What fatal weakness does the "Jiang Chunxuan phenomenon" reveal?

Modern scientific research is highly specialized, and it is almost impossible for amateur researchers to make any major discoveries, let alone

make revolutionary contributions. If you think you are a scientific genius and have made major scientific discoveries, you should also follow normal academic channels and submit your paper to authoritative academic journals for publication, so that you can be recognized by the scientific community. However

There are always people who do not abide by the rules of the academic world, encounter obstacles everywhere in the academic world, and cannot get through normal channels, so they want to create public opinion

to get their achievements recognized. . These people are the ones who study Goldbach's conjecture and relativity the most. Among Chinese people, there are probably tens of thousands of geniuses who claim to have proved Goldbach's conjecture or overturned the theory of relativity, and their names are often reported in the press. In Chinese newspapers and periodicals, we often see humanities scholars and reporters who think they have better judgment than experts. They cry out for those who want to become famous through abnormal channels, and criticize the academic community for their exclusion and suppression. Amateur talent. The article "The Thought-provoking "Chiang Chunxuan Phenomenon"" published by "Southern Weekend" on July 3, 2003

also falls into this category, but in a different way.

Trying to use international academic circles to suppress Chinese academic circles.

The authors of this article, Zhang Hao from the Institute of Philosophy, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and Song from the Institute of Natural Science History, Chinese Academy of Sciences

Zhenghai, as humanities scholars, must not be able to judge for themselves " Whether the research results of "amateur mathematician" Jiang Chunxuan are established or not.

They defended Jiang Chunxuan, attacked the Chinese academic community, and believed that Jiang Chunxuan's research was "flowering within the walls and fragrant outside the walls."

The only basis for him to even win the Fields Medal, the highest award in the international mathematics community, is that it is foreign There is a journal "Algebra·

Group·Geometry" that published Jiang Chunxuan's paper. The editor-in-chief of this magazine, the founder of the American hadron theory and the mathematician Professor Santilli

highly recommends it. he. If this magazine is a well-known academic journal, and if Professor Santilli is a mathematician with great prestige and high academic status, it may still have a little fragrance (of course, individual experts’ Recognition is not much better). Qiang

Calling Professor Santilli the "founder of hadron theory" is intended to make readers think that this person's academic status is of no small importance. So

Who is Professor Santilli, and what is the "hadron theory" he created?

Ruggero Maria Santilli is an American born in Italy. She received a PhD in physics in Italy

and has done research in physics at universities in Italy and the United States. , so he is not a professional mathematician, but a physicist. Since 1983, he has separated from formal scientific research institutions and created an "Institute for Basic Research" in the United States. He has been the president since then and founded several publications. "Algebras, Groups and Geometries" is the oldest of these publications.

He created a "Hadronic Mechanics" that claimed to transcend quantum mechanics.

In his personal resume, he claims to be a unique scientist in history, capable of discovering a series of "structural generalizations" of mathematics and applying them From a series of "structural generalizations" to physics, superconductivity, chemistry, biology,

astrophysics and cosmology, his impact on contemporary science is unparalleled by anyone else

< p>Not even a partial comparison with him (see the self-introduction on the website he created www.i-b-r.org).

He is simply the greatest scientific genius in human history, even Newton, Darwin, and Einstein are inferior to them.

But if we search on google, we find that the web pages mentioning "Ruggero Maria Santilli" (Santilli) and

"Hadronic Mechanics" only have More than three hundred pages, and basically all of them appear on websites sponsored by him

or his institutions, then you can understand that those astonishing boasts are just self-promotion, and his academic status

He has not been recognized by the mainstream of academic circles, and his influence has not exceeded his small circle. The journals he founded include "Algebra·Group·Geometry" where Jiang Chunxuan published his paper, and even SCI (Science Citation) Index) are not included, and papers published there cannot even be used to assess professional titles in China. This scientific genius is actually a scientific madman. How credible can a comment from a scientific geek be? What authority does a physicist's evaluation of a mathematical paper have?

Can publishing a paper in a journal that is not even included in SCI be considered accepted by the international academic community? It is worth mentioning that this "Basic Research Institute" seems to support pseudo-scientific research. For example, I found that a Chinese Liu Kexi claimed to be a member of the American Basic Research Institute. Professor of the Department of Engineering, member of the editorial board of the American Journal of Hadrons, and director of the Beijing editorial office of the American Hadron Press, gave a copy of "Physics" written by Li Yinghua, another scientific madman who claimed to have overturned the foundation of physics. "Several Major Theoretical Issues" sent a congratulatory letter.

In any case, Jiang Chunxuan’s research has not been accepted by the international mathematical community. Goldbach’s conjecture is still recognized as unproven

and the prover of Fermat’s last theorem is recognized as a powerful person. Ers instead of Jiang Chunxuan. Jiang Chunxuan is actually not very popular abroad. He is only appreciated by alternative people and has never been recognized by the mainstream of international academic circles. It is even more of a joke to say that he is likely to win the Fields Medal.

The Fields Medal obviously cannot be awarded to unrecognized achievements, nor to people over forty years old (Jiang Chunxuan in 1961< /p>

Have graduated from college in 2010 and are at least over 60 years old). A researcher in the history of natural sciences who does not even understand the common sense of the age limit for the Fields Medal is still aggrieved that Jiang Chunxuan was not recommended. It is not an exaggeration to say that he is uneducated and incompetent. . Some websites

when reprinting this article from Southern Weekend, they added the phrase "Is there a fatal weakness in Chinese academic circles?" "The author is indeed using the "Jiang Chunxuan phenomenon" to attack the Chinese academic community. However, we can see from the above investigation that the so-called "Jiang Chunxuan phenomenon" did not expose any fatal weaknesses in the Chinese mathematics community, but it exposed many Chinese humanities scholars. His fatal weakness: he is uneducated, speaks freely, and is pretentious.