1. The Need of New Approaches - Kritische Stimmen zur ...

Chapter 9: The Thought Experiment
disadvantaged groups must be given access, and that closer public scrutiny can prove to be a chance. With this you
have raised certain issues that are also central to our project, in that the critics of the theories of relativity are
suppressed by the “elite” amongst the academic physicists, in that the very existence of criticism is denied, and in
that, where such denial no longer appears possible, they are slandered, are socially excluded and are robbed of their
basic right to scientific freedom. The group of critics must again be allowed access to free public discussion.”
715 / 2004-12-12 - Prof. Oskar NEGT c/o Institut f. Soziologie, Universität. Hannover.
CD-ROM 1.2 with printout of 93 sample pages, 2nd Progress Report.
Extract:
“Please find everything else, dear Professor Negt, enclosed. In his congratulations to you on your 70th birthday
German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder (TAGESSPIEGEL, 1.8.04) characterized you as regarding the social role of
the intellectual as important, as wishing to mediate orientation, as being willing to engage in the scuffling of
criticism, as being willing to accept responsibility for the here and now, as demanding social intervention, and as
being unwilling to accept that existing contradictions can condemn one to the life of a mere observer. With this
Gerhard Schröder touched on all of the qualities and principles on which our project is dependent, which is why we
allow ourselves to draw your attention to our project.
We need not explain to the sociologist Oskar Negt what consequences it can have when in a branch of the
natural sciences every bit of criticism is suppressed for more than eight decades, the very existence of significant
criticism is denied, the critics are slandered and socially excluded and the public is deceived as to the true status of
a supposed fundamental and best-verified theory. What is at stake is no more and no less than the basic right of
scientific freedom in the field of research and teaching, and the maintenance of the facade of a theory, because since
1922 academic physics has “pokered” too high and this loss cannot be publicly admitted without a catastrophic loss
of face. Our documentation uncovers the trap of a supposedly “gigantic” success that wasn’t a success at all, and
our project demands free public discussion of the conditions existing in the academic field of theoretical physics
and on the true status of the special theory of relativity.
We assume that you will not become typically stiff with horror when you hear criticism of the holiest theory of
physics, but will instead support the demand for free public discussion, even in the field of theoretical physics. This
has moved us to send you, too, our work with the courteous request that you examine the problems uncovered by
our documentation and, in the event of a positive result of this examination, that you make efforts to stimulate, in
the context of your scientific and journalistic work, free public discussion of the conditions existing in the field of
theoretical physics. For purposes of your journalistic work you can make use of the texts sent to you by us at your
discretion.”
716 / 2004-12-12 - Annette SCHAVAN c/o Ministerium f. Kultus, Jugend und Sport. Stuttgart.
CD-ROM 1.2 with printout of 93 sample pages, 2nd Progress Report.
Extract:
“Please find everything else, dear Minister Schavan, enclosed. In your contribution “Politik muß den Wandel
gestalten, nicht ihm nachlaufen” [Politics Must Bring About Change, Not Chase After It] (DIE WELT, 10.10.02)
you outlined several principles that we read with great interest, because they also represent the basis of our project:
the competition of concepts; tolerance vis-à-vis the multiplicity of standpoints; an understanding of people who are
called to extol freedom, and are capable of bearing responsibility; and the importance of a society of active citizens.
“Our constant partners in dialogue are the many in our society who, beyond the limits of designing one’s own life,
play an active role in this society - in associations and groups, in citizens’ initiatives ... who make a contribution to
society as a whole.”
We need not explain to the Minister of Education and Cultural Affairs what consequences it can have when in a
branch of the natural sciences every bit of criticism is suppressed for more than eight decades, the very existence of
significant criticism is denied, the critics are slandered and socially excluded and the public is deceived as to the
true status of a supposed fundamental and best-verified theory. What is at stake is no more and no less than the basic
right of scientific freedom in the field of research and teaching, and the false maintenance of the facade of a theory,
because since 1922 academic physics has “pokered” too high and this loss cannot be publicly admitted without a
catastrophic loss of face. Our documentation uncovers the trap of a supposedly “gigantic” success that wasn’t a
success at all, and our project demands free public discussion of the conditions existing in the academic field of
theoretical physics and of the true status of the special theory of relativity. We would see our own work as having
been correctly understood if one were to regard the critics represented by our documentation as a citizens’
initiative: the critics are dependent on being your “constant partners in dialogue”, to use your formulation.”
2012
93
G. O. Mueller: STR