Friday, July 22, 2011

Our laser-like focus

On Retraction Watch, Amarcus41 writes in his latest post Should we change our name to Mori Watch? Yet another retraction from cancer researcher

Earlier this week we reported on the latest retraction of an article by Naoki Mori, number 21 in a series... We admit it has been tempting to spin off a blog called Mori Watch, with the laser-like focus of El Naschie Watch, but we’re sticking to Retraction Watch for now.

Yeah, we're pretty specialized. The urge to expand our coverage beyond El Naschie and his Shadowy Brotherhood must be resisted.

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. The lazer-like focused readers of this blog maybe interested in some more crackpot works:

    The paper concludes that " An interesting situation is observed from the above discussions that the soul can not be destroyed and a typical helical line communicates with outer space under the influence of a radiofrequency to activate the kinetic energy of the system. In this case the fifth state of matter can be transformed into a higher state of matter."


    That's a spectacular piece of crackpottery. The submission history says "Received March 27, 2011; revised April 26, 2011; accepted May 6, 2011" so a referee made suggestions, haha.

  3. Another excellent piece of crack-pottery is the supposed solution to the Clay Mathematics Institute Millennium Problem on Navier--Stokes:

    A little google searching will reveal that the author is somewhat like El Naschie--claims various institutional affiliations by being (I speculate) wealthy enough to visit them and social engineering himself a visiting position. You will see he has google-bombed the topic to his favor to promote his crackpot "quantum theory of turbulence":

    I am not holding my breath on a Clay Math Institute announcement about the Navier--Stokes problem. Being a researcher in this field, I can easily tell the paper is completely bunk, wild speculation on par with El Naschie and J.-H. He. The most hilarious part is that the paper begins with the wrong statement "There has not been any published solution of the 3-D Navier–Stokes equation (NSE)." Uhhh what about: and ?
    The proceeds NOT to solve NSE...

    I guess when you slip Elsevier a sweet $1500 for this open access journal, they turn a blind eye on peer review.

  4. Here's that paper. A very good read.

    Amador Muriel, An exact solution of the 3-D Navier–Stokes equation, Results in Physics, Volume 1, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 2-8.

    Here are the other links:

    Announcing an exact solution to the 3D Navier-Stokes Equation, The Philippene Star

    Muriel delivers "An Exact Solution of the 3D Navier-Stokes Equations" , University of the Philippenes Los Baños news announcement

    Facebook pages about it here and here.

    C. Ross Ethier and D. A. Steinman, Exact fully 3D Navier–Stokes solutions for benchmarking, Abstract


    P. G. Drazin and Norman Riley, The Navier-Stokes equations: a classification of flows and exact solutions, Volume 13 on Google Books

    Excellent, thank you for that. I see that Amador Muriel is on the faculty of Harvard and Columbia universities. Unfortunately he's a philosopher and an electrical engineer. :(