Dear Marc N. Chahin
(Bcc: undisclosed recipients)
As I stressed in my previous email, there are no errors of any kind in my paper entitled "Local causality in a Friedmann-Robertson-Walker spacetime." Neither are my results in any conflict with proven scientific facts. You have failed to provide any scientific proof or demonstration of your fallacious claims, or the claims of your so-called unsolicited “experts” who supposed to have reported “errors” in my error-free paper. No one in their right mind would consider a third-rate statistician without a single peer-reviewed publication on Clifford algebra or general relativity an “expert” qualified to understand, let alone criticize the arguments presented in my paper.
As I stressed in my previous email, your unjust action against me and my scientifically and mathematically impeccable paper are purely politically and ideologically motivated. You will find my detailed scientific response to the false claims by your unsolicited “experts” at the following link:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=271&p=6813#p6808.
Every word I wrote in my previous email to you still stands.
Sincerely,
Joy Christian
Since the story of the removal of my paper from Annals of Physics appeared on Retraction Watch, there have been over 2,000 views and over 500 unique visitors to our Centre's website, within just a couple of days:
http://einstein-physics.org/
But what is far more interesting is that not a single visitor or interested party has been able to identify a single error of any kind in my removed paper:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.2355
Only Richard D. Gill, who has never published a single peer-reviewed paper on either Clifford algebra or general relativity (as can be easily verified by anyone) has publicly claimed errors in my paper (a paper which is fundamentally based on the concepts from Clifford algebra and general relativity). Gill's claim, however, has been thoroughly debunked by me, all over again:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=271#p6808
More tellingly, even after my repeated requests, Annals of Physics has not been able to provide any scientific evidence (either publicly or privately) in support of their claim that there are errors in my removed paper. Unsubstantiated claims such as theirs amount to slander, and slander leads to defamation (not to mention disservice to science and physics).
As powerful as Elsevier and Annals of Physics are, I have no intention of letting them get away with this injustice, which at beast is due to their negligence and / or incompetence.
Joy Christian wrote:***
PS: Just as PubPeer moderators have done many times in the past, Retraction Watch moderators are freely allowing personal attacks on me while rejecting my replies.
***
Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests