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

Chapter 9: The Thought Experiment
On the basis of these three reproaches (peculiar, irritated and envious) you draw the conclusion that: “In the
matter of Einstein, Gehrcke had thoroughly deceived himself.“
When someone establishes a peculiar collection, is “irritated” by a theory and by the press razzamatazz and is
also himself envious of the razzamatazz, then he has thoroughly deceived himself as to the theory. You have to
agree,
(1) that you have reached your judgement without having reported even a single criticism from Gehrcke’s
standpoint to the reader, and without giving the response or refutation of the relativists!
This in itself is something we would describe as thoroughly non-objective. But that’s not all.
(2) No reference is made to the fact that in 1924 Gehrcke had published a very extensive selection (approx. 100
pages) taken from just these newspaper cuttings with criticism of the theories of relativity, under the title “Die
Massensuggestion der Relativitätstheorie” [The Mass Suggestion of the Relativity Theory].
(3) Your unfairness goes still further. On the great FAS double page one of the three objective complexes of the
exhibition is the collection “Gehrcke”. Of each of the other two cutting collections several examples were
highlighted at great length, whereas of Gehrcke’s collection only a smaller section was shown - and this consisted,
grotesquely enough, of a photo of Albert Einstein, of all persons - next to which there was a second, stamp-sized
caricature of Albert Einstein and Shaw! From Gehrcke’s critical text cuttings, there was not a single example. It
appeared as though Gehrcke had collected press photos of his idol.
(...)
At the time of publication of your contribution in December 2002 the FAZ editorial office had already had the
complete manuscript print of our documentation for a year. Since then we have sent our documentation and the two
progress reports to several authors of your editorial office. We have no idea at all, however, whether and how the
internal editorial procedures at the FAZ / FAS pass on information from one field or person to another, which is
why we would now appreciate a bit of help with the postal dispatch list (second progress report).
From the 3800 or so critical publications referred to we have summarized the criticism contained in approx. 130
theoretical errors (Chapter 2), without any claim to completeness, and with everything in a still very provisional
state of revision. We do not know how many of the critical publications and of the standpoints contained therein
were known to you in December 2002, though we now hope, with the present documentation, to add several points
to the previous status. Please take the trouble to confirm that the critics were and are by no means only “irritated”
and/or “envious”, but that they have indeed made critical arguments against the special theory of relativity. And
please also convince yourself of the fact that this criticism has not been given mention, so far, in the context of
official physics, but has instead been hushed up, and where necessary slandered and suppressed, that is has by no
means been accepted anywhere and that it has, for this reason, also not been discussed and therefore cannot have
been argumentatively dispelled. As a result, the theory can on no account have acquired the status claimed by the
physics propaganda of being the “best-proven theory of physics”. Only after you have convinced yourselves of the
existence of this state of affairs, would we respectfully request of you a journalistic contribution hereto.”
814 / 2005-04-11 - Prof. Heiner KEUPP c/o Universität München / Fakultät 11. München.
CD-ROM 1.2 with printout of 93 sample pages, 2nd Progress Report.
Extract:
“Please find everything else, dear Professor Keupp, enclosed. Since, according to the information available on
the Internet, the focus of your work involves you in “commitment” and “participation” and since, in your interview
with Anne Siemens in the SZ (31.7.04), you have addressed the subjects of “Reforms” supporting principles, judgements
and demands in respect of, for example,
- fundamental change in the political culture, more seriousness, and more honesty;
- the typical citizen is invited to think over reforms and to participate;
- government overlooks possibilities of active involvement of citizens;
- most needed is intellectual, reflective reforms;
- critical public debate;
- after Peter Bieri, the skills of freedom must be learned;
we believe that the problems uncovered by our documentation and our thought experiment on the effects of
critical ideas in society might interest you, which is why we allow ourselves to send you our work results. Since
your ideas as to the reforms necessary more or less match those of our research project, we need not explain to you
the peculiarity of the continuing suppression of every bit of criticism of a certain physical theory for almost a
2012
111
G. O. Mueller: STR