Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Vixra versus Arxiv

Skip to first unread message

Jay R. Yablon

Nov 7, 2013, 10:11:21 PM11/7/13
Over at sci.physics.relativity which my sci.physics.foundations
co-moderator Fred Diether calls the "Wild Wild West," a supportive
individual (they are rare over there) suggested that I not post my
papers any more on vixra because "this is the place where crackpots
upload their 'stuff'." That gave me a chance to state my views on this
topic, about which I feel strongly. You may agree or not, but I wanted
to share these views here as well, because it is important to not only
talk about science, but about the infrastructure that we employ to do
and share science, which sometimes may inadvertently impede science.
Below is what I said on this subject.

1) As a profession, I am in the patent business, and am fortunate to
have been successful enough to be able to fund my own physics research
as a independent scientist rather than chase grants and tenure, etc. on
that churning wheel. A central part of all intellectual property is
based on establishing a dated priority for a new idea / invention /
discovery. I find it unconscionable that arxiv will kick out some
submissions, because they are denying the submitters a chance to
objectively establish their priorities. If they really have a problem
with accepting all submissions, they should at least establish a
two-tired system so that even submissions they relegate to second tier
can get a priority date recording. They do not do that, vixra does. As
I said, arxiv is unconscionable to abuse their position in that way. To
me, vixra breaks the arxiv monopoly and does allow all priorities to be
recorded, which is a good thing that I am happy to support.

2) The arxiv endorsement system creates a tremendous bias toward people
who are affiliated with mainstream institutions and against independent
researchers. Underlying this is the view that most independent physics
research is not worth the paper it is written on. As a rule, this is
true, and when I see this "relativity is wrong" baloney on vixra and
also on this s.p.relativity forum, it makes me cringe. But there are a
handful of independents, like me, who are very serious researchers who
have have decided that there are too many badly worn paths upon which
everyone is going nowhere, and are looking for the untraveled paths that
provide answers to the hardest problems in physics. So do we hurt that
small number of independents who are doing valuable work in order to
screen out the nutjobs? That is an ageless question, but I always lean
toward acquitting the innocent over convicting the guilty. Arxiv does
not do so, vixra does.

3) If I was affiliated with an institution and I needed an arxiv
endorsement, I could walk down the hall and get it in five minutes from
a colleague. But I am not. So they only way I can get an endorsement
is to solicit over the internet, and not too many people are endorsers
in the GR/QFT categories I need. To me it is unseemly to beg over the
internet for an endorsement, or to make people have to do that. I will
not stoop to that.

4) Does it hurt me because I am posted on vixra amidst quite a few
nutjobs, as an innocent among some guilty. Short term, maybe so. But I
take a long view. It took me 43 years to finally explain the proton and
neutron masses as I did at I
could never have done that without patience. I am not a bumper sticker
sort of person. I have little doubt that in the next 3 to 5 years,
people will come to understand that I have quietly revolutionized
physics at the highest level from out in the wilderness. In science, it
may take time, but correct work does in the end get recognized. Once
that occurs, and it becomes known and recognized that some of the most
important physics papers of the past few generations first went up on
vixra, the arvix monopoly will end.

5) At one time there was tremendous resistance, but everyone now
accepts that the earth is not flat and that the sun is at the center of
the solar system. Right now, I know, and a few who have followed me
know, that protons and neutrons are the magnetic monopoles of Yang-Mills
theory. But the rest of the world including the gatekeepers of the
physics glass ceiling has not come around yet. Fifty years from now
people will look back to that quaint era, namely today, when people had
been chasing magnetic monopoles for 150 years since the time of Maxwell
without realizing that they are hiding in plain sight in Yang-Mills
incarnation as the protons and neutrons and other baryons that
Rutherford and Chadwick had discovered almost a century before anybody
(yours truly) caught on. Secure in that knowledge, and in other correct
but revolutionary work I have written that will also see the spotlight
once my Mass Gap Solution hits the big time and in a few years wins the
Clay Prize, my research's success will ultimately be invariant with
regard to vixra versus arxiv.


Hans Van Leunen

Apr 5, 2016, 1:20:09 PM4/5/16
Op vrijdag 8 november 2013 04:11:21 UTC+1 schreef Jay R. Yablon:
You might be interested in the reasons why in the standard model a short list of electric charges exist and why the color charges of quarks exist. The Hilbert Book Test Model formulates a possible answer.

John Heath

Apr 15, 2016, 1:40:05 PM4/15/16
Well said. Oliver Heaviside book " telegraphers guild " was considered nonsense with odd new terminology like impedance and step math. 100 years later and telegraphers guild is the foundation of the electronics industry taught in colleges. Science can not proceed forward if new ideas are not being heard. To give this balance there are crackpots out there. A price that has to be paid for intellectual freedom.

0 new messages