This proves the sockpuppet equation

David = Mohamed Mustafa.

We write often of El Naschie's sock puppets.

OK, next item. We have written several times about the new El Naschie-He kook journal:

- El Naschie and He launch new crackpot journal
- Rössler to publish in He-El Naschie kook journal
- Shawn Halayka drops a bomb
- FSNGQHEP has a website!
- FSNGQHEP is moribund

We see from David's blog that it has published its premier issue! The journal title has changed slightly, but it's probably the same journal, don't you think? It was

*Fractal Spacetime and Noncommutative Geometry in Quantum and High Energy Physics*, and now it's

*Journal for E-infinity and Complexity Theory in High Energy Physics and Engineering*. I can't imagine that there's room on God's green Earth for two such travesties. I have rolled the page scans of El Naschie's paper into a PDF and hosted it on Scribd for your edification and amusement.

M.S. El Naschie, The fractal geometrical origin of quantum mechanics from Hardy's quantum entanglement,

*Journal for E-infinity and Complexity Theory in High Energy Physics and Engineering*, Vol. 1, Number 1, pp. 1-7, 2011.

Kook Journal Debut

Finally, Shrink points out that El Naschie Watch will soon have 1000 posts!

I think you've already posted for the 1000th time. :)

ReplyDeleteHaha 213+548+239=1000. I did the calculation

ReplyDeletebeforeposting!So it was correct when I wrote it. ;)

ReplyDelete:) The number 1001 is even better: 1001 Arabian Nights for the Great Man. LOL

ReplyDeleteBut...the golden mean raised to the power 5 is not equal to 9.016 even to one significant figure. Wow.

ReplyDeleteOf course he means the golden ratio to the power of five minus 11 in brackets times 100. Since 11 is the spacetime dimension in string theory, and 100 is the approximate number of dalmatians, he is still numerologically right.

ReplyDeleteAnonymous, the reciprocal of the golden mean raised to the fifth power is 0.0901699437, so the great man's basic arithmetic in the first paragraph is correct to 7 places (though not 8), if one is using a nonstandard definition of $\phi$. Why it shouldn't be written as a percentage, and why it has nothing to do with quantum entanglement, is left as an exercise to the nonexistent peer reviewer.

ReplyDeleteGood comments, people! It's great that this is getting peer-reviewed. Paul is surely correct about the origin of "9.0169945 per cent". I consider this

ReplyDeletegood numerologyfrom the Great Man, in the sense discussed in my post Numerology FAIL. He has done much, much worse. For an El Naschie paper, it's carefully written.I found an interesting comment on

ReplyDeletehttp://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2011/06/07/even_worse_than_reality.php

6. student on June 7, 2011 5:54 PM writes...

Hey it's fine. Researchers have now managed to model love in our favorite journal Chaos Solitons and Fractals.

"Effects of random noise in a dynamical model of love"

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2011.03.009

Favorite Part: "Strogatz investigated the love affair between Romeo and Juliet by a series of simple linear ordinary differential equations, which can be written as

(1)R(t) the Romeo’s love (or hate if negative) for Juliet at time t and J(t) the Juliet’s love for Romeo. The parameters a and b specify Romeo’s “romantic style” respectively, and c, d specify Juliet’s “romantic style”. Here a denotes the extent to which Romeo is encouraged by his own feelings, and b is the extent to which he is encouraged by Juliet’s feelings."

Glad to see that El Naschie's departure hasn't changed the standards for this journal. It's good to see my library dollars put to good work.