El Naschie Discussion

[deleted]

I agree that Mohamed El Naschie was trying to provoke the establishment into a scientific dialogue. You see that clearly from many of his papers which carry the names of famous scientists in their title. It is as if he is trying to address them directly. Take for instance Penrose universe and Cantorian spacetime as a model for noncommutative quantum geometry. This is a very informative short paper. You do not need to go on dwelling on irrelevant matters unless your intention is defamation rather than information. As for the many papers cited in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, there are just as many papers published in other journals. Why not look into a paper published in Computer Math. & Appl, Vol. 29,12 (1995), also an Elsevier journal, entitled Statistical geometry of a Cantor discretum and semiconductors. You see it is not only Chaos, Solitons & Fractals which accepted his papers. There are many, many other well established international journals which published El Naschie's work. Why do you want to gloss over these facts? I can give you many other journals where I have seen the fundamental ideas of El Naschie's E-infinity theory discussed in the same characteristic way, unique to his science. El Naschie moves sovereignly between number theory, experimental data and theoretical concepts connecting all three together in a unique fabric. It is not usual for theoretical physicists to work in this way. However in nonlinear dynamics so called numerical experiments are on the daily order of researchers. At the beginning of American science they mix experiment and theory as well as computer calculations in a characteristic way which was not known at this time in Europe. Now this American way is the usual way of doing science all over the world, rather than the exception. I could imagine that Mohamed El Naschie's way of bringing all conceivable tools including number theory and numerical simulation to bear on a problem until it yields a solution might become sometime in the future the new way of doing science. John Baez is puzzled by Mohamed El Naschie's papers on E8. He simply does not understand that there are ten exceptional groups rather than only five and that there are eight groups of the E line. He does not understand how El Naschie adds all the dimensions together. The reason is very simple. John Baez does not understand the concept of average symmetry. The concept is well known in nonlinear dynamics. Rather than slandering El Naschie, John Baez and his friends should start with something easy which they can grasp. I advise them to read El Naschie's paper in the European Journal of Physics. In 1994 this journal's name was Il Nuovo Cimento. It is the journal where the work of Einstein and Fermi was published. The paper was entitled Average symmetry, stability and ergodicity of multidimensional Cantor sets, Vol. 109 B, N.2, Feb. 1994. Is this journal also run by idiots who do not know what they are doing? OK. Here is another one dealing with statistical mechanics and Cantor sets in physics. The paper of El Naschie published in SAMS was entitled On universal behavior and statistical mechanics of multi-dimensional Triadic Cantor sets, Vol. 11, p. 217, 1993. You need another example? Here is one of the fundamental papers of El Naschie published in a journal for astronomy and astrophysics. Vistas in Astronomy, paper entitled Quantum mechanics, Cantorian space-time and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Vol. 37, p. 249, 1993. And to show that El Naschie's work makes a great deal of mathematical sense you may look at a beautiful theorem which he proved in a pure mathematical journal called Appl. Math. Lett. The paper is entitled Orbits stability and dimensional criticality of Cantor sets, Vol. 7, No. 2, p. 91, 1994. When will John Baez and the like of him of mediocre mathematical physicists realize that not everything they cannot understand is wrong. In addition people who are so engaged in internet chat rooms do not have the time to read in depth anything. The establishment has two ways of dealing with somebody like El Naschie. The first way is to ignore him. When this does not work, then they try to laugh him out of court. They tried both ways with Einstein. The same was applied to David Bohm. A more recent example is Mitchell Feigenbaum and chaos theory. All these methods did not work with El Naschie. In addition the priority dispute which broke after the publication of the work of Renate Loll which is the subject of the Scientific American site, necessitates a far harsher method. Now they are character assassinating Mohamed El Naschie and if he does not yield, maybe they will yield to physical liquidation of him, who knows. They are putting unprecedented effort, finance and man power into discrediting El Naschie once and for all time. They tried the same with Einstein but somehow the truth will always prevail. People think that Einstein's theory was accepted immediately. Nothing is further from the truth. In all events, and I say it out of my own heart, shame on you John Baez and shame on all those who are helping him in this infamous job of smearing a respectable man.

[deleted]

I was hit by a totally idiotic contradictory expression describing Mohamed El Naschie's theory as a Cantorian continuum. OK. The writer was one of those pretentious journalists flattering themselves by pretending to be science writers. His name was Christopher or something similar which is not important. What is important is that a Cantor space can never be continuous. It is manifestly discrete. If the said journalist and the like of him would at least have read the title of a paper published in Computer Math. & Appl. Applications of which El Naschie is manifestly not an Editor, he would realize it should be called Cantor discretum. The paper is by El Naschie and he writes an acknowledgement to no one less that the legendary Carl Friedrich von Weizsaecker. See Vol. 29, No. 12, pp. 103 Computer Math. Appl. Will this smear campaign find no end? Are internet criminals out of contracts because of the financial slump so there is nothing left except to write about Mohamed El Naschie? Couldn't John Baez find a well paid job so that he does not need to supplement his income by defaming people continuously? You want to discuss Mohamed El Naschie's work objectively and seriously, then stop counting pages and papers and who is the Editor of what. For instance he is not the Editor of Int. J. of Theoretical Physics. The Editor of this Journal is Prof. David Finkelstein. At least three Nobel laureates are on the Editorial Board, Sheldon Glashow, Chen-Ning Yang and the late Ilya Prigogine. In addition you have names like Yuval Ne'eman, Roger Penrose and Leonard Susskind. Never the less in Vol. 37, No. 12, Dec. 1998 El Naschie's theory was published with all its ramifications in a paper entitled Superstrings, Knots and Noncommutative Geometry in E-infinity Space, pp. 2935-2951. The paper was accepted immediately as submitted on March 21, 1998. Does this mean he had a secret agreement with this journal? Do you have another conspiracy theory that in reality he owns the journal or something? Here is another one. In the Int. J. of Modern Physics E, El Naschie has yet another account of his theory under the title Topological defects in the symplictic vacuum, anomalous positron production and the gravitational instanton which appeared in Vol. 13, No. 4, Aug. 2004, pp. 835. Anybody who has been following this story must be by now sick and tired from the despicable characters perpetuating internet defamation. The point which every one of us should understand is that each and every one of us can be subjected to this internet terrorism. They are truly terrorists. How would you feel when your children in school are spoken to about what others have read about their father: shameless lies. What would anyone feel when he suddenly finds his picture and his private life exposed on the internet, painted by the fantasy of lunatics or greedy journalists who are paid to hit and run. No Editor-in-Chief is immune any more from the attacks of criminal elements on the internet, in fact no one is. I ask the readers of this site to think about it and to do whatever is in within their possibility to take arms against this internet hooliganism. There has to be new and much tougher laws forbidding people from using false identities and false email addresses to spread lies worldwide ruining the careers and private lives of innocent, decent people. Together we are strong enough to prevent this new kind of criminality which the internet has brought into our lives and homes.

[deleted]

The objections on the works of El naschie don't stem from his claimed prolific character, but relies on the quality of his works that tends to be very poor. El naschie is using the idea of fractal geometry and non linear dynamics in a very vague way, in this vague way of reasoning and thinking you can claim to have proved any thing. Even it is

very decent to say that his works are wrong, they are not even wrong ( as Pauli once evaluated one's work!)

Here I just give examples for two great scientists that happened to be extreme examples of prolificity.

The first one is Leonhard Euler, who was by far the most productive mathematician in the history of humankind and one of the greatest scholars of all time. His collected works filled 70 volumes, with a typical volume runs to 500 large pages and weighs about four pounds. Publishing

Euler's collected works started in 1911 under the title Opera Omina and is not yet finished.

Series I Opera mathematica

(In 29 volumes; 30 volume-parts)

Available complete

Series II Opera mechanica et astronomica

(In 31 volumes; 32 volume-parts)

Series III Opera physica, Miscellanea

(In 12 volumes)

Series IV A. Commercium epistolicum

(10 Volumes)

for more details you can see the following links

http://www.leonhard-euler.ch

http://www.springer.com/birkhauser/historyofscience?SGWID=0-40295-2-121672-0

The second example is Peter Higss who is the inventor of Higgs mechanism to which the Higgs particle is related. Peter Higss published only 12 articles in his life career, please see

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=a+Higgs,+Peter

You will also find 8000 papers containing Higgs in their titles. Please

see

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=find+title+higgs&FORMAT=WWW&SEQUENCE=

I doubt if the work of El naschie could fill one volume. The great man is concentrating on ideas, so his papers are typically short. Nor you can find a single good paper in his entire works.

Nevertheless, El naschie succeeded to have people trumpeting the virtue of his great theory and writing articles containing his name in their titles and out of contexts but exclusively published on his own journal. Here I give few examples for an author called M. Agop who is trumpeting the virtue E-Infinity theory, he has almost thirty nine articles containing in their titles El naschie.

1- El Naschie's E-infinity theory and effects of nanoparticle clustering on the heat transport in nanofluids

Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Volume 37, Issue 5, September 2008, Pages 1269-1278

M. Agop, V. Paun, Anca Harabagiu

Abstract:

Effects of nanoparticle clustering on the heat transfer in nanofluids using the scale relativity theory in the topological dimension DT = 3 are analyzed. In the one-dimensional differentiable case, the clustering morphogenesis process is achieved by cnoidal oscillation modes of the speed field. In such conjecture, a non-autonomous regime implies a relation between the radius and growth speed of the cluster while, a quasi-autonomous

regime requires El Naschie's E-infinity theory through the cluster-cluster coherence (El Naschie global coherence). Moreover, these two regimes are separated by the golden mean. In the one-dimensional non-differentiable case, the fractal kink spontaneously breaks the 'vacuum symmetry' of the fluid by tunneling and generates coherent structures.

This mechanism is similar to the one of superconductivity. Thus, the fractal potential acts as an energy accumulator while, the fractal soliton, implies El Naschie's E infinity theory (El Naschie local coherence). Since all the properties of the speed field are transferred

to the thermal one, for a certain conditions of an external load (e.g. for a certain value of thermal gradient) the soliton and fractal one breaks down (blows up) and release energy. As result, the thermal conductibility in nanofluids unexpectedly increases.

Here, El Naschie's E-infinity theory interferes through El Naschie global and local coherences.

2- El Naschie's structures in the electrodynamics of polarizable media

Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Volume 24, Issue 5, June 2005, Pages 1165-1181

M. Agop, I. Merches, V. Enache

Abstract:

Using the concept of 'combined field', an electrodynamics of polarizable media on a fractal space-time is constructed. In this context, using the scale relativity theory, the permanent electric moment, the induced electric moment, the vacuum fluctuations, the paraelectrics, the diaelectrics, the electric Zeeman-type effect, the electric Einstein-de Haas-type effect,

the electric Aharonov-Bohm-type effect, the superconductors in the 'combined field', the double

layers as coherent structures, the magnetic Aharonov-Casher-type effect, are analyzed. Correspondence with the E-infinity space-time is accomplished either by admitting an anomal electric Zeeman-type effect, or through a fractal string as in the case of a superconductor in'combined field', or, by phase coherence of the electron-ion pairs from the electric double layers (El Naschie's coherence). Moreover, the electric double layer or

multiple layer may be considered as two-dimensional projections of the same El Naschie's fractal

strings (higher-dimensional strings in E-infinty space-time).

The reader should be careful about the new concepts of El Naschie global and local

coherences and the ability of E-infinity for explaining every thing you can imagine. I advice every readers to give a look at this author Agop

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleListURL&_method=list&_ArticleListID=854751840&

view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=57e20c10dbdce6aebbbc81f36416a702

His articles are really endless kind of joy and great virtue of entertaining as the articles

of El naschie himself. Elseiver could distribute these articles as jokes and I bet that they

would be more profitable than distributing them as scientific papers.

[deleted]

It seems that the great man (El Naschie) is illiterate in physics, you can look at the spires data base for High energy physics literature you will find 124 articles titled with Witten and all of them contain references for Witten's work except yours that even have strange tiltes. Please look at http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=FIND+T+witten%27s&FORMAT=www&SEQUENCE=

The works of Witten are not standard or so popular as you think. It is not the same status as classical mechanics which we have since three hundred years and is a well established discipline.

I brought you another surprise , here I just quote from the n-category group, which has been Posted by: Denis-Charles Cisinski on November 11, 2008

"After discovering the existence of this ignored genius through this discussion, I couldn]t resist and had a look at his work (I am so blessed by providence that my library paid Elsevier enough to give me access on line to all of this wonderful journal: Chaos, Solitons & Fractals੮

I had a look by random at three papers, and I felt really lucky: if you have the opportunity to Wread] the following two articles,

El Naschie, On dimensions of Cantor set related system, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol 3, no. 6 (1993)

and

El naschie, Dimension and Cantor spectra, Chaos Solitons and Fractals, Vol. 4, no. 11 (1994)

you will see that, up to a small bunch of lines, they are exactly the same (I mean word for word). Of course this method of writing is quite efficient to reach the 300's of published papers. Well, 300 is not that much: the guy is lazy! Or maybe repeating the same thing three hundred times is a pedagogic trick to make sure we, dummy people, understand? Apart from kidding, did someone tried to count how much times he did copy himself so faithfully?

And I have been so lucky that the Wresults of these two papers seem to form the corner stone of E-infinity theory.

I am just amazed."

Till here the quotation is ended and just we present a simple explanation. It is well known in producing random numbers by computer codes, the produced numbers are not truly random and are called pseudo random numbers, at the best they satisfy some certain characteristic properties of randomness. If the programs is used for long it could reproduce the same numbers with clearly wrong statistical properties. The same phenomena occurs in producing pseudo science, if you are using a not well tested program for generating papers , the same paper can be produced two times and that was the case for El naschie. Since El naschie is so transparent in everything, he published the same article two times in his own journal, although it was clear that the code he used was broken too early. Who else would dare to publish the same article two times in the same journal. That is exactly what El Naschie did in his 1993 paper On ? dimensions of Cantor set related system, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Vol 3, no. 6 (1993) and Dimension and Cantor spectra, Chaos Solitons and Fractals, Vol. 4, no. 11 (1994).

In fact, this is just a statistical analysis of the El Naschie's papers that are really chaotic with no contents and superficially seeming complex but trivially could be produced by iterating some few buzz words.

Maybe the great man could provide us with a more interesting explanation.

[deleted]

"Said, how about signing with your own name. You are a big guy. Show the world you are really a man. You can be impotent and you can be incompetent but still you can pretend to be a man".

[deleted]

• Said, all of Egypt knows you are a thief. All of Egypt knows the real story. All of Egypt, except the thieves, knows how kind Mohamed is and in all your miserable mad existence nobody was kinder to you than him. I always warned him against you because I knew how evil you are. You did harm Mohamed for sure. The day he shook hands with you was a bad day for him. You have my word, he will recover from all this filth you have been spreading around him and for sure you have made his theory more famous than it was and that you will regret it as well. Mohamed never needed to kiss the hand of the Director of a private University in the Middle East to get employed but you do so everyday and with increasing frequency. You will hear them tell you that it is not your research record or the fact you have never really found anything of value in science or otherwise but it is your character - A man who steals his own mother and breaks her heart and lets her die penniless is a not a human being and we employ normal human beings. So rest assured that your co-criminals will be the ones who will first denounce you in the court of justice. It is only a matter of weeks and what you have done will backfire at you and the cheap journalist you have bribed with the money you have stolen from your mother.

[deleted]

John Baez: Bad news. The fraud squad is closing in. They are busy right now in Davos. But your ingenuity has drawn their attention. Why aren't you signing with your name lately? Nobody doubts your ability to get out of the fine mess which Stanley got you into.

[deleted]

I have a present to the readers of Scientific American -- A belated Christmas gift. Please log in to Renate Loll's website to see her in all of her glory holding Einstein in the palm of her hand: http://www.phys.uu.nl/~loll/Web/title/title.html It reminds me of the great poem by William Blake, only upside down.

[deleted]

John Baez,the fraudster: Nobody ever doubted your ability to raise an army of internet hooligans or with one telephone call you get the scum of all science journalists and all unemployed science journalists as well to dance to your whistle. The unfortunate old diploma mathematician of Die Zeit is one of them. You have to find a way to rescue him because he is facing imprisonment and we promise you as soon as this is done, we will have all the time in the world for Riverside, California. All these little tricks of yours will come to haunt you. But then: "Scum of the world unite, you have nothing to lose except your chains". Was that Said Elnashaie or Karl Marx?

[deleted]

Most of you who have read all this nonsense wonder what it is all about. Who is Prof. Said and who is Prof. An and all that. Well here is the CV of Prof. An. I am afraid it is only a certificate of conviction but at least you can guess what is behind this nauseating campaign instead of what is essentially a scientific debate. Prof. An is Prof. Said Elnashaie who invested in the one man internet army of John Baez. Please log into the following where you will find English and Arabic explanations. (LINKS) I think the case of John Baez, Renate Loll and their associates is now ripe to go to the State Prosecution of their respective countries. I understand they are now threatening to launch another defamatory article in Scientific American. We take this very seriously and why not? The sooner the full truth will come out, the better and that is all that we aspire to.

[deleted]

To Loll, Amjbjorn and Jurkiewicz: I did not know that you need money that badly. If so why wait until Mohamed El Naschie commits suicide because he will not. Why not help it a little. Come on guys. You are an inventive lot. Arrange for his physical liquidation. That can't be beyond you. From all what I have seen from your photographs you have far more reason to be unhappy with your existence. Mohamed El Naschie does science for fun. By contrast you have to beg, steal and borrow to buy things. Remember the New Seekers. From your pictures you look more like the Old Seekers, particularly the charming picture of Loll besides Wheeler's foam. Boy, I'd rather marry the foam!

[deleted]

In one of his numerous fascinating articles which

he dedicated to Gerardus tHooft and titled "On quarks confinement and asymptotic freedom"

(Chaos,Solitons and Fractals 37 (2008)1289-1291)

The great man El naschie gave a new miraculous explanation

for confinement. But unfortunately the great man doesn't

know enough physics, nor enough math, to get into such

a deep topic. The man has clearly a big confusion between the number

of flavors and number of generations. According to him

page 1290 "...This term appear as 33 -2 f where f is the number of

fermion-anti fermion loops considered...." where the great man

meant the one loop beta function. In the same page one finds

the expression of the one loop beta function b= 33- 2 N_f/12 Pi

" .... For a number of generation equal to that of the standard

model,namely N_f =3 one .nds b =0.716197....". But to the knowledge of El Naschie

N_f should be interpreted as the number of flavors not the number of generations.

Maybe the great man can check this in any standard textbook on the subject

or the one he used which is the first reference listed at the end of

his article.

Another extraordinary achievement of El Naschie is his freshman

explanation for the confinement phenomenon.

In page 1291, the great man gave us his magic explanation for

confinement "... We cannot see quarks for the same reason that we

cannot see real water at +300 degree centigrade or - 30 degree

centigrade. In both cases we can see vapor or ice and we know it was

water but we cannot see water......"

Let me ask the great man a technical question, if your approach is

a non-perturbative and can cope only with the one loop expression of

beta function. What about the other contributions to beta function

namely two loop, three loop and four loop do you interpret them as

Trans-infinite corrections. To your knowledge the four loop

correction to beta function appeared in 1997, which means you

can not find it in the old edition of your first reference

Yndurain FJ.The theory of quark and gluon interaction.Berlin:Springer;1992.

By now there is the fourth edition 2006, and you can give a look at.

The astonishing thing is that El Naschie uses just very elementary math operations like addition,

subtraction, multiplication and division. Maybe in this particular

paper he was a little more advanced and used the logarithm. That is

just a pedagogical trick to make dummy people understand. On the

top of all these, El Naschie explains low energy phenomena(

relatively) using Planck scale language (let us not say physics!).

Now, let us ask the following interesting question: if the great man El

naschie dedicates this article to Gerardus tHooft (Nobel prize

laureate), then what has Gerardus tHoof dedicated to him?

Although the question seems difficult, tHooft has made it easier for us. In his webpage

tHooft gave an account of How to Become Bad theoretical

Physicists.(http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theoristbad.html).The content of this page was

of course dedicated to every successful case. tHooft did not

mention any name but El Naschie can easily recognize himself as a

champion of this webpage.

At last, we argue the great man to devote part of his time to

learn proper math and physics (although it is toooo late now!).

Sciences and knowledge is not about using

English in a pedantic and impressive way. One can still do good science

even with broken English but not with broken and sick mind.

[deleted]

In this concluding comment, I am going to show in a rigorous

mathematical language that El Nashie is isomorphic to a "Bad

Theoretical Physicist" according to tHoof definition and criteria .

Thooft criteria are:

(http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theoristbad.html)

1-It is much easier to become a bad theoretical physicist than a good one.

I know of many individual success stories.

El- For sure El Naschie is one of those stories.

2- Compare yourself with Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Paul

Dirac.

El- This happened in many occasions. In his 60th

birthday celebration in China one reads in the preface of the

proceeding dedicated to him the following:

"Our Chinese Scientists on Nonlinear Dynamics are in infinite love

and admiration to both the man and his science."

"Treading the path of El Naschie, we gather together to celebrate

the century's greatest scientist after Newton and Einstein,

and share his greatest achievement."

One can find more on the following link: www.ijnsns.com/conf/China1.doc

3- You may consider the option of connecting your work with mystery

topics such as telepathy and consciousness.

EL- This is one of El Naschie' papers.

The brain and E-Infinity

Published in International journal of nonlinear sciences and numerical simulation

volume:7,issue: 2, pages:129-132 and published in the year 2006

Abstract: This short letter, in fact, this short telegram is mainly intended

to point out a recent and quite unexpected realization that E-Infinity space time

(E-infinity) theory (M. S. El Naschie,Chaos, Soliton & Fractals, 29 pp. 209-236 2004)

could be of a considerable help in deciphering one of the greatest secrets and

impenetrable questions of our own existence, namely what is consciousness and how

does it relate to the brain(G. M. Edelman. Consciousness. Penguin Books, London,2000).

4- Make outrageous claims of having solved long standing problems.

EL- El Naschie claims to have solved: Confinement, Quantum

Gravity, Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, explained the number

of elementary particles, the value of all gauge couplings..and

many other things...

5-The bad theoretical physicist, in anticipation,

names his own equations and effects, and even his entire theories, after himself right away.

EL- Feynman-El Naschie Hypothesis, El Naschie local

coherence...etc

6- Try to overshout all your critics, and have your work published anyway.

If the well-established science media refuse to publish your work,

start your own publishing company and edit your own books.

EL- El Naschie founded Chaos Solitons and Fractals journal and has to do with the one in China.

7- Your next step should be to advertise your work. Your reputation may have

caused the xxx ArXives and Wikipedia to refuse your submissions.

EL- El Naschie has been black-listed in xxx ArXives for affiliation arrogating

( forging).( http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0004152). More detail can

be found in ( http://archivefreedom.org/freedom/Cyberia.html).

8- You have convinced your friends at your local bar, your family, your pizza vendor, your dog,

and even a local radio station of the superiority of your theory.

El- Mohamed El Naschie answers a few questions about this month's new

hot paper in the field of Engineering.

In addition, Dr. El Naschie gives an audio interview about his work.

This is can be found in: http://esi-topics.com/nhp/2006/september-06-MohamedElNaschie.html

Beside many interviews and TV shows in Egyptian channels.

9- But then there are those few physicists such as one bloke called Gerardus 't Hooft,

who shamelessly have pointed out to you that your theory is nonsense!

Should you take them seriously? Of course not.

Don't even try to show them the details of your derivations,

which you forgot anyway and you might not be able to reproduce on the spot.

Here is what you do to establish your reputation forever: JUST GIVE THEM HELL.

Compare those obnoxious puppets of the establishment with nazis and

threaten them with law suits. That'll teach them.

El- This is can be easily seen from his comments in different

blogs including this blog.

10- Lastly, we ask El Naschie to measure his John Baez index or

crackpot index mentioned in tHooft web

page. (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html) of course

don't confuse this with Atiyah-Singer or Witten index....

I think with the above ten commands we have shown in a non

refutable way that El Naschie is in one to one correspondence with

the criteria of a BAD THEORETICAL PHYSICIST. Congratulations for

being a champ!

[deleted]

• To Mr. Gm who previously called himself in Scientific America Dr. dor, An, Said Elnashaie - Is it that far already? Congratulating yourself. You can analyze letters? Why don t you analyze yourself? Jihan Fadel, your so called daughter, who appears continuously defending you on TV could produce a film for you .. Analyze That Part III & It could become like Sahar Allialli, bring you fame and fortune and render unfeasible to continue the mad course you have taken. Imagine all that disgrace to yourself, your family and your country because you cannot bring yourself to admit a single, by comparison, little mistake nine years ago. You attempted to steal from your mother and your attempt failed. Make a U-turn, admit the truth. Anything is better than what you have done to yourself. But that is how you always were. You charge like a bull and you think later. And you are vicious. Even at the age of 5 you almost killed a boy in the school who was better than you in the class. When we joked about it once and you were already 50 you became very angry in the garden of the house which you built from the money which Mohamed made available to you through Saudi Arabia. At the age of 18 you caused the unfortunate creature whose name I will not name to jump out of a window in front of a police station in Kobri Algalaa at Giza. I also sat on this unfortunate day in the Court and saw you behind bars, standing besides drug traffickers, murderers and pimps and wondered how on earth is this possible. How could you bring yourself to that? I remembered how you were praising Mohamed El Naschie day and night when we were working together in Saudi Arabia. You overdo it in every respect. However you never denied that Mohamed El Naschie is the one who saved you when all your communist party comrades abandoned you and your weight reduced to barely 60 kilos. Your eyes were constantly shifting and you could hardly move or give a lecture. This was a relapse of what happened to you when you were in Belfast when you married this unfortunate girl from Ireland. You were also ungrateful for all what she did for you. Then you ended with the convicted Shadia Shashini, mother of Jihan Fadel. It is very important that the people around you can control your condition and these two ladies controlled it alright. Now you are one who has flown over the cuckoo s nest and I see no chance what so ever that you come back. We know you very well Said and we know all your tricks and the degree of your sick soul and mind. We know that there is nothing beyond you, even murder and your co-conspirators will realize the danger in which they are, being with you and will abandon you sooner or later. It provides me no pleasure writing these letters whether in Scientific American or on the blogs of Haraket Kafaya where some of your infamous communist comrades are hiding under the name of some Muslim brothers. A conglomerate of desperados.

[deleted]

• This is a direct response to Gm who called himself in Scientific American Dr. An and Dr. dor and Dr. Said. You are giving too many answers searching for questions. First how come that a scientist publishes his work not only for twenty years but over thirty five years in many international journals and no one except you notices that it is all garbage, as you put it? Mohamed El Naschie published almost 900 papers in ZAMM, Int. J. of Theoretical Physics, European J. of Physics, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Physics Letters and many others. Besides he was the Editor in Chief, Associate Editor or Member of the Editorial Board of over a dozen international journals apart of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals. That would mean a total failure of our entire scientific system to detect garbage, if you were correct. Even more pronounced is the fact that Mohamed El Naschie is the student and a close friend of dozens of well established scientists apart of a handful of Nobel laureates. Mohamed El Naschie lectured together with Nobel laureate Gerrard tHooft as well as Ilya Prigogine and he was even together with Steven Hawkings at various conferences in Japan. In other words all these people must be incompetent or were in deep slumber. The only three persons or one person who was alert to thirty years or so of scientific deception must have been you, Dr. dor and also to a certain extent, Dr. An and Dr. Said. It is therefore your responsibility towards our scientific civilization to give your full name(s) and address, telephone number and more importantly, your affiliation and the department in which you work so that we can benefit from your deep insight into science and how it works in our time. Mind you, I am also puzzled as to why you did not notice it earlier. It must be that you are very young people with extra ordinary talent to have discovered all these latent deceptions so quickly and with such ease. That is quite honestly baffling us. We are still struggling to read some of these 900 papers but you seem to have found a method to cut through the load and come to a conclusion much quicker than our entire scientific establishment. So please, as a matter of urgency communicate to us your address. It is your patriotic duty towards humanity. You seem like a responsible lot who keep a watching brief day and night on the most important affair on this planet, namely Mohamed El Naschie, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals and how Jihan Fadel is going to get the money for her next hot film. I hope Jeffrey forgives me for taking over his logic and twisting it to fit the twisted minds of certain twisted souls. Merci.

[deleted]

• To say that Said Elnashaie is the brother of Mohamed El Naschie is a complete blatant lie in more than one sense. It is part and parcel of the viscous defamation campaign which started with the publication of the article of Renate Loll, Jan Ambjorn and Jerzy Jurkiewicz in Scientific American. I challenge anyone including Said Elnashaie to produce a birth certificate with the name Elnashie or Elnashaie or any similarly sounding name in Arabic or English. The real name of Dr. Said is Said Salah Hamid. He has adopted the name Elnashaie like he adopted many other things. It is alone the kindness of Mohamed El Naschie that he did not prosecute him in the Courts of Justice to stop him using this name.

[deleted]

It is quite clear that Said Elnashaie is behind this vicious campaign against Prof. El Naschie. He is hiding behind Mr. An and lashing out a lot of hatred. Really Mr. An all what you are writing is not serving your case. On the contrary, it is quite clear to all the readers of this site and others that your argument is baseless and vindictive. You don't have a case whatsoever against Prof. El Naschie. Your problem is personal jealousy and hatred. Do I need to remind you Mr. Said Elnashaie that your personal profile is despicable? In case you forgot, here is your personal profile or better still your certificate of conviction: http:/thecaseofsaidelnashaie.blogspot.com

[deleted]

In this site you are Mr. Gm - Are you affiliated with General Motors. I dont think they have any use for you. But your hatred has gone out of all proportions. Poor soul! We think you are pathetic. It is time you cut the crap and face reality. You are a loser Gm or Said Elnashaie and only losers behave the way you do. Try to exercise some self control and refrain from this unfounded campaign. Again your allegations are false and you are exposing a lot of characteristics that we humans shy away from. You are a bad reminder of all that is evil and your comments serve no purpose. I personally have the utmost respect and admiration for the work and person of Mohamed El Naschie.

[deleted]

This is a direct response to An and now Gm and his silly comment posted on Feb. 28 in Scientific American Blog and all his other false allegations. We think it is time you call it quits. We all respect and admire Prof. El Naschie for his integrity and adroitness. His scientific feat is indisputable and there is no way on earth you are going to sway our minds. You have been trying so hard and so vehemently to smear him by your false allegations. You are the fraud. He never plagiarized nor cheated. His scientific contribution is a paradigm shift and people with little minds and sick souls like you and your puppets will never come to grips with it. Besides you and those in cahoots with you are not in a position to judge Prof. El Naschie. Eat your heart out and no matter how hard you persist and try, we will not be swayed.

Advocates

[deleted]

I am still keenly interested in a satisfactory resolution of the correct inverse coupling constant of unification of all fundamental forces. The value found by Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg is 17.5 as given on page 192 of volume III of his book - The Quantum Theory of Fields - Cambridge (2000). This 17.5 is for super symmetric grand unification. On the other hand, the leading German Theoretical Physicist W. Greiner gives the value 26 as easily estimated from figure 9.11 page 377 of his famous textbook - Gauge Theory of Weak Interaction - published by Springer - Berlin 1994. My own calculation based on Mohamed Elnaschie exact E-Infinity theory gives 26.18033989 which is very close to the value given by Greiner in his book. It seems that 17.5 must be excluded unless we are overlooking something. To go to the bottom of the discrepancy, I should refer to a remarkable paper by Mohamed Elnaschie titled - Quantum gravity unification via transfinite arithmetic and geometrical averaging - published in Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, volume 35(2008) pp 252 - 256. In this paper Elnaschie uses the exact three inverse couplings of electromagnetism 60, weak force 30 and strong force 10 as idealized for the electroweak energy scale. These values lead to the inverse Summerfield constant 137 as well as three inverse couplings for pair wise unification, namely the electromagnetic and weak force 42.4, the weak force and strong force 17.3 and the electromagnetic and strong force 24.49. Subsequently, Elnaschie shows that the three inverse couplings lead to 26.18 almost exactly as the E-Infinity exact solution. The new insight is however the value of the electromagnetic and weak force namely 17.3 which is very close to that found by Weinberg. The question is therefore the following: Could Weinberg result of 17.5 be interpreted as a partial unification coupling? I would be grateful to any helpful comment.

« Previous Page Next Page »