Monday, July 12, 2010

Rössler's unorthodox paper submission strategy

Readers will recall Prof. Otto E. Rössler, a leading member of the E-infinity group.


The Rössler paper "Abraham-Solution to Schwarzschild Metric Implies That CERN Miniblack Holes Pose a Planetary Risk" says in the acknowledgements

Paper submitted simultaneously to Science, Nature and Z. Naturforsch. to get the best criticism of the world, with the publishing rights going to the one who accepts first.


as we noted in Showcase: Otto E. Rössler's crackpottery. That's not done, and not allowed. If a paper is rejected, then you can submit it to another journal, and proceed through journals one at a time in that way, at each stage targeting a lower-tier journal. Rössler's simultaneous submission method is rude to referees and to journals, and if journals don't explicitly forbid it, it's only because they don't expect authors to be stupid boors.

So I thought Rössler was probably kidding.

But a reader points to this brand new July 3 Rössler masterwork, No Big Bang, No Safe Black Holes: Please, Dear CERN, Start to Listen, and in it I see that Rössler declares just before the references

Paper submitted simultaneously to Science, Nature, Scientific American, Physical Review Letters and Journal of the Leibniz Society – whoever publishes first.


So he's not kidding. He's like an unrepentant junk email spammer.

My new hypothesis is that he spams papers to multiple journals when he's in the manic phase of a bipolar cycle.


For readers who want to track down crackpot coauthors, crackpot journals, and further crackpot papers of Rössler, here are all the references, including both crackpots and real scientists:

1. T.M. Davis, “Is the universe leaking energy?“ Scientific American 303(1), 20-27 (1010),July Issue.

2. S. Chandrasekhar, “Dynamical friction I. General considerations: the coefficient of dynamical friction.“ Astrophysical Journal 97, 255-263 (1943).

3. O.E. Rössler, D. Fröhlich and N. Kleiner, “A time-symmetric Hubble-like law: light rays grazing randomly moving galaxies show distance-proportional redshift.“ Z. Naturforsch. 58 a, 807.809 (2003).

4. O.E. Rossler, D.O. Rudin, W. Graham and G.E. Lasker, “Hamiltonian physics: a new idea on the big bang.“ In: Advances in Education, Vol. 5 (G.E. Lasker and G. Andonian, eds.), pp. 17-21. Windsor, Ontario: International Institute for Advanced Studies in Systems Research and Cybernetics 2003. (ISBN 1-894612-29-5)

5. O.E. Rossler, “Cosmic shear’s temporal fluctuations generate distance-proportional redshift in both time directions: minibang theory.“ Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 19, 1335-1338
(2004).

6. O.E. Rossler and R, Movassagh, “Bitemporal Sinai divergence: an energetic analog to Boltzmannn’s entropy.“ International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical
Simulation 6(4), 349-350 (2005).

7. O.E. Rossler, G.E. Lasker and G. Andonian, “A possibly consistent cosmology based on the dynamic weak-lensing paradigm.“ In: Advances in Education, Vol. 6 (G.E. Lasker and G. Andonian, eds.), pp. 13-17. Windsor, Ontario: International Institute for Advanced
Studies in Systems Research and Cybernetics 2005. (ISBN 1-894613-85-6)

8. O.E. Rossler, “Static cosmology from chaos-borne Hubble law.“ Nonlinear Phenomena in Complex Systems 9(1), 53-60 (2006).

9. O.E. Rossler, D. Fröhlich, R. Movassagh and A. Moore, “Hubble-expansion in static space time.“ Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 33, 770-775 (2007).

10. K. Sonnleitner, “StV4: A symplectic time-reversible Störmer-Verlet algorithm of the 4th order for Hamiltonian multi-particle systems, with worked applications (gas, T-tube model).“ German-language PhD dissertation, University of Tubingen, submitted July 2010.

11. O.E. Rossler, “Hun Tun versus Big Bang: how classical chaos implies both ‘Thermodynamics‘ and ‘Cryodynamics.‘ International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos (in print).

12. R. Penrose, The Emperor’s New Mind. New York: Oxford University Press 1989, p. 338.

13. G. Wald, General Relativity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1984, pp. 432-434.

14. G.W. Cox, “The complete theory of quantum gravity.“
On: http://lhc-concern.info/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/quantumfieldtheory31.pdf

15. O.E. Rossler, “Abraham-solution to Schwarzschild metric implies that CERN miniblack
holes pose a planetary risk.“ In: Vernetzte Wissenschaften – Crosslinks in Natural and Social Sciences (P.J. Plath and E.C. Hass, eds), pp. 263-270. Berlin: Logos Verlag 2008. (ISBN 978-3-8325-1947-7) Preprint on: http://www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/ottoroesslerminiblackhole.pdf

16. O.E. Rossler, “A rational and moral and spiritual dilemma.“ In: Personal and Spiritual Development in the World of Cultural Diversity, Vol. 5 (G.E. Lasker and K. Hiwaki, eds.), pp. 61-66. Tecumseh, Ontario: The International Institute for Advanced Studies in Systems Research and Cybernetics 2008. (ISBN 978-1-897233-11-5)
Preprint on: http://www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/spiritualottoeroessler.pdf

17. O.E. Rossler, “Letter to Dr. Landua – English translation.“ On:
http://www.achtphasen.net/index.php/2010/02/11/p1502

18. O.E. Rossler, “Abraham-like return to constant c in general relativity: ‘-theorem‘
demonstrated in Schwarzschild metric.“ Submitted to Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2007, revised 2009.
Preprint on: http://www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/Chaos.pdf


Posts about Otto E. Rössler:


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

11 comments:

  1. I think you ran up against a character limit in the comment post widget. Annoying, huh? I have deleted your comments above and will add all the references to the above post.

    ReplyDelete
  2. the articles:

    1. T.M. Davis, “Is the universe leaking energy?“ Scientific American 303(1), 20-27 (1010),July Issue.

    2. S. Chandrasekhar, “Dynamical friction I. General considerations: the coefficient of dynamical friction.“ Astrophysical Journal 97, 255-263 (1943).

    12. R. Penrose, The Emperor’s New Mind. New York: Oxford University Press 1989, p. 338.

    13. G. Wald, General Relativity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1984, pp. 432-434.

    are certainly not crackpot articles.

    For example, reference 13 (G. Wald) is a very good book on general relativity that I have in my bookshelf.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Haha yes, just because he cites someone doesn't make them a crackpot. I can vouch for Penrose and Chandrasekhar :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Interesting is this here:


    11. O.E. Rossler, “Hun Tun versus Big Bang: how classical chaos implies both
    ‘Thermodynamics‘ and ‘Cryodynamics.‘ International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos

    According to:

    http://www.worldscinet.com/ijbc/mkt/editorial.shtml

    The journal lists rössler himself as an editor.

    Apparently, Rössler is slipping his crackpot papers in nonlinear science journals by his editorial positions.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This indicates that one should make a similar list for Rössler like the one for J. J. He....

    ReplyDelete
  6. I just realized this O.E. Rossler is none other than the one the Rossler attractor is named after ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rössler_attractor ). He has actually done some serious work on nonlinear dynamics and chaos, which would be why he is on the editorial board of IJBC. Though I haven't checked carefully, I would be very surprised if he slipped these types of ridiculous crap into IJBC. The editor in chief (Chua) is no El Naschie and would probably not allow this to happen. I am a bit shocked that Rossler's now gotten himself into this numerology and crackpot E-infinity stuff. He is very old now, perhaps he become senile?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Right, same Rössler. He was born 20 May 1940. He was not always a crank. I don't know if age is a factor in this case, but it does happen. In Fortasse pecunia olet interdum two old professors Greiner and Martienssen were less skeptical of El Naschie that they should have been.

    Does anyone know if Rössler is anyone's thesis advisor currently? I don't think he should be doing that any more, and I don't think his advisorship is going to benefit his students if they want jobs in real science.

    ReplyDelete
  8. here is an account of Rössler in german:
    http://www.spiegel.de/unispiegel/studium/0,1518,151581,00.html

    In 1990 he refused to lecture for chemistry sophomores. The chemistry professor Rössler said that he does not know anything in chemistry himself. He decided to lecture anyway, telling the students he can not teach anything relevant for exams, so he was thrown out of the lecture hall by the police and another professor had to lecture. Rössler decided to hold his "speech" publicly before the lecture room, with no students...
    The science minister of Baden Würtemberg wanted to check if Rössler has a psychological disorder. Rössler escaped from that, but he sprayed a colored graffity on the main hall of the university.

    The commenter above writes that Rössler is said to have done some serious work. Unfortunately, having looked at his old papers, i do not see this.

    Yes, Rössler has found his Rössler attractor. But nothing else that could be relevant beyond that. Even Rössler's earlier papers are of doubtful quality.

    Sentences like ". For the inhabitants of an MDS universe, therefore a radically new option is available: world change technology." in
    Z. Naturforsch. 52 a, 593-599 (1997)

    are from 1997

    Articles like Time Reversibility and the Logical Structure of the Universe

    Z. Naturforsch. 51a, 960-962 (1996)

    are from 1996.

    Of course, Rössler's papers got even weirder in time, with things like

    Superluminality Paradox in Special Relativity
    Phys. Essays 16, 254 (2003) (5 pages); doi: 10.4006/1.3025580

    in 2003

    ReplyDelete
  9. OMG that article is beyond belief. He's been crazy for years. Thanks very much for the info. I will blog it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I better clarify then: he's had a few serious papers on chaos in the 1970s. I guess now it is clear that he's beyond pale and has been maybe even for the entirety of the last 2 decades.

    ReplyDelete