Misplaced Pages

Talk:Ruggero Santilli: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 09:26, 12 November 2016 editAmbiguosity (talk | contribs)209 edits →If Misplaced Pages had articles on every fringe 'scientist', it would be overwhelmed by crackpottery - should they be consolidated?← Previous edit Latest revision as of 08:36, 17 November 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots8,041,197 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 4 WikiProject templates. (Fix Category:Pages with redundant living parameter)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion 
(94 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{COI editnotice}}
{{Calm}}
{{Old AfD multi|date=8 March 2007|result='''keep'''|page=Ruggero_Santilli|date2=22 August 2016|result2='''no consensus'''|page2=Ruggero Santilli (2nd nomination)}} {{Old AfD multi|date=8 March 2007|result='''keep'''|page=Ruggero_Santilli|date2=22 August 2016|result2='''no consensus'''|page2=Ruggero Santilli (2nd nomination)}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=Start|listas=Santilli, Ruggero Maria|1=
{{talk header}}
{{WikiProject Biography|needs-photo=yes|s&a-work-group=yes}}
{{WikiProject Physics|importance=low|bio=yes}}
{{WikiProject Alternative views|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Chemistry|importance=low}}
}}
{{Connected contributor
| User1 =Da cosenza | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ]
| User2 =SantilliGalilei | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = | U2-otherlinks =Promotional SPA per ]
| User3 = 86.139.177.31 | U3-EH = yes | U3-banned = | U3-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User4 = 86.133.114.47| U4-EH =yes | U4-banned = | U4-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User5 = 86.142.77.154| U5-EH = yes | U5-banned = | U5-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User6 =Speakthetruth2 | U6-EH = yes | U6-banned = | U6-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User7 =Geebee090 | U7-EH =yes | U7-banned = | U7-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User8 =98.251.106.167 | U8-EH = yes | U8-banned = | U8-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User9 =75.117.179.181 | U9-EH = yes | U9-banned = | U9-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User10 = 98.251.106.167| U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = | U10-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
}}
{{Connected contributor
| User1 =Bravescience | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ]
| User2 =Superbopper | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = | U2-otherlinks =Promotional SPA per]
| User3 = 87.64.22.137 | U3-EH = yes | U3-banned = | U3-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User4 =Kaufman1111| U4-EH =yes | U4-banned = yes | U4-otherlinks = Indeffed in 2011 per ]. Promotional SPA per ]
| User5 = Globalreach1| U5-EH = yes | U5-banned = yes | U5-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ]
| User6 = Eurousa| U6-EH = yes | U6-banned =yes | U6-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ]
| User7 =50.38.54.88| U7-EH =yes | U7-banned = | U7-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User8 = | Justfairy|U8-EH = yes | U8-banned = yes| U8-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ]
| User9 = Globedweller | U9-EH = yes | U9-banned =yes | U9-otherlinks =Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ]
| User10 =Reussi | U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = yes | U10-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ]
}}
{{Connected contributor
| User1 = Verderosso | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned =yes | U1-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA Per ]
| User2 = Scuranova | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = yes | U2-otherlinks =Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ]
| User3 = 123reuss | U3-EH = yes | U3-banned = yes | U3-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ]
| User4 = ISTAT | U4-EH =yes | U4-banned = yes | U4-otherlinks = Sock of Kaufman1111. Promotional SPA per ]
| User5 = 70.195.6.135| U5-EH = yes | U5-banned = | U5-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User6 = NewWorriedLad | U6-EH = yes | U6-banned =yes | U6-otherlinks = Indeffed for hate speech at ]. Promotional SPA per ]
| User7 =Zeus1M| U7-EH =yes | U7-banned = yes | U7-otherlinks = Sock of NewWorriedLad. SPA per ]
| User8 = 71.180.120.18 | U8-EH = yes | U8-banned = | U8-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User9 = 70.125.25.14| U9-EH = yes | U9-banned = | U9-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User10 = ScientificEthics| U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = yes | U10-otherlinks = Blocked for hate speech at ]. Promotional SPA per ]
}}
{{Connected contributor
| User1 = 70.125.25.14 | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ]
| User2 = Aabrucadubraa | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = yes | U2-otherlinks =Indeffed per ]. Promotional SPA per ]
| User3 = 81.248.175.47 | U3-EH = yes | U3-banned =| U3-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User4 = Paredi67| U4-EH =yes | U4-banned = | U4-otherlinks = Promotional near-SPA per ]
| User5 = Objctiveinfo | U5-EH = yes | U5-banned = | U5-otherlinks = Promotional near-SPA per ]
| User6 = Xhunawtsjdg | U6-EH = yes | U6-banned =yes | U6-otherlinks = Blocked as obvious sock. Promotional SPA per ]
| User7 =Darth Sidious 69 | U7-EH =yes | U7-banned = | U7-otherlinks = SPA per ]
| User8 = Skeptic of skeptic | U8-EH = yes | U8-banned = | U8-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User9 = PoseidonRC| U9-EH = yes | U9-banned =yes| U9-otherlinks = Indeffed for hate speech at ]. Promotional SPA per ]
| User10 = Vespro Latuna| U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = | U10-otherlinks = Promotional near-SPA per ]
}}
{{Connected contributor
| User1 = Truthfulperspective | U1-EH =yes | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Promotional SPA Per ]
| User2 =188.206.104.1 | U2-EH = yes | U2-banned = yes | U2-otherlinks =Promotional SPA per ]
| User3 = Nederlandse Leeuw | U3-EH = yes | U3-banned =| U3-otherlinks = Derogatory SPA (promotional for dutch skeptics) per ]
| User4 = Editorialeffort| U4-EH =yes | U4-banned = | U4-otherlinks = NOTHERE. Promotional SPA per ]
| User5 =USAEU | U5-EH = yes | U5-banned = | U5-otherlinks = Promotional near-SPA per ]
| User6 = Ethical1999 | U6-EH = yes | U6-banned = yes | U6-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User7 =DCsghost | U7-EH =yes | U7-banned = | U7-otherlinks = SPA per ]
| User8 = | U8-EH = yes | U8-banned = | U8-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User9 = | U9-EH = yes | U9-banned = | U9-otherlinks = Promotional SPA per ]
| User10 = | U10-EH = yes | U10-banned = | U10-otherlinks = Promotional near-SPA per ]
}}
{{Connected contributor (paid)
| User1 =Mr RD | U1-employer =Brian Buckley| U1-client = Ruggero Santilli | U1-EH = | U1-banned = | U1-otherlinks = Disclosed
| User2 = BrianBuckleySEO | U2-employer = | U2-client =Ruggero Santilli | U2-EH = | U2-banned = | U2-otherlinks = Username.
| User3 = | U3-employer = | U3-client = | U3-EH = | U3-banned = | U3-otherlinks =
| User4 = | U4-employer = | U4-client = | U4-EH = | U4-banned = | U4-otherlinks =
| User5 = | U5-employer = | U5-client = | U5-EH = | U5-banned = | U5-otherlinks =
| User6 = | U6-employer = | U6-client = | U6-EH = | U6-banned = | U6-otherlinks =
| User7 = | U7-employer = | U7-client = | U7-EH = | U7-banned = | U7-otherlinks =
| User8 = | U8-employer = | U8-client = | U8-EH = | U8-banned = | U8-otherlinks =
| User9 = | U9-employer = | U9-client = | U9-EH = | U9-banned = | U9-otherlinks =
| User10 = | U10-employer = | U10-client = | U10-EH = | U10-banned = | U10-otherlinks =
}}
{{Merged-from|Magnecule}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K |maxarchivesize = 70K
|counter = 3 |counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 1 |minthreadsleft = 1
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |minthreadstoarchive = 1
Line 10: Line 91:
|archive = Talk:Ruggero Santilli/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Talk:Ruggero Santilli/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}

{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Biography
|living=yes
|class=Start
|needs-photo=yes
|s&a-work-group=yes
|listas=Santilli, Ruggero Maria
}}
{{WikiProject Physics|class=start|importance=low|bio=yes}}
{{WikiProject Alternative Views|class=Start|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Chemistry|class=start|importance=low}}
}}
{{merged|Magnecule}}
{{cool talk}}
{{Connected contributor|Mr RD|Brian Buckley|declared=yes|otherlinks=COI declared at .}}
__TOC__ __TOC__


== Recommended updates ==
== Reference 5, http://thunder-energies.com/company.html is a dead link ==


Editor Dough Weller, I have made the following editing:
Reference #5, http://thunder-energies.com/company.html, is a dead link. If an alternative source for the information it supports inline is not produced within a reasonable amount of time, <strike>I'll</strike> another editor not involved in the current AfD discussion on this article should consider deleting the relevant section as unsourced per[REDACTED] guidelines. ] (]) 20:11, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
:The proper way of handling this is to tag the dead links with template {{tl|dead link}}; better yet, to execute due diligence and fix the problem by yourself. See ] for the guideline. Anyway, I fixed it. ] (]) 02:42, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
::Waiting till we resolve the AfD issue here. but you're right. I need to curate the entire reflist and see what else is dead. ] (]) 01:57, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
::Whoops, didn't see you'd fixed it - thanks! I think it's probably good practice from here on in to defer any more changes till we get a "keep" or "delete" on the AfD discussion. That'd save us a little work and not cause anyone to think about our votes on the AfD discussion as potential CoI. ] (]) 20:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


1)To prevent discriminations (see, e.g., the article on Sir Roger Penrose https://en.wikipedia.org/Roger_Penrose) I have added the title of "Sir" only once at the very top (for documentation, see the "Honors" in the CV , citations being available in numerous independent sources, such as the website of the international conference in Osaka, Japan https://www.scientificfederation.com/chemical-engineering-catalysis/speakers.php , numerous citations available on request);
== Questions/Suggestions Round 1 ==
Again I am new to Misplaced Pages so please be gentle with me. I have read through the Misplaced Pages guidelines but figured it best I ask for the interpretation here on the talk page before I try editing the actual article.. (yikes! with great power, comes great responsibility.


So the article here does reference the 1984 review published in the Harvard Crimson about Santilli’s book, Il Grande Grido ("the great-ornery") : Ethical Probe on Einstein's Followers in the U.S.A, an Insider's View


2) I have removed the second line "Mainstream scientists dismiss his theories as fringe science." and replaced with "originator of hadronic mechanics and chemistry" because mainstream scientists do not consider "fringe science" a lifelong dedication to the verification of the EPR Argument, and also because the current line is demeaning for the Unites States of America according to countless complaints on record throughout two decades.
I will provide a quick excerpt from that review to lead into my questions:


3) In the 6th line of Biography I changed
::''“..The book's title is well chosen, for it is really written as a cry in the wilderness. Faced with systematic rejection from what Santilli claims are vested interests that exercise almost monopolistic control over physics research in the U.S. he saw no other option but to make a public appeal for recognition and redress of what he calls "scientific corruption at the highest levels of academia.
"a one man organization, the Institute for Basic Research" into "the Institute for Basic Research " because the "one man"

claim is grossly disproved by the main page of the IBR i-b-r(dot)org/ that has been listing for years a division in Israel headed by Prof. P. Mandell, a division in Kazakstan headed by Prof. A. K. Aringazin, and a division in Nigeria headed by Prof. A. O. E . Animalu, while
::''It is not unusual for visionaries or malcontents in the scientific community to make outrageous claims about disproving established theories, but Santilli's credentials are far too respectable and his claims too simple and well-documented for him to be dismissed as such a crackpot.
stating from its inception " The Institute Statute does not allow the disclosure of their names, but their work can be identified by searching the various scientific archives under".

::''There is no denying that II Grande Grido is a polemic. Santilli is clearly outraged and puzzled by much of the 'scientific corruption' about which he writes-his appeals to the reader often betray a naïve faith in the inherent fairness of American society. Above all however Santilli is sincere. He has never learned formal English and admit from the start that his book is written in "broken" and "crude" language, but the issues he raises are so serious that they speak for themselves.
4) The word "Jewish" physicists etc. has been removed everywhere and replaced with "mainstream orthodox" physicists, etc. because: the word "Jewish" it does not exist in Il Grande Grido; Santilli son in law is Jewish; Santilli is known to have supported several Jewish physicists for their participation to meeting; and the recent International Teleconference on Einstein's Determinism (http://eprdebates.org/epr-conference-2020.php) has been organized by Santilli in collaboration with the Family of Israel Foundation (http://www.i-b-r.org/translational-medicine.htm);

::''Santilli does not make outrageous claims about physical theories. Rather, he explains:''
''
::''This book is, in essence, a report on the rather extreme hostility I have encountered in U.S. academic circles in the conduction, organization and promotion of quantitative theoretical, mathematical, and experimental studies on the apparent insufficient of Einstein's idea in the face of an ever growing scientific knowledge.''
''
::''II Grande Grido is divided into three parts in the first part Santilli tries to explain in layman's terms some of the physical problems that he feels are being ignored. In the second part he recounts his personal experiences with leading academic institutions including Harvard and MIT with physics publications such as the Journal of the American Physical Society with U.S. government laboratories and with government agencies like the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy. In the third part he presents some tentative recommendations for improving intellectual freedom in the U.S. physics community.” – Harvard Crimson''''

*1 Would it be ok if I added a link to the actual book? (which is publically available for free pdf viewing on various servers)
*2 Could I add something about how, according to the book’s publisher, several bookstores in the Harvard area refused to carry Santilli’s book ?
::''“You may find it difficult to find II Grande Grido in Cambridge. According to the book's publisher, several area bookstores have refused to carry Santilli's book for fear of alienating their Harvard customers. It would be a shame if after all his efforts. Santilli's case were never heard. However, the book can be purchased at the I.B.R. at 98 Prescott St. in Cambridge. If Santilli is right, it is a place a lot more people should be visiting.” - Harvard Crimson''
*3 As mentioned in the book review, there are 3 supporting volumes of correspondence from which the source concludes that Santilli’s charges were not made frivolously.
::''“Santilli's charges are far reaching--from the misconduct of individual physicists regarding his own work to general and perhaps conspiratorial activities at many institutions throughout the U.S. These charges are not made frivolously, he has amassed three volumes of correspondence, referee reports, and official documents corroborating every factual statement in his book.” – Harvard Crimson''
''
:::This should be mentioned for balance.

:::These three supporting volumes print out into 3 large phone book sized documents that contain photocopies of years of correspondence between Santilli and several major players in physics (including Steven Weinberg) and every major laboratory around the world.

*4. The authenticity of these photocopied records has never been called into question so I am wondering if we could cite them in the main article?

At the very least, this collection of correspondence should put a nail in the coffin of the camp currently trying to claim Santilli is not a notable scientist.
5) The entire paragraph starting with "After an explosion..." because Santilli's lawsuit against Frank Israel . contains documentation and testimonials that Magnegas stockholders, including myself, had suffered financial losses because of misrepresentations in Misplaced Pages's article on Santilli suitable for shorting the stock. In fact, the bottles that caused the indicated accidents were delivered by Magnegas Distributors and not by the factory that, as such has been removed by any and all liabilities. In any case, the listing in an article dedicated to a scientist of deaths occurred several years after the scientist left the company is blatantly questionable.
IL GRANDE GRIDO: ETHICAL PROBE OF EINSTEIN'S FOLLOWERS IN THE USA, AN INSIDER'S VIEW.(in English) -Ruggero Maria Santilli Alpha Publishing, Newtonville, MA,ISBN0-931753-00-7
http://www.scientificethics.org/ilgrandegridoedfig.pdf

6) I have added information on Thunder Energies Corporation, whose documentation is available in the corporate SEC filings (that I cannot list here due to the prohibition to edit the references), the sale of the public shell and the transfer of the ownership of all technologies to the private company
Here are the links to the documentation:
Hadronic Technologies Corporation for possible applications of the main technologies to National Security.

*VOLUMES I - http://www.scientificethics.org/Volume1.pdf
7) I have removed completely the statement starting with "In 2017 an article...." because of the evident loss of credibility by Misplaced Pages treating equivocal internet gossip in an article that is supposed to be eventually dedicated to the proof of the most important prediction by Einstein.
*VOLUMES II http://www.scientificethics.org/Volume2.pdf
*VOLUMES III http://www.scientificethics.org/volume3.pdf

If a second tap is needed for some reason, the following “Poem” about Santilli by Harry Lustig (Secretary‐treasurer at APS from 1985 to 1996) has been listed in the references of this article for some time:

''H. Lustig (2005). "A proper homage to our Ben". In H. Henry Stroke. Advances in Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics: 51 (Advances in Atomic, Molecular, & Optical Physics). Academic Press. p. 26. ISBN 978-0120038510. "Ruggero Maria Santilli of The Institute for Basic Research, who complained bitterly about the rejection of his papers 'disproving' Einstein's relativity, which he attributed to Jewish domination of APS' journals."''

I don’t see how anyone can credibly attempt to claim that Santilli is not a notable scientist when he is the punchline for jokes told between American Physical Society members.

As a concluding remark, I think it is important to debunk the rather widespread myth that Santilli is claiming to have ‘disproven’ Einstein Special Relativity’. I have been diligently reviewing his papers and lectures for some time and Santilli clearly states that SP is exactly valid for the conditions it was conceived for and verified to work in, by Einstein et al. In fact, he calls it the “rock” or foundation of modern physics.

Even valid theories have limitations though. For example, C is hardcoded into E=mc2 as a constant So the equation is limited for use only under conditions where C is traveling at constant speed in vacuum. Santilli’s covering preserves the axioms of SPR and lifts it with new mathematics which allow for C to be local variable. Nothing wrong with doing that if you can solve the historical Lorentz problem.

The rejected paper discussed in the article with the APS was titled “A possible, lie-admissible, time-asymmetric model for open nuclear reactions”. This paper was under tax payer support from the DOE. You can find the published paper (published outside of the APS journals of course) on Springer website:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02887014

Santilli had been petitioning for more scientific experiments to further confirm/deny Rauch’s 1976 (Determination of Scattering Lengths and Magnetic Spin Rotations by Neutron Interferometry Author(s): H. Rauch, G. Badurek, W. Bauspiess, U. Bonse, A. Zeilinger ) which showed the deformation of the neutron under sufficiently strong nuclear forces.

Remember, there can be no such thing as deformation (in QM) as the theory simplifies things by representing physical particles using dimensionless point-like structures that are perfectly ridged and can’t cannot undergo deformation (which doesn’t stop nature from doing what she does regardless of how complete we think our theory is ) Once you have deformation, symmetry is broken and QM is no longer exactly valid under those conditions.

The concepts are fairly easy grasp and definitely not anything someone should summarily assume just has to be “quack” “flim-flam” without any inspection.
I am here to help with the info/science – hopefully others here can help with the technical editing side of things.
I am really looking forward to contributing time to Misplaced Pages and help making things better!
Thanks! ] (]) 07:43, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

:Rather than asking other editors to respond to each of your suggestions for additions to the article, you should educate yourself on our guidelines for what is a reliable source for a fact cited in a[REDACTED] article ], the guidelines for which sources of information establish notability for our articles, ], and the guidelines which govern biographies of living persons in[REDACTED] ]. It's what we'll do in evaluating any changes you make to this or any other[REDACTED] article, so you'd save your time and ours by reading these guidelines, and evaluating each of your suggestions yourself before changing the article.
:Informally, having read your comments, they go to points which are irrelevant to the article. The article concerns Dr. Ruggero Santilli, not his theories. His theories are already mentioned in the article to the extent allowed by the ] guideline: "Articles which cover controversial, disputed, or discounted ideas in detail should document (with reliable sources) the current level of their acceptance among the relevant academic community. If proper attribution cannot be found among reliable sources of an idea's standing, it should be assumed that the idea has not received consideration or acceptance; ideas should not be portrayed as accepted unless such claims can be documented in reliable sources."
:One of the points made and documented by reliable sources in the article as it stands is that the subject has complained about difficulty in having these ideas published in journals which carry peer-reviewed content which is accepted by the relevant academic community in question (that of physics).
:You apparently wish the subject's theories to be covered in greater detail than the ] guideline permits. Unless you can find sources which comply with ] showing that these views enjoy general acceptance among the physics community (in other words, those physicists whose views form the generally accepted consensus on the matters you discuss), you should not modify the article to include those views. ] (]) 21:51, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
You realize the ''Harvard Crimson'' is a student newspaper, right? And that the paper's author (judging from the dates of his other writings for the ''Crimson'') appears to have been a college sophomore at the time of writing this piece? Why should we take it seriously as a ] about a scientific issue? —] (]) 22:25, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
:], please re-read the list of references to the article, the list of "Selected Publications", and our guideline ] very carefully. You seem to have overlooked that the former Reference 2 did actually cite ''Il Grande Grido'' (page 6) to support the first line of the article's "Biography" section. It was not a direct link to the book, but instead points to the third entry under "Selected Publications," a direct link to . To save us all some trouble, I deleted reference 2, as the page it cited in didn't point to the subject's early life (which it was cited to support in the text), but was a photocopy of a short memo from Dr. Steven Weinberg dated 1977 confirming the subject's acceptance as a research fellow at Harvard University.
:The logical place for ''Il Grande Grido'' to be cited would directly after an assertion of fact it is cited to support. As a primary source, it ''should not'' be cited as the ''sole support for any fact in the article for which there is no reliable secondary source'' (see ] for how we define that term). Neither the subject nor anyone else should cite the subject's books as sole support for statements about <strike>him</strike>, other physicists (see ]), or his theories. That includes the subject's own publications listed under "Selected Publications" - the fact of their existence is already acknowledged there, but you shouldn't do what the editor who cited ''Il Grande Grido'' after the first line in the "Biography" section did, and use any of those "Selected Publications" as the only reference cited in support of a fact in a[REDACTED] article, under ]. There ought to be a reliable secondary source which by itself is sufficient to support the fact. If the primary source material does anything but confirm what the secondary source establishes, it shouldn't be used to as a cite to support a statement in a[REDACTED] article (please see ]).
:While we use the terms "should" and "should not" in our guidelines to avoid inflexibility where situations aren't anticipated in the guidelines, one situation very explicitly anticipated in the guidelines is <strike>the subject of a biographical article</strike> or one of his supporters or detractors inserting information in that biographical article which cannot be proven by an independent source. It's as much for the subject's own protection as to keep[REDACTED] from being used as a free public relations firm (see ]).
:I hope you do exert the required effort needed to edit[REDACTED] articles in a helpful manner, and are successful in doing so. Welcome to wikipedia! ] (]) 17:29, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
:My apologies for an oversight - our guideline ] ''does'' allow editors to use self-published material as sources of information about themselves, but there are limitations:
:*The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim. (for example, no claims to having discovered special cases in which general or special relativity don't apply, as you proposed, unless you can cite reliable secondary sources saying these claims are generally accepted by the physics community)
:*It does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities - in other words, you can't cite ''Il Grande Grido'' for its intended purpose as an indictment of other physicists (see ] as well), or "to put a nail in the coffin of the camp currently trying to claim Santilli is not a notable scientist").
:*It does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject (arguably, the subject's statements about his own theories of "magnecular bonds" can't be cited beyond the existing documentation in our article that the theories exist and a very brief description of them - we can't have walls of text in this article about the exceptions the subject says exist to relativity, for example).
:*There is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity (no one can produce ''inauthentic'' evidence into the biography of a living person, in any case, under ]).
:*The article is not based primarily on such sources. (another objection to citing ''Il Grande Grido'' and other of the subject's own works here).
:I hope this information helps. ] (]) 18:09, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

== If Misplaced Pages had articles on every person with an idea, it would be overwhelmed by crackpottery - should they be consolidated? ==


8) I added the section on Honors from the CV as quoted independently by various sources. We believe it is demeaning for Misplaced Pages not to quote honors received by the scientists who spent his research life to prove that Einstein was right.
It is unclear to me why the person this article appears to be about merits mention in an encyclopaedia. While he appears to have some - novel - concepts, it does not appear that these have been supported by evidence or by peer review. No evidence is presented of why the subject is more than a theorist whose theories are unproven - many of these exist, as you can see simply by reviewing self-published books on Amazon, but it is not clear that their inclusion in an encyclopaedia adds value to that collection of useful information.


9) I added in the section "Selected Publications" the main papers presenting Santilli's claimed verifications of the EPR and I relisted, for their understanding, Santilli's "Elements of Hadronic Mechanics" that were removed by the article for reasons damaging Misplaced Pages because, according to the record under History, said volumes were accepted by t he Ukraine Academy of Science following severe reviews by highly qualified scientists, such as t he late Klimik, Sissakian, and others. I also added
I see from the article that the subject is apparently of the view that the entire world is against him - and has used lawyers to try to push his case against those who disagree with his 'novel theories'. I even see from that the subject is suing Pepijn van Erp; a Dutch sceptic who expressed a negative opinion of his work.
mathematical, physical and chemical papers published in refereed journals in which Santilli is not an editor, which papers are essential for the understanding of the apparent EPR verifications.


In closing allow me to recommend that the article be completed wiuth a section entitled "Research" since all visitors are expecting news on Santilli's apparent verifications of the EPR argument, while now there is none. I can draft this section, but I would need access to the References. Thank you. Jolli321 <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:18, 22 October 2020. NOTE: My above specified editing of Santilli's 'article' was removed by David Epstein in about three minutes following its posting. (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
One worrisome part of this Misplaced Pages entry is the suggestion, in section 3, that "papers he has submitted to peer-reviewed American Physical Society journals were rejected because they were controlled by a group of Jewish physicists led by Steven Weinberg". So the subject is not only suggesting that the scientific community is systematically ignoring "novel theories which may conflict with established scientific theories", but he ''appears'' to be extending this into an anti-Semitic argument.


Can please some more administrative persons who can decide have a look at the above proposed change. I find the page insulting, too, so it should be overworked. Till Meyenburg <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 16:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
The article makes clear that the subject's work has not been peer reviewed; it '''implies''' that he has built an institutional apparatus around himself in order to boost his perceived importance; an alleged supporter (J V Kadeisvili) may not even exist; and while he appears to have published a lot there appears to be no evidence supporting his theories. Given the subject's apparent lack of importance, and the lack of independent links supporting the subject's science, should this article be subsumed into another Misplaced Pages entry (e.g. ])?


Agreed. This page needs an unbiased administrative review in the interest of Misplaced Pages standing and its role of information vehicle. It is now evident that nobody has been and is allowed to make changes or additions in order to make a fair representation of the contributions of Prof, Santilli who, at age 87, keeps working and publishing in peer-reviewed journals such as Ratio Mathematica 1)<ref>https://eiris.it/ojs/index.php/ratiomathematica/article/view/477</ref> and Springer Nature Scientific Reports 2) <ref>Sci Rep 12 , 20674 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24970-4</ref>on subjects that, everybody can see, are vital to science and therefore society .The focus of this Misplaced Pages article is on events presented in negative light only that occurred almost 10 years ago. His recent article published by Nature and his work on the EPR argument point out to new horizons that lead to possible solutions to the crisis of our environment. By looking at the editing history the page, it is evident that nobody has been able to add this information to Prof. Santilli's page because Misplaced Pages remains stubbornly stuck on the defamation campaign fueled years ago by bloggers and stock market profiteers. Misplaced Pages is the loser here. ] (]) 21:59, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Tom Yeager] (])
While I note that there have been two nominations for deletion - with the second considered in August 2016 - I am not convinced that these have adequately considered the concerns raised by those who were pro-deletion. Additionally, the options of '''retain''' vs. '''delete''' are very black and white - there is no 'middle path'. Maybe Santilli is 'notable' according the <s>dictionary</s> encyclopaedia definition. I suggest that by providing scientists whose work is unsupported and unproven with the same status of scientists whose work has been used for decades or centuries, Misplaced Pages becomes less useful. Should articles such as this maybe be placed as sub-articles in a category of (e.g.) 'Unproven scientific ideas and scientists'? That is, retain the article but make clear that its importance/significance does not match that of proven science and/or the proven work of scientists. In two weeks (or twenty years), when the subject of an article within that category is proven/peer reviewed/accepted by the scientific community, then it can be 'promoted' to the main encyclopaedia. In the meantime, readers are not left confused by the lack of relative importance of such subjects.


{{reflist-talk}}
I look forward (hoping it is not simply ignored and forgotten) to the well-considered and quite possibly well-deserved opposition this suggestion will hopefully draw from the myriad Wikipedians who have used and developed Misplaced Pages for many years now and have very good reasons against such a concept of rating an entry's 'relative merit'. ] (]) 09:25, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 08:36, 17 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ruggero Santilli article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.
Peace dove with olive branch in its beakPlease stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconBiography: Science and Academia
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
Note icon
An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.
WikiProject iconPhysics: Biographies Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.
[REDACTED] Alternative views Low‑importance
[REDACTED] This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconChemistry Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
The contents of the Magnecule page were merged into Ruggero Santilli. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

Recommended updates

Editor Dough Weller, I have made the following editing:

1)To prevent discriminations (see, e.g., the article on Sir Roger Penrose https://en.wikipedia.org/Roger_Penrose) I have added the title of "Sir" only once at the very top (for documentation, see the "Honors" in the CV , citations being available in numerous independent sources, such as the website of the international conference in Osaka, Japan https://www.scientificfederation.com/chemical-engineering-catalysis/speakers.php , numerous citations available on request);


2) I have removed the second line "Mainstream scientists dismiss his theories as fringe science." and replaced with "originator of hadronic mechanics and chemistry" because mainstream scientists do not consider "fringe science" a lifelong dedication to the verification of the EPR Argument, and also because the current line is demeaning for the Unites States of America according to countless complaints on record throughout two decades.

3) In the 6th line of Biography I changed "a one man organization, the Institute for Basic Research" into "the Institute for Basic Research " because the "one man" 

claim is grossly disproved by the main page of the IBR i-b-r(dot)org/ that has been listing for years a division in Israel headed by Prof. P. Mandell, a division in Kazakstan headed by Prof. A. K. Aringazin, and a division in Nigeria headed by Prof. A. O. E . Animalu, while
stating from its inception " The Institute Statute does not allow the disclosure of their names, but their work can be identified by searching the various scientific archives under". 
4)  The word "Jewish" physicists etc. has been removed everywhere and replaced with "mainstream orthodox" physicists, etc. because: the word "Jewish" it does not exist in Il Grande Grido; Santilli son in law is Jewish; Santilli is known to have supported several Jewish physicists for their participation to  meeting; and the recent International Teleconference on Einstein's Determinism (http://eprdebates.org/epr-conference-2020.php) has been organized by Santilli in collaboration with the Family of Israel Foundation (http://www.i-b-r.org/translational-medicine.htm); 
5) The entire paragraph starting with  "After an explosion..." because Santilli's lawsuit  against Frank Israel . contains documentation and testimonials that Magnegas stockholders, including myself, had suffered financial losses because of misrepresentations in Misplaced Pages's article on Santilli suitable for shorting the stock. In fact, the bottles that caused the indicated accidents were delivered by Magnegas Distributors and not by the factory that, as such has been removed by any and all liabilities. In any case, the listing in an article dedicated to a scientist of deaths  occurred several years after the scientist left the company is blatantly questionable. 
6) I have added  information on Thunder Energies Corporation, whose documentation is available in the corporate SEC filings (that I cannot list here due to the prohibition to edit the references),  the sale of the public shell  and the transfer of the ownership of all technologies to the private company 
Hadronic Technologies Corporation for possible applications of the main technologies to National Security.

7) I have removed completely the statement starting with "In 2017 an article...." because of the evident loss of credibility by Misplaced Pages treating equivocal internet gossip in an article that is supposed to be eventually dedicated to the proof of the most important prediction by Einstein.

8) I added the section on Honors from the CV as quoted independently by various sources. We believe it is demeaning for Misplaced Pages not to quote honors received by the scientists who spent his research life to prove that Einstein was right.

9) I added in the section "Selected Publications" the main papers presenting Santilli's claimed verifications of the EPR and I relisted, for their understanding, Santilli's "Elements of Hadronic Mechanics" that were removed by the article for reasons damaging Misplaced Pages because, according to the record under History, said volumes were accepted by t he Ukraine Academy of Science following severe reviews by highly qualified scientists, such as t he late Klimik, Sissakian, and others. I also added mathematical, physical and chemical papers published in refereed journals in which Santilli is not an editor, which papers are essential for the understanding of the apparent EPR verifications.

In closing allow me to recommend that the article be completed wiuth a section entitled "Research" since all visitors are expecting news on Santilli's apparent verifications of the EPR argument, while now there is none. I can draft this section, but I would need access to the References. Thank you. Jolli321 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jolli321 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 22 October 2020. NOTE: My above specified editing of Santilli's 'article' was removed by David Epstein in about three minutes following its posting. (UTC)

Can please some more administrative persons who can decide have a look at the above proposed change. I find the page insulting, too, so it should be overworked. Till Meyenburg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:393:31C0:0:0:0:36D9 (talk) 16:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. This page needs an unbiased administrative review in the interest of Misplaced Pages standing and its role of information vehicle. It is now evident that nobody has been and is allowed to make changes or additions in order to make a fair representation of the contributions of Prof, Santilli who, at age 87, keeps working and publishing in peer-reviewed journals such as Ratio Mathematica 1) and Springer Nature Scientific Reports 2) on subjects that, everybody can see, are vital to science and therefore society .The focus of this Misplaced Pages article is on events presented in negative light only that occurred almost 10 years ago. His recent article published by Nature and his work on the EPR argument point out to new horizons that lead to possible solutions to the crisis of our environment. By looking at the editing history the page, it is evident that nobody has been able to add this information to Prof. Santilli's page because Misplaced Pages remains stubbornly stuck on the defamation campaign fueled years ago by bloggers and stock market profiteers. Misplaced Pages is the loser here. 139.55.184.2 (talk) 21:59, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Tom Yeager139.55.184.2 (talk)

References

  1. https://eiris.it/ojs/index.php/ratiomathematica/article/view/477
  2. Sci Rep 12 , 20674 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24970-4
Categories:
Talk:Ruggero Santilli: Difference between revisions Add topic