Posts Tagged ‘Scientific misconduct’

Misconduct of Physics Nobel Committee 2019

October 14, 2019

Here is the report I discuss.
.
nobel prize physics 2019, james peebles nobel prize, lars heikensten nobel foundation, carl-henrik heldin nobel foundation, christina moberg kth, royal swedish academy of sciences, penzias wilson, john mather nasa, cmb, cosmic microwave background, cosmic black body, science fraud

Advertisements

COSMOLOGY: The “Skirt-the-issue” discovery stratagem

January 18, 2019


nobel prize physics 2006, nobel prize physics 2017, lindau nobel laureate meeting 2019, 69th lindau nobel laureate meeting, starmus 2019, starmus v, cobe satellite, planck satellite
roger falcone aps, michael moloney aip, megan donahue aas, anne kinney nsf, allison lerner nsf

Inspirationslager Lindau: The creation of monsteroids

January 1, 2019

A DARK NEW YEAR MESSAGE FOR HUMANITY


lindau nobel laureate meeting, 69th lindau nobel laureate meeting, lindau nobel laureate meeting 2019, starmus 2019, starmus v, roger falcone aps, michael moloney aip, megan donahue aas, france cordova nsf, anne kinney nsf, allison lerner nsf, diane souvaine nsb
nobel foundation, lars heikensten nobel foundation, carl-henrik heldin nobel foundation, christina moberg kth, royal swedish academy of sciences, k n vyas dae, k vijayraghavan psa

The BICEP2 Casebook it is here!

April 13, 2018


Click here to download pdf file (5.75 MB).


drew gilpin faust harvard, thomas f. rosenbaum caltech, Marc Tessier-Lavigne stanford, christopher l. eisgruber princeton, l. rafael reif mit, france cordova nsf, allison lerner nsf, harvard smithsonian center for astrophysics, andrei linde stanford, alan guth mit, david spergel princeton, paul steinhardt princeton, michael turner chicago, kavli foundation, kavli prize, w. m. keck foundation, keck telescope, physical review letters
scientific misconduct, science fraud, BICEP2, BICEP2 telescope, bicep2 cmb, cmb polarization, john kovac harvard, chao-lin kuo stanford, james bock caltech, b-mode polarization, bicep2 south pole

Neil deGrasse Tyson lies on

January 17, 2018


neil degrasse tyson, neil degrasse tyson hayden planetarium, neil degrasse tyson cosmos, astrophysics for people in a hurry, neil degrasse tyson books, neil degrasse tyson smithsonian, neil degrasse tyson quotes, Julia A. Reidhead, Julia A. Reidhead norton, Lewis W. Bernard, hayden planetarium, American Museum of Natural History, startalk, nova science now, scientific misconduct, science fraud

neil degrasse tyson, neil degrasse tyson hayden planetarium, neil degrasse tyson cosmos, astrophysics for people in a hurry, neil degrasse tyson books, neil degrasse tyson smithsonian, neil degrasse tyson quotes, Julia A. Reidhead, Julia A. Reidhead norton, Lewis W. Bernard, hayden planetarium, American Museum of Natural History, startalk, nova science now, scientific misconduct, science fraud

LIGO: Great quacks think alike

October 30, 2017


ligo science collaboration, lsc collaboration, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, ligo gravitational wave, binary black hole merger, binary neutron star merger, nobel prize in physics, nobel prize in physics 2017, kip thorne caltech, kip thorne ligo, kip thorne nobel prize, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss ligo, rainer weiss nobel prize, nsf ligo, france cordova nsf, Fudan-Zhongzhi Science Award, david reitze ligo, david shoemaker ligo, laura cadonati ligo, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, pierre meystre, physical review letters

ligo science collaboration, lsc collaboration, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, ligo gravitational wave, binary black hole merger, binary neutron star merger, nobel prize in physics, nobel prize in physics 2017, kip thorne caltech, kip thorne ligo, kip thorne nobel prize, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss ligo, rainer weiss nobel prize, nsf ligo, france cordova nsf, Fudan-Zhongzhi Science Award, david reitze ligo, david shoemaker ligo, laura cadonati ligo, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, pierre meystre, physical review letters

LIGO: Space warps, Ligonaut chirps

October 26, 2017


ligo science collaboration, lsc collaboration, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, ligo gravitational wave, binary black hole merger, binary neutron star merger, nobel prize in physics, nobel prize in physics 2017, kip thorne caltech, kip thorne ligo, kip thorne nobel prize, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss ligo, rainer weiss nobel prize, nsf ligo, france cordova nsf, Fudan-Zhongzhi Science Award, david reitze ligo, david shoemaker ligo, laura cadonati ligo, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, pierre meystre, physical review letters

ligo science collaboration, lsc collaboration, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, ligo gravitational wave, binary black hole merger, binary neutron star merger, nobel prize in physics, nobel prize in physics 2017, kip thorne caltech, kip thorne ligo, kip thorne nobel prize, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss ligo, rainer weiss nobel prize, nsf ligo, france cordova nsf, Fudan-Zhongzhi Science Award, david reitze ligo, david shoemaker ligo, laura cadonati ligo, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, pierre meystre, physical review letters

BOGUS PHYSICS IN WIKIPEDIA

April 28, 2017


wikipedia, dark energy, cosmic inflation, accelerating universe, ligo gravitational waves, ligo India, COBE satellite, cosmic blackbody radiation, cmb, big bang cosmology, bicep2, keck array, asymptotic freedom, gravitational wave observatory

wikipedia, dark energy, cosmic inflation, accelerating universe, ligo gravitational waves, ligo India, COBE satellite, cosmic blackbody radiation, cmb, big bang cosmology, bicep2, keck array, asymptotic freedom, gravitational wave observatory

Why is Bibhas De so pissed off with the physics establishment?!

April 9, 2017

Part of the reason why I am so pissed off with the physics establishment is the following. I consider this collective scientific misconduct by the establishment. So, naturally, when they indiscriminately spawn scam science and fraud science and frou frou science or when they engage in group intellectual masturbation, I am predisposed to exposing them.

In the same timeframe as the above, this is what was going on:

bibhas_de_investigates

So there you have it!

LIGO AND US POLICY ON RESEARCH MISCONDUCT (= SCIENCE FRAUD)

November 18, 2016

In the following the text in italic font is the Federal Policy On Research Misconduct as promulgated by the American Physical Society. The text in regular font shows my comments interjected.


FEDERAL POLICY ON RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

I. Research Misconduct Defined

Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.

Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.

Based on the operating principle of the existing LIGO instrument, a match between the recorded LIGO output waveform and a theoretically modeled gravitational wave train emanating from a merger of two black holes is no scientific evidence of gravitational wave [1]. Such a match – however impressive it is – is scientifically irrelevant.

The proof that LIGO is observing a gravitational wave requires an independent and simultaneous experimental demonstration that the two LIGO end mirrors are in an entangled mode of actuation – synchronous, equal amplitude and 180 degrees out of phase. Only then the issue of matching the two waveforms becomes scientifically justified, provided the instrument is otherwise faultless (which it is not.)

In other words, LIGO is not a complete scientific instrument concept. A complete instrument concept would measure and report three waveforms: the conventional output waveform they have reported (the “Difference Waveform”, say), and two waveforms showing the “displacement” of the two mirrors. If these two waveforms (“Twin Waveforms”, say) are identical except that one is flipped vertically, then this is the proof that a gravitational wave has passed through. The Difference Waveform now can be used to do the black hole stuff and whatnot.

However, the Difference Waveform is actually a derivative of the Twin Waveforms, and hence the latter waveforms would be the primary LIGO measurements.

To be absolutely clear on this central point about the billion-dollar, multi-decade, thousand-man LIGO observatotry: If LIGO were an instrument that reported only the Twin Waveforms and they were as described above, we have evidence of a gravitational wave; if it reported the Twin Waveforms AND the Difference Waveform, we have evidence of gravitational wave AND black holes merger; if it reported only the Difference Waveform, then we have nothing. Absolutely nothing. This last case is what actually happened.

Finally, for the LIGO instrument the Twin Waveforms may be fundamentally indeterminate, making this concept totally worthless for any purpose.

So the total fabrication here is the false “scientific” premise that a match between the black hole merger theory waveform and the Difference Waveform leads to a simultaneous discovery of gravitational wave AND black holes merger.

Another total fabrication is to aver without any experimental evidence whatsoever that the LIGO instrument can detect displacement of the 30-kg pendulum mass as small as 1/10,000-th the diameter of a proton. The discovery actually rests on this fabrication.

Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.

The calibration of the LIGO instrument – which was an essential condition for the discovery – was falsified. No valid calibration data that pertained to the LIGO instrument as it existed and operated at the time of the discovery were ever presented – to this day. Instead, some old and flawed test was dusted and passed off as calibration [1,2]. An uncalibrated scientific research instrument is untrustworthy in all respects, and certainly cannot produce a discovery.

To be absolutely clear on this point: No calibration, no discovery.

Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

Not applicable.


Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.

We are way past the stage in the scientific process where honest error/mistake could be advanced as a reason for reporting the false discovery.

Seven months have elapsed since the report of the discovery. During this period an enormous amount of scientific documentation of the fault with the discovery has been placed in readily accessible public view.

Had there been the slightest indication that the LIGO team was reviewing this material, it would be another matter. Instead, the raucous partying has continued and grown uninterrupted. The lead LIGO operatives have been anointed, feted, and given enormous amount of moneys to be put in their personal bank accounts. The operatives have publicly accepted all these in the spirit they were given.

In the end, on 11 November 2016, it was announced the LIGO’s official Spokeperson – acting in that capacity – will reaffirm the discovery in its fullest glory [3].


II. Findings of Research Misconduct

A finding of research misconduct requires that:

There be a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community; and

Falsely averring under an elaborate ruse that an instrument was properly calibrated during the discovery is not and accepted practice of the community.

To subsequently refuse to elaborate on this pivotal point when requested to do so is also not an accepted practice [2].

To report a discovery where a mathematically ill-posed problem becomes an experimentally sound problem is not an accepted practice [4].

To report a discovery based on a single detection of a transient signal is not an accepted practice. So solid was this discovery claimed to be that unprecedented demands for an instant Nobel Prize were made in all seriousness, demands that would require the Nobel Foundation to wave its nomination deadline.


The misconduct be committed intentionally, or knowingly, or recklessly; and

Even if the misconduct was unintentional (stemming from what has to be gross and collective incompetence) when the discovery was reported, the failure to retract the discovery and instead to forcefully maintain it made it intentional, knowing and reckless after the fact.

Further example of this recklessness is the US-India LIGO Collaboration which, during the period in question, has been moving aggressively and hurriedly to take such concrete steps as would be difficult to reverse (such as acquiring land for the Indian LIGO).

Also an example of ongoing reckless is the continued “upgrades” of LIGO during the period in question, thus obliterating evidence that could be examined to substantiate the allegations about the instrument as it existed when the discovery was made. This amounts to tampering with evidence. The design should have been frozen as soon as the allegations arose, pending a resolution. These upgrades have now made the two US LIGO stations different [5] – making the situation extremely murky (the two stations needed to be exactly identical.)

(In the case of the recent BICEP2 debacle [9], we have learned that “instrument upgrade” is an euphemism for deep-sixing the botched instrument and moving on, without facing any accountabiliy or accepting any responsibility.)


The allegation be proven by a preponderance of evidence.

Starting immediately after the discovery report and continuing for months, independent scientists have documented evidence of fault with the LIGO discovery. These findings cover various scientific and engineering facets of the discovery. Because the instrument is fundamentally flawed, its symptoms are multi-faceted, and that is why various investigators have described various fatal faults [1, 2,6-8].

It has been placed in evidence that:

(1). The LIGO scientific principle is wrong;
(2). The LIGO instrumentation is flawed;
(3). The LIGO observation was flawed;
(4). The interpretation of LIGO observation was flawed or scammed.

There is also evidence that on the day the gravitational wave was detected, the various uncertainties with LIGO were at a heightened state, and malfunction occurred [6].

There is also circumstantial evidence. Rainer Weiss is the LIGO instrumentation maven. He was also the COBE Satellite instrumentation maven. In fact the two projects overlap in time. The COBE Satellite discovery was a fraud, rooted in the instrumentation. LIGO is an outcome of the same process.

In fact, nothing about LIGO survives that proper scientific scrutiny which the physics establishment was unable or unwilling to provide, and which their watchdogs were happy to look away from. This scrutiny – the preponderance of evidence – in the end was provided by outsiders, gratis.

EXHIBITS

[1] Unchallenged privilege: The billion-dollar trilateral gravitational-wave discovery scam by Bibhas De

[2] Open Letter to the Nobel Committee for Physics 2016

[3] Robert M. Walker Distinguished Lecture

[4] LIGO: Absurdity of Big Physics

[5] Advanced LIGO ramps up, with slight improvements

[6] Letter to the Nobel Committee on LIGO claims for gravitational waves detections GW150914 and GW151226

[7] A detailed critical review of reported event GW150914 that LIGO/VIRGO collaboration announced as gravitational waves and black holes observation

[8] LIGO Experiments Cannot Detect Gravitational Waves by Using Laser Michelson Interferometers

[9] The Falsifiers of the Universe: BIG BANG COSMOLOY: the first fraud in the final frontier by Bibhas De