The brief history of the question



History of antirelativistic struggle in the West
(on the basis of materials G.O.Mueller Research Project)

Apologists of the relativity theory constantly operate by a principle "it is not the truth but so sounds better". Many data used in given section, will seem to the reader unexpected (the same as absolutely unexpected they have appeared and for the composer). To you to choose between the truth and habitual (but invented) history. Interpretations of the special relativity theory (SRT) which first anybody seriously did not perceive, have started to be exposed to the analysis since 1908. Till 1914 all experiments have rejected SRT (including experiments on search of an aether wind which yielded nonzero result, but have not been obliged to give speed of 30 m/sek). Many theoretical works have not left from the given theory of a stone on a stone from the physical and philosophical points of view and have for a long time pushed it in a shade. Right after messages on detection of a deviation of a light ray in the field of the Sun, ostensibly confirming GRT, interpretation of the data of experiment has been denied (in England: A.Fowler, Sir Joseph Larmor, Sir Oliver J.Lodge, H.F.Newall, Ludwik Silberstein; in the USA: T.J.J. See; in Germany: Ernst Gehrcke, Philipp Lenard; we will notice also in brackets that for the first time the deviation of a light ray at passage near to the Sun, in accuracy coinciding with "results" of GRT, has been predicted in 1801 in J.Zoldner's article). Despite it, since November, 1919 campaign in support of the general relativity theory (GRT) begins wide which under statements of relativists is development of SRT (that actually far not so, but nevertheless propagation of SRT interpretations also amplifies). Permanent publications in newspapers begin, public performances before nonspecialists (schoolboys, housewives etc.), in advertising involve even Charlie Chaplin. In 1920 Einstein on the Congress in Leiden (Netherlands) recognises necessity of an aether in GRT, that is does a curtsey "both our and your" to calm a part of opponents. In 1921 A.Einstein makes the first tour across the USA where he was engaged in propagation including relativity theories.

Usually it is favourable for relativists to represent the state so as if against A.Einstein's theories one fascists acted. Actually during this period about fascism in Germany practically anybody also did not hear (even failed "beer putsch" is 1923!). Moreover, in 1922 on the 100-year-old anniversary the Society "Gesellschaft Duetscher Naturforscher und Ärztë" has made decision to exclude any criticism of SRT in the official academic environment. As a result since 1922 the interdiction is entered into Germany in the academic press and in formation on criticism of the relativity theory, which since then and without interruption (!) operates until now.

The Nobel Prize for 1921 has been awarded by A.Einstein for an explanation of two laws of a photoeffect on the basis of its formula (though the photoeffect has been discovered before by G.Gertz and the considerable contribution in photoeffect researches has brought by A.G.Stoletov whom one more law of a photoeffect earlier has been explained). Thus, at the announcement of Svante Arrenius (in 1922) about award of the Prize to A.Einstein, it has been told that Prize to it have awarded despite doubtfulness of its other theories and presence of serious objections to them (that is with a hint that it is not necessary to mention them in obligatory Nobel lecture). Despite it A.Einstein as the Nobel lecture (which has taken place only in 1923) again propagandised his theories.

The powerful criticism of theories of Einstein sounded on the Congress "International Congress of Philosophy" (Naples 1924). O.Kraus' Open Letter to A.Einstein and M.Laue in 1925 remains without the answer. He has not answered on the booklet of 1931 "Hundred authors against Einstein" also (only has laughed the matter off). But its environment pretended, as if all is persecution to a national sign (in spite of the fact that among critics there were many Jews). In general, only 17 publications of the military period (from more 300) contained antisemitic statements, and number of critical works supposing antisemitic statements at present make less than 1 percent (from more 4000! works). Yes, ideologized works were, but the majority of works had purely scientific character. Relativists were practically not got involved in scientific discussions and all reduced to ideology.

It is necessary the truth to our country, had such huge human loss in struggle against fascism (not to repeat former errors), instead of the invented stories. In the beginning we will result some historical data. The fascism in Germany has got real force only after an economic crisis of 1929. In the spring of 1929 from Berlin to Einstein it has been presented a ground on the bank of Templinsky lake and he often spent time on the yacht, that is to it all conditions for a life and work have been created. The fascist party has appeared the second by quantity of places on parliamentary elections and on December, 1st, 1932 as the German chancellor Kurt von Shlejher (not from nazis!) was appointed which however has retired on January, 28th, 1933. After that on January, 30th, 1933 president Gindenburg has appointed A.Gitler as reich-chancellor of Germany. And only after death of Gindenburg on August, 30th, 1934 Hitler has combined both posts and became the individual dictator of Germany. Even after occupation of Austria in 1938 nazis tried not to quarrel with anybody. To be convinced of it, it is enough to read magazine (in Russian) "the Collection a caravan of stories" N 02, 2006, p. 70-87 how in the occupied Austria were redeemed (!) possession of baron Rothschild (for 3 million pounds sterling from which 100000 has got personally to Goebbels for intermediary). Still an example: relativist Max von Laue (always siding with A.Einstein) safely continued to work at a fascist mode in Berlin up to 1943 (before the 64 anniversary) while, owing to the become frequent bombardments of Berlin, all institution has been evacuated in other city where he has not gone and has retired.

But in 1933 A.Einstein was not the refugee. It was the defector (and it "slightly" not one and the same). Every winter A.Einstein went on the country house in Passadene (California) and in 1933 simply has not returned to Germany. For this reason after a while he as the traitor, has been declared by the enemy of a Reich. Personally he, but not his theory as relativists always prevailed in the nazi government! So, for example, already during the second world war the nazi government has spent the decision (Munch 1940) that "the SRT is accepted as the basis for physics". Unexpectedly, isn't that so? Though, on the other hand, anything surprising here is not present, after all the nazi top has been always keen on magic and mysticism. In these questions the Society "Tule", and then at the state level - organisation "Annenerbe" at first was engaged. Mystical possibilities of change of space and time properties and magic management of a reality always interested a management of 3rd Reich and the theory of a relativity which is closer to magic or art, than to a strict science it has appeared comprehensible to their ideology.

And concentration camp at fascists have earned as "the destruction car" already after the Second World War beginning. And after the end of war the reminder on "Holocaust" became "argument" against any criticism of the SRT in modern Germany, also as in the USA similar "argument" of a steel of charge in anti-Semitism which can seriously damage to career of the scientist.

Despite all these complexities, a stream of critical works does not disappear, but only accrues (we will mention only some moments) though the academic science all over the world tries to hold the Iron Curtain. So, in 1949 in Italy magazine "Methodos", in 1950 in the Western Germany - magazine "Philosophia naturalis" starts to leave. In Austria two magazines supposing to the critic of the SRT start to leave: in 1957 - "Wissenschaft ohne Dogma" which since 1958 is called "Wissen im Werden", and in 1959 - "Neue Physik". In 1958 the Nobel winner Hideki Yukawa acts with criticism of the SRT at U.N. conference in Geneva. Since 1961 in Germany the program on development of ideas Hugo Dingler ("protophysics") - "Erlangen Program" operates. In 1972 the President of the Royal astronomical society G.Dingl flays the SRT. Since 1978 in Australia the magazine "Speculations in science and technology", and in the USA - "Hadronic journal" start to leave. In 1979 there appears a well-known collection "The Einstein myth and the Ives papers". In 1982 it is spent International Conference on Space-Time Absoluteness (ICSTA). Since 1987 in Canada magazine "Apeiron" (Montreal), and since 1988 - "Physics Essays" (Ottawa) start to leave. Since 1990 in the USA there is a magazine "Galilean Electrodynamics", and since 1991 in Austria - "Deutsche Physik". From the end of 80th years worldwide pass antirelativistic conferences (for example, in St.-Petersburg - time in two years, and in the USA the organisation "Natural Philosophy Alliance" spends Conferences to two times a year). It is only published materials though round them the academic circles try to create a silence wall, but to list all materials from the Internet it is not obviously possible at all. Thus, in the end of the last century and the beginning of the present unimaginable splash in the works, criticising both theories of a relativity and physical problems offering alternative decision, is observed.


History of antirelativistic struggle in Russia

In Russia modern historians of a science prefer superficial more likely political, than the scientific approach to events in the science of the XX-th century is more often, dumping all on the Soviet state system. Thus in one sheaf interdictions for genetics, cybernetics and ostensibly on the relativity theory (i.e. they carry out the order of the academic elite) are mentioned for some reason! Actually in the USSR the number of years with unpopularity of Einstein can be counted on fingers, and opponents of its theory were exposed to real persecutions almost all time. The relativity theory became fashionable in the USSR in 20th year, that is then when for it the wide advertising campaign (since November, 1919) worldwide has been organised. For reception of support in the USSR for A.Einstein, it has enough appeared to him to enter in 1919 Communist Party of Germany. The truth in half a year he left therefrom (as the Communist Party in Germany has not gathered force), but the given advertising gimmick has appeared enough to become "the friend of the Soviets Country". This status "the friend of the USSR and all progressive mankind" remained for A.Einstein and further, guaranteeing support to all his theories. Since 1922 A.Einstein becomes the member correspondent of the Russian Academy of Sciences (and since 1926 - foreign honorary member of the Academy of sciences of the USSR). To be convinced of the further official popularisation of the relativity theory, it is enough to look in the Small Soviet encyclopaedia, in volume the tenth, ñ.155 (1931 of the edition) a note about Einstein, “opposing anti-Soviet attacks of the bourgeois press and the governments, against white terror...” And in volume the eighth, s.741-744 article “the relativity Theory”. Similar articles, laudatory under the maintenance, were available in all subsequent editions (and also in other official collections, for example, SED, Publishing house "Soviet encyclopaedia", 1980, p. 1547). And after all it meant support at the highest Party-State level!

Popular magazines of those years are also overflowed by similar dithyrambs. For example, it is possible to look Lunacharsky's article “About Great” in magazine “30 days” (N 1 for 1930, s.39-42) how Lunacharsky was on a visit at Einstein in Berlin. And who at that time could argue with the People's commissar of education in its estimations of Einstein person and his theory? And what even more "serious" support is necessary for the theory?

For "authorities from a science" it is favourable to represent the state so as if all disputes round the relativity theory were conducted only at the beginning of the century and not to mention real discussions of the XX-th century. They were conducted both in a physical direction, and on the philosophical one. For example, K.N.Shaposhnikov and N.Kasterin (the chairman of the Physical society of P.N.Lebedev since 1925) have proved that the Buherer's experiment spent in 1909 contradicts conclusions of the relativity theory (see Shaposhnikov K.N., to article of Kasterin "Sur la nonconcordance du principe de relativite d'Einstein", News of Ivanovo-Voznesensky Polytechnic Institute, 1919, v.1; the given works can be looked also in J.J.Smulsky's books). A.K.Timirjazev's report on D.K.Miller's experiments (which has spent supervision more than all other researchers together taken!) has been hardly accepted on V congress of physicists. Thus relativists have organised provocation: in the beginning have put the report to the latest, and then have transferred it on the first plenary session that, naturally, has caused displeasure of other lecturers (not connected with the relativity theory). Obvious discontent with a point of issue (that is even the possibility of doubt in the relativity theory) have stated A.F.Ioffe, I.E.Tamm, J.I.Frenkel, G.S.Landsberg, and L.I.Mandelshtam in a pointed manner left organising committee and did not participate in sessions (that is to it not the science, but only own power was important). Unfortunately, it was time when discussions which were conducted around the SRT and GRT could not be limited only to a science - they were conducted under trying conditions when the science in the USSR has been strongly politized. So, for example, “sympathising Communist Party of Germany” A.Einstein was opposed to its opponent, too the Nobel Prize winner F.Lenard who “is close to nazi circles”. The quoted words represent itself as argument at one of lecturers on discussion of 1925 occurring in the USSR (the book with reports of participants of discussion till 1989 was not available – the special permission was required that it to read in Special Storehause of Public library, and on discussions of 30 and 40th years the book were not published at all). In 1930 HeadScience has closed the Physical Society (having left only Association of physicists under the leadership of relativistic academician A.F.Ioffe). The management of SRIPh have been replaced in the same year (as a result N.P.Kasterin therefrom has left). Permissions to session of the Physical society did not stand out any more, and since 1933 the property of the Physical society has been transferred to the Physical Institute. Since 1938 the Academy of sciences did not finance works which in something relativity theories contradicted at all.

Let's result some endurances from V.B.Cherepennikov's article "protection is necessary to the Science against Academy of sciences of the USSR", characterising historical (ideological) conditions of those years:

"We will come back in 20—30th years and we will track a course of ideological struggle. Activity of acad. V.F.Mitkevich, professors A.K.Timirjazev and A.A.Maksimov on ideological front was characterised by the academic science «as the main danger on theoretical front of those years», as them «concept... was original perception in materialistic philosophy of some ideas of positivism... was original audit of dialectic materialism». (Great Soviet Encyclopaedia)

Academician A.F.Ioffe acted as the basic opponent and the unmasker of "scientific reactionaries». In the accusatory article «About position on philosophical front of the Soviet physics» acad. A.F.Ioffe wrote: «... I am assured, for everyone who with Lenin's criterion will try to understand fairly philosophical positions of modern physicists and philosophers, - it is obvious that A.K.Timirjazev, A.A.Maksimov, acad. V.F.Mitkevich, including itself materialists, are actually scientific reactionaries. On the other hand, I.E.Tamm, J.I.Frenkel and V.A.Fock - doubtless materialists»... «Covering small group of reactionaries in the physicist, closed on the physical sights with German fascists, article of Maksimov accuses all other Soviet physics and all advanced scientists of the West — anti-fascists and friends of Soviet Union — in idealism, in anti-Soviet political installations».

To be convinced of justice of the charges which have been put forward acad. A.F.Ioffe in the relation acad. V.F.Mitkevich and its adherents in participation in «scientific reaction», it is impossible from the text of article. Absence of scientific proofs and abundance in a lexicon acad. A.F.Ioffe as arguments of words and turns of speech of not debatable character, such, as: «the unworthy slander», «amazing illiteracy», «monstrous to the absurd», «physical ignorance», «free illiteracy», "studied less to the physicist "the philosopher"", "scientific backwardness» and so on, testify to inability of the opponent to deny arguments of the opponents by scientific methods, that is frankly give out weakness of its position...

By such this way it had been provoked Central Committee VKP(b) decision from 25.01.31 «About magazine "Under a Marxism banner" by which the taboo was imposed on criticism of a philosophical inconsistency of quantum-relativistic subconsciousness and consideration of problems of physical interactions on mechanical — a materialistic basis was forbidden.

The academician V.F.Mitkevich insists on discussion carrying out on philosophical problems of physics about the nature of physical interactions. About it he writes: "As it is known, there are two points of view on a considered question in a science, mutually excluding one another: the point of view of action on distance and faradey-maxwell's the point of view according to which all interactions in the nature are made not differently, as at direct participation of the processes occurring in the intermediate environment.... I have formulated a question, concerning character of interaction of any two physical centres. This question, diversifying its construction a little, I regularly set since 1930 to my ideological opponents (to A.F.Ioffe, S.I.Vavilov, J.I.Frenkel, I.E.Tamm, V.A.Fock and another) which as regularly evade until recently from a definite answer on it... I and, of course, all ideological opponents of the group headed by acad. A.F.Ioffe and S.I.Vavilov, we object only against erroneous methods of interpretation of physical processes, against those methods, which... complicate development of the representations, able to correspond to the valid nature of the phenomena and consequently brake the further progress of a physical science».

V.B.Cherepennikov

The second time the decision forbidding to the critic of the relativity theory was accepted during the hardest period of our history - in days of the Great Patriotic War, that is it was allowed at the highest level. In 1942 at the anniversary session devoted to the 25 anniversary of revolution, Presidium AS of the USSR accepts the special decision under the relativity theory: "the valid scientifically-philosophical maintenance of the relativity theory ... represents a step forward in the process of disclosing of nature dialectic laws." What else proofs of "high" support of the relativity theory are required? Relativists attribute exclusively to themselves merits in creation of a nuclear bomb. However we will address to the facts. In the beginning the nuclear project was supervised by "the main academician", relativist A.F.Ioffe. It is natural that into his command entered, basically, adherents. However his work has been recognised by unsatisfactory. All former command have been dispersed, it have replaced a management and have changed a work principle: now only a few person could know a picture in the whole (and into number of these people former relativists have not been entered that it is possible to check up, for example, under the list "atomic scientist", received apartments in new post-war hillocks), and the others were involved only for consultations and works in private directions of the project (at last stage when the quantity of the people working over the nuclear project has grown on usages). Work in the USA has similarly been organised and "main relativist" A.Einstein was not included too into number of project heads (and only in number of advisers what there were hundreds! from 60 thousand cases of workers; A.Einstein is often mentioned simply as one of 12 Nobel prize winners working in the USA over atomic weapons). Nevertheless, anybody from a former command for it has not suffered, speak I.V.Kurchatov has interceded. He has simply shown elementary nobleness, after all for many the failure in military years could cost lives. However neither Stalin, nor Hitler are not present more and it would be time already for relativists to cease to hide for another's backs and to be responsible for "acts". Actually I.V.Kurchatov's protection would be obvious insufficiently, and it was not required, as at relativists there were higher patrons (we will not contact a policy, specifying in I.V.Stalin or L.P.Berija as the given underlying reason had no relation to the relativity theory at all). For example, when L.D.Landau was is taken 28.04.1938 for elementary leaflets (and it during the most complicated period of history of the country), he there and then "betrayd" a group of the adherents that they purposefully harmed to researches and young experts. Despite it, approximately a year later L.D.Landau have let out (!), and here, for example J.B.Rumer which researches on "five-optics" were not entered in the standard relativity theory, "has wound off the big term on the full coil" and left only when could not spend serious researches any more (The truth, a legend about L.D.Landau too goes as if to it "have organised" a road accident after under its patronage the philosophical articles criticising the SRT began to leave).

Nevertheless, then opposition of the academic and High school science is rather characteristic, as, on-essence, academy was at war for the one who will manage the right administratively to decide that in a science is true, and that - is false. But forces and possibilities were unequal. On University slanders were constantly strewed. Relativists from academy accused scientists of university that at them much less scientific works (i.e. rested on quantity). But after all the academy of sciences was engaged in a science only, and at University except scientific activity were also is industrial-economic activities also teaching activity. Moreover, overwhelming advantage on publishing houses also was behind academy. Relativists from Academy did not suppose in the numbers of scientists of University. Actually as blackmail it was a question of necessity to go begging to academicians. And to scientific results this "method" had no relation. After the next slander in 1946 to University there arrives the commission led by relativist S.I.Vavilov (!) and in May changes non-party dean A.S.Predvoditelev for S.T.Konobeevsky who however could not work well together with collective and retires in April, 1947. V.N.Kessenih is appointed to his place. The planned All-Union Meeting of physicists of 1949 and discussion on physics and philosophy problems have been cancelled, that is "very shaggy paw" was at relativists "above". In 1950 A.F.Ioffe's work on a post of director LPhTI has been recognised by unsatisfactory and it has been discharged of this post (but the Moscow University to Leningrad had no relation and was here obviously there is nothing, as well as the relativity theory). Already after I.V.Stalin's death in November, 1953 a little ministerial patrons of relativists "from a name" scientists (the group most part made "personally offended" which have ostensibly underestimated at faculty) written the letter to N.S.Hrushchev "about an unsuccessful state of affairs at physical faculty of the Moscow State University" (in which a number of the positive moments in university activity purposely disappears). As a result of this next slander V.M.Malyshev's commission changes on August, 5th, 1954 a faculty management (here N.S.Hrushchev did not interest at all the University science: it was not even on opening ceremony of a new complex of the Moscow State University on Vorobev's mountains), and since 1956 in the USSR all discussions have been declared "Stalin's propagation" and are completely closed.

In the third time the Presidium of Academy of sciences of the USSR accepts the decision forbidding to the critic of the relativity theory in a science, formation and the academic printing editions in 1964. After that there were only separate daredevils declaring disagreement with interpretations of the SRT. But against them other method (no, not a fire) was already applied, for the first time tested in Zurich in 1917 on F.Adler (written critical work against the SRT), then too in Zurich (probably, it were own psychiatrists!) in 1930 on A.Einstein's son Edward (which declared that the author of the SRT - Mileva Marich): ones not consent with official representations of the relativity theory were subjected to compulsory psychiatric examination. For example, A.Bronstein informs in the book "Conversations on space and hypotheses": "...Only for one 1966 the branch of general and applied physics AS of the USSR has helped physicians to reveal 24 paranoiacs". Here so, "without a fire" the new inquisitorial car operated. But there were also "punctures". So, in St.-Petersburg there lives one scientist (a name him we will not name yet) whom also "handed over" for examination, yes it is visible have not co-ordinated time with "the necessary" psychiatrist. As a result of the made examination the doctor has written a following conclusion: "It is healthy. It is possible to judge." Probably, the doctor could not present to itself that it is a question not of the criminal, and about the scientist who simply does not agree with interpretations of the relativity theory. Given "document" is stored at this scientist and, apparently, will be very interesting to descendants when all truth will open (and "all secret becomes sooner or later obvious").

Let's continue citing of endurances from V.B.Cherepennikov's brochure "protection is necessary to the Science against Academy of sciences of the USSR:

"Decades the numerous articles containing indisputable proofs of antiscientific essence of these theories, and also the works successfully resolving problems of physical interactions, deviate as «not being on modern level and not representing scientific interest» without any scientific substantiations. And this discrimination does not disappear at all: «And to this day articles with attempts to deny justice of the relativity theory arrive. Today such articles are not considered at all, as obviously antiscientific». (P.L.Kapitsa)

Despite an official interdiction, struggle against unscrupulousness of ruling academic elite does not stop and now. Some years magazine «the Inventor and the rationalizer» periodically publishes O.Gorozhanin's articles testifying to an inconsistency of the relativity theory. Addressing in the academic institutes, edition asks: «expose Gorozhanin. Please, no restrictions are present, except the only thing: that it will be clear to other ignoramuses..." Three years fought: all promised, promised to readers to answer... And already threats spout from outside physicists... "Dear edition, be not afflicted, true Ioffe's methods of scientific polemic are that. They simply do not know others!

In 1988 it was published V.I.Sekerin's brochure «the Sketch about the relativity theory» in which the experimental proofs denying relativism are furnished. An empty anonymous lampoon (concerning the edition of this brochure) was published in «the Literary newspaper» from 15.02.89, «All for twenty copecks or one more experience of unscientific polemic». Readers have responded numerous protests on this lampoon to edition with the requirement of a refutation and in support of V.I.Sekerin.

At last, in Vilnius the brochure of professor A.A.Denisov is published - «Myths of the relativity theory» in which the author also comes to a conclusion about an inconsistency of this theory. It is easy itself to present reaction of the academic elite to this edition. After all, the brochure has dispersed 50000 copies in circulation (!) carrying the truth about the relativity theory, as about «a new dress» of the Naked king. And here, on Year General meeting AS of the USSR sound their indignant voices: «It is necessary to protect academy from attacks. Take the newspaper «the Science in Siberia». In it, possibly, on-ignorance articles against the relativity theory are published... Other example. In «the Literary newspaper» there was an interview to professor A.A.Denisov which, under my data, is, almost the chairman of the Commission on ethics in the Supreme body of the USSR. This interview — an illiteracy and disgrace miracle. It shows that the professor does not understand the relativity theory at all... It is fraught with that the new stream critics of sciences is provoked. And after all and so position difficult, only also you hear: in all scientists are guilty. Our problem — to confirm a science great prestige». (A.D.Aleksandrov) «It is valid, professor Denisov is selected by the chairman of the Commission on ethics, but he is the enemy of the relativity theory. I have informed a management of the Supreme body what to select the chairman of the Commission on ethics of the person who is the enemy of a science in any sense, takes so pseudoscientific positions, is inadmissible..." (V.L.Ginzburg)

I believe that excitements of academicians are clear in connection with election of professor Denisov. If to «highly scientific» to arguments: "on ignorance", "an illiteracy and disgrace miracle", "the enemy of a science", "pseudoscientific positions» - borrowed the ideological instructor acad. A.F.Ioffe, in view of absence of other proofs, — to add that professor Denisov has informed in interview to "the Literary newspaper" from 28.02.90 ("Pluralism and myths") that opponents demanded dismissal, deprivations of doctor's degree, a response on the ground that professor Denisov cannot be the deputy as not so understands the relativity theory, — it is necessary to recognise that that the pluralism of opinions in our science really remains at inaccessible height. Inability of Academy of sciences to deny the publication..., and as an existing strict interdiction for heterodoxy give out hopelessness of their position."

V.B.Cherepennikov

So the XX-th century history not so is simple, as to us it represented and as represent now: the public has about it unilateral idea. For example, in Leningrad in 70th years series collections “Problem of research of the Universe” have started to be published. Their circulations were about 2 thousand copies, and some volumes have reached Siberia. Separate articles with discussion of the problems which were considered already definitively and irrevocably solved, were printed in collections with the note “is published as a basis for discussion”. It was pleasant not all. All circulation of collection N 9 (1982), already ready to release, has been sentenced by academician A.M.Prohorov to immediate sending directly from printing house in paper for recycling. Protection of a member-correspondent of the Russian Academy of Sciences M.S.Zverev has not helped also. Documents are published in A.G.Shlyonov's article “the Science as business” (N 16 same series, s.342-346, 1993ã.), where it is mentioned courage of the people who have rescued the collection (the chairman of the Publishing commission A.A.Efimov).

Since 1989 in the USSR, and then in Russia the International conferences are spent “Space and Time Problems”, “Space, Time, Gravitation”, etc. Works with articles of the critical maintenance are published in Russian and English languages (the truth, not all from them quality, but it should not surprise, after all “mad ideas” in which, according to N.Bor so the modern physics requires, can come to mind not only to followers of the SRT and GRT, but also to opponents of the given theories).

How the Russian Academy of Sciences reacts to the escalating criticism of the relativity theory? On-being questions keeps silent, after all hundreds scientists (and it only those to whom the finance allows, and there are more interested persons) participate in conferences, but mass-media are involved (funny, the truth when the actor G.Hazanov for the anniversary declares the validity of the relativity theory, i.e. pro it is possible to listen to the theory and nonspecialists?) . "Support groups" are involved also what it was necessary to face and to the composer. So, after a while after the publication of my book, two persons came to Edition, have told that "from Ginzburg" and it is impossible to suppose the publication of similar books. I doubt that it very much was necessary to V.L.Ginzburg as I from anybody did not disappear, and in January, 2004 itself has sent my book to V.L.Ginzburg, E.P.Krugljakov and to a number of other academicians (many of which have concerned this fact easy). Apparently, there are such people who wish "to seem more holy than the Pope" ("to be more holy"- it is impossible so wish though to toady at the mighty of this world). "The group of anonymous" also on the Internet tries to sink the theme, without expressing on a science. And the letter came to me that "my data (as signed the Appeal) is sent to the director of my institute and someone hopes that me will soon dismiss". Here there are such "scientific arguments of high-scientific colleagues", and others at them never were. However all comes to an end sooner or later, as will be and with "dark times" in a science.

 

Return to the main page of the Library