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

Chapter 9: The Thought Experiment
and if one compares these with the total number of answers received
3 from member of the Bundestag,
2 from journalists,
1 from a professor in Maryland,
1 from a HU professor,
1 from a constitutional-law teacher and
1 from the Office of the Federal President,
i.e. 9 answers, one arrives at a percentage of responses to dispatches of (9 : 2723 =) 0.0033; exactly a third of
one percent! This result is quantitatively not only meagre, it is shattering.
By repeated dispatches to the same addresses, the number of the addressees is admittedly smaller than the
number of dispatches: 2534. If one also discards the 138 libraries and approx. 50 dissidents, there remain approx.
2346 addressees worldwide from whom one would have wished to receive confirmation of receipt. If one now
calculates the percentage rate of answers per addressees on this basis one has (9 : 2346 =) 0.0038 - still just a good
third of a percent.
If one also discards those addressees who received dispatches only before the availability of the easier
communication options via our partners (this number can only be roughly estimated at 240), 2106 addressees
remain. Given these easy communication options, one might at least have expected confirmation of receipt. On the
basis of this minimum number the percentage rate of responses increases to (9 : 2106 =) 0.0043, i.e. almost half a
percent. This quantitatively extreme answering rate lies close to zero and needs to be interpreted as such.
The libraries, which are not included in the current comparison, will be treated below as a separate group.
The qualitative evaluation of the reactions received to date is quite a different one. It must, after all, be
evaluated as a first great success for the criticism of the special theory of relativity since 1922, that on 14th August
2006, for the very first time, a member of the German Bundestag and Federal Minister had her ministry officially
confirm receipt of (and answer) the open letter of 28th October 2005 and thereby also the accompanying
documentation on CD-ROM. We hereby openly express our thanks for this decisive first step towards a normal,
businesslike interaction of the government with the criticism of the theory.
It remains to be seen whether and when the ministry can bring the academic scientists to engage in just as
normal and legal interactions with the critical minority.
The answer ordered by Ms. Schavan is remarkable for a number of reasons. With her double function as a
member of the Bundestag and as a minister, both the legislative and the executive spheres can be documented as
having been informed. The fact that her answer only came around 10 months after receipt of our “Open Letter” and
only after subsequent enquiry by Ms. Lopez possibly allows one to see the silence of the other members of the
Bundestag in a different light, if one wishes to assume that a discussion had possibly taken place amongst the 614
members of the Bundestag and their parliamentary factions to the effect that the minister, via her ministry, might
have an answer sent on behalf of all of them. The decisive letter of 14th August 2006 from Prof. Jürgen Richter
reads as follows:
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:04:08 +0200Subject:
G. O. Müller Research Group; Criticism of the Theory of Relativity
From: “Richter, Juergen /711”
To: “Jocelyne Lopez”
Dear Ms. Lopez
You sent an e-mail on 31st July to the Federal Minister of Education and Research, Dr. Annette Schavan,
Member of the German Bundestag, under the heading “The Freedom of Science in Keeping with Article 5 of the
German Constitution”. Federal Minister Dr. Schavan sends you her thanks and has passed the letter on to the
Section “Naturwissenschaftliche Grundlagenforschung” [Basic Scientific Research] in the BMBF for response.
It should first of all be said that the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, on principle, does not issue
any statement on scientific theses and theories. The results of scientific research are to be discussed amongst the
scientific experts themselves. This also applies to the criticism of the special theory of relativity of A. Einstein from
the year 1905, put forward by the G. O. Müller Research Group.
26
G. O. Mueller: STR 2012