It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Suppression in the Science Community

page: 1
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 08:58 AM
link   
This thread is based on the case history of Dr. Paul LaViolette's Pioneer Effect paper. It is presented as a case in point for the issue of suppression in the science community - something that needs to change if we are to move science and technology forward.

Dr. LaViolette's story begins in 1985, when his physics unified theory subquantum kinetics was published in Intl. Journal of General Systems, which was favorably received. LaViolette then expanded on the astrophysical aspects of the theory which were published in Astrophysical Journal in 1986 and in Physics Essays in 1992 and 1994.

In that 1985 publication and again in the 1994 edition of his book Subquantum Kinetics, LaViolette stated that his theory predicted that if a maser signal was transponded between spacecraft over a distance of many astronomical units, the return signal would be found to be blueshifted. He also predicted the amount. Additionally, he had communicated this to JPL scientists in 1980.

Then, in 1998 and 2002 a member of the group of scientists at JPL he contacted in 1980, John Anderson, led a group which published papers announcing the discovery of an anomalous blueshift in maser signals transponded from Pioneer 10 and 11. The value they stated was within a factor of two of the value LaViolette had stated.

In April 2002 LaViolette submitted a paper regarding this confirmation of his prediction to a refereed physics journal. He also attempted to submit it to the physics archive, where papers are posted in a timely fashion, since publication in journals is very time consuming, that is if papers are accepted for publication at all.

In the physics archive subsection on general relativity and quantum cosmology, the Pioneer 10 anomaly was being actively discussed. The cause of the anomaly was being discussed, but no one knew about LaViolette's prediction.

Because LaViolette's email address did not end in gov or edu, he was required to have his paper endorsed by a sponsor. After three physicists contacted the archive on LaViolette's behalf and 2 1/2 years later, the archive still refused to post LaViolette'e paper. Finally in May of 2005 he was granted access but the paper was routed to the wrong subsection of the archive. LaViolette had to request that it be withdrawn, which it was, but his attempts to have it posted to the subsection general relativity and quantum cosmology, where it needed to be, failed.

Source: Part I: What transpired from 1985 - 2002 and Part II: What transpired from 2004 - 2005

I call that passive aggression.

I hope that scientists and the general public can have access to all scientific publications. We don't need gatekeepers. Quality control will sort itself out.




posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


Sometimes a scientific thread of discovery becomes a meme and people start acting like it's a religion of sorts.
Predictably, this transformation can be recognized from the outside but rarely from the inside.

What is a meme?



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 09:25 AM
link   
As a true scientist, to suppress anything is a blaspheme. A scientist is suppossed to be Zen (curious) about everything. Most "scientists" are overpaid governrment shills. How does covering something up help advance our world?



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Oannes
As a true scientist, to suppress anything is a blaspheme. A scientist is suppossed to be Zen (curious) about everything. Most "scientists" are overpaid governrment shills. How does covering something up help advance our world?


Most 'Scientists' are paid quite close to somewhere around the working class... there are a few who are above that, but those are few.

Also the ending of your e-mail address has no baring of identifying you as working for an educational institution. In fact NONE of my work e-mails have ever ended in .gov or .edu ... iv still had papers published
edit on 11-2-2014 by ErosA433 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 

This kind of thing generally happens when someone has there research stolen to be used in black operations government project's and also can occur were on faction (usually the larger) whom have rivalry between competing scientific theory has the backing of a powerful cartel of scientist, generally giving support to the old addage not what you know but whom you know.

I kind of suspect the former to be the case here and remember about two decades or so ago three electronic engineer's (not scientist's) whom claimed to have been able to mutiplex a signal in such a fashion that the data was not just carried but seemed to resonate onto the leading wave of the carrier signal which in essence means it would possible arrive near instantaneously even on a standard radio signal so long as the carrier signal was in place, as I remember as far fetched as this seem's even to me they had used a mix of PCM and AM modulations to achieve this, no one denied as they had result's but it went very quiet with no more information?.

When it come's to theoretical physic's however it may be that a possible communication's application of the theory was identified and then it was essentially blocked or hidden, also it could just be a bunch of incompetant idiot's whom caused this but I Certainly hope this scientist recieves the recognition he is justly entitled too.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Oannes
As a true scientist, to suppress anything is a blaspheme. A scientist is suppossed to be Zen (curious) about everything. Most "scientists" are overpaid governrment shills. How does covering something up help advance our world?


It maintains the power and position of the status quo. ALL the walls of secrecy and censorship need to be torn down and post haste. Otherwise we are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the (distant) past.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 

There are something like 5000 US patents that are classified. I'd love to know what's in them just out of curiosity, but I have the feeling I'd probably be disappointed if I found out. I suspect they have things like some secrets of improved stealth, which is nice and useful.

But I doubt if they have any antigravity patents or anything that would turn fundamental science on its head like that. I'm sure not everyone shares this opinion and some people believe TR3B mythology even though the author said he was writing fiction.

I think the "national security" mantra can be overused and abused as with the NSA metadata program, but I can understand why you don't want to share your most advanced technology with someone who might use it against you, so as much as I'd like to see less secrecy, I at least understand the reason for it.

You can get some inkling of what secrets are kept by transporting your imagination back to when secret projects like the F117 were not known to the public. Then decades later you find out about this technology, so you're always decades behind the latest. Granted the F117 was a pretty good stealth application, but not all that Earth-shaking from a science point of view. It was more of an engineering feat to get such an unstable aerodynamic design to stay airborne.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Arbitrageur
There are something like 5000 US patents that are classified. I'd love to know what's in them just out of curiosity, but I have the feeling I'd probably be disappointed if I found out. I suspect they have things like some secrets of improved stealth, which is nice and useful.


A lot of gagged patents are nuclear. If you want a patent filing to be slagged, all you've got to do is do either a basic weapons patent or even more simply, do a patent that extends or incorporates an already existing patent with a combination patent.

Let's say you want your very own gagged patent. If you were to take something you had access to, let's say you worked at LANL, you might design a slight improvement on boost gas systems that makes them easier to do maintenance on. Bang, gagged patent.

You can occasionally get a gag up front by simply mentioning that your patent has application to some aspect of nuclear weaponry. They often gag something for a few months to buy time to analyze it. But a real nuclear patent is forever. It falls under the "born secret" theory.

Getting a gag on a non-nuclear patent is an art form.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 

That's interesting, because I figured nuclear weapon secrets were locked up so tight they wouldn't even want them to appear in patents which might provide an extra potential channel for leaks.

If that's what a lot of the secret patents are, it's hard to make an argument for revealing the secrets, with some of the rogue lunatics running around who would do something evil with the information.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Arbitrageur
reply to post by Bedlam
 

That's interesting, because I figured nuclear weapon secrets were locked up so tight they wouldn't even want them to appear in patents which might provide an extra potential channel for leaks.


They don't "appear" anywhere you can get them once gagged. There's a separate numbering and filing system that's maintained by SLAG. A nuclear patent is rarely if ever ungagged. If you make a stink, they'll go through the pretense of reviewing it once a quarter. But in practice it doesn't happen, unless you do a head fake and the patent is unworkable once they review it for a few months.

SLAG has their very own Warehouse 13-ish locker full o' secrets. There are a few other topics that tend to buy you a SLAG review, most are military use patents. Generally for really wacky things. If you had a workable brain-machine interface that would do it. Reasonable looking attempts have been gagged temporarily.

eta: another fast way to a slagging is to attempt to patent something already slagged, or something that's very classified or a patent relating to the core science of a classified technology.

etaa: most gagged patents are issued to national labs like LLNL, military research labs like AFRL or NRL, intelligence agencies that do development such as NSA, and big aerospace like Lockheed, Northrop and Boeing. Only a few hundred a year are issued to small companies and independent developers. Of the ones that are gagged, a percentage of them will cycle off the slag list upon later review. If the thing is not workable and/or they decide after review that they don't care, it will drop back into the patent list. Also if the thing declassifies that was the reason for the gag it may ungag the patent later.

edit on 11-2-2014 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Arbitrageur
There are something like 5000 US patents that are classified.


I view the government, the military, and academia as mainstream, and the problem is in the mainstream. Our system is corrupt and the reason it's corrupt is that we think we have representative government but we don't. This is caused by the way elections are financed.

I think this corrupt system is crumbling and it's largely because of this goldmine the internet. I think new paradigms are evolving in response to widespread corruption because of the freedom ordinary people have to reach out to each other worldwide.

As google translate improves over time this communication tool the internet is going to get better and better.

People will be empowered.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   
flawed argument involving science, since there is not a bunch of apolitical people as scientists. You generally get people in science who say the political system is corrupt, and are typically pretty central in their opinions. Science doesn't swing and change tact with government.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   

ErosA433
Also the ending of your e-mail address has no baring of identifying you as working for an educational institution. In fact NONE of my work e-mails have ever ended in .gov or .edu ... iv still had papers published
edit on 11-2-2014 by ErosA433 because: (no reason given)


He's talking about Cornell's arXiv. FYI,


Subj: Admission to physics archive
Date: Friday, May 24, 2002 8:06:47 AM
To: jp126@cornell.edu

One month ago Dr. Chubb emailed to the archive an endorsement for my organization, the Starburst Foundation, recommending that we be allowed to post papers to the physics archive. I have a paper that I would like to post and have been waiting to receive a user name and password, but have not had any return communication. I was wondering why there is such a long delay. Could you tell me who to contact or have them contact me about this?

I have followed the instructions on your archive site. This said that if the organization's url does not end in edu or mil, an endorsement would be necessary to allow participation in the archive. The Starburst Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit scientific research institute and we have engaged in both research and education types of activities. Below is a copy of the endorsement letter emailed by Dr. Chubb.

Sincerely,
Paul LaViolette, Ph.D.

www.etheric.com...



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Oannes
As a true scientist, to suppress anything is a blaspheme. A scientist is suppossed to be Zen (curious) about everything. Most "scientists" are overpaid governrment shills. How does covering something up help advance our world?


THIS is Exactly how I feel.

It doesn't advance our world - it keeps control on the side of the Government and corporate big wigs who actually rule the country so they can maintain power over the masses. This is why i cannot trust any scientist especially American scientists, too many of them work for this illegal establishment. Just look at the FDA, American Heart Association, American Lung association, CDC, etc.. they all have tons ot very bad science they try to force on the masses as truth. It's pure manipulation.

Case in point, the Electronic cigarette bashing. Since e-cigs became known to the world in early 2000's there have been no deaths from millions of users world wide. There are no evidence of any serious health issues associated with e-cigs. Even new study after study confirms this yet these government lead so called health care associations all refute the real science and track record of e-cigs and use bad science to try and discredit e-cigs. All because the FDA and Big Pharma are in bed together. Big Pharma is losing millions of dollars a month to e-cigs and they don't like it. Big Pharma has a billion dollar stop smoking industry world wide that is at most about 6 percent effective. E-cigs are at least 50 percent effective. This is just one example.
edit on 11-2-2014 by JohnPhoenix because: addition



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtraeme
 


Yes, I know the arXiv, papers are often submitted to it as pre-prints, ie a place to put papers before they are officially published in a journal. I know the arXiv very well. This is an inaccurate justification for submission. I know people who have things on arXiv that do not have said prefixes to their e-mails.

I think it a bit weird. Namely because there are hundreds of universities that do not have edu or gov in their e-mail addresses. However, some of them are obviously universities.

I looked over their website and yes they do have an endorsement system, were if you are not from an academic institution you are asked to get an endorsement from a member. I agree that it is a little weird. The purpose of the arXiv though is for the distribution of scientific/mathematic papers etc, typically the people submitting are from academic institutions, so it is parhaps far to reduce the number of insane papers they receive by requiring a university e-mail address/contact or someone to endorse you.

Regardless... if said papers are good and valid the author should just get an endorsement, if he has scientific validity he should be able to convince someone to endorse him. Rather than screaming unfair play and supression as the op does, maybe you should look into what these people are saying and actually figure out if they are quite frankly nuts or actually have some valid evidence.

I think you will find that much of it is many tall tails and apparent predictions that go no further than someone saying

"My theory predicts this" and having no mathematical proof, no physical proof and no physical evidence other than anecdote.

You know... saying "I knew a guy who knew a guy whos friend said there is an ether that can power your home and I have a device in my shed the government wants to keep secret" is NOT evidence.



posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Arbitrageur
reply to post by Mary Rose
 

There are something like 5000 US patents that are classified. I'd love to know what's in them just out of curiosity, but I have the feeling I'd probably be disappointed if I found out. I suspect they have things like some secrets of improved stealth, which is nice and useful.


I bet a fair number of them involve industrial processes for production of "special nuclear materials" or accurate stellar targeting and inertial guidance which happen to be very useful for conical temporary satellites.



posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


I understand the history completely.

It's because subquantum kinetics is nonsensical bollocks and the 'gr-qc' section of arXiv isn't and the people who use it want to keep it that way. It isn't suppression, it is discernment.

In any case the Pioneer anomaly was finally resolved after hard work, and the answer was that there isn't any new physics unfortunately. It was just very hard work. No quick-n-dirty clever modification.

www.planetary.org...



posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Mary Rose

I hope that scientists and the general public can have access to all scientific publications. We don't need gatekeepers. Quality control will sort itself out.


Not going to happen for two primary reasons

1. Financial : Research is expensive to give away to your competitors.
2. National security :
www.fas.org...



posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by interupt42
 


There are researchers who are retired and have resources at their disposal and the motivation to share. They can network worldwide.



posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Mary Rose
reply to post by interupt42
 


There are researchers who are retired and have resources at their disposal and the motivation to share. They can network worldwide.


Not if they are under confidentiality clauses.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join