التقيم العلمى للدكتور محمد النشائى h-Index 62الحالى متفوقا على كل علماء الشرق الاوسط واسرائيل

حوار صحفى مع الدكتور محمد النشائى فى جريدة عاجل بتاريخ 16-09-14 صفحة 11

التقيم العلمى للدكتور محمد النشائى h-Index 62الحالى متفوقا على كل علماء الشرق الاوسط واسرائيل

comments

Jeffrey Beall:

No offence Mr. Beall but Prof. El Naschie did not say E = mc2 is wrong.  He only made a vital reinterpretation showing that it is the sum of two quantum parts.  You clearly are not a physicist and will thus not understand the meaning of his work not matter how hard you try or we try to explain it.  However I think you can understand (and others like you) that the place to put your point of view is in a scientific journal.  It is clear to anyone who is not biased like yourself and your backers that if El Naschie is so terribly wrong and is harming science so badly as you all try to make out, that you can simply put in writing in a scientific frame work all the points that are wrong.  So far – and we are talking years now – not one scientist has written a paper refuting scientifically anything that El Naschie has written.  You all just gossip on blogs, no doubt getting paid handsomely for advertising, just like Jason Rush before you.

2

Regarding Mr. Jeffrey Beall and his blacklist of journals:

Being an average human being I first wasted my time reading what Jeffrey Beall has forced on us by misuse of modern popular media and am now further punishing myself by writing about it instead of the far more rational stance of ignoring and ignoramus.

I think nobody could possibly doubt that an unmarried, impotent, frigid and sterile person could write a book about the virtues of marriage, having a family and a health sexual life.  I am really crossing red lines here of the religious sect to which I belong by expressing myself in this frivolous way but Mr. Beall forces me to commit this unpleasant act.  Mr. Beall is not a scientist, he is not a physicist, he does not hold a Ph.D. and he has not published any mathematical or experimental papers in open or closed access journal in his life and yet ye has the nerve to incessantly recommend his limitations as a sign of great distinction.  My guess is that Mr. Jeffrey Beall has various financial interests with commercial publishing companies and cartels and was commission for cash to attack open access journals and their publishers who are giving the traditional publishers like Elsevier a real run for their money.  It is truly telling that he has taken it upon himself to target El Naschie and in so doing, has revealed his real occupation as a hired internet character assassin.  I and many other objective people have nothing but revulsion for these marginalized characters who are so happy to sit behind their computer screens and make their money in this low level way.  Many religions, including mine, say we should have more compassion for such characters with their financial and moral bankruptcy but I am finding that very hard.  As someone else has pointed out: why are you so disturbed by the dissemination of science through any scientific means, be it open or closed access?  If you are so disturbed, why not write a scientific paper refuting the results?  Surely that is what science is all about.  You are saying that unless the mainstream and traditional scientific publishing avenues are used, no science should be allowed to see the light of day, in which case humanity would not have progressed very far.  However it seems you and others like you, are incapable of proper scientific discussion and resort instead to defamatory, low level blogs.  Mr. Beall you are not a scientist and are nothing more than a self appointed expert on nothing.  I have no problem with your ramblings – I hope they keep you company – but I do have a problem with you trying to stifle science and pretending to talk in the name of open minded real scientists who like to see new ideas.  We are all more than capable of making up our own minds and ignoring work that does not appeal or we do not agree with.  We do not need or want the likes of you trying to make our decisions for us.


3.

Integrity under attack indeed.  You should stop internet defamation:

Let me start with a little bit of history.  A well known group hijacked the work of G. Ord, L. Nottale and M.S. El Naschie and to cover up they started a major defamation campaign particularly against Prof. Mohamed El Naschie.  They paid favors and tangible advantages to anyone who helped them by writing defamatory articles in their own journals against El Naschie under the cover of protecting integrity while they violate all moral and scientific norms and codes.  El Naschie’s h-index at the time was 38.  After five years of constant attack El Naschie’s h-index in Google Scholar stands at 62.  That is the real reason for the renewed attacks on El Naschie by internet defamation experts.

10th Anniversary Series: Helping Researchers See Farther Faster - Google Scholar Blog

10MS El Naschie

Dipl-Ing Pof Dr -Dep. of Physics, University of Alexandria, Egypt

Structural Egeneering Nonlinear Dynamics-Quantum Physics and Cosmology-Dark Energy-Deterministic Chaos and Random Fractals

No verified email - Homepage

My profile is public

Citation indices	All	Since 2009
Citations	18765	9587
h-index	53	39
i10-index	566	320

th Anniversary Series: Helping Researchers See Farther Faster - Google Scholar Blog

Referee report on Prof. Mohamed El Naschie latest paper in Relativity and dark energy.

Referee report on Prof. Mohamed El Naschie latest paper in Relativity and dark energy.

-----Original Message-----
From:
To: Chaossf <Chaossf@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 18:09
Subject: your submission

Title: The nature of dark energy and its cosmic density from

Einstein's relativity and quantum field renormalization

Author: M. El Naschie

Dear Prof. El Naschie,

Reviewers have now commented on your paper. You will see that they are advising that the paper is acceptable once you have revised your manuscript to take their comments into account. The reviewers' comments are enclosed. Please send the revised version to me at the present email and as soon as possible. It will be accepted if the reviewers' comments will be met. It will then not need to go back to the referees.

Yours sincerely,

Editor in Chief

First referee report:

This paper should be accepted for publication, and it is worth a Nobel Prize indeed.

The paper gives a theoretical derivation of the dark energy, which is exact same with the experimental data. The derivation process is clear and correct. The paper is very much suitable for publication in this esteemed journal.

Second referee report:

The paper of Prof. El Naschie is without a doubt superb. His dissection of Einstein's original formula into quantum particle real energy and quantum wave dark energy is meantime recognized as the first step toward a paradigm shift and a new understanding of fundamental physics. Nonetheless I would like you to give him the chance to rethink the general structure of the paper and may be add some of his more recent results and eliminate some of already well known results. I have no objection whatsoever that he is presenting a state of the art paper of his research on dark energy, however it is recommendable that he is given the privilege of looking at this particular paper once more because Prof. El Naschie is extremely prolific and he writes papers with hefty contents faster than we can even read them. On the whole I have no further comment other than my compliments to the author on his great insight into quantum physics and cosmology.

لقاء مع الدكتور محمد النشائى فى القناة الثانية وبرنامج بنصبح عليك بتاريخ 24/08/2014