The thorny way of truth - Free Energy Community

"Qy.^ K^ K^ DdttaSTEFAN MARINOV Indian journal of physicsMorellcnfeldgasse 16 20 June 1990 JadavpurA-SOIO GRAZ - AUSTRIA Calcutta 700 032Dear Dr.Datta,Thank vou very much for your letters of the 7 and 2 March 1990, although the rejectof my papers ON THE ABSOLUTE ASPECTS OF ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERACTIONS and VIOLATIONS OFLAWS OF CONSERVATION OF ANGULAR MOMENTUM AND ENERGY was, of course, not pleasant for -I do not accept the referee's criticisms on these papers. The fact that my papers ar«published with difficulties in the scientific journals is not an argument against mytheory and EXPERIMENTS. Experiments either must be accepted or one has to show thattheir results are wrong. If the referee cannot show that the experiments are wrong, heMUST accept their results. Then the referee either has to try to explain these resultsin the frame of the conventional theory, or (in the case that he cannot do this), he musACCEPT the new proposed theory. Only this way is a scientific way.I have done a lot of experiments which show that the answer of NATURE is not such aone as one should expect proceeding from the conventional theory on space-time physicsand on electromagnetism. The results of my experiments must be presented to the judgementof the scientific community. Of course one can be mistrustful and one can rejectmy papers, but this can last only a limited time, as experiments cannot be silenced.I know how difficult is for the referees and the editors of the physical journals to_publish my papers. But with DIFFICULTIES I already published about 50 papers in the reffreed journals. My published experiments are not discussed in the li^?;;^^":;^, ^^^?"^%"?:body daresto take the responsibility to say "yes" or "no", but soon THEY WILL BE DISCUS-SED. (A paper of me has appeared in the IND. J. PHYS.. 558, 403 (1981)).But I have many CRUCIAL experiments which VIOLATE laws of conservation. Such arethe BUL-CUB MACHINE WITHOUT STATOR and the ROTATING AMPERE BRIDGE WITH DISPLACEMENT CUR^RENT (to distinguish it from the ROTATING AMPERE BRIDGE WITH SLIDING CONTACTS consructwrecently by me, a report on which will be published in PHYSICS ESSAYS). The presentatio*of these two machines are given in the paperTHE MYTHS IN PHYSICSwhich I submit now to IND. J. PHYSICS. - '^ ^These two experiments VIOLATE the law of angular momentum conservation. Yes, iheyVIOLATE a fundamental physical law . If the referee should suggest rejection, he has-1) Either to show that my experiments are WRONGLY done, i.e., that they cannot denstrate the reported effects.3) Or, if he will accept their effects, he has to show that these experiemts do NOTviolate the law of angular momentum conservation. I think, however, that even if he wi1be successful in showing that these apparatus do not violate the ^^^^^ angular momentuconservation, the paper is to be published, as the experiments are INTERESTING and onemust allow to the executor of an interesting experiment to present his explanation ofthe effect observed.I send only one copy of the paper, as my hopes that the paper will be accepted arefeeble. The photographs will be sent, if the paper will be accepted. I can change thestyle of the paper, but I think that when one destroys a FUNDAMENTLA PHYSICAL LAW, onemust be allowed to say this loudly enough, without the etw-nal Saxon "it seems ,one isafraid", etc. -^^^^You, Dr. Datta, have a difficult task. I shouldVthat you find enough scientificcourage to publish this paper.Hoping to receive your acknowledgement for the reception of this paper and then als(yor final decision in due time.Sincerely yours,Stefan MarinovEditorial note. The answer to the above letter is given by Dr. Datta with his letterof the 3 July 1990.