If someone who is not an expert on the nitty-gritty scientific issues involved in the John Mather fraud hears today that there are questions about his long-ago discovery, that someone might reasonably dismiss this out of hand by saying: “But he was given a Nobel Prize for this!”

This is a reasonable position because the Nobel Prize, for the hard sciences especially, comes at the end of a long and elaborate process of examination and vetting by the expert scientific community. In many cases there are subsequent verifications and convincing applications of the discovery. So the underlying assumption is that if there were anything the matter with the discovery, it would have surfaced during this long process. Every stone has been turned. John Mather, for example, made his discovery in 1990 and received his Nobel Prize in 2006. During the intervening period, his discovery was considered to be strenghtened by one new result after another.

So let us examine this Nobel Prize Defense. The right question to ask here is not

“But did he not get the Nobel Prize?”


“If something wrong were to emerge with the discovery after it had received the Nobel Prize, what would the Nobel Prize givers say or do?”

The answer: Absolutely nothing. They would remain mum. The reason for this is that the Nobel Prize, by its charter, is absolutely irrevocable. Even if a Laureate himself confesses to have committed science fraud or serial science fraud, he would remain a Nobel Laureate till the ends of time.

Furthermore, the deliberations of the Nobel Prize Committee in awarding the Prize remain secret for a period of 50 years from the year it is awarded. This means that nothing can be known about the process, and nothing can be said about the process today. So the prizegivers cannot say or do anything to indicate anything.

John Mather committed serial science fraud. We know today from the results of two modern satellites, the WMAP and the Planck, that there is hide nor hair of a 3 degrees Kelvin Big Bang Blackbody Spectrum in the sky. Yet in 1975 Mather reported discovering the full spectrum. It was crude, and did not get much attention. In 1990, using the COBE Satellite, he reported the spectrum again, this time with picture-perfect quality. This time he got attention. In due course he got the Nobel Prize.

All of the vetting and all the usual arguments about how the Nobel Prize is the final word failed in the case of Mather. This was a singular case, an exception rather than the rule. But now an exception is trying to hide under the umbrella of the rule.

The bottom line: There can be no Nobel Prize Defense for John Mather. The fact that the Nobel givers do not say anything cannot – by the evidence of their own charter – mean they are defending the discovery.

The fact of the matter is that no genuine discoverer ever needs to invoke the Nobel Prize Defense.

Let me also draw your attention to the repeated public allusions by Mather and his cohort to the facts that he was TIME Magazine’s one of the 100 most influential people in the world in 2007, and again one of the 25 most influential people in space in 2012 as supports for his scientific discovery. Can you get any more desperate than this?


Tags: , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s