Thursday, November 25, 2010

El Naschie says Nature not as good as it used to be

Of course El Naschie has a pending case against Nature for an article critical of him, and for that reason he'd like to show that their judgment is not to be trusted. He might even be so brazen as to imply that Nature rejected a paper, Coldea et al., because it supported El Naschie's E-infinity theory.

El Naschie's Rosa Al-Youssef column is up for Friday, November 26. Did the scientific level of Nature drop? Original Arabic or Google's English translation. My manual cleanup is below.

I could not believe it at first when I heard that two scientists of Russian origin «Andre Geim» and «Konstantin Novoselov» who got the Nobel Prize in physics this year «2010» [for graphene] had their paper rejected twice by the world-famous science journal «Nature». I mentioned «Nature» in a previous article about my theory on the golden section in quantum mechanics. These two scientists then sent their research to the magazine «Science» which is the second biggest scientific journal, and the biggest rival to the magazine «Nature».

What happened to Nature? How could the referees make such a mistake? Their scientific research in theory and in the laboratory was well-known, and the scientists worked in major universities in England. The University of Manchester, whose name may not have the same ring name as the University of «Cambridge» or «Oxford», is nevertheless famous in engineering and science.

Indeed, when such a world-famous scientist as «Rutherford», discoverer of certain sub-atomic particles, won the Nobel Prize, «Cambridge» tempted him to move there from Manchester!

But this error by «Nature» of mis-assessing their work to the extent of rejecting it, and it winning a Nobel Prize less than five years later -- is not Nature's only error. They also rejected a paper [Coldea et al.] on the existence of the golden mean in quantum mechanics about a year ago. This also was published in the journal «Science» rather than «Nature». This is also strange.

However I personally feel that there is no one in the world or in science who is infallible. Sometimes a huge mistake is made, even by the likes of «Nature». [Possibly a cue to lawyers that he'd accept Nature's apology.] Maybe I should mention here some examples from the history of science. First about «Einstein». Dr. «Max Planck» who won the Nobel Prize for his discovery of the principle of quantum energy levels said of Einstein's Nobel Prize [for photons and the photoelectric effect] that the notion that light consists not of waves but of particles called photons is nonsense.

Continued on Sunday. There is no Saturday column.

UPDATE: The Sunday column

El Naschie's Rosa Al-Youssef column is up for Sunday, November 28. Nobel and «indulgences». Original Arabic or Google's English translation.

El Naschie continues what he was talking about on Friday. The theme is judgment of scientists that turned out to be faulty later on. He says Einstein was wrong about God not playing dice, and what business did Einstein have telling God what to do.

In this context he mentions French professor, Dr. «David Ruelle» discoverer of chaos in the movement of water; and permanent candidate for the Nobel Prize in physics, El Naschie's friend «Mitchell Feigenbaum», an American. He gives examples of their having been misjudged.

He concludes by saying that «Nature» suffers from the sin of pride, and it's very sad they won't admit their mistake, referring to the Quirin Schiermeier article criticizing El Naschie, for which El Naschie sued Nature.

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


  1. Davd Roll = David Ruelle
    Mitchell Vision Boom = Mitchell Feigenbaum

  2. El naschie says that Einstein was right about some of his objection on quantum mechanics, and he himself (El naschie) treated these things in his works. Einstein was wrong in too many things especially in his philosophical argument that God doesn't play dice.
    I think the great man is affected by Neils Bohr response to Einstein "Stop telling God what to do with his dice."

    El naschie is claiming that Mitchell Feigenbaum is his friend and he is a permanent Nobel prize candidate. Not like El naschie who was nominated twice.

    El naschie also tells that Mitchell Feigenbaum was a little bit ahead of his time. Of course, El naschie, for sure, ahead of his time by at least one hundred years.

  3. :) Thank you Zahy. El Naschie's next Rosa column is due in one minute. They come out very punctually.

  4. "[Possibly a cue to lawyers that he'd accept Nature's apology.]"

    Great intuition: The Great Man indeed sought Nature's apology in exchange of dropping the case what was confirmed in a judgment by Mr Justice Eady half a year later.