March 25, 2017
Agreed with the UPITEC President Horst Eckardt. This scandal was the Watergate of modern physics, an all time low. ”
There is only one relevant scandal here, and that is the fact that a 24ct crackpot (perpetual motion and antigravity his specialty) is receiving a Civil List Pension. Non-scientists will perhaps not appreciate how great an insult that is to the memory of great British scientists. Try it: use Wikipedia to check out the accomplishments of Faraday, Heaviside, Herschel and Hamilton. What comparable accomplishments can be put on your account, Ron? Just a string of failed theories (all having the underlying aim of legitimizing notorious scams), based upon clearly incorrect mathematics. Have you seen the film version, Ron, the one where you are consorting with dead-heads; not knowing that you are yourself a dead-head.
“The worst offender is Wikipedia, which used disinformation and trolling to try to wreck a new theory, and to try to wreck careers. I would describe that as a deleted expletive. Nixon is summed up history as: “What did he know and when did he stop knowing it?” The standard modellers of that era must have known that Bruhn was a fraud, otherwise they were incompetent. ”
We are no fans of Wikipedia, precisely because we feel that it should not mention pseudoscientists at all, and is generally too soft on the lunatic fringe. As all of Bruhn’s opinions would be upheld by all other professional mathematicians (“mathematics cannot lie” as some crank said), we feel that he now has the prima facie basis for a defamation suit against you. Do you have any better evidence of ‘fraud’ to offer in your defence? Such as his promoting of perpetual-motion and cancer-curing scams? No. That would be you, again.
“The mathematics are not really all that difficult for a trained physicist. The mathematics are difficult for others, but even someone with no mathematical training at all can see that a self checking proof is correct. For example the proof of the Cartan identity that I have given in complete detail. ”
But Ron, have you forgotten? You are not a ‘trained physicist’. You are a bucket chemist. You learned a few limited mathematical techniques in order to model the resonance of molecules, and now you try to make that little go far too far. As Bruhn has pointed out, one certainly does not have to be a mathematician to appreciate the errors in your work. Do you not remember the bit where he shows that the numbers of tensor components do not match up on each side of some of your ‘equations’? The layman has only to be able to add in order to appreciate the error in that case.
“Bruhn’s behaviour was long drawn out academic misconduct, and he broke laws on harassment and stalking. At one point he wrote to Bo Lehnert of the Royal Swedish Academy, because the establishment for whom Bruhn was a minor prophet, feared a Nobel Prize. TU Darmstadt is ranked 305 in Webometrics and is a good university. It was founded in 1877 by the Grand Duke of Hessen. ”
Oops, more evidence for the defamation case. Can you not get it into your dead head that outing crackpots is not harassment or stalking; it is an essential public service. Would that be the same Lehnert who co-authored that notorious paper which ‘explained’ ‘Dr’ Bearden’s perpetual-motion machine? Would that be the same Lehnert who acted as a referee for the award of that undeserved Civil List Pension? No fear of a Nobel Prize being awarded. More like a fear of a crackpot conspiracy.
“I remember phoning Brian Josephson of Cardiff, a Nobel Laureate who works in Cambridge. I was congratulated on my “gong” as the rather eccentric physicists called the Civil List Pension, but was then asked “What about Bruhn?” and told that he would not introduce me to any Cambridge faculty. I replied “….but Brian, I didn’t ask to be introduced, and what about Nixon or Jo McCarthy of Wisconsin or Jo Stalin of the Gulag Archipelago? Is there any difference?””
This sort of thing poses a moral dilemma for us. It is nice to hear that Ron was dissed by Josephson, perhaps the only scientist in history to receive a Nobel Prize for undergraduate work, but we are honor-bound to point out that Josephson is just a different species of crackpot: the type that does not ‘soil its own nest’. That is, he is instead a gullible believer in everything supernatural.
Oh, stop-press: our author-friend reminds us that, when Josephson was told about Laithwaite’s claims, he saw nothing awry (“the spinning wheel has sufficient energy to rise against gravity”). It seems that a colleague had hurriedly to take him aside and explain that a lack of energy was not the problem: it was the complete lack of any mechanism! Jeez, you both see daft people!