| 1) |
1985
- 2004 background: In 1979
Dr. LaViolette made an astounding discovery -- an ancient record
describing the impact on our solar system of a Galactic core
cosmic ray volley. This indicated date for the beginning
of this event was approximately 15,835 ± 500 years before
present. During subsequent years Dr. LaViolette conducted
his Ph.D. dissertation on this topic to investigate if this prehistoric
event had actually occurred. The evidence he gathered all
appeared to support this thesis and key tests that he carried
out also validated the hypothesis. Over the years he had
published his findings in several journals: Meteoritics,
Earth Moon and Planets, Monthly Notices, Eos,
and Anthropos and during the course of these years 14
of the predictions stemming from this theory were validated;
see Predict.html.
In September 2000, after reading the paper of Hammer
et al. about the discovery of high concentrations of HF and HCl
acids in Antarctic ice, he discovered that when the ice core
was properly dated, the regular period of these acidity variations
matched that of the 11 year solar cycle. This suggested
to him that these acids were of extraterrestrial origin. He
also found that the deposition of these acids coincided with
a major change of climate, an initial cooling followed by a warming
that eventually ended the last ice age. The date of the
even coincided with the 15,800 years B.P. date indicated in the
ancient record Dr. LaViolette had earlier discovered. Eventually,
he realized that these acids were deposited by an incursion of
interstellar dustt (or possibly cometary dust) whose entry flux
was being modulated by the solar wind in step with the solar
cycle. He concluded that this must be evidence of the climatically
significant cosmic dust incursion event that earlier, in his
dissertation, he had proposed had energized the Sun, altered
the light scattering properties of the interplanetary medium,
and brought about a warming of the Earth's climate that ended
the last ice age. In effect, he had discovered what may
be the "smoking gun" (or at least the "smoke")
that had caused the termination of the last ice age. The
paper he had written about this discovery was finally accepted
in October 2004 for publication in Planetary
and Space Science. The paper dealt only with the
earth science and astronomical aspects of the discovery and did
not discuss any archeoastronomical aspects. |
| 2) |
October 22, 2004, an attempt is made to submit to arXiv.org:
The Cornell archive is automated to allow uploads from
individuals working at academic and government institutions having
email addresses ending in edu or gov. Dr. LaViolette at
that time was doing research on solar water desalination at the
California Water Institute facility on the California State University
Fresno campus and had been given a CSU Fresno email address.
So, he figured that he should have no trouble to post his
paper. As it turned out, this was not the case.
On Friday evening, October 22, 2004 he attempted
to upload his paper to the astrophysics section of the Cornell
archive preprint server. He had carefully followed the
instructions for uploading and had received an automated response
giving him a paper ID of astro-ph/0410557 and a paper password
of kiz5r. The auto responder said that his submission was
accepted and that his abstract would appear Monday afternoon:
From no-reply@arXiv.org (send mail ONLY to astro-ph)
Sent Friday, October 22, 2004 9:00 pm
To plaviolette@csufresno.edu
Subject astro-ph/0410557 password (SAVE)
*** SAVE THIS MESSAGE FOR FUTURE REFERENCE ***
(and forward to any collaborators for safekeeping)
Your user/password combination for this paper is
User-ID: astro-ph/0410557
Password: kiz5r
Your submission astro-ph.starburst.25549 was accepted.
You can view this submission or make changes to it, by logging
on with your current username and password. If you would like
to grant someone else (co-author,
administrative assistant, ...) the authority to view or change
this paper you will need to provide the PaperPassword specific
to this submission.
The paper id and paper password for this submission is
PaperId: astro-ph/0410557, PaperPassword: ***** (access still
password restricted)
Abstract will appear in mailing scheduled to begin at 20:00
Monday US Eastern time (i.e., Tue 26 Oct 04 00:00:00 GMT).
The above Paper-id/Password combination is necessary if you
expect to permit others to update this submission with web replaces,
modifications, addenda, or errata: be sure to
save it .
( An e-mail message with this information is also on the way
to your registered address: plaviolette@csufresno.edu).
|
| 3) |
October 25, 2004, LaViolette's paper does not appear:
On Monday LaViolette attempts to view his abstract using
his paper ID and password, but is unable to view it. He
then puts the paper ID into his browser and an abstract does
appear, but it is not the one he posted; it is one belonging
to someone else. Apparently, his paper ID had been reassigned
to another person. Confused about what happened, he sends
an email to the archive administration saying:
10/25/04
To: www-admin@arxiv.org
Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently posted
Archive administrator:
I recently uploaded a paper to the astro-phys archive over the
weekend, but it is now Monday and it has not appeared. When
I put in the paper ID that was emailed to me (astro-ph/0410557)
I instead get a paper posted by another author (Jacques Laskar).
Can you tell me the correct paper ID? Below is the email
I received after I posted the paper. Has there been a computer
error? Should I repost the paper?
Paul LaViolette
|
| 4) |
October 26, 2004, LaViolette's paper is judged inappropriate:
LaViolette receives a reply from the archive stating that
his paper was determined to be "inappropriate." No
further explanation was given. This seemed strange to him
considering that his paper had been accepted for publication.
The archive had allowed other scientists to post papers
which had been accepted for publication in that same journal.
So why should he be prevented from posting? The reply
he received is reproduced below;
---- Original Message -----
From: "arXiv admin [ams]" <www-admin@arxiv.org>
Date: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 6:51 am
Subject: Re: Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently
posted
>
> Your submission has been removed upon a notice from
> our moderators, who determined it inappropriate for
> the astro-ph archive.
>
> Please direct all questions and concerns regarding
> moderation to the moderation@arXiv.org address.
>
> --
> arXiv admin
>
|
| 5) |
October 26, 2004: LaViolette sends an email to the archive moderator
asking him to explain why his paper was considered inappropriate.
He writes:
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 08:56:29 -0700
From: Paul Laviolette <plaviolette@csufresno.edu>
Subject: Re: Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently
posted
To: moderation@arXiv.org
Cc: plaviolette@csufresno.edu
Dear arXiv-moderation:
I have been told that my paper submission was removed because
it was deemed inappropriate for the
astro-ph archive. I find this hard to believe! Could
you explain why you have considered it to be
"inappropriate"
Paul LaViolette
|
| 6) |
November 8, 2004: The registration part of the archive answers
him by inquiring about his affiliation to CSUFresno.
From register-query@arXiv.org (register-query for arXiv.org)
Sent Monday, November 8, 2004 6:57 am
To plaviolette@csufresno.edu
Subject RE: Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently posted
What is the precise nature of your current affiliation to
csufresno.edu ?
|
| 7) |
November 9, 2004: The next day LaViolette sends an email to archive
registration giving them further information. He writes:
As project PI, I am conducting solar water desalination research
on the California Water Institute facilities on the CSU Fresno
campus. I have an office there. My phone number is
given below if you wish to contact me.
Paul LaViolette
tel: 559-298-xxxx X211
CWI website: http://www.californiawater.org/.
|
| 8) |
November 18, 2004: Archive registration wrote back saying that
they could not find his name listed on the CSUFresno website:
From register-query@arXiv.org (register-query for arXiv.org)
Sent Wednesday, November 17, 2004 9:09 am
To plaviolette@csufresno.edu
Subject RE: Received wrong ID number for a paper I recently
posted
Your name does not appear on either csufresno.edu or californiawater.org
web pages, nor does it appear that the attempted submission is
related to
that project.
You should instead submit to a conventional journal for requisite
feedback
|
| 9) |
November 18, 2004: LaViolette responded to archive registration
telling them that his paper has been accepted for publication.
He reasserted that he is doing solar energy research on
the premises of the California Water Institute to hopefully eliminate
any doubts and asked for a clarification of their submission
rules:
From Paul Laviolette <plaviolette@csufresno.edu>
Sent Thursday, November 18, 2004 9:45 am
To register-query@arXiv.org (register-query for arXiv.org)
Cc plaviolette@csufresno.edu
Bcc
Subject Re: RE: Received wrong ID number for a paper I
recently posted
The paper I attempted to post has been accepted for publication
in Planetary and Space Sciences. So you have no
reason to block its posting.
My name is indeed not listed on those websites, but for the
past 6 months I have been conducting research on the CWI facilities.
The submission is not related to the presently funded solar
energy research I am doing here. Do I understand you correctly
that submitters with edu email addresses are restricted to post
papers only in the area of their funded research unless those
papers have already been submitted to journals for "requisite
feedback?" Please tell me where you have specifically
posted instructions on the arXiv.org website to this effect.
Are you saying that others who have posted papers to arXiv
are:
a) allowed to post in areas not related to their immedate area
of research provided that their paper has been submitted for
journal review, and
b) are also allowed to post papers prior to journal submission
provided that the paper is related to their immediate area of
university research?
Paul LaViolette
|
| 10) |
Over three weeks went by without any
response from the Archive. So, LaViolette sent an email
requesting a response.
From: Paul Laviolette <plaviolette@csufresno.edu>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 12:12 pm
To: register-query@arXiv.org
Cc: plaviolette@csufresno.edu
Subject: Re: Received wrong ID number for a paper
I recently posted
It has been over three weeks since I sent you my last
email (copied below) and have not heard back. Please
respond. I hope this clears up matters so that I can
post my paper now.
Paul LaViolette
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul <plaviolette@csufresno.edu>
Date: Thursday, November 18, 2004
|
|
11)
|
He got no response. Finally, not wanting
to wait any longer, on December 31st he decided to try once again
to upload his paper. This time he got the following automatic
email response instructing him to get a registered ArXiv.org
endorser to endorse his paper:
December 31, 2004
Endorsement needed for astro-ph
You must get an endorsement from another user to submit a
paper to category astro-ph (Astrophysics).
ArXiv is an openly accessible, moderated repository for scholarly
papers in specific scientific disciplines. Material submitted
to arXiv is expected to be of interest, relevance, and value
to those disciplines. Endorsement is necessary but not sufficient
to have a paper accepted in arXiv; arXiv reserves the right to
reject or reclassify any submission.
We've sent an email message to plaviolette@csufresno.edu with
a unique endorsement code; please forward this e-mail to someone
authorized to endorse you for category astro-ph (Astrophysics.)
Who is qualified to endorse?
To endorse another user to submit to the astro-ph (Astrophysics)
archive, an arXiv submitter must have submitted 4 papers to astro-ph
earlier than three months ago and less than five years ago.
You can find out if a particular person is qualified to endorse
by looking up one or more of his papers and clicking on the link
"Which of the authors of this paper can endorse?" at
the bottom of the abstract.
It would be good for you to find an endorser who is connected
with you: for instance, if you're a graduate student, your thesis
advisor or another professor in your department would be a good
choice. Otherwise, you should choose an endorser whose work is
related to the subject of your paper.
Your unique endorsement code is: xxxxxx
Why didn't they have the courtesy to respond
to his earlier email and tell him that he had to find an endorser?
Why did he find out on his own only after making one more
desparate attempt to upload his paper?
|
|
12)
|
December 31, 2004:
The search for an endorser begins.
At this point Paul began the long and difficult procedure
of trying to locate an endorser. This process lasted three
weeks and took hours and hours of his time and of the people
who he had contacted. During this time he contacted a total
of 7 potential endorsers. Three of these did not bother
to answer his email! He had not sent them his paper, so
it had nothing to do with any conceptual disagreement. One
endorser agreed to endorse his paper but was disqualified by
arXiv.org because he was not registered to endorse in the astro-ph
section which is where LaViolette wished to upload his paper.
Another endorser did not feel qualified since he said he
had no background in ice core research. Yet another endorser
did not wish to endorse because she felt there would be an ethical
problem of conflict of interest since she was preparing a literature
review and would be citing some of his past publications in that
review. Finally, the seventh person he contacted agreed
to endorse his paper. But it turns out that his problems
were not over.
|
|
13)
|
January 20, 2005:
LaViolette is endorsed and next attempts to upload his paper.
On January 21st, LaViolette once again attempted to upload his
paper. This time the arXiv system allowed him to upload and gave
him a paper ID number and password:
User-ID: astro-ph/0501485
Password: 2n7yw
But, when he then put in the ID and password to view
his uploaded paper, he got back the automated response "invalid
password." This continued for the next few days. Then
on the fourth day he found that his paper number had been assigned
to someone else and that his paper had in fact been suppressed
by the arXiv.org administration.
At first, confused about
the password rejection problem, he wrote to archive administration
informing them of the problem:
1/22/05
To: www-admin@arxiv.org
After having my paper endorsed and uploaded, your system sent
me a paper number and paper password (see below). But when I
use these to access my listing I get the response that the password
is invalid. What do you advise?
Paul LaViolette
There was no reply. Then, after discovering
his paper number had been reassigned, he wrote to them once again.
1/25/05
To: www-admin@arxiv.org
After having my paper endorsed and uploaded, your system sent
me a paper number and paper password (see below). But when I
used these to access my listing I got the response that the password
is invalid. Now when I put in that astro-ph paper number I see
that it has been reassigned to a Ms. G. Shaw. So what has happened
to my uploaded paper? I have not had a response also to my previous
inquiry of three days ago.
Paul LaViolette
|
| 14) |
Here he had followed their instructions to get an
endorser, spent many days of his time to find someone, including
many hours of time of many of the endorsers he had contacted.
He had gotten endorsed, and now after all that effort,
arxiv was still suppressing his paper. Since others who
have followed these same procedures have gotten their paper uploaded
without a problem, we are left to conclude that arxiv is engaging
in blatant discrimination. So, one can only conclude that
Dr. LaViolette's name has been put on some kind of internal blacklist.
Even if he follows the arXiv rules to their fullest extent,
in the end it will be to no avail. This blacklist must
be very important since the eprint archive administrators are
willing to violate their own posted procedures for endorsement
in order to keep his paper away from public view.
As mentioned above, it had already been accepted
for publication (and they were informed of that). Second,
an endorser had found it worthy of posting. Third, one
of the other endorsers who he had contacted had expressed interest
to cite this paper in a literature review she was preparing.
She had written to him asking, "What is the reference for
the Planetary Space Science paper, or is that the one
you want to submit to astro-ph? If so, send me the reference
after it is posted." So, obviously, their reason for
suppression is not because his paper is of poor quality. One
is left to conclude that it is being suppressed for one reason
only, namely because he is its author and his name is on a black
list.
To most people who have grown up believing that we
live in a free society, they will hesitate in disbelief. Surely,
there must be some mistake. |
15) |
February 1, 2005:
NSF Intervenes. On February 1st, Paul
called Jack Lightbody, the person in the U. S. National Science
Foundation physics division who oversees the funding of
physics research projects at Cornell and in particular of grant
funding to Paul Ginsparg, director of the arXiv.org program.
Aftering hearing the long story of his difficulties with
the people at Cornell, Dr. Lightbody felt some action was
warranted and said he would speak to people at Cornell.
LaViolette received no word back from arXiv.org
responding to his earlier emails. However, growing impatient,
he decided to try once again. On February 3rd he tried once more
to upload his paper, this being his third attempt. This
time the uploading was successful and he was given a paper ID
and password that worked. That is, he was able to successfully
view his paper abstract without getting any error messages.
It was obvious that arxiv
administrators released the block on LaViolette's account only
because NSF had intervened and expressed their concern over the
matter. When Lightbody finally reached Ginsparg, Ginsparg
replied to him that LaViolette is able to post his paper, implying
what is all the fuss about? But the truth is, that this
only happened because of NSF's pressure. NSF's employees
are very busy doing what they are supposed to be doing. They
don't have time to be telling Cornell to shape up. Does
a scientist have to go to the extreme of asking NSF's assistance
in the matter in order to get his paper posted on the preprint
archive? Although he was able to finally get his paper
posted, Paul felt somewhat sad that there are many other free
thinking cutting edge scientists whose works were still being
suppressed. He felt why should each of these people go
through the same stress he went through, to continually have
their emails ignored and to finally have to impose on NSF to
help them out.
Because of their arrogant practices,
the arxiv is literally shattering scientist's spirits and driving
them into depression. In his book The Pragmatics of Human
Communication, psychologist Paul Watzlawick explained that
people who are in a position of power over another person can
literally drive crazy a person who is dependent on them. It
is the situation of the classic double bind, where you are damned
if you do and damned if you don't. In this case, Cornell
University, which has taken over the electronic archive from
Los Alamos National Laboratories, oversees a monopoly in the
physics/astronomy community in that there is no other internet
archive that is as large or as prominent as this one. Scientists
depend for their careers on communicating effectively their ideas
to their colleagues and the internet archive has become an exceptional
way to do this since it allows the scientist's paper to be easily
accessed by others. Blocking certain individuals from participating
in this internet superhighway injures their careers and their
lives as a whole.
|
16) |
Arxiv automatically reclassifies Dr. LaViolette's
paper. But, although
Dr. LaViolette was able to upload his paper, problems still remained.
The arXiv moderators had put in an automated routine which,
upon detecting his name as the submitting author, would automatically
reclassify any paper he uploaded and place it in the archive's
physics category. In other words, it seems that regardless
of which archive category he would be endorsed to submit to and
regardless of what paper he chose to submit, it would automatically
be redirected against his will to the physics category. They
did such an automated reclassification to his solar cycle paper
without any explanation or apology, giving it the following classification:
physics/0502019. They
imposed this same maneuver when he later submitted his Pioneer
Effect paper to the general relativity/quantum cosmology category.
Like his solar cycle paper, it was reclassified to the
physics section; see Case History I.
Moreover they barred him from cross-listing his paper to
the astro-ph section, which is where it belonged in the first
place. An attempt by LaViolette to cross-list his paper
was met with the following automated response:
"physics/0502019 is not appropriate
for cross-listing to astro-ph"
He found this very strange since the paper dealt with a topic
that is of interest both to astrophysics and to Earth science,
since it reports ice core evidence of the influx of a large amount
of interstellar dust into the solar system and its effect on
the Sun and on the Earth's climate.
The archive moderators
have done this same maneuver to other physicists whose work they
do not approve of, some of whose names appear on the ArchiveFreedom
website in the "partial blacklist" category. Just
as happened to Dr. LaViolette, arxiv reclassified the papers
of these scientists without explanation, imprisoning them in
the physics category, a classification that most often does not
fit the subject of their paper. Moreover they too were
barred from cross-listing their papers to other categories.
Since other physicists are allowed to post their papers to the
category where they fit best and are also allowed to cross-list
those papers to other categories without a problem, arxiv's practice
of singling out and restricting a few people they personally
don't happen to like gives the impression of shameless discrimination. |
17) |
February 7, 2005:
Dr. LaViolette notifies arxiv of the problem.
LaViolette wrote to the moderators complaining about the relcassification
of his paper:
Date: 2/7/05
To: moderation@arXiv.org
Subj.: Crosslisting is blocked
Earlier I emailed my complaint that my paper was not posted
in the astro-ph section as I had intended, but was instead posted
in the physics section (physics/0502019). Now I see also that
the ability to cross list my paper has been blocked. An attempt
to cross list it to astro-ph was met with the following response
"physics/0502019 is not appropriate for cross-listing to
astro-ph." This is not true, the paper deals with an astrophysical
subject, the influx of interstellar dust into the solar system
and its effect on the Earth's climate.
Can you tell me why a block was put on cross-listing my paper.
Why are other scientists allowed to cross list their papers and
I am not?
I request that my paper either be posted in the astro-ph section
or be cross listed to astro-ph.
Paul LaViolette
He received no response from them.
|
18) |
February 16, 2005:
Arxiv arbitrarily reclassifies his second uploaded paper.
Dr. LaViolette attempted
to upload a second paper to the astrophysics section. But,
the arxiv system prevented him from uploading it, responding
only with an error message. To make matters worse, when
he tried to become endorsed to post a third paper to the gr-qc
(general relativity/quantum cosmology) section, arxiv ignored
the endorsement and retaliated by revoking the endorsing priveleges
of the endorser (for more see Case History
I)
Having received no response about the difficulty
with his first paper, he wrote to the moderators again notifying
them that his second submission was being blocked:
Date: 2/16/05
To: moderation@arXiv.org
The following is a different issue than I have written to
you before . I have previously been endorsed to upload papers
to astro-ph. I understand that one needs only to be endorsed
once to upload papers to a particularly category. Now I attempted
to upload a new paper to the astro-ph category and have received
the following error message:
<<
arXiv.org Error
The following error has occured:
Internal error: Invalid category id [astro-ph.H?v`H?vR°?¶$y?oreFiles]
on page:
/auth/need-endorsement.php?category_id=astro-ph.H?v`H?vR°?¶$y?oreFiles
The operators of arXiv.org have been notified.
Return to arXiv.org
>>
Why am I being blocked? Also I am waiting for an answer to
my previous question regarding being blocked from uploading to
gr-qc as well.
Paul LaViolette
He received no reply.
|
19) |
February 24, 2005:
He again contacts the moderators.
Two weeks having gone by and having received
no reply, he again wrote to the moderators:
From Paul Laviolette <plaviolette@csufresno.edu>
Sent Thursday, February 24, 2005 8:53 am
To moderation@arXiv.org
Subject Waiting for a response to my previous emails to
you
Dear moderator,
It has been almost two weeks since my earliest emails to you
and
I have not had a response. These concern my being blocked
from
uploading to astro-ph and gr-qc, and cross listing to astro-ph
even
though I have been endorsed to upload to both of these sections.
Why have you not responded?
Paul LaViolette
He received no reply.
|
20) |
March 18, 2005:
He uploads his second paper, but it is also reclassified
to physics.
Finally, after three weeks had
gone by, the moderators wrote to him:
From moderation@arXiv.org (moderation for
arXiv.org)
Sent Friday, March 18, 2005 6:36 am
To plaviolette@csufresno.edu
Subject Re: (moderation) uploading to astro-ph is blocked
It appears to be an issue with your browser software.
We cannot
repeat the problem locally.
What they said
was not correct since he had used three different browsers, two
of which were quite up to date, and had gotten the same error
message with all of them. But he thought he would make
yet another attempt to upload his paper to see what would happen.
This time the system does not stop him from uploading.
Obviously, they had done something to correct the situation.
They did not want to admit that they had previously been
blocking his paper and so tried to blame it on his browser.
But, still there were problems. Again,
an automated routine detected his name and reclassified his paper,
sending it to the physics section categorized as: physics/0503158.
Like his other paper submission, he was unable to cross-list
this second paper to the astro-ph section.
He again wrote to the
moderators:
Subj: Re: (moderation) uploading to astro-ph is
blocked
Date: Friday, March 18, 2005 12:23:37 PM
From: plaviolette@csufresno.edu
To: moderation@arXiv.org
Dear moderator,
After receiving your email, I again logged on and this time was
able to access the astro-ph section without an error message.
However, when I submitted my paper to astro-ph, it was instead
immediately given a physics category ID number. This has nothing
to do with the subject of my paper not being appropriate since
it does discuss an astronomical phenomenon and there was no time
for anyone to do an evaluation since this automatic response
occurred within seconds of my upload.
The response said "your submission astro-ph.starburst.15002
was accepted. Then on the same page it gave as a PaperID number:
physics/0503158.
So, why am I still blocked from uploading to astro-ph?
Paul LaViolette
LaViolette once again contacted
Jack Lightbody of NSF hoping that he could do something to remedy
the reclassification of his papers:
3/18/05
To Jack Lightbody, NSF
Dear Jack,
A change occurred today in that arXiv.org now allowed me to upload
my paper to the astro-ph section (whereas before I would get
an error message when I attempted to access that section). However,
when I uploaded to astro-ph, my paper was automatically classified
in the physics section. This happened within seconds. Since no
one had time to read my paper, it is apparent that the block
preventing me from uploading to the astro-ph section is still
in effect and that nothing really has changed. I assume the situation
is same for my access to the gr-qc section. Also they still block
my attempts to crosslist my other uploaded paper to the astro-ph
section. Recall that my previous paper was also automatically
blocked and switched to physics.
Could you call me to discuss what they told you
about my situation.
Below is an email I sent to them today complaining
about the first situation mentioned above.
Paul LaViolette
With no action being taken to change
his quarantine situation, he again wrote to Lightbody two weeks
later:
|
3/30/05
To Jack Lightbody, NSF
Dear Jack,
There are several problems that still have not been resolved
with my uploading account with Arxiv.org.
1) Arxiv.org has been blocking me from uploading to the gr-qc
section. When I go to upload to that section, I get back a message
saying that I should get endorsed and I am given a code for seeking
endorsement. However, I have already been endorsed to this section
on February 11th. Only one endorsement is necessary for uploading
to a given section. So, it is puzzling why Arxiv.org is ignoring
my February 11th endorsement and is asking me to seek endorsement.
I have followed their rules and am still excluded from uploading
to their site. I see this as unequal treatment since many other
physicists who get endorsement do not experience this kind of
treatment. Since the time of my endorsement, I have not been
allowed to upload to this section and it has been very aggravating.
The only response to my emails to Arxiv.org has been that they
consider that something is wrong with my browser. In my opinion
they are making this up. I have used three different browsers
from two different computers and the result is always the same.
I informed that my browser is not the problem, but apparently
they have chosen to not respond to my email. My paper has now
been accepted for publication in a refereed journal and still
this same blocking by ArXiv.org continues without any reason.
It is very important that this paper is posted as soon as possible
since it notifies my colleagues of my theory's early a priori
prediction of the Pioneer Effect which was subsequently confirmed
by the data.
2) I have also been endorsed to upload to the astro-ph (astrophysics)
section of Arxiv.org, but every time I do, my paper is automatically
classified in the physics section without regard to its content.
This indicates that they have put an automatic procedure in place
to reclassify my paper whenever their system detects my name
as the paper's author. This is a discriminative practice that
few other physicists have to put up with who are allowed to upload
to the archive. I strongly urge that it be stopped. My latest
upload to astrophysics was given a paper number "physics/0503158.
Shortly afterward the same day (prior to its official appearance)
I asked the paper be withdrawn from being posted to avoid its
misclassification. But the Arxiv.org moderators have refused
to take any action and allowed it to stay misclassified. They
have sent no email to me about their failure to take action.
This indicates that the transfers are not due to any inadvertent
mistake of the Arxiv.org software, but rather are due to a concerted
effort of the moderators to suppress my work from the astrophysics
section even though I have been endorsed to upload to that section.
3) The Arxiv.org moderators still prevent me from crosslisting
any of my posted papers to the astrophysics section (which is
where they should be posted) and give no reason for doing so.
These practices are intolerable and should be stopped. Please
see what you can do to correct this situation.
Sincerely,
Paul LaViolette, Ph.D.
|
But NSF accomplished
nothing. In May, LaViolette complained to Dr. Dehmer, head
of the NSF physics section about the unethical practices that
the Cornell arxiv was engaging in. Dehmer assigned one
of his staff, Pat Bautz, to call and take notes about what was
happening. LaViolette's later left many phone messages
inquiring as to what action NSF had taken, but his calls were
not returned. He only received a brief email from Bautz stating:
"NSF intends that they [Cornell University Library] will
implement appropriate screening practices to assure that the
arXiv conforms to Cornell University academic standards."
|
21) |
June 6, 2005:
LaViolette contacts the Cornell University Library, but
they take no action.
LaViolette then contacted
Pat Diele, a librarian involved in the arxiv project to see if
there was anything she could do to ensure that his papers were
placed in the proper category. She agreed to look into
the matter. But, when he called back to inquire about what
was going to be done to remedy the situation, all she was: "The
board is considering it." Here she was referring to
the arxiv board of directors. He pointed out to her that
this did not sound like a very promising answer since that is
the standard reply that they give to avoid taking action. When
he asked her if she would give him a way to contact some of the
board members about the matter, she refused. She then said:
"I have done all that I can
do. The conversation is over."
Without even saying a pleasant good by, she then hung up,
So that is where things
stand today. After three years of effort, LaViolette is
finally allowed to post papers to the arxiv, but he is quarantined
to post them only to the physics section. It seems that
even if he is awarded a Nobel prize for his work, this is unlikely
change arxiv's discriminatory treatment. Nobel Laureate
Brian Josephson, for example, was quarantined to the physics
section after trying to assist a colleague to post a paper on
the subject of cold fusion, a subject that the arxiv apparently
regards as tabou. No matter how many times he complained
asking to be allowed once again to post to the condensed matter
section of the archive, the arxiv administration refused to lift
their ban; see his case
study.
|
|