Tuesday, May 4, 2010

The case for a charlatan

One reader proposed that El Naschie's flagrant lies can be explained by delusions of grandeur. Reader Anon2 argues for the alternative, which is that El Naschie is a charlatan who knows full well that he's lying:


There is substantial evidence that he is a con-man/charlatan and not, strictly speaking, delusional. Notice that he has not tried to publish his work in journals other than his own, which would provide the greater recognition he supposedly yearns, because he understands at some level that the work is content-free. He does not speak at real conferences about his work, again because he knows at some level that he would be exposed as a fraud. So he stays safely in his own little fiefdom, where he is king, surrounded by sycophants, risking nothing. He can go to 't Hooft birthday party-like events, posing as a "respected" journal editor and token representative of physics in the developing world, precisely because none of the major players have ever heard of nor recognize him. He tells transparent lies on arabic language television, not yet realizing that the videos may find their way into the larger internet world and reappear with multi-language subtitles.

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, ... and that is usually sufficient."


This is El Naschie Watch's long-standing view.

The Naschie Party have sometimes tried to justify his nearly exclusive reliance on Chaos, Solitons and Fractals to publish his papers. For example, in This surfer is no Einstein, El Naschie's brother Amr -- or perhaps someone impersonating him -- said this. It's one of the all-time great letters of El Naschie support. The relevant paragraph is the last one:

Finally, why does [he publish in] his own journal? Simple, if I had a shop selling cars, and I was [sic] the best car [in] the world, why bless other shops with my cars? I would place my cars in my [own shop. His] work is simply brilliant, so he promotes his Journal, as if it needs promotion, [with] work in his Journal.
Good luck with your anger management course.
A.El Nashai
Posted by Amr Nashai on June 5, 2008 1:48 PM


But if that were the case, El Naschie's sacking as Editor-in-Chief of Chaos, Solitons and Fractals would merely have redirected his output to another journal. That didn't happen. Instead, he has stopped publishing his nonsense science papers entirely, as can be checked easily in Google Scholar.

Translate English to Arabic
محمد النشائى El Naschie Watch محمد النشائي El Naschie News محمد النشائى محمد النشائي All El Naschie All The Time محمد النشائى
StumbleUpon.com

4 comments:

  1. I agree that El Naschie is a charlatan who knows full well that he's lying. In addition he is using his money as a bribery to facilitate his corruption actions. Can any body giver any reasonable explanation for the following

    1- The great man remained as an editor in chief for CSF for almost twenty years 1991-2009. It is strange that no one in Elseiver noticed his non sense works.

    2- He used the affiliation of Cambridge for almost ten years and no body noticed that in Cambridge. It might be plausible to be unnoticed for one year, two years or at most three years but ten years, that is impossible.

    The great man published his articles for nearly ten years 1993-2001 using Cambridge 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.

    3- The strange relation between the great and W. Griener, who was caring to come to Egypt to approve the thesis of Ayman Elokaby Ph.D student of El naschie. I think that W. Greiner knows for sure that this work is nonsense.

    4- The strange relation between G. Thooft (Noble Laureate in physics 1999) and the great man. The great man dedicated non sense articles to G. Thooft and kept silent.
    This one example article, dedicated to Thooft,
    On quarks confinement and asymptotic freedom
    (Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 37 (2008)1289–1291).

    I think some people really got cash money from El naschie and some other may got generous invitation for spending holidays in the excellent properties of El naschie in Germany, England and Italy.

    Really, I'm quite sure that El naschie has not a successful engineering career too. I think that major part of his wealth has done in Gulf area (Saudi Arabia). He spent many years in Saudi Arabia During 1970's and 1980's, in which he collects a lot of money through corruptions.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Zahy, I agree conscious lying is the most straightforward explanation. As to each of your points about possible bribery or equivalently, improperly obtaining favors for use of his luxurious properties:

    1. I don't think it's strange that Elsevier didn't notice they were publishing nonsense. They are just publishers, not scientists. So bribery isn't a required hypothesis in this case. And the journal was making money through subscription bundling fees, so they had no cause to complain.

    2. Use of the Cambridge affiliation for ten years. Cambridge academics in math and physics accepting bribes to look the other way seems far-fetched. And I think they actually made several attempts to get him to stop doing it before finally kicking him off the arXiv in exasperation.

    3. "The strange relation between the great and W. Griener, who was caring to come to Egypt to approve the thesis of Ayman Elokaby Ph.D student of El naschie. I think that W. Greiner knows for sure that this work is nonsense." This is more plausible. We have reason to believe Greiner and Martienssen were after his money. By the way are we certain that Greiner was on Elokaby's thesis committee? I can't remember. I'd like to see the thesis.

    4. 't Hooft socializing with El Naschie and putting up with El Naschie's embarrassing dedications. This also is plausible. I bet El Naschie spent very very lavishly to impress 't Hooft.

    In cases 3 and 4 the bribery or favors would be implied, not explicit, I'd expect. And Greiner and 't Hooft probably convinced themselves they were doing a good deed in going along with El Naschie.

    I think you meant Egypt not Italy on the property location. Properties that he has to the best of my knowledge are offices in London and Cairo; a flat in Hamburg; and lavish homes in Surrey and Alexandria.

    I don't know anything about how he spent his time in Saudi Arabia. Any info would be appreciated. There's a picture of him signing some papers with officials at King Saud University on his Web site, but I don't know what it was about.

    ReplyDelete
  3. As to Elseiver, there should be a quality control system checking the quality of published papers and noticing abnormal behaviors. This is just for the good of the reputation of the journal and the whole publishing company.
    According to me, it is very strange that El naschie managed to be unnoticed for almost twenty years.

    As to Cambridge, it is too strange that they managed to stop El naschie using Cambridge affiliation and kick him out of the arxiv after almost ten years. El naschie was using the affiliation in attending international conferences and papers. At that time, it was more or less easy to figure out this using internet.

    The great man as I remembered was claiming to have houses in Germany, UK and Italy.

    The final point about Griener, it was confirmed by Tarek Ibrahim (Physicist from Egypt, in Alexandria university) in one of hist post that Griener was in the committee approving Ayman Elokaby's thesis.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Another seeming blatant lie for El naschie, he claimed that his father was a member of a free officer movement that led to revolution at 1952 in Egypt.
    You can find his claims in many places, for example in this
    http://www.rosaonline.net/Daily/News.asp?id=56570
    أما البرادعي فليس بعالم علي الإطلاق، ومن الناحية السياسية نجد أن النشائي طيلة حياته سياسي بحكم مخالطته لأحداث الاحتلال الإنجليزي والمقاومة وممارسته السياسة الشعبية العملية، إذ حمل بندقيته في سن 12 عامًا ضد الاحتلال ووالده من الضباط الأحرار، كما أن زويل أصبح سياسيًا بعد توليه منصب مبعوث أوباما الشخصي للشئون العلمية، أما البرادعي فليس سياسيًا علي الإطلاق وهناك فارق كبير بين السلك السياسي والدبلوماسي الذي ينتمي إليه البرادعي.

    This particular sentence (ووالده من الضباط الأحرار ) means that his father was a member of free officer movement.

    If you checked the list of the free officer members, you will not find the El naschie father's name
    http://www.alfikralarabi.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4346
    The lists are in Arabic, we need others confirmation from arabic readers.

    ReplyDelete