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

Chapter 9: The Thought Experiment
(2) The violations had already begun in the year 2001. But it is only since May 2008 that the spying affair has
devastated Telekom. After only 7 years, then, the matter was exposed - whereas the relativity catastrophe has still
not been exposed after 85 years, and 7 years after the publication of our documentation.
(3) On 8. June the FAZ reported that the head, Obermann, “expected ... more courage from the work force to
stand up against possibly inappropriate behaviour on the part of their superiors. He encouraged the employees not
to remain silent in critical cases, but to pass on any tips they may have. “Blind following of orders” could not be
accepted. A “cultural change in thinking” was necessary.” We have been speaking out “courageously” since 2001.
A female spokesman for the German Home Office even demanded a “stronger growth of awareness” for the
importance of data protection (taz, 31.5.08).
The scandal now at least makes it possible after 7 years: courage, a cultural change in thinking, and growth of
awareness. When things get tight, people become philosophical! Who will demand a cultural change in theoretical
physics?
(4) The government exercises no control. No one can force it to. As ever. It first exercises control when it is too
late, when the only possibility left is clarification. It rejects its own share of the blame up to the present day. We can
wait.
(5) The moral decay in a state-owned company since the year 2000 is the subject of complaint. In theoretical
physics this decay took place in the year 1922. To the denounced “poison in the food” there is an exact parallel in
theoretical physics: “lies in the theory”. Adherence to law and order was abolished for theoretical physics in 1922.
(6) The “godlike status” in the self-consciousness of the powers that be represents the most striking common
ground in both cases. As the only source to do so, the magazine “SPIEGEL” (9.6.08 - No. 24) addressed a
fundamental status of all of those responsible for the scandal: “They are all governed by fear”. This too is
astonishingly similar to the situation in theoretical physics, which in 1922 had staked too high a bet and, in fear of
having its bluff called, opted for a double swindle. Telekom no longer has this alternative, because it can no longer
bring the press into line.
(7) Result: Godlike attitudes, the break with basic rights, violations against further laws, moral decay, refusal of
control by the government - nothing new in the world of academic theoretical physics.
But there are also great differences. The number of those affected by the Telekom scandal is readily calculable.
The element of the double swindle is missing, as is the bringing-into-line of the press. The relativity catastrophe has
already lasted ten times as long and is much more momentous. Those involved will look back longingly at the
comfortable pigsty of the Telekom affair, when our academic league at last has its big day. The future enlightenment
of the relativity catastrophe will certainly be as “brutal as possible”.
2012
3. Comparison of the Relativity Catastrophe
with the Siemens Bribery Affair
Since 2002 - at least - the firm of Siemens has paid bribes in exchange for orders. This is seen as corruption and
it can also constitute a criminal offence. The firm has an anti-corruption representative. He notified the management
board: “We are talking about criminal offences” (FAZ, 18.7.08).
Technically speaking the bribe money was paid out as fees to “consultants” via bogus contracts. The source of
the bribe money was excessive prices 20 or 30 percent above the normal (FAZ, 29.7.08): “Exorbitant prices were
demanded in order to bribe those responsible.” The money was recorded in “slush funds”. Accounts used for
making payments were opened abroad, also private accounts by Siemens employees. In some cases cash was also
transported abroad by the suitcase, so as to leave no traces with these accounts. Already in 2003 the commissioned
firm of auditors and accountants had detected cash payments without associated proof and has spoken with the
financial directors and with the supervisory board. Certain other payments had been confirmed as being proper and
orderly. The firm of auditors feels itself deceived.
For purposes of coming to terms with the situation the important question is, who in the management board
ordered the bribe money and the keeping of slush funds. So far, no one has taken the blame. For this reason the
public prosecutor must investigate.
17
G. O. Mueller: STR