The End Of Peer Review System for Scientific Publications Publications???

loupspeed_at_yahoo.com
Date: 12/07/04 

Date: 7 Dec 2004 10:06:46 -0800

Esteemed Doctor (all the stuff of Harvard Smithsonian Astrophysics
X-Ray and High Energy Observatory- Harvard Massachusetts USA)

Good Afternoon

My name is Fernando Loup and i am a Researcher in General Relativity
and Astrophysics..i took your email adress from your webpage.

I am writing to you because you work on Harvard Smithsonian
AstroPhysics Observatori and perhaps you are familiarized with NASA
Chandra X-Ray Space Telescope operated by Harvard Smithsonian
Astrophysics Observatory Harvard Massachussetts USA .

I have 5 works avaliable at CERN-Centre Europeene por la Recherche
Nucleraire-European Organization for Nuclear Research but perhaps would
be better to read this email until the end before going to browse CERN.

my works can be seen at
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search.py?p=loupwarp&f=&c=

Some years ago Astronomers spotted the so-called Dark Matter Mistery
and NASA have a excellent resume on this available at:
http://chandra.harvard.edu/xray_astro/dark_matter.html

>>From the link above you will see that this is a Harvard link.

Many theories tried to solve this mistery and NASA launched the Chandra
Space Telescope to Outer Space trying to solve this mistery.

The final conclusion NASA figured out deals with the possibility that
Dark Matter is caused by matter on distant regions of our Universe
connected to out own local regions by a submilimeter Planck Size Extra
Dimension and these regions since these are at huge cosmic distances
would be regarded as paralell Universes.

Ssee the link:
http://chandra.harvard.edu/resources/faq/dmatter/dmatter-9.html

4 physicists from the United States at Lawrence Berkeley National
Labotarory,University of Stanford California and University of New York
create the theory of the Manyfold Universe to explain Dark Matter
mistery and this seems to be the most reasonable explanation since all
others were ruled out by NASA Chandra Satellite..all the works are
available at CERN...in the entire World there are only 8 works on this
theory and 5 belongs to me but all the merit must be credited to the
original Manyfold Universe work.

http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search.py?p=manyfold+universe&f=&c=

The quest here is:these works at CERN are preprints..ok fine CERN
checks the presentation material etc but i want to have a Fellowship in
a University abroad and in order to do that i need to have my stuff at
CERN published in the so-called peer review literature.The so called
peer review scvientific journals.

However unfortunately i must quest the honesty and validity of the
whole peer review system..while the 4 American Physicists argued in the
Manyfold Universe theory that distant regions of the Universe at
billion light years away in the ordinary spacetime are actually
connected by a submilimeter size extra dimension acessible only to
gravity and gravity propagating in this extra dimension generates the
extra gravitational force "seen" by Astronomers as Dark Matter other
physicists invented exotic particles such as the
Axions.WIMPS,Neutralinos,Cold Baryonic Dark Matter etc...NASA says
these exotic particles do not exists (again see
http://chandra.harvard.edu/resources/faq/dmatter/dmatter-9.html or
perhaps http://chandra.harvard.edu/xray_astro/dark_matter4.html both
Harvard links) and i agree 100% and agree 100% with the 4 American
Physicists creators of the Manyfold Universe
Dark Matter is chemically identical to odinary matter but lies on other
folds..og the Geometrical Manyfold Universe....the diference between
Dark Matter and ordinary matter is not microphysical..its purely
geometric,( see
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search.py?recid=408473&ln=en or better
http://doc.cern.ch//archive/electronic/hep-ph/9911/9911386.pdf at page
4 this is the original Manyfold Universe American work look to the
figure..it is clear... oh by the way i have a nice graphical picture
of the Manyfold Universe at
http://www.geocities.com/manyfolduniverse/Image20.jpg ) but
unfortunately referees of conventional peer review physics journals do
not take seriously the results of
http://chandra.harvard.edu/resources/faq/dmatter/dmatter-9.html and
http://chandra.harvard.edu/xray_astro/dark_matter4.html and are still
insisting with me that Axions,WIMPS and Cold Baryonic Dark Matter are
the right ways to follow.
If Axions,WIMPS or whatever do not exists ( see
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search.py?recid=782869&ln=en or
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search.py?recid=789634&ln=en these are some of my
works at CERN outlining the NASA Chandra Satellite) then why referees
are insisting with something we know can lead us to a dead
end?Why:Because they studied particle physics supported by these exotic
theories and they dont want to give up their theories in favor of the
strong evidence of NASA Chandra Satellite that the Manyfold Universe is
the correct explanation for Dark Matter.Look as a scientist i can fill
a chalkboard with Hamiltonians,Lagrangians,Degrees of Freedom for
Quintessence Fields,Scalar Cold Baryonic Dark Matter fields or
whatever...this looks beautiful..from the point of view of math...but
this rejects the natural beauty of Manyfold Universe theory creators
that Dark Matter is chemically identical to ordinary matter...but lies
on other folds of the Universe.As a scientist i know how to backdraft
in front of a evidence...Manyfold Universe theory is right....other
exotic theories are wrong.If referees reffuses the Manyfold Universe to
keep their theoretical works and their conveniences then this is no
longer science and then i must reject all the referreing scientific
prodecure..it is corrupted..they could reject my works due to
English..ok fine i am not a native English speaker...they could reject
due to a mathematical error.....ok fine i could correct...no they are
rejecting all the Manyfold Universe theory..they prefers
Axions,WIMPS,Neutralions and whatever....and NASA will agre with me
that this is for their convenience.Although i have 5 works at CERN
these are the main ones:
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search.py?recid=739597&ln=en
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search.py?recid=782869&ln=en
http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search.py?recid=789634&ln=en .

These outlines the NASA Chandra Satellite the latest ones even in the
abstract.
If refereeing process is corrupted then i must abandon peer-review...

Then i dont know what to do...for a Fellowship i need a "certified"
publication..however "certified" scientists are corrupted just like the
ones of the Inquisition in the Century XVI that prosecuted Galileo
Galilei...It was supposed the the referreing procedure in science
should be clean...unfortunately politicians in a Senate perhaps are
even more honest than some of the so called peer review scientists.

Well Doctor (ommitted of course)

i selected your name from Harvard people.I am trying to contact
Harvard NASA Chandra Satellite people.

Without success

I know i am taking your time..perhaps you could help..perhaps not...but
if i dont try the negative answer is certainly 100% .if i try perhaps i
will be the lucky guy of the 50% propability to get some help.

Thanks very much..i am deeply grateful to you for the time spent
reading this email
 
Kind Regards
Fernando Loup

Quantcast