Tuesday, November 6, 2012

El Naschie refutes Einstein

Click pic for full size.

The photograph shows El Naschie and an unidentified woman at the Einstein sculpture in Suzhou, China on or around October 30, 2012. This was taken on the occasion of his talk about dark energy. El Naschie claims that Einstein's famous equation is missing a factor of 1/22 on the right-hand side.

The photo is from the blog of Mohamed Mustafa, who provides this explanation:



Below we have embedded from the Egyptian daily journal Akhbarelyom an interview with El Naschie by Gada Zain Elabdeen. The title is "China honors El Naschie for stunning scientific achievement; He proved Einstein's theory is wrong and explained a long standing puzzle that had remained for one hundred years".

Elnaschie Discovery 2012 A

Here's Zahy's explanation with my minor edits:

Inside the interview you will find that El Naschie modified the famous Einstein energy mass relation from E = m c^2 to E = m c^2/22.

With this modification the great man can explain a lot of things.

The catastrophic thing in this interview is that the head of the physics department in Alexandria University, Prof. Dr. Mohamed Ali El-Borie, said that the equation reached by El Naschie is a stunning achievement that never happened since centuries. [O.M.G. --Jason] He mentioned that El Naschie had done a favor for Alexandria University in that he raised its academic ranking due to his extraordinary excellent research........

What a shame for Alexandria university. This head of physics department should be fired.

Unbelievable. Yes, he certainly should.

Thanks to Shrink and Zahy for these items.

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

30 comments:

  1. the picture of The Great Man in the article is begging for all kinds on inappropriate photoshops....

    ReplyDelete
  2. El Naschie has his supporters (sockpuppets?) on the web, though, see for instance the comment on this blog
    [->http://mathgradblog.williams.edu/dark-matter-dark-energy-fate-einsteins-theory-gravity/]

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thx, Anonymous. It's not really a surprise a sockpuppet emerged with a comment on the above topic. It's kind of a trademark of Great Man's sockpuppets to make grandiose claims about the puppet-master, e.g.:

    Golden mean quantum mechanics proved

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess that's why he has predicted a mass of 161.8033989 GeV for the Higgs boson, which is particularly delirious since it depends so obviously on the chosen system of units ("Quarterpounders are not called quaterpounders in Europe because of the metric system"). Unfortunately, recent experiments at CERN do not agree with this prediction...

      Delete
  4. meanwhile on Lifeboat, Rossler announces that the post of 11:11 on 11/11 will be his last about the LHC. Who wants to bet on how long he will resist? ;-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is he trying to emulate the Armistice Day from 1918? LOL

      Delete
    2. ...aaaand he's already broken the promise... ;-)

      Delete
  5. Can anybody of you guys show us ElNaschie's magnificent derivation of his new formula ? I bet it's gonna be something like 11*2+4-4 , but I'm curious as to how similar it's gonna be to Ramzy's work. If he's going to use some differential calculus that would be the most maths he has ever done in his life but I doubt it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Observe that the golden mean times 5 is approximately 8, which is 14 less than 22, where 14 is exactly equal to two times the number of dimensions in a 7-dimensional space. Also note that 7 is approximately equal to 11 minus 3. QED.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Seriously though, I'm really curious as to what kind of garbage he will come up with this time, can't we email Ji Huan He for the conference proceedings ?

    ReplyDelete
  8. The last post on Mustafa's blog claims that President Morsi "sent his scientific adviser to attend the ceremony and delivered the honorary shield to the big world, which considered Alnchaii, pleasantly surprised reflect the appreciation of the president for science and scientists."

    If I understand well, it was about a ceremony at Alexandria University. Zahy, can you confirm that?

    ReplyDelete
  9. "big world" by the way is a frequent mistranslation for "great scientist". Sounds like an award for El Naschie for being such a great scientist.

    ReplyDelete
  10. In The above article, Dr. El borie claims that El Naschie teaches in Alexandria university and supervises MANY master and Ph.D students. He also donates his salary for improving the labs and promised to sponsor a new lab which will be named after him.

    I can buy the sponsoring promises bit as it's typical of El Naschie, but can anyone confirm the teaching and supervision claims ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is truly horrifying news.

      Delete
  11. It is a joy to look at
    http://mohamed-elnaschie.blogspot.com/
    It is now full of master pieces that feature Elnaschie's typical idiot style. You will find also many stupid Photoshops for Elnaschie.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Oh my goodness Zahy. http://mohamed-elnaschie.blogspot.com/ The shamelessness, the stupidity and the sheer quantity of his recent ramblings are astonishing. I have needed a break from blogging. Now I take a look at what he's been up to and I am overwhelmed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, amazing! Given the focus on dark energy/matter on El Naschie's blog, the following paper might be interesting: http://www.sciencepub.net/nature/ns0712/05_2012_easy_ns0712_31_32.pdf. Someone recently referred to it on Retraction Watch (http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/12/05/math-paper-retracted-because-some-of-it-makes-no-sense-mathematically/#more-10981). It is simply hilarious! The authors seem to be hard to locate, so it could be a hoax. There might even be a reference to El Naschie's work in there, but it's hard to judge as most of the reference links appear to be broken...

      Delete
    2. Oh no, it's those guys. They're also the ones who published "A computer application in mathematics" in Computers & Mathematics With Applications. It has to be seen to be believed. This one is notable for the fact that one of the authors has gone to the trouble of obtaining a Gmail address, as opposed to the Budweiser-affiliated address he had in the earlier work.

      Delete
  13. A sock-puppet has vandalized the Great Man's entry on English Wikipedia in the recent days: the edits have been readily reverted, of course. :)

    ReplyDelete
  14. In fact, there is more than meets the eye. Here are all the contributions by the sockpuppet:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Adhamwaleed

    He posted the following screed on the talk page of the article (promptly removed by some other editor) and on the "Help Desk" page of Wikipedia:

    ****************************************************************************

    The content of this article is highly misleading and almost defamatory. This is CV of a person and not the opinion who wish the person ill and who are in unfair competition with him in the Court of Justice. For instance, the person concerned was not represented by any lawyer in Court while Nature-Macmillan the multi-national employed an army of solicitors and paid 5 million pounds to defend the non-defensible. In addition the case is still in the Court namely the Court of Appeal after a controversial initial judgement reminiscent of Galileo's trial. How come that your article gives the impression as if it was a case brought against the person and not the other way round. All of us scientists and engineers are taken aback that uneducated so-called science and engineering bloggers who are nothing but out of job journalists can tell the specialist what and what not they should write and think. Everyone knows that there is a plagiarism behind the trial and it was a vendetta against El Naschie conducted by financially strong media. Does Wikipedia as a highly used and mostly trusted Internet Encyclopedia want to take sides in such filthy fights. El Naschie has declined an offer by Nature to settle out of Court and he has papers to support their offer and his declination. Writing things about people and damaging their professional reputation without any information that is substantiated lacks in professionalism and undermines Wikipedia's reputation. You say encyclopedia content must be verifiable. Have you verified the information you got about Prof. Mohamed El Naschie? Saying he does not have a Doctorate is pathetic. I trust it is best not to follow what bloggers say because they are not a reliable source of any information. Many of them are hired to defame for money for instance the criminal who runs El naschiewatch and his name is Jason and he is a criminal. It is best to stick to facts and the facts are definitely not contained in what bloggers write. You must have reliable sources. Mohamed El Naschie has been subjected to an incredible vicious campaign to undermine his scientific findings. You even mention his thesis cannot be found? How little do you know. His thesis is there and he has a Doctorate and he had a full professorship. Please please before writing check your sources and verify the information. For instance he just made an historic announcement in Shanghai and Alexandria about an extension and correction of Einstein's famous theory on Relativity.

    M. Abdel-Hamid

    [to be continued...]

    ReplyDelete
  15. Then he wrote directly to an administrator, this time signing with his own name (thus showing "M. Abdel-Hamid" to be just another pathetic sockpuppet):

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tiggerjay#Mohamed_El_Naschie

    *********************************************************

    Dear Respected Editors of Wikipedia

    Re: Prof. Mohamed El Naschie Information in Wikipedia

    I have read with considerable horror the distortion which has been published about my very own life bio-data, education, engineering and scientific career. Even my most destructive personal enemy could not have written a more malicious, wicked and misinformed CV. I am not talking about my theory and I am not talking about science. I am talking about my very own CV which I guess you would agree with me that I know it a little better than anybody else. To read this trash written eloquently and wickedly about me was a revolting experience. I have only one explanation that a criminal and I really mean a criminal out of work pseudo mathematician whose pen name is Jason Rush purported to live in Seattle, Washington State, USA is the author of all the trash written about me in Wikipedia. The story is long and I do not intend to tell it to you in any detail. However my work was plagiarized and published in a famous American popular magazine. When my students, colleagues and collaborators objected it became the beginning of a 2008 world war against me. This is 4 years of continuous defamation by the owner of this magazine as well as those who were involved in the plagiarism who are mainly located in Germany and Holland. Nature published upon their instigation through a corrupt journalist a defamatory article about me. I took them to court and not the other way round. I had no solicitor representing me and our ordeal has not ended yet. The case is still in the court of appeal. They were trying to wiggle out by all means. However they had only mean namely infinite amount of money. To protect their reputation and pretend they had not employed thieves and criminals in their organization, Nature had to spend 5 million pound sterling according to the testimony of everybody and one 1.5 million pound according to their own admission in the open court of justice, take your pick. You are an encyclopedia and of course Jason Rush, the proprietor of a criminal site that is forbidden in some countries called Elnaschiewatch is enabled because of your system to post all this filth on the Wikipedia site. However it is easy for you I guess to exclude Jason Rush from using you to earn his kick up money. I implore you to either delete the entire content of the page or you write it according to correct information and objectively and not according to false information of paid criminals.

    [to be continued...]

    ReplyDelete
  16. [... continues EN's screed]

    For instance, you should concentrate on my career as an Engineer and an Engineering scientist which is my profession. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals is a journal which I have founded after I was already well established and a well known Engineer. It is one of hundreds of things which I have done and is not the most important in my career. Science was my hobby and nothing more. I am a Professor of Engineering and a practicing Engineer and I had been very successful in both. Also in my hobby science, I do not think any 70 years old hobby theoretical physicist could hope for more than what I have achieved. I have revised and extended Einstein’s celebrated equation E = mcsquare (for some reason the correct equation is not appearing here). I have also established a quantum relativity i.e. quantum gravity formula E = mcsquare/22 (equation fails to appear). The 22 which I found using Bosonic String theory of Veneziano and Nambu can explain easily dark energy away. The fact is 1/22 is 4.5% approximately. Consequently the measurement of Perlmutter, Schmidt and Riess for which they got the Nobel Prize last year (2011) confirms my formula. In other words there is no missing energy in the cosmos. However there is a missing factor in Einstein’s equation. How many other scientists old or young you know have developed a quantum relativity formula unifying quantum mechanics and relativity? I thought this is the aspect which Wikipedia should be concentrating upon and not the gossip and malicious lies of a pack of rats like Jason and the like. For more information about my new theory please consult:

    mohamed-elnaschie.blogspot.com/
    works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1076&context
    www.msel-naschie.com

    I would be grateful if you could answer me affirmatively to relieve me from the criminal work of a professional paid internet blogger like Jason and to correct my CV appropriately.

    Thank you very much for your understanding and effort.

    Mohamed El Naschie Adhamwaleed (talk) 18:35, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

    ******************************************************************************

    Jason, this is really a gold mine for ENW! (you were in a bit of a lull recently... ;-)

    BTW, I'm curious to see how the story pans out on the Wikipedia page. Perhaps now we will appreciate the importance of sticking to the guidelines for the biographies of living persons... ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  17. P.S. for the time being, the administrator's reply was non-committal:

    ***************************************************************

    Thank you for your e-mail, if you will please see the comments that were left for you on the Helpdesk page, and were also conveyed on your talk page, you will find the remediation steps necessary to have the article corrected. Unfortunately I am not a subject matter expert on either biographies of living persons, nor on the specific legal situation you discuss. As a result I cannot personally help you edit this page or bring the correction you are looking for. The best I can do is provide the guidance and help that was provided on the helpdesk page. Tiggerjay (talk) 18:42, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

    ReplyDelete
  18. Other editors, however, replied directly on the Helpdesk page:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2012_December_13#Mohamed_El_Naschie

    ***************************************************************
    You write, of the libel case, "your article gives the impression as if it was a case brought against the person and not the other way round". In fact the article is perfectly clear about this. It says "El Naschie disputed these allegations and sued Nature for libel."
    The statements in the article are supported by the references given. For example, you write "You even mention his thesis cannot be found? How little do you know." Well, we do know – the second reference in the article is to the British Library site, which states "The reason given by the institution is: Institution have been unable to locate thesis in their stock." Maproom (talk) 12:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

    It appears that User:Adhamwaleed is (or purports to be) Mohamed El Naschie. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:50, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thx, PassingByAgain.

    Jason: The sockpuppet's screeds are just fantastic and deserve their own post. :)

    ReplyDelete
  20. BTW: It seems that the sock-puppet machinery of the Great Man is in normal mode again - the notorious sock-puppet "David" has published some new E-Infinity communications in the recent days after a period of hiatus of 1.5 years (check on the E-Infinity blog). LOL

    ReplyDelete
  21. OMFG I may have to cut short my vacation. Oh. My. God.

    ReplyDelete
  22. From a recent blog post titled Science Publishing Group Publishes Junk Science:

    "So, the article claims to confirm El Naschie’s purported discovery of the nature of dark energy. In my opinion, this article is an excellent example of pseudo-science, and no legitimate publisher would allow such rubbish to appear in its journals.

    If you publish in any one of Science Publishing Group’s many journals, it’s possible that your article will appear next to an article that is pure rubbish, such as the article described above, and this will threaten the scientific credibility of your article.

    Therefore, I recommend that all honest scholars not submit any papers to the journals of Science Publishing Group."

    A snapshot of the first page of the article has the caption: "Dark pseudo-science." How appropriate! :D

    ReplyDelete