE8807C47","J.P.H.",460,118,null],[119,"3928DEF7-E266-2BA3-FD80236A82BB4906","38ED185E-B704-2A30-056CFFE1E8C35962",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear J. P. H.,

I agree with you that nonlinear dynamics, chaos and complexity deserve to qualify as an integral part of contemporary research in particle physics and Quantum Field Theory. But this is far from being the case.The reality is that (with few exceptions) major research programs in particle physics such as SUSY, String / M -theory, Loop Quantum Gravity, alternative models for electro-weak symmetry breaking, Lepto- and Baryogenesis (and so on) ignore almost completely the rich and unexpected consequences of nonlinear dynamics and emergent behavior. ","September, 06 2008 15:34:51","03:34 PM on 09/06/08","83A081EF-9459-E1CE-60748830AFCF4E04","ervingoldfain",460,119,118],[120,"3DDA645C-080C-99E0-E26FCAA2A38C4DFB",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","



Even the Londoner Daily Mail on Sunday is talking about Professor Otto E. Roessler. The internationally well known German pioneer of Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos is the center of one of the largest controversary of modern times connected to CERN. Prof. Roessler has been warning from producing miniblackholes in the new facility in CERN- Geneva, Switzerland.
But Roessler is also one of the promoters of Fractal spacetime. I found out about that from a book edited by the wellknown Austrian theoretical physicist Karl Svozil, dated 1999. The book is called Complexities and is dedicated to Professor Otto Roessler. The last paper is by Professor Mohamed El Naschie. In this paper El Naschie derives the four dimensionality of Cantorian fractal spacetime using the sporadic 196884-dimensional groups. This is the so called monster group. It is enormously interesting. In fact Karl Svozil has been working with the famous Austrian experimental physicist Anton Zeilinger on the problem of spacetime dimensionality since a long time. I think the book is reproduced in a special issue of Chaos, Solitons and Fractals Vol 10, No 6. The content could be found on this amazing Elsevier Science direct.
A. Schaber
","September, 07 2008 13:27:14","01:27 PM on 09/07/08","3DDA5FFA-D359-08C9-23FC09399386E397","Andreas Schaber",460,120,null],[121,"43109DFD-E2B8-D553-828212CFC8BFBBAB",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

A remark on the cosmic microwave background radiation and the Hausdorff dimension of spacetime is the captivating title of a paper by a Cambridge professor in the Dept. of Applied Math. & Theoretical Physics in the UK. The work has a real spark of genius connecting in an exact analysis the COBE measurement of the cosmic microwave background radiation to a Hausdorff dimension of 4.23606. You could not beat such a synthesis of accurate measurement and fundamental theory. The 1999 paper is available on Elsevier's Science Direct in a nonlinear dynamics and chaos journal called Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol. 10, No. 11, p. 1807-1811. The author Mohamed El Naschie also gives a nice formula for the inverse fine structure constant due to the Indian meteorologist Mary Selvam.



S. Lackshmin
","September, 08 2008 13:44:34","01:44 PM on 09/08/08","43109C3E-99C9-1525-D3BD85E0B4226BC6","S.Lackshmin",460,121,null],[122,"44C5A205-F8E7-667E-B2FDAE771F22D980",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The more I learn about the vast literature produced by the school of Cantorian spacetime and compare that with the claims made by Ambjorn and Loll, the more I sink in a mood of total incomprehension for their motives. Take for instance Mohamed El Naschie s papers published in the special issue of CS&F, Edited by the Swiss-Japanese Prof. of mathematical Physics, M. Nagasawa from the University of Zurich Relativity, Locality and Random Fractals in Quantum Theory. His paper entitled The Bethe Lattice and the Dimension of Micro Spacetime gives a vector bundle based derivation, the simplicity of which I have never seen before. The second paper called Remarks on Super Strings, CS&F, Vol. 8, No. 11, pp. 1873-1997 covers almost all aspects connecting anomalous diffusion and Cantorian spacetime dimensionality. How could anyone overlook all that?","September, 08 2008 21:41:54","09:41 PM on 09/08/08","44C5A1CA-03C3-00FF-0674C738B8893BB7","D. Toller",460,122,null],[123,"46F14572-F380-4B88-CBB018F58B479D69",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Prof. Otto Rossler, the father of the Rossler attractor, hyper chaos and indo-physics indicated in a recent interview (Professor R?ssler Takes On The LHC | Scientific Blogging) that the only hope for a definite answer regarding the danger of annihilating the earth via CERN mini black hole experiment is Mohamed El Naschie s E-infinity Cantorian-fractal spacetime theory.

I ask you all what could be a higher stake than the fate of the entire universe? Even if Rossler is wrong, why not wait just a little bit until we are completely sure. Never the less we have to be reasonable about reasons. That is why I suggest a world committee made up of John Eilese for CERN, Gerard tHooft for the conservative elite and Mohamed El Naschie for the avant-garde theoretical physics. The committee should be chaired by Prof. Sir Roger Penrose being the world s foremost expert on gravity and one of the originators of black hole research as well as the world s undisputed most intellectual scientist. The committee should be given two months to submit a final and binding report. I think the subject is worth it for after all, what if Prof. Rossler who is officially certified a genius and humanist is right? We cannot ignore Otto Rossler.

D. Shemanski

","September, 09 2008 07:48:49","07:48 AM on 09/09/08","46F1452F-9FF5-CEE8-EAA27514D55267DA","D. Shemanski",460,123,null],[124,"513D756C-D37A-8279-EF049C020303049A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

In the time between the 3rd and 8th November 2007 I left England to attend an international conference on nonlinear dynamics and nanotechnology in Amman, Jordan. The first lecture was given by Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. This lecture was partially related to the subject matter of the present discussion regarding the paper of Ambjorn and Loll. It was a day later that Prof. El Naschie was honored in the Schuman Inst. for his scientific efforts and achievements. He was given the Schuman Shield of Merit, one of the most sought after scientific prizes in the Arab world. The reason for bestowing this honor on him was two fold. First he is generally acknowledged as the man who introduced the Arab world to the nanotechnology age. Second he has developed a quantum gravity theory which starts from a fractal spacetime model based on Cantor sets. Prof. El Naschie is known to be the originator of this theory for the last 15 years and by looking at Elsevier s Science Direct web site, one can immediately see the impact of his theory on the field of high energy physics. There are virtually dozens of scientists all over the world working in this field and the large number of published papers is impossible to overlook.

Natsheh
Dept. of Electrical Eng.
Loughborough University

","September, 11 2008 07:48:14","07:48 AM on 09/11/08","513D7520-B10D-209F-EBC3439339E68771","A.Natsheh",460,124,null],[125,"513FB068-BE98-47F5-6ECBF598CBD6D72C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

In the time between the 3rd and 8th November 2007 I left England to attend an international conference on nonlinear dynamics and nanotechnology in Amman, Jordan. The first lecture was given by Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. This lecture was partially related to the subject matter of the present discussion regarding the paper of Ambjorn and Loll. It was a day later that Prof. El Naschie was honored in the Schuman Inst. for his scientific efforts and achievements. He was given the Schuman Shield of Merit, one of the most sought after scientific prizes in the Arab world. The reason for bestowing this honor on him was two fold. First he is generally acknowledged as the man who introduced the Arab world to the nanotechnology age. Second he has developed a quantum gravity theory which starts from a fractal spacetime model based on Cantor sets. Prof. El Naschie is known to be the originator of this theory for the last 15 years and by looking at Elsevier's Science Direct web site, one can immediately see the impact of his theory on the field of high energy physics. There are virtually dozens of scientists all over the world working in this field and the large number of published papers is impossible to overlook.

Natsheh
Dept. of Electrical Eng.
Loughborough University

","September, 11 2008 07:50:40","07:50 AM on 09/11/08","513D7520-B10D-209F-EBC3439339E68771","A.Natsheh",460,125,null],[126,"53154CF6-90F3-D9D8-2BF3328B0365DFA2",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I could only shake my head when I heard what Prof. Steven Hawking had to say about the large Hadron collider to assure the public that the earth will not be swallowed by a mini black hole. It is alright to assure the public but not on the account of scientific truthfulness. Hawking said (and this was quoted in the media for instance The Daily Telegraph, Wed. 10th Sept. on the first page) that the energy released in the collision of two particles in the reactor is comparable to two mosquitoes colliding. Even when we grant what is not true, that there are only two particles colliding in the reactor, then we can conclude from this statement that Prof. Hawking doesn t know anything about the butterfly effect. Prof. Edward Lorenz coined this expression to illustrate the unbelievable effect with can exist in a nonlinear chaotic system, for instance the weather. Imagine a butterfly fluttering its wings in California could in part be the cause of a hurricane in Florida. I think that part of the over confidence of certain high energy scientists in their experiments is due to their general ignorance of nonlinear dynamics and deterministic chaos. I can only recommend to all of them to join a course on nonlinear dynamics which is now offered by most Universities in the West. Alternatively they could ask experts on the subject such as Richard Feigenbaum or in this particular case Prof. Otto Rossler. On the other hand it may be too late.","September, 11 2008 16:23:36","04:23 PM on 09/11/08","53154CAD-F431-B540-026BA3EEAED6C331","Grayson",460,126,null],[127,"6B2274D2-ABD5-7BEB-9C50F2A7A8C626BF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Prof. Otto R?ssler, the renowned German scientist and many of his American colleagues have only been warning what if . What we know about the universe and what we know about quantum gravity is just a trickle of many other mysteries. R?ssler correctly points out that when the risk is infinitely large, i.e. loosing the entire globe, then it is time to check our scientific curiosity for the benefit of humanity as a whole. This planet is not owned only by curious scientists. In fact behind these scientists are huge industrial vested interests such as construction companies and giant electro-technical concerns. In the case of David Kelly we saw how far these interest groups could go. I am saying intentionally could because we do not know exactly the cause of the death of David Kelly. However it is not unknown in the history of humanity that the establishment tries to silence adversary scientific theory. It took hundreds of years for the Vatican to admit that Galileo was right. Never the less, Bruno lost his life in this heated scientific debate in the renascence.

Sometime ago it was suggested that we need a world government. Many names were suggested. I remember reading the name of Noam Chomsky, Mohamed El Naschie, Roger Penrose, Yehudi Menuhin and many others. Otto R?ssler was among them. Otto was against the war on Serbia, the war on Iraq and all sorts of wars. He is thoroughly a humanist with the kindest of hearts. However there is an element in the German society stemming from its old authoritarian tradition which does not easily swallow a person like R?ssler. There is a marked difference here between the three great European nations, Germany, England and France. I remember very well when one day during the student revolts, the Prime Minister of France at the time asked General de Gaulle to arrest the red cancerous cell of France, Jean Paul Satre. General de Gaulle themilitary man was shocked and retorted immediately we cannot arrest Voltaire. Such is the respect for science, art and philosophy in France. In Germany, even today s Germany, you will find a lot of people who are ready to smear dissidents like Otto R?ssler. The Germans have come a long way since Kaiser Wilhelm and Adolf Hitler but they are not completely there yet. I read yesterday a malicious article published in the largest newspaper in Frankfurt attacking Otto R?ssler simply for airing his concerns about the experiment in CERN. I just happen to know the people behind it very well and I find this all extremely sad. Otto has said that there are a few theories which can give us an accurate prediction for what the experiment at CERN could entail. He mentioned string theories limitation and expressed the hope that fractal spacetime and E-infinity theory could answer the puzzle of radiating or non-radiating mini black holes. R?ssler is of course guilty of naivety. He does not realize that once the industrial machinery went into motion, then billions of dollars are at stake. That is the reason behind the hurry and who knows, tomorrow may never come but who cares? The problem of Otto R?ssler is that he cares and he cares genuinely and deeply.

","September, 16 2008 08:28:52","08:28 AM on 09/16/08","6B22748A-0DD8-0FD3-2D83B2FF725D84B3","Schiller",460,127,null],[128,"77527CAF-F52E-85C0-0E595EA309C7767F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I could accept it as credible that the team from Spinoza Institute did not know about El Naschie s work if it were published in some little unknown journal. However this is not the case. I found out that M.S. El Naschie s work is published on Elsevier s Science Direct web site. There are hundreds of papers published on fractal spacetime, Cantorian spacetime and E-infinity theory. Elsevier is also not any publisher. It is the largest publishing company in the world. Elsevier has more than 5000 journals. All of them top journals. El Naschie s work is published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals. This journal has the highest impact factor of all nonlinear dynamics journals. It is more than 3.5. Most other journals as well as mathematical journals never exceed the 2.0 margin. Physica D is only 1.7. Chaos, published by the American Inst. of Physics which is probably the largest institute of physics in the world, is only 2.188. The European Journal of Physics is 2.0. Journal of Nonlinear Science is only 1.26. In fact the over one hundred years old Physics Letters has an impact factor of 7.0 which is not that much larger than Chaos, Solitons & Fractals when you consider that Nature for instance has an impact factor of 36. So all in all I cannot accept that Prof. Ambjorn and Prof. Loll could have overlooked the hundreds of papers published on Elsevier s Science Direct which is probably by now the largest and the most used scientific site on the world wide web.

","September, 18 2008 17:16:46","05:16 PM on 09/18/08","77527C70-BB9D-CC25-D6B911756FA25EEE","T. Singh",460,128,null],[129,"7A47354B-CAB9-16D8-3541E93872E0768D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

In the Journal of Physics of the British Inst. of Physics, Conference Series (http://www.iop.org/EJ/toc/1742-6596/96/1)
there is a nice review of the work done using E-infinity theory across many scientific fields. Reading this article I came across the name of M.S. El Naschie as well as his Cantor set theory many times. The article deals with human genome, exceptional Lie groups, Feigenbaum Golden Mean renormalization groups, Rouelle and Takeus turbulence, the theoretical prediction of the COBE curve using El Naschie s theory and so forth. It would be interesting to hear the opinion of Dr. Renate Loll and Dr. Jan Ambjorn on this paper.

","September, 19 2008 07:03:19","07:03 AM on 09/19/08","7A473500-B1FC-61DE-339B95C2B9278FA6","Arnout S.",460,129,null],[130,"95DD4B3F-B1F8-089E-9B85F86449713AD8",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Singh hit the nail on its head. Elsevier is the best scientific publisher in the world. They have the largest and the most comprehensive scientific data base that there is. That is why many so called learned societies are green with envy because of the success of commercial publishing on the high level of Elsevier. Maybe it is worth digging a little bit deeper into the philosophical roots of all of that. I am inclined to liken scientific old boys clubs and learned societies with the state controlled economy of communist countries. Elsevier and commercial publishing such as Springer and Wiley may be likened to free economy and enlightened capitalism. Milton Friedman, Nobel laureate in economics, and a guiding light for enlightened capitalism always maintained that only in a free market based on capitalistic ideology could there be any freedom for the individual. This is particularly so when the individual belongs to a minority. The Jewish people could not have survived except within a capitalistic system. They thrived and contributed to science and art in the United States to the benefit of humanity as a whole. You could see similar things in the history of Armenian people and many other minorities. The same applies to science. The learned societies crush innovation and encourage only those who can conform to the mainstream where, according to Thomas Mann, you can find mediocrity. People with different ideas will be suppressed. That is why Elsevier and particularly Chaos, Solitons & Fractals is resisted by the learned societies. It is the difference between freedom and autocracy. However freedom can never be absolute. One has to have great regard for the freedom of others and so capitalists have to be restrained or you will see the chaos which we are seeing right now on the American Stock Exchange. I think Elsevier, with their Dutch pragmatism, Calvinistic tradition and their sense for freedom were able to produce a unique company combining the best of all philosophies although it is a capitalistic enterprise. For all these reasons I really hold Elsevier and their journals in the highest esteem and wish them the best of luck to be able to keep up their good work.","September, 24 2008 15:36:59","03:36 PM on 09/24/08","95DD4B09-941B-52B2-40E4A2F2B7946FFE","P. Hartley",460,130,null],[131,"C9B2FC31-C07B-5F6E-1C3ECD333E216FEC",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It is surreal that neither the Authors of this article nor the Centre of excellence in Utrecht nor in fact Scientific American have given any explanation or answer to all what is written on this site. I looked in the latest issue of Scientific American and did not find a single letter or comment on this article. It is probably the modern gentlemanly way of confiscating scientific ideas. In their lofty tower who cares about those down there. To borrow memorable words from Clint Eastwood, there are two types of men, those who dig and those who shoot. Is it possible that Scientific American is endorsing a similar philosophy&..meaning there are two types of scientists, those who do the work and those who publish it. For the sake of science, I hope I am wrong but quite honestly, I do not believe I am wrong.","October, 04 2008 17:11:02","05:11 PM on 10/04/08","C9B2FBFF-C7B2-9FC4-B04008C617EB6E6F","Jazz",460,131,null],[132,"0233A00F-07A4-407A-3AB04E22286CB513",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

A paper which just appeared on Elsevier's Science Direct by A. Elokaby demonstrates a remarkable connection between super strings and Brane theory in 11 dimensions and the Fibonacci. The work seems to be related to crystallography. In particular the Fibonacci growth law is pointed out as the origin of internal symmetry. The work of Nobel laureate Herbert A. Hauptman and Mohamed El Naschie is referred to in connection with the Pascal triangle. In other words integers following the Pascal Fibonacci are the building blocks of matter and spacetime. We have therefore two opposed and yet complimentary view points. The first is that of George Cantor and the fractal sets of El Naschie, Ambjorn and Loll. The second is that of Kroniker and the integer Fibonacci of Hauptman and Elokaby. Interestingly at infinity the limit of the Fibonacci ratios is an irrational number which is the golden mean. ","October, 15 2008 16:30:17","04:30 PM on 10/15/08","F10B63C8-E230-74AA-6C3AA7FEF5C9CB20","Noyes",460,132,null],[133,"21857920-A275-44F5-AEC2EA23D441F11F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have just noticed something regarding causal triangulation as presented in this paper by Jurkiewics, Loll and Ambjorn and El Naschie's approach using what I may describe as 'tHooft-Anti de Sitter-Klein modular space. The point is related to Regge calculus. This is a method well known in engineering science. It is called finite element. This is a physical method to calculate stresses in say an aircraft fuselage. It is essentially a realization of the finite difference method. Finite difference is normally used to solve a differential equation numerically. But the differential equation for an aircraft fuselage is quite complex to say the least. In the finite element method the body of the aircraft is cut down to small triangles which are fitted together. This is the finite element method. We do something similar in Regge calculus. But the differential equation to be solved corresponds essentially to Einstein's equation of general
relativity and in the present paper, the equation of quantum gravity which connects relativity and quantum theory. Roger Penrose tiling could also be viewed as a finite element with golden mean proportionality. Tiling is a fundamental problem in mathematics and physics. A few years ago an American mathematician published a paper in Mathematical Intelligence which is published by Springer in which he showed how to tile space using knots. In this spirit we could see Klein's modular curve as a tiling of an Anti de Sitter space. Because of the way El Naschie handles this problem, he can find the total number of tiles required analytically without using a computer. Formally the number of tiles required is of course infinite but when using statistical weights, then the total sum is finite. Using the same statistical distribution as that of Max Planck black body radiation, the total sum is almost 339 triangles. Of these triangles 336 could be
regarded as integers, sharply drawn triangles. The rest which have statistical weight of almost 3 is the fractal part covering space to infinity which has now become finite. My guess is the computer program of this paper is doing numerically what El Naschie's theory was doing analytically, albeit in an explicit number theoretical way. The essence of what I am saying here could be seen in detail from three recent papers which can be found on Elsevier's Science Direct. The first is a paper by Ray Munroe 'Symplectic tiling, hypercolour and hyperflavor E12', the second and third are entitled 'The crystallographic space groups and Heterotic string theory' and 'Derivation of the Euler characteristic and the curvature of Cantorian-fractal spacetime using Nash Euclidean embedding and the universal Menger sponge'. All are published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals. I hope this somewhat long remark could narrow the gap between the opposing
points of view expressed on this site regarding this rather important paper.
","October, 21 2008 18:27:54","06:27 PM on 10/21/08","218578E0-9724-2D1C-D94593888981F6A9","James Sharpe",460,133,null],[134,"24B7D088-EC4A-7484-28E40E3F0E175236",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I appreciate the comments made Sunday by James Sharpe. None the less, saying that we have 336 sharp triangles and 3 more to account for fuzzy or fractal effect could be misleading. The fact is that we have 336 symmetries and the additional 3 are to account for average symmetry. We could do as El Naschie and call the 3 plus 336 effective degrees of freedom, but we cannot call it number of triangles. We could call them weighted number of triangles but then all dimensions are weighted, the 336 and the additional 3. It would seem to me that El Naschie was translating the work of Connes on non-commutative geometry to a language accessible to theoretical physicists. Connes calls fractals foliation and he works with average Euler characteristics. Dr. R. Loll does similar things in her more formal publication. One could say this is uncalled for sophisticated terminology or mathematical exactness. From a pragmatic point of view however, El Naschie, Connes and Loll are talking about the same things separated by different jargon.","October, 22 2008 09:21:45","09:21 AM on 10/22/08","24B7CFD6-CF7A-9997-A853C15AF5F14CC9","Mike Taylor",460,134,null],[135,"2C5514B8-0FD0-F495-7B040BCDBF748A8A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

A daughter of a biotechnologist, I was introduced to Scientific American at a young age, every time my father brought a new issue home. The topics were always fascinating, informing readers and inviting them to explore new horizons, to constantly try to piece together the puzzle this great universe is, through the language of science. I have always considered it a reliable, respectable & professional publication, but most importantly, it was always a credible source on information. Shall we now as readers begin to question the credibility of Scientific American? How is it then, that this entire piece made no reference of any kind to the work of Prof. Mohamed Elnaschie, and his efforts to complete quantum field theory and unify strings and loop quantum gravity in a single mathematical structure (E-8 to E-infinity) ? I've been reading more and more about scientific plagiarism, but it is appalling to me that Scientific American would be unaware of Prof. Elnaschie's efforts, or that it would willingly ignore it, despite the volumes of books and conferences documenting them. Knowldege is indeed constantly evolving, and the fruit of the contributions of countless names and scientists, but it our duty at least to document it correctly and give credit where credit is due- otherwise we are as guilty as those claiming credit for the work of others. Credibility is a fragile asset, that once lost and shattered, can hardly be recovered. I hope the Editor takes this into consideration, and does not deprive us of a long time symbol of objective reliable scientific reporting. I am actually looking forward to your next issue, as I hope it will shed some light on this strange matter, and reassure us that Scientific American is a reliable source indeed, that values its credibility and integrity above anyhting else. ","October, 23 2008 20:50:52","08:50 PM on 10/23/08","2C55147F-0927-475D-956DCE5AEB7FEAD8","Zina A",460,135,null],[136,"364D9403-FA4B-5653-8D459E637FF686E7",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

All is well that ends well. This is my feeling after reading an excellent paper by a Slovenian mathematical physicist L. Marek-Crnjac. In this paper the author did not only give an original and brand new theory to replace Feynman's summing over paths by summing over exceptional Lie groups. More importantly the end result of the paper validates both theories of Ambjorn's and El Naschie's. Said differently instead of confrontation, we have here an exemplary cooperation. I am persuaded that although both theories are based on the same things, they differ enormously in methodology. What could be better in such circumstances than getting precisely the same results. I am reminded here by the work of Feynman, Schwinger and Tomonaga. At the beginning they seemed extremely different and they got together the Nobel Prize in Physics. But it was Dyson who showed that they are only three different formulas of the same theory. This is the service rendered by
the excellent paper of Marek-Crnjac. I hope I can explain it to you correctly without using too much mathematics. Ambjorn, Jurkiewicz and R. Loll calculated the dimension of an ante de Sitter universe and found that it is 4.02. One could be led to think that it should have been exactly four and the 0.2 is a computer artifact due to natural computer rounding error. But then here comes the miraculous derivation of Crnjac. He starts from the exact number of massless states given by El Naschie to be 8872.135956. Then using El Naschie's theory and replaces differentiation by Weyl scaling and multiplies this value by the scaling exponent which is 0.618033989 to the power of 16 and obtains exactly 4.019999 which is practically the exact result of the article in Scientific American by the authors. This is tantalizing and shows that Ambjorn's result is exact and it is not 4 but 4.02. Furthermore, it shows that El Naschie's theory is truly exact and
meaningful as he has always maintained for the last decade. What a nice conclusion for a controversy which was to the larger part highly civilized but sometime temper was rising. Such is the benefit of discussing things using the scientific method and detached cool thinking. Now we don't have only one good new theory but two and I hope you see that I am justified in my optimism.
","October, 25 2008 19:18:53","07:18 PM on 10/25/08","364D93C4-AC6B-3C52-163EEC0C7D932A41","M. Hamisch",460,136,null],[137,"3659055F-F1AD-913F-362260C5B8874FA6",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","


Thank you very much Zina for your comments. I gather from your

exquisite English that you are American and from your name that you are

not European. Nevertheless I was cheered by your interest in a great

Moslem scientist, the Egyptian Prof. Mohamed Al Nashaie whose name is

constantly and wrongly spelled as El Naschie. However I don't share at

all your optimism. Look respected lady at what they are doing to

presidential hopeful Barrack Obama for possibly having a middle name

Hussein which he never used. By comparison, could you really imagine

that the circles in the West who have the real power would allow a man

with Mohamed as a first name to be mentioned in the same breath with

Newton and Einstein? Mohamed Al Nashaie or El Naschie is not just a

man who may induce a paradigm shift in science but he is also an

artist, a thinker and a politically aware person. When those who have

the power in the West promote someone from us then he must be their
client. Mohamed El Naschie is a self-respecting Moslem and an Arab and

I don't know which is worse in the eyes of this circle, being a Moslem

or being an Arab. He advocated in Arabia and particularly in Egypt

economical independence and caused in Egypt at least what is called the

nano revolution. He even brought the People's assembly in Cairo to

address nanotechnology and he spoke in the Parliament about science.

This is not the kind of man these powers in the West would like to see,

let alone to promote - neither Scientific American nor any important

entity in the West will acknowledge his contribution. Nonetheless it

is nice and comforting to know that the majority of Americans and

Westerners are like you. Maybe things will change if Obama wins. But I

don't think they will let him win easily. In two weeks, we will see.
","October, 25 2008 19:31:23","07:31 PM on 10/25/08","364D93C4-AC6B-3C52-163EEC0C7D932A41","M. Hamisch",460,137,null],[138,"3948393C-0782-34C4-F93C1CDC83A13E62",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

D","October, 26 2008 09:11:53","09:11 AM on 10/26/08","39483901-9402-CE41-E9CBAA59C25BAF3C","Ali Elsayed Ahmed",460,138,null],[139,"394B09AD-FB89-A698-34B31D0249EE4645",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear Zina,

Why should the West respect us more than we respect ourselves? True, it is a gross injustice which Scientific American may have intentionally or unintentionally inflicted on our beloved Dr. Mohamed Al Nashaie or El Naschie as it is written in the West. But I will be proud beyond belief if our own Arabic media, whether it is a journal or a magazine, could be only one percent as honest as the media in the West. With respect to Prof. Mohamed, let me give you one example: this man has campaigned for nine years in Egypt for nanotechnology and no one there has ever heard the word before. Now if you have access to the semi official newspaper Al Ahram, you will read about nanotechnology - see 24 October 2008 issue, page 27 where they are talking about nanotechnology and the future of industry in Egypt. They only mention the name of Prof. Mohamed in passing and they focus on the Minister and a very rich businessman and the Parliament speaker and show their
pictures. The whole article is written in such a way so as to give Prof. Mohamed the least credit and give all those who never understood anything about nanotechnology nor will ever do anything in reality, the role of pioneers and originators of nano in Egypt. Mohamed El Naschie was acknowledged in the West for a long time. They gave him a job, money and opportunity - and what did we give him in Egypt? No envy - nothing. With all due respect to your opinion and good intention, you and America don't know anything about us here in Egypt and I would rather have the imperfect system in the West and a second rate treatment than the perfect system here in the East with our Journalism that doesn't deserve even this name. When we learn to respect ourselves and our scientists, then the West will learn to respect us as well.

","October, 26 2008 09:14:58","09:14 AM on 10/26/08","39483901-9402-CE41-E9CBAA59C25BAF3C","Ali Elsayed Ahmed",460,139,null],[140,"39B4F889-944C-B3CF-9C39C646BACF0EEF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I ","October, 26 2008 11:10:40","11:10 AM on 10/26/08","39483901-9402-CE41-E9CBAA59C25BAF3C","Ali Elsayed Ahmed",460,140,null],[141,"39BEBA48-AB4D-512E-4617F4E491B052CF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

a","October, 26 2008 11:21:20","11:21 AM on 10/26/08","39BEBA09-A9BA-1BA9-DD491D3E501E7F7E","J. Raynard",460,141,null],[142,"39BF9351-DAA6-E145-F944B33787906724",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I ","October, 26 2008 11:22:15","11:22 AM on 10/26/08","39BEBA09-A9BA-1BA9-DD491D3E501E7F7E","J. Raynard",460,142,null],[143,"39C08FAB-D9A0-DCDD-9B9ACFDF3688C7A7",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have read a very nice paper proving that El Naschie's theory and Renate Loll's and Ambjorn's theories are equivalent. The paper is called: A Feynman path integral-like method for deriving the four dimensionality of spacetime from first principles. It is published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals and it is found online at: www.sciencedirect.com.","October, 26 2008 11:23:20","11:23 AM on 10/26/08","39BEBA09-A9BA-1BA9-DD491D3E501E7F7E","J. Raynard",460,143,null],[144,"3BA5E7C9-D939-B592-1503247996ADEECF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I would like to draw the attention to a recent paper by Prof. Ji-Huan He. In this paper Nonlinear science as a fluctuating research frontier Prof. He published a list of the impact factors of all important nonlinear journals. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals is at the very top with an impact factor of 3.025 and all other journals are below that. The International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation is the only Journal that has a higher impact factor. This was the situation a year ago. In addition, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals published more papers per volume and more volumes per year than the corresponding Elsevier or World Scientific Journals. I am mentioning all these tedious statistics to show that the authors of the Scientific American article could not claim that they knew nothing about our work and the work of Prof. El Naschie and his student which was published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractal many years before anybody else who may be working today on fractal spacetime.","October, 26 2008 20:13:27","08:13 PM on 10/26/08","3BA5E783-C027-39E4-39D6B83894F0D831","rock",460,144,null],[145,"3BA6775E-C4A3-E089-EF55FC83B1A7BFE8",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I would like to draw the attention to a recent paper by Prof. Ji-Huan He. In this paper - Nonlinear science as a fluctuating research frontier - Prof. He published a list of the impact factors of all important nonlinear journals. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals is at the very top with an impact factor of 3.025 and all other journals are below that. The International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation is the only Journal that has a higher impact factor. This was the situation a year ago. In addition, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals published more papers per volume and more volumes per year than the corresponding Elsevier or World Scientific Journals. I am mentioning all these tedious statistics to show that the authors of the Scientific American article could not claim that they knew nothing about our work and the work of Prof. El Naschie and his student which was published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractal many years before anybody else who may be working today on fractal spacetime.","October, 26 2008 20:14:04","08:14 PM on 10/26/08","3BA5E783-C027-39E4-39D6B83894F0D831","rock",460,145,null],[146,"3BAC3C1E-C073-DDC4-0102A4033EE32E2A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I think the work of our Chinese group on fractal and Cantorian spacetime far exceed in its scope anything which was published in the past. In fact the inventor of E-Infinity theory, the Egyptian Prof. Mohamed El Naschie never used the theory in biology. The Chinese chapter, by contrast, has been working in high energy physics, biology, nanotechnology and environmental sciences. ","October, 26 2008 20:20:22","08:20 PM on 10/26/08","3BAC3BD4-BAEF-54D5-E3F53C383BD78447","shuqiang wang",460,146,null],[147,"3D23FB8A-0CE7-229D-1B70596BD7966CD9",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The work of El Naschie is not only ingenious but extremely elegant. To prove my point, I refer anybody of interest in physics to a paper by A. Elokaby titled Confinement and asymptotic freedom seen with a golden eye published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals (www.sciencedirect.com).","October, 27 2008 03:10:47","03:10 AM on 10/27/08","3D23FB30-E05C-1040-59C129F11560C5D2","liujf",460,147,null],[148,"3D25015E-CB68-9345-141236790984C82D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The work of El Naschie is not only ingenious but extremely elegant. To prove my point, I refer anybody of interest in physics to a paper by A. Elokaby titled Confinement and asymptotic freedom seen with a golden eye published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals (www.sciencedirect.com).","October, 27 2008 03:11:54","03:11 AM on 10/27/08","3D23FB30-E05C-1040-59C129F11560C5D2","liujf",460,148,null],[149,"3E8F35B2-FA34-2B16-08F54F3D12A3FB7C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

We have been all praying in China that Prof. El Naschie get this year the Nobel Prize in Physics. He was indeed yet again very close. This year the Nobel Prize went for symmetry and symmetry breaking. Of course Prof. Nambu more than deserves the Nobel Prize. He almost singlehandedly invented the subject. But no one has put symmetry in the center of his work like Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. He used E8 to predict not only the number of elementary particles but also their masses as well as the coupling constants of nature. He made unbelievable predictions which are supported by experiment. For instance, he showed that the sum of all dimensions of all exceptional Lie groups is 548. Subsequently, he boldly predicted that the mass of the eta particle must be 548 gauged in MEV which is the correct experimental value. I know of no other work which made these predictions using exclusively symmetry arguments and Lie symmetry groups. Presently, we have a large research group in China on this subject.
","October, 27 2008 09:47:32","09:47 AM on 10/27/08","3E8F357B-BC81-FC84-76931F4B634ACEBC","ZhongTing",460,149,null],[150,"40A6DEC8-A058-0F35-23772AD7BC7C72DD",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am sorry but the value of 4.02 calculated by Ambjorn, Loll and Jurkiewicz could not be described as a Hausdorff dimension or a topological dimension of spacetime. El Naschie showed that the Hausdorff dimension is 4.236067977 which is correct. He also showed that the exact topological dimension is exactly 4. Initially this seems like a puzzle because how could the 4.02 be drivable from El Naschie's theory in full agreement with Ambjorn and his colleagues and yet be neither topological nor Hausdforff dimension. The resolution of this puzzle is that 4.02 is a triple average dimension for spacetime closely related to the emergence of spacetime starting from the Planck threshold. This is too complex to explain here but I am writing a paper on this subject and will submit it to Chaos, Solitons & Fractals or Classical & Quantum Gravity for publication.","October, 27 2008 19:32:37","07:32 PM on 10/27/08","40A6DE7B-CF8F-55B4-6A00FB25991E1324","E-infinity-fans",460,150,null],[151,"40AAF61E-9610-03C4-57655F914CFBE69D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Some of my colleagues asked me how can Prof. Mohamed El Naschie convert a mere symmetry group dimension to a particle mass gauged in particular electron volt unit system. The answer is very simple. In fact conventional. Mass in quantum physics is quite different from classical physics. A mass in quantum physics is a kind of charge like electric charge or magnetic charge. It is easier to understand it that way. One could say that mass in classical physics is impossible to understand. In classical physics it is a circulatory argument, namely mass comes from force and force is defined using mass. Even Newtons explanation of what mass is is no explanation at all. Therefore if we accept that Einstein converted empty spacetime into gravity, that means force which means mass, then why shouldn't we accept Mohamed El Naschie converting the most important invariant of space, namely its dimension into mass particularly when mass is nothing else but charge. Maybe I am putting it in a little bit provocative way but Mohamed El Naschie's explanation for mass is not at all far off from what Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek used to explain mass. In fact it is completely normal to work with unitless mass in quantum field theory. There is also something called dimensional transportation which is a well established procedure in quantum field theory. Then people start asking is there anything very special about the electron volt system. The answer is again simple. Of course it is very special and it is extremely disadvantageous to change this unit system to any other one because it is using the natural charge of the electron. Anything else is artificial. Then people ask do you believe in miracles or super natural acts of creation. The answer is once more yes. But this is not super natural but evolution which created human beings out of dead elementary particles. It is time. Given enough time, billion of years, chance and necessity created life. By comparison it is very easy what happened in theoretical physics. Hundreds of years of research give us the chance to have the good sense of inventing or should I say using the electron volt units. That way things become enormously simple and everything which is simple is natural. By understanding physics but having the sensitivity of ancient nations like China and Egypt to the music of numbers, El Naschie noticed the fundamental role of the electronic volt unit system and how to use it in conjunction with the fundamental symmetry groups of nature to deduce the mass of elementary particles. If you need to read more about that I recommend, apart from El Naschie's work, a superb article by Novel laureate Frank Wilczek called Four big question with pretty good answers, published in a book called Fundamental Physics - Heisenberg and Beyond, Edited by Gerd W. Buschhorn and Julius Wess and dedicated to the memory of Werner Heisenberg. Published by Springer, 2004, p. 79-97. ","October, 27 2008 19:37:05","07:37 PM on 10/27/08","40A6DE7B-CF8F-55B4-6A00FB25991E1324","E-infinity-fans",460,151,null],[152,"40ACCB9E-F660-F4F9-A4FAA285372B6B9D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Some of my colleagues asked me how can Prof. Mohamed El Naschie convert a mere symmetry group dimension to a particle mass gauged in particular electron volt unit system. The answer is very simple. In fact conventional. Mass in quantum physics is quite different from classical physics. A mass in quantum physics is a kind of charge like electric charge or magnetic charge. It is easier to understand it that way. One could say that mass in classical physics is impossible to understand. In classical physics it is a circulatory argument, namely mass comes from force and force is defined using mass. Even Newtons explanation of what mass is is no explanation at all. Therefore if we accept that Einstein converted empty spacetime into gravity, that means force which means mass, then why shouldn't we accept Mohamed El Naschie converting the most important invariant of space, namely its dimension into mass particularly when mass is nothing else but charge. Maybe I am putting it in a little bit provocative way but Mohamed El Naschie's explanation for mass is not at all far off from what Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek used to explain mass. In fact it is completely normal to work with unitless mass in quantum field theory. There is also something called dimensional transportation which is a well established procedure in quantum field theory. Then people start asking is there anything very special about the electron volt system. The answer is again simple. Of course it is very special and it is extremely disadvantageous to change this unit system to any other one because it is using the natural charge of the electron. Anything else is artificial. Then people ask do you believe in miracles or super natural acts of creation. The answer is once more yes. But this is not super natural but evolution which created human beings out of dead elementary particles. It is time. Given enough time, billion of years, chance and necessity created life. By comparison it is very easy what happened in theoretical physics. Hundreds of years of research give us the chance to have the good sense of inventing or should I say using the electron volt units. That way things become enormously simple and everything which is simple is natural. By understanding physics but having the sensitivity of ancient nations like China and Egypt to the music of numbers, El Naschie noticed the fundamental role of the electronic volt unit system and how to use it in conjunction with the fundamental symmetry groups of nature to deduce the mass of elementary particles. If you need to read more about that I recommend, apart from El Naschie's work, a superb article by Novel laureate Frank Wilczek called Four big question with pretty good answers, published in a book called Fundamental Physics - Heisenberg and Beyond, Edited by Gerd W. Buschhorn and Julius Wess and dedicated to the memory of Werner Heisenberg. Published by Springer, 2004, p. 79-97. ","October, 27 2008 19:39:05","07:39 PM on 10/27/08","40A6DE7B-CF8F-55B4-6A00FB25991E1324","E-infinity-fans",460,152,null],[153,"40DD3A3D-9370-584D-631D430937EA8773",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Prof. El Naschie did not derive only a dimension for spacetime. His work is really monumental. Lately he has shown incredible connections between Crystallographic space groups and Heterotic string theory. Even more recently El Naschie connected his theory to cosmology by noting that his theory implies a multiply connected and wrapped around universe. The trick which he used is noting that his 17 two and three stein spaces correspond to the 17 multiply connected Euclidean spaces. This is something which Einstein never thought about and only the American topologist William Thurston had similar ideas.

","October, 27 2008 20:31:59","08:31 PM on 10/27/08","40DD39EC-B073-A1E4-982EC4A9CEEA9B53","peeter",460,153,null],[154,"40DED2E9-E42A-7AB9-8E186E114C03930D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Prof. El Naschie did not derive only a dimension for spacetime. His work is really monumental. Lately he has shown incredible connections between Crystallographic space groups and Heterotic string theory. Even more recently El Naschie connected his theory to cosmology by noting that his theory implies a multiply connected and wrapped around universe. The trick which he used is noting that his 17 two and three stein spaces correspond to the 17 multiply connected Euclidean spaces. This is something which Einstein never thought about and only the American topologist William Thurston had similar ideas.

","October, 27 2008 20:33:44","08:33 PM on 10/27/08","40DD39EC-B073-A1E4-982EC4A9CEEA9B53","peeter",460,154,null],[155,"40E0EBD7-9555-4614-104F7CA2FFEF1E17",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Prof. El Naschie did not derive only a dimension for spacetime. His work is really monumental. Lately he has shown incredible connections between Crystallographic space groups and Heterotic string theory. Even more recently El Naschie connected his theory to cosmology by noting that his theory implies a multiply connected and wrapped around universe. The trick which he used is noting that his 17 two and three stein spaces correspond to the 17 multiply connected Euclidean spaces. This is something which Einstein never thought about and only the American topologist William Thurston had similar ideas.

","October, 27 2008 20:36:01","08:36 PM on 10/27/08","40DD39EC-B073-A1E4-982EC4A9CEEA9B53","peeter",460,155,null],[156,"42617B4B-FBC5-90C6-C8253D59DC38540B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Some of my colleagues asked me how can Prof. Mohamed El Naschie convert a mere symmetry group dimension to a particle mass gauged in particular electron volt unit system. The answer is very simple. In fact conventional. Mass in quantum physics is quite different from classical physics. A mass in quantum physics is a kind of charge like electric charge or magnetic charge. It is easier to understand it that way. One could say that mass in classical physics is impossible to understand. In classical physics it is a circulatory argument, namely mass comes from force and force is defined using mass. Even Newtons explanation of what mass is is no explanation at all. Therefore if we accept that Einstein converted empty spacetime into gravity, that means force which means mass, then why shouldn t we accept Mohamed El Naschie converting the most important invariant of space, namely its dimension into mass particularly when mass is nothing else but charge. Maybe I am putting it in a little bit provocative way but Mohamed El Naschie s explanation for mass is not at all far off from what Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek used to explain mass. In fact it is completely normal to work with unitless mass in quantum field theory. There is also something called dimensional transportation which is a well established procedure in quantum field theory. Then people start asking is there anything very special about the electron volt system. The answer is again simple. Of course it is very special and it is extremely disadvantageous to change this unit system to any other one because it is using the natural charge of the electron. Anything else is artificial. Then people ask do you believe in miracles or super natural acts of creation. The answer is once more yes. But this is not super natural but evolution which created human beings out of dead elementary particles. It is time. Given enough time, billion of years, chance and necessity created life. By comparison it is very easy what happened in theoretical physics. Hundreds of years of research give us the chance to have the good sense of inventing or should I say using the electron volt units. That way things become enormously simple and everything which is simple is natural. By understanding physics but having the sensitivity of ancient nations like China and Egypt to the music of numbers, El Naschie noticed the fundamental role of the electronic volt unit system and how to use it in conjunction with the fundamental symmetry groups of nature to deduce the mass of elementary particles. If you need to read more about that I recommend, apart from El Naschie s work, a superb article by Novel laureate Frank Wilczek called Four big question with pretty good answers, published in a book called Fundamental Physics Heisenberg and Beyond, Edited by Gerd W. Buschhorn and Julius Wess and dedicated to the memory of Werner Heisenberg. Published by Springer, 2004, p. 79-97","October, 28 2008 03:36:04","03:36 AM on 10/28/08","42617AE9-BAF5-C01B-2578229998E89E10","wuguocheng",460,156,null],[157,"5982EAA3-9668-4BAB-79F543152A287129",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

What our Chinese colleagues have written about the connection between symmetry and high energy physics is correct but I would like to add a few more remarks and shed more light on the subject. Let us start with an extremely well written and lucidly explained article by Edward Witten published in Nature, 429, 3rd June 2004, p. 507-508 entitled When Symmetry Breaks Down. Prof. Witten sees the subject mathematically but explained it in layman s terms. Never the less, it still leans towards the mathematical side. He sees symmetry breaking as a change in the symmetry of the object but this is really a change of the symmetry of the equation describing the object. His explanation becomes physically obvious only in the special case when water changes to ice. Water is generally homogeneous with no crystalic structure. Ice is a most pronounced crystalic structuret Thus a total homogeneous symmetry change to a structure with a preferred direction of symmetry. This is illustrated by the Mexican hat shown in the work of Witten as well as El Naschie but then how could one physically explain the fact that when elementary particles acquire mass, then this is due to symmetry breaking. Mass has nothing to do directly with symmetry. A massless particle is homogeneous. A massive particle is also homogeneous. Consequently Edward Witten s explanation explains only the fact that the mass term in the Lagrangian breaks the symmetry of the Lagrangian. In his lectures Prof. El Naschie goes a little bit further in explaining this phenomena. I hope I can make his point of view clear in the following few lines. El Naschie makes a distinction between a equilibrium or steady state and a stable equilibrium or a stable steady state. We could regard the Mexican hat as the energy surface with only two solutions which represents an equilibrium, namely the top point of the hat or the bottom rim of the hat. Obviously when the hat is subjected to a gravitational field then a massive ball could only be at the top or the bottom. When at the top the situation is totally symmetric seen from every and each side but when at the bottom then symmetry is broken and there are infinite amounts of points along the rim of the hat where equilibrium is possible and not only a single point at the top. However at the top symmetric as this may be, it is an unstable situation and the slightest irregularity or the minutest flaw in balancing the ball will disturb the unstable equilibrium and cause the ball to roll down to the rim. That is unless this ball is totally massless. A massless ball, like a massless particle, could not be affected by the gravitational field. Consequently we could put this massless ball anywhere on the hat and it will stay where it is, in a neutral equilibrium. There are an uncountably infinite number of points where the ball could be in equilibrium or steady state. The manifold of the entire hat is the equilibrium surface. This total symmetry is immediately destroyed as soon as the particle or the ball acquires any none zero mass.



It is correct that El Naschie always says that mass in classical physics is far harder to understand than in quantum physics. In doing that El Naschie follows the philosophy of the great Israeli scientist and philosopher Prof. Max Jammer. The book entitled Concepts of Mass in Contemporary Physics & Philosophy, published by Princeton in 2000 is a must read for anyone who wants to understand where El Naschie is coming from.

","November, 01 2008 15:23:51","03:23 PM on 11/01/08","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,157,null],[158,"5A938AEF-A9A6-7909-82C08EFC82BBBDD2",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have followed with great interest the engaging discussion centered around E-infinity theory and the comments made by various members of our Chinese chapter and many students of Prof. El Naschie all over the world. I am prompted by this discussion to explain yet again one of the most important models which constitutes in its totality a unique theory, namely E-infinity and the golden quantum field theory. I think it is fair to say that the most difficult thing about El Naschie's E-infinity theory is its simplicity. Those expert in high energy physics who meet this theory for the first time are virtually shocked by its simplicity. Let me outline as I have just said El Naschie's modular curve methodology for deriving the exact first level massless state of Heterotic strings. Let us start with the original Klein modular curve. A nice colored version due to the great English mathematician Mumford is given in a paper by Mohamed El Naschie in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 17 (2003), 797-807. Let us concentrate on the original curve as I said and at the risk of being repetitive, let's ignore the compactification or ramification which may be added later on as in Fig. 2a of the said paper. In the center we have a heptagon, that is to say a seven sided polygon. This structure is made of 14 triangles colored green and yellow. Around this heptagon there are 7 small heptagons, each again consisting of 14 red and yellow triangles. Moving again towards the border we have again 7 yet smaller heptagons each consisting of 14 orange and yellow triangles. Between each one of these third generation heptagons there is a kite-like structure made of 16 green and yellow triangles. In addition each of the smallest of the heptagons has a pointed nose made of 2 triangles. Thus we have in total the following number of triangles 14 + 7 x 14 + 7 x 14 + 16 x 7 + 2 x 7 = 336. This 336 is precisely the number of isometries of Klein's modular curve in its original form. In other words, it is exactly equal to the dimension of the corresponding Lie symmetry group SL(2,7). And here comes El Naschie's thoroughly ingenious insight. He assigned to each of these triangles a charge equal to instanton density of K3 crisp Kahler manifold. That means 24 instantons per triangle. The total worth and value of instantons is therefore 24 x 336 = 8064. This is the exact result obtained by Nobel laureate David Gross and his team and reported for instance also in a Scientific American article written many years ago by Michael Green. Now El Naschie goes one step further, in fact many steps further, and considers the compactified Klein modular curve. For that he used the gamma distribution of E-infinity theory. This is a discrete form of the Planck distribution. He starts by noting that 336 is equal 8 x 42. The 42 orbits correspond to the 42.36067977 transfinite orbit of E-infinity theory. Therefore he concludes that the weighted number of all triangles in a compactified version of Klein's modular curve is 8 x with the preceding value which gives 338.8854382. This is approximately 339. Now the corresponding total number of massless Heterotic states would be the preceding value multiplied with the instanton number of a fuzzy K3 Kahler manifold. This instanton number is 26.18033989 instead of 24. Multiplying both values gives us the exact total number of massless states which is 8872.135955 or approximately 8872. This is approximately 808 states more than the classical solution of Gross reported by Green in Scientific American. It was a most remarkable result confirmed by the computer simulation of the Scientific American paper which we are discussing here. To find out that the dimension found by the Authors of this paper, namely 4.02 can be obtained exactly by a continuous golden ring scaling from the exact number of massless Heterotic states. In other words we just need to multiply 8872.135955 with the golden mean to the power of 16 to find 4.02. El Naschie showed that this value is not an ordinary Hausdorff dimension nor a topological dimension but rather a triple average of three different E-infinity dimensions related to the threshold of the Planck energy when it meets the low energy according to Witten's T-duality or the P-Adic interpretation of this duality by El Naschie. I sincerely hope that I have given here the readers of this site a glimpse into the beauty, the simplicity and the incredible utility of El Naschie's E-infinity theory which has rightly captured the imagination and interest of many people around the world who are ready to accept new ideas, in this case, brand new ideas.","November, 01 2008 20:21:38","08:21 PM on 11/01/08","40A6DE7B-CF8F-55B4-6A00FB25991E1324","E-infinity-fans",460,158,null],[159,"67EB7C90-0013-9E32-659A01031B4CF309",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

A","November, 04 2008 09:32:45","09:32 AM on 11/04/08","39BEBA09-A9BA-1BA9-DD491D3E501E7F7E","J. Raynard",460,159,null],[160,"67F096F4-0734-0A0C-F129A1679BA94BD7",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

A","November, 04 2008 09:38:19","09:38 AM on 11/04/08","39BEBA09-A9BA-1BA9-DD491D3E501E7F7E","J. Raynard",460,160,null],[161,"67F61C50-EBE0-0F04-ECE7C8E6F87B1C49",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

a","November, 04 2008 09:44:21","09:44 AM on 11/04/08","39BEBA09-A9BA-1BA9-DD491D3E501E7F7E","J. Raynard",460,161,null],[162,"67FE16CE-B2E5-8246-5F1131D4397ED56D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 04 2008 09:53:04","09:53 AM on 11/04/08","67FE165F-E390-5555-23D42243E99B715D","A.lomamba",460,162,null],[163,"67FE6335-D46E-5D6D-D0BCDB0D5C80ACF4",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 04 2008 09:53:24","09:53 AM on 11/04/08","67FE165F-E390-5555-23D42243E99B715D","A.lomamba",460,163,null],[164,"67FF6095-B701-DC97-A9117BB7A57E5924",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Almost on the eve of Obama's historic expected victory Scientific American sided or tolerated what may be called scientific apartheid by ignoring the contribution of a great African scientist Mohamed El Naschie. I was told about and shown more than 18 Letters to the Editor of Scientific American by respected physicists and scientists expressing in different forms and using arguments their disappointment and sometimes indignation about the disregard of scientific fair play and priorities in the article of Ambjorn, Loll and Jurkiewicz","November, 04 2008 09:54:29","09:54 AM on 11/04/08","67FE165F-E390-5555-23D42243E99B715D","A.lomamba",460,164,null],[165,"680A4C89-DE29-EB97-CCBD80ACBCE8331B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 04 2008 10:06:24","10:06 AM on 11/04/08","680A4C42-BB95-67A2-43E79BB03AE97883","H. Wahabi",460,165,null],[166,"680B5E81-C519-E26F-0E36F1429A93E17E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I","November, 04 2008 10:07:34","10:07 AM on 11/04/08","680A4C42-BB95-67A2-43E79BB03AE97883","H. Wahabi",460,166,null],[167,"680D0B81-D129-B7EE-9B0BC22EF00FC99B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I was told by people with inside knowledge that Scientific American received the largest number of letters to the editors ever received concerning the article of Loll, Ambjorn and Jurkiewicz most protesting the omission of the contribution by Garnet Ord, Mohamed El Naschie and Ervin Goldfain. Since we are in Africa, Scientific American's conduct reminds me of the three apes deaf, dumb and blind.","November, 04 2008 10:09:24","10:09 AM on 11/04/08","680A4C42-BB95-67A2-43E79BB03AE97883","H. Wahabi",460,167,null],[168,"6D7C909C-025D-949C-20AEF5B6F9E18870",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Prof. Khory asked me to convey these comments to Scientific American:
My comments center around a single point. It is the case that either Ambjorn, Loll and Jurkiewicz work is another formulation of Mohamed El Naschie's theory using computer simulation then they should have mentioned him and said so or it is a completely new theory reaching the same conclusion as El Naschie and then they should also have said so.

In a nutshell, and avoiding too much technical jargon the relationship between the two theories are as follows. Repeating any process again and again to come near to an end state is called iteration. Constructing a Cantor set by deleting the middle third of a line segment again and again is also an iteration. The amusing fact is that you could iterate anything and end with a Cantor set. You could iterate snakes or frogs and the limit set would be a Cantor set. El Naschie used a beautiful trick. He started from the end, namely the Cantor limit set. That way he could ignore all the highly complicated nonlinear equations leading to this set. In the language of nonlinear dynamics, he started from a universality akin to that of Mitchell Feigenbaum. I suspect El Naschie learned this trick from the well known Russian/French topologist Alexei Sossinksy who published the idea in a 1999 book Editions du Seuil-Paris, France. In fact El Naschie used the same illustration of Sossinksy in his 2002 paper Quantum loops and fat Cantor sets in transfinite high energy physics which can be found on Elsevier's Science Direct. He combined it with Feigenbaum's period doubling and modified it to knots doubling ramifying at a Cantor set in his Fig. 7 of his highly cited paper Elementary prerequisites for E-infinity (Recommended background readings in nonlinear dynamics, geometry and topology), 2006 again on Elsevier's Science Direct. Then came a crucial point for the connection with the old work of Ambjorn on triangulation and Regge calculus. In his paper VAK, vacuum fluctuation and the mass spectrum of high energy particle physics, 2003 Science Direct, El Naschie gives the connection to the Klein modular curve triangular tiling. In Fig. 2 of this paper he considered both the approximate solution using Klein's original curve and the exact transfinite solution using Klein's compactified curve. Here comes the connection to Ambjorn's work who at that time was not working with Renate Loll who was busy with loop quantum gravity and super strings. Ambjorn starts from an approximate solution corresponding to the non-compactified Klein original curve. Subsequently he feeds his approximately correct equation and his approximately correct geometry into a highly efficient computer. In a sense, and loosely speaking, the computer iterates the equation, at just the geometry and fractalises it until it converges slowly but surely to the exact solution of El Naschie. This effect was illustrated by many calculations many years ago by El Naschie to show that his result and the old classical Ambjorn result are related. As I have already said at that time Ambjorn did not make any reference to fractal spacetime or modeling spacetime using Cantor sets. In fact I know of many papers in which El Naschie refers to Ambjorn's work on triangulation and indirectly drawing his attention to the fact that this is essentially a computerized fractal spacetime theory. I was only many years later that Ambjorn teamed up with R. Loll and Jurkiewicz and worked together in Utrecht, a well known Centre of Excellence. To our knowledge however only their Scientific American article was formulated in the language of El Naschie's Cantor sets and Nottale and Ord's fractal spacetime. By contrast the mathematics, or more accurately, the computer simulation remains the same. Of course they employed now a far more efficient modern computing but the procedure is essentially the same if we disregard their arguments about causality and the arrow of time. Many have commented about salient aspects of this work. However nothing is more surprising and revealing as a recent paper of Prof. L. Marek-Crnjac A Feynman path integral-like method for deriving the four dimensionality of spacetime from first principles, 2008 available on Science Direct. Prof. Crnjac derives the exact dimensionality 4.02 using El Naschie's theory without a computer. I was cheered by the fact that a group calling themselves E-infinity fans posed on this site on 11.01/08 at 08.21 p.m. a rather clearly written comment attesting to the same things which I have explained here. The result 4.02 is one of the most remarkable results ever published in theoretical physics for the following reason. Ambjorn used a highly accurate numerical simulation. If 4.02 is the topological dimension of spacetime, he could have increased the accuracy and easily reached 4.0000000. This is so because any deviation from four dimensionality must be enormously small. 0.02 is not a small number compared to four. Consequently this is not a topological dimension. Second this is not the Hausdorff dimension of quantum spacetime. The exact Hausdorff dimension of quantum spacetime was calculated many years ago by Prof. S. Al Athel, the then Minister of Science & Technology of Saudi Arabia as well as Prof. Mohamed El Naschie and many others of their co-workers. Never the less 4.02 is an exact result with a definite meaning consistent with El Naschie's theory and could be obtained only in two ways. Either by a theory which does not have a trace of continuity in it like the Cantorian theory of El Naschie or alternatively by a superbly refined computer simulation such as that published in Scientific American by Ambjorn and his co-workers. In a sense my nutshell has exploded beyond the nut and became almost a short article but my hope is that I could contribute constructively to this controversy.

Andrei Khory

","November, 05 2008 11:29:19","11:29 AM on 11/05/08","F10B63C8-E230-74AA-6C3AA7FEF5C9CB20","Noyes",460,168,null],[169,"77B9F8B6-EAE8-05BA-3CDCFD2275FEC3CD",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Without disagreeing with Andrei Khory on any point of his admirable explanation of El Naschie's work, I would just like to fill in some details and expand some points. First J. Ambjorn wrote two books as long ago as 1977 - Quantum Geometry, published by Cambridge Press and the second one - The geometry of dynamical triangulation, published by Springer. The Scientific American paper is mainly a polishing of what is in these two books couched in the fractal spacetime and Cantor sets general philosophy and terminology of Mohamed El Naschie, Garnet Ord and Laurent Nottale. For instance the inequality given in the Springer book on page 53 and denoted equation 3.35 could be made to an equality leading to El Naschie's Hausdorff dimension 4.2360679. The very same result is found using the non-commutative geometry of French Field Medalist Alan Connes. On page 506 of Connes' book - Non-commutative geometry, published by Academic Press in 1990, he gave at the bottom of the page an equation for a dimension in terms of a Lambda naught. Setting the Lambda equal the Hausdorff dimension of a random triadic Cantor set one finds the Hausdorff dimension 4.236067977. This all confirms El Naschie's view point that 4.02 is neither the topological nor the ordinary Hausdorff dimension of fractal spacetime.

I apologize for the length of my comments in such an historic week. In his Editorial El Naschie said that America has elected science and scientific thinking when they elected Barak Obama as their President.

","November, 07 2008 11:12:35","11:12 AM on 11/07/08","F10B63C8-E230-74AA-6C3AA7FEF5C9CB20","Noyes",460,169,null],[170,"81AAFA6D-050E-A7C6-A8AD0DFB61FD33CA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

A couple of years ago a controversy erupted in Egyptian newspapers regarding the arrow of time and order out of chaos. Nobel Laureate in experimental chemistry, Egyptian born Ahmed Zuwail gave a lecture transmitted by television from the Opera House in Cairo. He said the arrow of time can never be broken. A week later, a second celebrity, Egyptian scientist, Mohamed El Naschie gave a lecture in the same place and also transmitted by some satellite stations declared that the arrow of time could be broken as indirectly indicated in this article citing the fundamental work of Nobel Laureate, Ilya Prigogine. Interestingly, neither Zuwail nor El Naschie is specialized in thermodynamics. Zuwail works on femto chemistry and is a renowned experimentalist. El Naschie is an engineer and works in quantum gravity and fractal spacetime which means he is a theoretician. To be fair to Zuwail, it should be mentioned that El Naschie was a close friend of Prigogine, so no wonder he knows about his profound work which earned him a Nobel Prize.
The present article is a lucid presentation of the philosophical pitfalls which lead to sweeping wrong generalizations. I still recall how many idiotic comments were made by totally ignorant journalists about this subject at the time.
","November, 09 2008 09:32:25","09:32 AM on 11/09/08","7E6BE57A-C781-8CCC-8B0486BF827E1A13","Prof. M. Sayed",460,170,null],[171,"81B1C74F-07E7-C7E6-630A5A5DE42C599B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 09 2008 09:39:51","09:39 AM on 11/09/08","7E5E8EDD-C078-AB6E-E9E5DC98C5370C33","N. Georgi",460,171,null],[172,"81B30C91-92FF-0B28-C1D98D0627FD2562",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The work of Nobel Laureate Ilya Prigogine on irreversibility in micro physics is implicitly vindicated in the recent article of J. Ambjorn in scientific American. The point may be as follows: Quantum mechanics may appear reversible, however quantum gravity is not. The resolution may be found in fractal spacetime as argued by Mohamed El Naschie and Ervin Goldfain (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-self-organizing-quantum-universe)","November, 09 2008 09:41:14","09:41 AM on 11/09/08","7E5E8EDD-C078-AB6E-E9E5DC98C5370C33","N. Georgi",460,172,null],[173,"8D00E15F-BD10-DA8A-6D9982AD2E0D71EA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 11 2008 14:22:04","02:22 PM on 11/11/08","7E6BE57A-C781-8CCC-8B0486BF827E1A13","Prof. M. Sayed",460,173,null],[174,"8D04F790-CF35-4BE9-396F0E971863CE33",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 11 2008 14:26:32","02:26 PM on 11/11/08","8D04F754-B9FC-3BE9-D90C12D14104BD52","Trevor Howard",460,174,null],[175,"8D0691D3-AFF3-71FC-5B003CA7D7F97F5E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Drs. John Baez from UC, Riverside and Skoda Zoran of no fixed address known to me expressed recently their deep surprise about Dr. El Naschie's use of the 17 stein spaces. The surprise is really mine. I am deeply surprised that they think there is nothing called two and three stein spaces. In fact they said it doesn't make even sense and they don't know that there are 17 of them. This is truly surprising because it is a well known fact - a textbook stuff rather than cutting edge research. The classification of one, two and three stein spaces is given in the modern textbook on Riemannian geometry. Not surprisingly one stein space is an Einstein space. The spaces are deeply connected to compact and non-compact exceptional Lie symmetry group. They are exactly 17 and the sum of their dimension is exactly 686 as indicated for the first time by El Naschie. I wish people will get their facts right before we need to have an International Journal for Misinformation whose function is to correct all the nonsense littering certain blogs. People are already experimenting with a new fine mesh Google to filter away the coarse grained nonsense. An additional surprise is that Dr. John Baez is indeed an exceptional mathematical physicist who has introduced many imaginative ideas to knot theory and quantum gravity and he should know about the stein spaces.","November, 11 2008 14:28:17","02:28 PM on 11/11/08","8D04F754-B9FC-3BE9-D90C12D14104BD52","Trevor Howard",460,175,null],[176,"9CB52D9D-02ED-07CC-415E90835D33947F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 14 2008 15:33:18","03:33 PM on 11/14/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,176,null],[177,"9CB657FC-ED83-7C3D-B87F6CA645554A63",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

exceptional Lie group which according to you does not exist, why do not you learn first your mathematics before you make big words. I do not have a great love lost for commercial publishing but they have their good sides because they evade the old boys clubs. What is really despicable are the majority of the self-styled so-called scientific blogs and their owners. In this sense and knowing that Scientific American is a commercial publishing I give them my sincere appreciation and congratulate them on their professionalism and impartiality.","November, 14 2008 15:34:35","03:34 PM on 11/14/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,177,null],[178,"9D0A87E6-AAFE-BA28-1000C21200D16BC7",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear Colleagues and readers of this particular Scientific American site:
I must seriously and full-heartedly congratulate you for the high standard of your discussion. What impressed me most is that although the stakes are very high and despite various allegations, the niveau never sank to the level of some of the so-called scientific blogs. Yes it may well be that Prof. Renate Loll or Prof. John Ambjorn have overlooked the work of Prof. El Naschie or Prof. Erwin Goldfain. However, the dispute was a dispute between scientists. By contrast I was truly disgusted to an extent of nausea with this blog called: The n-Category café. The blog maestro is a well known mathematician Prof. John Baez. He is genuinely a Professor at UC Riverside, USA. But if you read what this gentleman has written from slander, defamation and lies against many people particularly Prof. El Naschie, you will shudder. Ironically all his so-called mathematical arguments are false and what is more disturbing he knows so. But the true shock came to me when I was informed and subsequently was able to confirm that Dr. Baez was also in Spinoza Institute in Utrecht, Holland. It pains me indeed to conclude from the many publications he has had with Dr. Loll and Dr. Ambjorn that this was a concerted action against Mohamed El Naschie to divert attention from the real issue of possible plagiarism. Is the pressure of obtaining grants and money from the Government is so great that scientists on this level as Prof. Baez can forget the most rudimentary principle of morality and integrity and launch such a vicious attack against his colleagues just to help them get funding? How could the directors of centers of excellence such as Spinoza Institute in Utrecht University allow one of the members to disregard priorities and indulge in a campaign of self-publicity on the account of others just to obtain money for the Institute? It is preposterous to see that once this was discovered then instead of apologizing and giving credit here credit is due with an intelligent word of apology, then they ask their colleague to work as their vigilante assassinating the character of innocent people? Nothing was sacred for Dr. Baez. He invented names, distorted facts, and went as far as saying that Prof. El Naschie who got his Ph.D. from University College, London under the supervision of Lord Henry Shilver and Sir M. Thomson, FRS has no Ph.D. and is not a Doctor.
He claimed further that Prof. El Naschie lives in Surrey which is unbefitting an editor in chief of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals and that he runs a cult and a sect which is totally devoted to him. How could anyone dish out so much trash and still call himself a Professor? If you don't believe me visit his respectable blog and read for yourself. Even if he has done all that and defamed both Elsevie, an all commercial publishing, with despicable words out of friendship to Dr. Loll and Dr.Ambjorn with or without their approval, then it is still unforgiveable for anyone who calls himself a man let alone a Professor and scientist. What is more embarrassing is that Spinoza Institute hosts one of the greatest scientists of all times, Prof. Gerardus 'tHooft and yet Dr. Baez who is proud of being the cousin of the legendary Joan Baez, of the flower power generation and is putting it in his CV, did not shrug from using the good name of Prof. Gerardus 'tHooft to achieve his less than honorable purposes. Nowhere in his comments has he indicated that he is a co-author of Loll and her editor. Just the opposite he pretended to be concerned about the future of mathematics and what the transfinite theory of spacetime could ruin. If El Naschie's theory is so bad and so wrong, I have only one question to ask you Dr. Baez and all the pseudo names you have surrounded yourself with: Why are you plagiarizing it? Secondly, before you start making of 2 and 3 stein spaces and say it does not exist, and before you make fun of Nash embedding and making totally wrong conclusions, and before you make sarcastic remarks about the E Line of the exceptional Lie group which according to you does not exist, why do not you learn first your mathematics before you make big words. I do not have a great love lost for commercial publishing but they have their good sides because they evade the old boys clubs. What is really despicable are the majority of the self-styled so-called scientific blogs and their owners. In this sense and knowing that Scientific American is a commercial publishing I give them my sincere appreciation and congratulate them on their professionalism and impartiality.
","November, 14 2008 17:06:32","05:06 PM on 11/14/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,178,null],[179,"A604CF93-D6B2-D390-6A5A82A761CBAB9B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

By AWT the behavior of Universe is analogous to behavior of hypothetical infinitelly dense particle gas, i.e. the Aether, as being observed from perspective of its fluctuations.



http://aetherwavetheory.blogspot.com ","November, 16 2008 10:56:52","10:56 AM on 11/16/08","A5FA3CAC-D21C-4F65-6EF2C12009F93314","Zephir_Zephir",460,179,null],[180,"A681C022-E72E-4DB9-A4264D96DD715100",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The work of Mohamed El Naschie could be easily understood in terms of theories connected to quantum logic and quantum sets. Quantum sets was discussed in different forms by David Finkelstein from Georgia Tech. It is related to some pioneering work done in the early days of the Copenhagen Interpretation in Germany. To be more specific, El Naschie s Cantor set theory is a computational version of the theory known as partially ordered sets or posets. This theory was developed in England and was revived recently using what is called Causal Set Theory. It is well known that the work of El Naschie is based on the deterministically chaotic sets. Loosely speaking, partially ordered set may be envisaged as a deterministically chaotic one and in a relatively recent work published in the proceedings of the American Institute of Physics, Mohamed El Naschie compared his work to that of G. tHooft s recent call for a revision of quantum mechanics as following: While tHooft is looking at the roots of deterministic quantum mechanics, El Naschie found that these roots are deterministically random classical mechanics.
It is not possible to understand new ideas unless one is open to new ideas. I am quite confident that a new quantum field theory based on discrete posets will be fully developed in the next few years. Many will ask themselves then, how could we have possibly misunderstood El Naschie s work for numerology while anyone, with a minimum of goodwill, will recognize it immediately as computational quantum set theory.
D. Hume

","November, 16 2008 13:13:20","01:13 PM on 11/16/08","A681BFB7-00BF-7046-BB202E357EC92F16","Hume",460,180,null],[181,"A68CD6E9-C759-A026-0633D70370AD3A85",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The Case of John Baez, Renate Loll and John Ambjorn
Following Prof. Keyes comments, I read the site of John Baez. There is not a shred of a doubt in my mind that Renate Loll and her colleagues have enticed their publisher Dr. Baez to launch this vicious attack against Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. I cannot fathom that any respectable Professor in a respectable University such as UC Riverside could indulge in such character assassination. Has Dr. Baez introduced a new profession to science: scientific vigilantism and paid for scientific assassins. It is a black day for science and academia.
D. Hume

","November, 16 2008 13:25:27","01:25 PM on 11/16/08","A681BFB7-00BF-7046-BB202E357EC92F16","Hume",460,181,null],[182,"AB72A5B1-9EE9-0D14-7BF1DA83FB8AF37C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The case of John Baez n-Category Caf? concur with what has been written before and warn everybody from this shadowy caf?Fraud and forgery are the means. Comments are blocked for anyone who is not a member of the gang. Names and addresses are false and the allegations are too idiotic to have a trace of any truth in them. How could UC Riverside allow such garbage to be connected with their name?
R. Meyer

","November, 17 2008 12:14:56","12:14 PM on 11/17/08","AB72A581-03D1-2484-8006D6EC7FF2492B","meyer",460,182,null],[183,"AB73B06C-B290-8571-8E9064F7FBB93ED8",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The case of John Baez n-Category Café
I concur with what has been written before and warn everybody from this shadowy café. Fraud and forgery are the means. Comments are blocked for anyone who is not a member of the gang. Names and addresses are false and the allegations are too idiotic to have a trace of any truth in them. How could UC Riverside allow such garbage to be connected with their name?
R. Meyer

","November, 17 2008 12:16:05","12:16 PM on 11/17/08","AB72A581-03D1-2484-8006D6EC7FF2492B","meyer",460,183,null],[184,"AB7D0E08-D847-07D8-D024A8F69A231B0B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

If John Baez thinks anybody is stupid enough to believe the trash he is writing then I am truly looking forward to see him in a cross examination in an American Court. John Baez must have lost his marbles if he ever had any. What is incredible however is that his name is listed as a visitor in Spinoza Institute, University of Utrecht, Holland. Where did I hear this address before?
S. Justice

","November, 17 2008 12:26:18","12:26 PM on 11/17/08","AB7D0DD5-BBC3-0E40-BD0DFD17778C71B7","justice",460,184,null],[185,"B9EA89E6-E42F-66DF-D881B287ED88BC92",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

With respect my learned friends, it is wholly untrue that Mohamed El Naschie publishes his papers exclusively in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals. Here are two samples of about 250 others. First, Superstrings, knots and noncommutative geometry in E-infinity space, published in Int. Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 37, No. 12, 1998. The Editor-in-Chief is Prof. David Finkelstein from Georgia Tech University, himself a distinguished theoretical physicist. I know that the referee of this particular paper was connected to the Nobel prize. Second, Average exceptional Lie group hierarchy and high energy physics, published in Frontiers of Fundamental & Computational Physics. American Inst. of Physics 2008, AIP Conference Proceedings, 1018. Mohamed El Naschie presented his work and lectured in the presence of the following Nobel laureates in physics: Gerrardus 'tHooft, Douglas Osheroff, Ilya Prigogine, Anthony Leggett, Gerd Bennig. He was in countless conferences and has been honored by numerous universities and institutions all over the world. Even lacking all of that, what right does anyone have to slander and defame out of hatred, jealousy and god knows what else in such a despicable way as what I have witnessed on the modern menace of our age of so called scientific blogs.","November, 20 2008 07:40:35","07:40 AM on 11/20/08","F10B63C8-E230-74AA-6C3AA7FEF5C9CB20","Noyes",460,185,null],[186,"B9F91635-E2C3-9CD8-60B952899F8029D5",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The correct way to start to understand El Naschie's work is set theory and quantum probability. An excellent starting point is probably the work of Stanley P. Gudder from the University of Denver, Colorado. On page 75/76 of his classical book published by Academic Press in 1988 he introduces posets. This is an abbreviation for partially ordered sets. In May 1996 Gudder published an excellent paper edited by Prof. M.S. El Naschie. The paper was entitled Hyperfinite quantum random walks. Gudder, as befitting a great mathematical physicist of his stature, acknowledged the work of Prof. S. Hemion, an outstanding British mathematician working in Germany. To close the circuit Hemion, in a pioneering paper entitled A class of partially ordered sets acknowledged Mohamed El Naschie's work as an application of his theory in physics. Hemion cited the following paper of El Naschie Average symmetry, stability and ergodicity of multidimensional Cantor sets. This paper was published in the old version of the present day European Journal of Physics. This was the journal where Einstein published many of his papers and it was located in Italy and called N. Cimento. This particular paper is in No. 109, p. 149 (1994). Defamatory allegations are extremely ugly. In the scientific milieu it is rare and takes such vicious form only when someone has something to hide. I wish those who are tormented by envy and jealousy would thoroughly research the subject first before making such despicable allegations.","November, 20 2008 07:56:28","07:56 AM on 11/20/08","F10B63C8-E230-74AA-6C3AA7FEF5C9CB20","Noyes",460,186,null],[187,"BA1D1D44-CCFE-18B2-FF6C28F0CA3B16A4",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It is a shameless and blatant lie perpetuated by those who fear nothing more than the truth that Prof. Mohamed El Naschie publishes his papers exclusively in his Journal. You simply need to look into the International Journal of Theoretical Physics, vol. 37 no. 12 December 1998, pages 2935-2951. The paper in this Journal whose editor in chief is a highly respected professor of Georgia Tech., namely David Finkelstein is entitled: Superstrings, knots, and non-commutative geometry in E-Infinity space. The paper was received by the Journal on March the 21st of 1998. The address of Prof. El Naschie at this time was the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics in Cambridge, England. The paper was accepted at once as submitted by the editorial board which comprised names such as: Nobel Laureate in Physics, Steven Weinberg and Chen-Ning Yang in addition to Sir Roger Penrose, Sheldon Glashow and Yuval Neeman, Leonard Susskind of Stanford and a past teacher of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie, Carl .F. Von Weizsaecker . It is a profound paper with hardly any number theory involved. It is all set theory. Any person must ask himself why now this vicious campaign masterminded by John Baez of n-Category caf","November, 20 2008 08:35:49","08:35 AM on 11/20/08","BA1D1D0D-0322-2F7F-4155AD4790C912B9","D. Sage",460,187,null],[188,"BA1ED402-B211-4A1E-FFD8260694C1F89F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It is a shameless and blatant lie perpetuated by those who fear nothing more than the truth that Prof. Mohamed El Naschie publishes his papers exclusively in his Journal. You simply need to look into the International Journal of Theoretical Physics, vol. 37 no. 12 December 1998, pages 2935-2951. The paper in this Journal whose editor in chief is a highly respected professor of Georgia Tech., namely David Finkelstein is entitled: Superstrings, knots, and non-commutative geometry in E-Infinity space. The paper was received by the Journal on March the 21st of 1998. The address of Prof. El Naschie at this time was the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics in Cambridge, England. The paper was accepted at once as submitted by the editorial board which comprised names such as: Nobel Laureate in Physics, Steven Weinberg and Chen-Ning Yang in addition to Sir Roger Penrose, Sheldon Glashow and Yuval Neeman, Leonard Susskind of Stanford and a past teacher of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie, Carl .F. Von Weizsaecker . It is a profound paper with hardly any number theory involved. It is all set theory. Any person must ask himself why now this vicious campaign masterminded by John Baez of n-Category café blog and UC Riverside. Prof. El Naschie has been publishing his work for 17 years so again why now? The obvious answer is the present paper published in Scientific American by Renate Loll and her co-authors. The numerous comments on this site bear witness to the real motives than anything else which I could possibly say.
Sage
","November, 20 2008 08:37:41","08:37 AM on 11/20/08","BA1D1D0D-0322-2F7F-4155AD4790C912B9","D. Sage",460,188,null],[189,"BBC44E81-FC31-D091-0A8FB74CBAA57BBC",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 20 2008 16:18:03","04:18 PM on 11/20/08","BBC44E52-D465-7246-A66D2856F06C683B","M.Eslam",460,189,null],[190,"BBC5ADF7-9A47-BAA9-2914A79AF78B3E3C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

W","November, 20 2008 16:19:33","04:19 PM on 11/20/08","BBC44E52-D465-7246-A66D2856F06C683B","M.Eslam",460,190,null],[191,"BBC65760-B7BB-E418-D8DCB74D383E972F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Why are all these people ganging against Mohamed El Naschie? Is it because of the name Mohamed? Barrack Obama was subjected to something similar because of his middle name Hussein. Are these powerful groups afraid that the Obama effect which took place on the political level could be repeated by El Naschie on the scientific level? I wonder.","November, 20 2008 16:20:17","04:20 PM on 11/20/08","BBC44E52-D465-7246-A66D2856F06C683B","M.Eslam",460,191,null],[192,"BBCC6010-077D-9ACF-11CD2A38A9E5E786",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Using","November, 20 2008 16:26:52","04:26 PM on 11/20/08","BBCC5FDB-0E39-25ED-4C5F62DE565AF1EB","W. Martin",460,192,null],[193,"BBCDDC84-FC96-9E25-C2BCDE8F3EE46B79",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Using set theory for a discrete space time makes a great deal of sense. I am intrigued by what previous commentators said about the connection between El Naschie theory and the work of Stanley Gudder and G Hemion. I think it is correct to describe the work on E-Infinity theory as computational posets. In this connection I just came across a brand new paper titled: Particle propagators on discrete spacetime- written by Steven Johnston and published in Classical and Quantum Gravity, 25 September 2008.
When you read this paper thoroughly, you realize that it is the same program as the work of El Naschie. I personally think that Coexter and Reflection Groups is a better mathematical foundation for the program of El Naschie. But the relation between Steven Johnston and the work of El Naschie is truly remarkable.

","November, 20 2008 16:28:30","04:28 PM on 11/20/08","BBCC5FDB-0E39-25ED-4C5F62DE565AF1EB","W. Martin",460,193,null],[194,"BBD321F9-E54C-529D-C54FC35D4CAEB893",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 20 2008 16:34:15","04:34 PM on 11/20/08","BBD321BC-F855-E40E-D35C352691FDC60B","R. Walker",460,194,null],[195,"BBD4587F-D4B1-CFF5-9B544DE49716C8D8",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Some have been asking, although with nothing good in the back of their minds, what El Naschie was doing as a Ph.D. student. I found a remarkable book on Stability and Catastrophe by J.M.T. Thompson, University College, London and a fellow of the Royal Society. The book is called: Instabilities and Catastrophes in Science and Engineering and published in 1982 by John Wiley and Sons. In this book and on page 54, Sir J. M. T. Thompson writes: The buckling and post buckling of a strut on an elastic foundation with a free, un-pinned end has been discussed by El Naschie who has also elucidated the mechanics of ring buckling.
I have inquired further and found out that both Thompson and El Naschie were working in a famous stability research group founded and directed by Lord Henry Chilver who was the adviser of Margaret Thatcher on all research and higher education matters.
","November, 20 2008 16:35:35","04:35 PM on 11/20/08","BBD321BC-F855-E40E-D35C352691FDC60B","R. Walker",460,195,null],[196,"BBD7F71F-0C9B-E9CB-0FAC9378CB0F687E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 20 2008 16:39:32","04:39 PM on 11/20/08","BBD7F6F4-9D13-0D9F-B1CE3BBC10885D66","I.Ottmear",460,196,null],[197,"BBD8FCFF-DE45-6C3F-88F0BF020B765FE8",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have a hunch that it is not religion or racial discrimination which is causing many so-called respectable gentlemen to gang against Mohamed El Naschie. I think it has something to do with King Faisal Prize. It has something to do with the manipulation that takes place. Arabs are well known to fight against one another. They rather see a foreigner win than one of their own. It is a strange aberration of this once great nation. Somebody is capitalizing on this inglorious characteristic. I think I know that a man who answers to the name of Al Hindi is twisting things to the benefit of certain people whose names have been mentioned on this site many times.","November, 20 2008 16:40:39","04:40 PM on 11/20/08","BBD7F6F4-9D13-0D9F-B1CE3BBC10885D66","I.Ottmear",460,197,null],[198,"BF51FEFD-9114-80BE-39AA98D4D9407950",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 21 2008 08:51:41","08:51 AM on 11/21/08","BF51FECC-00C6-641D-A80BF0CCAF6A62EB","F.Tengelin",460,198,null],[199,"BF536B6B-DDFF-0D5B-F2790A4733AD37E1",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The holy grail of quantum gravity is an exact calculation of the super symmetric inverse coupling. Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg in his well known classical book - The theory of Field, he calculated this coupling and found that it is equal to 17. Mohamed El Naschie, on the other hand, made the same calculation and concluded that it must be in the region of 24 and subsequently introduced an exact theory and found that the integer value must be 26. Now it is very easy to find who is right and who is wrong. If the Nobel Laureate is wrong, then all what I am saying is give Mohamed El Naschie a chance. This sounds like the Beatle song by John Lennon. But seriously why don't you write to Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg and ask him. He is in Austin, Texas. This is the same University where the owner of the n-Category café occupies a position of a Professor of Physics. Alternatively if you are afraid to write to a truly great Nobel Laureate in Physics, which Steven Weinberg is, then write to an expert on the subject in CERN. The man to write to and I think he probably knows El Naschie is John Ellis. I think this is the way to settle scientific disputes. This is an elegant valid and intelligent way to stop all this ongoing slander which is foreign to all scientific values which we all cherish.","November, 21 2008 08:53:14","08:53 AM on 11/21/08","BF51FECC-00C6-641D-A80BF0CCAF6A62EB","F.Tengelin",460,199,null],[200,"C01D0FE5-FE37-F700-643E59345244ADFA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 21 2008 12:33:29","12:33 PM on 11/21/08","C01D0FAF-A6EF-D975-3AD9E0035F1ED92F","R.A.M",460,200,null],[201,"C01E097B-04F9-912A-F6EEFE1999C36F33",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Chapeau for the sense of humor and the nerve of the Café Royal Proprietor alias n-Category Café au Lait!","November, 21 2008 12:34:33","12:34 PM on 11/21/08","C01D0FAF-A6EF-D975-3AD9E0035F1ED92F","R.A.M",460,201,null],[202,"C021C68B-92B8-DB2C-DFF396DCF845F3D7",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 21 2008 12:38:38","12:38 PM on 11/21/08","C01D0FAF-A6EF-D975-3AD9E0035F1ED92F","R.A.M",460,202,null],[203,"C0261DA6-96F8-8646-AD1D23D0CC34F9DA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 21 2008 12:43:22","12:43 PM on 11/21/08","C0261D6F-E55F-608A-EE4966EC41147081","J.M. Nader",460,203,null],[204,"C02772BF-A972-DE16-5CE6E829E743E283",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

They are waiting, according to their statement, for David Clark to answer an unsigned scientific report by the elite of Theoretical Physics worldwide written in pigeon English which implies pigeon brains and pigeon physics. Does anyone expect a respectable person to respond to such nonsense! Look at the high standards of Scientific American and Nature. Look at how they conduct their blogs and comments - no censorship and also no nonsense. Dr. John Baez you can always learn from your mistakes.","November, 21 2008 12:44:50","12:44 PM on 11/21/08","C0261D6F-E55F-608A-EE4966EC41147081","J.M. Nader",460,204,null],[205,"C0941A37-EEA9-2976-13903780BD2F0714",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","


Dr. F. Tengelin was quicker than me or more brave than me. I was just thinking of saying the same thing. Let me make his statement more precise. Prof. Steve Weinberg who developed the electro weak theory and shared the Nobel prize with two others is the author of the most authoritative book on quantum field theory. In volume 3 of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields published by Cambridge University Press in 2000 he states on page 192 that the inverse super symmetric unification coupling of all fundamental gauge forces is 17.5. This value is given by his equation 28.2.19. Finding this result scared me quite a bit because I used Prof. El Naschie s result which comes to 24.28. This is a large discrepancy. I repeated the calculation again and again but I always found 24.28 and never 17.5. To make things worse Prof. El Naschie noticed immediately that 17.5 must be a miscalculation and said that the exact integer value must be 26. That means 17.5 must be wrong and 24.28 is only an approximation to the exact value which is 26. He said it is obvious that 26 must be correct. He directed me to his paper in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 35, p. 862 (2008) entitled Non-perturbative super symmetric quantum gravity coupling. I am desperate to know who is right and who is wrong? This result will not affect either the career of a Nobel laureate or the career of a well established professor but it could be devastating for me. I would be extremely grateful to anyone who could help me decide who is right, Prof. Weinberg or Prof. El Naschie. Please send me your answers as quick as possible to the address below.



Ayman Elokaby

Dept. of Physics

University of Alexandria

Egypt
","November, 21 2008 14:43:30","02:43 PM on 11/21/08","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,205,null],[206,"C0B2A126-BEF5-2468-A15A2A7BCDBDD19A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. F. Tengelin was quicker than me or more brave than me. I was just thinking of saying the same thing. Let me make his statement more precise. Prof. Steve Weinberg who developed the electro weak theory and shared the Nobel prize with two others is the author of the most authoritative book on quantum field theory. In volume 3 of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields published by Cambridge University Press in 2000 he states on page 192 that the inverse super symmetric unification coupling of all fundamental gauge forces is 17.5. This value is given by his equation 28.2.19. Finding this result scared me quite a bit because I used Prof. El Naschie s result which comes to 24.28. This is a large discrepancy. I repeated the calculation again and again but I always found 24.28 and never 17.5. To make things worse Prof. El Naschie noticed immediately that 17.5 must be a miscalculation and said that the exact integer value must be 26. That means 17.5 must be wrong and 24.28 is only an approximation to the exact value which is 26. He said it is obvious that 26 must be correct. He directed me to his paper in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 35, p. 862 (2008) entitled Non-perturbative super symmetric quantum gravity coupling. I am desperate to know who is right and who is wrong? This result will not affect either the career of a Nobel laureate or the career of a well established professor but it could be devastating for me. I would be extremely grateful to anyone who could help me decide who is right, Prof. Weinberg or Prof. El Naschie. Please send me your answers as quick as possible to the address below.



Ayman Elokaby

Dept. of Physics

University of Alexandria

Egypt ","November, 21 2008 15:16:51","03:16 PM on 11/21/08","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,206,null],[207,"C0FBE5B9-BA0B-1934-30DD49CFFAFA906B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 21 2008 16:36:53","04:36 PM on 11/21/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,207,null],[208,"C10214BA-C21D-8BF3-887816734A987B34",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have been asked by G. Carroll to post the following comment:
If you want to know who is or who was Mohamed El Naschie then your best bet is to ask Prof. Alastair Walker. Prof. Walker was a member of the stability research group in University College, founded by Lord Chilver. He wrote the introduction to Prof. El Naschie's book on Stress, Stability and Chaos published 1990 by McGraw Hill. I think Walker was his thesis supervisor. Walker was last the Dean of Engineering in the University of Surrey. It is simple if you want to know the truth but of course, those who are asking these questions, do not want to know the truth.

G. Carroll

","November, 21 2008 16:43:38","04:43 PM on 11/21/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,208,null],[209,"C103D4FB-E3FF-FC4E-D700413A110BACB3",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

M. Gerrard asked me to post the following comment:
I have a big surprise for you. Mohamed El Naschie did not write 350 papers, he wrote about 900 papers. I am not counting his papers published in Arabic. He is practically an authority on everything. A true renaissance man. Not an Einstein but a Leonardo da Vinci when you count his phenomenal knowledge of art, music, literature, history, politics and economy. Now how can anybody master so much? I cannot tell you but he definitely does not spend his time writing defamatory letters or slandering anybody. Of course he has the opportunity and the means to do what he wants to do but this is a necessary yet not sufficient condition to achieve excellence, for that you must have character as well as courage.

M. Gerrard
","November, 21 2008 16:45:33","04:45 PM on 11/21/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,209,null],[210,"C106E7BD-C39B-137C-D64A3736403B60BA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have been asked by A. Jones to post the following comment:
The best man to ask is Gerard 'tHooft. He is a Nobel Laureate in physics for 1990 or was it 1999? Any case Mohamed El Naschie dedicated a whole issue of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals to Prof. 'tHooft on the occasion of his birthday. He wrote a very nice Editorial about him so why go on guessing Dr. Baez? Just ask Prof. 'tHooft about his opinion. I would have thought this was the logical and more civilized way to go about things.

A.Jones

","November, 21 2008 16:48:54","04:48 PM on 11/21/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,210,null],[211,"C108BEFC-C1C7-8789-724CADC93BEC2C0A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Ali Khan asked me to post the following comment:
I have a simple question for Dr. John Baez. If Prof. Mohamed El Naschie's work is as horribly wrong as you are trying to convince us, why are people snatching his ideas? Why are you using his terminology and general philosophy? I think we can wait until heaven freezes and you will never give an answer, only second hand jokes and boring sarcasm with no meaning.

Ali Khan
","November, 21 2008 16:50:55","04:50 PM on 11/21/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,211,null],[212,"C10A0316-9C12-AA7E-36D5CD06C8D01A98",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

M. Otter asked me to post the following comment:
You guys should forget all about that. The whole thing is just a diversion. If Mohamed El Naschie is sufficiently slandered and discredited then anybody can help himself to his work and call it his own. That is the only rationale behind this campaign.

M. Otter
","November, 21 2008 16:52:18","04:52 PM on 11/21/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,212,null],[213,"C10AE471-BFEB-CFB0-2D97C61BD3C1D719",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have been asked by John Clarke to post the following comment:
Suppose El Naschie has published his work in the journal of which he is the Editor in Chief. So what? This is completely common. The most important paper on chaos and turbulence written by David Ruelle, was referred by David Ruelle and published by David Ruelle in his own journal. And thank God for that; this enormously important paper would otherwise have been lost to science for ever. As David Ruelle in his popular book admitted, his paper was rejected by almost every well established journal in the world. And even if the papers were not refereed, there was nothing sinister about it. The name of the Author is clearly printed on the Journal as its Editor in Chief with all the editorial power of an Editor in Chief. Everything was transparent. How could anybody derive from this fact that he is free to borrow generously from these papers as much as he wants without giving the Author credit? The most important thing is that these papers are published. If you do not like them, you should not use them. If you use them you must refer to them. Anything else is very bad logic and I do not find the way Dr. Ambjorn, Dr. Loll and Dr. Jurkiewicz dealt with this problem convincing nor acceptable. They have never commented nor gave any explanation to anyone as if they were above the law, written or unwritten. I do not think this is something good and the diversion created by Dr. Baez makes things even far worse. Trying to involve Nature and push one of its journalists, Mr Schiermeier to write something about Chaos, Solitons & Fractals is probably the worse course of action possible. Why don't people learn from history. Watergate, Lewinskygate and so many other gates. It seems that the only thing man learns from history is that man does not learn from history.

John Clarke
","November, 21 2008 16:53:15","04:53 PM on 11/21/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,213,null],[214,"C10B9829-C394-F92B-AE03B3BC6550BE8B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have been asked by J. Lord to post the following comment:
I would like to come back to the connection between Mohamed El Naschie's work and the paper on causal sets published in Classical & Quantum Gravity and mentioned on this site. The Author of this paper is a professor in Imperial College. Interestingly Dr. Renate Loll got her Ph.D. from Imperial College although she is German and is working in Holland. I wonder what this means for the work of Prof. El Naschie. It is completely based on partially ordered sets. Maybe I am becoming paranoid.

J. Lord
","November, 21 2008 16:54:01","04:54 PM on 11/21/08","9CB52D60-F245-3581-18B3FA24321CEBE3","Jeremy Keyes",460,214,null],[215,"C46B9E5E-C015-D18E-6D9A02AFF733BF0A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is a direct response to Elokaby 11.21.08 3.16 p.m. and F. Tengelin 11.21.08 8.53 a.m.

It is obvious to me that the inverse coupling constant calculated by El Naschie is correct while that given by Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg is wrong. Printing errors or mistakes are common among the best of us, Nobel laureates not excluded. So there is nothing unusual about that. What is unusual or rather interesting is how quickly Mohamed El Naschie and Elokaby noticed the error. The value given by Weinberg in his book The Quantum Theory of Field, Vol. 3 is 17.5. This is the inverse unification coupling in case of super symmetry. Most of the values found in the literature are around 24. Mohamed El Naschie summarized these results in Table 5 of his paper On a class of general theories for high energy particle physics, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 14 (2002), p. 657. Using the perturbated equation of Weinberg, El Naschie and later Elokaby found that the value is about 24 so I can conclude from that, as did El Naschie, that there was a minor arithmetical mistake. However using the exact non-perturbated equation developed by El Naschie, the exact integer value is 26. I have not explained yet how he could have noticed so quickly that 17.5 is definitely wrong. To explain that satisfactorily we need to look into the non-super symmetric case. Weinberg gives this value on p. 247 of the same book to be 41. Now this is reasonable as indicated from the values gathered from the literature in Table 6, p. 658 of the above mentioned paper of El Naschie. Again El Naschie gives the exact integer value using his exact equation as 42. Notice that the difference between 26 and 42 is exactly 16 and the difference between 26 and 16 is exactly 10. Let us go on and note that the difference between 16 and 10 is 6 and the difference between 10 and 6 is 4. 4 on the other hand is either 2 multiplied with 2 or 2 plus 2. I am sure you have already noticed it is a Fibonacci Gross law starting with 2 and 2 as seeds. The 2 could be interpreted physically as the two-dimensional world sheet of string theory. When two world sheets interact together, they span the four-dimensional spacetime and then we obtain the string hierarchy of Heterotic string theory. I will not go into that. This is all explained admirably countless times in the equally countless number of papers which El Naschie has published but alas no one reads. That is how El Naschie noticed immediately that 17.5 cannot be right. In a very recent lecture El Naschie gave a highly interesting physical meaning for the wrong value 17 found by Weinberg but it will lead to far to start discussing this again.

From all of the above I conclude that El Naschie has found a sound method, a model or a theory which ever you prefer to call it which can serve as an excellent additional tool in exploring the Planck regime and quantum gravity. It is better to discuss the contents of a paper, not the address of an Author, his affiliation and whether the post office from which he mailed his paper was near to the Editorial Office or not. We are paying a very high price for our advances in technology and methods of communication, particularly the internet. The internet has encouraged things like pedophilia and pseudo scientific blogs devoted to slander and character assassination. We have to learn to live with that and ignore and non-scientific parasitic phenomena associated with technical progress. In this sense I end my comment.

","November, 22 2008 08:37:46","08:37 AM on 11/22/08","F10B63C8-E230-74AA-6C3AA7FEF5C9CB20","Noyes",460,215,null],[216,"C49F6974-DCC6-4498-583B6B85F43B0259",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 22 2008 09:34:20","09:34 AM on 11/22/08","C49F6913-E3B4-0513-9FAFE89C750D69F8","Anyone",460,216,null],[217,"C5279977-D8C7-AEC3-99C8DEB0642BBDD4",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Cheer envy has brought the people at the n-Category caf? to a state of hallucination. If you don t believe it, just log into their site and see the great discoveries they have found. Post office addresses, email addresses and what have you. Truly grandiose stuff. All that because it takes only a golden bullet to kill Mohamed El Naschie. Didn t Lawrence of Arabia say something similar after he freed Aqaba! ","November, 22 2008 12:03:06","12:03 PM on 11/22/08","C5279927-BBAA-D157-62CC1B66B970900A","M. Achok",460,217,null],[218,"C52EE238-E968-8B8B-996883BF199DEA09",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 22 2008 12:11:03","12:11 PM on 11/22/08","C52EE203-E537-1DBD-9864765A3FAB919C","H. Hedini",460,218,null],[219,"C53088B7-C4C3-2A2C-AFD6E8E2A62542AA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Yes I agree Mohamed El Naschie could produce a paper a day. That must seem to the Philistines terrifying. I know the guy since we were together in elementary school. At the beginning he was the class primus. But as his interests multiplied, he was not doing in the final year exams as good as he could. He regained his supremacy when he graduated from the University in Hannover. The guy could produce an original idea every one hour. It could be in science, art, philosophy or politics. It can be sometime unnerving for those around him. But he is simply a bundle of energy.","November, 22 2008 12:12:51","12:12 PM on 11/22/08","C52EE203-E537-1DBD-9864765A3FAB919C","H. Hedini",460,219,null],[220,"C5376700-FA6C-8B89-25AB4BAD99DBFC84",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 22 2008 12:20:21","12:20 PM on 11/22/08","C53766CB-E7ED-5B6F-3E8EA2DCE0F7265B","T. Alisons",460,220,null],[221,"C5389281-F62A-80D2-B938459A9BF834A2",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I see that it sounds incredible that a guy can produce 350 original research papers in such a short time. However this is all what the slanderer wants you to believe. EL Naschie was the editor in chief of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals for almost 20 years. When you divide 350 by 20 this is a very modest number of papers per month. However I admit that his rate of production increased enormously as he got older. Well off and retired at the age of 66 he worked with more energy and concentration than 60 of the Baez type of the neo-flower power generation. I think Mohamed El Naschie works feverishly with such intensity because he realized how slow the mainstream in theoretical physics comprehends new ideas. So he keeps presenting the same idea from enormous different viewpoints appealing to different specializations with the hope they understand. That explains to me the relatively high number of papers he has produced. That will not explain anything to those who really want nothing else but discredit the guy by hook or crook and mostly by crook.","November, 22 2008 12:21:38","12:21 PM on 11/22/08","C53766CB-E7ED-5B6F-3E8EA2DCE0F7265B","T. Alisons",460,221,null],[222,"C53C8A69-C7F6-A45A-C816B1D5FB5BE113",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 22 2008 12:25:58","12:25 PM on 11/22/08","C53C8A34-EC60-7618-905CCB7201945A58","R. Badio",460,222,null],[223,"C53D710A-E5CC-0459-0A5EA668889DED7E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

John Baez has a book published in World Scientific called Gauge Field, Knots and Gravity. The picture on the front page shows a rope made to a knot connected by Feynmans's gauge graphs and under it Einstein's equation of general relativity. J. Baez accused El Naschie of mixing too many things together. I find it really a case of the oven calling the pot black. I read also the book from beginning to end and I see why Baez is jealous. He was never able to break free from the standard knowledge of the field. He did not even discuss wild knots and wild topology. That is why he cannot reach the sweeping generalization which Mohamed El Naschie was able to reach by including wild topology. The editor of the series, Louis Kauffman, will understand what I am saying here. Kauffman is an excellent man and he is the one who stimulated Mohamed El Naschie work on wild topology in high energy physics. Baez did not understand the meaning of 8 multiplied by Pi square although he writes it everywhere in his book. If he wants to understand it, he better stop slandering Mohamed El Naschie and instead of trying to find his telephone number and home address, he should read his work attentively.","November, 22 2008 12:26:57","12:26 PM on 11/22/08","C53C8A34-EC60-7618-905CCB7201945A58","R. Badio",460,223,null],[224,"C5448A7A-0403-5888-93ED689960BF9076",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 22 2008 12:34:42","12:34 PM on 11/22/08","C5448A17-900A-986E-C50A3EB5E5175473","A. Mustafa",460,224,null],[225,"C545BAFE-E910-BFB9-E425FA02925E263D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

What my friends are calling Philistines are frightened from one paper a day by El Naschie. They say he cannot do it. Mohamed El Naschie like his most beloved hero Barrack Hussein Obama, said yes we can. And I say yes he did.","November, 22 2008 12:36:00","12:36 PM on 11/22/08","C5448A17-900A-986E-C50A3EB5E5175473","A. Mustafa",460,225,null],[226,"C667C672-DE4E-1A9A-5E02D1805504328E",null,2,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have watched for a while how the plot against Prof. El Naschie is unfolding. I see clearly that his main mistake is that he is not amused by the sight of people plagiarizing his work. It is this and nothing else which has motivated the despicable actions of John Baez and his fellow conspirators from the n-Category Caf?. They smuggled their advertisements into Nature. They dragged Lisi into it. They attempt to drag good people with good reputations to help them in their smear campaign. It is all for the money. Research funding is short so you grab what you can. It is interesting to see analogy with the oil thieves. You want oil free of charge so you start slandering an entire country and invent stories about weapons of mass destruction. Now you want to steal the work of El Naschie in order to get a King Faisal prize or even more, then you only need to slander him. Accuse him of being an Editor in Chief. After that, all is very simple. You just help yourself and publish the stolen goods where you like, in Nature or Physics Review or Classical and Quantum Gravity. The behavior of these people is truly revolting. I truly regret the day I became a scientist, to become one of those people. I hope you are not going to sensor these comments and I hope that Nature and Google report it so that the world knows about the filth which the n-Category Caf? is inundating us with. However I am expecting that this site of Scientific American will be closed very soon on the orders of you know who. This is the freedom of information in the age of the internet and blogs dictatorship.","November, 22 2008 17:52:49","05:52 PM on 11/22/08","C667C640-9194-6D73-86701489BC1F3026","Magyar",460,226,null],[227,"C6829CA8-AC59-E911-00CA3E5360CE261A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

One final note before I sign off: We need say nothing further about John Baez but refer you to what Einstein thinks of him! Needless to say, it is not a lot. Have a look at this site for yourself. It puts all this man's ramblings into perspective. Perhaps John is under the impression he is God himself?
http://physicsmathforums.com/showthread.php?t=2254.

","November, 22 2008 18:22:07","06:22 PM on 11/22/08","C667C640-9194-6D73-86701489BC1F3026","Magyar",460,227,null],[228,"D9EB3C6C-CFF7-DB48-C53B740DA5A5CD7A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 26 2008 12:49:11","12:49 PM on 11/26/08","D9EB3C2F-0551-7F58-F5D6605CAE3EE6B1","Enlightened",460,228,null],[229,"DA0902D2-F52E-674A-3DF4D18423D3C851",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 26 2008 13:21:42","01:21 PM on 11/26/08","DA090290-C967-0F45-2A8328B78F45758F","A.M.",460,229,null],[230,"DA0C4881-D83B-E927-ED76305413F740EA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Mohamed El Naschie is the elder brother, teacher and friend of Amr Elnashai, Director of the largest earthquake engineering centre in the USA at Urbana, Champaign. In a special issue of CS&F dedicated to Mohamed's 60th birthday, Amr wrote a wonderful tribute to his brother entitled Recollections. The El Naschie's are one of Egypt's most distinguished and richest families and all three brothers are famous. Said, the middle brother is a famous professor at Pennsylvania State University. Although he has some serious health problems he is a distinguished professor of environmental studies and a world renowned researcher of chaos in chemical engineering. He dedicated two of his books published by Gordon & Breach to Mohamed El Naschie. You should see http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-self-organizing-quantum-universe and http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/sciencetopics/largehadroncollider/3314456/Surfer-dude-stuns-physicists-with-theory-of-everything.html#postComment.","November, 26 2008 13:25:17","01:25 PM on 11/26/08","DA090290-C967-0F45-2A8328B78F45758F","A.M.",460,230,null],[231,"E9102692-DA07-5520-978D9E134EF6D9C2",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","November, 29 2008 11:23:49","11:23 AM on 11/29/08","E9102649-A4CB-72E4-E1BDF24C1EED6C85","A.Kayam",460,231,null],[232,"E915A3FE-C727-630B-93D7741A9F1BD00D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I remember seeing Barkley Rosser at the Conference in honor of Prof. Tonu Puu in Odense where I also met Mohamed El Naschie who is truly a distinguished gentleman "Un homme distingue" with all its implications. Tonu Puu retired from the University but he did not retire from the Journal. In fact he wrote me a letter, a couple of weeks ago expressing his admiration for the versatility of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals. It is wrong to describe this Journal as a Theoretical Physics Journal. The article in Nature is missing completely the point. But this is really not my concern. I was in blissful ignorance of the low standards which academicians can reach but alas! Now I know of Baez , his n-Category café and his crew and what struck me most is that they are blocking supporters of El Naschie from posting comments on their blog. This happened to me when I tried to respond to Rosser's comments on their blog. The trick Baez and his followers are pursuing, as the propaganda Minister of Adolf Hitler put it, is to make a lie so big that people would say even 50% of it is true then it is enough and when it is said so loud and by the mob then it must be true. I can assure you that ninety percent of what is written on their site - the n-Category café - are half truths and guess which half are they putting? They are connected to a blog known as Backreaction and they are coordinating their work very well. They are experts in this business. In the Nature article, the name of John Baez, the originator of all this rambling is conspicuously absent. The valiant brave hero feels more secure behind the bar of his café. His lawyer told him that blogs are difficult to prosecute. The bad news for him is that the loopholes in the international law have been taken care of so he may enjoy it while it lasts. Two or three more weeks make no difference.","November, 29 2008 11:29:48","11:29 AM on 11/29/08","E9102649-A4CB-72E4-E1BDF24C1EED6C85","A.Kayam",460,232,null],[233,"EF1BBC14-013F-2B54-065C5BD3FE94A6D1",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

j","November, 30 2008 15:34:11","03:34 PM on 11/30/08","EF1BBBED-9908-4AF3-E338C060BCE66282","Josh",460,233,null],[234,"0323EA0E-DC24-CA1B-6886EB659AE1EC29",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The whole idea behind the smear campaign against Mohamed El Naschie is more than obvious. Attention should be diverted from the article of Loll, Ambjorn and J& I can prove the point for those who are ready to be persuaded by logical arguments. The question about publishing in ones own journal only arose after the furor against Loll s article on this site. Many commenters pointed to the monumental work of El Naschie on fractal spacetime. Since the Author s do not want to acknowledge his work, it follows that they must trash and abolish it. The easiest and cheapest way is to say it should not have been published in the first place because it is self publishing. That is really a big joke in itself. There is not a single Editor in Chief to my knowledge who does not publish in his own journal. Many have pointed out Prof. Leon Chua from the Dept. of Mathematics & Computer Sci. in Berkeley and the Editor in Chief of the World Scientific journal Bifurcation & Chaos as the none plus ultra in self publishing. Second is Prof. Ali Nayfeh, a Palestinian American working in applied mechanics and chaotic behavior of mechanical systems. However this is not correct. At least not entirely. The Elsevier Journal Physica D is up to 50% papers written by the Editorial Board. In fact it is the policy of Elsevier to allow all their Editorial Boards to self publish without refereeing. The worst case maybe a little known journal called Communications in Nonlinear Science & Numerical Simulation. Some issues of this journal consist of two or three papers by the Editors. Believe it or not, some of these papers are 100 pages long and believe it or not, this is all allowed by Elsevier. But only somebody like John Baez would be so twisted as to single Elsevier out. All other commercial publishers do the same. For instance a nonlinear dynamics journal published by Springer does the same. The Editor in Chief is sometimes Wiggins and sometimes Philip Holmes and sometimes Marsden. Wiggins is the student of Marsden or Holmes and Holmes is a friend of Marsden and so on and they publish each other s papers in their own journal. You may say this is all the evil of commercial publishing. Wrong again. Physics Review Editors publish their own work in their own journal and they have published thousands of papers in this way. I would not mind all that if it would be transparent. However the non transparent part is the worst part. It earns them the name Physics Review mafia. Prof. Joao Magueijo from Imperial College wrote a best seller entitled Faster Than The Speed of Light in which he exposed the corruption going on in the old boys and old ladies clubs of Physics Review. The smear campaign against El Naschie and Chaos, Solitons & Fractals has to be seen in the light of the above. Here we have a man outside the main stream who was able to beat the main stream at their own game without resorting to devious methods. Everything done by El Naschie was transparent but the problem started when this article in Scientific America appeared. You must also realize that El Naschie publishes ideas and the average length of his papers is 3-4 pages. Compared to the average length of an ordinary published paper, namely 16, you must divide 300 papers by at least 4. It is very easy to publish many papers in this way because they are not time consuming. They are lean, pure ideas and not tutorial papers of the type we have seen in other Elsevier journals. Now you will probably say, what about the quality? Yes indeed, what about the quality and since when do serious scientific discussions take place on internet blogs using the language witnessed in the n-Category Caf?? Why should Mr. Skoda appoint himself judge and jury? Does he not realize that he is a relatively young mathematician with very little if any reputation and working in a very small east European country, namely Croatia with all the financial problems that there are. What prompts a man of his standing, with a maximum of eight published papers, to neglect his research and appoint himself as the Mary Whitehouse of science? It is incredible and unconvincing. The obvious fact is that he was hired by well known people in Egypt and when he met John Baez, the deal was done. Some of spoken of the axe Utrecht, Waterloo with John Baez playing a central role. This is the truth behind this smear campaign and very soon we will give you the proof and this episode will be one of the saddest episodes of its kind in the history of science. The integrity and credibility of many Institutions have been and will be shattered. Scientific American has done a disservice to its sister, Nature and the full extent of this disservice will be revealed to you very soon, sooner than they think.","December, 04 2008 12:55:31","12:55 PM on 12/04/08","0323E9D6-DAB7-696F-ECBB7C23C28F0A03","Ferdinand",460,234,null],[235,"146A8562-CE7A-55AE-513156F0A0BE7C3E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This article confirms my assertions that Causality itself is the originating structure of the universe. Not to be too theistic, but Causality as an analogy of the will of God reconciles all conflicts between traditional science and human psychology and morality.
In the last paragraph the author mentions a "threshold". Is this "threshold" a reference to the Planck Scale? Because your suggestion that existence is emergent from a fractal baseline, corresponds exactly with my own visualizations of what the universe must "look" or act like beyond the Planck scale limitation. I am not a scientist, I have no scientific background, I cannot even aspire to consider myself an amateur theorist. But I have always been fascinated with the nature of existence, and as I have gotten older, my derivations of cognitive modeling have begun to increasingly center around the nature of Causality itself. I have written many blogs on the subject, in my limited scope and comprehension of it, on my page at My space,com/astrochronic.","December, 07 2008 21:26:11","09:26 PM on 12/07/08","146A8536-0A86-864A-8B109B74CD3005F7","Astrochronic",460,235,null],[236,"1478E5F0-9468-5804-D9AFE2BB249C94E3",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am not going to read all of these comments, but suffice to say, I have no idea who John Baez is or what he has to do with this article or the assertions of its authors.

Some people never fail to politicize and desperately attempt to discredit theories that conflict with their own self serving ideology. Intellectual prions abound. Causality has a solution inevetably.

I also want to add an inarguable truth: "If a scientist is Athiest then they are prejudiced and cannot be trusted to be objective in the pursuit of understanding and explaining the true nature of reality. They have unscientifically eliminated a possibly integral axiom."
","December, 07 2008 21:41:54","09:41 PM on 12/07/08","146A8536-0A86-864A-8B109B74CD3005F7","Astrochronic",460,236,null],[237,"1632EB73-CD98-0F81-420C4417AFCD7C70",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 08 2008 05:44:42","05:44 AM on 12/08/08","1632EAFD-B8CB-25E6-1FF34291FD3949CF","Christen",460,237,null],[238,"1634C04A-012C-66C2-CE71E8AE5A42F511",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 08 2008 05:46:42","05:46 AM on 12/08/08","1632EAFD-B8CB-25E6-1FF34291FD3949CF","Christen",460,238,null],[239,"16367520-F3B2-A928-9E83ACA84BE6AE2A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 08 2008 05:48:34","05:48 AM on 12/08/08","1632EAFD-B8CB-25E6-1FF34291FD3949CF","Christen",460,239,null],[240,"16375562-D544-B6E2-E8612D1B513C9545",null,2,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Answering your question about who is John Baez, he is a man you love to hate. He is Assistant Prof. in department of mathematics UC Riverside, CA. He failed to be a pioneer in mathematical physics. He became further disillusioned when he could not even make it to the first or second line on cutting edge research frontiers. His aunt is a famous country singer so he turned to the media like so many people with chips on their shoulders, he became an internet celebrity. From being famous he became infamous for defaming almost everyone who has what he hasn't got. His hit list is long and includes Edward Witten, Lee Smolin, Sir Roger Penrose, Nobel Laureate Gerard 'tHooft and so on. His latest victim is Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. He was able to mislead Nature to write a defamatory article which is now the subject of a court case in the Old Bailey in London, England. He works closely with Renate Loll and Jan Ambjorg, two of the authors of the article of Scientific American discussed in this site. He is the one who hired a Croatian by the name of Zoran Skoda to start his n-Category café blog defamation campaign against Mohamed El Naschie. It is interesting to note as a Christian that Holland, Denmark and Croatia have always spearheaded many controversial campaigns against Islam.
Christen

","December, 08 2008 05:49:31","05:49 AM on 12/08/08","1632EAFD-B8CB-25E6-1FF34291FD3949CF","Christen",460,240,null],[241,"3859B47F-D910-F314-C5514C7DFEF3050E","16375562-D544-B6E2-E8612D1B513C9545",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I still have no idea what Baez has to do with this article or its assertions. Baez, by your characterization, does sound like the sort of incorrigible rebels we all love to hate.","December, 14 2008 20:54:09","08:54 PM on 12/14/08","146A8536-0A86-864A-8B109B74CD3005F7","Astrochronic",460,241,240],[242,"3AA879DA-9D17-CAF1-6E199DDD16971C96",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Looking for the numerous amazing articles of El naschie, I found a wonderful one whose title is

"P-Adic analysis and the transfinite E8 exceptional Lie symmetry group unification "

M.S. El Naschie

King Abdullah Institute for Nano and Advanced Technology, KSU, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Volume 38, Issue 3, November 2008, Pages 612-614

Just reading the first sentence in the introduction which is

"One of the most amazing results in high energy physics is the T-duality discovered in the context of superstring theories by Witten [1] "

But, for your surprise, the list of references you find no mention of any reference of Witten.

Reference [1] is just a paper of El naschie himself. Here is list

[1] M.S. El Naschie, A few hints and some theorems about Witten's M theory and T-duality, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals (2005), pp. 545-548.

[2] A. Leonovich, Comments on E8 unification and P-Adic numbers. http:/www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xm1=/eareth/2008/01/22/scieinstein122.xml (10/03/2008).

[3] M.S. El Naschie, Transfinite harmonization by taking the dissonance out of the quantum field symphony, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals (2007).

[4] M.S. El Naschie, High energy physics and the standard model from the exceptional Lie groups, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 36 (2008), pp. 1-17.

[5] M. Kaku, Introduction to superstrings and M-theory, Springer, New York (1999) see p. 385 in particular.

[6] M.S. El Naschie, Infinite dimensional Branes and the E(?) topology of Heterotic super strings, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 12 (2001), pp. 1047-1055.

The first reference as already mentioned is El naschie paper. The big surprise about this paper is its tilte

"A few hints and some theorems about Witten's M theory and T-duality" here again we find no reference to any of Witten's papers . here is list of references of this paper ;

[1] E. Goldfain, Cantorian spacetime and unified field theory, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 23 (2005), pp. 701-710.

[2] M.S. El Naschie, A review of E-infinity theory and the mass spectrum of high energy physics, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 19 (2004), pp. 209-236

[3] M.S. El Naschie, Gödel universe, dualities and high energy particles in E-infinity, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 25 (2005) (3), pp. 759-764.

[4] El Naschie MS. On the cohomology and instantons number in E-infinity Cantorian spacetime. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, in press doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2005.12.019.

[5] M. Kaku, Strings, conformal fields and M-theory, Springer-Verlag, New York (2000).

[6] A. Khrennikov, Non-Archimedean analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers, London (1997).

[7] V. Vladimirov, I. Valovich and E. Zelenov, P-Adic analysis and mathematical physics, World Scientific, Singapore (1998).

Something more peculiar about the list of references, of the first paper, is that one of the references is just a comment on an article published in the Telegraph, unfortunately the comment has been deleted. Also the address of the first paper raises another question about the so many false affiliation of El Naschie. The address seems not to be related to his activities.

It is obvious that there is no kind of peer review for these papers even at the fromal level apart from the content.

One can guess that papers may be generated using a program of language generation like n-moles or n-grams or whatever kind of program used. I think, at least for me, that the 'a b' of scientific writing should fulfill certain basic criteria:

1- If you mention a paper of Witten (or any name) [], then one should put reference for that person in the square bracket.

2- If you have a paper titled with theory of some one, then the list of references should contain at least one reference for that guy.

I hope, by now, El naschie has a plenty of time to fix the bugs in the program generating papers, implementing these two mentioned rules in the code and acknowledge this blog for drawing his attention. ","December, 15 2008 07:39:26","07:39 AM on 12/15/08","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,242,null],[243,"3F8F3C53-0BF2-2DD2-FAB19CF222357F8B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 16 2008 06:29:58","06:29 AM on 12/16/08","3F8F3C1C-E455-5988-5159305382C563AD","Volker",460,243,null],[244,"3F90F6B1-0DF7-4BD0-F2C9C580D4E0629F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

One of the major things which convinces me that this there is a defamation campaign against Prof. Naschie and that the real roots of this campaign lie in his success and the malignant envy which some have as well as the distraction technique employed by those who just plagiarized his work are the following: Why don't you discuss the real scientific content of the paper if you are capable of? Why do you keep repeating the same old charges again and again with boring repetitiveness? The charges are the same: the references are not perfect and it is obvious there is no peer review. Why is it so obvious? What is obvious is that there is an agenda itched in the souls of those who are tormented with jealousy. Poor souls! How could anyone spend so much time saying so little? There is no doubt that this is a case not for scientific American but for the International Journal of Psychoanalysis. A well meant advice which we said it many times before: Go and see a shrink.","December, 16 2008 06:31:51","06:31 AM on 12/16/08","3F8F3C1C-E455-5988-5159305382C563AD","Volker",460,244,null],[245,"45048D7A-E14C-B2C0-EF0A50509FEE909C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

El naschie using his own journal as

a stock for his endless uncountable papers.

Here is, one of his marvelous papers found in Chaos, soltion and fractals.

The title

On the universality class of all universality classes and E-infinity spacetime physics

M.S. El Naschie,

King Abdul Aziz City of Science and Technology, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Available online 18 October 2006.

Abstract

It is argued that E-infinity theory may represent the universality class of all universality classes of certain discrete dynamical maps which are at the root of relevant field theories. First we give a concise derivation of the basic equations of E-infinity and its ground state. Subsequently it is shown that the independence of the results obtained from the details of any equations of motion or Lagrangian is a clear indication that E-infinity may represent the universality class of all universality classes in the sense of Cantor with regard to relevant quantum field theories.

I m quite amzed how this could be published.

In fact, for any one who knows little about particle physics realize that the results of any theory depend strongly on the particle content of the theory. For example in QCD, asymptotic freedom depends on the number of colours and flavors. The presence of CP violation in the quark sector depends on the number of generations. No CP violation for one and two generations, at least three generations is required for the presence of CP violation. ","December, 17 2008 07:56:12","07:56 AM on 12/17/08","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,245,null],[246,"450640D7-DAEE-0499-1B9C58E8E9AEEDC6",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To St

It is not important if El naschie is a phd holder or not.

The number of his papers is 350 or 1000 papers is also

immetrial. If one is allowed to write in his style without any

peer review one could publish 6000 papers in twenty years.

The main problems in his papers is they don't make sense

whatever mathematically or physicaly.

About the address "King Abdullah Institute for Nano and Advanced Technology, KSU, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia" on

his recent papers is very supicious as it has no relation to his

activities.

On the Ninth International Symposium Frontiers of

Fundamental and Computational Physics 2008 had a lecture titled

"Average exceptional Lie group hierarchy and high

energy physics" where he claimed to be the director of

King Abdullah Al Saud Institute for Nano & Advanced Technologies

as evident from the affiliation mentoined below.

M.S. EL NASCHIE

King Abdullah Al Saud Institute for Nano & Advanced Technologies*,

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

*) Director

one can check

http://agenda.fisica.uniud.it/difa/getFile.py/access?contribId=52&sessionId=32&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=9

But if you check the web page of King Abdullah Al Saud Institute for Nano & Advanced Technologies you don't find his name listed in the Committee Members of Establishing King Abdullah Institute for NANO Technology and there is no mention for him at all. That

seems odd especially he is the director as he claimed.

One can check the web page for "Committees consultative sciencetisic"

http://www.nano-ksu.com/publish/article_46.shtml

web page for "Supervisory Committee to King Abdullah Institute for Nanotechnology"

http://www.nano-ksu.com/publish/article_63.shtml

Can the great man explain for us.
","December, 17 2008 07:58:04","07:58 AM on 12/17/08","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,246,null],[247,"49D05F83-AD0C-C7C9-87C8E5FDFB9FE2BC",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 18 2008 06:17:19","06:17 AM on 12/18/08","49D05F55-E89B-9932-7AA0A8BA90FC075A","Etaki Shar",460,247,null],[248,"4B0CFD0D-F617-E552-444D22A0E5269C90",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 18 2008 12:03:09","12:03 PM on 12/18/08","49D05F55-E89B-9932-7AA0A8BA90FC075A","Etaki Shar",460,248,null],[249,"4B16F57B-0473-7D86-44FBADB418B68491",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 18 2008 12:14:02","12:14 PM on 12/18/08","49D05F55-E89B-9932-7AA0A8BA90FC075A","Etaki Shar",460,249,null],[250,"4B17900B-CE53-BD22-4D870262FCB02D3D",null,3,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is a direct response to the previous comment signed by An which is probably an abbreviation for Any Nonsense. Good try any case. You gave some effort to sound like John Baez. But you are not even in this league. You are Said Salah El Din Hamed elnashaie kicked out recently from Penn State University and searching desperately for a job anywhere and found only one on the internet. You have been convicted with your wife Shadia El Shishini for forgery and theft. This is only a short introduction. The rest everyone in Egypt knows. Of course you got some help from the nonsense published on the n-Category café and maybe one like Khalil helped you in writing terminology and scientific terms of which you are totally ignorant. You are surprised about the meaning of universality classes because you don't have a clue what this is. And we are not surprised that you don't. You should stick to the business in environment which you use with your clique to defraud Egypt of the American aid paid to Egypt and emitted back to your accounts in the U.S. You would like to fish in murky waters regarding King Saud University and King Abdallah Institute for Nanotechnology. Why don't you write to them directly Genius? Your inferiority complex and deadly jealousy is so manifest that one does not know whether to pity you or ………The words appropriate to describe you are unprintable. You hate the great man, don't you? Ahmed Zuweil got his Nobel prize in Chemistry although you were ahead of him and went to engineering and you got a two- year prison sentence with your wife Shadia El Shishini of the Department of Chemical Engineering, Cairo University. Ahmed Zuweil wants to be the president of Egypt. This is a legal ambition at least. And what do you want to be Said? Your life ambition is to destroy Mohamed. Poor soul! I pity you. Etaky shar man ahsanat eleyeh","December, 18 2008 12:14:42","12:14 PM on 12/18/08","49D05F55-E89B-9932-7AA0A8BA90FC075A","Etaki Shar",460,250,null],[251,"4B991A9C-0A15-D79E-DBA3045B53887805",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 18 2008 14:36:11","02:36 PM on 12/18/08","4B991A73-C8CE-4D71-A4E451851D735AF6","Creight",460,251,null],[252,"4B99C46D-DD62-09D5-6BAA4D70D75BF98B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Said Hamed Elnashaie is a chemical engineer. He is an extremely good Professor and when he is himself an extremely good person. Unfortunately Said is suffering from schizophrenic paranoia. It is a very complex psychological condition and a terrible mental affliction. It is hereditary and no one knows when it would hit and in which generation. There are different forms of this condition. But this is neither the time nor the place to discuss it. I sincerely hope he will overcome it. I am not sure he is really the author of the ridiculous comment signed An. Maybe someone is using him but Said doesn't understand anything about high energy physics. The last paragraph of his comment, if not copied blindly from a text book, indicates that the author has some knowledge of particle physics. If this is correct, then he should understand that Mohamed El Naschie was able to find the particle content corresponding to what he called in his set theoretical foundation of E-Infinity the universality of all universal class. The classical particle content of David Gross and his colleagues is 8064 particle like states. In El Naschie transfinite version corresponding to his universality class, revised this figure to 8872. If Said is the writer I don't think this will make any sense to him. If one of his physicist friends is the writer of the comment, then I also would not think that he will understand because it requires some knowledge of Cantor set theory as well as particle physics. The tragedy is that particle physics on its own could never solve particle physics and particle physicists know nothing except particle physics. To overcome that, you have to be like Mohamed El Naschie - at home both in particle physics and non linear dynamics as well as set theory.

","December, 18 2008 14:36:55","02:36 PM on 12/18/08","4B991A73-C8CE-4D71-A4E451851D735AF6","Creight",460,252,null],[253,"55F6CF92-A6F8-DF4C-0B6917EEDEF5B954",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 20 2008 14:54:45","02:54 PM on 12/20/08","55F6CF61-0DC7-054B-843D3CFFEFC462FC","JBrown",460,253,null],[254,"55F88D6F-B6F7-6B31-A97485B35AB31E30",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is a direct answer to Ben Webster, Ph.D. 2007. What I find remarkable that a young researcher who just got his Ph.D. from an Ivy League University, Princeton is writing about a subject completely outside his own expertise. It is true El Naschie uses knot theory among many other things mainly non linear dynamics to model high energy physics. However, you are almost a pure mathematician working in a department of pure mathematics. Therefore you should be critical enough not to commit yourself to such common language and summary judgment belittling people whose work you would never understand without serious studies that will take you at least three years. When will people writing on blogs stop behaving like vandalists smearing the walls of public sanitary facilities with obscene words and pictures. At least this I would have thought is beneath Princeton, dear Webster.","December, 20 2008 14:56:39","02:56 PM on 12/20/08","55F6CF61-0DC7-054B-843D3CFFEFC462FC","JBrown",460,254,null],[255,"58F7A558-FF1D-7ACA-9E1160A57A850CA3",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 21 2008 04:54:31","04:54 AM on 12/21/08","58F7A52E-9541-247E-3E80469B163A38B1","Pavlovich",460,255,null],[256,"58F87CDA-D51B-9CAF-900D955F380A3C15",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Good Lord! I didn't realize he is from Princeton. Dr. Ben Webster is dragging the good name of Princeton through mud. Is that what he learned from his Professors at Princeton when they have just given him his Ph.D. last year? That explains exactly why I am against all these blogs that are filled with anger and frustration and nothing more. The factual and intellectual content is more often than not zero. Ben, if you start your life this way, you will end up like John Baez or was he your external examiner? Search for other ideals son. I doubt Princeton would take someone from UCR, California to be an external examiner. To be in Princeton is a privilege. Don't turn into a blog maniac. Leave this business to those who have nothing better to do. This is a well meant advice. You have defamed El Naschie enough to eternalize him as a victim of the blogs. From what I read about him he couldn't care less about all what you write. It is you who is harming himself. Remember Princeton is a privilege and to receive a writ for defamatory allegation is not looked kindly upon in Princeton.
M. Pavlovich

","December, 21 2008 04:55:26","04:55 AM on 12/21/08","58F7A52E-9541-247E-3E80469B163A38B1","Pavlovich",460,256,null],[257,"5966EF0B-BF5A-8A6A-3736E7AB460EB34B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 21 2008 06:56:04","06:56 AM on 12/21/08","5966EEE2-FA9B-F252-AE95148CADFE7AE1","A.B.",460,257,null],[258,"5967E531-077A-B375-48C64F0D84775245",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I hope this blog could have sufficient tolerance and a minimum of scientific thinking to accept a dissenting voice. You are pretending as if the most important thing is how many papers a scientist publishes. Any reasonable person, let alone a scientist, knows exactly that the number of papers per se is neither here nor there. Since some people for reasons better known to themselves have used the theme as a pretext for launching an attack on Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. Let me give you at least the facts as they are and not as some, for their own end, would like them to be. Mohamed El Naschie is known to be prolific. This has nothing to do with excellence. He published something in the order of 900 papers or even more, simply because he likes to convey his ideas in his own style on all conceivable subjects including art, economy, engineering and physics - something like 250 papers have been published in his own journal in the last 20 years. This is not really much in terms of productivity. It may be even nothing in terms of originality. But these blogs are not the place to discuss it because we cannot write a decent equation understandable to anybody in any of these blogs. When you don't write equations and you don't talk pure science, all what is left are gossip. If you add to gossips envy and vendettas you get the ugly face of internet blogs. You should research the background of the man which some would like to bedevil. Mohamed El Naschie is well known to have been a very wealthy man by the age of 35. He was a full professor of engineering by the age of 34. He has never applied for his research in physics for any funding whatsoever. He never got a penny out of his research in theoretical physics. His ambition is well known to those who live in the Middle East. Some said he wanted to be the Prime Minister of Egypt. That may well be the case. But I doubt very much he could do this job for a single day for reasons I don't want to go into on this blog. El Naschie is a free spirited man and he established CS&F to help scientists in the Third World. The Journal was supposed to be free of charge or at a minimum for a very modest subscription. He came into conflict with Elsevier precisely because of that and he was very upset to see that CS&F turned into a money spinning machine for commercial publishing. The breaking point came many years later with regard to Elsevier translation business enterprise in the People's Republic of China. Some outspoken persons called it a racket. That may be harsh. But El Naschie called it the end of scientific publishing as he knows it. I was privileged to some of the correspondence which he exchanged with top directors in Elsevier. El Naschie used to improve the manuscripts of good Chinese physicists and mathematicians with weak command of the English Language free of charge. You have to know the reasons: El Naschie is an Egyptian nationalist - he is neither a communist, nor a capitalist nor a Muslim fundamentalist or any of these readymade labels. The president of Jia tong University in Shanghai summed it up like that: Egypt was the first country in the world to recognize the People's Republic of China and to withdraw its recognition for Formosa or national China. The People's Republic of China was the first country to stand by Egypt when France and England invaded to recapture the Suez Canal. The President continued by saying it is a pleasure to honor today an Egyptian scientist and friend of China namely Mohamed El Naschie. This might sound to many Europeans as grotesque or comic. However this is what makes Mohamed El Naschie tick. It is typical for him to stand with the underdog, named the Third World where he originally comes from. It is typical for him to be loyal to those who stood with him and his country in its darkest hours. It is as simple as that. I know how hard it is for ordinary physicists to think that there are people who love science for the sake of science. Science is not how Mohamed El Naschie earns his money - that is for sure. CS& F was a costly project for him in terms of time and yes in terms of money. Of course Mohamed is extremely stubborn and he is a formidable opponent when he feels he is right. Those who have charged him wrongly and falsely, I am absolutely confident that they will find out that it is their greatest mistake in life. As with regard to the five papers in the last issue in CS&F written by him, this is really a bad joke. These papers were published on Elsevier science direct site a long time ago. It is the publishing officer in Elsevier who compiled then a hard copy out of the pool of papers. In this particular case, I can tell you an amazing story which I happened to know. The lady in Elsevier compiled this issue with ten papers by Prof. El Naschie and sent it for his approval. He was very busy and said more or less ok ok. I was there and I told him there is a trap and I smell a rat. I said it is ridiculous that Elsevier has put ten papers of yours in one issue although you never approve more than 3 papers at a time per issue if any. El Naschie jumped and said Good gracious, tell them to delete immediately 5 of these papers in order not to delay the production of the issue. I believe someone in Elsevier was trying to frame El Naschie knowingly and on purpose to create a case against him because he opposed the new Elsevier Translation Empire which they set out in China. They charge unreasonable amounts of money for what El Naschie has been doing any case year in and year out free of charge as a service for the young people of a great nation which stood by his country in one of its darkest hours. You have never been so misled about a man as you have been misled about the real motives, quality and character of Mohamed El Naschie. Yes I know him very well but this would never be a reason for me to take his side except that I know that all what has been said about him is more or less a fabrication. In two weeks from now at the most, you will read the truth about this plot in most of the accessible media including Nature. Thank you for being so tolerant to allow somebody to say the truth as he sees it.

","December, 21 2008 06:57:07","06:57 AM on 12/21/08","5966EEE2-FA9B-F252-AE95148CADFE7AE1","A.B.",460,258,null],[259,"59853ACD-B8C1-0497-32EBAAA5C0F78FDA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 21 2008 07:29:10","07:29 AM on 12/21/08","59853A9E-FF87-6589-9614C354279E7D0D","Boem",460,259,null],[260,"5987174F-D0D6-F5C4-135AE8153708B17A",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To those responsible for Secret Blogging Seminar Blog, a sub sub sub branch of the n-Category café. You remain faithful to the idea behind your entire net of blogs directed by John Baez. Any dissenting opinion you take off immediately. You are devoted to show process in the style of the Unholy Chinese Cultural Revolution. Your logic is that of the mobs devoted to intimidation. So this is what John Baez calls a one man internet army. At the end you will see that you are no more than Dad's army only without humor or purpose. You have systematically taken off every single dissenting voice defending Mohamed El Naschie. Your behavior is reminiscent of vicious children and has nothing to do with science or even pseudo conference on scientific publishing. You are a bad joke and when you will receive a court order restraining you and forcing you to pay for your evil deeds, you will stop laughing. You are giving a most miserable example to the youth. You have given the word blogs an infamous name. To try to evoke in you a sense of shame is trying the unfeasible. ","December, 21 2008 07:31:12","07:31 AM on 12/21/08","59853A9E-FF87-6589-9614C354279E7D0D","Boem",460,260,null],[261,"68CC0319-B505-EA86-0DD8F4031349A3E3",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have tried many times to write the truth as I see it on these blogs mentioned by Boem. No way. Anything positive about El Naschie is immediately removed. John Baez describes himself as a one man internet army. Indeed he was able to construct a spider web of interconnected blogs to magnify his pathetic claims to the extent of intimidating almost any commercial publisher. He is a man with an obvious split personality. In the morning he is Dr. John Jekyl pretending to be a professor. At night he is Mr. John Hyde, an internet thug as aptly described in many previous comments. The whole this is just to distract from the basic facts which are truly disgraceful. For the work of Nottale, Ord and El Naschie Reneta Loll received a prize of 1.25 million euros in addition to 3.5 million euros on fractal spacetime. One should ask why should Renate Loll leave the prestigious Max Planx Inst. to work in a small university in Holland? She said she wanted to work with Nobel laureate Gerrard tHooft. But tHooft does not work with anybody. She answered she just wanted to be near to him. Strangely tHooft is very near to El Naschie in more than one sense. El Naschie s, Ord and Nottale s approach is based on indeterministic classical mechanics that is deterministic chaos. Later on tHooft started working on what he termed deterministic quantum mechanics. He published a paper or a discussion on the subject in Physics World which I have read. He did not mention Nottale, Ord or El Naschie. Never the less, I saw a whole issue of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals which was dedicated to Gerrard tHooft s 60th birthday. In fact the cover of this issue had a very nice picture of tHooft on it and in the Editorial, El Naschie praised tHooft for indirectly supporting the approach pioneered by Nottale, Ord and himself. These are the sober facts. No allegation and no defamation. If you want to discuss El Naschie s work and why it is right or wrong, there are scientific methods and venues to do so. This character assassination and despicable campaign by the one man internet army, John Baez is what makes me convinced that this is truly a conspiracy. I am equally convinced that at the end, the truth will always prevail.","December, 24 2008 06:40:47","06:40 AM on 12/24/08","68CC0299-A2F2-92A1-7FD370F469BCE27B","Michalo",460,261,null],[262,"69308585-C2CE-2E8B-05F70A9A3AFE33C1",null,9,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I think that Elsevier is doing dirty jobs in scientific publishing. The CSF journal is owned by Elnaschie and Elsevier is getting money out of this apart from the journal subscription fees. El naschie pays for getting credibility of Elsevier and to have the chance to publish his great scientific ideas in journal hosted by a supposed reputable publishing house like Elsevier. There are other many similar cases in Elsevier.
El naschie keeps publishing junks in CSF for a quite long time and kept unnoticed by mentoring system of Elsevier which seems very odd. While it was so obvious from the far beginning that we have a crackpot.
The same applies to Cambridge university which allowed him to publish his articles for nearly ten years 1993-2001 using its affiliation, while, for sure, he wasn t a staff member there. It is far from reality to imagine that people in Cambridge have been fooled for that long time. According to the following data base
http://www.engineeringvillage2.org
One can find:
17 articles where the affiliation is DAMTP, Cambridge, UK.
72 articles where the affiliation is Dept. of Appl. Math. & Theor. Phys., Cambridge Univ., UK
40 articles where the affiliation is Univ of Cambridge.
No prize for one who guesses at which journal those articles have been published.
It is not enough for Elsevier just to step down Elnaschie , they should explain how these things happened and what their future precautions to prevent such a misusing of editorial power. On the other side, Cambridge people should explain how it was possible for El naschie to use its affiliation for a quite long time, harming their reputation without charging him and any legal action.
The papers of El naschie would be a permanent black record for both Elsevier and Cambridge for too long time in the future.
","December, 24 2008 08:30:34","08:30 AM on 12/24/08","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,262,null],[263,"6A44FCF1-97AB-1662-2B356970470E00BB",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am addressing John Baez and his students Zoran Skoda of Croatia and Said from Egypt as well as their entourage. The problem which you seem incapable of comprehending is that you could not understand neither the motivation nor the philosophy of Mohamed El Naschie from your own perspective. The man has a completely different perspective because of the opportunities and possibilities which always existed for him from the word go. For a poor academic sucker like myself and an impoverished little devil like Skoda or Said a 100 thousand dollar grant is the ceiling of all our scientific dreams. I followed how Mohamed El Naschie evolved and it is obvious to me that he was seeking confrontation with the establishment. You are missing the point altogether. He really does not give a dam about being an Editor in Chief. His main intention was shaking the establishment of high energy physics. He was not evading anyone. Just the contrary. He sought out the establishment and confronted them with his ideas. Initially he was taking a softly, softly approach to see how far he can go I guess. Let me give you a few examples. See his paper on David Gross criticism&. In this paper he defended Sir Stanley Eddington against Nobel laureate David Gross who is known to be very sharp, a king maker and a master of manipulation. I have seen a picture of Mohamed with David Gross who actually visited him in Cairo and if I am not mistaken, he also visited him in Saudi Arabia. In fact Gross signed a contract with Saudi Arabia at the same time that El Naschie did. Second El Naschie wrote many papers presenting Nobel laureate Gerrard tHooft s work in a way that was meant to provoke but Gerrard is Mohamed s best friend, as everybody knows so why is that unless he knows exactly what he wants. Finally Mohamed published a correction of the work of one of the most senior Nobel laureates in theoretical physics Steve Weinberg. Of course he wrote everything in the most polite and courteous language that there is but he knew very well the risk he is taking by pointing out a fundamental mistake in Weinberg s bible on quantum field theory. I could recite to you chapter and verse scores of such incidents which make it very clear that Mohamed felt right or wrong that he has a mission. It is described in many places as El Naschie s revolution of theoretical physics. Finally the establishment woke up and realized the danger of Mohamed El Naschie for them. They had two choices. Either cut him down to size or spend a considerable amount of time to understand what he is talking about. It would have taken them at least a year or two to study dimensional theory. It would take them an equal amount of time to understand transfiniteness and then move to the transfinite dimensional theory of transfinite sets. Some of them must have thought to short circuit the situation by joining the attack on Mohamed El Naschie, motivated not by science but by a personal vendetta. This vendetta has nothing to do with Europe or with Islam. I is to do with the enormous jealousy which the Egyptian born Nobel laureate in experimental chemistry Ahmed Zuwail feels towards Mohamed and the fact that Shadia Shishini, the wife of Said Elnashaie went to prison. That much I understood from what has been written here before. The whole thing may seem complex but it is now becoming transparent. John Baez caused great confusion by pretending to defend science while it was not his motivation at all. The man simply acted out of a false understanding of loyalty to his colleague Renate Loll. Once John Baez was in this tragedy he attracted a great many numbers of internet addicts. I have not heard a single scientific argument against El Naschie s work. The entire vocabulary used is very limited indeed. We have an infinite number of the following words&. garbage, crack pots, trash, incomprehensible, nonsense, pseudo science and so on. This is truly pseudo scientific criticism for which the internet and the blogs have become famous or rather, infamous. When John Baez or Said want to be really deep in analyzing Mohamed El Naschie s work the best they could come with to date is a boring statistic of how many papers he has written and where he was when he wrote them. Then, as if they have nothing better to do, they start analyzing the references. It is really pathetic. The latest on this site by Said is a repetition of what he has said oh so many times before. Why is Mohamed El Naschie s name not on the internet of the web page of this and that institution? It is truly a malady that these people do not see any reality except the virtual reality of the internet. If your name is not on the net, you do not exist. I am in the internet, thus I am. I guess Mohamed has asked the institution which is suffering from these criminal attacks from internet vandals to take his name out to safe guard the interests of his hosts. Said Salah El Din Hamad Elnashaie is a truly international embarrassment for Egypt, Arabia and particularly for Mohamed El Naschie. He wrote a letter to Mohamed El Naschie which I have seen. This ludicrous maniac wrote in Arabic and English that he has devoted the rest of his life to destroying Mohamed El Naschie. He said he will never rest until this is fulfilled. I truly believe him and I think that 90% of the defamation against Mohamed El Naschie is due to him and the rest is motivated by him. He is attacking this site to divert attention from the real issue which the article of Renate Loll and her generous use of the work of Nottale, Ord and Mohamed El Naschie without giving credit to any of them. Why does she do so, the answer is funding. The prize of 1.2 million euro which she got and the 3.5 million euro which she obtained for the Spinoza Inst. in Utrecht. It is the oldest story, namely fighting for money and glory. Mohamed could be accused to a certain extent rightly, that he wanted the glory of participating in a new era of doing theoretical physics differently but he could not ever be accused of fighting for money. The tragic thing about this story which very few people know, is that Said his arch enemy would have perished 20 or so years ago if it would not have been for Mohamed El Naschie who sent him for medical treatment on his own account in London and obtained for him and his wife, employment in King Saud University in Riyadh. Those in the know are aware that Said was black listed from entering Saudi Arabia and because of his extremist background could not find a job anywhere. It was Mohamed who got him employment and gave him money. This is a classical case of someone who not only bites the hand that fed him but excels in trying to destroy it. For a Christmas Eve I think this is a sad enough story and I do not intend to return to this cite again and what ever John Baez and Said will write, it will not be challenged. You can go on living in your virtual world. Good bye and may your God go with you.","December, 24 2008 13:32:32","01:32 PM on 12/24/08","6A44FCC2-C498-2504-B62365D9A0A5E4A2","AD",460,263,null],[264,"77385986-98C9-ADDD-8549B1D0FFD9E22D",null,6,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

If El naschie is an honest scientist and not a fraud. He should mention the web link to the institute he claimed to have a position or related to it in his website.

I challenge him to put links which shows his claims and to assure his honesty for the others. Please give links to the following claimed position

1-He is the current advisor of the Egyptian Ministry for Science and Technology (High Energy Physics and Nanotechnology)

2- He is Adviser to King Saud University on Nanotechnology, and even more he claimed to be the director of King Abdullah Al Saud Institute for Nano and Advanced Technologies.

One can check the following link where he claimed to be the director

http://agenda.fisica.uniud.it/difa/getFile.py/access?contribId=52&sessionId=32&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=9

If you check the webpage of of King Abdullah Al Saud Institute for Nano and Advanced Technologies. You find no mention for him at all

One can check the web page for "Committees consultative sciencetisic"

http://www.nano-ksu.com/publish/article_46.shtml

web page for "Supervisory Committee to King Abdullah Institute for Nanotechnology"

http://www.nano-ksu.com/publish/article_63.shtml

In fact it reflects badly on these countries if this was true.
","December, 27 2008 01:53:48","01:53 AM on 12/27/08","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,264,null],[265,"790F1872-0253-65F3-3E39ED1B85452E23",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 27 2008 10:27:59","10:27 AM on 12/27/08","790F1844-F446-A6F1-DCDCC36236ECB555","Amr",460,265,null],[266,"791190F6-E825-1E2C-826834F67B780EE2",null,2,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The internet fetishist Said Hamad paid John Baez defamation incorporated to establish yet another phony blog entitled L'affaire El Naschie. You can write anything you want against Mohamed El Naschie but they will remove immediately anything for him. That is the extent of scientific thinking of the two men mentioned, Said and John Baez the last. On December 22nd 2008 using the pseudo abbreviation BKG probably a corruption of the KBG, Said's old ideals as a saloon communist, he wrote some entertaining comments and I will pretend they deserve to be answered. Here are the answers:

1) The photo gallery of El Naschie appears indeed in the vol. 25 (2005) but this is an issue dedicated to his 60th birthday. It was not dedicated to his highness, Prof. Mohamed El Naschie but explicitly to the Egyptian engineering scientist and theoretical physicist, Mohamed S. El Naschie. It is completely normal to have photos on such an occasion. Said you try as much as you can, but you cannot mask your deadly jealousy and envy stemming from a rotten soul and aberration of the human gene. In evolutionary terminology, you are a mutation back in time to the missing link. 2) You smell a rat? What is so strange about that Said. It is the natural odor which surrounds you and after all what you have tried with your paid hired hands, your name is mud in Egypt and it will remain so, no matter how hard you try. 3) There is a backlog on the internet of Elsevier's Science Direct of more than three years. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals has the highest impact factor in the history of mathematical science. This is all thanks to Mohamed El Naschie and that is exactly what is killing you Said but remember this is the same Mohamed El Naschie who took you for treatment in London on his own account, who got you a visa and a job together with your wife in Saudi Arabia. Who protected you from persecution from the University of Dhahran in Saudi Arabia and the University of Al Ain in UAE for misappropriating funds and disappearing over night. You appeared later on in the University of Auburn, Alabama but you were dismissed and then you appeared in British Columbia and you were sacked. Then as a distinguished professor for environmental studies, although you are a chemical engineer, you were sacked again. It is the same Mohamed El Naschie who tried to get you a visiting professorship at Cambridge but they did not accept you and that is why you hate Cambridge . It is the same Mohamed El Naschie who tried to get you a journal for Chaos in Chemical Engineering. Prof. Rutherford Aris was one of your supporters but Elsevier turned down the project because of your unstable character, most probably and that is why you hate Elsevier as well. To put succinctly you hate yourself and what you have become and that is what is at the root of all this evil you are living in. You became the tool for the people who have more mundane reasons to defame Mohamed El Naschie, such as Dr. Renate Loll. 4) You can either publish in your own journal or you can't. There is not a single Editor in Chief who does not publish in his own journal. You know that very well and you are not convincing anybody in the know. It remains how many papers can one publish? You are a famous communist, albeit a saloon one, of Egypt Said so probably you are educated enough to know an important maxima from the communist manifesto. Don't they say each according to his needs and each according to his ability? Mohamed is not just an Editor in Chief, he is the Founding Editor in Chief. He created the journal and the discipline. He published about 2-3% of all papers. Prof. Munir Nayfeh and Prof. Ali Nayfeh of the Nayfeh clan publish about 5% of all papers in their journal. Prof. Leon Chua of World Scientific journal Int. Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos publishes about 4% of all papers on an extremely limited subject called the Chua circuit. The Editors of the Elsevier journal Physica D publishes about 50% of all papers. The Editor of Physics Review publishes about 1% of all papers. When you remember how many papers they publish, you are talking about thousands of papers. I am sorry Said but all your reasoning is artificial and blown out of all proportion to fit your real reason which keeps you writing all this trash on Christmas and New Year. Your real reason is revenge and vendetta for what you have caused your self and your family and which you attribute to Mohamed El Naschie. John Baez on the other hand has a more rational reason. He comes from a show biz family and is very proud about his relation to the truly great Joan Baez. She is truly a wonderful woman but he would not qualify to be her used shoes. As a physicist he is not bad but he is surely second if not third class. For this reason he created for himself internet defamation incorporated to feel important and earn some money. In the circumstances when a friend like Dr. Loll is in distress because of plagiarizing some of Mohamed El Naschie's work, then of course he comes to her aid. Noblesse oblige. Finally all of you are deadly jealous from the freedom which Mohamed enjoys. I am afraid he was in Cambridge Said and he refused to be tied to one University, even if it is Cambridge because he did not need to be the slave of anybody, least of all the slave of the lower emotions of hatred and jealousy like you.

I hope this will keep you busy for the rest of the vacation Said. I am sure even John Baez has something better to do, even if it is as a backup for his aunt's band. That would be far more constructive work than nourishing this ridiculous image of a one man internet thug. Oh sorry, I think he calls it army. Bon Noel and happy new year and may God relieve you from your pains.

Amr

","December, 27 2008 10:30:41","10:30 AM on 12/27/08","790F1844-F446-A6F1-DCDCC36236ECB555","Amr",460,266,null],[267,"797EEC76-E6C2-60E9-B2010B17CC5CFB4A",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 27 2008 12:30:07","12:30 PM on 12/27/08","797EEC49-E83E-3814-4F9338D7B87FB067","Albert Chen",460,267,null],[268,"797FB814-B175-E4FC-C877D4FB95713536",null,3,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The comment by AB is logical. I know very well that the Chinese Academy of Science wants to control all Chinese Scientists. This is the communist party policy. They got an old Professor, Chuo-Bin Lin and a double agent working for Elsevier Charon Duermeijer to establish a journal called Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation. This is not an Elsevier Journal. It is a very weak and old Chinese Journal and they now want to make it the top journal in nonlinear science. However the real reason is the large money revenue coming from translating Chinese articles into English. Elsevier of course doesn't mind this unethical behavior as long as they make millions of dollars. That is the real story. It is a scandal which will harm all commercial publishing. I know from friends working in China with Professor Mohamed El Naschie that he was against this project. I guess his enemies conspired with Elsevier to get rid of him.

","December, 27 2008 12:30:59","12:30 PM on 12/27/08","797EEC49-E83E-3814-4F9338D7B87FB067","Albert Chen",460,268,null],[269,"79906A5F-FB67-6A3C-FDA25EB6C548BDA0",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","December, 27 2008 12:49:14","12:49 PM on 12/27/08","79906A2C-00BF-A45F-25D2617F9D592985","Al",460,269,null],[270,"79915435-C563-4619-88E3C23D49ACDA2C",null,2,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

All Editors in Chief publish in their own Journals. This is completely normal. How much one publishes is a matter of ability. Therefore what you should discuss is the scientific quality of the publications. Reading the defamation written against Mohamed El Naschie, it is clear that no scientific issue whatsoever was considered. I am sure that those writing on this subject are completely incapable of a rational scientific discussion. Internet blogs are known for sensational news and scandals. They live from media frenzy. This is not the place to discuss science.
Al Cardenas

","December, 27 2008 12:50:14","12:50 PM on 12/27/08","79906A2C-00BF-A45F-25D2617F9D592985","Al",460,270,null],[271,"7A5F61DA-F43D-3A6C-65584435EC61EC49",null,3,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The power of the almighty chance brought me to this site. I know both Mohamed and Said. It is truly an incredible irony because Said Salah El Din Hamed Elnashaie is the one who can write papers quicker than he himself could read them. I am a chemical engineer just like Said. I was the Dean of Engineering in a north Canadian University. I arranged for a conference on mathematical modeling and chemical engineering. This was maybe fifteen or more years ago. We received one paper from Prof. Mohamed El Naschie and if I remember correctly, it was on the stability of chemical reactors using Rene Thom s catastrophe theory. We also had a contribution from Prof. Said. Believe it or not, he contributed 24 papers to one conference. He had a whole army of co-authors. Almost the entire department of chemical engineering in King Saud University of Saudi Arabia. What can we understand from that? I think one thing Egyptians are extremely peculiar creations of the Almighty. I am not drawing this conclusion from the scientific output of Mohamed and Said alone. Look at the pyramids. Who on earth could put so many stones on top of each other to create a wonder of the world? Taking it at its face value, the Egyptian s are marvelous pyramid builders. They could use it as an export article to enhance their collapsing economy once they have solved the transportation problem. Egypt has some of the worst, if not the worst economical problems of whole Africa. I said Africa you notice. You can no longer compare Egypt with its Arab brothers. It is at the bottom. Gone are the days where Egypt could be considered culturally part of the Mediterranean. They are a shadow of their own old self. Amidst all this misery and one of the lowest per capita incomes in the world, you read all these bizarre stories and contrived arguments about who publishes what and how much. If the Egyptians and their friends are evaluating scientific production by numbers of papers, why not go all the way and evaluate it by the number of pages. I have even a better Egyptian idea why not evaluate the Egyptian scientific output by weighing the papers in the bazaar and may the heaviest win! I think in this case the Egyptians will abandon write on papyrus and type their research on heavy leather of Nile buffalos or crocodiles. I am sure you have all felt my contempt by now to this oriental bazaar which the supporters of Mohamed and Said and John Baez and the rest of you have opened here on a respectable scientific site. People are dying in Gaza, Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan and a ravaging economical disaster is looming on the horizon for the entire world and some silly idiots are concerned here mainly with how many papers have been published in this dam Fractals, Solitons & Chaos. Now I am sure you think I am an Israelite. Wrong I am Egyptian and that is why I find the whole thing ranging from tragic to comedy. I hope God will restore the sanity of the people involved.


","December, 27 2008 16:35:17","04:35 PM on 12/27/08","7A5F61A8-A775-C55A-5E4CA5A1E5BF3E6A","Adel T",460,271,null],[272,"7E79073C-C5B6-0AF1-19F158B1B7EA1D40",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

During my years in Cambridge I attended one of those unforgettable lectures by Prof. Sir Arthur Stanly Eddington. In his characteristic prose Eddington gave the following definition for what he nicknamed super mathematics. He said: We need a super mathematics in which the operations are as unknown as the quantities they operate on and a super mathematician who does not know what he is doing when he performs these operations. Such a super mathematics is the theory of groups. Sir Eddington s lecture was reprinted in the fifties but I forget where. I was reminded of all that after what I read about Mohamed El Naschie s work on this and other sites. It seems to me that El Naschie completed what Eddington started but could not bring it to a satisfactory conclusion. El Naschie fused two subjects to a solid unit. First he used causal partially ordered set theory and transfinite groups. Then he joined his sets to the golden mean number system and transfinite dimension theory. The result was a simple computational partially ordered set formalism reminiscent of the original Herman Wyle gauge theory. It would be helpful if we put the polemic and unconstructive rhetoric aside and concentrate upon the mathematical concepts implicit in El Naschie s work with the necessary objectivity and seriousness befitting true scientists.

J.T., Oxbridge

","December, 28 2008 11:41:47","11:41 AM on 12/28/08","7E79070D-AAA1-F4F9-21BC56B3DD7A2D08","J.T.",460,272,null],[273,"988885D7-A39A-C314-94B04B0F85C309C6",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

One of John Baez sock puppets was saying on an obscure sub branch of n category cafe that he cannot fathom why so many people should be citing the work of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. Here is something which may help you visualize the situation. Why don?t you make a scientific analysis of El Naschie?s theory of transfinite dimension and a serious study of the work of Brauwer instead of all your irrelevant statistics which you are inundating us with. Besides, do you know how to fathom that Dr. Rentate Loll from Utrecht Uniersity obtained 1.2 million euro prize for publishing the work of Nottale, Ord and El Naschie. I should say republishing. It is not difficult to understand. The lady works in an Institute founded by a Nobel laureate. All what you need is a Nobel laureate to recommend you for the prize and that is what happened to her. Is your ability to fathom better now?","January, 02 2009 13:08:50","01:08 PM on 01/02/09","988885AE-ABE0-7947-EA2F12A700569FD3","JBS",460,273,null],[274,"A5818608-9796-6C93-9F784B09044C72AA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Believe it or not

El naschie had four articles whose titles containing Witten. The articles are

1- A few hints and some theorems about Witten's M theory and T-duality,

Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 25 (2005)545 û548

2- Using Witten's five Brane theory and the holographic principle to derive the value of the electromagnetic structure constant alpha =1/137,

Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 38 (2008)1051 -1053

3- Fuzzy knot theory interpretation of Yang -Mills instantons and Witten's 5-Brane model,

Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 38 (2008)1349 -1354

4- On the Witten -Duff Branes model together with knots theory and E 8 E 8 super strings in a single fractal spacetime theory,

Chaos, Solitons and Fractals xxx (2008)xxx - xxx . The article is still in press, but you can get the pdf. file.

The amazing thing about the references of the first three articles is that they don't contain any research paper for Witten. Finally, the great man realized his mistake and put a reference for Witten in the fourth one (the most recent one). But the man didn't acknowledge who pointed out to him this bug in his program which he used to generate papers (Backreaction blog). Any way this a good step, at least the references are now correctly produced. Unfortunately you still need further improvement in your code that seems has a serious problem with E. Witten. Although you referred to a paper of Witten the program has produced a wrong title for it. In the reference list we find

[4 ]Witten E. Searching for a realistic Kaluza-Klein Theory. Nucl Phys B 1981;186:412 - 28.

While the correct title turned out to be, as you can check yourself:

Search for a realistic Kaluza-Klein theory

Nuclear Physics B, Volume 186, Issue 3, 10 August 1981, Pages 412-428, Edward Witten

As N. Eisfeld wrote on Mar. 26, 2008 @ 18:32 GMT, in this blog, http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/395, describing El naschie

"This man has never bad-mouthed, ignored or downplayed anyone or any contribution. He also acknowledged every single person who contributed to his work unless he genuinely did not know and then he will immediately apologize of the unintended omission.
" ","January, 05 2009 01:36:15","01:36 AM on 01/05/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,274,null],[275,"A6CE8765-E2D9-4F54-04D1B0152D79B2D4",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To An alias KK alias Said Elnashaie alias John Brunt alias S. Khalil alias AlArabi alias the Sons of Egypt etc, etc, etc. compliments of the King and I.
It is truly amazing how much triviality people who profess to be scientists can harbor. The above mentioned person has inundated us with dozens of trivial analyses of the literature. It is the same person who hates El Naschie for nothing more than that he hijacked the media for five years. Personal envy and inferiority complexes on the rocks, thick, neither shaken nor stirred. Poor soul. Can t you for once say something important? You are killing yourself searching for anything you can comprehend from the work of El Naschie and all that you can come with is these pathetic statistics of the literature. OK. Let me free you from your illusions, if something of the sort is possible at all.
1.\t I have seen you and I know Mohamed El Naschie. The reason he hijacked the media is not
connected to his theory nor the width and depth of his knowledge and his intellectuality. It is mainly because of the attractiveness of his personality, stemming from living in harmony with himself. In old age you get the face you deserve and I am afraid a man full of bitterness and hatred like yourself does not and will never have a face appealing to the media. What are you going to do about that? There is no beauty salon or cosmetic surgeon who can change the soul which projects on your face.
2.\tFor a high energy physicist the name Witten as well as his 5-Brane in 11 dimensions is as well known as the name of Isaac Newton. When you write a paper on classical mechanics and mention the name of Newton being synonymous with classical mechanics, you do not give Principia as a reference. There is not a single person who would make such a remark as yours unless he is totally ignorant or blinded by hatred. What El Naschie has forgotten about the literature in high energy physics, a man like you could spend a life time trying to learn and not achieve. Said you have disgraced yourself, disgraced your family and disgraced Egypt. You are becoming a parasite and a fearful virus. We are all afraid of you. But this does not make you respectable. Everybody is afraid of microbes and viruses but that does not make them respectable. I think the best punishment for you is to wish you longevity of life so that you can suffer from your unattractive character as long as possible.

","January, 05 2009 07:39:59","07:39 AM on 01/05/09","A6CE86ED-E8F4-FA7D-9A65B28EE7BEB628","T. Hilal",460,275,null],[276,"A6E2DE88-ADAA-6EBF-D261A545F98D8EFF",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The following comment is a serious comment directed to serious specialized scientists, mathematicians and mathematical physicists such as Edward Witten and Steve Weinberg. I also sincerely hope that Prof. R. Loll will take this comment seriously and discuss it at depth with her distinguished colleagues and superiors. The completely novel aspects in Mohamed El Naschie's work is his discovery of a Cantorian manifold as the correct model for spacetime. Please take it seriously: Mohamed El Naschie was the first ever to use the notion Cantorian manifold for physics. I hope Mohamed El Naschie is also reading these lines because he thinks he is the first to discover the mathematical notion of Cantorian manifold. El Naschie is wrong on this point. He is the first to use it in theoretical physics and connected to the spacetime of quantum gravity. However the notion Cantorian manifold was invented in pure mathematics almost a hundred years ago. Mathematicians used exactly the same words, namely Cantorian manifold. This manifold is defined exactly by the clash between three different dimensions precisely as given by El Naschie, namely the topological dimension 4, the Hausdorff dimension 4.23606799 and 4 minus 0.1803397. The resulting overall dimension becomes unavoidably statistical and fractal and is equal to 4.019999 almost exactly as found by Renate Loll using computer simulation. It follows then that El Naschie's work is founded in the general theory of transfinite dimension. Again this is not an invention of El Naschie. The mathematical theory of transfinite dimensions is almost 100 years old and had a relatively humble beginning in the work of Menger as well as Brauwer and Uhryson. I do not believe El Naschie knew that he was rediscovering the work of eminent pure mathematicians. I believe he was led to his discovery by pure engineering intuition and probably later on became aware of the early mathematical work. He may have found it irrelevant to go into historical reappraisal of the subject and was content with referring to the work of Menger as well as the modern work on fractals. The point is theoretical physicists talk a lot about dimensions but do not realize how mathematically sophisticated the notion of dimension is. There is a vast body of literature on the mathematical theory of dimensions and when you study it you will realize that El Naschie's work hit the nail on its head. He is the first to make the effort of introducing the mathematical theory of dimension and the resulting Cantorian manifold into physics. Some may be forgiven for finding El Naschie's work difficult to understand because they simply lacked the vital knowledge of the mathematical general theory of transfinite dimensions. But what I find unforgivable is to pervert a scientific debate into a mud slinging, shouting and slandering match. I sincerely hope that away from the convenient prejudice of numerology, serious scientists will look carefully into these comments, research the general theory of dimensions and come back with constructive comments, criticism and suggestions regarding El Naschie's theory. At the end we can only gain. Look at what is happening in Palestine, Gazza and contrast this with Switzerland where four languages are coexisting in harmony. The difference as expressed eloquently by the great Israeli musician Daniel Barenboim at the 2009 New Year concert in Vienna is the difference between civilization and barbarism.","January, 05 2009 08:02:12","08:02 AM on 01/05/09","A6CE86ED-E8F4-FA7D-9A65B28EE7BEB628","T. Hilal",460,276,null],[277,"A931E57B-A8B5-8CAB-6C89B2EFCB02328C",null,3,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

There is no man as transparent in everything as Mohamed El Naschie. Who else would dare to dedicate a paper on Quarks Confinement modifying the conventional view about asymptotic freedom to Nobel laureate Gerardus tHooft. That is exactly what El Naschie did in his 2008 paper On quarks confinement and asymptotic freedom published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 37 (2008) 1289-1291. Under the title and address it is visibly written for even a blind man to read - Dedicated to Gerardus tHooft. I have seen many papers dedicated to tHooft published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals including a whole special issue to celebrate Gerardus tHooft's 60th birthday. In fact we in Elsevier sent a dozen or so copies to Dr. Loll who was in charge of the birthday celebration arrangements. When will those blatant liers stop streading lies. It is despicable that some people pretend and totally unconvincingly that they have uncovered anything. El Naschie was the Editor in Chief of Chaos Solitons & Fractals for almost two decades and nobody said a word until it became convenient for some to create a scandal which is not a scandal at all but an absolute sham directed in the first place against Elsevier and will eventually evaporate into nothing.","January, 05 2009 18:47:46","06:47 PM on 01/05/09","A931E549-B73B-F765-16B48A068F7823E2","S. Martin",460,277,null],[278,"B23F40A2-0184-5565-4A18AFB403F1BCE7",null,4,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I had read about Causality before. If Causality exists in quantum space time, if there is indeed a "flow of time", this means that the special relativity concept of time is wrong. This means that special relativity is wrong.

I do not want a deterministic universe, so it is probably good news.","January, 07 2009 12:58:56","12:58 PM on 01/07/09","B23F4075-D6B3-0961-0324AC29F5971298","QuantumBrain",460,278,null],[279,"BAD907DB-0C47-5A7D-4C0CF0CA7F026AA9",null,4,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

As the smear campaign intensifies against Mohamed El Naschie, no one is in doubt any more about why and when it started. It is all a consequence of the outcry on this site against the article of Dr. Renate Loll, Dr. Ambjorn and Dr. Jukiewicz. When the people responsible for this disgraceful campaign take their shameful false allegations to the gutter press as well as to respectable physics institutions using their old boy network, then they are only proving the point. Could anyone imagine that a dissident thinker like Einstein could have survived present day scientific financial cartels? I think not. Einstein s ideas were not accepted overnight. Even years after special and general relativity, German Nobel laureates and their entourage of anti Semitic herds were writing books like&.Hundreds of German scientists against Einstein. None the less, the situation in the past, grim as it appears today, was much better than at our present time. The tyranny of money and funding of research, theoretical or experimental is far worse than Nazi Germany. A man who could escape this tyranny like Mohamed El Naschie must be lynched. And this is not enough. His scientific production must be confiscated and transferred to one of the so called centers of excellence and purified using new terminology. Once this ritual is completed, a 1.2 million euro prize can be bestowed on the lucky he or she who happens to be standing beside the purifier, usually a man with a magical connection to a laureate or similar high authority in the rotten temple of the establishment. In this light we all see what John Baez and his army of internet hooligans and intimidators are inundating us with every day while secure behind a blog created especially to accomplish the mission of silencing those who complain about scientific plagiarizing. History teaches us that at the end the truth will always come out. You could be commissioned by presidents of societies with vested interests and as many heads of committees as you want but at the end the truth always comes out. Sooner or later and no matter how many corrupt journalists are used, the truth about this smear campaign against El Naschie will emerge. For Galileo it took hundreds of years but in this particular case and with the help of the modern methods of communication, which the internet hooligans are using themselves, it will take this time only hundreds of days at the most. For this reason John Baez, Said Elnashaie, Hassan Hamdy and the rest of the rotten core should enjoy their orgy of lies and scandal as while they can. The day of reckoning is sooner than you think. The arm of the law and the honorable which still constitute the majority of the inhabitants of this planet, will reach you everywhere and will expose you exactly as it exposed President Bush whom you should have taken on your band wagon, not because you are of the caliber of the president of a state, but because he is made of the same dirt of which slanderers, intimidators and internet hooligans are made.","January, 09 2009 05:03:52","05:03 AM on 01/09/09","BAD9079C-B38C-A61D-8082336F6FF7855E","Short",460,279,null],[280,"C5D336D2-E3AA-4899-C16894BFC7407D43",null,2,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The following comment should dispel any doubt about the scientific integrity and sense of mission which Mohamed El Naschie possesses, in bigger than life measures. It is taken from the Forward of the 1993 book Quantum Mechanics and Chaotic Fractals which he edited together with Nobel laureate Ilya Prigogine and published by Pergamon/Elsevier. The closing paragraph reads:
In conclusion, let us express our hope that the present issue will encourage young scientists to take a fresh look at quantum mechanics even if this is in strong opposition to well-established views. Fear from opposition and taking unpopular new avenues can be quite an obstacle in the face of progress as many notable scientists have repeatedly warned. Luckily there are and will always be eminent scientists who are ready to bear storms of opposition and convey t us a new view which may have escaped attention. De Broglie is a classical example; Bohm and Bell are more recent ones. In fact, we have the feeling that some of the present articles may become the subject of debates, agreements and passionate disagreements for sometime. As far as we are concerned that alone would make the effort more than worthwhile.
A minimum of fairness is required, at least from the scientific community. The man knew exactly what he is doing and his main crime is that he was brave enough to say the truth as he sees it. No man can do more, but do we do that? No, of course not. We do what our superiors ask us to do and we do what brings us funding. In other words we follow the herd.
I found another paper by El Naschie from 2005, so it is not that long ago. The title is tHooft ultimate building blocks and space-time as an infinite dimensional set of transfinite discrete points. This alone proves my point. El Naschie was always seeking dialogue and proper scientific debate. He did not duck or hide. And if this would mean provoking the establishment, so be it. I find El Naschie to be a man for all seasons and we should thank him or at least leave him in peace. The smear campaign against El Naschie has taken criminal forms which is going to invite state prosecution. The one man internet army of John Baez is not fiction. The man is really dangerous and I appeal to all civilized people to do what ever there is in their hands to stop John Baez before he kills somebody. He and his army have done so much harm to so many families that he should be thankful he lives in a country governed by law. In other countries John Baez would dealt with quite differently. But change is coming to America and as Guantanamo prison will be abolished, so too will this internet terrorism.
Keyes

","January, 11 2009 08:13:20","08:13 AM on 01/11/09","C5D336A7-9AE7-721E-F509982692A5E96D","Keyes",460,280,null],[281,"C997070E-0E4C-159B-265840317CDC6562",null,6,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It seems that the great man (El Naschie) is illiterate in physics, you can look at the spires data base for High energy physics literature you will find 124 articles titled with Witten and all of them contain references for Witten]s work except yours that even have strange tiltes. Please look at http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=FIND+T+witten%27s&FORMAT=www&SEQUENCE=



The works of Witten are not standard or so popular as you think. It is not the same status as classical mechanics which we have since three hundred years and is a well established discipline.

I brought you another surprise , here I just quote from the n-category group, which has been Posted by: Denis-Charles Cisinski on November 11, 2008

??er discovering the existence of this ignored genius through this discussion, I couldn]t resist and had a look at his work (I am so blessed by providence that my library paid Elsevier enough to give me access on line to all of this wonderful journal: Chaos, Solitons & Fractals?

I had a look by random at three papers, and I felt really lucky: if you have the opportunity to Wread] the following two articles,

El Naschie, On dimensions of Cantor set related system, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol 3, no. 6 (1993)

and

El naschie, Dimension and Cantor spectra, Chaos Solitons and Fractals, Vol. 4, no. 11 (1994)

you will see that, up to a small bunch of lines, they are exactly the same (I mean word for word). Of course this method of writing is quite efficient to reach the 300]s of published papers. Well, 300 is not that much: the guy is lazy! Or maybe repeating the same thing three hundred times is a pedagogic trick to make sure we, dummy people, understand? Apart from kidding, did someone tried to count how much times he did copy himself so faithfully?

And I have been so lucky that the Wresults] of these Wtwo] papers seem to form the corner stone of WE-infinity theory].

I am just amazed.\\

Till here the quotation is ended and just we present a simple explanation. It is well known in producing random numbers by computer codes, the produced numbers are not truly random and are called pseudo random numbers, at the best they satisfy some certain characteristic properties of randomness. If the programs is used for long it could reproduce the same numbers with clearly wrong statistical properties. The same phenomena occurs in producing pseudo science, if you are using a not well tested program for generating papers , the same paper can be produced two times and that was the case for El naschie. Since El naschie is so transparent in everything, he published the same article two times in his own journal, although it was clear that the code he used was broken too early. Who else would dare to publish the same article two times in the same journal. That is exactly what El Naschie did in his 1993 paper On ? dimensions of Cantor set related system, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol 3, no. 6 (1993)\\ and ??ension and Cantor spectra, Chaos Solitons and Fractals, Vol. 4, no. 11 (1994)\\.

In fact, this is just a statistical analysis of the El Naschie]s papers that are really chaotic with no contents and superficially seeming complex but trivially could be produced by iterating some few buzz words.

Maybe the great man could provide us with a more interesting explanation.
","January, 12 2009 01:46:04","01:46 AM on 01/12/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,281,null],[282,"CB88C620-DB90-359F-8346479D8271473D",null,5,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To An
From wonder to wonder, thus I am. I hope this is a deep enough sentence to our dear friend An. Less than 24 hours ago his name was Jimmy Hs. He put the same ridiculous comment on FQXi. Then hey presto, he underwent a metamorphosis and became An. The real name is Said Elnashaie, alias S. Khalil, alias John Baez, alias Technicolor because there are only three colors recognized in the standard model. Your comments are standard model for ignorance. You do not have a clue what you are talking about Said. You had better stick to producing films for Jihan Fadel. You moved from an engineering scientist to the person who was in the box you know where. Now you are moving from the box to the Egyptian world of starlets. Your parents would have been very ashamed of you. Couldn t you find anything except these silly remarks of yours? I think you were in London when the memorable words of this wonderful Secretary of State for the Exchequer. When a journalist was too dumb for him to answer, he used to say in his remarkable voice You my dear are a silly billy . That is what you are Said, alias John Baez etc. etc. You, your analyses and your comments are the epitome of silliness. You think I will relieve you and tell you the answer to your little puzzle? Of course I will not, but here is a hint. It will take you a hundred years before you can talk about theoretical physics with someone like Mohamed El Naschie. You call him the big guy. Well, why not fat man. By the time you can read his papers intelligently, you will undergo another metamorphosis from something resembling Buddha to something resembling the mummy of Luxor. Again, a well meant advice. Go and see your shrink. Oh, I forgot, they kicked you out of Pennsylvania State. Well I am sure you will find some psychiatrist near The 6th October City where you live, outside Cairo. Again, leave this site. It is a respectable scientific site. We are discussing serious scientific issues. Don t bother us or we will put your picture, you know where, on this site with your mobile number and the picture of Jihan Fadel if it is not against the law in democratic countries to show such pictures.
","January, 12 2009 10:49:45","10:49 AM on 01/12/09","CB88C5F5-96BD-6EAE-7FC125A609E777C0","snk",460,282,null],[283,"CC5BD3B4-E3BD-91B4-ACDA784E70C05E90",null,4,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I agree that Mohamed El Naschie was trying to provoke the establishment into a scientific dialogue. You see that clearly from many of his papers which carry the names of famous scientists in their title. It is as if he is trying to address them directly. Take for instance Penrose universe and Cantorian spacetime as a model for noncommutative quantum geometry. This is a very informative short paper. You do not need to go on dwelling on irrelevant matters unless your intention is defamation rather than information. As for the many papers cited in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, there are just as many papers published in other journals. Why not look into a paper published in Computer Math. & Appl, Vol. 29,12 (1995), also an Elsevier journal, entitled Statistical geometry of a Cantor discretum and semiconductors. You see it is not only Chaos, Solitons & Fractals which accepted his papers. There are many, many other well established international journals which published El Naschie s work. Why do you want to gloss over these facts? I can give you many other journals where I have seen the fundamental ideas of El Naschie s E-infinity theory discussed in the same characteristic way, unique to his science. El Naschie moves sovereignly between number theory, experimental data and theoretical concepts connecting all three together in a unique fabric. It is not usual for theoretical physicists to work in this way. However in nonlinear dynamics so called numerical experiments are on the daily order of researchers. At the beginning of American science they mix experiment and theory as well as computer calculations in a characteristic way which was not known at this time in Europe. Now this American way is the usual way of doing science all over the world, rather than the exception. I could imagine that Mohamed El Naschie s way of bringing all conceivable tools including number theory and numerical simulation to bear on a problem until it yields a solution might become sometime in the future the new way of doing science. John Baez is puzzled by Mohamed El Naschie s papers on E8. He simply does not understand that there are ten exceptional groups rather than only five and that there are eight groups of the E line. He does not understand how El Naschie adds all the dimensions together. The reason is very simple. John Baez does not understand the concept of average symmetry. The concept is well known in nonlinear dynamics. Rather than slandering El Naschie, John Baez and his friends should start with something easy which they can grasp. I advise them to read El Naschie s paper in the European Journal of Physics. In 1994 this journal s name was Il Nuovo Cimento. It is the journal where the work of Einstein and Fermi was published. The paper was entitled Average symmetry, stability and ergodicity of multidimensional Cantor sets, Vol. 109 B, N.2, Feb. 1994. Is this journal also run by idiots who do not know what they are doing? OK. Here is another one dealing with statistical mechanics and Cantor sets in physics. The paper of El Naschie published in SAMS was entitled On universal behavior and statistical mechanics of multi-dimensional Triadic Cantor sets, Vol. 11, p. 217, 1993. You need another example? Here is one of the fundamental papers of El Naschie published in a journal for astronomy and astrophysics. Vistas in Astronomy, paper entitled Quantum mechanics, Cantorian space-time and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Vol. 37, p. 249, 1993. And to show that El Naschie s work makes a great deal of mathematical sense you may look at a beautiful theorem which he proved in a pure mathematical journal called Appl. Math. Lett. The paper is entitled Orbits stability and dimensional criticality of Cantor sets, Vol. 7, No. 2, p. 91, 1994. When will John Baez and the like of him of mediocre mathematical physicists realize that not everything they cannot understand is wrong. In addition people who are so engaged in internet chat rooms do not have the time to read in depth anything. The establishment has two ways of dealing with somebody like El Naschie. The first way is to ignore him. When this does not work, then they try to laugh him out of court. They tried both ways with Einstein. The same was applied to David Bohm. A more recent example is Mitchell Feigenbaum and chaos theory. All these methods did not work with El Naschie. In addition the priority dispute which broke after the publication of the work of Renate Loll which is the subject of this site, necessitates a far harsher method. Now they are character assassinating Mohamed El Naschie and if he does not yield, maybe they will yield to physical liquidation of him, who knows. They are putting unprecedented effort, finance and man power into discrediting El Naschie once and for all time. They tried the same with Einstein but somehow the truth will always prevail. People think that Einstein s theory was accepted immediately. Nothing is further from the truth. In all events, and I say it out of my own heart, shame on you John Baez and shame on all those who are helping him in this infamous job of smearing a respectable man.","January, 12 2009 14:40:16","02:40 PM on 01/12/09","CC5BD37B-BABC-CC65-45F02232CF462066","Khan",460,283,null],[284,"D24A8CF9-01C9-7331-B5EC84D2D691B73A",null,4,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I was hit by a totally idiotic contradictory expression describing Mohamed El Naschie s theory as a Cantorian continuum. OK. The writer was one of those pretentious journalists flattering themselves by pretending to be science writers. His name was Christopher or something similar which is not important. What is important is that a Cantor space can never be continuous. It is manifestly discrete. If the said journalist and the like of him would at least have read the title of a paper published in Computer Math. & Appl. Applications of which El Naschie is manifestly not an Editor, he would realize it should be called Cantor discretum. The paper is by El Naschie and he writes an acknowledgement to no one less that the legendary Carl Friedrich von Weizsaecker. See Vol. 29, No. 12, pp. 103 Computer Math. Appl. Will this smear campaign find no end? Are internet criminals out of contracts because of the financial slump so there is nothing left except to write about Mohamed El Naschie? Couldn t John Baez find a well paid job so that he does not need to supplement his income by defaming people continuously? You want to discuss Mohamed El Naschie s work objectively and seriously, then stop counting pages and papers and who is the Editor of what. For instance he is not the Editor of Int. J. of Theoretical Physics. The Editor of this Journal is Prof. David Finkelstein. At least three Nobel laureates are on the Editorial Board, Sheldon Glashow, Chen-Ning Yang and the late Ilya Prigogine. In addition you have names like Yuval Ne eman, Roger Penrose and Leonard Susskind. Never the less in Vol. 37, No. 12, Dec. 1998 El Naschie s theory was published with all its ramifications in a paper entitled Superstrings, Knots and Noncommutative Geometry in E-infinity Space, pp. 2935-2951. The paper was accepted immediately as submitted on March 21, 1998. Does this mean he had a secret agreement with this journal? Do you have another conspiracy theory that in reality he owns the journal or something? Here is another one. In the Int. J. of Modern Physics E, El Naschie has yet another account of his theory under the title Topological defects in the symplictic vacuum, anomalous positron production and the gravitational instanton which appeared in Vol. 13, No. 4, Aug. 2004, pp. 835. Anybody who has been following this story must be by now sick and tired from the despicable characters perpetuating internet defamation. The point which every one of us should understand is that each and every one of us can be subjected to this internet terrorism. They are truly terrorists. How would you feel when your children in school are spoken to about what others have read about their father: shameless lies. What would anyone feel when he suddenly finds his picture and his private life exposed on the internet, painted by the fantasy of lunatics or greedy journalists who are paid to hit and run. No Editor-in-Chief is immune any more from the attacks of criminal elements on the internet, in fact no one is. I ask the readers of this site to think about it and to do whatever is in within their possibility to take arms against this internet hooliganism. There has to be new and much tougher laws forbidding people from using false identities and false email addresses to spread lies worldwide ruining the careers and private lives of innocent, decent people. Together we are strong enough to prevent this new kind of criminality which the internet has brought into our lives and homes.","January, 13 2009 18:19:07","06:19 PM on 01/13/09","D24A8CC7-B192-C6F4-9B21667ADFFCD0B9","Conrad K",460,284,null],[285,"D24AFD79-E650-4C1F-541F1B844435DE17",null,4,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I was hit by a totally idiotic contradictory expression describing Mohamed El Naschie's theory as a Cantorian continuum. OK. The writer was one of those pretentious journalists flattering themselves by pretending to be science writers. His name was Christopher or something similar which is not important. What is important is that a Cantor space can never be continuous. It is manifestly discrete. If the said journalist and the like of him would at least have read the title of a paper published in Computer Math. & Appl. Applications of which El Naschie is manifestly not an Editor, he would realize it should be called Cantor discretum. The paper is by El Naschie and he writes an acknowledgement to no one less that the legendary Carl Friedrich von Weizsaecker. See Vol. 29, No. 12, pp. 103 Computer Math. Appl. Will this smear campaign find no end? Are internet criminals out of contracts because of the financial slump so there is nothing left except to write about Mohamed El Naschie? Couldn't John Baez find a well paid job so that he does not need to supplement his income by defaming people continuously? You want to discuss Mohamed El Naschie's work objectively and seriously, then stop counting pages and papers and who is the Editor of what. For instance he is not the Editor of Int. J. of Theoretical Physics. The Editor of this Journal is Prof. David Finkelstein. At least three Nobel laureates are on the Editorial Board, Sheldon Glashow, Chen-Ning Yang and the late Ilya Prigogine. In addition you have names like Yuval Ne'eman, Roger Penrose and Leonard Susskind. Never the less in Vol. 37, No. 12, Dec. 1998 El Naschie's theory was published with all its ramifications in a paper entitled Superstrings, Knots and Noncommutative Geometry in E-infinity Space, pp. 2935-2951. The paper was accepted immediately as submitted on March 21, 1998. Does this mean he had a secret agreement with this journal? Do you have another conspiracy theory that in reality he owns the journal or something? Here is another one. In the Int. J. of Modern Physics E, El Naschie has yet another account of his theory under the title Topological defects in the symplictic vacuum, anomalous positron production and the gravitational instanton which appeared in Vol. 13, No. 4, Aug. 2004, pp. 835. Anybody who has been following this story must be by now sick and tired from the despicable characters perpetuating internet defamation. The point which every one of us should understand is that each and every one of us can be subjected to this internet terrorism. They are truly terrorists. How would you feel when your children in school are spoken to about what others have read about their father: shameless lies. What would anyone feel when he suddenly finds his picture and his private life exposed on the internet, painted by the fantasy of lunatics or greedy journalists who are paid to hit and run. No Editor-in-Chief is immune any more from the attacks of criminal elements on the internet, in fact no one is. I ask the readers of this site to think about it and to do whatever is in within their possibility to take arms against this internet hooliganism. There has to be new and much tougher laws forbidding people from using false identities and false email addresses to spread lies worldwide ruining the careers and private lives of innocent, decent people. Together we are strong enough to prevent this new kind of criminality which the internet has brought into our lives and homes.","January, 13 2009 18:19:36","06:19 PM on 01/13/09","D24A8CC7-B192-C6F4-9B21667ADFFCD0B9","Conrad K",460,285,null],[286,"D5C1B340-91BF-AB58-BBFDE07DB80069F6",null,3,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To Dr. John Baez
I could start to believe the stuff you are writing when you allow all opinions and not only those of which you approve. Scores of people have informed me that you welcome only statistics, criticism and a little bit more about El Naschie who you seem to be obsessed with. I am told you either block the blog completely or you simply remove the comments immediately. Seriously John, how can you be sure you are not yourself a crackpot? You are a mathematician. You know therefore Goedel theorem. You know that nobody can raise himself by pulling at his toes. Thus if you are a crackpot, somebody else has to tell you. OK, John steadfast you are a crackpot.

","January, 14 2009 10:28:08","10:28 AM on 01/14/09","D5C1B307-EDD6-4F3F-76CD016EF4059023","Annonymous",460,286,null],[287,"EBEC8695-9D5A-BDBB-FCCDDE905E28856D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am not surprised when I hear about the controversy surrounding this article. Some commenter s say Renate Loll did not cite the work of Nottale, Ord and El Naschie. But Dr. Renate Loll works with a Nobel laureate. Surely she is above all suspicion? If in doubt read what is written in the Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5367941.ece) and in Forbes.com (http://www.forbes.com/markets/2008/12/21/nobel-prize-controvery-face-markets-cx_je_1219autofacescan02.html).","January, 18 2009 17:46:33","05:46 PM on 01/18/09","EBEC866A-0B42-D2E2-B2068F750D9FC950","Mandy",460,287,null],[288,"EEDC2D2B-F01E-8EC1-ABE573A1457A8E53",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The objections on the works of El naschie don't stem from his
claimed prolific character, but relies on the quality of his works that
tends to be very poor. El naschie is using the idea of fractal
geometry and non linear dynamics in a very vague way, in this vague
way of reasoning and thinking you can claim to have proved any thing. Even it is
very decent to say that his works are wrong, they are not even
wrong ( as Pauli once evaluated one's work!)

Here I just give examples for two great scientists that happened to
be extreme examples of prolificity.

The first one is Leonhard Euler, who was by far the most productive
mathematician in the history of humankind and one of the greatest scholars of
all time. His collected works filled 70 volumes, with a typical volume
runs to 500 large pages and weighs about four pounds. Publishing
Euler's collected works started in 1911 under the title Opera Omina
and is not yet finished.

Series I Opera mathematica
(In 29 volumes; 30 volume-parts)
Available complete

Series II Opera mechanica et astronomica
(In 31 volumes; 32 volume-parts)

Series III Opera physica, Miscellanea
(In 12 volumes)

Series IV A. Commercium epistolicum
(10 Volumes)
for more details you can see the following links
http://www.leonhard-euler.ch
http://www.springer.com/birkhauser/historyofscience?SGWID=0-40295-2-121672-0

The second example is Peter Higss who is the inventor of Higgs
mechanism to which the Higgs particle is related. Peter Higss published only 12
articles in his life career, please see
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=a+Higgs,+Peter
You will also find 8000 papers containing Higgs in their titles. Please
see
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=find+title+higgs&FORMAT=WWW&SEQUENCE=

I doubt if the work of El naschie could fill one volume. The great
man is concentrating on ideas, so his papers are typically short.
Nor you can find a single good paper in his entire works.

Nevertheless, El naschie succeeded to have people trumpeting the
virtue of his great theory and writing articles containing his name in
their titles and out of contexts but exclusively published on his own journal. Here I give
few examples for an author called M. Agop who is trumpeting the virtue E-Infinity
theory, he has almost thirty nine articles containing in their
titles El naschie.

1- El Naschie s E-infinity theory and effects of nanoparticle clustering on the heat transport in
nanofluids

Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Volume 37, Issue 5, September 2008, Pages 1269-1278

M. Agop, V. Paun, Anca Harabagiu

Abstract:
Effects of nanoparticle clustering on the heat transfer in nanofluids
using the scale relativity theory in the topological dimension DT = 3 are analyzed.
In the one-dimensional differentiable case, the clustering morphogenesis process is achieved
by cnoidal oscillation modes of the speed field. In such conjecture, a non-autonomous regime
implies a relation between the radius and growth speed of the cluster while, a quasi-autonomous
regime requires El Naschie s E-infinity theory through the cluster cluster coherence
(El Naschie global coherence). Moreover, these two regimes are separated by the golden mean.
In the one-dimensional non-differentiable case, the fractal kink spontaneously breaks
the vacuum symmetry of the fluid by tunneling and generates coherent structures.
This mechanism is similar to the one of superconductivity. Thus, the fractal potential
acts as an energy accumulator while, the fractal soliton, implies El Naschie s E-infinity theory
(El Naschie local coherence). Since all the properties of the speed field are transferred
to the thermal one, for a certain conditions of an external load (e.g. for a certain value
of thermal gradient) the soliton and fractal one breaks down (blows up) and release energy.
As result, the thermal conductibility in nanofluids unexpectedly increases.
Here, El Naschie s E-infinity theory interferes through El Naschie global and local coherences.

2- El Naschie s structures in the electrodynamics of polarizable media

Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Volume 24, Issue 5, June 2005, Pages 1165-1181

M. Agop, I. Merches, V. Enache

Abstract:
Using the concept of combined field , an electrodynamics of polarizable media on a fractal
space time is constructed. In this context, using the scale relativity theory, the permanent
electric moment, the induced electric moment, the vacuum fluctuations, the paraelectrics,
the diaelectrics, the electric Zeeman-type effect, the electric Einstein de Haas-type effect,
the electric Aharonov Bohm-type effect, the superconductors in the combined field , the double
layers as coherent structures, the magnetic Aharonov Casher-type effect, are analyzed.
Correspondence with the E-infinity space time is accomplished either by admitting an
anomal electric Zeeman-type effect, or through a fractal string as in the case of a
superconductor in combined field , or, by phase coherence of the electron ion pairs from
the electric double layers (El Naschie s coherence). Moreover, the electric double layer or
multiple layer may be considered as two-dimensional projections of the same El Naschie s fractal
strings (higher-dimensional strings in E-infinty space time).

Please the reader should be careful about the new concept of El Naschie global and local
coherences and the ability of E-infinity for explaining every
thing you can imagine. I advice every readers to give a look at
this author Agop
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleListURL&_method=list&_ArticleListID=854751840&
view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=57e20c10dbdce6aebbbc81f36416a702

His articles are really endless kind of joy and great virtue of entertaining as the articles
of El naschie himself. Elseiver could distribute these articles as jokes and I bet that they
would be more profitable than distributing them as scientific papers.

","January, 19 2009 07:27:33","07:27 AM on 01/19/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,288,null],[289,"EFF31E80-CB24-1729-8B85ED3FF21318A7",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I","January, 19 2009 12:32:14","12:32 PM on 01/19/09","EFF31E54-BDE2-1644-E08B6E794BB79F3D","Fakruelddin",460,289,null],[290,"F001857F-CAC5-F12E-2E588E4DD7F0AFFA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","January, 19 2009 12:47:58","12:47 PM on 01/19/09","EFF31E54-BDE2-1644-E08B6E794BB79F3D","Fakruelddin",460,290,null],[291,"F0033880-D5A8-CB53-8F74BAEC82720394",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Prof. An I am sorry you are parading your ignorance. You couldn't possibly be a mathematician or a physicist or you will not mention Euler and Higgs in the same breath. If you would be a physicist, you would know that Peter Higgs is an average physicist. He is not the one who proposed the Higgs particle. There were two other scientists before him. This is well known. Instead of being an internet clochard, you should learn your stuff before spreading ignorance. To say El Naschie's use of fractals is vague is in itself an extremely vague statement. You obviously know nothing about fractals or cantor sets. How could you know that El Naschie's use of fractals, although he doesn't use fractals, is vague and is it not the fog in your brain caused by your hatred which make it appear to you as vague.
I read a few of your comments and I think I can diagnose your malady: The hatred in your heart and the jealousy in your soul are causing blood steam to obscure your thinking. You are trying to give the impression of someone who knows anything about physics but all what you are doing is copying statements from papers you don't understand and trying to make a joke but the joke is really this time on you. Take the advice of other people on this site and find yourself a life and leave us in peace.
Anwar Fakhruelddin

","January, 19 2009 12:49:49","12:49 PM on 01/19/09","EFF31E54-BDE2-1644-E08B6E794BB79F3D","Fakruelddin",460,291,null],[292,"F0041F6D-D0A7-4165-F1D92F3AD39231CE",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Prof. An I am sorry you are parading your ignorance. You couldn't possibly be a mathematician or a physicist or you will not mention Euler and Higgs in the same breath. If you would be a physicist, you would know that Peter Higgs is an average physicist. He is not the one who proposed the Higgs particle. There were two other scientists before him. This is well known. Instead of being an internet clochard, you should learn your stuff before spreading ignorance. To say El Naschie's use of fractals is vague is in itself an extremely vague statement. You obviously know nothing about fractals or cantor sets. How could you know that El Naschie's use of fractals, although he doesn't use fractals, is vague and is it not the fog in your brain caused by your hatred which make it appear to you as vague.
I read a few of your comments and I think I can diagnose your malady: The hatred in your heart and the jealousy in your soul are causing blood steam to obscure your thinking. You are trying to give the impression of someone who knows anything about physics but all what you are doing is copying statements from papers you don't understand and trying to make a joke but the joke is really this time on you. Take the advice of other people on this site and find yourself a life and leave us in peace.
Anwar Fakhruelddin

","January, 19 2009 12:50:48","12:50 PM on 01/19/09","EFF31E54-BDE2-1644-E08B6E794BB79F3D","Fakruelddin",460,292,null],[293,"F11BA771-BB8F-61BF-C8CC12CC4452A2AC",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is not Prof. An. This is nothing but the schizicophrenic Said Elnashaie and his sock puppets. A respectable scientist who wants to prove that a theory is wrong, writes a paper proving that a theory is wrong and sends it to a journal to be published. The wrangling on the internet is the finger print of the scientifically impotent and the mentally incompetent.","January, 19 2009 17:56:08","05:56 PM on 01/19/09","F11BA748-0726-A758-26332BECFF8D0F95","SamR",460,293,null],[294,"F92AE1AC-F1A7-A692-909AAC2FE03921B8",null,3,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Oh, Great man (El naschice); of course Peter Higss is
an average physicist compared to you. Even, you can convince
yourself by the following:

1- Higgs won wolf prize in physics 2004 and Dirac medal
in physics 1997,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_W._Higgs.

But, you have won a lot of prizes, and your beautiful photo
standing behind such a bunch of prizes which one can have a look at
in your photo gallery that you published in a special issue of Chaos,
Solitons and Fractals 25 (2005), 915 933. For the sake of joy, one
can find a copy
http://www.el-naschie.net/bilder/file/Photo-Gallery.pdf

2- Higss works in University of Edinburgh.

But, you have worked in Cambridge from 1993-2001.
By the way you, why you don't mention this on your website
or you forget to do it.

3- Higgs has a very limited research interest.

But you are interested in every thing, even in Nano-technology.
You have claimed to be the director of King Abdullah Al Saud
Institute for Nano and Advanced Technologies.
http://agenda.fisica.uniud.it/difa/getFile.py/access?contribId=
52&sessionId=32&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=9
But if one checks the webpage of King Abdullah Al Saud Institute
for Nano and Advanced Technologies finds no mention for you at all
One can check the web page for Committees consultative scientists
http://www.nano-ksu.com/publish/article_46.shtml
web page for Supervisory Committee to King Abdullah Institute
for Nanotechnology
http://www.nano-ksu.com/publish/article_63.shtml

Why doesn't this position appear in the list of the prestigious
positions listed in your website? .
Regarding your nice picture in your website showing you signing contract
with king saud university,riyadh - saudi arabia.
http://www.el-naschie.net/el-naschie-physicist.asp?site=260&lang=

It is clear that you managed to deceive people in Egypt and
Saudi arabia. But why don't you tell us how finally, in saudi arabia,
they discovered that you are a fraud and kicked you out?. I think
it is an interesting story and worthy to be told in your website.

You may know that Freeman J. Dyson
Gerard 't Hooft, Victor F. Weisskopf, Roger Penrose,
Stephen W. Hawking, Yoichiro Nambu and John Archibald Wheeler
all won wolf prize. do you consider them as average physicists?.

For the invention of Higss particle there many scientist
contributed to the theoretical works namely are F. Englert,
R. Brout, P. Higgs, G. S. Guralnik, C. R. Hagen, and
T. W. B. Kibble. But the particle was named after Higss.

For the sake of entertaining, we present another article for this
miraculous author M. Agop trumpeting the virtue of the great
El-naschie's E-infinity theory.

Ball lightning as a self-organizing process of a plasma plasma interface and El Naschie s
E-infinity space time
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Volume 33, Issue 3, August 2007, Pages 754-769
M. Agop, C. Murgulet
Abstract:
In the fractal space time theories, some properties of a ball lightning (BL)
are established: the oscillation regimes, the hysteresis, the distributions
of the potential, field and charge etc. In such a context, the Feynman El Naschie
hypothesis on the universality of the dipole dipole interaction is confirmed and
a connection between El Naschie s E-infinity space time and Feigenbaum Goldfain
conjecture is given.

In this enlightening article, one finds the name of the great man El naschie
associated with Feynman, which remembers us for the association of Bose and
Einstein. Can the great man tell us what is Feynman-El naschie
hypothesis.!!!!, and if you use fractal space time or not or he
does not use fractals at all. By the way, Feynman had only 35
published papers, do you consider him as an average physicist.
Feynman's prolificity can not match yours.
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=FIND+A+FEYNMAN&FORMAT=
wwwcitesummary&SEQUENCE=


Finally your miraculous and ridiculous articles and even those based on
them are not even wrong, they are non sense. No respectable journal will
ever accept a paper discussing your theory.
","January, 21 2009 07:29:43","07:29 AM on 01/21/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,294,null],[295,"00A82C17-D171-311D-DA49BC44A475C0DC",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am shocked to see this, but there seems to be a system: the current issue of American Scientific explains nanotchnology: Nanomedicine--Revolutionizing the Fight against Cancer. And there is no reference to the groundbreaking contributions of El Naschie either! This must be part of the hidden agenda to rob El Naschie's life time work. It's sad indeed.

","January, 22 2009 18:23:55","06:23 PM on 01/22/09","00A82BF6-AC33-344E-C5AB09DA37529C5E","chribishop",460,295,null],[296,"048EA8A4-E4F8-D9C8-D8557B8401B9C3D1",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The rage and hatred of the language of An who is so courageous when he is hiding behind two letter words and a computer speaks volumes. Truly a Chribishop. Could be listed on the menu of an n-Category Caf?. In all events it is better than the coffee served in Egyptian prisons. You are not worth even these words.","January, 23 2009 12:34:32","12:34 PM on 01/23/09","048EA86A-9360-34AD-39D319C0CD52B0AA","Tariq",460,296,null],[297,"0591D7A1-D57C-C159-82866A32677BD75F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Prof. An in his different guises. Since you are such a clever boy how come you can spend so much time lounging around in the internet? I guess it is public service. Would it also not be a public service to give us your real name, address and telephone number so that the public at large could have the benefit of such a super brain.","January, 23 2009 17:17:37","05:17 PM on 01/23/09","0591D778-F9AF-C2CD-7022D8941B509B67","Simon",460,297,null],[298,"0A05FA87-D99C-2443-45943E1128D5ACC5",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Could I take the liberty of asking Prof. An and his Middle Eastern colleagues to take their indulgence and oriental petit bourgeois quarrels somewhere else. Clearly you have not learnt to disagree in a civilized manner. No wonder the Middle East is the shambles that we see. Thank you for understanding that your presence here is not desired.","January, 24 2009 14:02:57","02:02 PM on 01/24/09","0A05FA3F-E51F-4733-DB7D639A595D24E7","Alastair",460,298,null],[299,"0A119F7D-9C2A-E1BB-AE4F265DD2C87B9D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Thank you Alastair. You took the words out of my mouth. Coming back to our subject, there seems to be a common thread on all recent non main stream theories for quantum gravity. This common thread is fractals. However I am slightly confused and would be grateful for any form of clarification. Unless you decide on a compact and closed kind of spacetime universe, you will have all sorts of problems with a fractal spacetime. As far as I understood the work of Mohamed El Naschie, when you go as far as the ultimate energy, say the Planck energy, then the world will be simplest again. In other words the fractal joins the classical in a T-duality like manner. However Renate Loll and those working in a similar direction claim that at the Planck energy, the world changes to two dimensions instead of four and that is where it becomes fractal. This seems to me to be the opposite of what El Naschie requires based on duality. There is another difficulty with the Loll interpretation. When you reach fractal-like resolution, your dimensions definitely increase, not decrease. I think El Naschie's approach is more consistent with the pure mathematical literature on the subject. As a mathematician I believe more in the mathematical conception of infinite dimensional topology. This branch of mathematics is highly developed but physicists seem to know next to nothing about the subject. El Naschie gave in his work some indication that he is familiar with the work of Menger and Uhrysohn. For this reason I think El Naschie may be right. You cannot have a closed universe without introducing a hierarchy. To make myself clearer, I would need to write some formulas. This is unfortunately not possible here.

","January, 24 2009 14:15:41","02:15 PM on 01/24/09","0A05FA3F-E51F-4733-DB7D639A595D24E7","Alastair",460,299,null],[300,"0A13DF41-AA1F-026C-2BA27ED2567DE501",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Thank you Alastair. You took the words out of my mouth. Coming back to our subject, there seems to be a common thread on all recent non main stream theories for quantum gravity. This common thread is fractals. However I am slightly confused and would be grateful for any form of clarification. Unless you decide on a compact and closed kind of spacetime universe, you will have all sorts of problems with a fractal spacetime. As far as I understood the work of Mohamed El Naschie, when you go as far as the ultimate energy, say the Planck energy, then the world will be simplest again. In other words the fractal joins the classical in a T-duality like manner. However Renate Loll and those working in a similar direction claim that at the Planck energy, the world changes to two dimensions instead of four and that is where it becomes fractal. This seems to me to be the opposite of what El Naschie requires based on duality. There is another difficulty with the Loll interpretation. When you reach fractal-like resolution, your dimensions definitely increase, not decrease. I think El Naschie s approach is more consistent with the pure mathematical literature on the subject. As a mathematician I believe more in the mathematical conception of infinite dimensional topology. This branch of mathematics is highly developed but physicists seem to know next to nothing about the subject. El Naschie gave in his work some indication that he is familiar with the work of Menger and Uhrysohn. For this reason I think El Naschie may be right. You cannot have a closed universe without introducing a hierarchy. To make myself clearer, I would need to write some formulas. This is unfortunately not possible here.

","January, 24 2009 14:18:08","02:18 PM on 01/24/09","0A13DF0F-E042-8606-ACFA736477A6C481","Kawalski",460,300,null],[301,"0E1FF87C-B560-C834-F35CA5264871821F",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It seems that our El Naschie is making a monologue with himself..without being aware he used the same nickname (Alastair) twice but in one of them he thanked himself! ....funny","January, 25 2009 09:09:50","09:09 AM on 01/25/09","0E1FF84E-B7EB-300D-A23C12DAC80AF3D5","dor",460,301,null],[302,"0E219F0F-F9FD-228E-B18EC8565B7F21D1",null,3,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It is really a sad thing to see all these attacks on the person of
EL Naschie and indeed for ungrounded reasons. I have been
following several internet blogs in which one finds unprecedented
criticisms and attacks on one' works. I must say that I have a
real sympathy for El Nashcie case and feel that it is a moral
duty for me to rise my voice up and speak. El Naschie case is very
similar to string theory case in many respects. Back in the early
'70s, the Italian physicist, Daniele Amati reportedly said that
string theory was part of 21st-century physics that fell by chance
into the 20th century. The same thing can be said about El Naschie
" He is a 22ed century mind that fell by chance into the 20 and
21st century". Indeed the story of El Naschie and his E-infinity,
fractal space..etc reminds me of the Boltzamn struggle with the
physicists of his time to convince them of his atomicity theory,
and which, as we all know, ended by his celebrated suicide. El
Naschie today is struggling (in vain) to convince people of the
powerfulness of his theory in predicting all the constants of
nature and providing simple, but deep, answers to the most subtle
questions of nature, like "the confinement". The only thing that
is missing to make the case of El Naschie match Boltzman case is
the suicide event. Indeed it would be another historical event if
El Naschie commits a suicide as a consequence of the depression
that he has been led to by the contemporary physicists . Therefore
I strongly suggest that prof El Naschie commit a suicide and show
to the physics community that he believes in his theory to the
point of committing suicide to defend it.

Below I list some ideal places where prof El Naschie could commit his suicide. The places
are all historical and memorable.


In Egypt , He can chose among the following famous places:

- The Great Pyramid of Giza (Note that this is one of Seven
Wonders of the Ancient World.)

- Cairo tower .

- Salah Eddeen castle in Cairo ( He may be remembered later as
hero like Salah Eddeen).


In England where he frequently spends his summer, he may chose
among:

- Big Ben


- Hyde Park.


The best alternative in my view would be to go to Duino in Itlay and commit his suicide near the grave of
Boltzman. This will make his name eternally linked to Boltzman
name. We may write the Golden number formula on his grave, like
the entropy formula on Boltzman' grave.

I think after his suicide El Naschie will definitely achieve the
fame and celebrity that he could not achieve alive.","January, 25 2009 09:11:38","09:11 AM on 01/25/09","0E1FF84E-B7EB-300D-A23C12DAC80AF3D5","dor",460,302,null],[303,"0E8AA998-D6E7-FC0A-9BBEAB2D6C0CA6D4",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I do not fully agree that fractality is the most important aspect in the work of Loll and El Naschie. Of course it is a common thread in causal dynamical triangulation as well as the theory of Reuter. El Naschie seems to come from Wheeler s vacuum fluctuation. This is clear from the picture colored by his two daughters in his book co-authored by Nobel laureate Ilya Prigogine. Consequently El Naschie combined spacetime and matter in one entity. It is pre-geometry mixed with fractals in a subtle way. In a sense he made pre-geometry out of Cantor sets. You will recall that Wheeler made this proposal for the first time many years ago but suggesting Borel sets. It is amazing that a civil engineer was so sensitive to abstract pure mathematics and converted the Borel set proposal to random Cantor sets and used the dimensional theory of Menger and Uhrysohn. The connection to possets, that is to say partially ordered sets and the work of Fay Dowker, Stanley Gudder and Hemion becomes obvious. This is the correct way to interpret El Naschie s work. The most important trick was finding a numerical indexing which enabled him to do computation without a computer. It is an ingenious validation of the Loll model which led to 4.02 as an effective dimension of the emerging spacetime. The value found by El Naschie as well as Crnjac and Elokaby was 4.019999. It was found using Weyl scaling. The Weyl scaling is the original gauge theory as is well known. It is when we think in this rational way that we will come to the conclusion that a conflict might signal an opportunity.","January, 25 2009 11:06:22","11:06 AM on 01/25/09
","0E8AA96B-EC69-7A7B-7958325047637090","Garnet",460,303,null],[304,"0F288027-C254-F24E-03ADF585B32DC618",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

n","January, 25 2009 13:58:46","01:58 PM on 01/25/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,304,null],[305,"0F2927B3-FFB1-545D-E320442D4F0A8F81",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. Said Elnashaie, alias Dor, An etc… As you very well know I know both of you very well. It will not come to you as a surprise to know that Mohamed Elnaschie would rather die than to live in your skin. In fact the same applies to me, although you have a very thick skin. ","January, 25 2009 13:59:29","01:59 PM on 01/25/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,305,null],[306,"0F30E5C9-9E3D-DE26-9B290225D083A3F0",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Said,","January, 25 2009 14:07:56","02:07 PM on 01/25/09","0F30E5A3-9843-5B12-33802C3B79487366","K. Abdallah",460,306,null],[307,"0F3C6C73-E20E-A4B0-95E87594176A398A",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Said, you can call yourself Dor and you can call yourself John Brandt. We will always know it is Said Elnashaie. You can bring Lord Byron or Ezra Pound to write on your behalf. We still recognize it is you because of your smell. Your odor Said as well as your demeanor and character have become unbearable. How could you have changed so much in the last twenty years? You have become slimy and a coward and an internet thug. If not, write your own name and give your address and credentials including the Certificate of your Conviction. This is the last warning to leave the site and after that you are to blame yourself for what will happen.","January, 25 2009 14:20:32","02:20 PM on 01/25/09","0F30E5A3-9843-5B12-33802C3B79487366","K. Abdallah",460,307,null],[308,"116251D2-CA2A-2926-CCF6E9D09447B750",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear El Naschie, believe it or not, I have nothing to do with your brother Said...but I am sure of one thing: You are a mentally sick person..it is really meaningless to spend even a little of my time to exchange comments with you. But as last words: You must accept the reality now, you have been asked to retire from being an editor in chief of CFS journal, you have been kicked out from KACST and KAINT in SA, your reality has been uncovered, your suspicious roads have been cut-off , you are bleeding..I think it would be better for your health (at this late age) that you stop writing those monologues where you self-discuss your crap, pretending to be different persons. It is really amazing how a person can arrive to this point of madness..May god help you .","January, 26 2009 00:21:10","12:21 AM on 01/26/09","0E1FF84E-B7EB-300D-A23C12DAC80AF3D5","dor",460,308,null],[309,"12E7D6FD-09F3-CDB9-8735D459E1D26DDF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

If Prof. El Naschie is bleeding then Mr. Dor who is Said or John Baez or Kalil or one of these nutters must have a brain hemorrhage. How many times have you been kicked out Said for mental incompetence? To call yourself the brother of anybody is a blatant lie. The only brother you could possibly have is Lucifer in the private mad house of hell. Again what a coward and a rat. Give your name and address before you talk about the other people. Send your certificate of conviction. You have sold your soul to the devil and you did not even obtain the 1.2 million euro of Renate Loll. You sold your soul to the devil gratis for the price of a cup of coffee in the n-Category Caf? to support Jihan Fadel, the virtuous lady of Egyptian cinema. Said you and your whole crew are sick internet thugs, cowards and not worth spitting at. Suppose you are not Editor in Chief and not Director of an Institute, does this make you a lesser human being? Does this make you a thief who conspires with the wife of somebody else to steal from his own mother? You are a thief Said, a cheap convicted thief and you have to live with that. You are living in a world of fantasy on the internet. If not, sign with your name. At least John Baez occasionally signs with his name but you are a cowardly rat. Always have been and always will be. ","January, 26 2009 07:26:37","07:26 AM on 01/26/09","12E7D6D2-949E-3930-2611AD3AA0A8D472","KAtef",460,309,null],[310,"14051649-A555-859D-25DD70A15D085646",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Being an internet master of scandalizing and defaming people John Baez the infamous made as much noise as he can make of a harmless photo gallery included in a Special Issue of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals dedicated to the 60th birthday of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. Of course it would have been too much for him to bother to read the notes of the Editor, Prof. Garnet Ord on the third page of the volume. It states the following: This issue was assembled and produced without the knowledge of its Editor in Chief. It was constructed at very short notice because nobody guessed ahead of time that Professor El Naschie was anywhere near his sixtieth birthday. The articles are cross-disciplinary and range from playful exercises to serious descriptions of emerging work. I think this is in accord with the combination of humor and intensity that characterized the work of our Chief Editor. We hope you enjoy them. Only people who do not understand the word shame could write the stuff which I have seen in some comments on this site. Who is this Mr. or Mrs. Dor writing on 1/25/09 and 1/26/09? What is all this talk about bleeding, hanging and killing? Is this Scientific American blog or Dr. Frankenstein s museum? What kind of sick people are hiding inside some so called scientists? I am truly appalled by all of that, whether it is Renate Loll who does not acknowledge the sources of her work or those vampires lusting for bloodletting. It is truly revolting and it would be a good thing that Scientific American put some more stringent standards to the comments appearing on their site. It is alright to criticize scientific ideas in any form one chooses to, as long as you use civilized language. However these personal attacks and malignant fantasies should not appear in printed form in a site belonging to Scientific American.","January, 26 2009 12:38:11","12:38 PM on 01/26/09","14051611-AFAB-5A5F-EF5EA55B77DAA5EE","Jennifer F.",460,310,null],[311,"1542C4F5-CD35-D093-6F2A2A6538962D94",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

to","January, 26 2009 18:25:11","06:25 PM on 01/26/09","1542C4C3-0C55-B5CF-C397666437C02A05","A happy Boltzman ",460,311,null],[312,"15439152-DD10-8E1D-BB733B73D8A12C8A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To Loll, Amjbjorn and Jurkiewicz: I did not know that you need money that badly. If so why wait until Mohamed El Naschie commits suicide because he will not. Why not help it a little. Come on guys. You are an inventive lot. Arrange for his physical liquidation. That can't be beyond you. From all what I have seen from your photographs you have far more reason to be unhappy with your existence. Mohamed El Naschie does science for fun. By contrast you have to beg, steal and borrow to buy things. Remember the New Seekers. From your pictures you look more like the Old Seekers, particularly the charming picture of Loll besides Wheeler's foam. Boy, I'd rather marry the foam!
","January, 26 2009 18:26:03","06:26 PM on 01/26/09","1542C4C3-0C55-B5CF-C397666437C02A05","A happy Boltzman ",460,312,null],[313,"157DCCCC-A486-EF13-BB143C6E88EF9602",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Sehr geehrte Frau Dr. Renate Loll,
ich habe Ihre Kommentare über Prof. El Naschie mit größtem Bedauern gelesen. Ihren Wunsch dass er sich das Leben nimmt ist erschreckend und unter der Gürtellinie. Ich habe jede Achtung für Sie verloren. Ich schäme mich, dass eine deutsche Frau so eine schwarze Seele haben kann. Außerdem haben Sie kein Respekt für den tragischen Tod von Ludwig Boltzmann gezeigt. So etwas liest man in Hexengeschichten aber doch nicht von einer renommierten und eigentlich respektablen Wissenschaftler in wie Sie. Was würden Sie denken wenn Ihre Kinder so etwas über Sie lesen werden? Hoffentlich müssen Sie das nicht erleben. Das wünsche ich weder Feind noch Freund.
Hochachtungsvoll
Carol Winter, Canada


","January, 26 2009 19:29:39","07:29 PM on 01/26/09","157DCC9A-91ED-DEA6-6634D8395ADAA0EA","Carol Winter",460,313,null],[314,"15804ABF-A7D6-C76A-D5D4B1CF3E134D86",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Sehr geehrte Frau Dr. Renate Loll,
ich habe Ihre Kommentare über Prof. El Naschie mit größtem Bedauern gelesen. Ihren Wunsch dass er sich das Leben nimmt ist erschreckend und unter der Gürtellinie. Ich habe jede Achtung für Sie verloren. Ich schäme mich, dass eine deutsche Frau so eine schwarze Seele haben kann. Außerdem haben Sie kein Respekt für den tragischen Tod von Ludwig Boltzmann gezeigt. So etwas liest man in Hexengeschichten aber doch nicht von einer renommierten und eigentlich respektablen Wissenschaftler in wie Sie. Was würden Sie denken wenn Ihre Kinder so etwas über Sie lesen werden? Hoffentlich müssen Sie das nicht erleben. Das wünsche ich weder Feind noch Freund.
Hochachtungsvoll
Carol Winter, Canada


","January, 26 2009 19:32:23","07:32 PM on 01/26/09","157DCC9A-91ED-DEA6-6634D8395ADAA0EA","Carol Winter",460,314,null],[315,"1A0CEA81-F910-5C82-1F6B94E656B2E420",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear Prof. Ambjorn,\t
Thank you for the entertaining comment signed by pseudo name dor. A lot of people think it is extremely cruel and lower than black humor but I am an odd man out. Never the less I must correct you and no offense, Boltzmann is not buried in Italy. With respect he is buried in Vienna. He is surrounded by people who will not mean much to the internet crowd like yourself. Beside him lies Mozart, Schubert and many similarly obscure personalities. Please forgive me that I liked your first little book with the beautiful drawings which indicated to me that you are an artistically inclined person. Now I stand corrected. By the way, you may ask how I knew it was you. Easy. It is the entropic production of hair. You have an enormous entropic production of hair but miserably distributed like in old capitalism. They are all concentrated in your face, leaving your head almost bare. What a gross injustice. Otherwise you could have made a pretty sight. Let us hope your wish comes true and you will be alive to join the funeral of Mohamed El Naschie. Judging from the hair entropy, I am inclined to think it will be the other way around.
Best wishes,

","January, 27 2009 16:44:28","04:44 PM on 01/27/09","1A0CEA52-ABCC-7012-F10616DAAEB2E68C","F. Ludwig",460,315,null],[316,"1D03DCDA-0121-2F1D-7C24290CAB5467FE",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

a","January, 28 2009 06:33:26","06:33 AM on 01/28/09","1D03DCAE-9725-2AAD-00862B12AC085E93","No particular one",460,316,null],[317,"1D04B29F-B6A4-981D-6B66D7FCDED83496",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

There is a very simple to test to know who is phony and who is real. If you are real, give your real name and address and make yourself visible. Signing An just to implicate Prof. Ali Nayfeh is of course one of those phony tricks. Ali Nayfeh is a Palestinian and a member of Hamas. He could be anything but he is not a coward. Those who sign as dor or Alshistawi or what have you are cowards and therefore, phony. So if you want to show yourself to be real and so brave to defame innocent people, then sign with your name. Why are you so worried that Mohamed El Naschie is making monologues with himself as you say? If he is mad, why do you waste your time on a mad person? Using the above rule, it is clear you are not only phony but you are thieves and you do not want the truth to come out. More shockingly, you are now calling for the demise of Mohamed El Naschie. How much of a threat does this Egyptian, civil engineer constitute for you to indirectly
call for assassination? You did your job with character assassination but now you are entering an area which could change the rules of the game to that of Kandahar and Bagdad. If I were you, especially Prof. Ambjorn from the Niels Bor Inst. who is so versed in the history of Ludwig Boltzmann, I would not count on Mohamed El Naschie committing suicide. However some might get the wrong idea. Someone who grew up in the Middle East with its chequered history might interpret a Viennese waltz wrongly. Prof. Ambjorn he might take your ideas but correct its logic. I think you are all playing with fire but since you are phony, you think everyone is like you. You are making a gross error of judgment and when you discover it, it will be too late.
","January, 28 2009 06:34:21","06:34 AM on 01/28/09","1D03DCAE-9725-2AAD-00862B12AC085E93","No particular one",460,317,null],[318,"221A5FB9-F02C-7924-F6DE45896E49D3E4",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

At last, El naschie acquired the fame that he has dreamed of.
Now he is internationally recognized by his unique
character as a fraud in science. Now in many languages
his scandal is reported and in many respectable journals.

1- As you can find the article of nature:
Self-publishing editor set to retire
Published online 26 November 2008
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/081126/full/456432a.html
"The editor of a theoretical-physics journal, who was facing
growing criticism that he used its pages to publish numerous
papers written by himself, is set to retire early next year....."

2- Article in German language published in DIE ZEIT
whose title is "Betrug in der Wissenschaft" and the
English translation is ( Fraud in science)
http://www.zeit.de/2009/03/N-El-Naschie?page=1
You will find a beautiful carton for El naschie
in this article.

It would be better if the great man links these two articles
in his website, since these two articles are really about him.

In fact, for the German article, the great man doesn't give up
and struggling with his sockpuppet army to convince people
with the conspiracy against him and his achievements.


Why we are interested in the case of El naschie, here are some
answer taken from
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08%2F12%2F23%2F1831225&from=rss

by tsstahl (812393) on Tuesday December 23, @04:31PM (#26216319)
In the immortal words of Tom Hanks, I don't get it.

If the guy is a well known crackpot, what harm is happening? Obviously,
I am not a citizen of this sub-world and could use the enlightenment.
Re:I don't get it.

by Daniel Dvorkin (106857) * on Tuesday December 23, @04:37PM
The harm, I think, is that he's not a well-enough-known crackpot;
a respectable publisher (Elsevier) has given him a journal as his
own private playground. This makes it more difficult for non-crackpots
trying to enter the field (e.g. grad students) to sort the wheat
from the chaff. It also allows other crackpots to come off as more credible
by citing crackpot articles which have a veneer of respectability.
Imagine if a computer science "journal" based on Hollywood's portrayal
of how computers work were being published by the ACM, and you have some
idea of how big a problem this is.


by ocean_soul (1019086) on Tuesday December 23,
In fact, the crackpotness of El Nachies' papers is obvious even to most
grad students (you should read some, they are in fact rather funny).
The bigger problem is that, by repeatedly citing his own articles,
his journal gets a high impact factor. People who have absolutely no
clue about math, like the ones who decide on the funding, conclude from
the high impact factor that the papers in this journal must be of high quality.



by dujenwook (834549) on Tuesday December 23, @05:16PM
Yea, I read through a bit of the cited paper and got a few good
laughs out of it. Maybe he's being published more for the humorous
aspect of it all than for the actual information.

At the end, It would be good and fair if scientific American
devotes an article about El naschie and his unique character
as a fraud.

","January, 29 2009 06:16:07","06:16 AM on 01/29/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,318,null],[319,"238CFFD8-B7CA-A45A-0C8ECCDDB6CE3F04",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am sure everybody would welcome Scientific American running a story on this story. There are also other stories inside this story, almost like a fractal.
We understand from all the news coming from Stockholm that three of the five people on the Nobel Committee are being investigated for bribery. If you can investigate the Nobel committee, then surely we can investigate commercial scientific publishing including Scientific American, Nature and Die Zeit. I would be thrilled to know what is behind all this and be it at a minimum to demystify science, famous professors and those bigger than life Nobel laureates.

","January, 29 2009 13:00:57","01:00 PM on 01/29/09","238CFA0C-F46B-2AA3-D556D1CF9782744C","Lundquist",460,319,null],[320,"23D49A4E-D593-4528-F8233C8C7A9556A0",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

l","January, 29 2009 14:19:09","02:19 PM on 01/29/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,320,null],[321,"23D8BB7F-B99B-E29A-C3DF2D1F204B8230",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Most of you who have read all this nonsense wonder what it is all about. Who is Prof. Said and who is Prof. An and all that. Well here is the CV of Prof. An. I am afraid it is only a certificate of conviction but at least you can guess what is behind this nauseating campaign instead of what is essentially a scientific debate. Prof. An is Prof. Said Elnashaie who invested in the one man internet army of John Baez. Please log into the following where you will find English and Arabic explanations. http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com
http://saidelnashaie.blogspot.com
I think the case of John Baez, Renate Loll and their associates is now ripe to go to the State Prosecution of their respective countries. I understand they are now threatening to launch another defamatory article in Scientific American. We take this very seriously and why not? The sooner the full truth will come out, the better and that is all that we aspire to.

","January, 29 2009 14:23:40","02:23 PM on 01/29/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,321,null],[322,"240A5669-D34C-FC8E-E92D397F36218DF3",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

S","January, 29 2009 15:17:51","03:17 PM on 01/29/09","240A563B-F3F8-4E39-DF12435278FAE45B","Yunis",460,322,null],[323,"240B82A6-F977-8D45-A6A96891A4C4D3C8",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Said, all of Egypt knows you are a thief. All of Egypt knows the real story. All of Egypt, except the thieves, knows how kind Mohamed is and in all your miserable mad existence nobody was kinder to you than him. I always warned him against you because I knew how evil you are. You did harm Mohamed for sure. The day he shook hands with you was a bad day for him. You have my word, he will recover from all this filth you have been spreading around him and for sure you have made his theory more famous than it was and that you will regret it as well. Mohamed never needed to kiss the hand of the Director of a private University in the Middle East to get employed but you do so everyday and with increasing frequency. You will hear them tell you that it is not your research record or the fact you have never really found anything of value in science or otherwise but it is your character - A man who steals his own mother and breaks her heart and lets her die
penniless is a not a human being and we employ normal human beings. So rest assured that your co-criminals will be the ones who will first denounce you in the court of justice. It is only a matter of weeks and what you have done will backfire at you and the cheap journalist you have bribed with the money you have stolen from your mother.
","January, 29 2009 15:19:08","03:19 PM on 01/29/09","240A563B-F3F8-4E39-DF12435278FAE45B","Yunis",460,323,null],[324,"241AEC30-FFA1-D350-DEC259F1A90019F9",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","January, 29 2009 15:35:58","03:35 PM on 01/29/09","241AEBF4-E648-1C95-1A51D93B1CE83C7F","Laurel and Hardy",460,324,null],[325,"241BA740-926D-0EB9-9E414E563DB04AB2",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

John Baez: Bad news. The fraud squad is closing in. They are busy right now in Davos. But your ingenuity has drawn their attention. Why aren't you signing with your name lately? Nobody doubts your ability to get out of the fine mess which Stanley got you into. ","January, 29 2009 15:36:46","03:36 PM on 01/29/09","241AEBF4-E648-1C95-1A51D93B1CE83C7F","Laurel and Hardy",460,325,null],[326,"243291B7-EDC2-719A-18B1638EEE5356AB",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","January, 29 2009 16:01:47","04:01 PM on 01/29/09","24329180-E43F-5BA3-2A3755B63FEEC6AE","What s new Pussycat, Manfred Mann",460,326,null],[327,"243356F1-A185-BC3F-3BCF67BE2027A477",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

"Said, how about signing with your own name. You are a big guy. Show the world you are really a man. You can be impotent and you can be incompetent but still you can pretend to be a man".","January, 29 2009 16:02:38","04:02 PM on 01/29/09","24329180-E43F-5BA3-2A3755B63FEEC6AE","What s new Pussycat, Manfred Mann",460,327,null],[328,"245007D1-ACC8-5D92-A86242E3F80AE836",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","January, 29 2009 16:33:58","04:33 PM on 01/29/09","245007AB-0B56-A8D9-066E753941A44AE3","William Tell",460,328,null],[329,"2450C113-D632-E87B-9931DB0D75E029A8",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have a present to the readers of Scientific American -- A belated Christmas gift. Please log in to Renate Loll's website to see her in all of her glory holding Einstein in the palm of her hand. It reminds me of the great poem by William Blake, only upside down.","January, 29 2009 16:34:46","04:34 PM on 01/29/09","245007AB-0B56-A8D9-066E753941A44AE3","William Tell",460,329,null],[330,"245F122B-0336-510E-85DEBCFE69BD7943",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

z","January, 29 2009 16:50:24","04:50 PM on 01/29/09","245F11FA-C66E-A2C5-B348FA3752B62CF6","Frederich Engels",460,330,null],[331,"245FD2D4-FB4C-CE55-48A53E39DE66D038",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

John Baez,the fraudster: Nobody ever doubted your ability to raise an army of internet hooligans or with one telephone call you get the scum of all science journalists and all unemployed science journalists as well to dance to your whistle. The unfortunate old diploma mathematician of Die Zeit is one of them. You have to find a way to rescue him because he is facing imprisonment and we promise you as soon as this is done, we will have all the time in the world for Riverside, California. All these little tricks of yours will come to haunt you. But then: "Scum of the world unite, you have nothing to lose except your chains". Was that Said Elnashaie or Karl Marx?","January, 29 2009 16:51:13","04:51 PM on 01/29/09","245F11FA-C66E-A2C5-B348FA3752B62CF6","Frederich Engels",460,331,null],[332,"24AABC3D-DC38-B788-9718528D19C61BC8",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

You all know the phrase jumping from the sinking ship please ascertain for yourselves that the rats who have been defaming Mohamed El Naschie, the Egyptian engineer and scientist are hiding. Search for the n-Category Caf? which was publishing all the fraudulent assertions against Mohamed El Naschie. It has now changed identity like a chameleon, I should say like a snake. They changed the name to Friendfeed by one of those who answer to the name Michael Nielsen and soon enough, when Schiermeier the journalist of Nature is convicted in German and British courts, then John Baez will pretend he never said a word against Mohamed El Naschie. The fraud squad however is capable of proving everything from scratch. John Baez will have to get rid of his computer and every computer he used to spread the lies for which he was commissioned. And Dr. John Baez what are you going to do about the copies? Will you will swear an affidavit that you never ever wrote anything of the sort and that the whole thing is a conspiracy planned and executed by all the people you have defamed over so many years. I think your maternal Grandmother must have told you John, you can fool some of the people some of the time but you can t fool all of the people all of the time. I have myself a Mediterranean temperament, not very different from the Mexican temperament of some of your ancestors. I tell you, it does not help when you are in a situation similar to the one in which you are. You have to keep a cool head. You have made a colossal mistake and again, as a man of a similar background, I swear to you there is no way out except the truth. Say you were mistaken. Say that Said or Renate Loll mislead you and we will all forgive you, be it because you were a reasonably good mathematician. But if you insist on the lies you have created on the internet, we will never ever give up before seeing you behind bars.","January, 29 2009 18:13:03","06:13 PM on 01/29/09","24AABC08-D47C-6B03-B67233287101DC0E","Ibrahim K",460,332,null],[333,"24B0A275-08DF-C761-438F67EB84968E9E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I admit to being a victim of my own curiosity most, if not all of the time. This site talks almost exclusively about Mohamed El Naschie. The attributes range from a genius to a crackpot. I hate all these superlatives. I am sure he is neither. I am almost sure that the commenter’s are crackpots. I say that at the risk of referring to myself being a member of the set. All the same I looked at a most interesting and informative paper by Mohamed El Naschie called The concepts of E Infinity: An elementary introduction to the Cantorian-fractal theory of quantum physics, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 22 (2004), pp. 495. Paragraph 9 on page 507/508 caught my attention. The paragraph is entitled ‘What is a particle?’ After reading this paragraph which does not contain a single mathematical formula or equation, I had the feeling that I acquired at least a better grasp of the problem which most would have thought was self evident. The next day I was accosted by a paper published in Classical & Quantum Gravity, Vol. 26, No. 2, 21 Jan, 2009 which just appeared. The title of the paper is nothing else but ‘What is a particle?’ The authors are Daniele Colosi and Carlo Rovelli. Carlo is a marvelous scientist and well known to me. He is one of the main founders of loop quantum gravity, incidentally a subject in which Renate Loll worked for many years. However I must say Carlo’s paper is full of mystifying mathematics and is 22 pages long. This is exactly the number of pages of all the five papers which El Naschie published in the last issue of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals about which so many people have written so many pages. Of course no sane person would measure in good faith the quality or lack of it of a scientific paper by the number of pages. Never the less, and will due respect to Carlo and his co-author, I found the two pages written by Mohamed El Naschie under the title ‘What is a particle?’ far more illuminating. Having reached this conclusion I decided to know more about the man than the hearsay printed superciliously on this site. I can recommend this article taken from the horse’s mouth so to speak A tale of two Kleins unified in strings and E-infinity theory. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol. 26 (2005), pp. 247. The rest is self evident.

Norbert D. H.





","January, 29 2009 18:19:29","06:19 PM on 01/29/09","24B0A241-07B7-2B01-14E00BBBF2EB7859","Norbert D.H.",460,333,null],[334,"24C19068-C545-1FDB-7EE283C48479FD15",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. Renate Loll playing with Einstein. Nobody knows if other Nobel laureates were watching. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~loll/Web/title/title.htm.","January, 29 2009 18:37:59","06:37 PM on 01/29/09","24C19039-AA67-3523-A595F235C3D8A76B","Isaac Newton",460,334,null],[335,"24F5A5A7-C2FA-A0D5-F850D24A0A76164C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I don`t want to be paranoid but even on the risk of that, isn’t it true that the holding company of Scientific American, Nature and Die Zeit is the same holding company? What if this company has conspired in one way or another against Mohamed El Naschie? You say this is impossible? Didn`t they say the same about Nixon and Watergate? What if a small journalist was bribed or bullied or tempted to write something in Nature and then found himself in trouble. To divert attention and find allies he contacted another obscure journalist in Die Zeit. And since when do we take the opinion of journalists for granted on scientific issues? I find all these questions very disturbing and I think they should be investigated by the authorities. There is something very weird about the behavior of the Editorial Board of all the involved periodicals. In particular Die Zeit is a weekly newspaper and I understand that the journalist involved is already under indictment in the Court in Germany. If you read German and if you read the comments, you will start wondering. In particular that Die Zeit has closed the comments on its on-line article. I have nothing against John Baez. I heard he is a reasonably good mathematician but the lynching justice of the internet is something which none of us could find normal or acceptable.

Manfred

","January, 29 2009 19:34:52","07:34 PM on 01/29/09","24F5A579-E2F0-2C0C-52976AF94472F1D7","manfred",460,335,null],[336,"24FC5038-C76E-85A4-C5B358D5065A3E8D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

John Baez has made a great deal of fun of what is basically not funny at all. He said in one of his rather coarse lines that his favorite picture is that of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie sitting amidst his medals and grinning. I find charity starts at home. Have anyone of you seen the homepage of Renate Loll? Have you ever seen her picture there standing tall holding a little Einstein in the palm of her hand? The big lady and the little man, or is that her private mascot? Quite honestly this particular picture of Dr. Renate Loll reminds me of one of the Witches of Eastwick. Then she writes papers with James Bond slogans. Quantum gravity, shaken not stirred. Does she intend to become a Bond girl? For the 1.5 million Euros she won by snatching the work of Laurent Nottale and his friends, she can surely produce her own Bond film. Jan Ambjorn will play the role of Q. She only now needs to find Moneypenny and then Jurkiewicz will not be bored staring only at Loll. That leaves Nobel laureate Gerrard t Hooft with the role of directing this new Casino Royale, according to the script of Marquis de Sade. How much truth could be said in jest.

Claude




","January, 29 2009 19:42:09","07:42 PM on 01/29/09","24FC4FF9-09BA-9CD4-773C1BFB9DA81799","maynier claude",460,336,null],[337,"2E481D67-0D1E-7A19-B4CC44ED52E174EF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To those who are writing that E-infinity theory is non sense, I have one question why so many people are imitating or even copying the work of Prof Mohamd El Naschie without refereeing to him?

Ossma Ali


","January, 31 2009 15:01:32","03:01 PM on 01/31/09","2E481D38-FD59-1C2D-233FFB7B48BA5995","history77",460,337,null],[338,"2E853E97-D93B-32F0-034769AEDB887068",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Even for Non-Physicists and Non-Mathematician it is clear that the main idea of Dr. Loll`s and Dr. Ambjorn`s paper in Scientific American is taken from the following paper which was published long ago 1993 in the Journal of the Franklin Institute. The paper title is "On turbulence and complex dynamic in a four dimensional Peano- Hilbert space" page 183 - 198. The author is a Professor in the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. USA. You see there the same Cantor sets and the same Menger sponge. In the legend of figure 4 the author M.S. El Naschie mentioned explicitly that micro spacetime of Quantum Mechanics may be similar to a four dimensional analogue of this curve. That much at least must be admitted.
Gerhard Kroll
","January, 31 2009 16:08:18","04:08 PM on 01/31/09","2E853E61-F0E8-8B92-08E5E9F4735CB2AC","gerhard",460,338,null],[339,"2F822B73-DEF9-CDCD-F48F25218D538247",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The work of Professor Mohamed El Naschie has been reviewed in the year 2000 in Physics Reports. This journal has an impact factor of 20. This ranks after Nature and Science. The paper is called "Fractal Geometry in Quantum Mechanics, field theory and spin systems" . It is Physics Reports no. 323 page 81-181. Page 108 and 109 are devoted to the subject of fractal spacetime. It is mentioned explicitly that the founders of this subject are L. Nottale, M.S. El Naschie and G. Ord. I think it is clear that there must be a coordinated defamation campaign against Professor Nottale, Professor El Naschie and Professor Ord. I also think that reading the comments in this site and reading the paper in Scientific American makes it more than clear who is behind this campaign.
Maurice Ollier


","January, 31 2009 20:44:33","08:44 PM on 01/31/09","2F822B4F-0878-5A90-53B519556B253F97","Maurice",460,339,null],[340,"33D8B04B-A20D-1024-0760ED95184A40A1",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am putting my comment here too as I see that the site L affaire El Naschie is yet another where no dissenting voice may remain. I fail to see how any of these people can call themselves scientists at all.

I think everybody must agree that a reasonable scientist distinguishes himself from the average, non-scientific person by a reasonable degree of objectivity without which science could not exist. If we write according to our heart s desire, emotion or lust for revenge and inferiority complexes then we should better find ourselves another profession. For these reasons I appeal to the readers of this site as well as to those responsible for it to remove all slander and non-scientific comments out of this site. I want to read a single comment on this site which is only pertinent to the scientific content of the work of Mohamed El Naschie. Instead I read personal opinions, dressed in philosophical gowns intended only to either condemn or glorify Mohamed El Naschie. This is not a scientific debate.
Much has been said about the controversy between Dr. Renate Loll from the University of Utrecht and Dr. Jan Ambjorn from the Niels Bor Inst., Denmark on the one side and Mohamed El Naschie, Laurent Nottale and Garnet Ord on the other side. The reason is an article which appeared in Scientific American last year. It is said with boring repetition that Renate Loll and Jan Ambjorn plagiarized the work of El Naschie, Nottale and Ord. This may or may not be the case but I deplore any public flogging which reminds me of our Middle Ages. However since this article and the criticism of Loll and Ambjorn, the doors of hell opened on El Naschie and his colleagues. That is when I started to become suspicious. El Naschie has been publishing his work for twenty years or so. It was reviewed everywhere including in Physics Reports as I have just learned. The paper is Fractal geometry in quantum mechanics, field theory and spin systems, 323 (2000), pp. 81-181. One of the first proposals for fractal spacetime by El Naschie was made in the journal of the Franklin Inst., On turbulence and complex dynamics in a four-dimensional Peano-Hilbert space, Vol. 330, No. 1, (1993), pp. 183-198. These are a considerably long time ago but the non-scientific campaign against El Naschie which started in the n-Category Caf? wants us to believe the man was working secretly, in hiding, writing unintelligible papers. Being unintelligible is a relative matter anyway it depends on who is reading it but in all honesty, I have never read a more lucid paper on the subject of quantum spacetime than the following paper by El Naschie, The theory of Cantorian spacetime and high energy particle physics (an informal review), Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, (2008), doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2008.09.059. An equally excellent historical review was given by a Slovenian mathematician, L. Marek-Crnjac in A short history of fractal-Cantorian spacetime, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2008.10.007. I also wanted to understand why El Naschie and why Ambjorn and Loll. I think I have found the connection. I did that not because I hate or love anyone of them, because I do not know anyone of them, but because I followed scientific thinking. El Naschie worked on finite elements. This is basically a Regge calculus, just like Ambjorn. Second El Naschie worked on engineering problems of shells using the theory of Pogorelov. This led him to triangulation and Japanese origami. Again this led him to Ambjorn or led Ambjorn to him. On a very close examination of a wonderful book by the great Russian topologist P.S. Alexandrov you realize that both El Naschie and Ambjorn have read this book very well. The key to understanding the work of both El Naschie and Ambjorn is in this book, particularly chapter number IV entitled Complexes. I forgot to mention the name of the book which is Combinatorial Topology, published by Dover, Copyright 1956. Following this logic El Naschie, Ambjorn and Loll should be the best of friends. There is no place for the remarks of John Baez nor of course the incredible comments by Peter Woit that Mohamed El Naschie was able to publish his work simply because he belongs to some disadvantaged or misfortunate minority. This is really way below any standard I know of and this is a man who has written a book criticizing string theory entitled Not Even Wrong. Finally, the latest news for everybody, the John Baez site n-Category Caf? has disappeared from the web. Of course the harm has been done and now he is the one in hiding. For a scientist, this is most definitely conduct unbecoming. That is definitely wrong. When it comes to character there is nothing called Not Even Wrong. I sincerely hope that this site takes notice of the fact that John Baez groundless allegations have evaporated out of the internet except for those repeating things without knowing if they are right or wrong or even where they come from.

","February, 01 2009 16:57:32","04:57 PM on 02/01/09","33D8B028-D705-4A0E-0B216D945441E168","Brian Seindler",460,340,null],[341,"374915FC-E21A-1274-025E97E93EC03CFC",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Maybe after reading the Da Vinci code novel or
watching its movie.The great man El naschie inspired
to write one of his numerous fascinating papers which is

The cosmic Da Vinci code for the big bang - a mathematical toy model

Published in International journal of nonlinear sciences and numerical simulation
volume:8,issue: 2, pages:191-194 and published in the year 2007

Abstract: Division by zero is the source of all infinites in mathematics
and could be likened to a mathematical big bang. It is therefore clear that
starting from any two very small successive dimensions phi(n) and phi(n-1)
where phi = (root 5-1)/2, one could generate all fundamental dimensionless
quantities of physics and in particular the inverse electromagnetic fine
structure constant alpha(o) congruent to 137. This is simply achieved by
applying the simple local role of the Fibonacci progression as described in
a recent paper (M.S. El Naschie, Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, 31, 2007,537-547).

I refrain to put any comments, I left comments for the readers and it
would be more interesting if one can read the full paper.

","February, 02 2009 08:59:10","08:59 AM on 02/02/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,341,null],[342,"37564D61-D884-A8DD-38641820AF748FFA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Another incidence for showing the supreme capability of E-infinity
theory that can explain any thing, nothing and every thing. One
can look at the article whose title is

The brain and E-Infinity

Published in International journal of nonlinear sciences and numerical simulation
volume:7,issue: 2, pages:129-132 and published in the year 2006

Abstract: This short letter, in fact, this short telegram is mainly intended
to point out a recent and quite unexpected realization that E-Infinity space time
(E-infinity) theory (M. S. El Naschie,Chaos, Soliton & Fractals, 29 pp. 209-236 2004)
could be of a considerable help in deciphering one of the greatest secrets and
impenetrable questions of our own existence, namely what is consciousness and how
does it relate to the brain(G. M. Edelman. Consciousness. Penguin Books, London,2000).

Oh my god, it is really terrible.

","February, 02 2009 09:13:36","09:13 AM on 02/02/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,342,null],[343,"37C7C13C-BEE9-A689-75B9EA0BE132D239",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

For ever the sniveling dog who does not know what he reads. Prof. An. Prof. G.M. Edelman is a Nobel laureate but then again this would not impress you. You are surrounded by so many of them. Are you out of a job again? Why don t you take up brain research? Follow Einstein. Take a giant leap and donate your brain for brain research. I know for sure that there are some theories about rabies saying that it is inborn, destined from the first minute of birth. Your brain will make a fantastic guinea pig but at least you are sticking to abstracts. It is nice to see even a madman knowing his limitations. Why don t you go to your Caf?. Closed down?","February, 02 2009 11:17:31","11:17 AM on 02/02/09","37C7C106-E2F4-980D-7162245B05F03D80","AC",460,343,null],[344,"38D42D72-C705-0991-5DD47593AD8AA584",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I think it is harsh to call An a sniveling dog. The sniveling is OK but to stick to pure logic, dogs to do not read. Well again, to be a purist, the fact that dogs do not read is not logic, it is only a fact. Not even that because it is a fact restricted to our planet. It is quite conceivable logically that there are other planets in other galaxies where it is completely normal that dogs read. There could also be other galaxies where division by zero is allowed and does not give an infinity. I am afraid this is a completely false statement. It is as false as stating that John Baez is a gentleman and that he is 50% a descendant of the great civilization of the Aztecs, and why not. On the planet of the apes they were waiting for a monkey which can speak. Some would say this wish has been fulfilled by another gentleman who is 50% a descendant of the great Egyptian civilization. His name could be Khalil, Said or the son of Egypt although nobody knows where the other 50% comes from. Didn t Shakespeare say we are all bastards? This is a 100% true statement Prof. An. Good luck studying Mohamed El Naschie s work. It is a long way to Tipperary and you have nothing better to do and considering you do not have a clue what you are reading and considering Shakespeare a wonderful kind of beer, you are doing a good job. Keep up the good work. But maybe more importantly, why don t you join an English for foreigners class? Your English is deteriorating quite a bit Prof. An.","February, 02 2009 16:10:43","04:10 PM on 02/02/09","38D42D4D-FF9B-0FF2-1770494E0BCB4E66","GW",460,344,null],[345,"39251BC0-E95F-0B32-0F2105EE3DA2DC20",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The case of John Baez infamous n-Category Cafe. This is a clear case of internet criminality which concerns all scientists, in fact everybody. Today we all rely on the internet. In Britain Gordon Brown said that in two years everybody must have an internet connection. In the USA Obama won his election via the internet. However with the rising internet criminality, all these advantages could be wiped out. The John Baez infamous campaign is a threat to every one of us. Look how well rehearsed it was. He is an internet one man army. He search and finds a victim. The first requirement is the ability to pay, i.e. the victim must be rich. Most of his victims were publishers. He did it with the New Scientist. He is trying with Elsevier. The recipe is easy. You launch a blistering attack using any pretext. Subsequently you spread the defamation using your sock puppets and the internet crime syndicate. He even has a company pretending to be an internet solicitor company to protect you from internet criminality. That is how they find their victims. After you have created such a furor, you commission a mole or two, usually a science writer who is a drop out from a science course in a University to smuggle an article or two in well established popular science magazines, periodical or newspaper. When the scandal becomes official, the original slander on the internet, for instance the n-Category Cafe, disappears and you have only the echo and no legal responsibility. The victim has now to fight rich publishers of say Nature or Scientific American, incidentally both owned by the same holding company. This is exactly what happened now. Like any defamation rat, all the pseudo mathematical garbage with which John Baez the infamous, filled the site of n-Category Cafe disappeared. However the echo of the sock puppets is still there. We still have blogs like Backreaction, Ars Mathematica, Scholarly Kitchen and Friendfeed echoing John Baez n-Category Cafe which no longer exists. By that I mean the site wherein Prof. El Naschie was defamed has evaporated. What John Baez and his co-internet criminals do not know however, is that the state prosecution in the UK and the Federal Republic of Germany as well as the respective lawyers have full copies of the trash which they published with the intention to blackmail Mohamed El Naschie as well as Elsevier Publishing. Now this devilish plan could be used against any innocent person and if he does not have the clout like Prof. Edward Witten and Sir Roger Penrose or the money the stamina of someone like Mohamed El Naschie, then the victim has no alternative except to pay the intimidators and blackmailers or perish. Is that the world we want to live in? Is that what Google who keeps reporting things like a brainless robot want us to have? Is that the age of Google blackmail? John Baez hired cheap puppets like Dr. Skoda from Croatia and Dr. Hindi from Arabia at similarly cheap prices and then cashed in in a big way. Everyone reading this site could contribute to a better world by writing letters of protest against John Baez and anyone like him to Google Directory as well as the Universities which engage people like John Baez which in his case is Riverside University, California, USA. People should stop contributing to these shadowy blogs and should under no circumstances advertise their products on the same page as these blogs. Internet criminality is big business and we can stop it together and those who say we cannot, we can only repeat the words of Obama, together, yes we can.






S.B.","February, 02 2009 17:39:07","05:39 PM on 02/02/09","39251B9A-D851-EC9B-5786E2CFE9989CF7"," Susan Berkely",460,345,null],[346,"393626DA-B889-E5D0-CD19CC67E90ADADF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have seen the webpage of Renate Loll. I have seen her picture holding her personal little Einstein in her hand. I think she is a case for a psychiatrist who should try to relieve her from whatever she is suffering from.



J. Johnson



","February, 02 2009 17:57:44","05:57 PM on 02/02/09","393626A2-AD26-C31F-1253DF9719E9A8E1","j. johnson",460,346,null],[347,"393B5552-CF92-9DAD-F2D3737DF3B0D610",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I fully agree that all this internet criminality of John Baez, Said Elnashaie, Prof. An and the rest of these failed people must end. Alternatively all scientific blogs should be outlawed. They are no longer a source of scientific information. They are a source and means for gossip, mudslinging and defamation. If it must remain like that, then there is something very wrong with science and particularly with physics.



P. Lewy

","February, 02 2009 18:03:23","06:03 PM on 02/02/09","393B5519-EAC0-1B36-5CDC575AED7078CD","Paul Lewy",460,347,null],[348,"3AFE628B-F622-BD08-86B5509D338DBDF0",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

It is really funny how this El Naschie spends his time following internet blogs signing with different names and commenting on his own comments. It is unbelievable, on one hand El Naschie (signing with: Lewy, Johnson..etc) speaks about internet criminality and at the same time he attacks Renate Loll calling her a psychiatrist and many other stupid words. Indeed as far as scientists are concerned internet blogs remains a far more reliable source of information than the source of all garbage and junk CSF. I think if El Naschie has the slightest respect to himself he must at least shut-up and hide for ever and save himself from being very possibly prosecuted, because he is playing a stupid game that may turn back over him. The only thing that El Naschie still doesn't understand is that there are IP addresses which can identify the region from which this comments are coming, and as it has been discovered in the n-category cafe all the comments defending El Naschie were coming from the same IP address. So be careful El Naschie and don't take a lot of risk just to save your internet existence (because as far as the real scientific community is concerned you don't even exist! you are a measure zero set, indeed you are an empty set except from noise, lies , fraud, corruption....). Try to have a little of dignity, you know you are scientifically nothing, you don't even know the most elementary things in HEP..and I think you did a good job by creating this journal which gave you the opportunity to pretend for almost two decades to be a scientist..I personally know of no one who succeeded in what you have succeeded..now it is enough! it is time that you stop and retire from being the most successful fraud-scientist. ","February, 03 2009 02:16:03","02:16 AM on 02/03/09","0E1FF84E-B7EB-300D-A23C12DAC80AF3D5","dor",460,348,null],[349,"3C5F42A3-E40F-451D-6E9DBFA07079E174",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

d","February, 03 2009 08:41:29","08:41 AM on 02/03/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,349,null],[350,"3C61F0B2-0B19-066B-AD68518E4E3886A9",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

When a creature steals his mother, you notice I am not saying a man, and then lets his wife go to prison for eight months in the Women's prison in Kanater near Cairo and then hides behind the computer under the pseudo-name dor - I guess it is supposed to be a corruption of the name Ord - how infantile? and then he claims to be a human being who has an opinion and not only that he gives himself the right to pass judgment on others. I don't think all the shoes in the world could be thrown at your ugly picture and give you justice. You need not be jealous. You have achieved excellence as far as cowardice, lowliness and sickening envy. When the Lord created you important, he knew exactly what he was doing.

","February, 03 2009 08:44:25","08:44 AM on 02/03/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,350,null],[351,"3C64D4BC-B682-283E-D08B4CEABA388A06",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. Said Elnashaie - When a creature steals his mother, you notice I am not saying a man, and then lets his wife go to prison for eight months in the Women's prison in Kanater near Cairo and then hides behind the computer under the pseudo-name dor - I guess it is supposed to be a corruption of the name Ord - how infantile? and then he claims to be a human being who has an opinion and not only that he gives himself the right to pass judgment on others. I don't think all the shoes in the world could be thrown at your ugly picture and give you justice. You need not be jealous. You have achieved excellence as far as cowardice, lowliness and sickening envy. When the Lord created you important, he knew exactly what he was doing.
Atef
","February, 03 2009 08:47:34","08:47 AM on 02/03/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,351,null],[352,"3C82C0B0-B67C-A23A-3DD1E2FA22ECA09D",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

of","February, 03 2009 09:20:15","09:20 AM on 02/03/09","3C82C07A-03AB-FDEE-E6D2696A7860FEDE","Emara",460,352,null],[353,"3C8427E1-E846-8A02-FC28664A8D4DE0E1",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. Said Elnashaie, alias dor, alias An - of course you are an internet thug and you hide behind the computer and spread your hate and viciousness. And because you are an internet thug you think internet blogs are far more reliable than scientific magazines. This is a statement that holds no water. If you are a scientist and it is doubtful you are one, then you will never disclose such a misleading statement. You are filled with so much hate and it is easily revealed from the way you are writing and your choice of words. I am taken aback by your false statements and accusations. How abominable. All your comments reveal nothing other than a sick soul who is envious and jealous. Your arguments hold no water and you are wasting your time - that is if you have any precious time. You and your blogs are not in any position to pass judgment. You are a criminal and you set out to defame famous people. Don't ever forget your criminal record which is of course self-explanatory. I found these two links posted on this site on 1.29.09 (See: http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com
http://saidelnashaie.blogspot.com.
Good luck with your anger management

","February, 03 2009 09:21:47","09:21 AM on 02/03/09","3C82C07A-03AB-FDEE-E6D2696A7860FEDE","Emara",460,353,null],[354,"3C8C4E03-ACD4-F739-BC0FC7132E590ABB",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr.","February, 03 2009 09:30:41","09:30 AM on 02/03/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,354,null],[355,"3C8D616A-ECED-3367-482FAB2C009F6836",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. Said Elnashaie - When a creature steals his mother, you notice I am not saying a man, and then lets his wife go to prison for eight months in the Women's prison in Kanater near Cairo and then hides behind the computer under the pseudo-name dor - I guess it is supposed to be a corruption of the name Ord - how infantile? and then he claims to be a human being who has an opinion and not only that he gives himself the right to pass judgment on others. I don't think all the shoes in the world could be thrown at your ugly picture and give you justice. You need not be jealous. You have achieved excellence as far as cowardice, lowliness and sickening envy. When the Lord created you impotent, he knew exactly what he was doing.","February, 03 2009 09:31:52","09:31 AM on 02/03/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,355,null],[356,"3C8EFFBC-990D-F454-93EF6BC51F000238",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The comment of Dor whoever he really is shows a sick man. The man is sick with envy.
Samantha

","February, 03 2009 09:33:38","09:33 AM on 02/03/09","3C8EFF8D-9A58-4512-89F286AAE3DF5776","samatha",460,356,null],[357,"3C9E948C-A86E-C7A6-ACDBE53846C228E1",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am writing now from Canada. I am definitely not Egyptian. Mr. Dor you are definitely a bad person. You write bad things about real people and you hide behind false names. This is very bad.
Chris Norton


","February, 03 2009 09:50:39","09:50 AM on 02/03/09","3C9E9440-C7BF-03C5-09332F6BB72655FD","chris norton",460,357,null],[358,"3CA5592D-B118-5D50-227D88B739CC3053",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

think Scientific American should close this site. It is becoming the meeting point for mad people .

George
","February, 03 2009 09:58:03","09:58 AM on 02/03/09","3CA55166-0F60-61F5-BEC87F70970F8305","george pratt",460,358,null],[359,"3CFBC0E4-93A7-F0F8-4CECE5953751C7B8",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To the Editorial Board of Scientific American On-Line
I think the Editorial Board of Scientific American are well advised to close this site to any further comments. To start with people were talking science. In the last few weeks the standard of comment sank to an all time low, in fact, unprecedented in the history of Scientific American. Democracy and freedom of expression must be limited by moral and good taste. The language used on this site which is supposed to be scientific is not spoken even in the back alleys of certain quarters in London.
Thank you.

","February, 03 2009 11:32:25","11:32 AM on 02/03/09","3CFBC0BA-A649-C65D-366EF181F8EBC9BF","Chris",460,359,null],[360,"3D052610-09C7-1AE2-B43E6E099FE4B10A","EB248D42-FCA7-BC92-09E6DF6ABDA8F2D2",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is a direct answer to Paul of Eugene. You are right about the generalisation of the Menger sponge to higher dimensions. A structure which is 4 dimensional and has many relations to the Menger sponge is the Hilbert cube. Mohamed El Naschie seemingly without knowing the Hilbert cube rediscovered it. This is his 4 dimensional model with the following average dimension. An average ind of 4 minus k and an average Ind equals 4 and a covering equal 4 plus the golden mean to the power of 3. The formal dimension is of course infinity as in the classical Hilbert cube. You can read the background to all of that in the book of Alexandrov. The work of El Naschie may be found on Elsevier's Science Direct 2008.","February, 03 2009 11:42:41","11:42 AM on 02/03/09","3CFBC0BA-A649-C65D-366EF181F8EBC9BF","Chris",460,360,10],[361,"413CBB79-DD53-80AB-CA32F12729309DD9",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is a direct response to Dr. dor. You are giving too many answers searching for questions. First how come that a scientist publishes his work not only for twenty years but over thirty five years in many international journals and no one except you notices that it is all garbage, as you put it? Mohamed El Naschie published almost 900 papers in ZAMM, Int. J. of Theoretical Physics, European J. of Physics, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Physics Letters and many others. Besides he was the Editor in Chief, Associate Editor or Member of the Editorial Board of over a dozen international journals apart of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals. That would mean a total failure of our entire scientific system to detect garbage, if you were correct. Even more pronounced is the fact that Mohamed El Naschie is the student and a close friend of dozens of well established scientists apart of a handful of Nobel laureates. Mohamed El Naschie lectured together with Nobel laureate Gerrard tHooft as well as Ilya Prigogine and he was even together with Steven Hawkings at various conferences in Japan. In other words all these people must be incompetent or were in deep slumber. The only person who was alert to thirty years or so of scientific deception must have been you, Dr. dor and also to a certain extent, Dr. An. It is therefore your responsibility towards our scientific civilization to give your full name and address, telephone number and more importantly, your affiliation and the department in which your work so that we can benefit from your deep insight into science and how it works in our time. Mind you, I am also puzzled as to why you did not notice it earlier. It must be that you are very young people with extra ordinary talent to have discovered all these latent deceptions so quickly and with such ease. That is quite honestly baffling us. We are still struggling to read some of these 900 papers but you seem to have found a method to cut through the load and come to a conclusion much quicker than our entire scientific establishment. So please, as a matter of urgency communicate to us your address. It is your patriotic duty towards humanity.","February, 04 2009 07:21:53","07:21 AM on 02/04/09","413CBB36-B839-CD08-4C908BE4016C9BAC","Jeffrey S.",460,361,null],[362,"41E08192-B76A-D02A-7B354232A37CF95F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

In one of his numerous fascinating articles which
he dedicated to Gerardus tHooft and titled "On quarks confinement and asymptotic freedom"
(Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 37 (2008)1289 1291)

The great man El naschie gave a new miraculous explanation
for confinement. But unfortunately the great man doesn't
know enough physics, nor enough math, to get into such
a deep topic. The man has clearly a big confusion between the number
of flavors and number of generations. According to him
page 1290 "...This term appear as 33 2 f where f is the number of
fermion-anti fermion loops considered...." where the great man
meant the one loop beta function. In the same page one finds
the expression of the one loop beta function b= 33- 2 N_f/12 Pi
" .... For a number of generation equal to that of the standard
model,namely N_f =3 one .nds b =0.716197....". But to the knowledge of El Naschie
N_f should be interpreted as the number of flavors not the number of generations.
Maybe the great man can check this in any standard textbook on the subject
or the one he used which is the first reference listed at the end of
his article.

Another extraordinary achievement of El Naschie is his freshman
explanation for the confinement phenomenon.

In page 1291, the great man gave us his magic explanation for
confinement "... We cannot see quarks for the same reason that we
cannot see real water at +300 degree centigrade or - 30 degree
centigrade. In both cases we can see vapor or ice and we know it was
water but we cannot see water......"

Let me ask the great man a technical question, if your approach is
a non-perturbative and can cope only with the one loop expression of
beta function. What about the other contributions to beta function
namely two loop, three loop and four loop do you interpret them as
Trans-infinite corrections. To your knowledge the four loop
correction to beta function appeared in 1997, which means you
can not find it in the old edition of your first reference
Yndurain FJ.The theory of quark and gluon interaction.Berlin:Springer;1992.
By now there is the fourth edition 2006, and you can give a look at.

The astonishing thing is that El Naschie uses just very elementary math operations like addition,
subtraction, multiplication and division. Maybe in this particular
paper he was a little more advanced and used the logarithm. That is
just a pedagogical trick to make dummy people understand. On the
top of all these, El Naschie explains low energy phenomena(
relatively) using Planck scale language (let us not say physics!).

Now, let us ask the following interesting question: if the great man El
naschie dedicates this article to Gerardus tHooft (Nobel prize
laureate), then what has Gerardus tHoof dedicated to him?

Although the question seems difficult, tHooft has made it easier for us. In his webpage
tHooft gave an account of How to Become Bad theoretical
Physicists.(http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theoristbad.html).The content of this page was
of course dedicated to every successful case. tHooft did not
mention any name but El Naschie can easily recognize himself as a
champion of this webpage.

At last, we argue the great man to devote part of his time to
learn proper math and physics (although it is toooo late now!).
Sciences and knowledge is not about using
English in a pedantic and impressive way. One can still do good science
even with broken English but not with broken and sick mind.","February, 04 2009 10:20:46","10:20 AM on 02/04/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,362,null],[363,"41E21104-A9EC-58D6-81FB769832104362",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

In this concluding comment, I am going to show in a rigorous
mathematical language that El Nashie is isomorphic to a "Bad
Theoretical Physicist" according to tHoof definition and criteria .

Thooft criteria are:
(http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theoristbad.html)

1-It is much easier to become a bad theoretical physicist than a good one.
I know of many individual success stories.

El- For sure El Naschie is one of those stories.

2- Compare yourself with Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Paul
Dirac.

El- This happened in many occasions. In his 60th
birthday celebration in China one reads in the preface of the
proceeding dedicated to him the following:
"Our Chinese Scientists on Nonlinear Dynamics are in infinite love
and admiration to both the man and his science."

"Treading the path of El Naschie, we gather together to celebrate
the century's greatest scientist after Newton and Einstein,
and share his greatest achievement."

One can find more on the following link: www.ijnsns.com/conf/China1.doc


3- You may consider the option of connecting your work with mystery
topics such as telepathy and consciousness.

EL- This is one of El Naschie' papers.

The brain and E-Infinity

Published in International journal of nonlinear sciences and numerical simulation
volume:7,issue: 2, pages:129-132 and published in the year 2006

Abstract: This short letter, in fact, this short telegram is mainly intended
to point out a recent and quite unexpected realization that E-Infinity space time
(E-infinity) theory (M. S. El Naschie,Chaos, Soliton & Fractals, 29 pp. 209-236 2004)
could be of a considerable help in deciphering one of the greatest secrets and
impenetrable questions of our own existence, namely what is consciousness and how
does it relate to the brain(G. M. Edelman. Consciousness. Penguin Books, London,2000).

4- Make outrageous claims of having solved long standing problems.

EL- El Naschie claims to have solved: Confinement, Quantum
Gravity, Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, explained the number
of elementary particles, the value of all gauge couplings..and
many other things...


5-The bad theoretical physicist, in anticipation,
names his own equations and effects, and even his entire theories, after himself right away.

EL- Feynman-El Naschie Hypothesis, El Naschie local
coherence...etc


6- Try to overshout all your critics, and have your work published anyway.
If the well-established science media refuse to publish your work,
start your own publishing company and edit your own books.

EL- El Naschie founded Chaos Solitons and Fractals journal and has to do with the one in China.

7- Your next step should be to advertise your work. Your reputation may have
caused the xxx ArXives and Wikipedia to refuse your submissions.

EL- El Naschie has been black-listed in xxx ArXives for affiliation arrogating
( forging).( http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0004152). More detail can
be found in ( http://archivefreedom.org/freedom/Cyberia.html).

8- You have convinced your friends at your local bar, your family, your pizza vendor, your dog,
and even a local radio station of the superiority of your theory.

El- Mohamed El Naschie answers a few questions about this month's new
hot paper in the field of Engineering.
In addition, Dr. El Naschie gives an audio interview about his work.

This is can be found in: http://esi-topics.com/nhp/2006/september-06-MohamedElNaschie.html

Beside many interviews and TV shows in Egyptian channels.

9- But then there are those few physicists such as one bloke called Gerardus 't Hooft,
who shamelessly have pointed out to you that your theory is nonsense!
Should you take them seriously? Of course not.
Don't even try to show them the details of your derivations,
which you forgot anyway and you might not be able to reproduce on the spot.
Here is what you do to establish your reputation forever: JUST GIVE THEM HELL.
Compare those obnoxious puppets of the establishment with nazis and
threaten them with law suits. That'll teach them.

El- This is can be easily seen from his comments in different
blogs including this blog.




10- Lastly, we ask El Naschie to measure his John Baez index or
crackpot index mentioned in tHooft web
page. (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html) of course
don't confuse this with Atiyah-Singer or Witten index....

I think with the above ten commands we have shown in a non
refutable way that El Naschie is in one to one correspondence with
the criteria of a BAD THEORETICAL PHYSICIST. Congratulations for
being a champ!
","February, 04 2009 10:22:28","10:22 AM on 02/04/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,363,null],[364,"42AF77DD-D948-37C9-2F28CCAA59195F6C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

d","February, 04 2009 14:06:49","02:06 PM on 02/04/09","42AF710B-C190-CF93-92BA49AC05DAF3EA","Mamun",460,364,null],[365,"42B15A79-F750-DEBF-B56CCAA95C7D659F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Despite all this fuss there is one nagging question which cannot be whitewashed. If Mohamed El Naschie's work is of no value why is a leading centre of excellence in Holland, more precisely in Utrecht, plagiarizing the main idea and concept and masquerading it as something else while everybody, even an educated layman can see that it is essentially the same ideas? When you can answer this question without swearing and rampaging, then I will start to believe what you want us so badly to believe.","February, 04 2009 14:08:53","02:08 PM on 02/04/09","42AF710B-C190-CF93-92BA49AC05DAF3EA","Mamun",460,365,null],[366,"42D43AC9-D6AA-6A22-C1043E5D3B25AE47",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

S","February, 04 2009 14:46:58","02:46 PM on 02/04/09","42D43A93-FCCC-C0EA-6B51CC18BFCA17B5","Leila",460,366,null],[367,"42D5320C-F4B2-9DC8-A5C4617AAA93554E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. Said, I don't think you will find a person who has the time to read your work to make fun of it. Quite honestly you are not worth it. But stealing one's own mother is deplorable beyond any measure.
Leila

","February, 04 2009 14:48:02","02:48 PM on 02/04/09","42D43A93-FCCC-C0EA-6B51CC18BFCA17B5","Leila",460,367,null],[368,"42DC1A6D-9172-9DF9-A73754BA37B92BDB",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is a direct response to both comments of Mr. An Said Elnashaie. Dear Said, If that is the extent of your logic of one to one correspondence and irrefutable proof, I am not astonished you are the mediocrity which you are. That is what is killing you about Mohamed. The length of your comment however and the effort you are putting into it together with a bunch of second rate students of yours, if you still have any, or science friends of yours, again if you have any indicates to me that you are in a deep, deep crisis. This time your father is dead and the only one who would have given you a helping hand is precisely the man you have written to in English and Arabic that you would devote the rest of your life to destroying so you can be sure that this time, he will not be helping you. You are now alone Said from here to eternity. Goodbye.
The spirit of Christmas to Come

","February, 04 2009 14:55:34","02:55 PM on 02/04/09","42DC1A37-DA6C-0FCC-85F750DEDFF13068","The Spirit of Christmas to Come",460,368,null],[369,"42EBA4EE-C071-652B-7A6BC2D7C57F29F1",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear An We would all be very grateful if you would refrain from making any reference to Prof. tHooft. Your dispute is not our concern. We are grateful for your sensitivity and sensibility.

","February, 04 2009 15:12:33","03:12 PM on 02/04/09","42EBA4B9-AB5D-FAE3-A856D38604A4B10F","Anyone else",460,369,null],[370,"431C2760-A20C-D662-4AC078231E335ED5",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The story of the article of Nobel laureate tHooft has been told somewhere before, probably by the same authors of these comments. The problem with the credibility is the same. Both Prof. tHooft and the other person mentioned are known to be the best of friends. Nobody frequented the house of the tHooft s as much. He was present at all important occasions. I do not think it is a sign of good manners to use these things in a private vendetta. There is a Dutch saying to the effect that if you put your finger into the nose of someone else, this is proof that you are the one who is a swine.","February, 04 2009 16:05:32","04:05 PM on 02/04/09","431C270C-BB98-C4AC-82E6B1ACF4955339","Hank",460,370,null],[371,"438245A1-E293-1980-A00DA60F7EFC138B",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is a direct response to Dr. An and Dr. dor and Dr. Said. You are giving too many answers searching for questions. First how come that a scientist publishes his work not only for twenty years but over thirty five years in many international journals and no one except you notices that it is all garbage, as you put it? Mohamed El Naschie published almost 900 papers in ZAMM, Int. J. of Theoretical Physics, European J. of Physics, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Physics Letters and many others. Besides he was the Editor in Chief, Associate Editor or Member of the Editorial Board of over a dozen international journals apart of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals. That would mean a total failure of our entire scientific system to detect garbage, if you were correct. Even more pronounced is the fact that Mohamed El Naschie is the student and a close friend of dozens of well established scientists apart of a handful of Nobel laureates. Mohamed El Naschie lectured together with Nobel laureate Gerrard tHooft as well as Ilya Prigogine and he was even together with Steven Hawkings at various conferences in Japan. In other words all these people must be incompetent or were in deep slumber. The only three persons or one person who was alert to thirty years or so of scientific deception must have been you, Dr. dor and also to a certain extent, Dr. An and Dr. Said. It is therefore your responsibility towards our scientific civilization to give your full name(s) and address, telephone number and more importantly, your affiliation and the department in which your work so that we can benefit from your deep insight into science and how it works in our time. Mind you, I am also puzzled as to why you did not notice it earlier. It must be that you are very young people with extra ordinary talent to have discovered all these latent deceptions so quickly and with such ease. That is quite honestly baffling us. We are still struggling to read some of these 900 papers but you seem to have found a method to cut through the load and come to a conclusion much quicker than our entire scientific establishment. So please, as a matter of urgency communicate to us your address. It is your patriotic duty towards humanity. You seem like a responsible lot who keep a watching brief day and night on the most important affair on this planet, namely Mohamed El Naschie, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals and how Jihan Fadel is going to get the money for her next hot film. I hope Jeffrey forgives me for taking over his logic and twisting it to fit the twisted minds of certain twisted souls. Merci.

","February, 04 2009 17:57:04","05:57 PM on 02/04/09","4382455A-C330-E2B7-EE6D2046C4745693","Kazim",460,371,null],[372,"43A6B330-DF72-C835-D65082A8607AE6FA",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 04 2009 18:36:52","06:36 PM on 02/04/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,372,null],[373,"43A7C4C3-E366-EE85-30311A1AF948E7FD",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Prof. An who is nothing else but Said Elnashaie was talking about a beautiful picture of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie published in a German magazine. Surely this could not match the picture of Dr. Said behind bars in an Egyptian court where he was sentenced to two years hard labor but on petition of decent people, the sentence was suspended to one year. What a pity that the decency of decent people is wasted on such a person. If Said tries harder we can still show this picture not in a German newspaper but in all Arabic and Egyptian newspapers. He has no more credit at all, not even with decent people and as for talking about honor, I would have thought that Said is the last person who should pronounce this word. In the course of a few decades he changed from a reasonable chemical engineer to a devious environmental scientist defrauding the United States and Egypt of a large amount of money with the help of his partner Chimonix owned by him and Dr.
Ahmad Gaber. As if this is not enough, now he has opened his house for the hiring of young starlets of the lower strata of Arabic films for belly dancing. What is next? Drug trafficking in Sinai? Who knows.

","February, 04 2009 18:38:02","06:38 PM on 02/04/09","0F287FEF-A6E8-5AE7-48F12593C4CB3608","Atef",460,373,null],[374,"43B2069D-DBB1-F481-E74CA1E919FD6E74",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 04 2009 18:49:14","06:49 PM on 02/04/09","43B2066B-C323-90F8-626A61AC8415993F","A.Fekry",460,374,null],[375,"43B5053F-046E-4E00-C958DCCEDE91A961",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Said Elnashaie, you are repeating yourself. We have read this trash so many times. However we read for the first time your criminal record. Quite honestly a man like that who steals his mother ……nothing is beyond him. I don't think you will find anybody who is ready to insult you as a scientist if you ever have been one. You are of no consequence in any direction. And when you depart from the here to the hereafter, there would be luckily nothing left and you will end in the trash bin of those who disgraced themselves, then disgraced their family and now disgracing their whole nation publicly. The word decency is something you never heard in your entire life. But again what do you expect of someone who steals his mother and then puts her on the street penniless and not even with sufficient nightgowns. If someone is a good or a bad physicist, this mite be due to a limitation of education or brain power. But in your case it is a lack of character and
morality which is irrevocable. Will these words put you into shame? No chance. You have been all your life a shameless creature.

","February, 04 2009 18:52:30","06:52 PM on 02/04/09","43B2066B-C323-90F8-626A61AC8415993F","A.Fekry",460,375,null],[376,"45F31E7E-DC1A-102A-F6809B0C33A83596",null,2,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I think An has done a great job with his tow last comments. The strange thing is that El Naschie is insisting that An is his brother Said. I personally don't think so, because he already accused me to be Said. Any way, what makes me amazed more is the fact that El naschie is continuing to bring in his family scandals and shameful stories about his own family to scientific blogs. This really shows that El Naschie has no moral limit.
May be El naschie is wondering how I could recognize that all the previous comments are coming from him. I tell him that it is too easy to see that .
I don't need to check and get the IP address, but simply by looking at the words , the stories, "the style of English", and noting that he usually sends empty comments (before sending the complete one) or comments with one letter, sometimes the same comment is sent twice and surprisingly without noticing he sends the same comment with two different signatures.
","February, 05 2009 05:19:34","05:19 AM on 02/05/09","0E1FF84E-B7EB-300D-A23C12DAC80AF3D5","dor",460,376,null],[377,"46234150-F420-7B0A-A024A83F0F328DDF",null,2,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To Dr. dor, An, Said Elnashaie - Is it that far already? Congratulating yourself. You can analyze letters? Why don t you analyze yourself? Jihan Fadel, your so called daughter, who appears continuously defending you on TV could produce a film for you .. Analyze That Part III & It could become like Sahar Allialli, bring you fame and fortune and render unfeasible to continue the mad course you have taken. Imagine all that disgrace to yourself, your family and your country because you cannot bring yourself to admit a single, by comparison, little mistake nine years ago. You attempted to steal from your mother and your attempt failed. Make a U-turn, admit the truth. Anything is better than what you have done to yourself. But that is how you always were. You charge like a bull and you think later. And you are vicious. Even at the age of 5 you almost killed a boy in the school who was better than you in the class. When we joked about it once and you were already 50 you became very angry in the garden of the house which you built from the money which Mohamed made available to you through Saudi Arabia. At the age of 18 you caused the unfortunate creature whose name I will not name to jump out of a window in front of a police station in Kobri Algalaa at Giza. I also sat on this unfortunate day in the Court and saw you behind bars, standing besides drug traffickers, murderers and pimps and wondered how on earth is this possible. How could you bring yourself to that? I remembered how you were praising Mohamed El Naschie day and night when we were working together in Saudi Arabia. You overdo it in every respect. However you never denied that Mohamed El Naschie is the one who saved you when all your communist party comrades abandoned you and your weight reduced to barely 60 kilos. Your eyes were constantly shifting and you could hardly move or give a lecture. This was a relapse of what happened to you when you were in Belfast when you married this unfortunate girl from Ireland. You were also ungrateful for all what she did for you. Then you ended with the convicted Shadia Shashini, mother of Jihan Fadel. It is very important that the people around you can control your condition and these two ladies controlled it alright. Now you are one who has flown over the cuckoo s nest and I see no chance what so ever that you come back. We know you very well Said and we know all your tricks and the degree of your sick soul and mind. We know that there is nothing beyond you, even murder and your co-conspirators will realize the danger in which they are, being with you and will abandon you sooner or later. It provides me no pleasure writing these letters whether in Scientific American or on the blogs of Haraket Kafaya where some of your infamous communist comrades are hiding under the name of some Muslim brothers. A conglomerate of desperados.

","February, 05 2009 06:12:09","06:12 AM on 02/05/09","4623412A-C514-0AE9-B75002908F4F4D00","Atef A.",460,377,null],[378,"464CBD73-98FB-710E-BDD0436838CD3147",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 05 2009 06:57:28","06:57 AM on 02/05/09","464CBD43-A2B0-0809-74BD771208154D58","Adams",460,378,null],[379,"464DA521-0AB1-2B8C-6B5F4BF6BD5D656A",null,2,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

How clumsy of Jeffrey S. He addressed only Dr. dor and Dr. An and not Dr. An Said Elnashaie. Thus predictable as with every parasite, comes the answer of An about Nobel laureates and quarks confinement reminding us of his confinement behind bars imprisoned in the Egyptian court. So you are Said again. Said the coward, Said who stole from his mother. Said who escaped to America and pretended to be an environmental scientist. You are not a man. You are not a woman. You are something in between. No that would be an insult to both including eunuchs. If you are a man, even 10% a man, give your name and address and then you will be allowed to ask your master anything. We might even answer your silly questions which you mistake for deep philosophical transactions of a runaway lunatic. Just once sign a letter with your name and address otherwise you will be branded with the only description befitting a creature like you - a little homunculus, fit
only to sit in the lap of Jihan Fadel.
","February, 05 2009 06:58:27","06:58 AM on 02/05/09","464CBD43-A2B0-0809-74BD771208154D58","Adams",460,379,null],[380,"46AD7D3B-C124-4E6D-224F837438644186",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Gentlemen, I hope you are acquainted with this expression, this is a scientific site and not a brothel. If Mr. An or Mr. dor have something to say, they said it and we have understood. Thank you. If you keep on writing then of course El Naschie s friends or he himself under a different name or what ever you want to call it, will go on defending his name. By contrast you are writing under pseudo names, also understandably, but you can stop and then probably El Naschie s friends or sock puppets will stop writing any comments, at least in theory. So Mr. An and Mr. dor you are the ones who are provoking these entire extremely unpleasant comments. It is within your power to stop it. Making your point over and over again will achieve just the opposite. I hope that much at least is clear to you.","February, 05 2009 08:43:08","08:43 AM on 02/05/09","46AD7D12-B310-74BB-3ECC693C118CA84A","James M.",460,380,null],[381,"4701756F-F7FB-F1B6-9216570C0881BD57",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Ok I will stop...not because of your comments..but I already decided to do so..it is meaningless to continue with you, I just wanted to show to any one who happens to read this blog how you desperately defend your internet existence ....but I tell you for the last time..I have nothing to do with brother, I learned about his existence from you...and I may give you my real name..but believe me what I was doing is more intelligent than your mind can compass or perceive. You can go and sleep now, but I wonder how one like you can sleep with all this garbage in his mind.","February, 05 2009 10:14:51","10:14 AM on 02/05/09","0E1FF84E-B7EB-300D-A23C12DAC80AF3D5","dor",460,381,null],[382,"477236F9-0A59-385B-4B4C9D3292FEF367",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To say that Said Elnashaie is the brother of Mohamed El Naschie is a complete blatant lie in more than one sense. It is part and parcel of the viscous defamation campaign which started with the publication of the article of Renate Loll, Jan Ambjorn and Jerzy Jurkiewicz in Scientific American. I challenge anyone including Said Elnashaie to produce a birth certificate with the name Elnashie or Elnashaie or any similarly sounding name in Arabic or English. The real name of Dr. Said is Said Salah Hamid. He has adopted the name Elnashaie like he adopted many other things. It is alone the kindness of Mohamed El Naschie that he did not prosecute him in the Courts of Justice to stop him using this name.

","February, 05 2009 12:18:01","12:18 PM on 02/05/09","477236C0-F6C1-802A-CF099561FED0C9E8","Moustapha Khalil",460,382,null],[383,"47F54BBA-B5B4-C190-B0A3C04BBF1AB08F",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 05 2009 14:41:11","02:41 PM on 02/05/09","47F54B8A-FC51-68DB-BF6D5A73409F6147","Moustapha Khalil",460,383,null],[384,"47F673C5-932A-91A3-059A3977ABBEFFD3",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To say that Said Elnashaie is the brother of Mohamed El Naschie is a complete blatant lie in more than one sense. It is part and parcel of the vicious defamation campaign which started with the publication of the article of Renate Loll, Jan Ambjorn and Jerzy Jurkiewicz in Scientific American. I challenge anyone including Said Elnashaie to produce a birth certificate with the name Elnashie or Elnashaie or any similarly sounding name in Arabic or English. The real name of Dr. Said is Said Salah Hamed. He has adopted the name Elnashaie like he adopted many other things. It is alone the kindness of Mohamed El Naschie that he did not prosecute him in the Courts of Justice to stop him using this name.","February, 05 2009 14:42:27","02:42 PM on 02/05/09","47F54B8A-FC51-68DB-BF6D5A73409F6147","Moustapha Khalil",460,384,null],[385,"482AB1F4-D2AE-5C67-C2A2F4494FD89C31",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Bernard Shaw was fascinated by the seven pillars of wisdom. Whether it is a true historical account or not, it does not change the fact that it is a masterpiece of English literature. Some may remember an unforgettable passage which fits wonderfully in this bizarre landscape of comments on this site. Sharif Ali Lawrence said as long as Arab kills Arab, they will remain weak people, little people, barbarous and cruel True, very true. This fits what is happening in Gaza and it fits what is happening on this site.
","February, 05 2009 15:39:31","03:39 PM on 02/05/09","482AB1B5-07F8-C01E-956FA4842AA720BE","S. Nutting",460,385,null],[386,"483FDDFA-B1F8-CD34-BE618053B8BACFF0",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The comment of Khalil is very harsh. Even if it is true, it is harsh. I know for sure how Mohamed El Naschie feels. He has a very big heart and is capable of forgiveness when most, if not all the people around him in a similar situation would not. I am also sure also Said is a ludicrous person but this is not his own fault. It is circumstances and misfortune. What is the difference between a stomach tumor and a brain tumor? Both are afflictions and diseases which we cannot help and no one chooses to be sick. But Mr. dor, if you are not Said and if your noble objective has eluded us, then please make yourself known. Maybe we could together bring sanity not only to this site, which is really not important, but to the relief of millions of Arabs who are at pain seeing their idols torn to be pieces on this site. Yes it is extremely important that you make yourself known. Give us your name, affiliation and email or mobile number if it is more convenient and we will contact you in good faith. You have my word of honor, despite all the dishonorable rhetoric on this site for which we will all later on have to give a collective apology to Scientific American, Renate Loll, Mohamed El Naschie and Nobel laureate tHooft whose name has artificially been dragged into all of that.","February, 05 2009 16:02:39","04:02 PM on 02/05/09","483FDC54-9CB0-8E4C-1B93D0E69AAA0752","Tariq S.",460,386,null],[387,"4DA2F3C8-067B-56DA-5D4F8AD74E4FB00A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have a genuine scientific question. I would be grateful to anyone who could help answer it. I know this is a hot site. Initially it was a scientific site but somehow it went another way. Never the less, I will risk it. Here is my question: The inverse coupling constant of quantum gravity as well as the grand unification inverse coupling constant are two of the most important fundamental constants of any general theory going beyond the standard model. I found two radically different values for this constant in the literature. In the classical treaty on quantum field theory Vol. 3 by Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg the value is given by alpha bar equals 17.5. On the other hand in a paper published in the hotly disputed Chaos, Solitons & Fractals the same value is given by 26.18. The paper is entitled Non-perturbative super symmetric quantum gravity coupling, 35 (2008), p. 862-870. There are three possibilities. Either 17.5 is correct or 26.18 is correct or both values are wrong. Now it is very difficult to think that the value given by Weinberg is prima facie wrong. This is not a scientific argument because Nobel laureates can also make mistakes, particularly printing errors. I repeated the calculation and found that it cannot be a printing error. On the other hand, 26.18 is the result of exact transfinite calculation which should be very accurate, in fact exact. So we are still facing the dilemma. I searched in the literature and found that there are many approximate solutions to this problem. For instance John Ellis from CERN found this value to be 24, approximately that is. 24 seems to be a good approximation to 26 but definitely not to 17.5. So here I am puzzled by this discrepancy and do not have the courage to say which one is right and which one is wrong and hence, my question. The question is directed of course in the first instance to Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg who does not answer emails because he is understandably extremely busy. However maybe the Author of the paper Mohamed El Naschie could explain why his result is right and that of Steven Weinberg is wrong because this is what he mentions in his paper. Assuming both do not answer, there is nothing left for me but to hope that somebody reading these comments could help. There is a Ph.D. student whose future depends on a resolution of this discrepancy. Thanks.

","February, 06 2009 17:08:58","05:08 PM on 02/06/09","4DA2F0B7-FD9F-BDC0-DF97F36E99632CB3","A. Nazmi",460,387,null],[388,"4F0D6272-C4A0-9862-4375E88E5D0375FB",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

OK, I told you that I would stop..but I thought you understood that you should stop too. You are again trying to make monologues discussing nonsense things. If there is PhD student working on this "not even wrong topics": what a wonderful Dr this will be!
But I understand why you continue writing in this blog. This is the only place left for you where people can see what you write. The days of CSF are gone ( 1 paper each two days).
I am telling you stop writing on this blog ok..stop. !!!
","February, 06 2009 23:44:51","11:44 PM on 02/06/09","0E1FF84E-B7EB-300D-A23C12DAC80AF3D5","dor",460,388,null],[389,"4F248D54-F320-13A8-0FE8437B192E3FBF",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

OK, I told you that I would stop..but I thought you understood that you should stop too. You are again trying to make monologues discussing nonsense things. If there is PhD student working on this "not even wrong topics": what a wonderful Dr this will be!
But I understand why you continue writing in this blog. This is the only place left for you where people can see what you write. The days of CSF are gone ( 1 paper each two days).
I am telling you stop writing on this blog ok..stop. !!!
","February, 07 2009 00:10:09","12:10 AM on 02/07/09","0E1FF84E-B7EB-300D-A23C12DAC80AF3D5","dor",460,389,null],[390,"57E3AF77-A8B9-E969-80355F9EDB3C7D1C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Table 1 of Mohamed El Naschie s paper Superstrings, entropy and the elementary particle content of the standard model published in Chaos Solitons & Fractals, vol. 29 (2006), p. 48254 gives a complete answer to the ignoramous John Baez. You will recall the nonsense he wrote in his n-Category Caf? before it was removed and he went into hiding. He did not know anything about Riemannian manifolds. He never heard about 2 and3 Stein spaces and yet he allowed himself to joke about things which he cannot even guess at. That is the misery of the times we are living in, that people like John Baez can form and in fact register internet companies which they then use for defamation.","February, 08 2009 16:55:53","04:55 PM on 02/08/09","57E3AF2F-9927-0B6B-911BEC86D617CB95","Erogal",460,390,null],[391,"57FE4E5E-D97A-2804-FC4F6B0A628EDEB8",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The old pharaohs believed in reincarnation. Here is the living experimental proof. The Hound of the Baskerville has resurrected in the form of dor, the dog guarding the door to this scientific American site. Speaking of Holmes let me play the sleuth please, pretty please. Look my dear Watson; let us assume first it is John Baez. He is loco, down in Acapulco that is in Mexico. But John Baez can write much better English than that and to be honest he is several quantums more intelligent. The second possibility is Dr. Renate Loll. She needs to disqualify Mohamed El Naschie completely in order to justify plagiarizing his work without mentioning anyone even remotely related to the work but then again, the lady has more class than this. For sure she is behind the article in Nature and she will try a few other tricks but the whole thing has to remain on Nobel laureate s level so we have to exclude that too my dear Watson. Now the comment of dor shows a far more stupid man that we ever guessed. He is doolally, a complete nutter. So how many times did I tell you my dear Watson that when you exclude all what is impossible, then what ever is left, however improbable, must be the truth. ","February, 08 2009 17:24:57","05:24 PM on 02/08/09","57FE4E2B-C599-615F-A4CAF27FAF04D798","Conan Doyle",460,391,null],[392,"58418C83-AC8F-5555-D63ED4DD0F5713BA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

To those who are writing that E-infinity theory is non sense,I have one question why so many people are imitating or even copying the work of Prof Mohamed El Nashie without refereeing to him
Ossama Ali
","February, 08 2009 18:38:24","06:38 PM on 02/08/09","58418C5B-93CA-7871-A39065C2640EFC20","ossama",460,392,null],[393,"59710F51-F650-A64E-7A73CD3848B75FD1",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Ok Dear genius (El Naschie), the bog is yours , write whatever you like...it seems that I was beating a dead dog ( not to say a horse).","February, 09 2009 00:09:55","12:09 AM on 02/09/09","0E1FF84E-B7EB-300D-A23C12DAC80AF3D5","dor",460,393,null],[394,"5A272935-F2D5-EA42-29698EC78C015DB3",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 09 2009 03:28:49","03:28 AM on 02/09/09","5A272907-BB97-B901-9BF2F33D9C6897CF","Aly",460,394,null],[395,"5A288B0B-0B36-77E0-EEB8599BD404D6E3",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dooooor a mee faso ludicrous. Try to hide your inferiority complexes. Who is paying you? Are you laid off? Where is your address? Where is your name? The eternal coward!","February, 09 2009 03:30:20","03:30 AM on 02/09/09","5A272907-BB97-B901-9BF2F33D9C6897CF","Aly",460,395,null],[396,"5AA5B4B7-B825-33FE-D3277B2568453D47",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. F. Tengelin was quicker than me or more brave than me. I was just thinking of saying the same thing. Let me make his statement more precise. Prof. Steve Weinberg who developed the electro weak theory and shared the Nobel prize with two others is the author of the most authoritative book on quantum field theory. In volume 3 of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields published by Cambridge University Press in 2000 he states on page 192 that the inverse super symmetric unification coupling of all fundamental gauge forces is 17.5. This value is given by his equation 28.2.19. Finding this result scared me quite a bit because I used Prof. El Naschie s result which comes to 24.28. This is a large discrepancy. I repeated the calculation again and again but I always found 24.28 and never 17.5. To make things worse Prof. El Naschie noticed immediately that 17.5 must be a miscalculation and said that the exact integer value must be 26. That means 17.5 must be wrong and 24.28 is only an approximation to the exact value which is 26. He said it is obvious that 26 must be correct. He directed me to his paper in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 35, p. 862 (2008) entitled Non-perturbative super symmetric quantum gravity coupling. I am desperate to know who is right and who is wrong? This result will not affect either the career of a Nobel laureate or the career of a well established professor but it could be devastating for me. I would be extremely grateful to anyone who could help me decide who is right, Prof. Weinberg or Prof. El Naschie. Please send me your answers as quick as possible to the address below.



Ayman Elokaby

Dept. of Physics

University of Alexandria

Egypt ","February, 09 2009 05:47:03","05:47 AM on 02/09/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,396,null],[397,"5B4E3BD7-0D81-D967-AF1BB977AA14F87D",null,2,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

There is a new place where you can enjoy more stuff about you:
http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/","February, 09 2009 08:51:07","08:51 AM on 02/09/09","0E1FF84E-B7EB-300D-A23C12DAC80AF3D5","dor",460,397,null],[398,"5CD4ADE6-F7C5-1E6C-9F8C34176B372732",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 09 2009 15:57:35","03:57 PM on 02/09/09","5A272907-BB97-B901-9BF2F33D9C6897CF","Aly",460,398,null],[399,"5CD5D3C7-A8FF-FC7C-A8835E3353B9C299",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 09 2009 15:58:51","03:58 PM on 02/09/09","5A272907-BB97-B901-9BF2F33D9C6897CF","Aly",460,399,null],[400,"5CD6D145-B835-5691-896BAF19C1DE4510",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Nothing in comparison to what one can enjoy reading about your criminal history and profile Said Elnashaie. Nothing compared to the story circulating about Jihan Fadel, your virtuous so-called daughter. But more than anything nothing compared to the story about the parties in the 6th of October in your lovely house in your absence. Apparently there is no law enough for a criminal like you. There is a lot of room for your down there. And you with a few who are helping you will be ending behind bars like you always ended. This is a promise. Just keep your good work. In case you forgot here is your true address:
http: http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/

","February, 09 2009 15:59:56","03:59 PM on 02/09/09","5A272907-BB97-B901-9BF2F33D9C6897CF","Aly",460,400,null],[401,"5CF2A248-AEE4-E1FD-36082DF74B26287B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 09 2009 16:30:19","04:30 PM on 02/09/09","5CF2A20F-0A3A-74E3-A44EFD88A68E19C8","Karem",460,401,null],[402,"5CF42259-E60B-8218-6138A65602D68C57",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dor, the coward. Your ugly face which matches your character becomes visible. Now you are hiding behind John Baez or are you John Baez hiding behind himself. I have lost any respect for John Baez, Renate Loll and her colleagues and backers. However, this viciousness is not indicative of these people. The mixture between an absolute coward and vicious leeches is characteristic of what Dor has been saying and doing and if Dor is Said Elnashaie then the circle is closed. How true. You are writing that John Baez has succumbed to legal threats. Mr. Said or Mr. Dor that is something you cannot understand. What is wrong about being afraid from violating legality? This is the reaction of normal people. Creepy crawly like you are of course made different. No one could have proven the point stronger than you. Your statement speaks for itself. You are a criminal and a coward and as noted everywhere on this site, that is the way you are and that is the way you will always be. There is a world of difference between being a bad physicist or a crackpot if you want and being a liar and a thief like your good self. A thief who doesn't shrink from stealing his own mother and framing his own friends and then hiding like a roach in cracked walls of public conveniences. In case you forgot here is your real profile: http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
Karem

","February, 09 2009 16:31:57","04:31 PM on 02/09/09","5CF2A20F-0A3A-74E3-A44EFD88A68E19C8","Karem",460,402,null],[403,"5E9B5B57-DF58-9FB3-E523EAF576FEC8BF",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I. This site has witnessed an incredible variety of reasoned insights and at times deeply emotional responses. But all of this should have been expected, given that the authors, Jurkiewicz, Loll and Ambjorn, failed (either intentionally or with extreme irresponsibility) to give due credit to those who had already succeeded in making incredible inroads into the fractalization of space-time. And here I mean particularly the profound insights of Mohamed El Naschie whose prolific pen has cranked out a series of the most stunning papers that I, as a philosopher of science, have ever read. And his brilliant insights fall within the nexus of a group of honorable physicists who have been deeply maligned by this action. Looking back through the variety of responses, I recall MSteffan s 08/12/08 avowed sense of embarrassment as a Dutch national recounting El Naschie s exact derivation no less than 14 years prior to that of the Spinoza Institute. He rightfully laments the serious ramifications of the choice by &my colleagues [who] opted not to refer to [the simplicity of El Naschie s Cantor sets solution] and in the course of doing that ignored the lifelong work of deceased Nobel laureate Ilya Prigogine as well as many living relatively young scientists, notably Laurent Nottale, Garnet Ord, Ervin Goldfain and Ji-Huan He to mention only a few. He then went on to call for the need to remedy this situation immediately, the sooner the better: I think the sooner this story is closed in a way befitting the prestige of t Hooft, University of Utrecht and Holland the better it will be for everyone.
Frankly this is a scandal that never, ever should have been allowed to happen (and clearly should have been caught by the S.I. editors), and will be difficult for the physics and science community at large to live down. You may think the Leibnitz/ Newton controversy has drawn attention over the years, listen, mark my words, we have here a clear-cut egregious decision by a group of authors to usurp credit which is not their due. This is not a controversy, this is a full-blown scandal! I do not allow my freshmen and sophomore students to turn in a research paper without properly citing to the sources of the ideas presented. And this is much, much worse.

","February, 10 2009 00:14:13","12:14 AM on 02/10/09","B998D6E1-B277-59C3-63DC7B98931E21B8","scottolsen",460,403,null],[404,"5E9D841A-0802-A362-0DF1E2724D0EA2F5",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

II. I originally wrote a letter to the editors of S.A. on 7/21/08. In it I wrote how I was literally stunned by the failure of the authors to acknowledge the prior work of El Naschie, the former protégé of Ilya Prigogine. I pointed out that he is clearly the "recognized originator of the idea of using Cantor sets to rigorously deduce the topological dimension and the Hausdorff dimension of space-time." And furthermore, the fact that "the Hausdorff dimension of a random Cantor set is equal to the golden mean" allowed El Naschie to solve what was otherwise an intractable problem, and to do it without a computer. My concern then, and now, is very simple, "as a philosopher of science deeply interested in the creativity, novelty, and proper recognition of precedence in hypothesis formation [italics added], I for one believe that this oversight in an otherwise splendid article must not go unaddressed." But tell me, what in fact have the authors, and just as importantly, the S.A. editors done about this, or should I say, failed to do?
And then we have had this inane distraction from the accusations of John Baez and others who have attempted to besmirch the character of El Naschie. Anyone who has ever spent any time with El Naschie will attest to both his utter brilliance and role model character. And the attempted distraction is just that, an effort by very petty individuals to cloud the merits of his work. Indeed, it is incredible how jealousy, lust for attention, deceit and outright ignorance can cloud the mind and muddy the waters. But it is interesting how ultimately the truth has a way of prevailing. Everything is ultimately exposed. And isn't it intriguing to see how those so ready to defame others are ferreted out in the process. And this is why I am so concerned about the failure of the authors of said article and the editors of S.A. to act promptly to remedy this situation. I can assure you, it will not go away! Look at the number of blogs created over this outrageous fiasco. Some have called for an article in S.I. to address this. Others have called for an investigation of three periodicals, included amongst them S.I. My call is simply for the authors and editors to do what is right. Certainly the editors of what many of us have considered to be one of the most prestigious exponents of science and the quest for knowledge, hold a fiduciary duty (a duty of trust) towards their readers to always seek and report the truth, at all costs. As the editors of this publication, who rightfully, courageously and admirably took George W. Bush to task in a 4-26-04 S.A. editorial for his "Lysenkoism" and distortion of scientific results - you simply MUST NOT fall victim to the same kind of disinformation and deceit that he was guilty of perpetrating upon the American people. This failure to act in the way that we entrust you to do, or nonfeasance, is now borderline malfeasance, or actual misconduct. I implore you, please, get up off your hands and quit sitting by in silence, and do something about this before further articles are published which perpetuate the wrong already done to not only Mohamed El Naschie, but all the other fine scientists concerned.

","February, 10 2009 00:16:35","12:16 AM on 02/10/09","B998D6E1-B277-59C3-63DC7B98931E21B8","scottolsen",460,404,null],[405,"6078B961-F2E1-52DE-72C2EB1289CCE099",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. F. Tengelin was quicker than me or more brave than me. I was just thinking of saying the same thing. Let me make his statement more precise. Prof. Steve Weinberg who developed the electro weak theory and shared the Nobel prize with two others is the author of the most authoritative book on quantum field theory. In volume 3 of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields published by Cambridge University Press in 2000 he states on page 192 that the inverse super symmetric unification coupling of all fundamental gauge forces is 17.5. This value is given by his equation 28.2.19. Finding this result scared me quite a bit because I used Prof. El Naschie s result which comes to 24.28. This is a large discrepancy. I repeated the calculation again and again but I always found 24.28 and never 17.5. To make things worse Prof. El Naschie noticed immediately that 17.5 must be a miscalculation and said that the exact integer value must be 26. That means 17.5 must be wrong and 24.28 is only an approximation to the exact value which is 26. He said it is obvious that 26 must be correct. He directed me to his paper in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 35, p. 862 (2008) entitled Non-perturbative super symmetric quantum gravity coupling. I am desperate to know who is right and who is wrong? This result will not affect either the career of a Nobel laureate or the career of a well established professor but it could be devastating for me. I would be extremely grateful to anyone who could help me decide who is right, Prof. Weinberg or Prof. El Naschie. Please send me your answers as quick as possible to the address below.



Ayman Elokaby

Dept. of Physics

University of Alexandria


Egypt ","February, 10 2009 08:55:38","08:55 AM on 02/10/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,405,null],[406,"6704E9CA-C658-98D1-C6A4B0F157602AE9",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This","February, 11 2009 15:26:29","03:26 PM on 02/11/09","6704D9C0-0B1A-4252-D5D8FB0F7FA9517B","Jane Astor",460,406,null],[407,"6705C191-FF79-996B-C6F625C3F46F1BD0",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is a great reading. Please log into http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com. If Mohamed El Naschie is half what is written there, then he is my man. If this handsome looking civil engineer can cause this stir and frighten the daylight out of a few people, some backed by Nobel Laureates and some driven by deadly jealousy, then I would like to be wedded to him immediately.
Jane Astor

","February, 11 2009 15:27:24","03:27 PM on 02/11/09","6704D9C0-0B1A-4252-D5D8FB0F7FA9517B","Jane Astor",460,407,null],[408,"671F4826-E91C-E1D3-28A0C6466A0AF7B0",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Wow! I urge everyone to see the following site http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com established specifically for Mohamed El Naschie. It is called elnaschie watch all the time. Just imagine they are watching the guy all the time. I wish I had so much time to spare I would have done something useful. I don t think any scientist, in fact no one I know of is worth watching all the time. This site is a living proof that these guys libeling Elnaschie have gone real cuckoo. I can think of no more effective way for Elnaschie to prove his innocence than showing this site to everyone. I hope he realizes that. He should not move a finger to try to close this site. That would be the wrong thing to do. It is a clear vicious vendetta and this is the proof for it.
","February, 11 2009 15:55:17","03:55 PM on 02/11/09","671F47E0-9FCF-B10A-AA323C7759473674","Geraldine",460,408,null],[409,"679863E9-B28A-8239-F96E58AF1B218E79",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 11 2009 18:07:34","06:07 PM on 02/11/09","679863C0-E35C-50FF-D2B1D7D6A123348E","J. Cautious",460,409,null],[410,"6799DA05-E809-1A0C-84B33C5D97E95C2E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I beg to differ Jane Astor. If this site indicates anything then it indicates that Dor, An, Said Elnashaie, Renate Loll, whether they are one and the same person or different people, are dangerous internet thugs who must be put out of business. John Baez started it all and he might be still behind it all. All of them living in chat rooms and by proxy through pseudo names have no real existence and can become dangerous and even mass murderers. I caution of dealing with them and I advise that this case should be reported immediately to the police. Scientific American is taking a huge gamble by letting all this happen because one should not forget before John Baez, there was this cursed article by Renate Loll, Jane Ambjorn and this third guy whose name I can never remember. ","February, 11 2009 18:09:10","06:09 PM on 02/11/09","679863C0-E35C-50FF-D2B1D7D6A123348E","J. Cautious",460,410,null],[411,"6A71CF04-DC3D-64F1-B9BC9AB179151302",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I for one do not take this defamatory blog entitled (http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com) lightly. I take it very seriously and I think such practice threatens our civilized societies, the very foundation of it. Baez, Droesser, Said, Schermeier may have been juvenile delinquents but now they have matured into full fledged criminal society. The responsibility falls squarely with Scientific American. It is not Renate Loll nor Nature. Had Scientific American acted in the proper way entrusted to them all of this would not have happened. Now you have an international scandal involving Nobel Laureates and internet fascists. Calling Elnaschie a terrorist and picturing him with guns will lead most definitely to criminal persecution and possibly an international conflict. One look at this site will convince you that the people behind this campaign have completely lost their marble and passed the point of no return.
","February, 12 2009 07:24:17","07:24 AM on 02/12/09","6A71CB18-DE55-428D-B872F2F780A1FE6E","King",460,411,null],[412,"6F9B3F80-CCCA-A0A5-D3BFF054A8CE866F",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The webmaster of a blog orgy devoted to character assassinations see:http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com - is exclaiming why Prof. Dr. El Naschie is not attempting to take a court order against them. I could attempt to satisfy his perverted curiosity but I doubt it would help him. First, he is wrong to think that John Baez was threatened with legal proceedings and that is why his site on the n-Category caf? blog disappeared. Unlike the webmaster of this doubtful blog, John Baez is a mathematician and not entirely an idiot. John Baez childish mathematical argument with which he thought would frighten the daylight out of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie failed to do the trick. The man was rational enough to call his bluff. It was truly embarrassing for John Baez. He got every single point wrong. Of course there are two and three stein spaces as Mohamed El Naschie said. Of course there are Riemannian surfaces and what is more embarrassing it is well known that there are 17 of them. It is mathematics post graduate course material and J. Baez should have known it and now he had to be told about it from a civil engineer. Second, of course there are 8 exceptional Lie groups of the E line family. This is the result of modern research on E8 in the last ten years. So here again, John Baez and his sock puppet Skoda from Croatia made fools of themselves and had to realize that El Naschie was using well known mathematics. How embarrassing! A civil engineer can rehearse the 8 Exceptional E groups correctly while John Baez, the mathematician does not even recognize them even after being explained to him. El Naschie never bothered to answer them and left them to be punished by their own ignorance. Now I come to answer the question posed by the webmaster. If after all what I have said above, someone so blind with ignorance and hatred like the said webmaster comes along collecting all the false statements of John Baez and exposing it once more on the internet, then the better it is for Prof. El Naschie. If this webmaster is sufficiently stupid as it is apparently the case to add all these obscene and scandalous pictures with Hamas terrorists, then there is no doubt that Prof. El Naschie and his supporters will be delighted. For them and for any sane person, this is a court affidavit attesting for their perversity and the real reason behind the disgraceful defamation campaign and character assassination against Prof. El Naschie and his work. When will these internet criminals understand that scientific methods in criticizing scientific theory how.","February, 13 2009 07:27:39","07:27 AM on 02/13/09","6F9B3E12-CB95-58F2-67142984A6C5EF58","Peters",460,412,null],[413,"7471DA45-D022-F5A9-B9F3EE78217611C6",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

When will these internet criminals understand that scientific methods in criticizing scientific theory however harsh are normally accepted. By contrast, when you use non scientific arguments they only can discredit themselves. In the case of the n-Category caf?, and far more this El Naschie watch site, they have done it to themselves master way. In the circumstances it would be foolish for El Naschie and his supporters to move a finger. ","February, 14 2009 06:00:32","06:00 AM on 02/14/09","6F9B3E12-CB95-58F2-67142984A6C5EF58","Peters",460,413,null],[414,"755B7B63-C540-52E0-3B9DC4B4DBDBB93E",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The internet subculture is striking back. Typical for the mob. The more you warn them the worse they become. After the fiasco of this new un-site and the no blog named http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com , the responsible or should I say the irresponsible people crossed the line to pornography. The site and all what is discussed there reminds one of a revolting picture of decay or a carcass, this time of science and the big name which we used to revere. How is it possible that we can think that low? This is a question which the author of the article in Scientific American should think very seriously about. The damage has nothing to do with reputation of an innocent man like Mohamed El Naschie. The damage is global. Holland is of course a very liberal country. Unfortunately this liberalism brought us things like Big Brother TV show. Nevertheless I thought there are things that are still sacred in Holland. I invite Nobel Laureate Gerard tHooft as well as the Director of the University of Utrecht and maybe the Interior Minister of Holland to have a good look at this site and decide if they want to be part of that. In case you forgot the blog address, here it is again: http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com

","February, 14 2009 10:15:43","10:15 AM on 02/14/09","755B79F1-F864-5FCB-A30A689BF99B30CC","Dutch Goodwill",460,414,null],[415,"76B720E8-0F39-459D-25FCBE556675563C",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

By mentioning Brigiette Bardot you are implicating Nobel laureate Garradus tHooft and by mentioning twin towers and 9/11 you are implicating the whole of Egypt. You are playing with fire and you are ignorant and narrow minded and crazy enough to not realize how bad this will end for you. This is a coded message to the lunatic hairy monster of the M4. His current address is: http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/","February, 14 2009 16:35:26","04:35 PM on 02/14/09","76B71F79-DBE9-FF28-B65E37DF401673B5","Anybody",460,415,null],[416,"7A11FF22-C912-8807-C56C788C1414C749",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Another beautiful cartoon sumarizing the case of El naschie in:
http://medinfo.netbib.de/archives/2009/01/23/2975
Beer-Review statt Peer-Review: Der Elsevier/El-Naschie-Fall
Beer Review instead of peer review: The Elsevier / El-Nashi-case

Enjoy it","February, 15 2009 08:13:33","08:13 AM on 02/15/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,416,null],[417,"7E78D415-9CC7-0759-77BA81CFA199CE6A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Oh how nice! Mr. An surfaced again. Although An indicates normally singular this An means An Said Elnashaie, An Christopher Dosser, An John Baez and last but not least An idiot. Well Sinai could be a very lonely place and one needs something to kill the time. In this case we recommend that you look at yourself in the mirror Said. You have become An incredible caricature of your own self. Your German alter ego whom you may have met through the grandparents of your An so-called son Hecham who married An half breed half An German is also An incredibly failed mathematician with An oversized inferiority complex. After An unprecedented disappointment in your An extremely boring new site all El Naschie all the time you need some or An consolation. Some An never grows up. Said & friends you are growing down.

","February, 16 2009 04:44:21","04:44 AM on 02/16/09","7E78D29D-D2B3-6683-6E13B4D433573DDC","Jade",460,417,null],[418,"7E8E68AF-FD07-FAFA-91488E97D342F330",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Jason Hasten of http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com . You are asking why Prof. Mohamed El Naschie is ignoring you while he may have taken a court injunction to close the defamatory site of John Baez and his bleak n-Category caf?. With all due disrespect to John Baez you don t even qualify to the stature of John Baez. After all John Baez at least during the day is a recognized Professor at a recognized University. By contrast you are an impostor and not a very good one on top of that. Who is paying you for all this industrious work? Nobody is visiting your boring site. It is obscene, humorless and based entirely on lies and fallacies. You are obviously a Zionist but without anything of the Jewish culture and humor. Your jokes are vulgar and your language is not better. Jewish jokes normally have deep meanings such as wit and most of all deep truth to them. You are based entirely on hearsay and defamatory allegations. Your site may qualify for posters in the toilets for undergraduate dorms. To sum up you can go on beefing up your site with your trashy vulgarity and you can rest assured that neither Prof. El Naschie nor anyone of us will attempt to disturb your obscenity.

","February, 16 2009 05:07:56","05:07 AM on 02/16/09","7E8E6747-E48C-C3EB-5193D96027804542","Bugati",460,418,null],[419,"8056E075-96AF-4CF2-6763F06DEBB243FC",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria University
","February, 16 2009 13:26:31","01:26 PM on 02/16/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,419,null],[420,"805863AC-CF6D-A976-6BE7166F16C75A13",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. F. Tengelin was quicker than me or more brave than me. I was just thinking of saying the same thing. Let me make his statement more precise. Prof. Steve Weinberg who developed the electro weak theory and shared the Nobel prize with two others is the author of the most authoritative book on quantum field theory. In volume 3 of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields published by Cambridge University Press in 2000 he states on page 192 that the inverse super symmetric unification coupling of all fundamental gauge forces is 17.5. This value is given by his equation 28.2.19. Finding this result scared me quite a bit because I used Prof. El Naschie s result which comes to 24.28. This is a large discrepancy. I repeated the calculation again and again but I always found 24.28 and never 17.5. To make things worse Prof. El Naschie noticed immediately that 17.5 must be a miscalculation and said that the exact integer value must be 26. That means 17.5 must be wrong and 24.28 is only an approximation to the exact value which is 26. He said it is obvious that 26 must be correct. He directed me to his paper in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 35, p. 862 (2008) entitled Non-perturbative super symmetric quantum gravity coupling. I am desperate to know who is right and who is wrong? This result will not affect either the career of a Nobel laureate or the career of a well established professor but it could be devastating for me. I would be extremely grateful to anyone who could help me decide who is right, Prof. Weinberg or Prof. El Naschie. Please send me your answers as quick as possible to the address below.



Ayman Elokaby

Dept. of Physics

University of Alexandria

Egypt
","February, 16 2009 13:28:10","01:28 PM on 02/16/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,420,null],[421,"8059747E-C5B2-668E-2A61122CEC8AEF4A",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. F. Tengelin was quicker than me or more brave than me. I was just thinking of saying the same thing. Let me make his statement more precise. Prof. Steve Weinberg who developed the electro weak theory and shared the Nobel prize with two others is the author of the most authoritative book on quantum field theory. In volume 3 of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields published by Cambridge University Press in 2000 he states on page 192 that the inverse super symmetric unification coupling of all fundamental gauge forces is 17.5. This value is given by his equation 28.2.19. Finding this result scared me quite a bit because I used Prof. El Naschie s result which comes to 24.28. This is a large discrepancy. I repeated the calculation again and again but I always found 24.28 and never 17.5. To make things worse Prof. El Naschie noticed immediately that 17.5 must be a miscalculation and said that the exact integer value must be 26. That means 17.5 must be wrong and 24.28 is only an approximation to the exact value which is 26. He said it is obvious that 26 must be correct. He directed me to his paper in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 35, p. 862 (2008) entitled Non-perturbative super symmetric quantum gravity coupling. I am desperate to know who is right and who is wrong? This result will not affect either the career of a Nobel laureate or the career of a well established professor but it could be devastating for me. I would be extremely grateful to anyone who could help me decide who is right, Prof. Weinberg or Prof. El Naschie. Please send me your answers as quick as possible to the address below.



Ayman Elokaby

Dept. of Physics

University of Alexandria


Egypt ","February, 16 2009 13:29:20","01:29 PM on 02/16/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,421,null],[422,"805D8291-D543-7023-FAB96F58C5CADEDE",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

As a child I was petrified by the future of humanity as envisaged in D.H. Wells novel - The Time Machine. Of course I was thrilled by the possibility of traveling backward and forward in time. The frightening bit was however the division of humanity into two species which await us in the future according to the novel. The first part of humanity is supposed to be a kind of back to nature gentle, beautiful and soft yet powerless humans eating fruits and spending their lives in innocent love and laughter. Under the earth however, there lived another species of non-humans who have descended in the words of Wells to the lowest standard of evolution and became cannibals who mastered primitive industries and some kind of science and were feeding on the gentle human beings living in the light as in the Lost Paradise. Somewhere I have read the phrase - The fraternity of the blogsphere. The phrase was made by John Baez or some of his associates. I am now a grown up person but I am just as horrified by the vision of computer cannibals sitting in the dark behind their computer screens similar to the cannibals of D. H. Wells and feeding on the reputation of innocent people living in the daylight. Fraternity of Internet cannibals indeed. If you are in any doubt, please log into the same site which has been mentioned here so many times by so many different people. The internet has brought a great advantage to humanity but there is a world of difference between the internet and this subculture of internet cannibalism which we have witnessed in the n-Category caf?, Backreaction and last but not least the aforementioned site.
","February, 16 2009 13:33:45","01:33 PM on 02/16/09","805D8114-BAC7-E939-8727AC44672F2283","Svensen",460,422,null],[423,"818CBC29-9CA0-629B-E14D58202B230671",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 16 2009 19:04:58","07:04 PM on 02/16/09","818CBABE-BB7B-8105-8EA790AC0EE5A460","Kohne",460,423,null],[424,"818D6744-9711-9AAC-428F9F9B0AC86A50",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

The recent work of El Naschie regarding the energy stored in his transfinite sub manifolds reminds me of the Willmore energy conjecture. In fact a classification of the Stein spaces used by El Naschie to drive his 5 alpha bar 685 was considered at length by Willmore sometime ago. Ignorance of the published literature doesn't relieve of responsibility. This is something which John Baez and his students should think about seriously. They have done science a great disservice by introducing the Spanish inquisition to the internet. If these people would read and think as much as they swear and ridicule, they would not have done what they have done. Dr. John Baez and his students have caused a great harm and damage to the reputation of hundreds of scientists who have published their excellent research papers in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals and other Elsevier Journals.
","February, 16 2009 19:05:41","07:05 PM on 02/16/09","818CBABE-BB7B-8105-8EA790AC0EE5A460","Kohne",460,424,null],[425,"8191C4AC-BD5A-6305-8DF272C9D9522569",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 16 2009 19:10:27","07:10 PM on 02/16/09","8191C340-C7C9-4E4C-344CE3A6F1D387B2","Edwards",460,425,null],[426,"81932D0B-D8A9-E98B-353EF7976F25B30D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I have failed to read a single genuine comment from a respectable and authoritative scientist condemning the work of Mohamed El Naschie on these trashy blogs. I have read only comments which can be only attributed to the mob and unholy alliance between neo-Nazi, Zionists and the fraternity of the blogshere. This new fraternity of internet maniacs and thugs specialized in blackmail is a truly new horrifying phenomena.","February, 16 2009 19:12:00","07:12 PM on 02/16/09","8191C340-C7C9-4E4C-344CE3A6F1D387B2","Edwards",460,426,null],[427,"81BF32BE-96B8-281F-2DE29A8B65C33E35",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 16 2009 20:00:05","08:00 PM on 02/16/09","81BF314A-E766-D18C-045DE82D0CE079CC","Juan",460,427,null],[428,"81BF9CD0-C642-A64D-729CB3800ADF86BE",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Ayman El Okaby mentioned the discrepancy between the result of Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg and his result. Steven Weinberg found the inverse quantum gravity coupling for super symmetry to be 17.5. On the other hand, El Okaby found it to be 26. He is asking which is result is correct and which is wrong. I do not know but there is a survey in which both values are quoted. The survey is given in table 5 of the following paper On a class of general theories for high energy particle physics. It seems from this table that the value 26 is more likely to be the correct one. This is a pure common sense conclusion because 9 of the ten values quoted in this survey are very close to 26. The only value which differs is that given by Weinberg namely 17.5.Thus this value is the odd one out and more likely to be the wrong one. I hope this helps.","February, 16 2009 20:00:32","08:00 PM on 02/16/09","81BF314A-E766-D18C-045DE82D0CE079CC","Juan",460,428,null],[429,"838EE68C-EBC7-A2A8-C7A46AC60854E56C",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is a direct response to the comment by Juan regarding the discrepancy between the result of Nobel Laureate Weinberg and the result found by Mr. El Okaby. The paper he refers to in his comment is titled: On a class of general theories for high energy particle physics, by M. S. El Naschie, published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 14(2002) 649-668.
","February, 17 2009 04:26:34","04:26 AM on 02/17/09","838EE4F3-B737-B0CD-1ED65AF7E5774CA8","Angelina",460,429,null],[430,"861A0599-9247-C41E-F5AD5B4C09E9BFCB",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. F. Tengelin was quicker than me or more brave than me. I was just thinking of saying the same thing. Let me make his statement more precise. Prof. Steve Weinberg who developed the electro weak theory and shared the Nobel prize with two others is the author of the most authoritative book on quantum field theory. In volume 3 of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields published by Cambridge University Press in 2000 he states on page 192 that the inverse super symmetric unification coupling of all fundamental gauge forces is 17.5. This value is given by his equation 28.2.19. Finding this result scared me quite a bit because I used Prof. El Naschie s result which comes to 24.28. This is a large discrepancy. I repeated the calculation again and again but I always found 24.28 and never 17.5. To make things worse Prof. El Naschie noticed immediately that 17.5 must be a miscalculation and said that the exact integer value must be 26. That means 17.5 must be wrong and 24.28 is only an approximation to the exact value which is 26. He said it is obvious that 26 must be correct. He directed me to his paper in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 35, p. 862 (2008) entitled Non-perturbative super symmetric quantum gravity coupling. I am desperate to know who is right and who is wrong? This result will not affect either the career of a Nobel laureate or the career of a well established professor but it could be devastating for me. I would be extremely grateful to anyone who could help me decide who is right, Prof. Weinberg or Prof. El Naschie. Please send me your answers as quick as possible to the address below.



Ayman Elokaby

Dept. of Physics

University of Alexandria


Egypt ","February, 17 2009 16:17:46","04:17 PM on 02/17/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,430,null],[431,"861B1F9B-0F3F-3B54-EBFAF8547C9A5426",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria University
","February, 17 2009 16:18:58","04:18 PM on 02/17/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,431,null],[432,"89F5B4D6-F142-0314-3F8649FE309625F3",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Hi! I am a phd student in sockpuppetry and would like to ask if the ip logs and times of posts can be made available for scientific research? in my groups, there are now three phds assigned to this (me, Susanne and Francis) and without Mohamed El-Naschie, we would have no phd topics! Thanks for that by the way. now personally i am running a linguistic pattern search on the sockpuppet posts and generate signatures for style of writing and trained some markov-chains on them. soon I will be able to automatically generate sockpuppet posts. my thesis was a little in danger when it turned out to be too simple, since the signatures belong all too El-Naschie, of course. but my supervisor had an idea, so here it comes: I could try to find out in which state he was while he was writing, how much he drank, from which soaps he is taking the inspirations for his accusations AND here it comes, AND to predict exactly when the next comment will be posted and/or if a new name will be connected to it. So this is my question, the model will be able to predict these times, but for the validation I would need the exact posting times. And Francis would like to have the ips for his thesis but he said, guys, if it is all from cairo or all through proxies, he will take a different subject.
Would anybody here help me with that?
","February, 18 2009 10:16:35","10:16 AM on 02/18/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",460,432,null],[433,"89FAED92-EE1B-42A6-CB7F44454B7CC3B5",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

ah, times of posts are of course visible in the header, I can just write them down! cool, next thing then is the analysis of times between posts and times between empty posts and the actual comment, since this shows how long he is typing for it or if he actually uses copy paste for many comments. Are there times available for the other comments when he started to write and when he hit the submit button? that would be nice maybe.","February, 18 2009 10:22:17","10:22 AM on 02/18/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",460,433,null],[434,"8B06424A-B1F8-8D6A-9E45952D167A6C3B",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria University
","February, 18 2009 15:14:17","03:14 PM on 02/18/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,434,null],[435,"8F943EF9-BEBB-9CD6-58F6E3310FDB8CC1",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Hey Mr. El-Okaby, you are spamming. The same post over and over again. Don't you recognize that? Is this something you can't let go of? Posting the same crap over and over again, like papers in journals:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2169448/Exceptional-Lie-Groups-Einfinity-Theory-and-Higgs-Boson-ElOkaby
Check this paper of Mr. El-Okaby to get an impression about the level at which he conducts "science". Someone publishing such nonsense papers is a fraud or a crackpot, sorry, it doesnt get any better.
And again: the ridiculous babbling and insane numerology of yours can NOT be explained by a neo-nazi/zionist/blogsphere conspiration. It is YOU who is responsible for your own deeds. And YOU were writing papers full of distractions and nonsense. Serious scientist were not paying attention to you, because they didnt want to get connected to what you do. It is dirty. Dirt would stick to them. That is why everybody stood of and hoped nobody would notice. But you overplayed it. Now take the resposibility. And please, WITHOUT adding any extra dimensions, if you can. At least don't repeat the same post over and over again. It is so nutty.
","February, 19 2009 12:27:51","12:27 PM on 02/19/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",460,435,null],[436,"900FB898-EA67-B47E-A5753424B85B3396",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria University
","February, 19 2009 14:42:43","02:42 PM on 02/19/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,436,null],[437,"90BF51C2-B15C-603C-DBDDA9B497AA7A40","900FB898-EA67-B47E-A5753424B85B3396",1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Hey Mr. El-Okaby, you are spamming. The same post over and over again. Don't you recognize that? Is this something you can't let go of? Posting the same crap over and over again, like papers in journals:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2169448/Exceptional-Lie-Groups-Einfinity-Theory-and-Higgs-Boson-ElOkaby
Check this paper of Mr. El-Okaby to get an impression about the level at which he conducts "science". Someone publishing such nonsense papers is a fraud or a crackpot, sorry, it doesnt get any better.
And again: the ridiculous babbling and insane numerology of yours can NOT be explained by a neo-nazi/zionist/blogsphere conspiration. It is YOU who is responsible for your own deeds. And YOU were writing papers full of distractions and nonsense. Serious scientist were not paying attention to you, because they didnt want to get connected to what you do. It is dirty. Dirt would stick to them. That is why everybody stood of and hoped nobody would notice. But you overplayed it. Now take the resposibility. And please, WITHOUT adding any extra dimensions, if you can. At least don't repeat the same post over and over again. It is so nutty.
","February, 19 2009 17:54:31","05:54 PM on 02/19/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",460,437,436],[438,"90FE3529-DBFF-4EDC-D059ABA8AB959653",null,2,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Isn t it weird, your name is puppet with a phd and you are lecturing about spamming while you are a spam and then you have the nerve to lecture about science and fraud to a man who signs with his own name and gives his proper address? Elokaby is at least a man. You are a coward and since you are a coward, you must come from certain quarters in the Middle East. If this is true, and I think it is true, then you must be the greatest coward of them all the man who stole from his mother, Said Elnashaie. Here is your profile, the certificate of your conviction Said http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com. After you clean the floors of your room in Sinai by licking the boots of your masters, you can start taking revenge on these people whose boots are more valuable than your entire existence. Your end is coming very soon Said.","February, 19 2009 19:03:12","07:03 PM on 02/19/09","90FE3521-E0B7-D751-1E07AFD03ACEF0DD","A. Abdullah",460,438,null],[439,"94FE10A3-D831-EE20-5DC0ED35FC24092F","90FE3529-DBFF-4EDC-D059ABA8AB959653",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

That is remarkable, you are almost right. But my name is not Said. Guess again. Oh, and, Ayman Elokaby, he is a man, right? Huh.. but at the same time, he is El-Naschie.. so, in fact he is two men! At least. Many boots I see there. Many socks in the boots. And now I can figure how much experience with boot licking you must have. You are an ill and immoral man. You have no idea who I am and why I am disgusted by your immoral practices. That seems to be above you. But I have something for you, and I am willing to give it to you: proof for the global conspiration, the involvement of the surfer dude, the underground neo-nazi and zionist movements and how the blogsphere comes into play there. I sent it to Ayman Elokaby, Dept. of Physics, University of Alexandria, Egypt. He himself only gives a yahoo email address. Strange. elokaby@yahoo.com. So I put all the proof into a letter and sent it to University of Alexandria. I hope they will tell me if there is in fact a person called Ayman Elokaby. Or they may just relay it to your address, Mohamed. Now I don't want to disturb any longer, give you more times with your puppets.
P.S.: again you were right, you could see a connection between my name "puppet" and "phd" and my posts. you must be a very intelligent man. I guess you also know many things about addition, subtraction, multiplication and division, do you? and boot licking rituals. Makes you a scientist in some areas.
","February, 20 2009 13:41:32","01:41 PM on 02/20/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",460,439,438],[440,"951E689A-FEAC-DEB1-9B1F1FF73898462D",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am puzzled by those who are not puzzled by all the sockpuppets Mohamed El-Naschie invents to cover the traces of his disreputable deeds like a [insert some crazy comparison here, involving small mammals, best are such species able to reach all possible body parts] but he is in fact just leaving signatures everywhere, pointing to the stations of his dishonorable path.
I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. It is simplay crap. There is nothing more to it. Familiarizing more scientists with the concepts and logic behind E-Infinity would
certainly not help science, so let's try to find out something that is in fact verifiable:
The existence of... not extra dimensions or sub-atomic particles, no...
the existence of... Ayman El Okaby. (the man)
I sent important mail to his address at Alexandria University, Department of Physics. But they don't seem to have anybody there of that name. Strange, huh?
Tomorrow I will call the dean of the faculty of science:

Faculty of Science
Dean:Prof. Mahmoud Mohamed Hassan Gabr
Email:dean@fsci.alex.edu.eg

Contact Info:
Tel:(+203)3921595/3922919/3922918 Fax:(+203)3911794

After I checked again with the head of the physics department. Maybe they can find Mr. El-Okaby somewhere! Maybe somewhere else at the university.
Department of Physics
Head of Dept.:
Prof. Ahmed Mohamed El-Khateeb
Contact Info:
Phone: 5458331

I think everybody interested in the reality of sockpuppets should be fair and ask the question: maybe it is a real person. So I will check this for you and inform you about the results.
A good idea would be to make a list of names and affiliations appearing here and in all the other blogs and verify each of them.
The list can serve for the purpose of not unnerving the poor institute members suffering from the fraud affiliations. The claimed phds should also be verified, but that can happen later.
I just want to see a list of the "men" signing here. That is the least we can do to honour them.
Mr. El-Okaby wrote two papers in his life (?) correct me if I'm wrong I couldn't find any others. Both of the papers are written about El-Naschie stuff. I am not saying that El-Naschie himself made El-Okaby up, wrote two papers under a fake name and now stupid how he is even uses the fake name again in the blogs, waking sleeping dogs.
I just want to produce proof of the contrary. If this is not possible, the result should be stored in a list, and nobody should annoy Prof. Mahmoud Mohamed Hassan Gabr or Prof. Ahmed Mohamed El-Khateeb ever again with this very ashaming matter. Where could such a list be hosted, maybe in the http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com? Personally I don't like the arabic design, but it could maybe be a place.

","February, 20 2009 14:16:51","02:16 PM on 02/20/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",460,440,null],[441,"953DE67E-D6C7-369F-E119CD00A1B7AF39",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

El naschie deserves the name of the great corrupter.
A lone single handed and with his own money.
He has managed to corrupt Elsevier for almost twenty
years, 1992-2009. He has published few hundered (347)
non sense articles in CSF. Up till now, Elsevier can not
get rid of him. There is no article for El naschie in
the recent article of 2009 in CSF, which is a good sign.
But most of the articles trumpeting the E-infinity theory
and citing El naschie works.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/
science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%235300%239999
%23999999999%2399999%23FLA%23&_cdi=5300&_pubType=J&_auth
=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&
md5=faf5d2a06ff9be6c0d0126fdc479017c

Not only that but the great man (El naschie) has also
managed to corrupt Cambridge for ten years.
According to the following data base
http://www.engineeringvillage2.org
One can find:
17 articles where the affiliation is DAMTP, Cambridge,
UK.

72 articles where the affiliation is Dept. of Appl.
Math. & Theor. Phys., Cambridge Univ., UK

40 articles where the affiliation is Univ of Cambridge.

No prize for one who guesses at which journal those
articles have been published.

All of these indicates the power of money not of self
publications or citations.
It is sad, that we lost the joke papers and now one can
not find any new paper for him. His papers are source of
infinite jokes.

The great man can establish his own publishing company
and calling it Elnaschievier to compete Elsevier in
publishing science fronteir.

We hope the great man not to waste a lot of time with
his socckpuppets and return producing lovely, joke
papers in Elnaschievier publishing house. ","February, 20 2009 14:51:15","02:51 PM on 02/20/09","3AA87966-F738-1A76-C75143BA8920CAFC","An",460,441,null],[442,"98D718BD-C03D-9D9D-8F872399FA0A78A4",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

This is to answer puppetphd question. Regarding the personality of Ayman El Okaby, I would like to inform that there is really a living organism whose name is Ayman El Okaby and he is supposedly doing his PhD with El naschie. However, I should tell you that I am 100% sure that he is not the one who is writing and posting over and over those comments, I can infer from the English style, it is El naschie himself who is signing with the name of Ayman. Ayman English is very poor and easy to recognize.
","February, 21 2009 07:37:27","07:37 AM on 02/21/09","98D718A6-E3FF-CE6C-E2658E31138EE8DD","puppet2",460,442,null],[443,"99205C4A-FD65-7C8C-A39FD0A9EC24D96D",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria University"
,"February, 21 2009 08:57:28","08:57 AM on 02/21/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,443,null],[444,"9927B9A1-B700-DE2E-F2FD0559624FE8BA",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Is it nobler in the hearts to suffer the slings and arrows of an outrageous fortune or to take arms against a sea of puppets - to die, to sleep and perhaps to dream that the puppet gets brains and starts thinking instead of contaminating this site.","February, 21 2009 09:05:31","09:05 AM on 02/21/09","9927B99A-B869-CB58-E45DB2CAAF4512F7","Hamlet",460,444,null],[445,"99315387-F3A5-F2BD-53E80CF2406634C2",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

","February, 21 2009 09:16:00","09:16 AM on 02/21/09","9931537F-A0AE-FB91-212883814C891538","Cardinal Richelieu",460,445,null],[446,"9932573C-0D8E-889F-F76FBB268DB5C3AD",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Like a puppet on a string, but there is a world of difference between Sandy Show and Said Elnashaie show. It is really the rocky horror show featuring Egypt's no.1 Nutter performing not in the Coliseum but on the foot of Mount Sinai. It is becoming a case for the Holy Seal. Why don't you use your connection to Ahmed Gaber to clean Sinai from insects and puppets. That would be your greatest achievement, believe you me. It is never too late to put your mark on history. You just need to use your time wisely and to do something useful rather than nourishing your jealousy and inferiority complexes. ","February, 21 2009 09:17:07","09:17 AM on 02/21/09","9931537F-A0AE-FB91-212883814C891538","Cardinal Richelieu",460,446,null],[447,"993BBD93-088D-A739-C9A97CC2BDE74189",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

One for all and none for you Said. You really have the time to go into sciencedirect and see who is referring to Prof. El Naschie and who is not? Wow, this is a late state of spiritual cancer. There will be no luck with anger management course without amputation there is no hope!","February, 21 2009 09:27:23","09:27 AM on 02/21/09","993BBD5A-EC56-046E-D89F5A3CC8870FE1","Gameel",460,447,null],[448,"9942CC54-CB01-9F02-1E6C28159B9CEF3D",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

urgh","February, 21 2009 09:35:05","09:35 AM on 02/21/09","9942CC46-DF7F-F58B-2692622BD42F0AB2","H0sten",460,448,null],[449,"994351E8-D896-9053-80FE14F05C5A5E14",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

test","February, 21 2009 09:35:39","09:35 AM on 02/21/09","9942CC46-DF7F-F58B-2692622BD42F0AB2","H0sten",460,449,null],[450,"9943EE62-B82D-9EE6-E59DE545FC254813",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Your mathematical incompetence whoever you are is no where as evident as in your comment about adding, subtracting, dividing and multiplying. I am ready to lend you a dime. Said Elnashaie take the money and go and call your mother tell her your future as a mathematician or a scientist is as bleak as the black soul governing everything you utter on this site.","February, 21 2009 09:36:19","09:36 AM on 02/21/09","9943EE5A-E7C1-F04D-8B685933DD3CE83B","Kenneth",460,450,null],[451,"9947A001-E5DE-E99C-DF98EF59B766587B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Of course it is clear as Mr. El Okaby says that there are no mysteries in the work of Mohamed El Naschie. All you need is to understand the transfinite general theory of dimensions due to Menger and Uhryson as well as measure theory. ","February, 21 2009 09:40:22","09:40 AM on 02/21/09","99479FFA-9E4F-B8B5-44559354C46990C1","Malvovich",460,451,null],[452,"9948075C-E49F-9C34-618F2BCAF94E5726",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Gameel wrote: One for all and none for you Said. You really have the time to go into sciencedirect and see who is referring to Prof. El Naschie and who is not? Wow, this is a late state of spiritual cancer. There will be no luck with anger management course without amputation there is no hope!

Answer: Dear Mr. Mohamed El-Naschie, you dedictated your lifework to nothing else but trying to push the impact rate of your papers to infinite levels (i.e. e-infinity means egomania-infinity, the theorie about the infinite dimensions of your ego.) You proved your point, now why should you attribute the glory for your achievements to somebody else? You are the center of the spirograph Mr. El-Naschie, nobody else. All strings meet there, all puppets feed on your energy. You are the center of the spirograph-puppet machine with the anti-machine in china (in fact there are many in china, you can think of them as manifestations of the same particle in different states at the same time). Don't belower yourself on pest-control topics. That has nothing to do with LSD, and you are such a charismatic guy.","February, 21 2009 09:40:48","09:40 AM on 02/21/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",460,452,null],[453,"994D38D2-93E7-DA55-74EE89C675D1778B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Oh, one remark to your tries "Kenneth", "H0sten" to push down the other comments: they are collected and published somewhere else. I will publish them at least in the appendices of my thesis on sockpuppetry of course. It is remarkable how well the signatures of your writing styles fit, I can not say how thankful I am for this live presentation. Thank you so much! God bless you. May god give your life some other meaning after I finished my thesis and peace to your peaky soul.
","February, 21 2009 09:46:28","09:46 AM on 02/21/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",460,453,null],[454,"995B67EC-0A19-653F-5D057BF919687605",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dr. Said Elnashaie or Puppetphd. Let me tell you why I don't respect you. I don't respect you because you turned scientific arguments into non-scientific arguments. This is not the first time in history, far worse was done to Einstein and far worse was done to better and lesser people. However, I have never encountered this low standard and misuse of the English Language. You find El Naschie's work worthless. You are entitled to your opinion. You hate Prof. El Naschie for personal reasons including whatever. You are also entitled to that. What you have never learned and apparently will never understand is that you should not mix one with the other. But that is what you are doing all the time with hysterical intensity. In the course of following your lust for revenge of El Naschie you did not stop for a minute to think how many more people you are harming. You are behaving like suicide bombers. I read what is written about you in the English version of sentencing you for two years hard labor. You didn't spare your mother or anyone else You are a man full of rage and hatred. You may have your reasons as far as any human being can have his reasons for being insane. You could plead insanity in any court in any civilized country and you would be taken for treatment. Now you unleash your anger and blind hatred against an innocent Ph.D. student in Alexandria University. You are a reckless person with nothing sacred whatsoever. That is why I and many people have no respect for you or what you write.","February, 21 2009 10:01:58","10:01 AM on 02/21/09","995B67E5-0787-D4AF-757E6F772BC75A04","A.Kabeer",460,454,null],[455,"995F9E09-ED24-1964-6C1E02DF6717FE3B",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

What a downfall? Far worse than the twilights of the Gods. From a distinguished professor in Penn State University to a toilet clerk in Sinai - that is more than anyone can take. You have my sympathy.
","February, 21 2009 10:06:34","10:06 AM on 02/21/09","995F9E02-92FC-9DD7-6C32233292378347","Gobran Gaber",460,455,null],[456,"99748C82-97BE-72E0-CC6FC5DEADDA64D8",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Dear Mohamed El-Naschie a.k.a. A. Kabeer, Gobran Gaber, Gameel, the last names for your sockpuppets are strangely similar, don't you think so.
Your imaginative force is infinitely smaller than your infinite egomania. The whole outside world seems to consist for you only of one guy. Whoever is not with you, is against you. Whoever is against you must be Said. You need help, I think. Now for poor Ayman El-Okaby. YOU, Mohamed El-Naschie, you raped this poor soul, betrayed on him and abused him for your low objectives. A man who obviously is not able to write such papers or comments you wrote for him. Stop blaming other people for your shameless actions. This will all redound upon you, as it is now starting to do. Stop comparing me with your friends, I am a German phd student and I never knew anybody you had to do with, neither in Cairo nor in Frankfurt. I was studying Theaterwissenschaften at the Freie Universität in Berlin, Germany. Stop your defamatory unholy lies for one hour, if you can.
","February, 21 2009 10:29:26","10:29 AM on 02/21/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",460,456,null],[457,"9AACE498-A077-7B99-DBADCBBF8E47F3FA",null,1,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

I am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria University

","February, 21 2009 16:10:35","04:10 PM on 02/21/09","10B3C57A-F354-0E16-24E28B84302E8932","elokaby",460,457,null],[458,"9CFA6992-E016-006D-3EAF77E486C73912",null,0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Said Elnashaie it is not strange to call yourself a student of Drama and Theatre in Germany. This is an understatement. You are an accomplished actor. The crocodile tears in front of your boss a couple of days ago and demeaning yourself by showing them family dirty linen and forged documents on top of that, put you on par with your step daughter Jehan. The language you use is indicative of your psyche. You would make a wonderful stuff for a Hitchcock Psycho 2 movie. A misfit and a genetically disordered victim of nature. So in a sense you could be innocent if you just allow people to give you the medical treatment you urgently need. If in any doubt, here again is your profile http://saidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
better known as your Certificate of Conviction in two languages. By the way your performance in front of your boss has earned you more disrepute and deep contempt than you could ever imagine in your malignant fantasy and your soul so stuffed with hate that you cant see that the whole of Egypt can no more afford to have not even in Sinai. Although these are harsh words and may not bring anything positive, they are sincere and any sane person would have recognized them as such.

","February, 22 2009 02:54:30","02:54 AM on 02/22/09","9CFA698A-A725-BD58-CA2CA8D10BBB3468","Sincere",460,458,null],[459,"9D3EFFDA-E764-2E83-9609F232D8BE9D16","9CFA6992-E016-006D-3EAF77E486C73912",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Ich muss sagen, ich bin wirklich entsetzt ?ber die Unbek?mmertheit, mit der Sie hier aggressivste Unterstellungen und Verleumdungen und auf die frechste Weise immer wieder toilettenorientierte Unterwerfungs- und F?kalfantasien im Bezug auf Ihren Lieblingswidersacher entwerfen. In einem deutschen Artikel ist diese Art der Bezugnahme zu einer wissenschaftlichen Frage nat?rlich unvorstellbar - Beleidigungen in dieser Form und Art k?nnte ich mir in einem deutschsprachigen Forum gar nicht vorstellen. Und Hr. Mohamed El-Naschie, Sie nehmen mit dieser Form der Auseinandersetzung mit Ihren obsz?nen Publikationsvergehen wohl auch in der englischsprachigen Blogsph?re eine herausragende Position ein. Montag (morgen) werde ich mit Hilfe eines ?bersetzers mit der Fakult?tsleitung der Universit?t von Alexandria telefonieren. Ich werde auch ?bersetzungprotokolle der unvorstellbaren, gottlosen Frechheiten liefern, die Sie hier schreiben. Man wird sich fragen m?ssen, inwieweit so etwas f?r die arabische Welt und die Medien tragbar ist. Vielleicht ist das ein normaler Diskussionsstil dort wo Sie sich normalerweise bewegen. Ich jedoch bin anderes gew?hnt. Und leider haben Sie nichts zu den fachlichen Fragen gesagt: Hier sind einige junge Studenten, die gerne einen Mathematik-Test mit Ihnen machen w?rden, sozusagen eine m?ndliche Pr?fung, wie auch hier in den Kommentaren angeboten: http://www.zeit.de/2009/03/N-El-Naschie. Denn vielen Menschen in Europa ist aufgefallen, dass Sie Ver?ffentlichungen schreiben die deutlich zeigen, dass Sie nicht die geringste Ahnung von der Materie haben (im mehrfachen Wortsinne, wenn es Ihnen gef?llt). Stellen Sie sich gef?lligst diesen Anschuldigungen und lassen Sie das l?cherliche Puppentheater und die verleumderischen Anschuldigungen, f?r die Sie sich hoffentlich eines Tages vor Ihrem Sch?pfer verantworten werden m?ssen.

Martin Klicken
Freie Universit?t Berlin
klickensiehier@yahoo.de","February, 22 2009 04:09:25","04:09 AM on 02/22/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",460,459,458],[460,"9D41C63B-0B71-0F0F-7E95554DA080858C","9CFA6992-E016-006D-3EAF77E486C73912",0,"Using Causality to Solve the Puzzle of Quantum Spacetime","

Ich muss sagen, ich bin wirklich entsetzt ueber die Unbekuemmertheit, mit der Sie hier aggressivste Unterstellungen und Verleumdungen und auf die frechste Weise immer wieder toilettenorientierte Unterwerfungs- und Faekalfantasien im Bezug auf Ihren Lieblingswidersacher entwerfen. In einem deutschen Artikel ist diese Art der Bezugnahme zu einer wissenschaftlichen Frage natuerlich unvorstellbar - Beleidigungen in dieser Form und Art koennte ich mir in einem deutschsprachigen Forum gar nicht vorstellen. Und Hr. Mohamed El-Naschie, Sie nehmen mit dieser Form der Auseinandersetzung mit Ihren obszoenen Publikationsvergehen wohl auch in der englischsprachigen Blogsphaere eine herausragende Position ein. Montag (morgen) werde ich mit Hilfe eines Uebersetzers mit der Fakultaetsleitung der Universitaet von Alexandria telefonieren. Ich werde auch Uebersetzungprotokolle der unvorstellbaren, gottlosen Frechheiten liefern, die Sie hier schreiben. Man wird sich fragen muessen, inwieweit so etwas fuer die arabische Welt und die Medien tragbar ist. Vielleicht ist das ein normaler Diskussionsstil dort wo Sie sich normalerweise bewegen. Ich jedoch bin anderes gewoehnt. Und leider haben Sie nichts zu den fachlichen Fragen gesagt: Hier sind einige junge Studenten, die gerne einen Mathematik-Test mit Ihnen machen wuerden, sozusagen eine muendliche Pruefung, wie auch hier in den Kommentaren angeboten: http://www.zeit.de/2009/03/N-El-Naschie. Denn vielen Menschen in Europa ist aufgefallen, dass Sie Veroeffentlichungen schreiben die deutlich zeigen, dass Sie nicht die geringste Ahnung von der Materie haben (im mehrfachen Wortsinne, wenn es Ihnen gefaellt). Stellen Sie sich gefaelligst diesen Anschuldigungen und lassen Sie das laecherliche Puppentheater und die verleumderischen Anschuldigungen, fuer die Sie sich hoffentlich eines Tages vor Ihrem Schoepfer verantworten werden muessen.

Martin Klicken
Freie Universitaet Berlin
klickensiehier@yahoo.de","February, 22 2009 04:12:27","04:12 AM on 02/22/09","89F5B4CE-B1C5-B835-F60B723E81E74816","puppetphd",


Silver Lining at 06:08 PM on 03/01/09
There is a silver lining to the vicious campaign against Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. We were referred to this site by our colleagues in China who hold the utmost respect for this man. They were dismayed that some people out there have made it their life long mission to attack and character assassinate him. We decided to check this man out and we started by reading and researching his scientific work. We have news for you out there! What we found is amazing. His E-Infinity theory deserves our utmost admiration. For you to understand it, you need to be well versed in mathematics. We scrutinized his mathematics and equations, and the results were amazing. Those who claim it is numerology have no clue about what this man has succeeded in doing. We agree with his advocates that this is a paradigm shift and sooner than later this man will get the recognition he deserves. We will continue to follow his work closely and we know that his work has stirred a lot of interest and we all know that no important work such as his can be acknowledged without first raising a lot of controversy.
Reply | Report Abuse
Atef at 05:16 PM on 03/01/09
It is quite clear that Said Elnashaie is behind this vicious campaign against Prof. El Naschie. He is hiding behind Mr. An and lashing out a lot of hatred. Really Mr. An all what you are writing is not serving your case. On the contrary, it is quite clear to all the readers of this site and others that your argument is baseless and vindictive. You don t have a case whatsoever against Prof. El Naschie. Your problem is personal jealousy and hatred. Do I need to remind you Mr. Said Elnashaie that your personal profile is despicable? In case you forgot, here is your personal profile or better still your certificate of conviction: http:/thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.comReply | Report Abuse
elokaby at 03:34 PM on 03/01/09
I am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria University
Reply | Report Abuse
Advocates at 01:09 PM on 03/01/09
This is a direct response to An and his obnoxious comment posted on Feb. 28 and all of his false allegations. We think it is time you call it quits. We all respect and admire Prof. El Naschie for his integrity and adroitness. His scientific feat is indisputable and there is no way on earth you are going to sway our minds. You have been trying so hard and so vehemently to smear him by your false allegations. You are the fraud. He never plagiarized nor cheated. His scientific contribution is a paradigm shift and people with little minds and sick souls like you and your puppets will never come to grips with it. Besides you and those in cahoots with you are not in a position to judge Prof. El Naschie. Eat your heart out and no matter how hard you persist and try, we will not be swayed.
Reply | Report Abuse
Suleiman A at 12:10 PM on 03/01/09
The coward calling himself An has surpassed himself once more. What a twisted soul. Do you really think that anyone could mistake you for anybody but Said Salah El Din Hamad Elnashaie, the mad man, an amateur film producer of Jihan Fadel of the 6th October, Cairo, Egypt? Said, you can try as much as you like but you were, you are and will always remain the epitomy of cowardness. It is you who should reward his family, his country and last but not least himself by drowning himself in the sewer.Reply | Report Abuse
Atef J at 08:10 AM on 03/01/09
Mr. An wrote on 28th Feb: but already the damage was done. This is his English for but the damage has already been done. This sentence alone shows what kind of creepy crawlies are surfing in this site. All that this creature has in mind is causing permanent damage. The fact that this defamatory article against Prof. El Naschie could have been removed by a Court order because it contravenes the law in Germany by being nothing but blatant lies is something which would not cross the mind of someone like Mr. An. I have no respect what so ever for those who plagiarize other peoples work nor for those who defame others on request and after receiving payment. Never the less, I cannot see that either Dr. Renate Loll or Dr. John Baez could be Mr. An. There is only one person who is low enough and coward enough to cause so much damage using lies while hiding like a sewer rat behind a computer screen. I am sure this rat knows his own name so there is no need to contaminate this site by mentioning his name again.Reply | Report Abuse
Maysa at 04:24 PM on 02/28/09
It is not a matter of a savior or a man who is bringing love and prosperity to the world. It is much simpler than that. Mohamed El Naschie is a victim of a vendetta. The vendetta is a petty vendetta which started in the Middle East. The West has nothing to do with it. That is until the publication of Renate Loll s paper. Dr. Renate Loll felt she is above the law or at least above a civil engineer from Egypt to need to refer to him. Anyone who sees her paper particularly in Scientific American will immediately realize that she and her co-Authors have benefited quite a bit from the work of El Naschie as well as Ord and Nottale. But here arrogance comes into play. She worked in the Max Planck Institute for gravitation as well as with the great Lee Smolin and most of all, she is the right hand of Nobel laureate Gerrard tHooft. You don t really expect a person with such distinction to take notice of minor figures such as those working for twenty five years on fractal spacetime. The problem became a real problem when many comments and letters to the Editors arrived protesting the omission of priority. At this juncture the usual mistake took place. Instead of admitting an omission and making a conciliatory gesture, the usual denial and indignation took place. Somebody of the stature of Richard Feynman would have laughingly said..I screwed up. In fact something similar was said by Obama in a different context. Such honesty is disarming and I am sure Nottale, Ord or for that matter El Naschie would have said be my guest or we have benefited from your work just as much as you did from ours, if not more. This is the behavior of truly great people as opposed to pseudo great people. It is important to understand that all people are equal and not even Nobel laureates have a license to do whatever they like. Renate Loll had an obligation towards her boss to be more vigilant than anyone else. After all the young Gerrard tHooft was himself the victim of an unfortunate omission of his work on the strong interaction. The kind remarks of Baron are noted but the sarcasm was misplaced, in fact, out of place. All in all you can fool some of the people some of the time, but never all the people all of the time. Even for the most gullible person, the attack on El Naschie was clearly viscous, wrong and immoral. It was well coordinated by John Baez, the publisher of Renate Loll as well as certain people who should have been above all of that who pushed it to Nature and finally to Die Zeit. Now Baez and Die Zeit vanished leaving a trail of destruction for which Nature will be made responsible. People are human beings with feelings, whether they have a Nobel Prize or not. At least that should be obvious to any human being calling himself a human being. I got your message and I hope you got mine. Sincerely yours

Reply | Report Abuse
An at 03:05 AM on 02/28/09
Once again, the great man El naschie proved his capital power. He manged
to remove the german article, but already the damge was done. I hope he
can do the same with nature article, as an advice try to pay more (more is different). As is clear El naschie has three powers that are,
self-publishing, self-citation and capital power.

As D. Baron in the previous comments suggested that El naschie deserves a nobel prize at least for peace. I think it would be better for nobel prize comittee to create a new nobel prize for the worst physicist like
oscar for worst actor. The best candidate would be El naschie. At least Gerrard tHooft can nominate him for the prize, as El naschie matches exactly his criteria for a bad theoritacal physicist.
http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theoristbad.html

By the way one can find the german article in the site
http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/395
you can upload the article from the comment due
Gm wrote on Jan. 29, 2009 @ 11:36 GMT.
The responsible for fqxi site removed your shmeful comments that
contains your family shameful stories. In which your half brother Said stole
the money of his own mother.

If you still have any little diginity, one like you shoud disappear.
All your reaction demonstrate the action of fraud found out. Reply | Report Abuse
D. Baron at 12:27 PM on 02/27/09
trueReply | Report Abuse
D. Baron at 11:28 AM on 02/27/09
Yes you are right. It is time that the arab world and the western world reach each others the hands and understand the gifts offered to them. El Naschie is a saviour and it is not happening all the time that a man of his kind is born to bring peace and progress and prosperity to the world. He even is willing to suffer from the envy of other people. At the end, even a nobel prize for peace could be acceptable.Reply | Report Abuse

I expected it but I still cannot believe it. First John Baez and his n-Category Caf? disappears into thin air and now Christopher Dosser and his infamous article in Die Zeit against El Naschie has also disappeared. Never the less, there is a method to their madness. They have caused havoc to Elsevier and must have hurt the feelings of El Naschie and his family. Imagine anyone reading these things about his father or his brother. There has to be somebody behind all of that. There are always some allegations here and there and nobody is immune, be it Einstein or Barack Obama. However the magnitude of madness, stupidity and perversity in this case is unusual. There has to be someone behind it all. Who is ready to spend so much time and money to create blogs devoted to watching El Naschie? The expression All El Naschie- all the time is reminiscent, in fact identical to the slogan of Al Jazeera Arab satellite station, English All news, all the time and I guess therefore that some Arabs are behind all this defamation. On the other hand the whole thing started with the article of Renate Loll. There are many comments on this English site, written in German. Many people confuse German and Dutch. But Dr. Renate Loll is not Dutch, she is German. She moved from a Max Planck Institute near Berlin to Utrecht . She is a reasonably well known scientist. Never the less I cannot see her doing all that on her own. She could not induce a well established leading periodical like Nature, nor for that matter a weekly newspaper with the prestige of Die Zeit to write defamatory articles against Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. That is unless she has the backing of somebody who is a heavy weight. I am afraid this somebody could be only one person which is Nobel laureate Gerrard tHooft. He did something similar many years ago against some of his colleagues and even his own teacher, Veltman. But this would not do either because Mohamed El Naschie and Gerrard tHooft are true friends, both scientifically and socially. It is clear they enjoy each others company or they would not spend so much time together travelling around the world. It is really strange and unsettling. I agree with some who have said that this site should also disappear and that we should all forget the whole matter, following the German idiom sponge over it.

Reply | Report Abuse
Zeigrid G. at 03:05 PM on 02/26/09
Like rats, all these puppets and sub-puppets are abandoning the sinking defamation ship. Please search for the article in Die Zeit written by this Christopher Dosser, diplom mathematic extraordinaire but don t be astonished when you can t find it. It all disappeared from the blog of Die Zeit. There is surely a very good reason for that. A respectable weekly newspaper like Die Zeit cannot afford trash. I do not know who Christopher Dosser is but as mathematicians like to say&.. if he exists& then as the German say, the apple never falls far from the tree or is this an English saying? I think it is universal, and all Chancellors of Germany present and past are ashamed from what this Dosser has written. Germany has produced the Nazi physics but they also produced Heisenberg, Heine and much, much more. I hope they will be forgiven that now and then the quality control goes wrong and one finds Hitler and Herr Dosser.Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 01:03 PM on 02/25/09

karl valentin at 04:32 PM on 02/24/09
Sehr geehrter Herr Dr. puppetphd - der mit Martin Klicken unterschreibt
Wollen Sie wirklich Herrn El Naschie mit Ihrem Geplapper Angst einjagen. Sie haben Ihr Augenmaß für Verhältnismäßigkeit total verloren. Wissen Sie, Sie jagen soviel Angst ein wie der Anblick einer toten Fliege auf dem Boden. Wir haben den Dreck gelesen den Sie früher geschrieben haben und alle Ihre blödsinnigen Bücher. Vielleicht wird Ihnen bald ein Lichtlein aufgehen. Wenn das Lichtlein aufgeht müssen Sie Ihren Namen zu König Drosselbart ändern. Übrigens grüßen Sie schön den Schmiermeier von München.



Reply | Report Abuse
Martin Luther King at 01:39 PM on 02/24/09
You are a puppet with a doctorate and sign as Martin Klicken of some university in Berlin. Curious and more curious. It is getting very curious indeed even for Alice in Wonderland. You are writing what appears to be German with an Austrian sound. At least old fashioned but without old fashioned good manners. Maybe you are Dutch. No offense for the Dutch people. But why should a German who is a puppet at a University in Berlin undertake so much work free of charge translating everything written in English about El Naschie into Arabic? Aha insight! You mean you want to blackmail Mohamed El Naschie. But again why should a puppet with a name Martin in Germany who studies Theater, be interested in Science at all and read Scientific American? Maybe it is like Pinocchio a little puppet which comes to life and wants to be useful so it starts to talk. Wow! It talks and then it wants to study science and what could be better than translating this garbage from English into Arabic. Very convincing indeed! Bye.
Reply | Report Abuse
Atef at 11:59 AM on 02/24/09
Said Elnashaie you could write in Dutch or even double Dutch we will still recognize you. Someone on this site suggested it is your odor. We beg to differ. It is your cowardice which is characteristic of everything you do and every thought which passes in your head. If you are a man, sign with your name and real address. But what am I saying here? We both know that not even in theory would you be able to stand up in the daylight and say the truth. You are worried it is getting serious and it is getting serious and you would like to confuse the situation but you are only confusing yourself.
Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 05:18 PM on 02/23/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

Entschuldigung, ich kann Ihr Deutsch nicht verstehen, es ist zu schlecht.

Ich habe heute bei der Universitaet von Alexandria, Direktor des Instituts fuer Physik angerufen. Es war scheinbar seine Privatnummer, bzw. er hat nach Hause umgeleitet und war nicht zu sprechen. Man hat mir eine Mobiltelefonnummer gegeben, unter der ich es weiter versuchen werde. Es geht mir nur darum, dass niemand unter falschem Namen Kommentare anstatt von Hr. Ayman El-Okaby schreibt. Lieber "Herr von Eichendorf", Ihr Kommentar ist leider zu raetselhaft bzw. das Deutsch nicht zu verstehen. Er klingt ein wenig wie die Kommentare im ZEIT Magazin, allerdings waren die gut zu verstehen. Ach ja, nur die Art der Unterstellungen schimmert natuerlich immernoch durch. Also, falls Sie sich wieder dahinter verbergen, Hr. El Naschie: Sie muessen weiter raten - ich bin auch kein Diplommathematiker. Irgendwann kommen Sie drauf.
Ich hoffe, meine Englisch-Arabischen Uebersetzungen aller Kommentare von hier werden besser zu verstehen sein. Diese werde ich dem Institut und dem Dekan zur Verfuegung stellen. Ich denke, die arabische Oeffentlichkeit sollte auch lesen, was hier geschrieben wird. Das mache ich kostenlos. Und sobald die arabischen Medien erreicht werden, werden sich sicher viele z.B. aegyptische Interessierte finden, die sich der Suche nach der Wahrheit - ebenfalls kostenlos - anschliessen werden.

Beste Gruesse
Martin Klicken
Freie Universitaet Berlin
klickensiehier@yahoo.deReply | Report Abuse
von Eichendorf at 03:24 PM on 02/23/09
Es wird uns eine Wonne sein, wenn Sie uns in Alexandria kontaktieren. Am besten benutzen Sie Ihren wahren Namen und Ihre wahre Adresse Herr Diplommathematiker. Geben Sie uns an wie viel sie mit dieser Verleumdung verdienen. Machen Sie es bitte nicht billig. Sie können überzeugt sein, dass die wahren Lügner und Verleumder die Herrn Professor EL Naschie auf Befehl angegriffen und jede noch so niederträchtigen Mittel benutzt haben sehr bald in München, Hamburg und London gebührender Halt geboten wird. Aber bitte, diese falsche Frömmigkeit ist ekelerregend. Sie kennen weder Moral noch Gott und bestimmt kein Gesetz. Also sparen Sie uns diese Krokodilsunschuldsbeteuerungen.
von Eichendorf
Buckingham Palace, Belgien
Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 04:12 AM on 02/22/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

Ich muss sagen, ich bin wirklich entsetzt ueber die Unbekuemmertheit, mit der Sie hier aggressivste Unterstellungen und Verleumdungen und auf die frechste Weise immer wieder toilettenorientierte Unterwerfungs- und Faekalfantasien im Bezug auf Ihren Lieblingswidersacher entwerfen. In einem deutschen Artikel ist diese Art der Bezugnahme zu einer wissenschaftlichen Frage natuerlich unvorstellbar - Beleidigungen in dieser Form und Art koennte ich mir in einem deutschsprachigen Forum gar nicht vorstellen. Und Hr. Mohamed El-Naschie, Sie nehmen mit dieser Form der Auseinandersetzung mit Ihren obszoenen Publikationsvergehen wohl auch in der englischsprachigen Blogsphaere eine herausragende Position ein. Montag (morgen) werde ich mit Hilfe eines Uebersetzers mit der Fakultaetsleitung der Universitaet von Alexandria telefonieren. Ich werde auch Uebersetzungprotokolle der unvorstellbaren, gottlosen Frechheiten liefern, die Sie hier schreiben. Man wird sich fragen muessen, inwieweit so etwas fuer die arabische Welt und die Medien tragbar ist. Vielleicht ist das ein normaler Diskussionsstil dort wo Sie sich normalerweise bewegen. Ich jedoch bin anderes gewoehnt. Und leider haben Sie nichts zu den fachlichen Fragen gesagt: Hier sind einige junge Studenten, die gerne einen Mathematik-Test mit Ihnen machen wuerden, sozusagen eine muendliche Pruefung, wie auch hier in den Kommentaren angeboten: http://www.zeit.de/2009/03/N-El-Naschie. Denn vielen Menschen in Europa ist aufgefallen, dass Sie Veroeffentlichungen schreiben die deutlich zeigen, dass Sie nicht die geringste Ahnung von der Materie haben (im mehrfachen Wortsinne, wenn es Ihnen gefaellt). Stellen Sie sich gefaelligst diesen Anschuldigungen und lassen Sie das laecherliche Puppentheater und die verleumderischen Anschuldigungen, fuer die Sie sich hoffentlich eines Tages vor Ihrem Schoepfer verantworten werden muessen.

Martin Klicken
Freie Universitaet Berlin
klickensiehier@yahoo.deReply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 04:09 AM on 02/22/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

Ich muss sagen, ich bin wirklich entsetzt ?ber die Unbek?mmertheit, mit der Sie hier aggressivste Unterstellungen und Verleumdungen und auf die frechste Weise immer wieder toilettenorientierte Unterwerfungs- und F?kalfantasien im Bezug auf Ihren Lieblingswidersacher entwerfen. In einem deutschen Artikel ist diese Art der Bezugnahme zu einer wissenschaftlichen Frage nat?rlich unvorstellbar - Beleidigungen in dieser Form und Art k?nnte ich mir in einem deutschsprachigen Forum gar nicht vorstellen. Und Hr. Mohamed El-Naschie, Sie nehmen mit dieser Form der Auseinandersetzung mit Ihren obsz?nen Publikationsvergehen wohl auch in der englischsprachigen Blogsph?re eine herausragende Position ein. Montag (morgen) werde ich mit Hilfe eines ?bersetzers mit der Fakult?tsleitung der Universit?t von Alexandria telefonieren. Ich werde auch ?bersetzungprotokolle der unvorstellbaren, gottlosen Frechheiten liefern, die Sie hier schreiben. Man wird sich fragen m?ssen, inwieweit so etwas f?r die arabische Welt und die Medien tragbar ist. Vielleicht ist das ein normaler Diskussionsstil dort wo Sie sich normalerweise bewegen. Ich jedoch bin anderes gew?hnt. Und leider haben Sie nichts zu den fachlichen Fragen gesagt: Hier sind einige junge Studenten, die gerne einen Mathematik-Test mit Ihnen machen w?rden, sozusagen eine m?ndliche Pr?fung, wie auch hier in den Kommentaren angeboten: http://www.zeit.de/2009/03/N-El-Naschie. Denn vielen Menschen in Europa ist aufgefallen, dass Sie Ver?ffentlichungen schreiben die deutlich zeigen, dass Sie nicht die geringste Ahnung von der Materie haben (im mehrfachen Wortsinne, wenn es Ihnen gef?llt). Stellen Sie sich gef?lligst diesen Anschuldigungen und lassen Sie das l?cherliche Puppentheater und die verleumderischen Anschuldigungen, f?r die Sie sich hoffentlich eines Tages vor Ihrem Sch?pfer verantworten werden m?ssen.

Martin Klicken
Freie Universit?t Berlin
klickensiehier@yahoo.de

Sincere at 02:54 AM on 02/22/09
Said Elnashaie it is not strange to call yourself a student of Drama and Theatre in Germany. This is an understatement. You are an accomplished actor. The crocodile tears in front of your boss a couple of days ago and demeaning yourself by showing them family dirty linen and forged documents on top of that, put you on par with your step daughter Jehan. The language you use is indicative of your psyche. You would make a wonderful stuff for a Hitchcock Psycho 2 movie. A misfit and a genetically disordered victim of nature. So in a sense you could be innocent if you just allow people to give you the medical treatment you urgently need. If in any doubt, here again is your profile http://saidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
better known as your Certificate of Conviction in two languages. By the way your performance in front of your boss has earned you more disrepute and deep contempt than you could ever imagine in your malignant fantasy and your soul so stuffed with hate that you cant see that the whole of Egypt can no more afford to have not even in Sinai. Although these are harsh words and may not bring anything positive, they are sincere and any sane person would have recognized them as such.

Reply | Report Abuse
elokaby at 04:10 PM on 02/21/09
I am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria University


Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 10:29 AM on 02/21/09
Dear Mohamed El-Naschie a.k.a. A. Kabeer, Gobran Gaber, Gameel, the last names for your sockpuppets are strangely similar, don't you think so.
Your imaginative force is infinitely smaller than your infinite egomania. The whole outside world seems to consist for you only of one guy. Whoever is not with you, is against you. Whoever is against you must be Said. You need help, I think. Now for poor Ayman El-Okaby. YOU, Mohamed El-Naschie, you raped this poor soul, betrayed on him and abused him for your low objectives. A man who obviously is not able to write such papers or comments you wrote for him. Stop blaming other people for your shameless actions. This will all redound upon you, as it is now starting to do. Stop comparing me with your friends, I am a German phd student and I never knew anybody you had to do with, neither in Cairo nor in Frankfurt. I was studying Theaterwissenschaften at the Freie Universität in Berlin, Germany. Stop your defamatory unholy lies for one hour, if you can.Reply | Report Abuse
Gobran Gaber at 10:06 AM on 02/21/09
What a downfall? Far worse than the twilights of the Gods. From a distinguished professor in Penn State University to a toilet clerk in Sinai – that is more than anyone can take. You have my sympathy.Reply | Report Abuse
A.Kabeer at 10:01 AM on 02/21/09
Dr. Said Elnashaie or Puppetphd. Let me tell you why I don’t respect you. I don’t respect you because you turned scientific arguments into non-scientific arguments. This is not the first time in history, far worse was done to Einstein and far worse was done to better and lesser people. However, I have never encountered this low standard and misuse of the English Language. You find El Naschie’s work worthless. You are entitled to your opinion. You hate Prof. El Naschie for personal reasons including whatever. You are also entitled to that. What you have never learned and apparently will never understand is that you should not mix one with the other. But that is what you are doing all the time with hysterical intensity. In the course of following your lust for revenge of El Naschie you did not stop for a minute to think how many more people you are harming. You are behaving like suicide bombers. I read what is written about you in the English version of sentencing you for two years hard labor. You didn’t spare your mother or anyone else You are a man full of rage and hatred. You may have your reasons as far as any human being can have his reasons for being insane. You could plead insanity in any court in any civilized country and you would be taken for treatment. Now you unleash your anger and blind hatred against an innocent Ph.D. student in Alexandria University. You are a reckless person with nothing sacred whatsoever. That is why I and many people have no respect for you or what you write.Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 09:46 AM on 02/21/09
Oh, one remark to your tries "Kenneth", "H0sten" to push down the other comments: they are collected and published somewhere else. I will publish them at least in the appendices of my thesis on sockpuppetry of course. It is remarkable how well the signatures of your writing styles fit, I can not say how thankful I am for this live presentation. Thank you so much! God bless you. May god give your life some other meaning after I finished my thesis and peace to your peaky soul.Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 09:40 AM on 02/21/09
Gameel wrote: One for all and none for you Said. You really have the time to go into sciencedirect and see who is referring to Prof. El Naschie and who is not? Wow, this is a late state of spiritual cancer. There will be no luck with anger management course without amputation there is no hope!

Answer: Dear Mr. Mohamed El-Naschie, you dedictated your lifework to nothing else but trying to push the impact rate of your papers to infinite levels (i.e. e-infinity means egomania-infinity, the theorie about the infinite dimensions of your ego.) You proved your point, now why should you attribute the glory for your achievements to somebody else? You are the center of the spirograph Mr. El-Naschie, nobody else. All strings meet there, all puppets feed on your energy. You are the center of the spirograph-puppet machine with the anti-machine in china (in fact there are many in china, you can think of them as manifestations of the same particle in different states at the same time). Don't belower yourself on pest-control topics. That has nothing to do with LSD, and you are such a charismatic guy.Reply | Report Abuse
Malvovich at 09:40 AM on 02/21/09
Of course it is clear as Mr. El Okaby says that there are no mysteries in the work of Mohamed El Naschie. All you need is to understand the transfinite general theory of dimensions due to Menger and Uhryson as well as measure theory. Reply | Report Abuse
Kenneth at 09:36 AM on 02/21/09
Your mathematical incompetence whoever you are is no where as evident as in your comment about adding, subtracting, dividing and multiplying. I am ready to lend you a dime. Said Elnashaie take the money and go and call your mother tell her your future as a mathematician or a scientist is as bleak as the black soul governing everything you utter on this site.Reply | Report Abuse
H0sten at 09:35 AM on 02/21/09
test
H0sten at 09:35 AM on 02/21/09
urghReply | Report Abuse
Gameel at 09:27 AM on 02/21/09
One for all and none for you Said. You really have the time to go into sciencedirect and see who is referring to Prof. El Naschie and who is not? Wow, this is a late state of spiritual cancer. There will be no luck with anger management course without amputation there is no hope!Reply | Report Abuse
Cardinal Richelieu at 09:17 AM on 02/21/09
Like a puppet on a string, but there is a world of difference between Sandy Show and Said Elnashaie show. It is really the rocky horror show featuring Egypt’s no.1 Nutter performing not in the Coliseum but on the foot of Mount Sinai. It is becoming a case for the Holy Seal. Why don’t you use your connection to Ahmed Gaber to clean Sinai from insects and puppets. That would be your greatest achievement, believe you me. It is never too late to put your mark on history. You just need to use your time wisely and to do something useful rather than nourishing your jealousy and inferiority complexes.
Reply | Report Abuse
Cardinal Richelieu at 09:16 AM on 02/21/09
Reply | Report Abuse
Hamlet at 09:05 AM on 02/21/09
Is it nobler in the hearts to suffer the slings and arrows of an outrageous fortune or to take arms against a sea of puppets - to die, to sleep and perhaps to dream that the puppet gets brains and starts thinking instead of contaminating this site.Reply | Report Abuse
elokaby at 08:57 AM on 02/21/09
am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria University
Reply | Report Abuse
puppet2 at 07:37 AM on 02/21/09
This is to answer puppetphd question. Regarding the personality of Ayman El Okaby, I would like to inform that there is really a living organism whose name is Ayman El Okaby and he is supposedly doing his PhD with El naschie. However, I should tell you that I am 100% sure that he is not the one who is writing and posting over and over those comments, I can infer from the English style, it is El naschie himself who is signing with the name of Ayman. Ayman English is very poor and easy to recognize.
Reply | Report Abuse
An at 02:51 PM on 02/20/09
El naschie deserves the name of the great corrupter.
A lone single handed and with his own money.
He has managed to corrupt Elsevier for almost twenty
years, 1992-2009. He has published few hundered (347)
non sense articles in CSF. Up till now, Elsevier can not
get rid of him. There is no article for El naschie in
the recent article of 2009 in CSF, which is a good sign.
But most of the articles trumpeting the E-infinity theory
and citing El naschie works.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/
science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%235300%239999
%23999999999%2399999%23FLA%23&_cdi=5300&_pubType=J&_auth
=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&
md5=faf5d2a06ff9be6c0d0126fdc479017c

Not only that but the great man (El naschie) has also
managed to corrupt Cambridge for ten years.
According to the following data base
http://www.engineeringvillage2.org
One can find:
17 articles where the affiliation is DAMTP, Cambridge,
UK.

72 articles where the affiliation is Dept. of Appl.
Math. & Theor. Phys., Cambridge Univ., UK

40 articles where the affiliation is Univ of Cambridge.

No prize for one who guesses at which journal those
articles have been published.

All of these indicates the power of money not of self
publications or citations.
It is sad, that we lost the joke papers and now one can
not find any new paper for him. His papers are source of
infinite jokes.

The great man can establish his own publishing company
and calling it Elnaschievier to compete Elsevier in
publishing science fronteir.

We hope the great man not to waste a lot of time with
his socckpuppets and return producing lovely, joke
papers in Elnaschievier publishing house. Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 02:16 PM on 02/20/09
I am puzzled by those who are not puzzled by all the sockpuppets Mohamed El-Naschie invents to cover the traces of his disreputable deeds like a [insert some crazy comparison here, involving small mammals, best are such species able to reach all possible body parts] but he is in fact just leaving signatures everywhere, pointing to the stations of his dishonorable path.
I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. It is simplay crap. There is nothing more to it. Familiarizing more scientists with the concepts and logic behind E-Infinity would
certainly not help science, so let's try to find out something that is in fact verifiable:
The existence of... not extra dimensions or sub-atomic particles, no...
the existence of... Ayman El Okaby. (the man)
I sent important mail to his address at Alexandria University, Department of Physics. But they don't seem to have anybody there of that name. Strange, huh?
Tomorrow I will call the dean of the faculty of science:

Faculty of Science
Dean:Prof. Mahmoud Mohamed Hassan Gabr
Email:dean@fsci.alex.edu.eg
Contact Info:
Tel:(+203)3921595/3922919/3922918 Fax:(+203)3911794

After I checked again with the head of the physics department. Maybe they can find Mr. El-Okaby somewhere! Maybe somewhere else at the university.
Department of Physics
Head of Dept.:
Prof. Ahmed Mohamed El-Khateeb
Contact Info:
Phone: 5458331

I think everybody interested in the reality of sockpuppets should be fair and ask the question: maybe it is a real person. So I will check this for you and inform you about the results.
A good idea would be to make a list of names and affiliations appearing here and in all the other blogs and verify each of them.
The list can serve for the purpose of not unnerving the poor institute members suffering from the fraud affiliations. The claimed phds should also be verified, but that can happen later.
I just want to see a list of the "men" signing here. That is the least we can do to honour them.
Mr. El-Okaby wrote two papers in his life (?) correct me if I'm wrong I couldn't find any others. Both of the papers are written about El-Naschie stuff. I am not saying that El-Naschie himself made El-Okaby up, wrote two papers under a fake name and now stupid how he is even uses the fake name again in the blogs, waking sleeping dogs.
I just want to produce proof of the contrary. If this is not possible, the result should be stored in a list, and nobody should annoy Prof. Mahmoud Mohamed Hassan Gabr or Prof. Ahmed Mohamed El-Khateeb ever again with this very ashaming matter. Where could such a list be hosted, maybe in the http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com? Personally I don't like the arabic design, but it could maybe be a place.
Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 01:41 PM on 02/20/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

That is remarkable, you are almost right. But my name is not Said. Guess again. Oh, and, Ayman Elokaby, he is a man, right? Huh.. but at the same time, he is El-Naschie.. so, in fact he is two men! At least. Many boots I see there. Many socks in the boots. And now I can figure how much experience with boot licking you must have. You are an ill and immoral man. You have no idea who I am and why I am disgusted by your immoral practices. That seems to be above you. But I have something for you, and I am willing to give it to you: proof for the global conspiration, the involvement of the surfer dude, the underground neo-nazi and zionist movements and how the blogsphere comes into play there. I sent it to Ayman Elokaby, Dept. of Physics, University of Alexandria, Egypt. He himself only gives a yahoo email address. Strange. elokaby@yahoo.com. So I put all the proof into a letter and sent it to University of Alexandria. I hope they will tell me if there is in fact a person called Ayman Elokaby. Or they may just relay it to your address, Mohamed. Now I don't want to disturb any longer, give you more times with your puppets.
P.S.: again you were right, you could see a connection between my name "puppet" and "phd" and my posts. you must be a very intelligent man. I guess you also know many things about addition, subtraction, multiplication and division, do you? and boot licking rituals. Makes you a scientist in some areas.



puppetphd at 05:18 PM on 02/23/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

Entschuldigung, ich kann Ihr Deutsch nicht verstehen, es ist zu schlecht.

Ich habe heute bei der Universitaet von Alexandria, Direktor des Instituts fuer Physik angerufen. Es war scheinbar seine Privatnummer, bzw. er hat nach Hause umgeleitet und war nicht zu sprechen. Man hat mir eine Mobiltelefonnummer gegeben, unter der ich es weiter versuchen werde. Es geht mir nur darum, dass niemand unter falschem Namen Kommentare anstatt von Hr. Ayman El-Okaby schreibt. Lieber "Herr von Eichendorf", Ihr Kommentar ist leider zu raetselhaft bzw. das Deutsch nicht zu verstehen. Er klingt ein wenig wie die Kommentare im ZEIT Magazin, allerdings waren die gut zu verstehen. Ach ja, nur die Art der Unterstellungen schimmert natuerlich immernoch durch. Also, falls Sie sich wieder dahinter verbergen, Hr. El Naschie: Sie muessen weiter raten - ich bin auch kein Diplommathematiker. Irgendwann kommen Sie drauf.
Ich hoffe, meine Englisch-Arabischen Uebersetzungen aller Kommentare von hier werden besser zu verstehen sein. Diese werde ich dem Institut und dem Dekan zur Verfuegung stellen. Ich denke, die arabische Oeffentlichkeit sollte auch lesen, was hier geschrieben wird. Das mache ich kostenlos. Und sobald die arabischen Medien erreicht werden, werden sich sicher viele z.B. aegyptische Interessierte finden, die sich der Suche nach der Wahrheit - ebenfalls kostenlos - anschliessen werden.

Beste Gruesse
Martin Klicken
Freie Universitaet Berlin
klickensiehier@yahoo.deReply | Report Abuse
von Eichendorf at 03:24 PM on 02/23/09
Es wird uns eine Wonne sein, wenn Sie uns in Alexandria kontaktieren. Am besten benutzen Sie Ihren wahren Namen und Ihre wahre Adresse Herr Diplommathematiker. Geben Sie uns an wie viel sie mit dieser Verleumdung verdienen. Machen Sie es bitte nicht billig. Sie können überzeugt sein, dass die wahren Lügner und Verleumder die Herrn Professor EL Naschie auf Befehl angegriffen und jede noch so niederträchtigen Mittel benutzt haben sehr bald in München, Hamburg und London gebührender Halt geboten wird. Aber bitte, diese falsche Frömmigkeit ist ekelerregend. Sie kennen weder Moral noch Gott und bestimmt kein Gesetz. Also sparen Sie uns diese Krokodilsunschuldsbeteuerungen.
von Eichendorf
Buckingham Palace, Belgien
Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 04:12 AM on 02/22/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

Ich muss sagen, ich bin wirklich entsetzt ueber die Unbekuemmertheit, mit der Sie hier aggressivste Unterstellungen und Verleumdungen und auf die frechste Weise immer wieder toilettenorientierte Unterwerfungs- und Faekalfantasien im Bezug auf Ihren Lieblingswidersacher entwerfen. In einem deutschen Artikel ist diese Art der Bezugnahme zu einer wissenschaftlichen Frage natuerlich unvorstellbar - Beleidigungen in dieser Form und Art koennte ich mir in einem deutschsprachigen Forum gar nicht vorstellen. Und Hr. Mohamed El-Naschie, Sie nehmen mit dieser Form der Auseinandersetzung mit Ihren obszoenen Publikationsvergehen wohl auch in der englischsprachigen Blogsphaere eine herausragende Position ein. Montag (morgen) werde ich mit Hilfe eines Uebersetzers mit der Fakultaetsleitung der Universitaet von Alexandria telefonieren. Ich werde auch Uebersetzungprotokolle der unvorstellbaren, gottlosen Frechheiten liefern, die Sie hier schreiben. Man wird sich fragen muessen, inwieweit so etwas fuer die arabische Welt und die Medien tragbar ist. Vielleicht ist das ein normaler Diskussionsstil dort wo Sie sich normalerweise bewegen. Ich jedoch bin anderes gewoehnt. Und leider haben Sie nichts zu den fachlichen Fragen gesagt: Hier sind einige junge Studenten, die gerne einen Mathematik-Test mit Ihnen machen wuerden, sozusagen eine muendliche Pruefung, wie auch hier in den Kommentaren angeboten: http://www.zeit.de/2009/03/N-El-Naschie. Denn vielen Menschen in Europa ist aufgefallen, dass Sie Veroeffentlichungen schreiben die deutlich zeigen, dass Sie nicht die geringste Ahnung von der Materie haben (im mehrfachen Wortsinne, wenn es Ihnen gefaellt). Stellen Sie sich gefaelligst diesen Anschuldigungen und lassen Sie das laecherliche Puppentheater und die verleumderischen Anschuldigungen, fuer die Sie sich hoffentlich eines Tages vor Ihrem Schoepfer verantworten werden muessen.

Martin Klicken
Freie Universitaet Berlin
klickensiehier@yahoo.deReply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 04:09 AM on 02/22/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

Ich muss sagen, ich bin wirklich entsetzt ?ber die Unbek?mmertheit, mit der Sie hier aggressivste Unterstellungen und Verleumdungen und auf die frechste Weise immer wieder toilettenorientierte Unterwerfungs- und F?kalfantasien im Bezug auf Ihren Lieblingswidersacher entwerfen. In einem deutschen Artikel ist diese Art der Bezugnahme zu einer wissenschaftlichen Frage nat?rlich unvorstellbar - Beleidigungen in dieser Form und Art k?nnte ich mir in einem deutschsprachigen Forum gar nicht vorstellen. Und Hr. Mohamed El-Naschie, Sie nehmen mit dieser Form der Auseinandersetzung mit Ihren obsz?nen Publikationsvergehen wohl auch in der englischsprachigen Blogsph?re eine herausragende Position ein. Montag (morgen) werde ich mit Hilfe eines ?bersetzers mit der Fakult?tsleitung der Universit?t von Alexandria telefonieren. Ich werde auch ?bersetzungprotokolle der unvorstellbaren, gottlosen Frechheiten liefern, die Sie hier schreiben. Man wird sich fragen m?ssen, inwieweit so etwas f?r die arabische Welt und die Medien tragbar ist. Vielleicht ist das ein normaler Diskussionsstil dort wo Sie sich normalerweise bewegen. Ich jedoch bin anderes gew?hnt. Und leider haben Sie nichts zu den fachlichen Fragen gesagt: Hier sind einige junge Studenten, die gerne einen Mathematik-Test mit Ihnen machen w?rden, sozusagen eine m?ndliche Pr?fung, wie auch hier in den Kommentaren angeboten: http://www.zeit.de/2009/03/N-El-Naschie. Denn vielen Menschen in Europa ist aufgefallen, dass Sie Ver?ffentlichungen schreiben die deutlich zeigen, dass Sie nicht die geringste Ahnung von der Materie haben (im mehrfachen Wortsinne, wenn es Ihnen gef?llt). Stellen Sie sich gef?lligst diesen Anschuldigungen und lassen Sie das l?cherliche Puppentheater und die verleumderischen Anschuldigungen, f?r die Sie sich hoffentlich eines Tages vor Ihrem Sch?pfer verantworten werden m?ssen.

Martin Klicken
Freie Universit?t Berlin
klickensiehier@yahoo.deReply | Report Abuse
Sincere at 02:54 AM on 02/22/09
Said Elnashaie it is not strange to call yourself a student of Drama and Theatre in Germany. This is an understatement. You are an accomplished actor. The crocodile tears in front of your boss a couple of days ago and demeaning yourself by showing them family dirty linen and forged documents on top of that, put you on par with your step daughter Jehan. The language you use is indicative of your psyche. You would make a wonderful stuff for a Hitchcock Psycho 2 movie. A misfit and a genetically disordered victim of nature. So in a sense you could be innocent if you just allow people to give you the medical treatment you urgently need. If in any doubt, here again is your profile http://saidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
better known as your Certificate of Conviction in two languages. By the way your performance in front of your boss has earned you more disrepute and deep contempt than you could ever imagine in your malignant fantasy and your soul so stuffed with hate that you cant see that the whole of Egypt can no more afford to have not even in Sinai. Although these are harsh words and may not bring anything positive, they are sincere and any sane person would have recognized them as such.

Reply | Report Abuse
elokaby at 04:10 PM on 02/21/09
I am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria University


Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 10:29 AM on 02/21/09
Dear Mohamed El-Naschie a.k.a. A. Kabeer, Gobran Gaber, Gameel, the last names for your sockpuppets are strangely similar, don't you think so.
Your imaginative force is infinitely smaller than your infinite egomania. The whole outside world seems to consist for you only of one guy. Whoever is not with you, is against you. Whoever is against you must be Said. You need help, I think. Now for poor Ayman El-Okaby. YOU, Mohamed El-Naschie, you raped this poor soul, betrayed on him and abused him for your low objectives. A man who obviously is not able to write such papers or comments you wrote for him. Stop blaming other people for your shameless actions. This will all redound upon you, as it is now starting to do. Stop comparing me with your friends, I am a German phd student and I never knew anybody you had to do with, neither in Cairo nor in Frankfurt. I was studying Theaterwissenschaften at the Freie Universität in Berlin, Germany. Stop your defamatory unholy lies for one hour, if you can.Reply | Report Abuse
Gobran Gaber at 10:06 AM on 02/21/09
What a downfall? Far worse than the twilights of the Gods. From a distinguished professor in Penn State University to a toilet clerk in Sinai – that is more than anyone can take. You have my sympathy.Reply | Report Abuse
A.Kabeer at 10:01 AM on 02/21/09
Dr. Said Elnashaie or Puppetphd. Let me tell you why I don’t respect you. I don’t respect you because you turned scientific arguments into non-scientific arguments. This is not the first time in history, far worse was done to Einstein and far worse was done to better and lesser people. However, I have never encountered this low standard and misuse of the English Language. You find El Naschie’s work worthless. You are entitled to your opinion. You hate Prof. El Naschie for personal reasons including whatever. You are also entitled to that. What you have never learned and apparently will never understand is that you should not mix one with the other. But that is what you are doing all the time with hysterical intensity. In the course of following your lust for revenge of El Naschie you did not stop for a minute to think how many more people you are harming. You are behaving like suicide bombers. I read what is written about you in the English version of sentencing you for two years hard labor. You didn’t spare your mother or anyone else You are a man full of rage and hatred. You may have your reasons as far as any human being can have his reasons for being insane. You could plead insanity in any court in any civilized country and you would be taken for treatment. Now you unleash your anger and blind hatred against an innocent Ph.D. student in Alexandria University. You are a reckless person with nothing sacred whatsoever. That is why I and many people have no respect for you or what you write.Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 09:46 AM on 02/21/09
Oh, one remark to your tries "Kenneth", "H0sten" to push down the other comments: they are collected and published somewhere else. I will publish them at least in the appendices of my thesis on sockpuppetry of course. It is remarkable how well the signatures of your writing styles fit, I can not say how thankful I am for this live presentation. Thank you so much! God bless you. May god give your life some other meaning after I finished my thesis and peace to your peaky soul.


Maysa at 04:24 PM on 02/28/09
It is not a matter of a savior or a man who is bringing love and prosperity to the world. It is much simpler than that. Mohamed El Naschie is a victim of a vendetta. The vendetta is a petty vendetta which started in the Middle East. The West has nothing to do with it. That is until the publication of Renate Loll s paper. Dr. Renate Loll felt she is above the law or at least above a civil engineer from Egypt to need to refer to him. Anyone who sees her paper particularly in Scientific American will immediately realize that she and her co-Authors have benefited quite a bit from the work of El Naschie as well as Ord and Nottale. But here arrogance comes into play. She worked in the Max Planck Institute for gravitation as well as with the great Lee Smolin and most of all, she is the right hand of Nobel laureate Gerrard tHooft. You don t really expect a person with such distinction to take notice of minor figures such as those working for twenty five years on fractal spacetime. The problem became a real problem when many comments and letters to the Editors arrived protesting the omission of priority. At this juncture the usual mistake took place. Instead of admitting an omission and making a conciliatory gesture, the usual denial and indignation took place. Somebody of the stature of Richard Feynman would have laughingly said..I screwed up. In fact something similar was said by Obama in a different context. Such honesty is disarming and I am sure Nottale, Ord or for that matter El Naschie would have said be my guest or we have benefited from your work just as much as you did from ours, if not more. This is the behavior of truly great people as opposed to pseudo great people. It is important to understand that all people are equal and not even Nobel laureates have a license to do whatever they like. Renate Loll had an obligation towards her boss to be more vigilant than anyone else. After all the young Gerrard tHooft was himself the victim of an unfortunate omission of his work on the strong interaction. The kind remarks of Baron are noted but the sarcasm was misplaced, in fact, out of place. All in all you can fool some of the people some of the time, but never all the people all of the time. Even for the most gullible person, the attack on El Naschie was clearly viscous, wrong and immoral. It was well coordinated by John Baez, the publisher of Renate Loll as well as certain people who should have been above all of that who pushed it to Nature and finally to Die Zeit. Now Baez and Die Zeit vanished leaving a trail of destruction for which Nature will be made responsible. People are human beings with feelings, whether they have a Nobel Prize or not. At least that should be obvious to any human being calling himself a human being. I got your message and I hope you got mine. Sincerely yours

Reply | Report Abuse
An at 03:05 AM on 02/28/09
Once again, the great man El naschie proved his capital power. He manged
to remove the german article, but already the damge was done. I hope he
can do the same with nature article, as an advice try to pay more (more is different). As is clear El naschie has three powers that are,
self-publishing, self-citation and capital power.

As D. Baron in the previous comments suggested that El naschie deserves a nobel prize at least for peace. I think it would be better for nobel prize comittee to create a new nobel prize for the worst physicist like
oscar for worst actor. The best candidate would be El naschie. At least Gerrard tHooft can nominate him for the prize, as El naschie matches exactly his criteria for a bad theoritacal physicist.
http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theoristbad.html

By the way one can find the german article in the site
http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/395
you can upload the article from the comment due
Gm wrote on Jan. 29, 2009 @ 11:36 GMT.
The responsible for fqxi site removed your shmeful comments that
contains your family shameful stories. In which your half brother Said stole
the money of his own mother.

If you still have any little diginity, one like you shoud disappear.
All your reaction demonstrate the action of fraud found out. Reply | Report Abuse
D. Baron at 12:27 PM on 02/27/09
trueReply | Report Abuse
D. Baron at 11:28 AM on 02/27/09
Yes you are right. It is time that the arab world and the western world reach each others the hands and understand the gifts offered to them. El Naschie is a saviour and it is not happening all the time that a man of his kind is born to bring peace and progress and prosperity to the world. He even is willing to suffer from the envy of other people. At the end, even a nobel prize for peace could be acceptable.Reply | Report Abuse
K. Schmidtses at 08:15 PM on 02/26/09
I expected it but I still cannot believe it. First John Baez and his n-Category Caf? disappears into thin air and now Christopher Dosser and his infamous article in Die Zeit against El Naschie has also disappeared. Never the less, there is a method to their madness. They have caused havoc to Elsevier and must have hurt the feelings of El Naschie and his family. Imagine anyone reading these things about his father or his brother. There has to be somebody behind all of that. There are always some allegations here and there and nobody is immune, be it Einstein or Barack Obama. However the magnitude of madness, stupidity and perversity in this case is unusual. There has to be someone behind it all. Who is ready to spend so much time and money to create blogs devoted to watching El Naschie? The expression All El Naschie- all the time is reminiscent, in fact identical to the slogan of Al Jazeera Arab satellite station, English All news, all the time and I guess therefore that some Arabs are behind all this defamation. On the other hand the whole thing started with the article of Renate Loll. There are many comments on this English site, written in German. Many people confuse German and Dutch. But Dr. Renate Loll is not Dutch, she is German. She moved from a Max Planck Institute near Berlin to Utrecht . She is a reasonably well known scientist. Never the less I cannot see her doing all that on her own. She could not induce a well established leading periodical like Nature, nor for that matter a weekly newspaper with the prestige of Die Zeit to write defamatory articles against Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. That is unless she has the backing of somebody who is a heavy weight. I am afraid this somebody could be only one person which is Nobel laureate Gerrard tHooft. He did something similar many years ago against some of his colleagues and even his own teacher, Veltman. But this would not do either because Mohamed El Naschie and Gerrard tHooft are true friends, both scientifically and socially. It is clear they enjoy each others company or they would not spend so much time together travelling around the world. It is really strange and unsettling. I agree with some who have said that this site should also disappear and that we should all forget the whole matter, following the German idiom sponge over it.

Reply | Report Abuse
Zeigrid G. at 03:05 PM on 02/26/09
Like rats, all these puppets and sub-puppets are abandoning the sinking defamation ship. Please search for the article in Die Zeit written by this Christopher Dosser, diplom mathematic extraordinaire but don t be astonished when you can t find it. It all disappeared from the blog of Die Zeit. There is surely a very good reason for that. A respectable weekly newspaper like Die Zeit cannot afford trash. I do not know who Christopher Dosser is but as mathematicians like to say&.. if he exists& then as the German say, the apple never falls far from the tree or is this an English saying? I think it is universal, and all Chancellors of Germany present and past are ashamed from what this Dosser has written. Germany has produced the Nazi physics but they also produced Heisenberg, Heine and much, much more. I hope they will be forgiven that now and then the quality control goes wrong and one finds Hitler and Herr Dosser.Reply | Report Abuse

karl valentin at 04:32 PM on 02/24/09
Sehr geehrter Herr Dr. puppetphd - der mit Martin Klicken unterschreibt
Wollen Sie wirklich Herrn El Naschie mit Ihrem Geplapper Angst einjagen. Sie haben Ihr Augenmaß für Verhältnismäßigkeit total verloren. Wissen Sie, Sie jagen soviel Angst ein wie der Anblick einer toten Fliege auf dem Boden. Wir haben den Dreck gelesen den Sie früher geschrieben haben und alle Ihre blödsinnigen Bücher. Vielleicht wird Ihnen bald ein Lichtlein aufgehen. Wenn das Lichtlein aufgeht müssen Sie Ihren Namen zu König Drosselbart ändern. Übrigens grüßen Sie schön den Schmiermeier von München.



Reply | Report Abuse
Martin Luther King at 01:39 PM on 02/24/09
You are a puppet with a doctorate and sign as Martin Klicken of some university in Berlin. Curious and more curious. It is getting very curious indeed even for Alice in Wonderland. You are writing what appears to be German with an Austrian sound. At least old fashioned but without old fashioned good manners. Maybe you are Dutch. No offense for the Dutch people. But why should a German who is a puppet at a University in Berlin undertake so much work free of charge translating everything written in English about El Naschie into Arabic? Aha insight! You mean you want to blackmail Mohamed El Naschie. But again why should a puppet with a name Martin in Germany who studies Theater, be interested in Science at all and read Scientific American? Maybe it is like Pinocchio a little puppet which comes to life and wants to be useful so it starts to talk. Wow! It talks and then it wants to study science and what could be better than translating this garbage from English into Arabic. Very convincing indeed! Bye.
Reply | Report Abuse
Atef at 11:59 AM on 02/24/09
Said Elnashaie you could write in Dutch or even double Dutch we will still recognize you. Someone on this site suggested it is your odor. We beg to differ. It is your cowardice which is characteristic of everything you do and every thought which passes in your head. If you are a man, sign with your name and real address. But what am I saying here? We both know that not even in theory would you be able to stand up in the daylight and say the truth. You are worried it is getting serious and it is getting serious and you would like to confuse the situation but you are only confusing yourself.


Bridget Bardot at 02:37 PM on 03/04/09
Now now Mr. An, temper temper. Don t blow your top just because an honest Court in Germany ruled that the Die Zeit article is defamatory lies. Here are the sober facts, if you know what this means. Mr. Drosser claimed that he met Prof. Otto Peitgen. Fact is Prof. Otto Peitgen, the famous fractal scientist has never seen Mr.Drosser. It is a blatant lie. Mr. Drosser said Prof. El Naschie is not a professor. Proof was produced that Prof. El Naschie is a professor. Some certificates from nothing less than University of Stanford, USA signed by Prof. George Herman where produced and so on and so on. This is not the Middle East where you can buy a judge for a modest sum of money. This is Germany, a center of modern civilization where truthfulness prevails at the end. The same will happen in England Mr. An. Besides, when you remember your own real name and address, you may contact us again. Toodleloo.
Reply | Report Abuse
John the Baptist at 01:44 PM on 03/04/09
Mr. An s tragedy is almost a mirror image of a nearly 2000 year old tragedy. Remember Salome? She was the step daughter of the King of Palestine. The wife of the King wanted the head of a man who was announcing the coming of Savior of humanity who was later on crucified, like so many innocent people even today in the Middle East. The King was unwilling, afraid from the wrath of the Gods if he beheaded a Holy man. At the same time the King lusted after his step daughter. At the end he succumbed to temptation for the price of a very short lived joyful sin and he beheaded the Messenger of a better life. How true for Mr. An whose real name we all know. How true for his step daughter the actress whose name is just as well known, if not more. The natural decency of any human being is what prevents me from citing the names publicly but Mr. An of course does not suffer from such an affliction as natural decency. He is happy to hide behind a pseudo name and throw his dirt in the faces of innocent people. The only consolation for people like myself is that a man like An is punished by the very nature of his character far more than any external agent or person could punish him. He can spend the rest of his life posting comments that help him to live in the fantasy land where thieves and perverted maniacs are portrayed as crusaders for the integrity of science, while the truth is that they are neither scientists nor possess a trace of integrityReply | Report Abuse
M Hartley at 11:37 AM on 03/04/09
What would broken self employed journalists, failed scientists and those who flatter themselves to be either do if they did not have the internet to libel innocent people? It is interesting to observe the truthfulness of many theories of psychology about projection. Those who are unequivocal crackpots would call some outstanding scientists crackpots. Those are definite frauds would attempt to smear everyone they hate as being a fraud. What is the end of all that? Well one of Mohamed El Naschie s heroes is von Neuman. John Nash s work on zero sum game goes back to von Neuman. Now as an exercise please add Schiemeier of Nature, Christoph Drosser of Die Zeit and Said Elnashaie of no particular known address and you will have a perfect zero sum.


Reply | Report Abuse
An at 03:54 AM on 03/04/09
According to
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=1109#comments
Prego Senor says:
February 27, 2009 at 3:48 am
The ZEIT article was removed, most probably due to pressure from El-Naschie. This is another scandal, since the article contained nothing but facts and opinions of other scientists bold enough to speak out. Many people underestimated Mohamed S. El-Naschie and hoped this would silently solve itself out somehow. They could not know that El-Naschie is a genius. Not by any means in the field of science, but the field of propaganda, defamation and filing law-suits.

According to the frist issue of CSF in 2009

Publisher s note

The Founding Editor for Chaos,Solitons and Fractals Dr El Naschie has retired as Editor-in-Chief.The publisher will work
with the editorial board and other advisors to identify a new editor.This is likely to also lead to revision of the aims and
scope of the journal,as well as the editorial policies and submission arrangements.Prospective authors can keep informed
of the progress on this through the journal s homepage.
Reply | Report Abuse
Silver Lining at 06:08 PM on 03/01/09
There is a silver lining to the vicious campaign against Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. We were referred to this site by our colleagues in China who hold the utmost respect for this man. They were dismayed that some people out there have made it their life long mission to attack and character assassinate him. We decided to check this man out and we started by reading and researching his scientific work. We have news for you out there! What we found is amazing. His E-Infinity theory deserves our utmost admiration. For you to understand it, you need to be well versed in mathematics. We scrutinized his mathematics and equations, and the results were amazing. Those who claim it is numerology have no clue about what this man has succeeded in doing. We agree with his advocates that this is a paradigm shift and sooner than later this man will get the recognition he deserves. We will continue to follow his work closely and we know that his work has stirred a lot of interest and we all know that no important work such as his can be acknowledged without first raising a lot of controversy.
Reply | Report Abuse
Atef at 05:16 PM on 03/01/09
It is quite clear that Said Elnashaie is behind this vicious campaign against Prof. El Naschie. He is hiding behind Mr. An and lashing out a lot of hatred. Really Mr. An all what you are writing is not serving your case. On the contrary, it is quite clear to all the readers of this site and others that your argument is baseless and vindictive. You don t have a case whatsoever against Prof. El Naschie. Your problem is personal jealousy and hatred. Do I need to remind you Mr. Said Elnashaie that your personal profile is despicable? In case you forgot, here is your personal profile or better still your certificate of conviction: http:/thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.comReply | Report Abuse
elokaby at 03:34 PM on 03/01/09
I am puzzled by those who are puzzled by E-Infinity theory. Possibly familiarity breeds contempt. But I fail to find out where the difficulty with E-Infinity lies. Reversing the proverb it maybe that unfamiliarity of the typical physicist with E-Infinity methodology is at the root of the puzzle. How could we change this regrettable situation? Maybe the following tour de simplicite is a partial remedy. To understand E-Infinity we start by the master plan which Mohamed El Naschie attributes correctly to Prof. John Archibald Wheeler namely a Borel set. Now we move to the geometric measure theory. Suddenly you are amidst of it all. There you find the whole shebang of el Naschie s mathematics at reduced retail prices. The liet motif is non-Wagernian simple. Geometric Measure Theory generalizes differential geometry to deal with the functions, maps and general geometric surfaces that are not necessarily smooth. From there to E-Infinity it is a
relatively short road. I showed my comments to the master of the trade before posting it here and he agreed with minor reservations.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria UniversityReply
| Report Abuse
Advocates at 01:09 PM on 03/01/09
This is a direct response to An and his obnoxious comment posted on Feb. 28 and all of his false allegations. We think it is time you call it quits. We all respect and admire Prof. El Naschie for his integrity and adroitness. His scientific feat is indisputable and there is no way on earth you are going to sway our minds. You have been trying so hard and so vehemently to smear him by your false allegations. You are the fraud. He never plagiarized nor cheated. His scientific contribution is a paradigm shift and people with little minds and sick souls like you and your puppets will never come to grips with it. Besides you and those in cahoots with you are not in a position to judge Prof. El Naschie. Eat your heart out and no matter how hard you persist and try, we will not be swayed.
Reply | Report Abuse
Suleiman A at 12:10 PM on 03/01/09
The coward calling himself An has surpassed himself once more. What a twisted soul. Do you really think that anyone could mistake you for anybody but Said Salah El Din Hamad Elnashaie, the mad man, an amateur film producer of Jihan Fadel of the 6th October, Cairo, Egypt? Said, you can try as much as you like but you were, you are and will always remain the epitomy of cowardness. It is you who should reward his family, his country and last but not least himself by drowning himself in the sewer.Reply | Report Abuse
Atef J at 08:10 AM on 03/01/09
Mr. An wrote on 28th Feb: but already the damage was done. This is his English for but the damage has already been done. This sentence alone shows what kind of creepy crawlies are surfing in this site. All that this creature has in mind is causing permanent damage. The fact that this defamatory article against Prof. El Naschie could have been removed by a Court order because it contravenes the law in Germany by being nothing but blatant lies is something which would not cross the mind of someone like Mr. An. I have no respect what so ever for those who plagiarize other peoples work nor for those who defame others on request and after receiving payment. Never the less, I cannot see that either Dr. Renate Loll or Dr. John Baez could be Mr. An. There is only one person who is low enough and coward enough to cause so much damage using lies while hiding like a sewer rat behind a computer screen. I am sure this rat knows his own name so there is no need to contaminate this site by mentioning his name again.

Klaus-Peter Haase at 06:35 AM on 03/07/09
Mr. An take care of your own criminal record first. Here it is for all to read:
http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/2009/01/case-of-said-elnashaie.html
Second, a coward can say whatever he likes because he is coward hiding behind a false name.
Third, take care of your step daughter first before someone makes an extra webblog for both of you.
Finally everyone knows about your connection with Christopher Droesser. Mr. Droesser`s new defamatory article is considerably different form the first. It shows clearly what a liar he is. In addition he is defying a Court order and he will be made responsible for that again. Indeed Germany is a democratic country and even people like Christopher Droesser can misuse this democracy to his less than noble ends. A creature like you will not understand that: However this is the price we have to pay in order not to decline to the standard of Saudi Arabia, Egypt or Iran.

Klaus-Peter HaaseReply | Report Abuse

An at 05:14 AM on 03/07/09
Droesser's article is back with only minor changes . One can check the two
following sites:
http://www.scienceblogs.de/mathlog/2009/03/wissenschaftsjournalismus-und-pressefreiheit-update.php (checking changes).
http://www.zeit.de/2009/03/N-El-Naschie (new versions with minor changes)

As the great man El nashice said "This is Germany, a center of modern civilization where truthfulness prevails at the end. "

Soon, the same will happen in nature's article. When the nature article
is back we may tell you. In any case the cat is out of the bag. I don't see that El Naschie has much to gain by spending money on lawyers to take down the Nature article. Furthermore, his reactions confirm that he is
a fraud which is selfevident even for a blind.Reply | Report Abuse
sven hanson at 05:29 PM on 03/06/09
To the Candy colored Clown calling himself Jason of El Naschie watch and who is sleepless in Seattle. Here is a song from the sandman to you:
You are doing a very good job for Mohamed El Naschie. You can be sure he will never take a solicitor to shut you up. Why should he? You are obviously an idiot and pose no danger. You have now credibility what so ever. You are absolutely nobody! Even Christoph Droesser is more of a somebody than you are. However you have a modest function. Every morning you are issuing a health certificate for the claim that it is a coordinated mafia-like campaign against Mohamed El Naschie . At the same time you are delivering the proof that you and who ever cares to read and believe your site must be brainless clowns. You are more of a Jimmy Bond than a James and on the top of that confined to the Internet prison. Truly pathetic!
Sven Hanson

Reply | Report Abuse
elokaby at 07:51 AM on 03/06/09
I am still keenly interested in a satisfactory resolution of the correct inverse coupling constant of unification of all fundamental forces. The value found by Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg is 17.5 as given on page 192 of volume III of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields Cambridge (2000). This 17.5 is for super symmetric grand unification. On the other hand, the leading German Theoretical Physicist W. Greiner gives the value 26 as easily estimated from figure 9.11 page 377 of his famous textbook Gauge Theory of Weak Interaction published by Springer Berlin 1994. My own calculation based on Mohamed Elnaschie exact E-Infinity theory gives 26.18033989 which is very close to the value given by Greiner in his book. It seems that 17.5 must be excluded unless we are overlooking something. To go to the bottom of the discrepancy, I should refer to a remarkable paper by Mohamed Elnaschie titled Quantum gravity unification via transfinite
arithmetic and geometrical averaging published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, volume 35(2008) pp 252 256. In this paper Elnaschie uses the exact three inverse couplings of electromagnetism 60, weak force 30 and strong force 10 as idealized for the electroweak energy scale. These values lead to the inverse Summerfield constant 137 as well as three inverse couplings for pair wise unification, namely the electromagnetic and weak force 42.4, the weak force and strong force 17.3 and the electromagnetic and strong force 24.49. Subsequently, Elnaschie shows that the three inverse couplings lead to 26.18 almost exactly as the E-Infinity exact solution. The new insight is however the value of the electromagnetic and weak force namely 17.3 which is very close to that found by Weinberg. The question is therefore the following: Could Weinberg result of 17.5 be interpreted as a partial unification coupling? I would be grateful to any helpful comment.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria -Egypt
Reply | Report Abuse
Dr. Ulrich Graf at 07:30 AM on 03/06/09
Also der Artikel von Nature über El Naschie ist auch verschwunden. Das heißt, alles was darin über El Naschie geschrieben wurde war Betrug am Leser. Ziemlich peinlich für DIE ZEIT. Jetzt gibt es für Sie Herr Drösser nur eine einzige Sache und zwar, Herrn El Naschie um Entschuldigung zu bitten. Er war ein Gast in unserem Land und ich bitte um Entschuldigung bei ihm. Herr Drösser wenn Sie ein Ehrenmann sind, dann sollten Sie das Gleiche tun. Vergessen Sie nicht, Ihr Artikel basierte auf den Verleumdungen von John Baez und den falschen Fakten des Natureartikels. Ferner hat Herr Professor Dr. Heinz Otto Peitgen, der mir sehr gut bekannt ist, allen seinen Freunden versichert, dass er Sie nicht kennt und auch nie mit Ihnen gesprochen hat.
Dr. Ulrich Graf
Reply | Report Abuse
Trevor at 06:32 AM on 03/06/09
This is to let you all know that the article in Nature about Mohamed El Naschie has been removed and is no longer accessible. In short it disappeared.





Reply | Report Abuse
Siegfried Lenz at 06:13 AM on 03/06/09
If you look for the Nature article about El Naschie you will not find it. Nature has taken the article out of its online version. This speaks for the high standard of Nature. Those who like and live from defamation will not be impressed. John Baez disappeared first. The defamatory article of Christoph Droesser disappeared second. Now Nature article disappeared. The only conclusion is the logical conclusion. It was all a defamation campaign nothing more or less. Unfortunately and given the low standard of the so called scientific blogs it will be business like usual i.e. defamation will go on. That is the stuff from which these blogs are made.
Siegfried Lenz, Hamburg





Reply | Report Abuse


puppetphd at 08:29 AM on 03/08/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

Ach, Herr Achim Westendorf, Sie haben vergessen Ihrem Beitrag eine ladungsfaehige Anschrift beizufuegen. Sehen Sie, auf der einen Seite unterstellen Sie hier den anderen Schreibern sich zu verstecken, aber ueber Ihre wahre Identitaet muessen wir hier wohl auch raetseln. Ich tippe mal anhand des Schreibstils und des etwas eingerosteten Deutschs, dass Sie in Wirklichkeit Herr Mohamed S. El Naschie sind. Aber das kann ich nicht beweisen. Fuer viele andere Dinge, die hier zu Ihren Ungunsten behauptet werden existieren allerdings Beweise.
Nunja Herr Westendorf, wie gesagt. Um Ihren extra auf Deutsch formulierten Anschuldigungen den rechten Nachdruck zu verleihen waere es wohl das beste, auch Sie wuerden hier Ihre Adresse aufschreiben. Zumindest aber erstmal eine email-Adresse. Aber das werden Sie sicher nicht machen, oder? So himmelschreiend daemlich sind Sie ja dann auch wieder nicht *zwinker* sich fuer diese Luegen zu Gunsten von Hr. El Naschie verklagen zu lassen.
Ihr
Martin KlickenReply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 08:08 AM on 03/08/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

If I may interrupt here again. I do not agree with everything D. Baron said, but I think he has an important point in asking the questions he asked.
Just answer the questions:
- when and where did you give your first lecture?
- were you a professor at cambridge for eleven years or not?
- if not, why are you lying about your affilitations or keep people spread wrong facts in the arabic media?

By answering these, you can cut this short. And you can spare us the "no-one in his right mind would buy blablablablah". Make your point.
You know the questions. Help answering them. End of story.

Martin Klicken
FU Berlin
klickensiehier@yahoo.deReply | Report Abuse
Amazed at 07:20 AM on 03/08/09
I am truly amazed at the false assumption the fake D. Baron is making about my affiliation. Are you omniscient? How can you be so sure? Here you go again dishing out lies, metaphors, innuendos and threats. What a sick soul! You never give up despite repeated claims that you will post your final comment and quit. But you simply are imprisoned in this vicious cycle of hatred and lies. I am sure SciAm will no longer tolerate all this trash. Is this the proper arena to settle personal vendettas? You have no credibility and whatever credibility you may have had, you lost it because you kept insisting that you are right. When people try hard to drill an argument repeatedly, they lose their credibility. Do you think a scientific blog is an appropriate place to vent your hate and anger? I dont think so. I am still amazed at your tenacity in distorting facts and insisting on false allegations and fabricating false stories and events. My advice to you is to find something more productive to do. Perhaps work on furthering your scientific career. One more time, I am a keen admirer and supporter of Prof. El Naschie. We cannot be swayed and no one in his right state of mind will buy your argument about him being a fraud. So cut it out. Reply | Report Abuse
The Real D. Baron at 06:52 AM on 03/08/09
I am the real D. Baron. I have never written anything of the disgusting comments filed falsely under my name. When the coward who is writing these comments and signing my name gives us his real name and address then we will take if from there. In my entire life, I have never witnessed a more bizarre or a more disgusting story like this story. It is preposterous that such a story should be published as a scientific discussion in Scientific America and be connected to names of respectable people like R. Loll, M. El Naschie and G. tHooft.
D. Baron

Reply | Report Abuse
Achim Westendorf at 06:14 AM on 03/08/09
Herr Christopher Drösser, das ist kein Journalismus mehr. Das ist eine persönliche Schlammschlacht auf niederträchtigste Art. Da die Lügen in Ihrem Artikel aufgedeckt wurden gehen Sie vor Wut auf die Barrikaden. Jetzt haben Sie aufs Neue getrickst. Ihr Artikel ist eine Reflektion Ihrer Gesinnung. Leute wie Sie haben Deutschland zwei Mal viel größeren Schaden zugefügt weil sie nie fähig waren, Fehler einzugestehen, bevor alles in Schutt und Asche liegt. Sie werden schon sehen was Sie davon haben. Ob Sie im Namen von D. Baron schreiben oder dem Weihnachtsmann die Leser wissen genau um was es geht. Es ist eine bezahlte Hetzkampagne und Sie wissen wo die Zahlmeister sitzen. Sie haben den Ruf der DIE ZEIT großen Schaden zugefügt. Hoffentlich wachen Ihre Vorgesetzen auf!
Achim Westendorf
Reply | Report Abuse
D. Baron at 04:56 AM on 03/08/09
There the monkey throws with his own excrement again. You are a coward Mohamed S. El Naschie, hiding behind the names Klaus-Peter Haase, Daniel Grossmann, Reg and Amazed and you have no right to accuse other people of hiding. Of course some people hide. If you go to the zoo and there is a monkey cage. And inside the cage are monkeys. And outside is a sign: "Be careful, the monkey throws with excrements." And the monkey inside the cage is very upset and you can't see one of his hands. Would you not protect yourself? You are a lying coward, throwing with excrement at everything that moves here. And you are a criminal Mohamed S. El Naschie, and the only reason why you can't shut your defamatory mouth is because you feel safe in this place because it has not been translated to Arabic now. But it will be translated. That was new for you, wasn't it? The watch blog suddenly started with some Arabic words. Here at SciAm you can feel safe. Arabic comments are not possible here. You don't even try to sound different with all the dozens of fake names you use to throw lies and accusations at other people.
And you are a criminal, Mohamed S. El Naschie and a traitor and a man without honour and without any respect or sense of decency, because you supposedly must be the one who set up that blog about a man who might have done mistakes and has difficulties as every person on earth makes mistakes and has difficulties. Maybe Said El-Nashaie did unlawful things. There is only one problem here: This has nothing at all to do with you. You fear the truth so much that you don't hesitate to do such things as telling about the mistakes of Said El-Nashaie. I don't know him. I don't know if he stole from his mother.
I know one thing, Mohamed S. El Naschie: You stole from the people who raised you, where you received your education by acting as a con man in science. You betrayed the Arabic world. You cheated on the Arabic people. You are a stain on the cloth of science. You are a con man and a criminal, lying about his affiliations. You stained many universities reputations and they expelled you. You betrayed on the people of Egypt and the Arabic world who put so much hope in you. You use their hope, you abused many people and the country where you received your education and you explain the holes in your web of lies about the Nobel prize by telling evil stories about racism and prejudice. You betrayed Ayman El-Okaby at University of Alexandria, destroying his scientific career before it started. You cheated on thousands of people. That is who you are. Every comment here will finally be translated to Arabic. We will see then if you dare to continue your productive work here in the SciAm comments in that way when that day comes.
Answer these questions: When and where did you ever had a lecture as a professor? What do you say to your defense to the fact that you copied your papers and plagiarized yourself? What do you say about the fact that you state in hundreds of Arabic webpages and interviews that you were a professor for eleven years at Cambridge? How much did you pay for the pathetic lawsuit against Die ZEIT that had a clear result: you finally got your mechanical doctorate now. And Robert Maxwell didn't need your financial help when he was in a tight spot, he just gave you Chaos, Solitions and Fractals because you are such a charming and handsome guy. All the rest stays as it was and your lawyers Howrey LLP couldn't achieve anymore with the money you gave them. The money you stole from science as a pseudo-science con artist and by that you stole from all the people paying taxes, from the cancer children waiting for a cure but don't get, because all around the world people, scientists, universities, libraries had to pay your egregious journal bundled by Elsevier. This money could have been put to better use. Think about that. Now continue throwing excrement and fly off on a tangent.Reply | Report Abuse
Amazed at 04:34 AM on 03/08/09
This is a direct response to comment by An. You have inundated us with the same false allegations over and over and readers of this site and others polluted by your incessant fallacious arguments have had enough. You must know when to stop and when to retract and when to present a solid and viable argument. You have repeated the same unfounded allegations and it seems you never tire. The motives behind your stance are clear to all readers. Your obsession with labeling El Naschie as a fraud is indicative of a major ailment involving your own fraudulent behavior which you are unconsciously projecting. You are the fraud and your stance is confirming it day in and day out. We reiterate here that El Naschie is not a fraud and has never been one. Sorry to inform you that your arguments hold no water whatsoever. Only morons can buy your deceptive allegations. Reply | Report Abuse
Reg at 05:08 PM on 03/07/09
This is a response to Baron/An/Said Elnashaie and all this other psuedonyms. I have had the misfortune to know Said in many ways over the last 50 years or so and never have I met such a tortured soul. He is a man - and I use that word very loosely - who is full of inferiority complexes about everyone around him. Colleagues who are more successful are always cheating, men who have fathered children are bastards and do not deserve families, people who are rich are crooks, anyone better looking and that is pretty easy are shallow, anyone who gets to the top has bribed their way there: the list is endless. He sees only that he has failed in every respect of his life, at work, socially and family. All has been a failure for him and he cannot and will not forgive the world and most definitely those closest to him, especially the man without who he would not be alive today. The man who picked him up countless times, the man who built bridges between the family after Said had disgraced them yet again, the man who got him jobs, the man who gave him a car etc, etc. That man will never be forgiven and why? Because he has more integrity, humanity, intelligence, good looks and decency in his little finger than Said could ever hope of having. You can rail against the Gods all you like Said, but destiny has sealed your fate. Allah knows, your parents know and everyone who knows you knows what you have done. You will rot in eternity and it cannot come soon enough. You are the most pathetic excuse for man I have ever had the misfortune to come across. God help you! But even that will not happen. You have called upon the Devil and he will be waiting for payment. Reply | Report Abuse
Daniel Grossmann at 04:33 PM on 03/07/09
This is a direct answer to D. Baron`s last comment while knowing that his name is not D. Baron:
The obvious difference is that Prof. El Naschie does not want to talk to you nor care to talk to you. He did not attack you nor anybody else. He is a real person with an address and you are a fake without address. Mohamed El Naschie did not create a blog to watch you or anybody else day and night. So if you are not a coward give your name and address or shut up. It seems you and your colleagues are furious and mad of jealousy from Mohamed El Naschie. You do nothing since month but writing defamatory and obscene comments. If you want to translate anything in Arabic why don`t you do so? All this noise shows clearly you have no case. I guess when your Arabic translation is finished people will laugh about you in Arabia as they are laughing about you in the West. Furthermore your colleague is translating all the time from Arabic into English on the El Naschie watch dog blog. You in the Middle East are very strange people. No wonder most Western dislike Arabs. I did read the blog called “the case of Said Elnashaie”
http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/2009/01/case-of-said-elnashaie.html
It makes a nauseating reading. I hope Obama and Netanjahu can straighten all of you up.
Daniel Grossmann



Reply | Report Abuse
D. Baron at 03:11 PM on 03/07/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

You are a coward Mohamed Saladin El Naschie, hiding behind the name Klaus-Peter Haase and you have no right to accuse other people of hiding. Of course some people hide. If you go to the zoo and there is a monkey cage. And inside the cage are monkeys. And outside is a sign: "Be careful, the monkey throws with excrements." And the monkey inside the cage is very upset and you can't see one of his hands. Would you not protect yourself? You are a lying coward, throwing with excrement at everything that moves here. And you are a criminal Mohamed Saladin El Naschie, and the only reason why you can't shut your defamatory mouth is because you feel safe in this place because it has not been translated to Arabic now. But it will be translated. That was new for you, wasn't it? The watch blog suddenly started with some Arabic words. Here at SciAm you can feel safe. Arabic comments are not possible here. You don't even try to sound different with all the dozens of fake names you use to throw lies and accusations at other people.
And you are a criminal, Mohamed Saladin El Naschie and a traitor and a man without honour and without any respect or sense of decency, because you supposedly must be the one who set up that blog about a man who might have done mistakes and has difficulties as every person on earth makes mistakes and has difficulties. Maybe Said El-Nashaie did unlawful things. There is only one problem here: This has nothing at all to do with you. You fear the truth so much that you don't hesitate to do such things as telling about the mistakes of Said El-Nashaie. I don't know him. I don't know if he stole from his mother.
I know one thing, Mohamed Saladin El Nashie: You stole from the people who raised you, where you received your education by acting as a con man in science. You betrayed the Arabic world. You cheated on the Arabic people. You are a stain on the cloth of science. You are a con man and a criminal, lying about his affiliations. You stained many universities reputations and they expelled you. You betrayed on the people of Egypt and the Arabic world who put so much hope in you. You use their hope, you abused many people and the country where you received your education and you explain the holes in your web of lies about the Nobel prize by telling evil stories about racism and prejudice. You betrayed Ayman El-Okaby at University of Alexandria, destroying his scientific career before it started. You cheated on thousands of people. That is who you are. Every comment here will finally be translated to Arabic. We will see then if you dare to continue your productive work here in the SciAm comments in that way when that day comes.


Mohamed S. El Naschie at 10:18 AM on 03/08/09
As a child I was petrified by the future of humanity as envisaged in D.H. Wells novel - The Time Machine. Of course I was thrilled by the possibility of traveling backward and forward in time. The frightening bit was however the division of humanity into two species which await us in the future according to the novel. The first part of humanity is supposed to be a kind of back to nature gentle, beautiful and soft yet powerless humans eating fruits and spending their lives in innocent love and laughter. Under the earth however, there lived another species of non-humans who have descended in the words of Wells to the lowest standard of evolution and became cannibals who mastered primitive industries and some kind of science and were feeding on the gentle human beings living in the light as in the Lost Paradise. Somewhere I have read the phrase - The fraternity of the blogsphere. The phrase was made by John Baez or some of his associates. I am now a grown up person but I am just as horrified by the vision of computer cannibals sitting in the dark behind their computer screens similar to the cannibals of D. H. Wells and feeding on the reputation of innocent people living in the daylight. Fraternity of Internet cannibals indeed. If you are in any doubt, please log into the same site which has been mentioned here so many times by so many different people. The internet has brought a great advantage to humanity but there is a world of difference between the internet and this subculture of internet cannibalism which we have witnessed in the n-Category caf?, Backreaction and last but not least the aforementioned site.
Reply | Report Abuse

D. Baron at 10:00 AM on 03/08/09
What???? No! I am Mohamed El Naschie. How dare you you you mafia subject without any decency you boot licking tortured man from the Sinai! You middle east rat.
I hope Obama calls in the airstrikes soon.Reply | Report Abuse
Ayman El Okaby at 09:57 AM on 03/08/09
I am the real D. Baron. Don't you believe the blatant lies of all the others.
I'm the only Baron. Trust me.

Mohamed S. El Naschie
Full Professor
University of CambridgeReply | Report Abuse
Mohamed S. El Naschie at 09:50 AM on 03/08/09
To the Real D. Baron and the fake Baron and the commenter using my name Mohamed S. El-Naschie with a wrong spelling. I am the real Ayman El Okaby and I am puzzled by those who are puzzle with sockpuppet theory.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria
EgyptReply | Report Abuse
Mohamed S. El-Naschie at 09:46 AM on 03/08/09
I am the real D. Baron!Reply | Report Abuse
D. Baron at 08:57 AM on 03/08/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

To the "real" Baron. Would you please be so friendly and state your identity? I am sure that I am the real D. Baron - it feels very real to me. Maybe your name is D. Baron, too. What is your name and address?
D. BaronReply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 08:54 AM on 03/08/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

Mr. Atef, as long as you don't give your real name and identity, you remain a state member of the mafia paid to support Mr. El Naschie so that he can continue his fraud work. The members of this mafia are well known to you.Reply | Report Abuse
Atef at 08:45 AM on 03/08/09
Mr. Baron as long as you don t give your real name and identity, you remain a state member of the mafia paid to defame Prof. El Naschie so that they can steal his work. The members of this mafia are well known to you.



Reply | Report Abuse
Mohamed S. El Naschie at 02:30 PM on 03/10/09
Of`course I use the internet! My IP`address is: 62.135.88.111
Who is the so called Klein here speaking on my behal`f?
You are not giving an e`mail address or a real name. This is a blatant forgery and you will be liable to legal prosecution. You are just another internet terrorist paid by these people that don`t like my success.
D`Baron
Reply | Report Abuse
Klein at 10:58 AM on 03/10/09
For the record and as a reference to Court Discovery procedures, we draw the attention of Scientific American and particularly those responsible for this blog to the following:
1. Professor Mohamed El Naschie does not use the Internet. He has never commented and will never comment on this blog nor any other blog.
2. In particular the comment carrying his name and dated 03/08/09 is a forgery.
3. All comments purporting to be from Professor Mohamed El Naschie are forgeries. The imposters are liable to legal prosecution. The ultimate responsibility for these illegal actions however lies with Scientific American as masters of this site.
4. The comment purported to be by Dr. Aymann El Okaby 03/08/09 from the Department of Physics, Alexandria, Egypt is not from Aymann El Okaby.
5. The most likely people responsible for committing these forgeries are:
Said Elnashaie, Christopher Droesser, Renate Loll, Quirin Schiermeier and their associates.
6. The readers of this and others sites and blogs should be assured that neither Professor El Naschie nor anyone acting on behalf of Professor El Naschie, with the consent of Professor El Naschie would ever comment without giving real e-mail addresses and real names. Professor EL Naschie does not answer to allegations on the Internet. He also does not answer e-mails from unknown sources. He does not participate in discussions which are outside the norm and the written and unwritten laws of civilized behavior.
7. It is our considered opinion that the blog masters of this site should take this good advice and delete the forged comments and stop further abuse. This is supposed to be a scientific discussion. The comments now posted serve no scientific purpose what so ever.

Free Legal Advice
Reply | Report Abuse
Marion Schmieder at 07:18 AM on 03/10/09
Sie kennen sicherlich Stephen Spielberg`s Film „Die Gremlins“. Das sind die kleinen außerirdischen teuflischen Scheusale die wie Spielzeuge aussehen und die Menschheit tyrannisieren. Schauen Sie sich diese Site an Herr Christoph Drösser, die Sie mit Ihren Gremlins von Wissenschaft zur schwarzen Komödie umfunktioniert haben. Pfui Teufel und so etwas nennt sich Journalist. Nicht nur Journalist, sondern auch noch Diplom-Mathematiker. Sie sind weder noch Herr Drösser, Sie sind nichts anderes als ein kleinkarierter Angeber voller Hass und Neid auf jeden der Erfolg hat. Durch Sie hat der Wissenschaftsjournalismus in Deutschland einen schlechten und unseriösen Ruf bekommen.
Ein dubioser Journalist in der Tat, aber ein Felix Krull des Journalismus sind Sie noch lange nicht, dazu fehlt Ihnen Eleganz, Grazie und Herz.
Marion Schmieder
Reply | Report Abuse
Elisabeth at 06:49 AM on 03/10/09
Jason is free to write whatever he likes. He needs not be worried about shutting him up. He enjoys what the Germans call “Narrenfreiheit”. In my rudimentary English this is something like the freedom of the fools. Nevertheless there are even more stupid people than Jason i.e. those who give him money to write this trash and those you spend time reading it, my goodself not within standing.
Elisabeth Steinbach

Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 02:46 PM on 03/09/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

So, by your own logic (item 6) , you are obviously acting without consent of Prof. Mohamed El-Naschie. You don't give an email address, you just use a constructed name like all the other sockpuppets here.
Thanks, genius.Reply | Report Abuse
Free Legaladvice at 06:53 AM on 03/09/09
For the records and as a reference to Court Discovery procedure, we draw the attention of Scientific American and particularly those responsible for this blog to the following:
1. Professor Mohamed El Naschie does not use the Internet. He has never commented and will never comment on this blog nor any other blog.
2. In particular the comment carrying his name and dated 03/08/09 is a forgery
3. All comments purporting to be from Professor Mohamed El Naschie are forgery. Those imposters are liable to legal prosecution. The ultimate responsibility for these illegal actions lays with Scientific American.
4. The comment purported by Dr. Aymann El Okaby 03/08/09 from the Department of Physics, Alexandria, Egypt is not from Aymann El Okaby.
5. The most likely persons who committed these forgeries are:
Said Elnashaie, Christopher Droesser, Renate Loll, Quirin Schiermeier and their associates.

6. The readers of this and others sites and blogs should be assured that neither Professor El Naschie nor anyone acting on behalf of Professor El Naschie with the consent of Professor El Naschie would ever comment without giving real e-mail addresses and real names. Professor EL Naschie does not answer do allegations in the Internet. He also does not answer e-mails from unknown sources. He does not participate in discussions which are outside the norms and the written and unwritten laws of civilized behavior.
7. It is our considered opinion and good advice to the blogmasters of this site to delete it and stop further abuse.

Free Legaladvice



Reply | Report Abuse
An at 04:58 AM on 03/09/09
To follow the highy quality comdey trend

To be El naschie or not to be that is the SCIAM question

My kingdom for a SCIAM

Even you D. Baron ( The fake and the real ones)Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 03:59 PM on 03/08/09
Wow! If I wouldn't know better, I'd call that a party here! And who are you, reg? The one who broke his arm? How come you know so many interesting stories? Where do you hear them? Have you been very close to Said once? Did you arrange for a car for him? Help him often? Arranged jobs for him?
Have fun here,
Martin KlickenReply | Report Abuse
Reg at 02:54 PM on 03/08/09
Thank you to An/Said etc. for confirming my diagnosis. You know Said, your history of mental instability is far too old for anyone not to take it seriously. You should think long and hard about your life and what you have done and I am not only talking about this feud against your brothers. You life is littered with feuds against innocent people. Remember the boy with the broken arm Said? How long ago was that? If I recall the story correctly you were about 6 years old and already your diseased character was set and obvious. It is a shame your parents did not take it seriously and get you the help you so obviously required and your life has continued in the same vain just as I described in my earlier email. All this ranting and nonsensical raving only goes to prove my point. I feel truly sorry for you. Look closely in the mirror every night before you go to sleep. Look deeply into your eyes. Do you see the devil looking back? If not, perhaps he is in the eyes of those around you, looking out at you. Believe me, he is there and he is closing in. You do not get to spend your life the way you have without having to pay the price. Be wary. Maybe those who seem to be most on your side are actually his tools for your destruction. It will come. You get back ten times over what you have sown in your life and you know what that is more than anyone, at least if you were able to be honest with yourself. But maybe you are not yet that courageous.

Klein at 10:58 AM on 03/10/09
For the record and as a reference to Court Discovery procedures, we draw the attention of Scientific American and particularly those responsible for this blog to the following:
1. Professor Mohamed El Naschie does not use the Internet. He has never commented and will never comment on this blog nor any other blog.
2. In particular the comment carrying his name and dated 03/08/09 is a forgery.
3. All comments purporting to be from Professor Mohamed El Naschie are forgeries. The imposters are liable to legal prosecution. The ultimate responsibility for these illegal actions however lies with Scientific American as masters of this site.
4. The comment purported to be by Dr. Aymann El Okaby 03/08/09 from the Department of Physics, Alexandria, Egypt is not from Aymann El Okaby.
5. The most likely people responsible for committing these forgeries are:
Said Elnashaie, Christopher Droesser, Renate Loll, Quirin Schiermeier and their associates.
6. The readers of this and others sites and blogs should be assured that neither Professor El Naschie nor anyone acting on behalf of Professor El Naschie, with the consent of Professor El Naschie would ever comment without giving real e-mail addresses and real names. Professor EL Naschie does not answer to allegations on the Internet. He also does not answer e-mails from unknown sources. He does not participate in discussions which are outside the norm and the written and unwritten laws of civilized behavior.
7. It is our considered opinion that the blog masters of this site should take this good advice and delete the forged comments and stop further abuse. This is supposed to be a scientific discussion. The comments now posted serve no scientific purpose what so ever.

Free Legal Advice

Reply | Report Abuse
Marion Schmieder at 07:18 AM on 03/10/09
Sie kennen sicherlich Stephen Spielberg`s Film „Die Gremlins“. Das sind die kleinen außerirdischen teuflischen Scheusale die wie Spielzeuge aussehen und die Menschheit tyrannisieren. Schauen Sie sich diese Site an Herr Christoph Drösser, die Sie mit Ihren Gremlins von Wissenschaft zur schwarzen Komödie umfunktioniert haben. Pfui Teufel und so etwas nennt sich Journalist. Nicht nur Journalist, sondern auch noch Diplom-Mathematiker. Sie sind weder noch Herr Drösser, Sie sind nichts anderes als ein kleinkarierter Angeber voller Hass und Neid auf jeden der Erfolg hat. Durch Sie hat der Wissenschaftsjournalismus in Deutschland einen schlechten und unseriösen Ruf bekommen.
Ein dubioser Journalist in der Tat, aber ein Felix Krull des Journalismus sind Sie noch lange nicht, dazu fehlt Ihnen Eleganz, Grazie und Herz.
Marion Schmieder
Reply | Report Abuse
Elisabeth at 06:49 AM on 03/10/09
Jason is free to write whatever he likes. He needs not be worried about shutting him up. He enjoys what the Germans call “Narrenfreiheit”. In my rudimentary English this is something like the freedom of the fools. Nevertheless there are even more stupid people than Jason i.e. those who give him money to write this trash and those you spend time reading it, my goodself not within standing.
Elisabeth Steinbach
Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 02:46 PM on 03/09/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

So, by your own logic (item 6) , you are obviously acting without consent of Prof. Mohamed El-Naschie. You don't give an email address, you just use a constructed name like all the other sockpuppets here.
Thanks, genius.Reply | Report Abuse
Free Legaladvice at 06:53 AM on 03/09/09
For the records and as a reference to Court Discovery procedure, we draw the attention of Scientific American and particularly those responsible for this blog to the following:
1. Professor Mohamed El Naschie does not use the Internet. He has never commented and will never comment on this blog nor any other blog.
2. In particular the comment carrying his name and dated 03/08/09 is a forgery
3. All comments purporting to be from Professor Mohamed El Naschie are forgery. Those imposters are liable to legal prosecution. The ultimate responsibility for these illegal actions lays with Scientific American.
4. The comment purported by Dr. Aymann El Okaby 03/08/09 from the Department of Physics, Alexandria, Egypt is not from Aymann El Okaby.
5. The most likely persons who committed these forgeries are:
Said Elnashaie, Christopher Droesser, Renate Loll, Quirin Schiermeier and their associates.

6. The readers of this and others sites and blogs should be assured that neither Professor El Naschie nor anyone acting on behalf of Professor El Naschie with the consent of Professor El Naschie would ever comment without giving real e-mail addresses and real names. Professor EL Naschie does not answer do allegations in the Internet. He also does not answer e-mails from unknown sources. He does not participate in discussions which are outside the norms and the written and unwritten laws of civilized behavior.
7. It is our considered opinion and good advice to the blogmasters of this site to delete it and stop further abuse.

Free Legaladvice


Reply | Report Abuse
An at 04:58 AM on 03/09/09
To follow the highy quality comdey trend

To be El naschie or not to be that is the SCIAM question

My kingdom for a SCIAM

Even you D. Baron ( The fake and the real ones)

1sogali1 at 10:53 PM on 03/15/09
Here is one thing. We have to think of General Relativity and Special Relativity as a reason that actually explains the whys of measurements. It does not explain the fact of the nature. For example when you feel the gravity force caused by the earth, you say to Einstein: -Hey man how on earth? Then Einstein graciously with his equivalence principle and say's -Yeah it’s because the contraction of space time, that you are victim of an acceleration-. Then you start to think of an actual tangible bended space and got very worried about that fact that you might be eaten by the bended space…Now comes Quantum Mechanics with Borh's-Born gang and say's I can't see how the actual mater is bended…Later the young guys of QFT comes and say well its true what you both said. --The fact is that there is some damn particle that its actually pushing you down wards, like the photons carry energy and make the electromagnetic field possible, but we don't know how to explain how comes this bloody particle-, from farther in the room one voice emerge and there is a bunch a guys saying, -Well, all is about resonant patterns-.Reply | Report Abuse
An at 09:23 AM on 03/14/09
The Great man (El naschie) is puplishing backward in time. The man was used to puplish forward in time, but here the instance for puplishing backward. The great man is not concerned with time arrow, for hime time can go forward and backward even vibrates. The ritle of this amazing paper is

On John Nash's crumpled surface

M. S. El Naschie

Department of Mathematics,The School of Electronics and Computer Science,University of Surrey,Guildford,UK

Solvay Institute of Physics and Chemistry,University of Brussels,Belgium

Faculty of Science,Department of Astrophysics,University of Cairo,Egypt

Chaos,Solitons and Fractals xxx (2003)xxx –xxx
www.elsevier.com/locate/chaos

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Since 2003 and it is still in press. The great man wrote many nonsense things about string theory, cosmology and particle physics.

I'm interested in the pargraph where the great man telling about him self that he became a professor in a civil engineering department.
"Few years later after becoming a professor in a civil engineering department,I again had a ?are up of my interest in
economics due to coming in touch with the person and work of John Kenneth Galbraith.I was taken,like everybody
else who read his books and knew the man by his wit,eloquence and humanity and I found his book the ‘‘Age of
Uncertainty ’’,thoroughly and wholly delightful [5 ].I did not know at this time that I will be working in the years to
come within the framework of the principle of uncertainty in the form enshrined in quantum physics by Heisenberg and
in classical mechanics by chaotic dynamic and fractal geometry."

Can the great man mention at which university he got the title Prof. Dr. and also explain why the article is still in press.

I'm afraid, that he might have aricles still in press from the ancient Greek time. Who knows.
Reply | Report Abuse
An at 08:27 AM on 03/14/09
For the genious free legaladvice (El naschie):
Here is one of the reference for the paper "The theory of Cantorian spacetime and high energy particle physics (an informal review)", Chaos,Solitons and Fractals xxx (2008)xxx xxx. The article still in press

51- Ambjorn J,Jurkiewicz J and Loll R.The Self-Organizing Quantum Universe.Scienti c American,July,pp.24-31 (2008).(http://www.sciam.com/
article.cfm?id=the-self-organizing-quantum-universe).

There are other three article which contain the same reference (Sciam)
1- On zero-dimensional points curvature in the dynamics of Cantorian-fractal spacetime setting and high energy particle physics
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 5 November 2008
M.S. El Naschie

2- An irreducibly simple derivation of the Hausdorff dimension of spacetime
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 17 September 2008
M.S. El Naschie

3- On the Witten Duff five Branes model together with knots theory and E8E8 super strings in a single fractal spacetime theory
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 23 August 2008
M.S. El Naschie

Can the genious explain for us, how it comes that El naschie is not using the internet.
Reply | Report Abuse
elokaby at 03:31 PM on 03/13/09
I am still keenly interested in a satisfactory resolution of the correct inverse coupling constant of unification of all fundamental forces. The value found by Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg is 17.5 as given on page 192 of volume III of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields Cambridge (2000). This 17.5 is for super symmetric grand unification. On the other hand, the leading German Theoretical Physicist W. Greiner gives the value 26 as easily estimated from figure 9.11 page 377 of his famous textbook Gauge Theory of Weak Interaction published by Springer Berlin 1994. My own calculation based on Mohamed Elnaschie exact E-Infinity theory gives 26.18033989 which is very close to the value given by Greiner in his book. It seems that 17.5 must be excluded unless we are overlooking something. To go to the bottom of the discrepancy, I should refer to a remarkable paper by Mohamed Elnaschie titled Quantum gravity unification via transfinite
arithmetic and geometrical averaging published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, volume 35(2008) pp 252 256. In this paper Elnaschie uses the exact three inverse couplings of electromagnetism 60, weak force 30 and strong force 10 as idealized for the electroweak energy scale. These values lead to the inverse Summerfield constant 137 as well as three inverse couplings for pair wise unification, namely the electromagnetic and weak force 42.4, the weak force and strong force 17.3 and the electromagnetic and strong force 24.49. Subsequently, Elnaschie shows that the three inverse couplings lead to 26.18 almost exactly as the E-Infinity exact solution. The new insight is however the value of the electromagnetic and weak force namely 17.3 which is very close to that found by Weinberg. The question is therefore the following: Could Weinberg result of 17.5 be interpreted as a partial unification coupling? I would be grateful to any helpful comment.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria -Egypt

Reply | Report Abuse
Arthur Wagener at 03:04 PM on 03/13/09
Und jetzt gehen sie los auf den armen Laurent Nottale. Ich kann es verstehen wenn sie beim Anblick von Mohamed El Naschie vor Neid erblassen. Er kann dies auch verkraften, aber warum um Gottes Willen Laurent Nottale ? Ich habe den Mann in Karlsruhe getroffen, er ist bestimmt der beste Physiker Frankreichs seit Poincaré. Er ist bescheiden und harmlos und Geld hat er auch nicht. Kennt ihr Hass und Intrigen keine Grenze? Wenn Ihre Kabalen und Hass erst einmal aufgedeckt werden, dann werden Sie Herr Quirin Schiermeier und Sie Herr Christoph Drösser nichts zu lachen haben. Scham kennen Sie beide nicht das ist wohl klar.
Arthur Wagener
Reply | Report Abuse
An at 10:34 AM on 03/11/09
This a direct response to Francoise

In fact there is a french article, dated back 2007, about Nottale who is one of the associate editor of CSF, and as a by product the article catched the case of El naschie.

www.archipel.uqam.ca/481/01/gingras_bontems_SSI.pdf
and
cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=20046891

The article is a biblometeric study, and you can see how the scintific corruption can take place. There many people involved in that matter, the study mentioned El naschie, sidharth, Agop, Castro and Ord.
Nottale is not a prominent french scintist at all.

I hope that the great man El naschie will sue those people who wrote this article after carefully reading it . I think the great is a multi-lingual one.Reply | Report Abuse
Francoise at 09:00 AM on 03/11/09
Quirin Schiermeier the author of the defamatory Nature article which has been taken off by Nature from the internet is conspiring again. He joined forces with his friend Christopher Drosser the author of the defamatory article in Die Zeit which should have been taken out of the internet based on a Court order. Both gentlemen are enlisting the services of a French science journalist who originally comes from the Far East to write a new defamatory article. You can take that as a measure of desperation. Now that Nature realizes that its good name was misused for personal vendettas and since the article Die Zeit did not bring the hoped for demise of El Naschie, in fact you can say it created the opposite, they are now embarking upon a new enterprise in France. The idea is to overwhelm El Naschie. I received a letter exactly in this wording. They hope to make El Naschie bankrupt so that he cannot defend himself in a legal way using lawyers. Those people who lived in the dark, in fact in the filth for so long simply cannot fathom that someone could remain steadfast out of conviction. They will be surprised. The truth has a very peculiar property. It always comes out. Good luck in France, you will need it.Reply | Report Abuse
An at 04:29 AM on 03/11/09
In response to the comment of Free Legaladivic.

Are you kidding, how it is possible that El naschie does not use the internet. Pleae look at his wepage you will find that he linked the sciam webpage to his website
http://www.el-naschie.net/el-naschie-physicist.asp?site=260&lang=
According to his website
Article in Scientific American from June, 2008
and comments from oldest to newest
> link to article
The link now is inactive and of course everyone knows why??

In one of his article "P-Adic analysis and the trans nite E8 exceptional Lie
symmetry group uni cation" Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 38 (2008)612 614. One can find in the list of references
A.Leonovich,Comments on E8 uni cation and P-Adic numbers.http:/www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xm1=/eareth/2008/
01/22/scieinstein122.xml (10/03/2008).

If el naschie does not use internet, then who is writing his papers and putting references for Telegraph, Sciam,........

I hope the genious Free Legaladivic can explain.
Reply | Report Abuse

elokaby at 03:53 PM on 03/10/09
I am still keenly interested in a satisfactory resolution of the correct inverse coupling constant of unification of all fundamental forces. The value found by Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg is 17.5 as given on page 192 of volume III of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields Cambridge (2000). This 17.5 is for super symmetric grand unification. On the other hand, the leading German Theoretical Physicist W. Greiner gives the value 26 as easily estimated from figure 9.11 page 377 of his famous textbook Gauge Theory of Weak Interaction published by Springer Berlin 1994. My own calculation based on Mohamed Elnaschie exact E-Infinity theory gives 26.18033989 which is very close to the value given by Greiner in his book. It seems that 17.5 must be excluded unless we are overlooking something. To go to the bottom of the discrepancy, I should refer to a remarkable paper by Mohamed Elnaschie titled Quantum gravity unification via transfinite
arithmetic and geometrical averaging published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, volume 35(2008) pp 252 256. In this paper Elnaschie uses the exact three inverse couplings of electromagnetism 60, weak force 30 and strong force 10 as idealized for the electroweak energy scale. These values lead to the inverse Summerfield constant 137 as well as three inverse couplings for pair wise unification, namely the electromagnetic and weak force 42.4, the weak force and strong force 17.3 and the electromagnetic and strong force 24.49. Subsequently, Elnaschie shows that the three inverse couplings lead to 26.18 almost exactly as the E-Infinity exact solution. The new insight is however the value of the electromagnetic and weak force namely 17.3 which is very close to that found by Weinberg. The question is therefore the following: Could Weinberg result of 17.5 be interpreted as a partial unification coupling? I would be grateful to any helpful comment.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria -Egypt

Reply | Report Abuse
Mohamed S. El Naschie at 02:30 PM on 03/10/09
Of`course I use the internet! My IP`address is: 62.135.88.111
Who is the so called Klein here speaking on my behal`f?
You are not giving an e`mail address or a real name. This is a blatant forgery and you will be liable to legal prosecution. You are just another internet terrorist paid by these people that don`t like my success.
D`Baron

1sogali1 at 10:53 PM on 03/15/09
Here is one thing. We have to think of General Relativity and Special Relativity as a reason that actually explains the whys of measurements. It does not explain the fact of the nature. For example when you feel the gravity force caused by the earth, you say to Einstein: -Hey man how on earth? Then Einstein graciously with his equivalence principle and say's -Yeah it’s because the contraction of space time, that you are victim of an acceleration-. Then you start to think of an actual tangible bended space and got very worried about that fact that you might be eaten by the bended space…Now comes Quantum Mechanics with Borh's-Born gang and say's I can't see how the actual mater is bended…Later the young guys of QFT comes and say well its true what you both said. --The fact is that there is some damn particle that its actually pushing you down wards, like the photons carry energy and make the electromagnetic field possible, but we don't know how to explain how comes this bloody particle-, from farther in the room one voice emerge and there is a bunch a guys saying, -Well, all is about resonant patterns-.Reply | Report Abuse
An at 09:23 AM on 03/14/09
The Great man (El naschie) is puplishing backward in time. The man was used to puplish forward in time, but here the instance for puplishing backward. The great man is not concerned with time arrow, for hime time can go forward and backward even vibrates. The ritle of this amazing paper is

On John Nash's crumpled surface

M. S. El Naschie

Department of Mathematics,The School of Electronics and Computer Science,University of Surrey,Guildford,UK

Solvay Institute of Physics and Chemistry,University of Brussels,Belgium

Faculty of Science,Department of Astrophysics,University of Cairo,Egypt

Chaos,Solitons and Fractals xxx (2003)xxx –xxx
www.elsevier.com/locate/chaos

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Since 2003 and it is still in press. The great man wrote many nonsense things about string theory, cosmology and particle physics.

I'm interested in the pargraph where the great man telling about him self that he became a professor in a civil engineering department.
"Few years later after becoming a professor in a civil engineering department,I again had a ?are up of my interest in
economics due to coming in touch with the person and work of John Kenneth Galbraith.I was taken,like everybody
else who read his books and knew the man by his wit,eloquence and humanity and I found his book the ‘‘Age of
Uncertainty ’’,thoroughly and wholly delightful [5 ].I did not know at this time that I will be working in the years to
come within the framework of the principle of uncertainty in the form enshrined in quantum physics by Heisenberg and
in classical mechanics by chaotic dynamic and fractal geometry."

Can the great man mention at which university he got the title Prof. Dr. and also explain why the article is still in press.

I'm afraid, that he might have aricles still in press from the ancient Greek time. Who knows.
Reply | Report Abuse

An at 08:27 AM on 03/14/09
For the genious free legaladvice (El naschie):
Here is one of the reference for the paper "The theory of Cantorian spacetime and high energy particle physics (an informal review)", Chaos,Solitons and Fractals xxx (2008)xxx xxx. The article still in press

51- Ambjorn J,Jurkiewicz J and Loll R.The Self-Organizing Quantum Universe.Scienti c American,July,pp.24-31 (2008).(http://www.sciam.com/
article.cfm?id=the-self-organizing-quantum-universe).

There are other three article which contain the same reference (Sciam)
1- On zero-dimensional points curvature in the dynamics of Cantorian-fractal spacetime setting and high energy particle physics
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 5 November 2008
M.S. El Naschie

2- An irreducibly simple derivation of the Hausdorff dimension of spacetime
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 17 September 2008
M.S. El Naschie

3- On the Witten Duff five Branes model together with knots theory and E8E8 super strings in a single fractal spacetime theory
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 23 August 2008
M.S. El Naschie

Can the genious explain for us, how it comes that El naschie is not using the internet.
Reply | Report Abuse

elokaby at 03:31 PM on 03/13/09
I am still keenly interested in a satisfactory resolution of the correct inverse coupling constant of unification of all fundamental forces. The value found by Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg is 17.5 as given on page 192 of volume III of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields Cambridge (2000). This 17.5 is for super symmetric grand unification. On the other hand, the leading German Theoretical Physicist W. Greiner gives the value 26 as easily estimated from figure 9.11 page 377 of his famous textbook Gauge Theory of Weak Interaction published by Springer Berlin 1994. My own calculation based on Mohamed Elnaschie exact E-Infinity theory gives 26.18033989 which is very close to the value given by Greiner in his book. It seems that 17.5 must be excluded unless we are overlooking something. To go to the bottom of the discrepancy, I should refer to a remarkable paper by Mohamed Elnaschie titled Quantum gravity unification via transfinite
arithmetic and geometrical averaging published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, volume 35(2008) pp 252 256. In this paper Elnaschie uses the exact three inverse couplings of electromagnetism 60, weak force 30 and strong force 10 as idealized for the electroweak energy scale. These values lead to the inverse Summerfield constant 137 as well as three inverse couplings for pair wise unification, namely the electromagnetic and weak force 42.4, the weak force and strong force 17.3 and the electromagnetic and strong force 24.49. Subsequently, Elnaschie shows that the three inverse couplings lead to 26.18 almost exactly as the E-Infinity exact solution. The new insight is however the value of the electromagnetic and weak force namely 17.3 which is very close to that found by Weinberg. The question is therefore the following: Could Weinberg result of 17.5 be interpreted as a partial unification coupling? I would be grateful to any helpful comment.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria -Egypt

Reply | Report Abuse
Arthur Wagener at 03:04 PM on 03/13/09
Und jetzt gehen sie los auf den armen Laurent Nottale. Ich kann es verstehen wenn sie beim Anblick von Mohamed El Naschie vor Neid erblassen. Er kann dies auch verkraften, aber warum um Gottes Willen Laurent Nottale ? Ich habe den Mann in Karlsruhe getroffen, er ist bestimmt der beste Physiker Frankreichs seit Poincaré. Er ist bescheiden und harmlos und Geld hat er auch nicht. Kennt ihr Hass und Intrigen keine Grenze? Wenn Ihre Kabalen und Hass erst einmal aufgedeckt werden, dann werden Sie Herr Quirin Schiermeier und Sie Herr Christoph Drösser nichts zu lachen haben. Scham kennen Sie beide nicht das ist wohl klar.
Arthur Wagener
Reply | Report Abuse
An at 10:34 AM on 03/11/09
This a direct response to Francoise

In fact there is a french article, dated back 2007, about Nottale who is one of the associate editor of CSF, and as a by product the article catched the case of El naschie.

www.archipel.uqam.ca/481/01/gingras_bontems_SSI.pdf
and
cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=20046891

The article is a biblometeric study, and you can see how the scintific corruption can take place. There many people involved in that matter, the study mentioned El naschie, sidharth, Agop, Castro and Ord.
Nottale is not a prominent french scintist at all.

I hope that the great man El naschie will sue those people who wrote this article after carefully reading it . I think the great is a multi-lingual one.Reply | Report Abuse
Francoise at 09:00 AM on 03/11/09
Quirin Schiermeier the author of the defamatory Nature article which has been taken off by Nature from the internet is conspiring again. He joined forces with his friend Christopher Drosser the author of the defamatory article in Die Zeit which should have been taken out of the internet based on a Court order. Both gentlemen are enlisting the services of a French science journalist who originally comes from the Far East to write a new defamatory article. You can take that as a measure of desperation. Now that Nature realizes that its good name was misused for personal vendettas and since the article Die Zeit did not bring the hoped for demise of El Naschie, in fact you can say it created the opposite, they are now embarking upon a new enterprise in France. The idea is to overwhelm El Naschie. I received a letter exactly in this wording. They hope to make El Naschie bankrupt so that he cannot defend himself in a legal way using lawyers. Those people who lived in the dark, in fact in the filth for so long simply cannot fathom that someone could remain steadfast out of conviction. They will be surprised. The truth has a very peculiar property. It always comes out. Good luck in France, you will need it.Reply | Report Abuse
An at 04:29 AM on 03/11/09
In response to the comment of Free Legaladivic.

Are you kidding, how it is possible that El naschie does not use the internet. Pleae look at his wepage you will find that he linked the sciam webpage to his website
http://www.el-naschie.net/el-naschie-physicist.asp?site=260&lang=
According to his website
Article in Scientific American from June, 2008
and comments from oldest to newest
> link to article
The link now is inactive and of course everyone knows why??

In one of his article "P-Adic analysis and the trans nite E8 exceptional Lie
symmetry group uni cation" Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 38 (2008)612 614. One can find in the list of references
A.Leonovich,Comments on E8 uni cation and P-Adic numbers.http:/www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xm1=/eareth/2008/
01/22/scieinstein122.xml (10/03/2008).

If el naschie does not use internet, then who is writing his papers and putting references for Telegraph, Sciam,........

I hope the genious Free Legaladivic can explain.
Reply | Report Abuse

elokaby at 03:53 PM on 03/10/09
I am still keenly interested in a satisfactory resolution of the correct inverse coupling constant of unification of all fundamental forces. The value found by Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg is 17.5 as given on page 192 of volume III of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields Cambridge (2000). This 17.5 is for super symmetric grand unification. On the other hand, the leading German Theoretical Physicist W. Greiner gives the value 26 as easily estimated from figure 9.11 page 377 of his famous textbook Gauge Theory of Weak Interaction published by Springer Berlin 1994. My own calculation based on Mohamed Elnaschie exact E-Infinity theory gives 26.18033989 which is very close to the value given by Greiner in his book. It seems that 17.5 must be excluded unless we are overlooking something. To go to the bottom of the discrepancy, I should refer to a remarkable paper by Mohamed Elnaschie titled Quantum gravity unification via transfinite
arithmetic and geometrical averaging published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, volume 35(2008) pp 252 256. In this paper Elnaschie uses the exact three inverse couplings of electromagnetism 60, weak force 30 and strong force 10 as idealized for the electroweak energy scale. These values lead to the inverse Summerfield constant 137 as well as three inverse couplings for pair wise unification, namely the electromagnetic and weak force 42.4, the weak force and strong force 17.3 and the electromagnetic and strong force 24.49. Subsequently, Elnaschie shows that the three inverse couplings lead to 26.18 almost exactly as the E-Infinity exact solution. The new insight is however the value of the electromagnetic and weak force namely 17.3 which is very close to that found by Weinberg. The question is therefore the following: Could Weinberg result of 17.5 be interpreted as a partial unification coupling? I would be grateful to any helpful comment.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria -Egypt

Reply | Report Abuse
Mohamed S. El Naschie at 02:30 PM on 03/10/09
Of`course I use the internet! My IP`address is: 62.135.88.111
Who is the so called Klein here speaking on my behal`f?
You are not giving an e`mail address or a real name. This is a blatant forgery and you will be liable to legal prosecution. You are just another internet terrorist paid by these people that don`t like my success.
D`Baron

Anonymus at 07:23 AM on 03/28/09
I am realistic enough to realize that there is a great deal of people with very low self esteem. Internet blogs provide an outlet for those unfortunate individuals. I have therefore some understanding for what these people are writing in order to relieve internal pressure and feelings of inadequacy. It is the electronic version of Andy Warhol 5 minutes of fame. But there is a world of difference between Andy and An. Nobel Laureate tHooft could do without Mr. An, Mr. Said and Mr. Baron and the like of them. Nobel Laureate tHooft had to wait for 20 years to get his Nobel prize because somebody decided to pinch it from him. He was quite philosophical about it but now and then you could sense the bitterness. He wrote about it directly and indirectly. I recall a paper published in Classical and Quantum Gravity or a similar Journal with the title - A rehabilitation of quantum field theory. He may have been talking about the strong interaction. In some informal writings, he spoke openly about the subject. He was a Ph.D. student when a group of people decided to publish his lecture which he gave in France in Physics Review without mentioning directly or indirectly the name of tHooft. He would be the last person to appreciate the dishonesty of those who use his good name to justify similar acts of scientific piracy and plagiarism. There is no connection whatsoever between the personal vendetta and it is clearly a personal vendetta launched by An, Said and maybe even some of those around Gerard tHooft and the article of Gerard tHooft on pseudo science. M. Kaku is a very famous science writer and money spinning machine appearing far more often on the television and the popular media than all theoretical physicists in America combined. However so what? Some people are photogenic and some are not. Some people are well spoken and others lack this talent. Some people possess a charisma others are repulsive. Some people possess a beauty that comes from the inside and others are extremely ugly no matter how elegantly they are dressed and how much they spend on makeup. In short Mr. An, if you are a friend of tHooft, so don t drag his name into your own private war. If you are an enemy of tHooft, let me tell you this you are not making a very good job writing all this nonsense. I doubt very much you have understood anything from what I have written but one can at least try.Reply | Report Abuse
Atef at 06:53 AM on 03/28/09
But An Said Elnashaie, you don t need to Google in the sand of Sinai. You just need to look into your criminal record to see the most appropriate description of your despicable self. A thief, a forgerer, a traitor of his family and his people. Meantime the most despised man in the whole of Egypt. Go on do the dirty work for Renate Loll. You are subservient for those who stole your own country. You did end your life as a bootlicker of Sinai drug dealers, sex-film producer for your stepdaughter Salome Jihane Fadel. Go on dreaming that you are a man. Any stray dog in Sinai is more valued than you and in order not to forget your credentials, here it is. http://saidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/

Reply | Report Abuse
An at 06:07 PM on 03/26/09
As Gerard 't Hooft provided us with the best criteria that nicely fits the
case of El naschie as a bad theoretical physicist.
http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theoristbad.html

Another favor has also been done by Gerard 't Hooft is to provide a suitable job for El naschie in Myron Evans University (Pseudo science university). I think that university needs one has merits like those
of El naschie.

According to Gerard 't Hooft in his recent update of his page
"...
One exception I fail to resist. Recently a new University was founded: the Myron Evans University. Here, those with a fine taste for perfection can specialize and obtain PhD degrees. I won't provide the link, but I am sure it will appear right up front if you google it up."

Of course the great man El naschie can google to find the webpage of that
university.


Reply | Report Abuse
Maurice Deveaux at 04:20 PM on 03/26/09
If you want to steal fractal space time and to claim it is yours, you have to rewrite history. Surely you know lecture notes in Physics published by Springer. Look at the Volume edited by Heck and Perdang from France and Belgium. The book is entitled “Applying Fractals in Astronomy “ and published in 1991. This is 18 years ago Monsieur and there you find a paper by Laurent Nottale, entitled “ The fractal structure of quantum space time” , it is page 181 to page 200. The work of Mohamed El Naschie is from about the same time. The work of Garnet Ord from Canada is even much earlier. I think Dr. Baron is insulting Dr. Renate Loll and Nobel Laureate Gerardus ‘ t Hooft when he writes these compromising remarks . Even when somebody has the might he still does not have the right. At least this is the way it is in France since the French revolution. I do not think it is different in Holland. Quite honestly I do not know where Dr. Baron comes from, but he has very strange views.
Maurice Deveaux





Reply | Report Abuse
Whistler at 01:44 PM on 03/26/09
Mr. Baronne, If you were not so petty, some might find you witty. Save me the embarrassment and do not ask who would find you witty. Why don t you sign with your name, An Said Elnashaie bin Loll Al Ambjorn and the web master son of Utrecht with a big head, so big that is deserves a Nobel prize. Why don t you tell us about your own achievements? Did you break into Fort Knox or just the cupboard of your ailing mother. In case of doubt, consult this site (http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/2009/01/case-of-said-elnashaie.html#comments). Best regards to your brother Jason of the Juggernauts. He needs your help badly to appear in a French cancan directed by Dr. Frankenstein or was it Einstein? So long.Reply | Report Abuse

D.Baronne at 01:32 PM on 03/25/09
I am shocked to see this, but nor really surprised: The shameless steeling of the ideas of the great man, El Naschie, continues! Here is a paper published in the renowned "Physical Review Letters", with the title "Fractal Properties of Quantum Spacetime", by one Dario Benedetti from the
Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Canada. This poor soul makes the bold claim to "show that, in general, a spacetime having a quantum group symmetry has also a scale-dependent fractal dimension which deviates from its classical value at short scales." But can you believe that there is not a single reference to the goundbreaking contributions by El Naschie, who has laid the foundations of our understanding of Fractal Spacetime? Instead, this guy refers to Ambj?rn, Jurkiewicz, and Loll. This behavior, on the pages of the Physical Review Letters, can not be tolerated!


D. BaronneReply | Report Abuse
Margie at 07:37 AM on 03/25/09
A man who sits day and night thinking of nothing except harming the reputation of innocent people cannot be a subject of hatred. He can be only the subject of pity. If Mr. An spends his time doing something useful then he would know that Grassman was a school teacher. The inventor of a whole world of geometry was a school teacher. |What is wrong with that? A school teacher is at least an honorable job. A school teacher is not a thief for instance. Palmer was incidentally also a Swiss schoolteacher. I don t presume Mr. An knows who Palmer is. He is too busy following on every step and trip Mohamed Elnaschie. The poor An has a phobia called Mohamed Elnaschie. It seems to make him even more furious the more Elnaschies followers ignore him. However charity starts at home. Before belittling other people Mr. An why don t you tell us where you come from and what is your real name and where are you working and what is your education. From all what I read from your comments no matter who you are in reality, your reality must even be more pathetic than anything else we can conceive of. A bad loser indeed!

Reply | Report Abuse
Aman at 06:54 AM on 03/25/09
An you are a bad loser. You are a bad person and a bad loser.

Reply | Report Abuse
An at 05:36 AM on 03/25/09
From http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/02/06/chaos-continues-in-math-journal/


Zoran Skoda Says:

Mar 22, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Elsevier has made the worst possible decision by starting to publishing the backlog of papers which were accepted during the provable badly (or no) peer reviewed age of El Naschie and the rest of complying board. Before Elsevier could claim, well this is the editor s resposibility, we BELIEVED that the peer reviewing practicies were maintained at hi level. Now they DO know of the problem, and they issues January 15 issue of chaossf with papers accepted by El Naschie s board, without reexamining them for quality. This is MANIFEST ACCEPTANCE by Elsevier of LOW QUALITY STANDARDS. You know that the papers were accepted in a process doubted by majority of public scientific community, you are reviewing the future of the process but you are happy with taking over 900 papers from that old pool to print! It is unbelieable a major company, not to say world-class SCIENTIFIC publisher would ever dare to be so irresponsible!

Moreover, the number of papers accepted by around New Year was about 900, it has grown since by at least around 40 new articles. That means that the old board is still acting and that Elsevier is doing this. Instead Elsevier bans on new submissions what is an unheard practice for a journal in existance!

One should either cancel the journal or do a Hercules job of make it a quality journal. Though I do not believe the latter were easy. the rest of the board was complient to bad peer reviewing practices. Some of the members of the board confirmed in letters to me that their names were there without their prior consent. Most of others did not respond to my emails if they agreed or not with the current editorial practices as of June 2008. Now who would like to take a role of an editor in the board with such a history. The whole board needs to be replaced at minimum. But I think the chances to regain the value after being so reluctant and defending the undefendable, and prolonging the agony by publishing the badly reviewing papers, is close to zero. I received letters from many members of scientific community and the opinion in general is that chaossf has practically no chance to survive, all the damage the bad past and current practices of the board
and reluctance of Elsevier to act have done.

Zoran Skoda


Reply | Report Abuse

An at 06:24 AM on 03/23/09
Here I just qoute from the comment dated Nov. 4, 2008 due to Andrei Khory
appeared on Sciam (this site), which is obviously due to El naschie

".....However nothing is more surprising and revealing as a recent paper of Prof. L. Marek-Crnjac A Feynman path integral-like method for deriving the four dimensionality of spacetime from first principles, 2008 available on Science Direct. Prof. Crnjac derives the exact dimensionality 4.02 using El Naschie's theory without a computer. I was cheered by the fact that a group calling themselves E-infinity fans posed on this site on 11.01/08 at 08.21 p.m. a rather clearly written comment attesting to the same things which I have explained here. The result 4.02 is one of the most remarkable results ever published in theoretical physics for the following reason. Ambjorn used a highly accurate numerical simulation. If 4.02 is the topological dimension of spacetime, he could have increased the accuracy and easily reached 4.0000000. This is so because any deviation from four dimensionality must be enormously small. 0.02 is not a small number compared to four. Consequently this is not a topological dimension. Second this is not the Hausdorff dimension of quantum spacetime....."

Now it comes the important question, who is Prof. L. Marek-Crnjac . The answer can be found in http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2009/03/hello-slovenia.html

Just for the record:

Leila Marek-Crnjac is a high school math teacher and she obtained her PhD in the field of pedagogical mathematics (needless to say that she fulfilled the PhD criteria due to papers published in CS&F). As for her affiliation at the "Institute of Mathematics, Physics and Mechanics", she is no longer a member of that institution and even in the past was only a part time member for the obvious reason of using her credentials for applications to science projects (see her curriculum):

http://sicris.izum.si/search/rsr.aspx?opt=1&lang=eng&id=8298

Greetings from Slovenia,

shrink

The great man using pseudo Prof. to trumpet his theory. As the great man himself is a pesudo prof., then other pseudo profs. are naturally attracted toward him.

Baron Conscience at 03:35 AM on 04/04/09
I can understand the embarrassment of Dr. Renate Loll, University of Utrecht and Dr. Jan Ambjorn from Neils Bohr Institute and their wish to divert attention to something else. The breaking news is that yet another person whose name is Palmer is supposed to have plagiarized Mohamed Elnaschies work on fractal spacetime in a new article which is supposed to be published in the proceedings of the Royal Society. Even if this is true, so what Mr. Baronne? Thus this make the behavior of two leading scientists working under the guidance of a Nobel laureate acceptable? Of course not. Or do you mean that the victim is to be blamed. This is ridiculous. How would Oscar Wilde put it Plagiarizing Elnaschies work once seems like misfortune. Plagiarizing him twice seems like negligence. May I extend the notion Plagiarizing him continuously seems like modern times where all what you need is to hire an internet expert like John Baez to do the work for you i.e. defame your competitor and close down the journals where they are publishing. Amazing brand
new world!Reply | Report Abuse
elokaby at 12:17 PM on 04/03/09
I am still keenly interested in a satisfactory resolution of the correct inverse coupling constant of unification of all fundamental forces. The value found by Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg is 17.5 as given on page 192 of volume III of his book The Quantum Theory of Fields Cambridge (2000). This 17.5 is for super symmetric grand unification. On the other hand, the leading German Theoretical Physicist W. Greiner gives the value 26 as easily estimated from figure 9.11 page 377 of his famous textbook Gauge Theory of Weak Interaction published by Springer Berlin 1994. My own calculation based on Mohamed Elnaschie exact E-Infinity theory gives 26.18033989 which is very close to the value given by Greiner in his book. It seems that 17.5 must be excluded unless we are overlooking something. To go to the bottom of the discrepancy, I should refer to a remarkable paper by Mohamed Elnaschie titled Quantum gravity unification via transfinite
arithmetic and geometrical averaging published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, volume 35(2008) pp 252 256. In this paper Elnaschie uses the exact three inverse couplings of electromagnetism 60, weak force 30 and strong force 10 as idealized for the electroweak energy scale. These values lead to the inverse Summerfield constant 137 as well as three inverse couplings for pair wise unification, namely the electromagnetic and weak force 42.4, the weak force and strong force 17.3 and the electromagnetic and strong force 24.49. Subsequently, Elnaschie shows that the three inverse couplings lead to 26.18 almost exactly as the E-Infinity exact solution. The new insight is however the value of the electromagnetic and weak force namely 17.3 which is very close to that found by Weinberg. The question is therefore the following: Could Weinberg result of 17.5 be interpreted as a partial unification coupling? I would be grateful to any helpful comment.

Ayman El Okaby
Department of Physics
Alexandria -EgyptReply | Report Abuse

Advocates at 04:11 AM on 04/03/09
Once again An you are poisoning us with your fallacious comments. It is also clear that you are not giving up despite the triviality and shallowness of your arguments that expose a very sick mind with a lot of hate. We are not buying any of your false allegations. All what you are saying and keep saying over and over shows that you are really envious and that you bear a grudge against Prof. El Naschie. Your arguments are false and no matter how hard you try to substantiate your viewpoint it still holds no water. You are constantly exposing yourself as a sore loser. Try as hard as you want, you will never succeed in changing our appreciation and admiration for Prof. El Naschie. All these attacks against him are a proof that his scientific achievements are causing a lot of envy and jealousy. So to all envious people, eat your heart outReply | Report Abuse

Lilli Mohr at 03:26 PM on 04/02/09
Dieser An gehört in eine geschlossen Anstalt, aber nicht für Menschen sondern für bösartige Schweine. Herr Drösser wird ihn sicher täglich besuchen, dann können sie miteinander plaudern. Pfui Teufel was sind das nur für Dreckmenschen. Merkt dieser Trottel nicht, dass ein Mensch der nicht einmal einen Namen hat, sich um seinen eigenen Dreck kümmern sollte ? Na ja, ein Schwein ist ein Schwein und bleibt ein Schwein !!
Lilli
Reply | Report Abuse

Atef at 11:34 AM on 04/02/09
There is nothing more eloquent and revealing than putting down the whole correput reality about you Mr. An and your family. The two sites speak eloquently for the real vendetta behind your vicious slander and smearing campagin. Here they are in case you have forgotten: http://saidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com
You are propagating false lies and the more you continue, the clearer it becomes to all that you are suffering from a personal vendetta. How can someone live with so much hate. Baffling!


Reply | Report Abuse
D.Baronne at 04:59 PM on 03/31/09
Another incident of stealing the great man, El Naschie's, idea - Can fractals make sense of the quantum world? in the New Scientist:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20127011.600-can-fractals-make-sense-of-the-quantum-world.html

Some Tim Palmer claims that he can explain quantum theory with fractals. No wonder that he can, as El Naschie has demonstrated how to understand the double slit experiment - the "only mystery" in quantum theory according to the famous physcist Feynman - with E-infinity fractal spacetime. But Palmer doesn't give credit at all to El Naschie.
Reply | Report Abuse

An at 07:29 AM on 03/30/09
The great man El naschie in his recent CV
http://www.fikr7.org/WMS_Gallery/cv/naschie.pdf

His suspicious academic career

• Research Scientist, University College 1974, London, U.K.
• Associate Professor, KSU 1980, Saudi Arabia
• Distinguished Professor, New Mexico 1981, USA
• Professor, KACST 1985, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
• Director, KACST 1987, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
• Professor, Cornell 1988, Sibley School of Aeronautics & Astronautics, USA
• Professor, Solvay Institute for Physics & Chemistry 1990-2004, Free University of
Brussels, Belgium
• Professor, DAMTP 1991-2002, Cambridge, U.K.
• Professor, School of Electronic Engineering 2000-2004, University of Surrey, Guildford, U.K.

It is seems that the great man is fond of both false (pseudo) affiliations and
pseudo sciences. The great man is still not able to realize that his claims can be vindicated easily through internet, please, great man wake up, you are a completely dormant.

El naschie claimed to be the director, KACST (King Abdul Aziz city of science and Technology) during 1987, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
But if you look at the website of that KACST and the website of past directors, as usual, no mention for him.
http://www.kacst.edu.sa/aboutkacst/pages/pastpresidents.aspx
The list is as the following
Prof. Rida M.S. Obaid, KACST President 1977 - 1983
Dr. Saleh Al-Athel, KACST President 1983 - 2007

The great man is a big liar or if he is telling the truth he must sue KACST.

Reply | Report Abuse

An at 09:56 AM on 03/29/09
El naschie mentioned in his recent CV http://www.fikr7.org/WMS_Gallery/cv/naschie.pdf
Honorary member in the Editorial Board of The International Journal for E-Infinity and Complexity Theory in High Energy Physics and Engineering. This Journal is exclusively dedicated to Prof. El Naschie’s E-Infinity Theory.
Can the great man tell us where we can find this journal, it is urgent.
I have a generalization of E-Infinity theory, I call it Alphabetic -Infinity theory, in which E-Infinity is a special case. You can imagine A-Infinity, B-,... and so on even you can use Greek letters. Even more one can use continous index to have really uncountable number of theories.

Publications
More than 500 papers in engineering, applied and theoretical physics. See: www.sciencedirect.com

I think the great man repeatedly telling us that he pubplished 900. Why he didn't mention remaining 400 articles.
I guess the great man has puplished One Thousand and One article, to be similar to One Thousand and One Nights. The man has a taste for classic literature.

Major research interest of the great man

Nuclear engineering, nonlinear dynamics, nanotechnology and quantum field theories and spacetime physics
Of course the great man has a sharp critical mind and he is concerned with the topical questios of his time and even beyond space-time.

Prizes:
Honored for contribution to Science, Abdel Hameed Shoman Foundation, Amman, Jordan in November 2007. Shit


Reply | Report Abuse

An at 09:13 AM on 03/29/09
As a peice of gold, you find the recent CV of El naschie. One can enjoy reading it on www.fikr7.org/WMS_Gallery/cv/naschie.pdf that is due to The Arab Thought Foundation (www.arabthought.org) on its seventh conference 2008. Where El naschie was on of the speaker, maybe about pseudo science!!!!!!!!!! The more interesting thind is about the great man's CV, let us go through it for the sake of joy. In his suspicious academic career, the most suspicious one is to be a Professor at DAMTP 1991-2002, Cambridge, U.K. I don't know if the great man was a fool or full prof. there, please see his record with Cambridge where El Naschie has been black-listed in xxx ArXives for affiliation arrogating (forging). http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0004152 More detail can be found in http://archivefreedom.org/freedom/Cyberia.html
The great man forged the affiliation of Cambridge.
Activities: 1. Appointed by the Egyptian Minister of Higher Ed cation and Scientific Research as the Advisor for Nano-technology and High Energy Physics, Egypt.
2. Chair of the National Nanotechnology Committee, Egypt.
3- Advisor to President of King Sa d University, Riyadh, Sa di Arabia .
So much the worse for Egypt and Saudi Arabia. But remember the man
has been claimed to be the director of King Abdullah Institute for Nanotechnology here in http://agenda.fisica.uniud.it/difa/getFile.py/access?contribId=52&sessionId=32&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=9
But if you check the web page of King Abdullah Al Saud Institute for Nano & Advanced Technologies you don't find his name listed in the Committee Members of Establishing King Abdullah Institute for NANO Technology and there is no mention for him at all. That seems odd especially he is the director as he claimed.
One can check the web page for "Committees consultative sciencetisic"
http://www.nano-ksu.com/publish/article_46.shtml
web page for "Supervisory Committee to King Abdullah Institute for Nanotechnology"http://www.nano-ksu.com/publish/article_63.shtml
Other writen activities
Founder and Editor in chief of 'The Interdisciplinary Jo rnal of Non-Linear Sciences, Nano & Q ant m Technology' p blished by Elsevier Sciences.
-The great man didn't specify which journal, is it the CS&F that you have already kicked out of it. Or what are the other journals.
- Honorary member in the Editorial Board of The International Journal for E-Infinity and Complexity Theory in High Energy Physics and Engineering. This Journal is exclusively dedicated to Prof. El Naschie’s E-Infinity theory.
Where's that Reply | Report Abuse

Advocates at 04:32 PM on 03/28/09
Once again An you are poisoning us with your fallacious comments. It is also clear that you are not giving up despite the triviality and shallowness of your arguments that expose a very sick mind with a lot of hate. We are not buying any of your false allegations. All what you are saying and keep saying over and over shows that you are really envious and that you bear a grudge against Prof. El Naschie. Your arguments are false and no matter how hard you try to substantiate your viewpoint it still holds no water. You are constantly exposing yourself as a sore loser. Try as hard as you want, you will never succeed in changing our appreciation and admiration for Prof. El Naschie. All these attacks against him are a proof that his scientific achievements are causing a lot of envy and jealousy. So to all envious people, eat your heart out!


Captain Kirk at 02:13 PM on 04/06/09
Not even washer women or market wenches would write if they can write what this An and his colleagues write. First Elnaschie was working secretly, then six months later he was dedicating his papers to Nobel Laureates and we should believe everything. Of course it is Mr. An who is saying it. What more can you ask for. A Covent Garden flower girl would say: Goooooon! I am sure this means a great deal to Mr. An. As for publishing in Nature, we are all waiting for the example of Mr. An. Show us the way Governor. A geezer like you deserves nothing less than publishing in Nature. We have the name of the periodical and now we need your najavascript:void(0)me and address. That is logical Mr. Spock. Reply | Report Abuse

Salute at 08:35 PM on 04/05/09
Boredom on the rocks! Mr. An sek. And Mr. An is really sick.Reply | Report Abuse

Jason at 10:05 AM on 04/05/09
Hi EInfinity Club, thanks for you prompt and polite response to my invitation. I'm going to post it, and my response to it, on my blog.Reply | Report Abuse

An at 09:21 AM on 04/05/09
The astonishing thing about El naschie is that he
could survive for a quit long time in Europe and remained as a Cheif editor of CS&F for almost nearly twenty years.

Also, I think he managed to damage the reputation of Cambridge to some extent by publishing numerous non sense papers using its affiliation.

Furthermore, he damaged the reputation of Nobel laureate G. Thooft when he dedicated some of his non sense papers to G. Thooft - (On quarks confinement and asymptotic freedom Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 37 (2008)1289–1291)-
, surprisingly enough Thooft kept silent about this. I think even a third class physicist wouldn't be happy if El naschie dedicated one of his non sense paper to him, and for sure he would complain and sue El naschie.

It is a tempting suggestion to invoke the issue to sue Elsevier and El naschie for damaging the reputation of scientific publishing. I think that the respectable institutes, universities and research centers that paid for that junk CS&F must sue Elsevier and El naschie and asking for penalties.
Reply | Report Abuse

An at 09:07 AM on 04/05/09
To EInfinity Club at 08:05 AM on 04/05/09

Of course El naschie has a peculiar sense of humor which is evident in his numerous papers displaying his extraordinary mathematical skills. The great man showed in a single stroke
that 5= 2 x 2 + 1 and 686 = 5 x 137 + 1, his mathematical talent is Gods gift to foolish people.

The nice Einfinity club didn't mention Germany which was also involved in that conspiracy against El naschie. By the way, is there any news about the new court order against Drosser (Die Zeit article). I would like to remember Einfinity club with El naschie's humorous interpretation of quantum mechanics (Many jokes interpretation).

Finally comment from http://www.scienceblogs.de/mathlog/2008/11/chaos-bei-elsevier.php

rank zero? 27.03.09 ? 12:41 Uhr

Imho, a couple of authors publishing in CSF can be blamed. They simply took advantage of the lousy peer-reviewing process and managed to publish papers that no serious mathematical journal would have accepted. They managed to prolongate their publication lists in an easy way and did harm to colleagues who worked seriously and with much effort, and at least the authors who have almost no publications except in CSF and "friendly" journals whose articles where obviously turned down elsewhere should have been very much aware of this situation.

In addition, it appears that the citation abuse was very much in common not only for El N. himself, but a whole group of CSF authors. When such manipulationa are frequently done, one shouldn't claim to be innocent.


Reply | Report Abuse

EInfinity Club at 08:05 AM on 04/05/09
This is a direct response to comment of April 4, 2009 posted by Jason. Dear Jason: You have outlined the problem better than anyone of us could do. You said anything goes. That is it precisely. The majority of us, if I may say so, subscribe to the value which I know for sure that Mohamed Elnaschie cherishes. There are limits to what one can say or not say. These limits are constituted by truthfulness, good taste and civilized ways of conducting a debate and a controversy. It is lamentable that most human beings change their attitude as soon as they think they are not visible or when using pseudo names. We think what you can say without giving your real identity should not differ from anything you say when you put your signature under it. Some of the stuff you wrote about Prof. Elnaschie is simply and extremely in bad taste. Others were truly funny. Some have shown a sense of humor on the borderline between what can and what cannot be said. However, involving family members, writing things about Hamas and 911 and playing with these malicious innuendos is simply not acceptable. The campaign against Elnaschie was planned and financed by people who are meantime very well known to us all. The green light was given to John Baez to start it. He was ideally suited because he stood with one foot in the world of academia and with the other in the internet and even far worse than the internet. Let us call it the darker side of the internet business more connected to the mob than to the internet. John Baez was instructed by a group in the University of Utrecht. They contacted Banks and Dawker in England and USA. Then there was Said who is a very very sad figure. Then there are those who aspired to become the President of the most important Arab nation. So you have a m?nge of Nobel Laureates all the way down to character assassins. It is not a joy for anyone to make this experience, but Mohamed El naschie is more than capable in dealing with them. We don t hold a grudge against you personally and we have regarded the site as just another effort to smear the reputation of Elnaschie. You are right when you said that Elnaschie made a reference to you in the media in the Arab world and it is true that you are being watched by the Secret Service of several countries. However you are wrong to think that Prof. Elnaschie wanted to close down this site or that he ordered anything of the sort. Prof. Elnaschie knew about Renate Loll relatively recently and I must say that is the only thing that upset him. He could not care less about Renate Loll, however he cares about the fact that she is connected or is the right hand of a very important friend of his which is extremely disappointing but will come to an end one way or another. Prof. Elnaschie could not give a damn about Die Zeit nor this new paper in the Newscientist. He does not care one bit about anything published in the proceedings of the Royal Society because his teacher told him once if you want to bury a paper, publish it in the proceedings of the Royal Society. What is upsetting for him is the lie which they spread in Nature which he takes very seriously. So where does all this leave us? I guess if you put rules for your site, stick to good taste and humor, Elnaschie is the first person to laugh about himself and he has a very peculiar sense of humor just like you. But there has to be a limit and this limit is good taste, truthfulness and morality. If you are ready to abide by these rules, then I will ask our group to use your blogs as a forum for scientific discussion which can be as heated as you want but no exchange for personal insults and three lettered words. Hope this explains our position.

Jason at 04:29 AM on 04/05/09
Hello El Naschie supporters! Jason here, from the El Naschie Watch blog, which El Naschie himself has criticized by name in an interview. You are warmly invited to post comments on my blog, which is unmoderated. Anything goes.
http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/Reply | Report Abuse

Wallace at 03:32 PM on 04/04/09
I guess Elnaschie is not going to publish any papers any more. It is for you now Dr. An to entertain us with your scientific pleasantries. You have the stage for all the genius who is you. Display all your capabilities and your considerable knowledge of mathematics, physics and last but not least your exquisite English. Yes your English is Gods gift to the illiterates and true consolation to those normally referred to as Spanish cows. Reply | Report Abuse

Jessy at 02:28 PM on 04/04/09
An of the Hundred Second. To be An of the Hundred Days would be boredom beyond endurance. You made your silly jokes God knows how many times. The best punishment which anybody could think of for Ex President Bush for all his crimes against humanity is to lock him into a room with you for eternity. Hell would be heaven compared to that. Reply | Report Abuse

An at 06:55 AM on 04/04/09
To Baron Conscience at 03:35 AM on 04/04/09

What prevents El naschie to publish in scientific leading journals like nature, science, nuclear physics (that journal belongs to Elseiver), and physical review etc...
For what reason he is insisting to publish 350 articles in CS&F, and when the journal was closed he couldn't publish in any good journal. Is it a sign for his incompetence ??!!

El naschie is a very rich man then he can establish his own company, and let me suggest the name El naschiveir publishing house, world unlimited corruption. That is much better that stealing people's taxes for his vanity journal. He should publish his great ideas at his own expense not at people's taxes.

I think that El naschie and Elseiver should be sued for wasting people's taxes in doing junk science. I think El naschie should be punished for his scientific guilty and for claiming false positions and affiliations.

Jason at 08:30 PM on 04/06/09
Come on over to http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com EInfinity club, et. al., you got our hopes up.
JasonReply | Report Abuse

EInfinity Club at 06:20 AM on 04/08/09
Dear Mr. Jason
You are in breach of the beginning of a beginning of an agreement even before the beginning started. The minimum one expects from a respectable site is a thorough investigation of any allegation before it is made. If you don t do that how on earth could you call yourself connected to anything called Science. Prof. Elnaschie has never met Dan Winter. Prof. Elnaschie has never been to a conference where Dan Winter was present. If you look to the site of Dan Winter you will find a polite exchange of letters. One is from Prof. Elnaschie asking him for moderation of his views. But what if he met Dan Winter? Or for that matter the Mahatma Ghandi? Haven t you studied law? There is no such thing as guilt by association. This is the basis of natural justice. Second you did not refrain from the use of excitable language and loose malicious innuendos. We have nothing against a joke or a caricature but we said before that good taste is the basis of civilized friendship. Being of different opinion is no reason to spoil a good friendship. The truth is that John Baez committed a big blunder. He was asked to commit this blunder. He foolishly and without knowing the consequences charged like a bull against the wall and in the course of this action be broke his horns. Then he hired two presumptuous journalists wishing to be scientists. These are the worst type. If you don t believe me ask Nobel Laureate Murray Gell-man what he thinks of science journalists in general. If it is of any comfort to you Prof. Elnaschie spent the last ten days in the company of his most respected Nobel Laureate s friend. But what if they are not Nobel Laureates? A pleasant and entertaining Nobel Laureate is the absolute exception rather than the rule. If it is of any interest to Mr. An and his crew Prof.Elnaschie dedicated many papers to many Nobel Laureates for instance, his teacher and friend Nobel Laureate Ilya Prigogine. He has many correspondences with Nobel Laureate Werner Heisenberg dating 40 years ago as well as more recent correspondence with Karl Friedrich Von Weizscker. When you decide to investigate everything we will be more than pleased to collaborate with you to discover the real scandal. The real scandal is where all the strings meet. When time comes you will know the truth and if you are not part of this conspiracy Mr. Jason, you will be shocked.
With best wishes,
EInfinity Club

Reply | Report Abuse

An at 07:15 AM on 04/08/09
Concerning the Ph. D. of the great man El naschie as it is written in his website www.el-nachie.net. He has taken his Ph. D. from university of London but if you search the university of London catalogue, as usual, no mention for him
You will find only the thesis of his brother Elnashai, Amr Salah, http://catalogue.ulrls.lon.ac.uk/search?/aElnashai%2C+Amr+Salah./aelnashai+amr+salah/-3%2C-1%2C0%2CB/frameset&FF=aelnashai+amr+salah&1%2C1%2C
Nonlinear analysis of composite tubular joints / by Amr Salah Elnashai, 1984.

But if you checked out the "Integrated Catalogue" of the British Library. You will find the following under the entry with system number 014720109:

System number: 014720109
Cataloguing level: Minimal record
Author - personal: El Nashie, M. S.
Title: The roll of formulation in elastic buckling.
Publisher/year: [S.l.] : University of London, 1974.
Physical descr.: pp. 348.
Dissertation: Doctoral Thesis - University of London.
Reproduction note: Microfilm. 35 mm.
Added name: University of London.
Holdings (All): Details
Shelfmark: D11176/74 DSC Request

Here it comes the interesting question
Why, the Ph. D. of the great man was not listed on the online catalogue of university of London. Theses of great man like
El naschie should written in Gold and should be a source of proud for university of London.

Just an innocent question that could have undreamable answer.
Reply | Report Abuse
An at 09:56 AM on 04/08/09
From www.elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com

A plan to rescue CS&F. I think it would work, but pride will prevent it from being implemented.


My idea is very simple.

1. Keep El Naschie as Editor in Chief.

2. Add to the cover the small-print tagline "for papers that have no chance of being published anywhere else".

3. Rather than making a pretense of individual peer-review, require all submissions to have appeared on the arxiv for two months prior to submission.

4. Reduce the price from $4520 per year to $45.20. That should cover publication costs if authors are required to follow a strict template that avoids the expense of typesetting.

5. Unbundle it from Elsevier's higher-quality journals. Require it to be purchased separately, or demonstrate good humor and lack of bitterness by working out a deal to bundle it with The Journal of Irreproducible Results. http://www.jir.com/

That's the whole plan! There's a refreshing honesty and logic to it. In every area of commerce there are better and worse quality products, and they are distinguished by price. Why should science journals pretend to be different?
Reply | Report Abuse

EInfinity Club at 10:26 AM on 04/08/09
The problem with blogs like those of Jason is that they are at best a gossiping marketplace. Why do they want people to write there when they can t report a single incident without malicious twisting of words. Jason is jumping from one blog to blog smearing the reputation of Mohamed Elanschie. So could you tell me a single reason why should his friends write in Jasons blog? You have a Mr. An and you can give him bed and breakfast at elnaschie watch. The lawyer of Elnaschie must be delighted that Mr. An is returning to his most beloved theme that Elnaschie doesn t have a Ph.D. Deeply disappointed in everything and nobody giving a damn about him or what he says he has to start all over again. This time without John Baez, the great science writer of Die Zeit nor even Mr. Schermeier of Nature. It can be very lonely in Sinai. Why doesn t Said send you an invitation to join him in his exile and waste the time playing scrabble. It is definitely more intellectual than this nonsense you are wasting your life in. Our offer remains when you take the rule of civilized behavior and scientific value truly into your heart then we will answer and discuss whatever you like. Two pieces of information we can give you as a present. First, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals will remain. It is the most successful Journal which Elsevier has to date. It will continue to appear and there are 3 new hardcopies already sent to subscribers and libraries. Second, Mohamed Elnaschie continues to be the best friend for all of his good friends and Gerardus tHooft is of course included. Living too long in the dirt makes people used to murky waters, however Sinai has long beautiful beaches and in the solitude people should rethink their lives and reorient themselves. There are other alternatives to Dostovesky s Crime & Punishment and this is valid for Said, Christopher and Querin. It is never too late to repent and ask for forgiveness. It was the man from Galileo who said those who have never sinned should throw the first stone. Well Galileo is very near from Sinai so you could have also good sightseeing.

A member of the EInfinity Club


Reply | Report Abuse

An at 10:31 AM on 04/08/09
This is just a typical abstract paper for one of the greatest member of E-infinity club namely Ji-Huan He and his company.

Hierarchy of wool fibers and its interpretation using E-infinity theory
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals,
In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 9 August 2008
Ji-Huan He, Zhong-Fu Ren, Jie Fan, Lan Xu

Abstract
Why do wool fibers show excellent advantages in warmth-retaining and many other practical properties? The paper concludes that their hierarchical structure is the key. Using E-infinity theory, its Hausdorff dimension is estimated to be about 4.2325, very close to El Naschie’s E-infinity dimension, 4.2360, revealing an optimal structure for wool fibers.

I suggest for the next time that author study tefal coating and how things can't stick to it. And how this related to its fractal properties and in turn to its Hausdorff dimension. That is could be an amazing application of El naschie's E-infinity theory.

Of course this can explain that El naschie is using anti-tefal to stick forever to Elsevier even if he has set to retire.

Reply | Report Abuse
EInfinity Club at 07:19 PM on 04/08/09
Dear Jason
Thank you for the correction. I am not being sarcastic but lets recall this eternal line from Casablanca that maybe the beginning of a great friendship -. Let me give you another vital information. Prof. Elnaschies Ph.D. supervisors were two. The first is Lord Henry Shilver who was the Head of the Stability Research Group in University College, London. The second more day to day supervisor was Prof. Thomson, FRC. He is the editor in chief of the proceedings of the Royal Society as far as I can recall. Hs is Ph.D. was published in English, German and French. I mean extracts from it. Maybe you can find out for us who is this vindictive little twit who writes with the pseudo name An and put him out of business. It is such little insects who spoil the reputation of blogs. Let me ask you an honest question: Why should such creature go on reporting all sorts of lies day after day except that he is burning of hate inside. He is so stupid and can thank God that when God made him so stupid, that by a well known theorem due to a great Austrian, he cannot realize how stupid he is. Another fact about Mohamed Elnaschie is that whether Chaos, Solitons & Fractals exists or disappears, and whether he publishes two papers or two thousand, this could not affect his lifestyle one iota. Mohamed Elnaschie is not money driven and has never been. He could be described as a socialist of the brand of people like John Kenneth Galbraith. Incidentally Galbraith was his friend despite the large difference in age. If you search in Elsevier sciencedirect, you will find a letter which Galbraith has written to Mohamed many years ago and you will find an obituary which he has written for Galbraith. You can bet that in a few years from now most people will realize that Mohamed is genuine and his E-Infinity is one of the most profound developments in theoretical physics since decades. In a few weeks a very important paper will be published in a leading British Journal and you will see that Mohamed Elnaschie was ahead of everybody by at least 25 years. The most important discovery on the theoretical level will be announced to you in a few days. Once you have taken all the distortions in your blog, we will reciprocate immediately by giving you names and addresses of all those who have been conspiring against Mohamed Elnaschie. We don t work like John Baez using scandals and who can shout louder. We will deliver proofs - Tangible proofs and irrefutable court documents. The story in Germany has reached a new climax and the court case against a certain person has been transformed now from a civil court to a criminal court. We promise you a big surprise and the table will be turned against those who think they owe the world just because they occupy for the time being an influential position here or there. When you know the names of the people involved, you will say - Play it again Sam. You will be the first to be informed once you adopt a balanced and even handed approach and take out all the libelous statements made against Prof. Elnaschie out of your blog.
Yours faithfully,
EInfinity Club

Reply | Report Abuse

Jason at 03:02 AM on 04/09/09
Hi EInfinity Club. I don't use a pseudonym. I don't know who AN is. Please let me know if you find something libelous on my blog. Be specific so I can take care of it.Reply | Report Abuse

Jason at 05:57 AM on 04/09/09
EInfinity Club, If you Naschienal Socialists really want a free and fair discussion, rather than just to pretend you want one but can't because of rampant libel, racism, foul language, etc., on El Naschie Watch, I suggest you stop whining and get on with it. What did I do when you guys accused me of attacking El naschies family; and when you accused me of attributing 9/11 to El Naschie? Did I say libel libel WTF libel libel ZOMG libel libel libel STFU libel FOAD libel secret service from several countries watching you? No. I said I don't know what you're talking about and moved on. Because I want to talk, and you pretend to want to talk. No doubt you will continue to erect imaginary obstacles.

Kassim at 06:11 AM on 04/09/09

To Jason
I am afraid most of the stuff on your blog is libelous and disrespectful of many people, particularly of Prof. Elnaschie. The name of the blog in Arabic is already wrong and derogatory. You write in Arabic welcome Marhaba to the register ila al mudawana of Al Nasha . Clearly this is nonsense. Please consult with somebody who knows how to write Arabic. Somewhere else you have written the name of Prof. Elnaschie correctly in the Italic form of Arabic which is called Koufi letters. I am an Indian Moslem from Hyderabad and I can write Arabic letters but I am sure you have many Arabs in your neighborhood who can correct the Arabic. Any talking about Prof. Elnaschie not being a Professor and not being a Distinguished Fellow of the Frankfurt Institute is libelous of the first caliber and there are court affidavits signed by those responsible in the Frankfurt Institute who are waiting to take oath in the witness stand. As for the mere suggestion that he doesn t have a Ph.D. or anything of the sort, it s absolutely ludicrous and nobody will even bother to read it. However it is in England at least a very serious matter which can cost a few millions of pounds in compensation. Any sane person even if he is hiding his identity will avoid your blog like the plague if he would be living in England. It might be that in America it is a different matter. In Germany and particularly Switzerland libel law is not very strong. But there is a twist to the story. It is no more libel. In fact it was never a libel. It was from day one a constructed conspiracy. There is a famous Egyptian whose ambition to become the President of Egypt involved. Then there is a person who is an engineering scientist who was in psychiatric treatment who is also involved. This particular persons wife went to prison for 18 months. The wife is using her mentally disturbed husband to take revenge on those whom she thinks were able to put her behind bars. She thinks that the strongest moving power behind her imprisonment for theft and forgery was Prof. Elnaschie. This all would have been rather harmless and was going on for at least ten years but suddenly something else happened. It is the article which appeared in Scientific American connected to this site where we are exchanging our views. For a long time the establishment felt that Mohamed Elnaschie who is an engineer, Laurent Nottale who is an astrophysicist in a non prestigious position and Garnett Ord an enormously nice, polite and modest person who works in a mediocre University in Canada are all not worthy of the great honor of discovering the fundamental role played by fractals in the geometry and topology connected to high energy physics. The idea was far too important to be discovered by people who are far too unimportant in the view of the establishment. They were able to silence and intimidate Nottale after a long time. Nottale is an eloquent and high profile Frenchman. He published in the French version of Scientific American a famous paper on fractal spacetime ten years ago. The establishment was able to cut all grants from Nottale and to send him to Timbuktu. Garnett is not a man who likes controversy. He is musically inclined and his income is modest to say the least. The problem was then Mohamed Elnaschie who is a very pleasant and strong personality as you have already presumed. But the worst thing is that he was financially independent and was very well known as an Engineer and when he started his Journal he had hundreds of papers already published in International Journals. More importantly he had now a well known Journal of which he is the founding editor and he could use it to promote the new idea and free the many young scientists eager to publish their work from the oppression of the establishment. The first step was to rob him of his Journal. They started ten years ago by pushing Nature against him. They failed miserably. Just the opposite, the more they attacked Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, the more it became popular and the impact factor soared. Many moles were smuggled in his vicinity pretending to be friends or students and when they thought they had understood what he is doing sufficiently, they start publishing the same stuff in different guise. Fractal was called foliation; negative dimensions were interpreted as anti commuting Grassmanian variables and so on and so forth. When this paper appeared in 3 different Journals simultaneously, Mohamed Elnaschie knew nothing about it. But unfortunately the Scientific American version was translated in many languages including Arabic. That was the beginning of a massive angry outcry amongst the students and followers of Elnaschie. It is at this point when the conspiracy started. The 3 different lines of attack or interest groups, if you want, who were longing for the demise of Elnaschie united. With two famous scientific personalities who met each other in 1999 in the background, several people were conniving to create a scandal of whatever can come into their hands. The unusual high record of publication of Elnaschie was chosen as a best avenue to start the attack. John Baez was the ideal man. He is a temperamental half South American and he is a friend of Renate Loll. He contacted Schermeier and that is how Nature was dragged into the sodded affair. When the Nature business turned sour and unexpectedly Elnaschie did not crumble and he never does, Schermeier and some people in Macmillan contacted Die Zeit. Renate Loll and somebody else whose name I am not at liberty to mention contacted Dowker and they started a side affair in the Institute of Physics. That was the most stupid step because Mohamed Elnaschie was made a Fellow of the Institute of Physics. It is the first incident in history that a Civil Engineer becomes a Fellow of the Institute of Physics. Since the Institute has the entire history of Mohamed Elanschie including his Ph.D. things became really dangerous for his conspirators. If they would be intelligent they would simply apologize and give the man his due and call it a day. But if humans would be so rational we wouldn t have had the French revolution, the Russian revolution, nor Mr. Bush scandalous lies to the Congress. At the end the truth always comes out. I have told you only five percent or maybe less but I have promised that if you just make a U-turn and start vetting your information before you publish them, you will be the first to receive a copy of the Court Judgment against all those who have conspired to pervert the course of justice. I am writing this letter in my own capacity and not as a member of EInfinity Club.


Jason at 08:25 AM on 04/09/09

Hi Kassim,

"I am afraid most of the stuff on your blog is libelous"

You know that's crapola, and it's why I requested specificity. You won't be specific because you don't want to converse. You want to assert.

El Naschie has a PhD. That's settled. Stop pretending I say otherwise. LIBEL LOLOLOL. Speaking of which Elisabeth Steinbach wrote back on March 10, "...there are even more stupid people than Jason i.e. those who give him money to write this trash..." LIBEL LIBEL ZOMG. Nobody pays me. But I'm over it. Because unlike you guys I don't cultivate and preen a thin skin. I want to talk, not whine.

You and EInfinity Club seem to know a lot about Dr. El Naschie. Please explain the following sentence from his Web site: "After becoming full Professor of Engineering he followed his inclination towards theoretical subjects and moved first towards Applied Mathematics and later on Nuclear and High Energy Physics." I am inclined to think it's a flat-out lie; that in fact he never was made a full professor; but please enlighten me. What university made him a full professor, and when? I'll stand corrected and do a post on my blog titled "El Naschie is a full professor". Fair's fair.

Jason


Jason at 08:37 AM on 04/09/09

To be clear:

El Naschie's claim to be a full professor is a lie.

Jason

Christopher Dowker at 01:06 PM on 04/09/09
Kassim must have touched a sensitive nerve in Jason. Having pretended for 24 hours to be something else than his normal self, he is back at what he can do best which is obvious from his language. The inescapable conclusion Jason, Renate Loll, Fay Dawker and John Baez are more or less one and the same person. Their preferable mouthpieces is Christopher Drosser and to a somewhat more limited extent, the poor Nature correspondent. That is the simple truth and no offense is meant old chump. Enjoy it while it lasts. Signing off,

Jason at 02:48 PM on 04/09/09
"Jason, Renate Loll, Fay Dawker and John Baez are more or less one and the same person."

You are a deluded nutcase.

Anonymus at 08:00 AM on 04/10/09
The worst and most dangerous economic crisis since the Great Depression is threatening the entire world. Unemployment is ravishing the U.S. and Europe. Famine is infesting several African countries as well as Asian countries. Political unrest and human rights violations are short of causing a nuclear war in the Middle East. The People at CERN spent few billion dollars on an experiment which is going to bring nothing save a Nobel Prize for one or two. In fact they shut down the experiment or that is what I heard a month or so ago. Amidst all of that what are the most important things on earth for Mr. An and his varieties? You guessed it right: Mohamed Elnaschie s obsession. I do agree that this could not be Fay Dawker. She is a politically engaged person. She is a first class mathematical physicist. If she commits mistakes, they are not intended and are based on false information. As for Renate Loll, she had enough and she must be regretting underestimating the situation she got herself into needlessly. John Baez is a hot headed half Mexican but good mathematical physicist. He should have been an actor who could play some roles with the young Clint Eastwood. Shoot first, think later. There are only two nutters left to continue these ridiculous allegations: the first is the tragic figure Said Elnashaie, the second is the incarnation of the word inferiority complexes, Christopher Dosser. They are most likely behind this site called El Naschie Watch. That is the best guess I can give lacking hard evidence. If EInfinity Club sends me some information, I could for a modest price, give you a more accurate picture and end this ridiculous pollution of the blog of Scientific American. You can contact me at the same address which I left before.

Christoph at 12:38 PM on 04/10/09

Jason, Sie haben so viel auf Deutsch in Ihrem Blog. Ich bin sicher Sie verstehen Deutsch und deshalb möchte ich Ihnen unmissverständlich meine Meinung sagen. Sie sind ein verlogenes Schwein und ein Arschloch wie es im Buche steht! Viele Grüße Christoph Drösser

Jason at 01:35 AM on 04/11/09

Sock Puppet Christoph -- Perhaps your other sock puppet friends Atef, elokaby, Maysa, Zeigrid G. ,Bridget Bardot, John the Baptist,M. Hartley, The Real D. Baron, Whistler, Margie, and especially EInfinity Club should lecture you rather than me on minimum standards.

An at 07:01 AM on 04/11/09
I didn't claim that El naschie has no Ph.D., but I just wonder
why one can't find his thesis on the online catalouge of university of London. The theses of the great man El naschie should be written in gold and to be available to every one. It is the theses that led it author to golden physics, golden quantum field theory and golden differential geometry. In fact this is something at the level of Newton's principa even may be more important. El naschie thesis offer gold while principa doesn't. I urge the great man just to put a coy of his thesis on his wepsite. Soon, it comes the day where you can find his thesis on museum.

I urge the great man to give his views and plans for the next millennium as Hilbert did this for the twentieth century at its beginning, where Hilbert gave 23 open problems in mathematics. Man like El naschieis is more influential and smarter than Hilbert and can easily plan for the next coming thousand years. El naschie could give one thousand and one open problems in math and physics, nearly a problem for each year.

I urge the great man before publishing a new breakthrough paper shocking the establishment by his tremendous genius brain, just to number the equations in your papers. I have looked at many of your papers and I found in all of them equations are not numbered. You can just fix the program producing papers to number equations. Please acknowledge this site when you fix bugs in the program generating paper. Alternatively, you can learn latex program which numerate automatically numerate equations. You can find many stuff about latex on http://www.tug.org/ (tex user group).

If you have any paper in CS&F at which you numbered equations please tell me.

Aiman Attar at 11:56 AM on 04/11/09
Jason, why don t you put on your blog the full text of one of the more comprehensive papers by Elnaschie? The following paper is ideal because it is half review and half original research and it is rather lengthy so that people could understand it easily. Elnaschie has a weak point of assuming that all people are familiar with all what he has written. He has written an enormous amount of papers not counting his associates and students. So maybe people should be forgiven for not being able to follow them easily particularly when you refer to technical notes and short communications. The paper in question is High energy physics and the standard model from the exceptional Lie groups, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, vol. 36 (2008) 1-7. It is not enough to give the email address of Elsevier sciencedirect. Those guys at Elsevier are real sharks and are claiming exorbitant prices for downloading a paper. Thirty five dollars or so is stiff and it is more than what you pay for an excellent world scientific comprehensive monograph. Particularly since this campaign against Mohamed Elnaschie people are downloading his papers like mad. Strangely as it sounds, John Baez has done Elsevier a great service. So if you can download this paper on your blog and release it free of charge, you would be doing a lot of people a great service. Commercial publishing is a true menace in my own humble opinion. I don t understand why people who claim to be socialist are still willing to work for Elsevier as editors or editors in chief. The paper you chose on your blog Average exceptional Lie etc is not a bad paper but you must really download it completely. In addition, I think you are well advised to censor your blog. Scientific American is doing a very bad job. Ninety percent of all comments are nonsense and by crackpots if not downright lunatics who have escaped from the asylum, you should delete immediately all personal attacks of any kind. It is inappropriate to be sarcastic and most of these blogs are pure empty sarcasm with no content whatsoever and it is a sign of mental poverty and scientific emptiness. You may make a witty remark here and there. However all wit and no content is a total bore. I hope these remarks are of value to you. All the best, Aiman Attar

Jason at 12:57 PM on 04/11/09
Dear Aiman, If someone sends me that paper I'll put it up with the note that it comes highly recommended. I fact I'm greedy for anything from CSF, anything as all. Please send what you've got, everybody.

An, I always enjoy your posts. I agree it's very odd Dr. El Naschie's PhD dissertaion is so hard to obtain. I'm convinced it exists though. On the other hand, when he says he was made a full professor, he's almost certainly lying. I asked him for proof of this a long time ago and he still hasn't responded.

Jason

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com

King of the Old Incas in Transylvania at 02:22 PM on 04/11/09
Sheer triviality and silliness. I implore everybody to enjoy Jasons site which he calls All El Naschie All the time. It is really worth looking at. Anyone who doubts that there is a great nutty living around us should not miss this opportunity. In case you don t know here it is: http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com. It is the only show in town. Come in and see the wonders of the world and discover how El Naschie has stolen a hundred years old drawing by Coexter apart from stealing the Golden Mean discovered by the Pharaohs. Queen Hatshepsut herself will sue him. She has employed the personal solicitor of King Cheops and is calling to the witness stand King Tut and Queen Nefertiti. Come in and don t miss this unique opportunity, Jason and the Juggernauts playing live in the Acropolis. Cleopatra, as the personal envoy of the King of Mesopotamia, will be personally there as a cheer leader hee hee hee Jason mee come everybody and si si. Boy I am becoming myself nuts.

King of the Old Incas in Transylvania


Company at 06:06 PM on 04/11/09
P.S. Should you keep discouraging us by spitting in our face, not visiting my Watch El Naschie blog and not giving me any answer or the slightest respect, I will get real mad because I can stand that much but then I can’t stand no more as my research friend, Popeye would say.

Company at 06:05 PM on 04/11/09
An Baboon and Jason Chimpanzee are pleased to announce the opening of their academic certificate accreditation zoo. Although we do not have a fixed address nor in fact a fixed name we still hope that you will accept us as self appointed guardians of internet piracy ethics. We are pleased to announce that we are full time employees of the Barracuda located near to Riverside, California. Anyone who wants anybody slandered or intimidated should contact us day or night at the nearest local homeless asylum. Sincerely yours An, Jason, Said, Baez & Co.
P.S. Should you keep discouraging us by spitting in our face, not visiting my Watch El Naschie blog and not giving me any answer or the slightest respect, I will get real mad because I can stand that much but then I can t stand no more as my research friend, Popeye would say.


Jason at 07:18 PM on 04/11/09
El Naschie's claim to have been made a full professor is a lie.

Jason

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/

An at 04:37 AM on 04/12/09

I didn't claim that El naschie has no Ph.D. , but I just wonder
why one can't find his thesis on the online catalouge of university of London. The thesis of the great man El naschie should be written in gold and to be available to every one. It is the thesis that led its author to golden physics, golden quantum field theory and golden differential geometry. In fact this is something at the level of Newton's principia even may be more important. El naschie's thesis offers gold while principia doesn't. I urge the great man just to put a coy of his valuable precious thesis on his website. Soon and for sure, it comes the day where you can find his thesis on museums.

I urge the great man to give his views and plans for the next millennium as Hilbert did this for the twentieth century at its beginning, where Hilbert gave 23 open problems in mathematics. Man like El naschie is is more influential and smarter than Hilbert and can easily plan for the next coming thousand years - third millennium. El naschie could give one thousand and one open problems in mathematics and physics, nearly a problem for each year.

I urge the great man before publishing a new breakthrough paper shocking the establishment by his tremendous genius brain, just to number the equations in your papers. I have looked at many of your papers and I found in all of them equations are not numbered. You can just fix the program producing papers to number equations. Please acknowledge this site when you fix bugs in the program generating papers. Alternatively, you can learn latex program which automatically numerate equations. You can find many stuff about latex on http://www.tug.org/ (tex user group).

If you have any paper in CS&F at which you numbered equations please tell me.

P. S. Awaiting the reply of the great man El naschie

An at 08:37 AM on 04/12/09
Other criteria of crackpottishness are exactly fitting El naschie case can be found in
http://www.cognitionandculture.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=435:how-i-found-glaring-errors-in-einsteins-calculations&catid=57:pascals-blog&Itemid=34

1 All crackpottery is foundational. Crackpots do not go for the small problems, for what Kuhn called the puzzle-solving of normal science, they invariably shake the foundations of modern physics. They provide a new structure for the atom, a new unified theory of field and energy, a complete alternative to general relativity, an entirely novel cosmology, etc.

2 Most physics crackpots are engineers. More than 95% of my sample boast engineering degrees, or combine an undergraduate maths/physics degree followed by an engineering PhD or equivalent. This is not too surprising, as this may be the only kind of cursus that provides one with enough math background to understand the equations and formulae in the textbooks without actually studying maths and physics - which would show the crackpot why he’s misguided.

3 All crackpots are male. There used to be the one lady valiantly posting ‘quantum physics disproved’ webpages but she recently died. Perhaps this extraordinary sex-ratio is explained by point [2] above.

4 Crackpots ignore other crackpots. For a long time, physicists pursued by cranks used the time-honored strategy of forwarding those messages to other ones, in the hope that the cooks would exhaust their energies in reciprocal refutations. In fact, practically none of the websites in my collection makes any mention of any other one. In the crackpot’s worldview, there is ego (with an enormously important discovery) vs. the monolithic community of “establishment physics”, and that’s it.

5 The crackpot theory is invariably more intuitive than the standard one. The alternatives to special relativity (which is a favourite crackpot target - about 4/5 of my sample are about that) are invariably “better”, at least in the eyes of the authors, in that they do not result in deeply non-intuituive notions, eg time-dilation. Similarly, alternatives to general relativity eschew the notion of time-space distortion as an account of gravitation. Alternative to the standard model of elementary particles are generally fonded on material particles with known or knowable position and velocity, rather than the standard uncertainty picture.

6 In the same way, the crackpot alternative is, almost universally, less mathematically challenging than the standard account. For instance, tensors and other complicated tools of SR are replaced with college-level calculus, and in many cases with high-school algebra.

7 The crackpot theory is based on textbooks. Most of my cranks cite virtually no recent publications in physics. Almost all of them rely, for their understanding of modern physics, on what is in the textbooks. This explains some quaint, often comical aspects of their prose. For instance, the sites I observed contain extensive and meticulous analyses of the famous Michelson-Morley experiment, demonstrating identical speed of light in all directions, often cited as the princeps refutation of the notion of ether and vindication of relativistic models. The cranks go on and on about possible aspects of that particular study that standard physics may have neglected. Or they fill pages with the 1919 eclipse and the demonstration of Einsteinian “light-bending” by gravity, trying to show that the observation was not so conclusive, etc. The reason for this obsession with particular studies is that those are invariably cited by textbooks - and that is where the cranks get their scientific training.

An at 08:46 AM on 04/12/09
Congratulation for being a champ for the third time dear El Naschie...you have passed all testes with excellent scores the tests of:
-1- T'Hooft criteria for being a bad theoretical physicist.
2- Jhon Baez index of crackpots.
3- Finally Pascal Boyer measure.
http://www.cognitionandculture.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=435:how-i-found-glaring-errors-in-einsteins-calculations&catid=57:pascals-blog&Itemid=34

You are unbelievable..you are so universal that you fit with all bad criteria. You deserve to be mentioned in the next edition of Guinness World Records.

James at 05:48 PM on 04/12/09
I mistakenly listened to a colleague this weekend who advised me to look at the El Naschie Watch site. I gave up looking at most of this garbage some time ago as it is very clearly nothing to do with science and all to do with personal mud wrestling. This new site is even worse in fact it should be relegated to the props box of the local drama society from whence it has obviously sprung. This is clearly run by someone who has a totally warped mind. I can well imagine a criminal profiler describing him as a bit of a misfit, very intelligent but a complete failure at normal life. This is someone who is very frustrated in their work and who longs for and constantly seeks the limelight, unsuccessfully, and who cannot function normally in social settings. Someone who, just like many others who have jumped on this bandwagon, feels they have been given the short straw in life professionally, personally and very likely, looks-wise as well. Someone who cannot accept responsibility for their life and their problems but who blame the world or anyone that is successful. The only emotion this site invoked in me was pity. Pity for the poor soul spending his time creating this trash and I for one will certainly not be visiting again and will tell as many people as I can not to waste their time either.

Anonymus at 06:39 PM on 04/12/09
You are a true ignoramus Jason. Some of the founding fathers of modern theoretical physics are engineers and had no other education except engineering. Nobel Laureate Paul Dirac studied electrical engineering. Nobel Laureate Oigen Wiegner is an aeronautical engineer. The only man who got two Nobel Prizes in modern physics is a well-known engineer and I will not give you his name to save you googling all night long. Mohamed Elnaschie maybe a crackpot, I don t know him but I know you. You are a not a crackpot. You are a cracked crook. I know you are only doing your job. You are paid to do just what you are doing. Forget about all that. Please just tell me how do you evaluate within your classification of crack pottery a man or a creature who spent so much time as you do writing nonsense about Mohamed Elnaschie. What is so important for you to compel you to leave everything and spend this unreasonable amount of time and effort on this nonsense? I understand how difficult it must be for a creature of your mould to answer a reasonable question. I think I can wait for a reasonable answer from you until hell freezes. With a probability bordering on certainty your next comment will be trash as usual.

Hi Anonymous, thanks for your question. I answer it on my blog:
see
Why are you doing this?
and also
Blowback
El Naschie is an evil racist scapegoater, victimologist, and hatemonger, in short. You Naschienal Socialists of the Naschie Party give him a pass on that, so you are as well. He's also a fraud who pretends to have been made a full professor. And a legal bully. Finally, he is a gazillionaire who pretends money doesn't matter. I understand he's a gentleman, a kind person, extemely likeable, and obviously fiercely defended by his friends. People are complicated, not black-and-white. But on balance I think he's vile, and deserving of all the scorn that can be mustered.

Jason at 09:54 PM on 04/12/09
You Naschienal Socialists keep libeling me:

1. Claiming I get paid for my blogging. I wouldn't mind, but as it happens I do not. I don't even have advertisements on my site.

2. Claiming I defamed El Naschie's wife and or daughters, about whom I know nothing.

3. Claiming I accused El Naschie of involvement in the events of September 11, 2001, which is laughable.

Here are the URLS from my previous post stripped out of their tags for easier copy/paste:

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2009/03/why-are-you-doing-this.html

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2009/02/blowback.html

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2009/04/hypocrite.html

An at 02:07 AM on 04/13/09
I didn't claim that El naschie has no Ph.D., but I just wonder
why one can't find his thesis on the online catalouge of university of London. The thesis of the great man El naschie should be written in gold and to be available to every one. It is the thesis that led its author to golden physics, golden quantum field theory and golden differential geometry. In fact this is something at the level of Newton's principia even may be more important. El naschie's thesis offers gold while principia doesn't. I urge the great man just to put a coy of his valuable precious thesis on his website. Soon and for sure, it comes the day where you can find his thesis on museums.

I urge the great man to give his views and plans for the next millennium as Hilbert did this for the twentieth century at its beginning, where Hilbert gave 23 open problems in mathematics. Man like El naschie is is more influential and smarter than Hilbert and can easily plan for the next coming thousand years - third millennium. El naschie could give one thousand and one open problems in mathematics and physics, nearly a problem for each year.

I urge the great man before publishing a new breakthrough paper shocking the establishment by his tremendous genius brain, just to number the equations in your papers. I have looked at many of your papers and I found in all of them equations are not numbered. You can just fix the program producing papers to number equations. Please acknowledge this site when you fix bugs in the program generating papers. Alternatively, you can learn latex program which automatically numerate equations. You can find many stuff about latex on http://www.tug.org/ (tex user group).

If you have any paper in CS&F at which you numbered equations please tell me.

P. S. Awaiting the reply of the great man El naschie

Silver Lining at 05:07 AM on 04/13/09
Pathetic and evil creatures. A good place for people like Mr.An and Mr. Jason is a mental institute. You should be ignored completely. Creatures like you are despicable and one wonders why God created you in the first instance. You are so full of hate and you live in a fallacious world. You are wrong on every claim and you deserve nothing than our utmost disgust. The more you attack the more Prof. Elnaschie supporters increase because they know better. So continue with your hate campaigns. It is working for us. Again as we said before it is a silver lining.

Emara at 07:16 AM on 04/13/09
Nothing and I mean nothing could be said or written about Jason, An, Said, Baez, Loll, Drosser and Schermeier which could reflect their character, moral values and scientific principle better than looking at the blog of Jason of which he is so proud. His blog El Naschie watch is the best living proof and testament to the filth we have to endure through the internet. Macmillan, the publisher of Scientific American should be ashamed that they allow these insects to thrive through their blogs. When you look at the CV of Said who is Baez, who is Jason, who is Christopher Drosser, then you will understand everything. I will never comment on this site again. It is a complete disgrace. But for the record, you may review again the said CV: http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
http://saidelnashaie.blogspot.com/


Reply | Report Abuse
Martin Schueber at 09:07 AM on 04/13/09
Ich bin nat?rlich mittlerweile kl?ger und wei? wer dahinter steckt. Das sind die Zwei, Christoph Droesser der seine Schuld schon vor dem Gericht schriftlich gestanden hat und der vorbestrafte Said S.E.H. El-Nashaie. Sie sind wirklich ein Sauhaufen ohne jeglichen Scham und Anstand. Sie haben sich diesen Verbrecher und Internetclochard Jason gemietet. Sie sind es beide nicht einmal wert das man Sie anspuckt. Beide ins Klo und dann kr?ftig nachsp?len sollte man Sie zusammen. Sie sind keine Wissenschaftsjournalisten, Sie sind Zuh?lter und St. Pauli Rausschmei?er und der Editor von Scientific American der erlaubt wie es hier zugeht und auch noch Werbung f?r so einen dreckigen, fiesen Web-Blog macht sollte lieber ins Rotlichtmilieu wechseln und sich dort einen Job suchen und bitte nehmen Sie auch noch Ihre Entourage. Es ist keine Wissenschaft mehr sondern ein ekelerregender Dreckshaufen.
Martin Sch?ber


Reply | Report Abuse
Steve W. at 09:58 AM on 04/13/09
There is no numerology at all in the work of Palmer on the invariant limit set or in El Naschie s VAK conjecture. They are using well known topological arguments. I doubt very much Jason understands what he is talking about. His comments show a man who does not know what topology is or in fact what numerology is.Reply | Report Abuse

Jason at 09:22 PM on 04/12/09
Hi Anonymous, thanks for your question. I answer it on my blog:
see
Why are you doing this?
and also
Blowback
El Naschie is an evil racist scapegoater, victimologist, and hatemonger, in short. You Naschienal Socialists of the Naschie Party give him a pass on that, so you are as well. He's also a fraud who pretends to have been made a full professor. And a legal bully. Finally, he is a gazillionaire who pretends money doesn't matter. I understand he's a gentleman, a kind person, extemely likeable, and obviously fiercely defended by his friends. People are complicated, not black-and-white. But on balance I think he's vile, and deserving of all the scorn that can be mustered.Reply | Report Abuse
Jason at 09:54 PM on 04/12/09
You Naschienal Socialists keep libeling me:

1. Claiming I get paid for my blogging. I wouldn't mind, but as it happens I do not. I don't even have advertisements on my site.

2. Claiming I defamed El Naschie's wife and or daughters, about whom I know nothing.

3. Claiming I accused El Naschie of involvement in the events of September 11, 2001, which is laughable.

Here are the URLS from my previous post stripped out of their tags for easier copy/paste:

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2009/03/why-are-you-doing-this.html

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2009/02/blowback.html">Blowback

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2009/04/hypocrite.htmlReply | Report Abuse
Jason at 11:19 PM on 04/12/09
By the way, El Naschie's claim to have been made a full professor is a lie.

Jason

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/Reply | Report Abuse
An at 02:07 AM on 04/13/09
I didn't claim that El naschie has no Ph.D. , but I just wonder
why one can't find his thesis on the online catalouge of university of London. The thesis of the great man El naschie should be written in gold and to be available to every one. It is the thesis that led its author to golden physics, golden quantum field theory and golden differential geometry. In fact this is something at the level of Newton's principia even may be more important. El naschie's thesis offers gold while principia doesn't. I urge the great man just to put a coy of his valuable precious thesis on his website. Soon and for sure, it comes the day where you can find his thesis on museums.

I urge the great man to give his views and plans for the next millennium as Hilbert did this for the twentieth century at its beginning, where Hilbert gave 23 open problems in mathematics. Man like El naschie is is more influential and smarter than Hilbert and can easily plan for the next coming thousand years - third millennium. El naschie could give one thousand and one open problems in mathematics and physics, nearly a problem for each year.

I urge the great man before publishing a new breakthrough paper shocking the establishment by his tremendous genius brain, just to number the equations in your papers. I have looked at many of your papers and I found in all of them equations are not numbered. You can just fix the program producing papers to number equations. Please acknowledge this site when you fix bugs in the program generating papers. Alternatively, you can learn latex program which automatically numerate equations. You can find many stuff about latex on http://www.tug.org/ (tex user group).

If you have any paper in CS&F at which you numbered equations please tell me.

P. S. Awaiting the reply of the great man El naschie Reply | Report Abuse
Silver Lining at 05:07 AM on 04/13/09
Pathetic and evil creatures. A good place for people like Mr.An and Mr. Jason is a mental institute. You should be ignored completely. Creatures like you are despicable and one wonders why God created you in the first instance. You are so full of hate and you live in a fallacious world. You are wrong on every claim and you deserve nothing than our utmost disgust. The more you attack the more Prof. Elnaschie supporters increase because they know better. So continue with your hate campaigns. It is working for us. Again as we said before it is a silver lining.
Reply | Report Abuse
Jason at 06:48 AM on 04/13/09
El Naschie's claim to have been made a full professor is a lie.

Jason

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/Reply | Report Abuse
Emara at 07:16 AM on 04/13/09
Nothing and I mean nothing could be said or written about Jason, An, Said, Baez, Loll, Drosser and Schermeier which could reflect their character, moral values and scientific principle better than looking at the blog of Jason of which he is so proud. His blog El Naschie watch is the best living proof and testament to the filth we have to endure through the internet. Macmillan, the publisher of Scientific American should be ashamed that they allow these insects to thrive through their blogs. When you look at the CV of Said who is Baez, who is Jason, who is Christopher Drosser, then you will understand everything. I will never comment on this site again. It is a complete disgrace. But for the record, you may review again the said CV: http://thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com/
http://saidelnashaie.blogspot.com/

Reply | Report Abuse
Martin Schueber at 09:07 AM on 04/13/09
Ich bin nat�rlich mittlerweile kl�ger und wei� wer dahinter steckt. Das sind die Zwei, Christoph Droesser der seine Schuld schon vor dem Gericht schriftlich gestanden hat und der vorbestrafte Said S.E.H. El-Nashaie. Sie sind wirklich ein Sauhaufen ohne jeglichen Scham und Anstand. Sie haben sich diesen Verbrecher und Internetclochard Jason gemietet. Sie sind es beide nicht einmal wert das man Sie anspuckt. Beide ins Klo und dann kr�ftig nachsp�len sollte man Sie zusammen. Sie sind keine Wissenschaftsjournalisten, Sie sind Zuh�lter und St. Pauli Rausschmei�er und der Editor von Scientific American der erlaubt wie es hier zugeht und auch noch Werbung f�r so einen dreckigen, fiesen Web-Blog macht sollte lieber ins Rotlichtmilieu wechseln und sich dort einen Job suchen und bitte nehmen Sie auch noch Ihre Entourage. Es ist keine Wissenschaft mehr sondern ein ekelerregender Dreckshaufen.
Martin Sch�ber

Reply | Report Abuse
Steve W. at 09:58 AM on 04/13/09
There is no numerology at all in the work of Palmer on the invariant limit set or in El Naschie s VAK conjecture. They are using well known topological arguments. I doubt very much Jason understands what he is talking about. His comments show a man who does not know what topology is or in fact what numerology is.Reply | Report Abuse
Jason at 04:18 PM on 04/13/09
El Naschie's claim to have been made a full professor is a lie.

Jason

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/

Jason at 09:43 PM on 04/13/09
HAHAHAHAHA Chaos, Solitons and Fractals doesn't number equations!?

An, that's a riot. LOL :)

JasonReply | Report Abuse
Jason at 10:25 PM on 04/13/09
Emara said:

"the blog of Jason... His blog El Naschie watch is the best living proof and testament to the filth we have to endure through the internet."

Who's making you endure it, Emara? The Internet's a big place. You can watch the Moon song all day.
http://www.rathergood.com/moon_song
Or turn off your computer and go for a walk.Reply | Report Abuse
Jason at 04:14 AM on 04/14/09
Jason at 10:25 PM on 04/13/09
Emara said:

"the blog of Jason... His blog El Naschie watch is the best living proof and testament to the filth we have to endure through the internet."

Who's making you endure it, Emara? The Internet's a big place. You can watch the Moon song all day.
http://www.rathergood.com/moon_song
Or turn off your computer and go for a walk.Reply | Report Abuse



Mohamed Ali Akbar at 07:04 AM on 04/14/09
Any Moslem or any god-fearing person, Moslem, Christian or Jew must be shattered to see the obscenity of Jason Blog which Scientific American is propagating. It is not a coincidence that the main perpetuators of these obscenities are located in Denmark and Holland. Was it not in Copenhagen that a far greater crime was committed against our most sacred values? Is it not Holland who supports anti-Islam at every possible occasion. I call on all Moslems and all decent people to stop Jason. I say to Dr. Renate Loll and Dr. Gerard tHooft that they are just as responsible as Jason for all these blasphemous obscenity with which they are filling the blogs via hired criminal like Jason. Said El Nashaie is a sick person. He is detained in the University of Sinai and is watched day and night and the owner of the University Dr. Hassan Rateb is himself a pious Moslem. I do not think that this poor soul, Said El Nashaie could on his own erect this repulsive orgy on Jason blog. There is a lot of money behind that. This money can come only from Hassan Rateb or from Holland and Denmark. I call on all Moslems to stop Jason and his blog by peaceful means. We do not want to wake up one day and hear that someone of these guys was found with a bullet in his head in a water ditch in Seattle, Copenhagen or Utrecht. This is not the way a Moslem behaves. We should protest and sign a petition and send it to influential people including the editorial board of Scientific American. Please write to the President of the board of Directors of Macmillan and maybe even to the Banks providing loan and credit to the Macmillan Publishing empire. Together we can put an end to this obscene, distasteful and blasphemous behavior of the perverted minority and the trash of western civilization.

Reply | Report Abuse
Atef at 07:21 AM on 04/14/09
This is a message to Said Salah Eldin Hamed. You call yourself Elnashaie yet you stood behind bars spitting on the cousin of your father who is an old lady and a retired judge. Now you hire a transvestite to draw a picture of a man behind bars and put it on Al Naschie watch. This shows me that you are more tormented and more insane than I even every thought. I have known you for so long but I never knew that you are so perverted. Is all that the influence of Dr. Shadia Elshishiny. Is that all the influence of Ms. Jehane Fadel. That is what Mohamed El Naschie believes. He believes it because he does not want to see the truth. The truth is that you are a fatal mistake of creation. You are rotten to the core. I could only pray that the Almighty relieves you and us from having to share the same space. You slipped from a distinguished Professor in Pennsylvania University to a vagabond in Sinai University begging Dr. Hassan Rateb for tips. Your free fall is unstoppable and it seems there is nothing low enough for you. If you are in any doubt, just have a look at the Jason blog which you finance. Just go and talk to your real friends and ask them what they think of your new position as a freelance correspondent for the Jason Daily. Do you have any feelings any more left or any sense of dignity or manhood or loyalty or family ties or belief in God or belief in decency or truth. Of course not. From the depth of my heart, Said, I hope you rot in hell as you are rotting now in Sinai.
Atef

Reply | Report Abuse
Anonymus at 11:19 AM on 04/14/09
It is worth recalling how all this began that a respectable site degenerated to the level you are witnessing in this blog. Dr. Renate Loll from Utrecht University, Dr. Jan Ambjorn from Neils Bohr Institute and Dr. Jerzy Jerkiewicz from University of Warsaw decided to ignore twenty years of fundamental contribution to the theory of fractal spacetime. They more or less claimed the discovery of cantor sets as the building block of spacetime and derived the 4 dimensionality of spacetime from these basic blogs using computer simulation. Understandably, the many scientists who contributed to this field notably Mohamed Elnaschie, Laurent Nottale and Garnett Ord became aghast. I am not aware of any direct protest from these three scientists but scores of their students and colleagues wrote letters with varying degrees of intensity to the editor in chief of Scientific American. The arrogance of Renate Loll and her co-authors was clearly provocative. The direct boss to whom she reports is Nobel Laureate G. tHooft. It is fair to say that Gerard was grossly misled and greatly influenced by half truths which he neither had the time nor inclination to study as meticulously as he developed his well known theory of renormalization. The discussion became heated maybe because a large sum of many millions Euros, prize and research money was awarded to Renate Loll and the University of Utrecht. This was perceived by many as gross injustice to the many young people who contributed to this field far more than Loll and her colleagues. It must be admitted that the discussion was sometime less than courteous but it remained a scientific discussion. That is until Renate Loll contacted her friend John Baez from the University of California, Riverside, USA. John Baez described himself as a one man internet army and he contacted some criminal element in the Middle East, some non entities in the former Soviet Block. A young mathematician from Croatia who got his Ph.D. not long ago named Zoran Skoda from Boscovitch Institute was drafted to forge letters of indignation written in the most rudimentary English making scandalous allegations against Prof. Elnaschie who is the founding editor of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals and the strongest proponent of cantor sets in quantum mechanics. When Baez and Skodas plot failed, they had many auxiliary plans. A science Journalist in Nature based in Munich Querin Schermeier was misled to write a completely fabricated defamatory article in Nature. When this did not work either, they moved to the Institute of Physics and enlisted the help of Dr. Banks and Dr. Fay Dawker. When this failed miserably, they got hold of a totally twisted science writer who boasts a diploma in pure mathematics named Christian Dosser to write one of the most despicable articles ever written in a respectable weekly newspaper. The whole thing was financed in a joint venture between all of the above and a convicted criminal in Egypt as well as his wife and stepdaughter. When all that failed, there remained only downright criminality. With the help of a man who is dying to become the President of Egypt, although his chances are less than zero, they found Jason who constructed one of the most obscene blogs on the internet. Jason is clearly coached by Said Elnashaie, John Baez and Renate Loll apart of the mega maniac Drosser who will never stop before his behind bar. It is now up to the editorial board of Scientific American to clean up this site from all this perverse transvestite, sado machistic trash which Jason and the rest of anonymous commentators have put on this blog. Unless this is done soon, the editorial board of Scientific American will not be able to escape from the responsibility of defaming so many people and advertising obscenities on the site of what is supposed to be a scientific magazine.Reply | Report Abuse
puppetphd at 03:24 PM on 04/14/09
The following is a direct response to this comment.

Maybe we should really go to these people and get some money for what we do, what do you think, Jason?

Oh... No.

The stuff I read here is motivation enough for me to do my contributions at no charge at all :) Go on Mohamed Ali Akbar but take care. I find your bullet-in-the-head phantasies shocking. Still I hope there will be a better way out for you, out of this world of imaginary identities and degrees and affiliations. Please don't harm yourself. Keep libeling, keep up the denunciation of who your wretched thinking assumes is behind the development of things that reveal the truth about you. Your vile moves keep the whole thing turning.

Cheers,
Martin KlickenReply | Report Abuse
An at 04:20 AM on 04/15/09
I didn't claim that El naschie has no Ph.D. , but I just wonder
why one can't find his thesis on the online catalouge of university of London. The thesis of the great man El naschie should be written in gold and to be available to every one. It is the thesis that led its author to golden physics, golden quantum field theory and golden differential geometry. In fact this is something at the level of Newton's principia even may be more important. El naschie's thesis offers gold while principia doesn't. I urge the great man just to put a coy of his valuable precious thesis on his website. Soon and for sure, it comes the day where you can find his thesis on museums.

I urge the great man to give his views and plans for the next millennium as Hilbert did this for the twentieth century at its beginning, where Hilbert gave 23 open problems in mathematics. Man like El naschie is is more influential and smarter than Hilbert and can easily plan for the next coming thousand years - third millennium. El naschie could give one thousand and one open problems in mathematics and physics, nearly a problem for each year.

I urge the great man before publishing a new breakthrough paper shocking the establishment by his tremendous genius brain, just to number the equations in your papers. I have looked at many of your papers and I found in all of them equations are not numbered. You can just fix the program producing papers to number equations. Please acknowledge this site when you fix bugs in the program generating papers. Alternatively, you can learn latex program which automatically numerate equations. You can find many stuff about latex on http://www.tug.org/ (tex user group).

If you have any paper in CS&F at which you numbered equations please tell me.

P. S. Awaiting the reply of the great man El naschie Reply | Report Abuse
Anonymous 2 at 10:04 AM on 04/15/09
It is worth recalling how all this began that a respectable site degenerated to the level you are witnessing in this blog. Dr. Renate Loll from Utrecht University, Dr. Jan Ambjorn from Neils Bohr Institute and Dr. Jerzy Jerkiewicz from University of Warsaw decided to ignore twenty years of fundamental contribution to the theory of fractal spacetime. They more or less claimed the discovery of cantor sets as the building block of spacetime and derived the 4 dimensionality of spacetime from these basic blogs using computer simulation. Understandably, the many scientists who contributed to this field notably Mohamed Elnaschie, Laurent Nottale and Garnett Ord became aghast. I am not aware of any direct protest from these three scientists but scores of their students and colleagues wrote letters with varying degrees of intensity to the editor in chief of Scientific American. The arrogance of Renate Loll and her co-authors was clearly provocative. The direct boss to whom she reports is Nobel Laureate G. tHooft. It is fair to say that Gerard was grossly misled and greatly influenced by half truths which he neither had the time nor inclination to study as meticulously as he developed his well known theory of renormalization. The discussion became heated maybe because a large sum of many millions Euros, prize and research money was awarded to Renate Loll and the University of Utrecht. This was perceived by many as gross injustice to the many young people who contributed to this field far more than Loll and her colleagues. It must be admitted that the discussion was sometime less than courteous but it remained a scientific discussion. That is until Renate Loll contacted her friend John Baez from the University of California, Riverside, USA. John Baez described himself as a one man internet army and he contacted some criminal element in the Middle East, some non entities in the former Soviet Block. A young mathematician from Croatia who got his Ph.D. not long ago named Zoran Skoda from Boscovitch Institute was drafted to forge letters of indignation written in the most rudimentary English making scandalous allegations against Prof. Elnaschie who is the founding editor of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals and the strongest proponent of cantor sets in quantum mechanics. When Baez and Skodas plot failed, they had many auxiliary plans. A science Journalist in Nature based in Munich Querin Schermeier was misled to write a completely fabricated defamatory article in Nature. When this did not work either, they moved to the Institute of Physics and enlisted the help of Dr. Banks and Dr. Fay Dawker. When this failed miserably, they got hold of a totally twisted science writer who boasts a diploma in pure mathematics named Christian Dosser to write one of the most despicable articles ever written in a respectable weekly newspaper. The whole thing was financed in a joint venture between all of the above and a convicted criminal in Egypt as well as his wife and stepdaughter. When all that failed, there remained only downright criminality. With the help of a man who is dying to become the President of Egypt, although his chances are less than zero, they found Jason who constructed one of the most obscene blogs on the internet. Jason is clearly coached by Said Elnashaie, John Baez and Renate Loll apart of the mega maniac Drosser who will never stop before his behind bar. It is now up to the editorial board of Scientific American to clean up this site from all this perverse transvestite, sado machistic trash which Jason and the rest of anonymous commentators have put on this blog. Unless this is done soon, the editorial board of Scientific American will not be able to escape from the responsibility of defaming so many people and advertising obscenities on the site of what is supposed to be a scientific magazine.Reply | Report Abuse
Akbar at 10:52 AM on 04/15/09
Dear brother Ali Akbar, I have seen the revolting document you sent me. The entire blog smells of the devil. All the brothers here are shaking their heads, wondering what is next on the web. Is that what they call science? Is that what their Western civilization is all about? When a Moslem scientist achieves excellence and causes a paradigm shift unprecedented in modern science, then they face him with an unprecedented obscene defamation campaign. The mere thought that our women folk could see these revolting pictures makes me ignore your warning. But this would be wrong. Two wrongs do not make a right. We were tempted in the mosque today to make a fatwa against the perpetrators of obscenities and these new enemies of Islam masquerading as scientists. Particularly this infidel you call Said is far worse than Salman Rushdie. He is giving it all what he got to deprive the Moslem world from a great honor. It is I must admit exactly what the infidel wants us to do. They want to point the finger at us as enemies of science. They will ignore later on that what they mean with science is nothing but pornography. I advise patience and starting with taking legal action first. If they do not get the point, there will remain ample time to take one or more of the options which we have at our disposal. The Moslem world is not weak. Do not forget we were forced to live with these people because blasphemers from our own midst have forced us out of our own countries so as painful as it is brothers, it is also our mistake. I pray to God that those behind El Naschie Watch blog, whether they are mentally sick people or Nobel laureates should rot in hell and be eternalized in fire. To avoid any misunderstanding, all our options must remain peaceful and we advise strongly against the use of any illegal means. The law in the West, imperfect as it is, is the law of our host countries and we must respect it, regardless of the kind of parasite that we have to face. We should never play ourselves into their hands. Doing that is all that the infidels want us to do. You must make a definite distinction between decadent European civilization and European civilization. Some of the best Moslems in the history of Islam were European. In fact a Jew like Prof. Norman Chomsky or a Christian like Lord Tony Benn is worth a million Moslems like Said Elnashaie and Salman Rushdie.


Anyone surprised? Not Me.

Reynolds at 01:05 PM on 04/16/09
About 600 comments and some 400 or so of these 600 are absolutely disgraceful trash. None the less, the Editors of Scientific American consider this trash fit to be printed and kept on their blog. The last comment by some Moslems who seem to be offended in their beliefs and values are truly serious. Scientific American should remember that obscenity can provoke many people and not only Moslems. [What obscenity? murderously so? what people? -Ed] The people responsible may want to recall some incidents in California. Do you remember the Sharon Tate tragedy? Do you want something similar to Mason and his sister to strike in Seattle? [Note this is a threat of violence against me, as I live in Seattle. Funny he was unable to think of a single Muslim nutball since 1969 --Ed]
Would it not be better and more civilized for Scientific American to close down this site and stop this orgy which is bringing science and scientific debate to unprecedented low levels. Why cant Dr. John Baez and Dr. Said whatever his second name is call off their dogs?
[I'm my own dog, bro. --Ed]

Jason at 01:25 PM on 04/16/09
Stop it threatening to go all Manson-murder on me Reynolds, you violent creep. And learn to spell.

Killing me won't make El Naschie a full professor anyway.

EInfinity Club at 04:41 PM on 04/16/09
I have seen the trash written by Jason and this is a message to his paymasters. Prof. Elnaschie lives in Munich and Hamburg as well as Frankfurt. He will be more than delighted to meet you in court. Please do not delay initiating proceedings and you may report your case to your nearest state prosecution. In return, I can assure you that you are the one who will end up behind bars. You lied in court and we have the evidence. Do not let us wait too long.

Günther Koenig at 04:59 PM on 04/16/09
Das war zu erwarten von Ihnen Herr Diplom-Mathematiker. Ein Mann der es so hoch gebracht hat und Diplom-Mathematiker geworden ist muss entsetzt sein das ihn niemand au?er der Klatschpresse aufgenommen hat. Noch schlimmer dass er es mit Ach und Krach zu einem pseudo-wissenschaftlichen Kolumnisten in einer halbwegs renommierten Wochenzeitung geschafft hat, dann ist er auf die Nase gefallen. Sie haben gelogen und daf?r gehen Sie ins Gef?ngnis. Es wurde Ihnen schon einmal gesagt und jetzt sagen wir es Ihnen wieder. Sie kommen noch hinter Gitter. Das ist ein Ehrenwort, falls Sie, woher Sie kommen wissen was ein Ehrenwort ist.

Julius Daum at 05:00 PM on 04/16/09
An Herrn Droesser von Die Zeit:
Uns wurde mitgeteilt, dass Sie gerne mit Professor Klicken und Professor Jason eine Klage gegen Professor El Naschie einreichen wuerden. Professor El Naschie wohnt in Deutschland, gibt sich dort als Professor aus und wuerde sehr gerne vor Gericht geladen werden um auszusagen. Bitte versuchen Sie keine leeren Drohungen zu machen. Anstelle großer Sprueche und das Maul wieder groß aufzureißen, tun Sie es! Die Staatsanwaltschaft wird sich todsicher dafuer interessieren was ein Mann Ihres Standes und Wuerde zu sagen hat.
In Erwartung Ihres tatkraeftigen Handelns
Ihr sehr ergebener Julius Daum

M. Stoll at 05:19 PM on 04/16/09
Christoph Droesser, dass Sie ein verlogenes Schwein sind, das wissen Sie ja. Aber Sie wissen immer noch nicht was für ein saublöder Kerl Sie sind. Sie können sich Ihre Decknamen Jason und Klicken in den Hintern stecken. Wir haben alles! Es waere ja gelacht, wenn eine tote Fliege wie Sie jemandem Angst einjagen koennte. Sie haben uns alle beschaemt. Ich war immer dagegen, dass Sie von DIE ZEIT engagiert werden. Jetzt muss DIE ZEIT für Sie die Zeche bezahlen Sie Schweinehund.

Fritz Gehrmann at 05:39 PM on 04/16/09
Herr Professor Dr. Dr. habil Klicken! Bei Ihnen klickt es wohl nicht mehr richtig. Im nächsten Eurovisions-Song-Wettbewerb sollten Sie auftreten mit
Wadde hadde Du de da
ich hasse den El Naschie da,
weil ich ein bisschen bloed und gaga war.
Schöne Gruesse an den Dussel Droesser von Dusseldorf. Reply | Report Abuse
Maria Engel at 05:29 PM on 04/16/09
Ueberheblich und Dumm ist eine giftige Mischung. Wenn Sie noch einen Funken Verstand haben entschuldigen Sie sich sofort bei Professor El Naschie. Mit diesem hirnverbrannten Zeug ueber Professur, da kommen Sie keinen Zentimeter weiter. Sie machen sich in allen Zeitungen laecherlich Herr Droesser.Reply | Report Abuse

M. Stoll at 05:19 PM on 04/16/09
Christoph Droesser, dass Sie ein verlogenes Schwein sind, das wissen Sie ja. Aber Sie wissen immer noch nicht was für ein saublöder Kerl Sie sind. Sie können sich Ihre Decknamen Jason und Klicken in den Hintern stecken. Wir haben alles! Es waere ja gelacht, wenn eine tote Fliege wie Sie jemandem Angst einjagen koennte. Sie haben uns alle beschaemt. Ich war immer dagegen, dass Sie von DIE ZEIT engagiert werden. Jetzt muss DIE ZEIT für Sie die Zeche bezahlen Sie Schweinehund.Reply | Report Abuse
Julius Daum at 05:00 PM on 04/16/09
An Herrn Droesser von Die Zeit:
Uns wurde mitgeteilt, dass Sie gerne mit Professor Klicken und Professor Jason eine Klage gegen Professor El Naschie einreichen wuerden. Professor El Naschie wohnt in Deutschland, gibt sich dort als Professor aus und wuerde sehr gerne vor Gericht geladen werden um auszusagen. Bitte versuchen Sie keine leeren Drohungen zu machen. Anstelle großer Sprueche und das Maul wieder groß aufzureißen, tun Sie es! Die Staatsanwaltschaft wird sich todsicher dafuer interessieren was ein Mann Ihres Standes und Wuerde zu sagen hat.
In Erwartung Ihres tatkraeftigen Handelns
Ihr sehr ergebener Julius Daum

Reply | Report Abuse
Günther Koenig at 04:59 PM on 04/16/09
Das war zu erwarten von Ihnen Herr Diplom-Mathematiker. Ein Mann der es so hoch gebracht hat und Diplom-Mathematiker geworden ist muss entsetzt sein das ihn niemand au?er der Klatschpresse aufgenommen hat. Noch schlimmer dass er es mit Ach und Krach zu einem pseudo-wissenschaftlichen Kolumnisten in einer halbwegs renommierten Wochenzeitung geschafft hat, dann ist er auf die Nase gefallen. Sie haben gelogen und daf?r gehen Sie ins Gef?ngnis. Es wurde Ihnen schon einmal gesagt und jetzt sagen wir es Ihnen wieder. Sie kommen noch hinter Gitter. Das ist ein Ehrenwort, falls Sie, woher Sie kommen wissen was ein Ehrenwort ist.


Julius Daum at 05:00 PM on 04/16/09
An Herrn Droesser von Die Zeit:
Uns wurde mitgeteilt, dass Sie gerne mit Professor Klicken und Professor Jason eine Klage gegen Professor El Naschie einreichen wuerden. Professor El Naschie wohnt in Deutschland, gibt sich dort als Professor aus und wuerde sehr gerne vor Gericht geladen werden um auszusagen. Bitte versuchen Sie keine leeren Drohungen zu machen. Anstelle großer Sprueche und das Maul wieder groß aufzureißen, tun Sie es! Die Staatsanwaltschaft wird sich todsicher dafuer interessieren was ein Mann Ihres Standes und Wuerde zu sagen hat.
In Erwartung Ihres tatkraeftigen Handelns
Ihr sehr ergebener Julius Daum

M. Stoll at 05:19 PM on 04/16/09
Christoph Droesser, dass Sie ein verlogenes Schwein sind, das wissen Sie ja. Aber Sie wissen immer noch nicht was für ein saublöder Kerl Sie sind. Sie können sich Ihre Decknamen Jason und Klicken in den Hintern stecken. Wir haben alles! Es waere ja gelacht, wenn eine tote Fliege wie Sie jemandem Angst einjagen koennte. Sie haben uns alle beschaemt. Ich war immer dagegen, dass Sie von DIE ZEIT engagiert werden. Jetzt muss DIE ZEIT für Sie die Zeche bezahlen Sie Schweinehund.

Maria Engel at 05:29 PM on 04/16/09
Ueberheblich und Dumm ist eine giftige Mischung. Wenn Sie noch einen Funken Verstand haben entschuldigen Sie sich sofort bei Professor El Naschie. Mit diesem hirnverbrannten Zeug ueber Professur, da kommen Sie keinen Zentimeter weiter. Sie machen sich in allen Zeitungen laecherlich Herr Droesser.

Fritz Gehrmann at 05:39 PM on 04/16/09
Herr Professor Dr. Dr. habil Klicken! Bei Ihnen klickt es wohl nicht mehr richtig. Im nächsten Eurovisions-Song-Wettbewerb sollten Sie auftreten mit
Wadde hadde Du de da
ich hasse den El Naschie da,
weil ich ein bisschen bloed und gaga war.
Schöne Gruesse an den Dussel Droesser von Dusseldorf.


puppetphd at 08:51 PM on 04/16/09
Oh Mann, Herr Mohamed El Naschie, Sie m?ssen wirklich wieder sehr besoffen gewesen sein. Schauen Sie sich an, was Sie da in so kurzer Zeit f?r Kommentare verfasst haben. Es ist wirklich traurig. Dabei habe ich Ihnen so sehr gew?nscht, dass das Ganze irgendwie noch ein gutes Ende nehmen k?nnte. Aber Sie sind wirklich kaputt.
Gute Besserung, Herr Professor El Naschie,
Martin Klicken

P.S.: N?chstes Mal sp?testens nach dem 4. Glas Rotwein lieber duschen und eine Runde um den Sportplatz laufen.

Saddiqi at 09:48 AM on 04/17/09
Mohamed Elnaschie is a symbol for all Moslems in the world who represent hope for our youth. That is exactly why you loathe him. He does not need a Nobel Prize from you. For us he got many Nobel Prizes particularly because a scum like you hates him. That alone is a living proof that he is a great man.Reply | Report Abuse
Jamal at 09:21 AM on 04/17/09
Muslims are not murderers like you Mr. Jason. That is the difference between us. Go on spreading your blasphemy. You will see how it will end.Reply | Report Abuse
Iqbal at 09:07 AM on 04/17/09
Any man who kills a little worm like you Jason, could not be a respectable man. The best punishment for a worm like you is to let it thrive and then rot under the earth. Besides there is nobody called Jason. You are a pseudo name paid by John Baez and his colleagues.Reply | Report Abuse
Amin at 08:44 AM on 04/17/09
To the so-called Jason. You do not need to worry. Nobody is going to kill you for the simple reason that you are not a living being. You know what is the difference between you and Elvis Presley? You are the one who is really dead.Reply | Report Abuse


An at 06:40 AM on 04/18/09
Comments on the article of Amr El naschie

Of course M. S. El naschie is interested in every things and he can change his field every 10 years and may be every day. But how Amr Elnashie did know that his brother a pinnacle of nuclear and particle physics,amongst other things.
Does he know what he has published in particle physics is non sense. It didn't happen to him to read by chance any of his brother's article to discover easily it is non sense. Did he discovered that in most his brother's papers equations are not numbered. How he was sure that his brother is a really brilliant one, is that impression got by reading his trivial papers.

According to Amr El naschie
" I continued though to say that
although I do not see Mohamed much,I admire him from a distance;whilst I could not a ?ord the same admiration to
our middle brother Saiid,who really looked after me and helped me grow up."
Why this prejudice against Saiid, can he give us more explanation.

Telling about professor's positions piled by El naschie in four continents? It is a favor to tell us where he got professor title.

you were admiring M. S. Elnaschie publishing record, do you know that he published few hundreds of non sense papers in CS&F where he is the editor in Chief abusing his editorial power.

The fraudulence of M. S. El naschie is evident even for non specialist.

Of course one should check if Amr El naschie has really written that article or not. Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 25 (2005)767 –768
The e-mail of Amr Elnaschie is aelnash@uiuc.edu


Reply | Report Abuse
An at 06:20 AM on 04/18/09
I have found an amazing article due Amr El naschie (brother of M. S. Elnaschie) celebrating his brother.s 60-th brithday.
The article is published in Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 25 (2005)767 768 under the title Recollections.

Here are some short bits from the article

" ..But my brother believes that I su?er
from total lack of imagination and technological atness because I do not change disciplines every 10 years. .."

".. I would
love to lock up the said colleague with Professor El Naschie,or ...,and reveal to the former that the latter was trained as a structural engineer,and is now a pinnacle of nuclear and particle physics,amongst other things."

" He,Mohamed,is indeed brilliant,but all those who will read my article know that already.He is versatile and is a
visionary,but these are characteristics that all those who meet him conclude that he enjoys."

"I continued though to say that
although I do not see Mohamed much,I admire him from a distance;whilst I could not a ?ord the same admiration to
our middle brother Saiid,who really looked after me and helped me grow up. .."

"....When I was 17,I visited Mohamed in London,and followed this by a visit to Saiid in Edinburgh.There was a hot
competition between them regarding who would be able to convince me to leave the Medical School at Cairo University
and go into engineering;civil,like Mohamed,or chemical,like Saiid. "

"This was in 1973,the year my name appeared on a paper,with Mohamed,published in the Journal of the
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. "

"..Being Mohamed El Naschie brother is a major responsibility!You are expected to be somewhat of a genius,which
I certainly am not.OK,I still hold the dubious distinction of being the youngest full professor in Civil Engineering at
Imperial College,London,and certainly the rst,and hitherto the only,Middle Eastern full professor and Head of Sec-
tion,but how high this stacks up next to the series of professor positions that Mohamed has piled up in four continents?.."

"I am inspired along the route
of publish or perish by Mohamed's publication record (journal papers in the hundreds)and the story of Thomas
Harriot..."

I have some doubts that Amr El naschie wrote this article. This article is mentioned no where on his website https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/aelnash/www/index.htm.
The man should be proud to celebrate birthday of his brother who is considered as the most influential scientist in the history of man kind. One can even send e-mail to aelnash@uiuc.edu to get confirmation about his article.Reply | Report Abuse
Amin at 05:48 AM on 04/18/09
Prof. El Naschie does not answer to worms and parasites like you. This vicious campaign masterminded by Said Elnashaie is pathetic and it clearly reflects that he is a man full of envy and jealousy and harbors a personal vendetta against his brother who supported him when he needed help. But more importantly it proves that Mohamed Elnaschie must be indeed a great man and a great scientist. We all fully support him and we know that his theory is already making major dents in physics. So continue with your hate campaign Mr. Said and associates. You cannot smear clean people. You are sore losers. Reply | Report Abuse
Silver Lining at 05:35 AM on 04/18/09
There is a silver lining to the vicious campaign against Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. We were referred to this site by our colleagues in China who hold the utmost respect for this man. They were dismayed that some people out there have made it their life long mission to attack and character assassinate him. We decided to check this man out and we started by reading and researching his scientific work. We have news for you out there! What we found is amazing. His E-Infinity theory deserves our utmost admiration. For you to understand it, you need to be well versed in mathematics. We scrutinized his mathematics and equations, and the results were amazing. Those who claim it is numerology have no clue about what this man has succeeded in doing. We agree with his advocates that this is a paradigm shift and sooner than later this man will get the recognition he deserves. We will continue to follow his work closely and we know that his work has stirred a lot of interest and we all know that no important work such as his can be acknowledged without first raising a lot of controversy. It is easy to be part of the mainstream herd. But this man is not.Reply | Report Abuse
Atef at 05:26 AM on 04/18/09
An Said Elnashaie, you are really a vicious person and you deserve nothing other than our disdain and disgust. You stink and you are a liar. You are the one who committed a crime against his mother. If I were you I would shut up completely. You have no honor and integrity and those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. So shut up and give us a break. You make us all laugh.Reply | Report Abuse
An at 05:17 AM on 04/18/09
All these comments describing El naschie as a hero for muslem countries are just lies. Even more these comments are due to El naschie himself as is clear to every one. El naschie is an extremely bad muslem example, if he is really a true good muslem then he should be adhered to the Islamic morality like honesty. But the great man lies in telling about his affiliations and expertise. Abusing his power as an editor in chief publishing hundreds of non sense papers.
All of these are not good deeds according to Islamic mesure and deserve a punishment or at least this guy should be declared to all people for being dishonest and cheating innocent people and warning people to deal with him. Reply | Report Abuse
An at 04:36 AM on 04/18/09
I didn't claim that El naschie has no Ph.D. , but I just wonder
why one can't find his thesis on the online catalouge of university of London. The thesis of the great man El naschie should be written in gold and to be available to every one. It is the thesis that led its author to golden physics, golden quantum field theory and golden differential geometry. In fact this is something at the level of Newton's principia even may be more important. El naschie's thesis offers gold while principia doesn't. I urge the great man just to put a coy of his valuable precious thesis on his website. Soon and for sure, it comes the day where you can find his thesis on museums.

I urge the great man to give his views and plans for the next millennium as Hilbert did this for the twentieth century at its beginning, where Hilbert gave 23 open problems in mathematics. Man like El naschie is is more influential and smarter than Hilbert and can easily plan for the next coming thousand years - third millennium. El naschie could give one thousand and one open problems in mathematics and physics, nearly a problem for each year.

I urge the great man before publishing a new breakthrough paper shocking the establishment by his tremendous genius brain, just to number the equations in your papers. I have looked at many of your papers and I found in all of them equations are not numbered. You can just fix the program producing papers to number equations. Please acknowledge this site when you fix bugs in the program generating papers. Alternatively, you can learn latex program which automatically numerate equations. You can find many stuff about latex on http://www.tug.org/ (tex user group).

If you have any paper in CS&F at which you numbered equations please tell me.

P. S. Awaiting the reply of the great man El naschie Reply | Report Abuse
Ibrahim Badawee at 06:52 PM on 04/17/09
This is a direct answer to the comment of Martin Klicken. Your comment clearly indicates how little you know about Prof. Mohamed El Naschie or in fact any Moslem. Prof. Mohamed El Naschie has never drunk wine in his life or any kind of alcohol not even in his wild, revolutionary years. He has never smoked. I am not divulging a secret when I tell you that he does not know how to switch on or off the computer and cannot get onto the internet. He is totally helpless when it comes to the mundane things in life. In that respect, he is not that much different from Paul Erdos. Reading the indignation of Jason and your words of disappointment, I realize there is a great rift between us us Europeans and the rest of the world, particularly the Moslem world. The nude picture is clearly nothing special for Jason or for you. With respect this was a big mistake and the uproar in the Arab and Moslem world is beyond your imagination. Hypothetically, and I stress this is only hypothetically, should Jason walk in any street in any city in the Arab or Moslem world today and should he be recognized as the one responsible for the nude picture, the mob would tear him to pieces in the street. I know you do not understand that but this is your problem. All this stuff about Hamas and that Mohamed El Naschie is responsible for 9/11 if of course malicious fabrication and extremely dangerous but it does not turn peoples feelings to the revulsion which this nude picture has caused. Who is Jason to decide for the Arabs and Moslems who they should regard as heroes and who they should not? Mohamed El Naschie is very popular because he is kind and an extremely eloquent and charismatic speaker who inspired the young people. On the other hand his cult status in the Moslem world was made mainly by the vicious attack on him by Jason, John Baez, Renate Loll, Drosser and the rest. Mohamed El Naschie is an extremely rich man and if he decided to, he could have wiped out his enemies from the surface of the earth using an army of lawyers because he would never act outside of the law. Do you know how easy it would be for him to establish two blogs for each one of you and have you watched day and night and report the most intimate habits of Drosser and Renate Loll etc. on a daily basis? Many of his advisers came up with such a proposition which he dismissed immediately with indignation. He told me personally that he is not ready to sink to the level of these people. If I do, then they would really have won. There is nothing called full professor in Germany. It is mainly an American academic rank. Prof. El Naschie is a full professor and would correspond to the highest academic status in Germany. If you keep writing lies, one of us will snap and it will not be good for anyone. There are too many things to tell you but I think the cultural divide between us is enormous. I hope you have at least understood a little. I apologize on behalf of my colleagues, friends and students of Prof. El Naschie if anyone of them used in the heat of the moment an inappropriate word or a thoughtless remark. Prof. El Naschie does not behave outside the law. You can inform Mr. Jason that Prof. El Naschie will condemn any act of violence against anyone and that he considers violence unacceptable, regardless of the motivation or reason. I will now tell you something which will not immediately make sense to you but Prof. El Naschie is a Moslem existentialist. He prays five times a day but not publically. At the same time he can recite most of the works of John Paul Sartre by heart. In that respect he is like Andre Mouriac but enough of all that. Once more my hope that Jason could understand the difference between jokes, bad jokes, vulgarity, obscenity and blasphemy. If he can keep the first two, use occasionally the third and forget totally about the last two then he will have nothing to fear from anyone.Reply | Report Abuse
Anwar at 04:54 PM on 04/17/09
Mr. Anonymous, parasites are not entitled to an answer. Could not you get it in your parasitic brain that when you ask for information while hiding like a little sewer rate behind the name anonymous, that nobody would give a shit about you. Mohamed Elnaschie did not answer a single one of you while you are barking like rabid dogs. You said you know that Mohamed Elnaschie has a house in Munich, Frankfurt and Hamburg, so why do not you sue him there instead of barking here. The amazing thing is that you parasites really think that you are entitled to an answer when you ask anybody a question. Are we not entitled to ask you who the hell are you? You have turned this scientific site into a pig sty. Scientific American is becoming no better than Jason Peeping Tom Blog. If they would be different they would have shut down this disgraceful site long ago.

AA at 07:56 AM on 04/18/09
Dear Amin,
I know your good intention but you have made a gross mistake. Said is not the brother of Prof. Mohamed El Naschie. You can check his birth certificate and you will never find the name El Naschie. His name is spelt completely different. Prof. El Naschie and his family must have been very tolerant or charitable for whatever reason to let this guy claim that his name is El Naschie. It is true that Prof. El Naschie helped Said and paid for his medical care in England when he was suffering severely from paranoid schizophrenia. He also took him out from the list of persona non grata in Saudi Arabia to grant him a visa and a job. He gave him money and to bolster his ego, he even made him an Associate Editor for Chemistry in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals. This is not to say Said is not a good engineer because he is but he is either an extremely sick man or an extremely vicious and envious man. Whatever his reality is, he is not Mohameds brother and has never been. Just look at his picture and look at Mohameds picture. There is not the slightest similarity. As for character, heaven forbid, there is no relation what so ever. Said is Mr. An who writes so enthusiastically on the web, mostly slander and lies to relieve himself from the internal pressure from which he suffers since he was exiled in Sinai after being dismissed from Pennsylvania University as well as Auburn University. Said is the one who contacted John Baez, Renate Loll and particularly Zoran Skoda. Said, having changed from the Moslem Brothers at a very early age to militant communist in his later years has excellent relations to the former Soviet bloc academics. As for Amr El Naschie, this is truly the brother of Mohamed. The article he mentions is not in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals as far as I know. It is published in a Springer book, printed in Vienna, Austria to celebrate Mohamed El Naschies 60th birthday although at the time, he was 62. An in his characteristic cowardly way, having failed miserably in all his plots, is attempting to cause Amr problems and embarrassment. An, who is Said as well as Christoph Drosser, the lying journalist of Die Zeit has nothing anymore to lose. They have lost everything already. That is why they are campaigning like mad, for a vendetta. John Baez, Renate Loll and their backers have discovered that they have a lot to lose and that is why they are not writing in their own names, preferring to call themselves Jason, Klicken and Puppetphd. Could you possibly believe somebody who calls himself Puppet or a man who spends all his time searching for obscene pictures to put on his blog to prove his scientific point? The quality of the arguments and the language used by An and Jason speaks for itself. You can eat your heart and die of envy that Mohamed is and will remain the only positive figure combining science, art and politics in the Arab world. For the young people he is a cult figure and a living legend. He never tried to be that way. It is the effort of Said and the corrupt politicians and scientists, some of the highest caliber, who are ironically the ones most responsible for Mohamed El Naschies cult status. Maybe Said or An should remember how he got himself in this nine year ordeal to Sinai. It was a simple mistake Said. You could not say the truth about a trivial slip. You wasted your entire life just because you could not admit a little mistake and say your are sorry.


Atef
Reply | Report Abuse
An at 06:40 AM on 04/18/09
Comments on the article of Amr El naschie

Of course M. S. El naschie is interested in every things and he can change his field every 10 years and may be every day. But how Amr Elnashie did know that his brother a pinnacle of nuclear and particle physics,amongst other things.
Does he know what he has published in particle physics is non sense. It didn't happen to him to read by chance any of his brother's article to discover easily it is non sense. Did he discovered that in most his brother's papers equations are not numbered. How he was sure that his brother is a really brilliant one, is that impression got by reading his trivial papers.

According to Amr El naschie
" I continued though to say that
although I do not see Mohamed much,I admire him from a distance;whilst I could not a ?ord the same admiration to
our middle brother Saiid,who really looked after me and helped me grow up."
Why this prejudice against Saiid, can he give us more explanation.

Telling about professor's positions piled by El naschie in four continents? It is a favor to tell us where he got professor title.

you were admiring M. S. Elnaschie publishing record, do you know that he published few hundreds of non sense papers in CS&F where he is the editor in Chief abusing his editorial power.

The fraudulence of M. S. El naschie is evident even for non specialist.

Of course one should check if Amr El naschie has really written that article or not. Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 25 (2005)767 –768
The e-mail of Amr Elnaschie is aelnash@uiuc.edu

achim scherer at 03:49 PM on 04/18/09
Selbst seinen Bruder Amr wollen sie anzeigen!! Was sind sie nur f?r dreckige, widerwaertige, ekelerregende, niedertr?chtige Dreckskerle und Kreaturen. Sie alle sind so zum Kotzen, es gibt nicht mal Worte fuer ihr verlogenes, beschiessenes, schweinisches, schmutziges Benehmen. Ja richtig ich meine sie alle: An, Martin Klicken, John Baez!!!!


Jamal at 04:40 AM on 04/19/09
An Said Elnashaie here you go again digging in books and publications in a vain attempt trying to find anything that would undermine the reputation of Mohamed Elnaschie. Now you are trying to create a rift between him and his brother Amr who absolutely adores him and is proud of him. you are shameless and very Machiavellian. You go to all extremes to twist facts so that you can serve your personal agenda. You are a sore loser and suffer from an inflated ego. Again we reiterate try as hard as you can, we will not be swayed from our love and admiration to Prof. Mohamed Elnaschie. Bask in your vile and jealousy. Reply | Report Abuse
An at 05:05 AM on 04/19/09
I have found an amazing article due Amr El naschie (brother of M. S. Elnaschie) celebrating his brother.s 60th birthday.
The article is published in Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 25 (2005)767 -768 under the title Recollections.

Here are some short bits from the article

" ..But my brother believes that I suffer
from total lack of imagination and technological fatness because I do not change disciplines every 10 years. .."

".. I would
love to lock up the said colleague with Professor El Naschie,or ...,and reveal to the former that the latter was trained as a structural engineer,and is now a pinnacle of nuclear and particle physics,amongst other things."

" He,Mohamed,is indeed brilliant,but all those who will read my article know that already.He is versatile and is a
visionary,but these are characteristics that all those who meet him conclude that he enjoys."

"I continued though to say that
although I do not see Mohamed much,I admire him from a distance;whilst I could not afford the same admiration to
our middle brother Saiid,who really looked after me and helped me grow up. .."

"....When I was 17,I visited Mohamed in London,and followed this by a visit to Saiid in Edinburgh.There was a hot
competition between them regarding who would be able to convince me to leave the Medical School at Cairo University
and go into engineering;civil,like Mohamed,or chemical,like Saiid. "

"This was in 1973,the year my name appeared on a paper,with Mohamed,published in the Journal of the
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. "

"..Being Mohamed El Naschie's brother is a major responsibility!You are expected to be somewhat of a genius,which I certainly am not.OK,I still hold the dubious distinction of being the youngest full professor in Civil Engineering at Imperial College,London,and certainly the first,and hitherto the only,Middle Eastern full professor and Head of Section,but how high this stacks up next to the series of professor positions that Mohamed has piled up in four continents?.."

"I am inspired along the route
of publish or perish by Mohamed's publication record (journal papers in the hundreds)and the story of Thomas
Harriot..."

I have some doubts that Amr El naschie wrote this article.
This article is mentioned no where on his website https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/aelnash/www/index.htm.
The man should be proud to celebrate birthday of his brother who is considered as the most influential scientist in the history of man kind. One can even send e-mail to aelnash@uiuc.edu to get confirmation about his article.Reply | Report Abuse
An at 05:10 AM on 04/19/09
Comments on the article of Amr El naschie

Of course M. S. El naschie is interested in every things and he can change his field every 10 years and may be every day. But how Amr Elnashie did know that his brother is a pinnacle of nuclear and particle physics,amongst other things.
Does he know what his brother has published in particle physics is non sense. It didn't happen to him to read by chance any of his brother's article to discover easily it is non sense. Did he discovered that in most of his brother's papers equations are not numbered. How he was sure that his brother is a really brilliant one, is that impression got by reading his trivial papers.

According to Amr El naschie
" I continued though to say that
although I do not see Mohamed much,I admire him from a distance; whilst I could not a ?ord the same admiration to
our middle brother Saiid,who really looked after me and helped me grow up."

---Why this prejudice against Saiid, can he give us more explanation.

Telling about professor's positions piled by El naschie in four continents? It is a favor to tell us where he got professor title.

you were admiring M. S. Elnaschie publishing record, do you know that he published few hundreds of non sense papers in CS&F where he was the editor in Chief abusing his editorial power.

The fraudulence of M. S. El naschie is evident even for non specialist.

Of course one should check if Amr El naschie has really written that article or not. Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 25 (2005)767 –768

The e-mail of Amr Elnaschie is aelnash@uiuc.edu
Amr S. Elnashai, Ph.D.
Bill and Elaine Hall Endowed Professor of Civil Engineering
Director Mid-America Earthquake Center
Director NEES-MUSTSIM Facility
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of Illinois
2129e Newmark Civil Engineering Laboratory, MC-250
205 North Mathews Avenue
Urbana, Illinois 61801
Phone: (217) 265-5497
Fax: (217) 265-8040
Email: aelnash@uiuc.edu
https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/aelnash/www/
Reply | Report Abuse
Jamal at 06:04 AM on 04/19/09
An Said Elnashaie here you go again digging in books and publications in a vain attempt trying to find anything that would undermine the reputation of Mohamed Elnaschie. Now you are trying to create a rift between him and his brother Amr who absolutely adores him and is proud of him. you are shameless and very Machiavellian. You go to all extremes to twist facts so that you can serve your personal agenda. You are a sore loser and suffer from an inflated ego. Again we reiterate try as hard as you can, we will not be swayed from our love and admiration to Prof. Mohamed Elnaschie. Bask in your vile and jealousy. Reply | Report Abuse
Amin at 06:10 AM on 04/19/09
Prof. El Naschie does not answer to worms and parasites like you. This vicious campaign masterminded by Said Elnashaie is pathetic and it clearly reflects that he is a man full of envy and jealousy and harbors a personal vendetta against his brother who supported him when he needed help. But more importantly it proves that Mohamed Elnaschie must be indeed a great man and a great scientist. We all fully support him and we know that his theory is already making major dents in physics. So continue with your hate campaign Mr. Said and associates. You cannot smear clean people. You are sore losers. Reply | Report Abuse


Atef at 06:27 AM on 04/19/09
This is a message to Said Salah Eldin Hamed. You call yourself Elnashaie yet you stood behind bars spitting on the cousin of your father who is an old lady and a retired judge. Now you hire a transvestite to draw a picture of a man behind bars and put it on Al Naschie watch. This shows me that you are more tormented and more insane than I even every thought. I have known you for so long but I never knew that you are so perverted. Is all that the influence of Dr. Shadia Elshishiny. Is that all the influence of Ms. Jehane Fadel. That is what Mohamed El Naschie believes. He believes it because he does not want to see the truth. The truth is that you are a fatal mistake of creation. You are rotten to the core. I could only pray that the Almighty relieves you and us from having to share the same space. You slipped from a distinguished Professor in Pennsylvania University to a vagabond in Sinai University begging Dr. Hassan Rateb for tips. Your free fall is unstoppable and it seems there is nothing low enough for you. If you are in any doubt, just have a look at the Jason blog which you finance. Just go and talk to your real friends and ask them what they think of your new position as a freelance correspondent for the Jason Daily. Do you have any feelings any more left or any sense of dignity or manhood or loyalty or family ties or belief in God or belief in decency or truth. Of course not. From the depth of my heart, Said, I hope you rot in hell as you are rotting now in Sinai.
AtefReply | Report Abuse
Jamal at 06:35 AM on 04/19/09
An Said Elnashaie here you go again digging in books and publications in a vain attempt trying to find anything that would undermine the reputation of Mohamed Elnaschie. Now you are trying to create a rift between him and his brother Amr who absolutely adores him and is proud of him. you are shameless and very MachiAn Said Elnashaie here you go again digging in books and publications in a vain attempt trying to find anything that would undermine the reputation of Mohamed Elnaschie. Now you are trying to create a rift between him and his brother Amr who absolutely adores him and is proud of him. you are shameless and very Machiavellian. You go to all extremes to twist facts so that you can serve your personal agenda. You are a sore loser and suffer from an inflated ego. Again we reiterate try as hard as you can, we will not be swayed from our love and admiration to Prof. Mohamed Elnaschie. Bask in your vile and jealousy. avellian. You go to all extremes to twist facts so that you can serve your personal agenda. You are a sore loser and suffer from an inflated ego. Again we reiterate try as hard as you can, we will not be swayed from our love and admiration to Prof. Mohamed Elnaschie. Bask in your vile and jealousy. Reply | Report Abuse
Arabic World at 08:56 AM on 04/19/09
el-naschie.net, the website of Mohamed El Naschie is now down. The rat is hiding from the police. Every good muslim should decide himself what to do with a man like El Naschie who betrayed on the whole of Arabic World and all kings and religious and scientific leaders. Of course violence is no solution. You should not hunt the liar who damaged the reputation of the Arabic World and our Women Folk in the whole western world. We dont want to find him with a bullet in his head somewhere in a street of London or Cairo. Violence can not be the solution. But you have to find him and bring him to jail. We will have a Fathwa discussing on how to proceed with a man that is worth less than the dogs around our houses. Mohamed El Naschie needs to face the truth and pay back the money he owes our cancer children and all our brothers and the Arabic World.

Reply | Report Abuse
JamaI at 09:03 AM on 04/19/09
Maybe you are `right and I was supporting the wrong man. Mohamed El Naschie must be brought to justice. We can take care of the other bootlicker`s later.

Jason at 10:13 AM on 04/19/09
You Naschienal Socialists are gaga insane. You are self-deluding homophobic misogynistic murderous turds. But on the other hand maybe you are just self-loathing and need support in coming out of the closet? Not a problem. Being gay is not a big deal. Speak up.

While you're making up your mind to come out of the closet, visit El Naschie Watch.

http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/

Scroll down to the bottom of the page and vote for your gay. I mean guy, sorry.

Jason at 05:05 AM on 04/21/09
Hello Naschie Party. Will you be coming back here, or was the 100-comment purge too painful for you to endure? If you need a forum, you are still welcome to my blog, El Naschie Watch. As I told EInfinity Club, I promise not to delete your comments. So it's a perfect forum for you!

Jason


محمد النشائي El Naschie Watch محمد النشائي El Naschie News محمد النشائي
محمد النشائي All El Naschie All The Time محمد النشائي

StumbleUpon.com

17 comments:

  1. That the honorable M. El-Naschie has never been awarded a Nobel Prize is one of the great injustices of our time.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear Jason
    Could you please udate the comments of sciam by including the new ones. At the time being they are 472!!!!, and keep regular updating.

    ReplyDelete
  3. omg trying to post new stuff but only one of me

    Jason

    ReplyDelete
  4. OK Anonymous -- got them through 478

    ReplyDelete
  5. Where is the John Baez's matterials. Do they disappear from this site too!!!!????

    ReplyDelete
  6. Comments have been updated. 1-560. Complete as of April 6.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 1-572. Complete as of April 9.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Updated April 11 with all 584 comments to date.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hi Anonymous, An, Comment Elm, Egyptian Engineer, Jamal Bakhit, Abdel-Hamid Bassiouni, and Emara, as to why I do this. I answer on my blog:
    see
    http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2009/03/why-are-you-doing-this.html
    and also
    http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2009/02/blowback.html

    El Naschie is an evil racist scapegoater,expert victimologist, and anti-Western hatemonger, in short. He drums up resentment with the moronic claim of deserving a Nobel prize that is denied him because he's an Arab Muslim named Mohamed. You Naschienal Socialists of the Naschie Party give him a pass on that, so you are just as bad. He's also a fraud who pretends to have been made a full professor. And a legal bully. Finally, he is a gazillionaire heir who pretends sanctimoniously that
    http://elnaschiewatch.blogspot.com/2009/04/hypocrite.html
    money doesn't matter.

    Elmara,
    I understand personally he's a gentleman, a kindly fellow, extremely likeable, and he's obviously fiercely defended by his friends. People are complicated, not black-and-white. But professionally he's vile, and deserving of scorn and condemnation.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Jason, that Akbar comment is hilarious!

    "The mere thought that our women folk could see these revolting pictures makes me ignore your warning."

    How typically homophobic! Man I grew up in the Middle East and I'm surely glad I got the hell out of there. The best part about it, is its hot as hell, but no one can wear shorts, because Islam does not like you to show your legs to their women folk! Seriously, WTF!

    I had to put pants on after basketball practice, because it is unacceptable to walk home in shorts, or I could get beat up or even killed.

    Besides that, I'd like to point out that blind belief is for retards, and that includes blind belief in any religion and today science to some extent.

    As for being Anti-Western hatemonger, I don't think that is necessarily true. Publishing crap paper without peer-review for 20 years will get you in the state of self-denial, and that is what it is, but hardly its a state of hate. Also, given his money potential, it seems that he can easily afford to tackle head-on and/or ignore established scientific channels and create his own instead.

    Remember my word, Mr. Big Time Egyptian Nobel Physicist will have his own journal to publish his papers, but that would not be any different than any of the other crackpot physics websites out there, except that he will have a richer foundation and a better web-designer.

    "We were tempted in the mosque today to make a fatwa against the perpetrators of obscenities and these new enemies of Islam masquerading as scientists."

    Best quote ever. 1984 to 2009 where brainwashed sons of Islam ready to attack! But, I'd like to point out that right-wing movement is on the rise in US and Europe as well these days, so its not that much different. Except that US Nazis/ Clan don't have anyone "high-profile enough" to defend against "infidels posing as scientists". Except for Inteligent Design crew of course.