Laureates regret Indian physicist's Nobel loss : South, News - India Today

Laureates regret Indian physicist's Nobel loss : South, News - India Today

Hyderabad-basedphysicist Dr B.G. Sidharth has received support from some of the world renowned scientists after he was overlooked for this year's Nobel Prize in physics.

The award was given to Saul Perlmutter and Adam Reiss of the US and Brian Schmidt from Australia "for the discovery of the accelerating expansion of the Universe through observations of distant supernovae".

But a year before Perlmutter and Reiss came up with their observations on "dark energy" in theInternational Journal of Astrophysics, Sidharth had in 1998 presented his paper on the expansion of the universe.

The director general of BM Birla Science Centre, Hyderabad, had first proposed the "dark energy" model at the 7th Marcel Grossman Conference in Jerusalem, Israel, from June 22-27, 1997 and a year later at another international conference on quantum physics in Singapore. In 1998, his research paper titled The Universe of Fluctuations was accepted for publication in theInternational Journal of Modern Physics.

But all this was ignored when the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences announced this year's award winners in physics. There was not even a mention of Sidharth or his work. This has caused a lot of heartburn among the scientists who have now come out in Sidharth's support.

"It is of course clear that your equation predicts an exponential (inflation-type) expansion of the current universe, hence acceleration. And it would have been nice if the Nobel committee had mentioned this," Sir Anthony James Leggett, also known as Prof Tony Leggett of the University of Illinois, a Nobel Prize winner in physics in 2003, wrote in his e-mail to Sidharth.

Prof Antony Hewish, a British astronomer who had won the Nobel for physics in 1974, also felt that Sidharth's work should have been recognised. "You must feel gratified that your ideas in 1997 were spot on," Hewish wrote.

Prof M.A. Fullana of the University of Valencia, Spain, in his message to the Indian scientist said he felt very disappointed.

"The scientific community unfortunately is also immersed in defects of our present economical and social system. Many times, the recognition of work does not go the path of justice. This is the case you have experienced in your person. It is obvious you deserve the just acknowledgement. It is clear you also deserve the Nobel Prize," Fullana said.

"I am sorry about the Nobel. There is considerable lobbying by American agents to influence the Nobel committee. Unfortunately we have none. Something must be done," C.R. Rao, Professor Emeritus at the Pennsylvania State University, observed.

Indian Physicist ‘cheated’ of Nobel?

Indian Physicist ‘cheated’ of Nobel?
This year’s Nobel Prize in physics went to three astronomers for their work demonstrating that “ dark energy” was propelling expansion of the universe at ever- increasing speeds. An Indian physicist claims that he had proposed a similar theory a year before the three astronomers first announced their results in 1998.

Dr B. G. Sidharth, director general of B. M. Birla Science Centre, had proposed the “ dark energy” model at the seventh Marcel Grossman Conference in Jerusalem in June 1997, and at another conference on quantum physics in Singapore a year later.

His research paper titled “ The Universe of Fluctuations” was published in International Journal of Modern Physics in 1998.

Astronomers, including Saul Perlmutter and Adam Reiss — two of the three winners of the 2011 Nobel — published their observations, which confirmed Sidharth’s theory.

Their studies were published in the Astrophysics Journal in 1999.

Sidharth asserts that it was only after his paper was published that the other researchers got their findings published. “ My theory was based on physics and mathematical calculations. The mathematical model that I followed is called fluctuational cosmology. On the other hand, the model proposed by the Nobel winners was based on observational findings while studying a supernova,” he said.

According to his model, there was no big bang resulting in the creation of matter and energy in the universe instantaneously. Rather the universe is permeated by an energy field or

quantum vacuum. Out of such an all- pervading energy field, particles are created in a totally random manner, a process that continues. “ This model was diametrically opposite to the accepted idea that the universe, dominated by dark matter, was actually decelerating. However, I proposed that driven by dark energy, the universe would be expanding and accelerating,” he said.

Sidharth recalls that his theory was written off by physicists since it had several inexplicable concepts.

“ Several astronomers in 1998 confided to me that my observations were wrong. What is surprising is that when the three astronomers also proposed the same theory based on observational findings, it was also rejected.” He said the presence of dark energy was later confirmed by the Wilkinson Microwave Probe ( WMAP) and the Sloane Digital Sky Survey. He claims that his research papers had received several critical reviews.

Though Sidharth had presented his papers at the Jerusalem conference and got them published in the international journals, they went unnoticed by the subsequent researchers, including the three Nobel prize winners.

Sidharth feels that the Nobel academy should have acknowledged his contribution, but does not plan to take up the issue with it. However, he said, several of his scientist friends are planning to write to the Academy. “ I am happy that my findings have been reconfirmed, though I did not expect that the theory would fetch the Nobel prize,” he signs off.


Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/135407-indian-physicist-cheated-nobel.html#ixzz2FnjRR37x

الدكتور النشائى فى قناة الخليجية وبرنامج مواجهات بتاريخ 20-07-2-2012

Dr. Mohamed Al- Naschie in the ALFATH

comment from Prof. Tharwat El-Sherbini

Received this very gentle comment from Prof. Tharwat El-Sherbini, who is a Distinguished Professor of Physics and he is the son of an eminent Professor of Physics as well. Prof. Tharwat has received every State Merit and Recognition there is in Egypt.    

From: Tharwat El-Sherbini ; 
Subject: Re: Ultimate F 
Sent: Wed, Dec 12, 2012 10:16:25 PM 

I am always an admirer of prof. M. S. El Naschie. In his research work he tackles subtle problems in theoretical physics. With his elegant mathematical treatments he oftenly reaches convenient, logical and accurate solutions. This is clear in his work on  high energy quantum physics, heterotic strings, E (infinite) spaces, and more recently on dark matter and the unification of gravity and quantum mechanics. His work was crowned by the discovery of the extension of the well known Einstein's equation (E=mc2) to become E=mc2/22).   I hope that prof. El Naschie will continue to show us how nature works.                                                  Prof. Th. M. El Sherbini

On the Shoulder of Giants

Einstein Time Magazine Cover Picture A threefold falsity

Einstein Time Magazine Cover Picture
A threefold falsity

I think that it is only a slight exaggeration to say that when anyone finds his picture one day on the cover page of Time Magazine, then he has reached the Media Promised Land. Some maintain ( for instance the Egyptain Fareed Zakaria) that at least in politics you don't get your picture there except on the order of the White House. In any case the picture of Einstein with the mushroom smoke typical of the atomic bomb explosion with E=mc² written on it is threefold misleading.

In fact it helped mislead generations of laymen and scientists into thinking that Einstein's research had anything to do with the bomb and that E = mc² has anything to do with the energy released in atomic explosions. Einstein being a media star at the time was asked by Leo Szillard to write to Roosevelt urging him to develop an atomic bomb. He told him:"You are an officially certified genius and they may listen to you. They would not listen to a specialist like me." Szillard meant it ironically of course. Einstein signed the letter written by Szillard and the rest is history.

Mohamed El-Naschie (محمد النشائى)

In any event I personally like to read a nice popular scientific book and I read many of them. However I must forewarn from the pitfalls of mixing politics and religion with real mathematical and experimental science. The Internet is a double-edged sword and media tabloid have nothing to do with real science.

Ultimate F

Quantum theorem shakes foundations

Prof. Rindler on the experimental and theoretical limitation of Einstein’s Theory

Prof. Rindler on the experimental and theoretical limitation of Einstein’s E=mc²

We are still within the very same context of Mohamed El Naschie’s surprising extension of Einstein’s media star formula E=mc².

Today there are only at most handful experts on Relativity who could possibly be measured to the German Wolfgang Rindler. If you are searching for the best written books on Relativity then Rindler is the author, the co-author or at a minimum his name will be all over the book. In one of his acclaimed books “Relativity” published by Oxford Press (2004), Prof. Rindler writes on pages 111 and 112 the following: “Nevertheless, Einstein’s assertions of the full equivalence of mass and energy, according to the famous formula  E=mc² was in part a hypothesis as we shall see. It cannot be uniquely deduced from the basic laws”

Then on page 112 he continues: “In fact it is equation (6.9) that supplies the constant of proportionality between E and m. And it is the enormity of this constant that explains why the mass increases corresponding to the easily measurable kinetic energies of particles in classical collision had never been observed.”

We say that in a situation where relativity and quantum mechanics are both relevant simultaneously, E=mc² is inaccurate and we must use Mohamed El Naschie’s equation E=mc² /22.In fact he gives a very reasonable justification for that based on Witten’s T-duality and this is why his equation agrees with the accurate data collected by the WMAP and the supernova teams headed by Perlmutter, Schmidt and Riess who earned the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics.

To date this data is the only reliable experimental confirmation of energy-mass relation at quantum relativity geometrical scales i.e. cosmological scales.

I hope, as many others have hoped before me that this silences the irrelevant and artificially constructed reasons used to object to El Naschie’s formula. This is a formula which agrees with reality i.e. cosmic measurements and that on its own should be sufficient.

M.S.

Robert Mills on the Lack of Experimental Evidence for Einstein's Theory

Robert Mills on the Lack of Experimental Evidence for Einstein E=mc²

Some, in fact many scientists are in a state of disbelief that Mohamed El Naschie was able to revise Einstein’s masterpiece theory E=mc². Not always but frequently they cite fission and fusion in reactors and weapons as experimental proof of Einstein’s most famous formula in the world.  Of course these are very poor examples as anyone would discover who carefully read the writings of the masters of the trade as opposed to Wikipedia or other loose popular media articles.

First who is Robert Mills? This Professor who excelled as a teacher is the very same great man and co-discoverer of Yan-Mills’ theory i.e. the Center of Quantum Field Theory which was the road travelled by Prof. Gerard ‘tHooft to complete the standard model and obtain his Nobel Prize in Physics and establish himself as one of the principal architects of modern theoretical physics.

In his wonderful textbook: “Spacetime and Quanta” published by W. H. Freeman and Company, New York (1994) John Mills starts by outlining relativity theory before going into quantum mechanics. On page 164 of this book, he writes:

“The energy from fission and fusion comes from tiny differences in the binding energies of different nuclei, not from the destruction of particles, just the same as with ordinary combustion.”

Nothing could be stated clearer than that.  Mohamed El Naschie merely extended Einstein’s formula to the quantum gravity domain and he thereby confirmed Einstein generally and did not contradict his basic ideas.

M. S. (2012)

The Basic Principles behind Mohamed El Naschie's revision of Einstein's celebrated formula

The Basic Principles behind Mohamed El Naschie's revision of Einstein's celebrated formula E = mc² to E=mc²/22 which stands on the shoulders of giants

We live in a time that is very different from that when science was all about science or at least was mainly about discovering how nature works with only one reward which is the personal satisfaction of contributing to mankind's enlightenment. Presently prizes and far worse funding are paramount considerations which draw the most strange and foreign elements to science namely media spectacles, Internet hype or defamation and some of the most distasteful methods of illegal competition.

Here I will consider the latest and probably the most important result in theoretical physics since 1905 which is Mohamed El Naschie's revision of Einstein's E = mc² to E = (mc²)/(22.18033989) mc²/22. From a media viewpoint and depending on one's political, religious and ethical prejudices, the result may be described in vocabulary terms as ranging from heresy to absolute pure genius. I personally could see how patriotic Egyptians would rejoice that an Egyptian engineer has proven a German Jewish icon to be wrong by 95.5% and turned European Theoretical Physics upside down. Others filled with hatred to anything Muslim or Arab will dismiss El Naschie's work offhand without even reading it and will be outraged at how an Egyptian engineer dares to place himself on the same level as the greatest brain humanity has ever seen namely Albert Einstein. Sober facts however do show that all these stances and attitudes have nothing whatsoever to do with science.

In what follows I would like to put El Naschie's important work in its proper context. The most striking aspect of his work is that it proves the basic truth and elegance of not only Newton and Einstein but also the pioneers and heroes of quantum mechanics i.e. Heisenberg, Schrodinger, Dirac and their colleagues. The point is that Einstein has generalized Newton's space and time as well as gravity. Mohamed El Naschie has in a very similar way merely generalized Einstein's Relativity to include quantum mechanics, which is by itself a great deal, but by no means more than that.

People thought wrongly for a long time that because Relativity on its own and Quantum Mechanics also on its own are extremely successful models of Nature then there can be no context where both theories could be changed in a major way. This is wrong because at the level of quantum gravity at the extremely small scale of the Planck Length, Newtonian gravity changes in strength in a very major way. At the other end i.e. at very large scales such as the Hubble Radius, which is measured in hundreds of light years, the contra part of Newtonian gravity namely relativity must change in a considerably large degree in order to accommodate the strength of quantum entanglement which accumulates to the extent of reducing the total energy of the cosmos by almost 95.5%. El Naschie could have never reached his beautiful results without standing on the shoulders of giants like Newton, Einstein, Heisenberg, Schrodinger, Dirac, Legget, Connes, Hardy, Nottale, Smolin, Magueijo and many others.  

With that I hope I can rest my case.

A.E.

الأسس العلمية التى مكنت اينشتاين مصر من تصحيح نظرية اينشتاين وأشهر معادلاته

الأسس العلمية التى مكنت اينشتاين مصر من تصحيح نظرية اينشتاين

 وأشهر معادلاته

هناك مبادئ هامة لابد من أن توضح وتشرح بتأنى وإيجاز لكى يستطيع المرء من أن يتفهم كيف تمكن العالم العربى المصرى الأستاذ الدكتورمهندس محمد صلاح الدين النشائى من اكتشاف خطأ أساسى ضخم فى معادلة اينشتاين الأشهر التى تقول أن الطاقة تساوى الكتلة فى مربع سرعة الضوء حيث تمكن النشائى أن يوضح بما لا يدعى مجال لأى شك أن القانون الصحيح يجب أى يكون نفس قانون اينشتاين لكن بعد أن يقسم الناتج على اثنين وعشرون(22). لكى يفهم المرء هذا الموضوع لابد أن نعلم الآتى :

1- هناك مفهوم خاطئ أن قانون اينشتاين أختبر فى المعمل اختباراً كمياً دقيقاً وأن نتائج التفاعلات الذرية المختلفة تدل على صحة القانون. هذا خاطئ مائة فى المائة وعلى سبيل المثال وليس الحصر كل التجارب والأمثلة التى تستخدم لتأكيد صحة القانون هى تجارب غير كمية ولم يستطيع أحد أن يقيس بأى مقدار من الدقة كمية المادة التى تحولت إلى طاقة بل أن أغلب تلك الأمثلة لا يحدث فيها أى تحول للمادة إلى طاقة. هذا ينطبق على المفاعل الذرى وينطبق على القنبلة الذرية بالإضافة أن النشائى لا يشكك فى صحة نظرية اينشتاين بتاتاً من الوجه العام ولكنه أثبت أن هناك معامل مفقود فى هذه المعادلة ألا وهو القسمة على اثنين وعشرون (22) وهو ما ياخذ نظريه الكم فى الاعتبار.

2- التجربة الوحيدة التى تستطيع أن تحدد العلاقة الكمية بين الكتلة والطاقة هى قياسات الطاقة الكونية بأجمعها, هذه هى القياسات التى حازت على جائزة نوبل لعام 2011 وهى القياسات التى أدت إلى فكرة الطاقة الداكنة المفقودة. القياسات تدل على أن تقريباً واحد مقسوم على اثنين وعشرون (22) هى كمية الطاقة الكونية بالمقارنة بما تنباءت به معادلة اينشتاين الأصلية لذلك فهناك احتمالين، احتمال منطقى سهل هو أن هناك خمسة وتسعون فى المائة (95%) من الطاقة الكونية مختبئة ولا نستطيع قياسها وهذا ما تبناه أغلب العلماء، أما الاحتمال الثانى فهو أنه هناك خطأ كمى فى نظرية اينشتاين بسبب هذا الالتباس وهو الأقرب إلى المنطق وعلى الرغم من ذلك لم يتبنى هذا الاحتمال سوى قلة قليلة من الناس وعلى رأسهم العالم المصرى محمد النشائى. الملفت للنظر حقاً هو أن تؤيد تلك القياسات نظرية النشائى وهذا ما يثبت صحتها المطلقه على مستوى تعادل النسبيه مع نظرية الكم اى النقطة التى تتطلب معادلة تجمع بين نظرية النسبية ونظرة الكم معاً فى وقت واحد.

3- هناك نظريتان أساسياتان ترتكز عليهما جميع علوم الطبيعة النظرية: الأولى هى نظرية الكم والثانية هى: نظرية النسبية  ونظرية النشائى تصهر النظريتان فى نظرية واحدة ولذلك هى أدق من أى نظرية أخرى. الجزء الأول فى نظرية النشائى ألا وهو الكتلة فى مربع سرعة الضوء هى نظرية النسبية. أما الجزء الثانى من نظرية النشائى فهو المعامل واحد مقسوم على اثنين وعشرون (22). هذا المعامل هو نصف معامل معروف باسم الالتصاق الكمى بنظرية الكم ومقداره التقريبى واحد مقسوم على احدى عشر. بضرب النتيجاتان حصل النشائى بطريقة مذهلة فى سهولتها على النتيجة الصحيحة التى تجمع نظرية الكم ونظرية النسبية فى معادلة واحدة وهذا هو السبب وراء نجاح نظرية النشائى فى التنبؤ بالكمية الحقيقية للطاقة الكونية والتى تتفق بدرجة غير عادية فى دقتها مع القياسات الكونية التى قام بها العلماء الثلاثة الذين حازوا على جائزة نوبل فى الطبيعة عام 2011. نكرر مرة اخرى ان تجارب مثل التصادم التفرقى لكومبتن لا علاقه لها بنظريه تجمع بين نظريه الكم مع نظريه النسبيه فى نظريه واحده وهى نظريه الكم النسبى كما يحب النشائى ان يسميها او الكم التثاقلى كما هى معروفه عالميا. للتوضيح أكثر نقول أن القوة الاساسية تتحد جميعاً عند طول غاية فى الصغر يسمى المسافة البلانكية هذه المسافة تقرب من سنتميتر واحد مقسم على عشرة وإلى جانبها 32 صفر هذه مسافة لايمكن حتى تصورها وعند هذه المسافة لايمكن التعامل مع نظرية الكم بدون ادماج النسبية والتثاقل أى الجاذبية فى المعادلات المعنية. هناك فى الجانب المعاكس أطوال ومسافات طولها يتعدى الخيال وحتى الخيال العلمى على الرغم انها موجوده بالفعل. هذه هى المسافات التى تقاس بملاين السنوات الضوئية وأكبرها هو قطر الكون الذى يطلق عليه أسم مسافة "هبل". هذه هى المسافة التى تعنينا والتى يصبح من الضرورى عندها وحتى قبلها ادماج نظرية الكم مع نظرية النسبية والا سوف نحصل على اجابات لامعنى لها إذا قارنت بالقياسات الكونية والمعملية. بعنى أخر لايمكن ان نستخدم نظرية اينشتاين التى لاتاخذ نظرية الكم فى الاعتبار عندما نتعامل مع هذه الابعاد الخيالية. بالمقارنة هذا هو سر نجاح القانون المعدل الذى استحدثة النشائى لكى يستطيع ان يتنبئ بدقة الطاقة الكلية للكون وهو ماحدث. لهذا السبب ولهذا السبب فقط نجح النشائى حيث فشل إينشتاين ولكن لابد ان نعم تمام العلم لولا أعمال إينشتاين ما تمكن النشائى ابدا من يتوصل إلى نتيجاته. العلم هو نتيجة لتراكم المعلومات وقد قالها نيوتن من مئات السنوات "إذا كنت تمكنت من ترى على بعد شاسع فذلك لاننى كنت اقف على اكتاف عملاقة" 

كاتب المقالة يرجو أن تكون تلك السطور القليلة قد أوضحت نظرية النشائى وقربها أكثر إلى الأذهان.

م.ح.ب