Topic

Bildung

10 petitions

Update posted 1 month ago

Petition to Prof. Karsten Danzmann karsten.danzmann@aei.mpg.de, Prof. Martin Stratmann, Prof. Johanna Wanka, Bundesministerin für Bildung und Forschung, information@bmbf.bund.de, Stephan Weil, Prof. Hermann Nicolai

Prof. Karsten Danzmann, beantworten Sie bitte 3 Fragen über das LIGO Experiment!

PETITION TEXT IN GERMAN AND ENGLISH   Das Albert Einstein Institut hat sich maßgeblich durch die Entwicklung der Detektoren an das #LIGO Experiment in den USA beteiligt, das kürzlich in den Massenmedien als sensationellen Nachweis von Gravitationswellen nach den Vorhersagen Albert Einsteins gefeiert wurde. Es bestehen jedoch in der internationalen wissenschaftlichen Gemeinde sehr große Zweifel darüber, dass die Messgenauigkeit, die erforderlich gewesen wäre um Gravitationswellen zu registrieren, nach heutigem Stand der Messtechnik überhaupt erreicht werden kann: Die LIGO-Detektoren sollen eine Verschiebung der 40 kg-Spiegel des Interferometers um 10^(-18) m durch den Druck einer Gravitationswelle, die aus der Verschmelzung von zwei Schwarzen Löchern in 1.3 Milliarden Lichtjahren Entfernung stammte, am 14. Sept. 2015 während ca. 0.2 Sekunden registriert haben. Hochskaliert um den Faktor 10^(13) entspricht diese Verschiebung des Spiegels einer Haaresbreite (10 Mikron) in Relation zur Distanz bis zum nächsten Fixstern (4 Lichtjahre)! Ein solcher sensationeller Fortschritt bei der Messgenauigkeit in der Laserinterferometrie, der für sich allein einen Nobelpreis verdient hätte, wurde jedoch vorher noch nie nachgewiesen: Die bisher höchste relative Genauigkeit, die experimentell nachgewiesen wurde (Mößbauergenauigkeit), liegt um den Faktor 1 Million unterhalb der angegebenen Leistung der LIGO-Detektoren! Vor diesem Hintergrund ist die Skepsis aus der Fachwelt verständlich und berechtigt.  Das Unbehagen der Fachgemeinde hinsichtlich der angegebenen Genauigkeit wird dadurch verstärkt, dass das Albert Einstein Institut sich nachhaltig weigert, Transparenz über die Eichung der Messanlage herbeizuführen, die jedoch einzig den experimentellen Nachweis bringen kann, dass diese Genauigkeit überhaupt möglich ist. Wie es einer Bürgeranfrage nach Informationsfreiheitsgesetz zu entnehmen ist, die ich Anfang April 2016 an das Albert Einstein Institut zusammen mit dem fachlich qualifizierten Physiker Dr. Wolfgang Engelhardt gestellt habe, gibt es Unregelmäßigkeiten bzw. Unstimmigkeiten über das vor Durchführung der Messungen angewandte Eichungsverfahren, siehe: Bürgeranfrage über das LIGO-Experiment zum Nachweis von Gravitationswellen Die gestellten Fragen wurden nicht beantwortet, dafür hat der angesprochene Prof. Karsten Danzmann in unzumutbarer Weise die Privatperson von Dr. Wolfgang Engelhardt angegriffen, Beleidigungen und Diffamierungen gegen ihn ausgesprochen, sowie auch angekündigt, dass er sich über das LIGO Experiment nicht mehr äußern wird (Dokument 16 in der oben verlinkten Bürgeranfrage). Die Bürger und Steuerzahler dürfen nicht hinnehmen, dass sachliche und berechtigte Fragen zur Klärung eines extrem teuren Experiments, das mit Millionen Euro aus der Steuerkasse finanziert wurde, nicht beantwortet werden, sowie ein Antragssteller diskreditiert wird.  Ich habe daher am 05.07.2016 Prof. #KarstenDanzmann erneut gebeten, im Rahmen des Informationsfreiheitsgesetzes folgende Fragen zu beantworten (Dokument Nr. 22 in der oben verlinkten Bürgeranfrage): 1) Im „Discovery Paper“ PRL 116, 061102 (2016) wird eine einzige Eichungsmethode für das LIGO-Experiment mit dem Satz beschrieben: "The detector output is calibrated in strain by measuring its response to test mass motion induced by photon pressure from a modulated calibration laser beam [63]." Referenz [63] bezieht sich auf einen unveröffentlichten e-Print und enthält keine Daten. Wo sind die einschlägigen Daten - also "strain" als Funktion von "laser power" - veröffentlicht?   2) Im Jahre 2003 wurde dieses beschriebene Eichungsverfahren der LIGO-Meßanlage durchgeführt, wobei die erzielte und gemessene Spiegelauslenkung eher bei 10^(-15) m als bei 10^(-18) m lag. Die Daten stehen der Öffentlichkeit zur Verfügung (vgl. Papier von Bruursema: Technical Document LIGO-T030266-00 - D 9/22/03). Wurde seit 2003 diese beschriebene Eichungsmethode der LIGO-Meßanlage erneut durchgeführt und eine Verbesserung der Genauigkeit dokumentiert? Wann? Von welchen Autoren? Wo sind die Daten?   3) Falls diese im Discovery Paper referierte Eichungsmethode der LIGO-Meßanlage seit 2003 nicht wiederholt wurde, ist es vorgesehen, sie nachträglich durchzuführen, um zu dokumentieren, dass die durch die Gravitationswelle GW150914 induzierte und gemessene Spiegelbewegung durch definierten Strahlungsdruck in gleicher Weise hervorgerufen wird?   Bitte unterstützen Sie diese Petition durch Ihre Unterschrift, um diesen wissenschaftlichen Missstand zu beseitigen und die Rechte der Bürger und Steuerzahler durchzusetzen. Vielen Dank!     ----------------------------------------------PETITION TEXT IN ENGLISH Prof. Karsten Danzmann, please answer 3 questions on the measurement of gravitational waves in connection with the LIGO Experiment.   Through the development of the detectors, the Albert Einstein Institute has participated decisively in the LIGO Experiment in the USA, which was recently celebrated in the mass media as having provided sensational proof of gravitational waves, in keeping with the predictions of Albert Einstein. There are, however, very great doubts in the international scientific community as to whether the measurement accuracy required to register gravitational waves can be achieved at all by current measurement techniques and technology. On 14th Sept. 2015, during a period of approx. 0.2 seconds, the LIGO detectors are supposed to have registered a displacement of the 40 kg mirror of the interferometer by 10^(-18) m due to the pressure of a gravitational wave stemming from the fusion of two black holes at a distance of 1.3 billion light years. Scaled up by a factor of 10^(13), this corresponds to a displacement of the mirror by a hair's breadth (10 microns) in relationship to the distance to the next fixed star (4 light years)! Yet such a sensational advance in measurement accuracy in the field of laser interferometry, which in its own right would be worthy of a Nobel Prize, has never been previously proven. The highest level of relative precision experimentally proven to date (Mossbauer precision) lies below the given performance of the LIGO detectors by a factor of 1 million! Against this background the scepticism of the experts is both understandable and justified. The discomfort of the professional community regarding the given precision is further aggravated by the fact that the Albert Einstein Institute persistently refuses to provide the transparency as to the calibration of the measuring equipment that alone can constitute the experimental proof that this precision is at all possible. As can be seen from a citizens' enquiry   in keeping with the German Freedom of Information Act ["Informationsfreiheitsgesetz"]   that I prepared together with the technically qualified physicist Dr. Wolfgang Engelhardt and sent to the Albert Einstein Institute at the beginning of April 2016, there are irregularities or disagreements as to the calibration procedures applied before the undertaking of the measurements. See:  Bürgeranfrage über das LIGO-Experiment zum Nachweis von Gravitationswellen [Citizens' Enquiry as to the LIGO Experiment for Proof of Gravitational Waves]   The questions asked were not answered. Instead the addressee, Prof. Karsten Danzmann, Director at the Albert Einstein Institute and co-author of the publication of the LIGO Experiment, attacked the person of Dr. Wolfgang Engelhardt in an unacceptable way, with insults and defamation. He also announced that he would make no further comment on the LIGO Experiment (Document 16 in the above-linked citizens' enquiry). The citizens and taxpayers should not be compelled to accept that objective and justified questions aimed at clarification of an extremely expensive experiment, that was financed with million of euros from taxpayers' money, may remain unanswered, and that an enquirer can be discredited in this way. For this reason, on 05.07.2016 I again asked Prof. Karsten Danzmann, in the context of the Freedom of Information Act, to answer the following questions (Document No. 23 in the above-linked citizens' enquiry): 1) In the "Discovery Paper" PRL 116, 061102 (2016) a single calibration method for the LIGO Experiment is described with the sentence: "The detector output is calibrated in strain by measuring its response to test mass motion induced by photon pressure from a modulated calibration laser beam [63]."  Reference [63] relates to an unpublished e-print and contains no data. Where has the relevant data - or "strain" as a function of "laser power" - been published?   2) In the year 2003 the calibration procedure described was undertaken for the LIGO measuring equipment, whereby the mirror excursion achieved and measured was rather 10^(-15) m than 10^(-18) m. This data is available to the public (cf. the paper by Bruursema: Technical Document LIGO-T030266-00 - D 9/22/03).   Has the calibration method described for the LIGO measuring Equipment been carried out again since 2003 and has an improvement in the precision been documented? When? By which authors? Where is this data?   3) If this calibration method for the LIGO measuring equipment reported in the Discovery Paper has not been repeated since 2003, is it foreseen that this be undertaken subsequently, so as to document that the measured movement of the mirror induced by the gravitational wave GW150914 is produced in the same way by a defined radiation pressure?   Please support this petition, which is aimed at correcting this scientific anomaly and at enforcing the rights of citizens and taxpayers, by adding your signature. Thank you!  

Jocelyne Lopez
600 supporters
Update posted 3 months ago

Petition to Roman Catholic Archdiocese Munich and Freising

Newly Discovered Birgittine Manuscripts at Risk: Monastery Altomünster, Germany

DiscoveryThe Birgittine scholars who met in Altomünster for a symposium in October 2015 did not expect to discover an unknown library containing uncataloged books including illuminated cantus sororum manuscripts, normative texts, and devotional literature dating back even before the founding of this monastery at the end of the 15th century. Art historian Eva Lindqvist Sandgren and musicologists Michelle Urberg and Karin Strinnholm Lagergren spent the day following the symposium exploring and photographing the collection. Volker Schier and Corine Schleif immediately sought and received permission from the prioress Sister Apollonia Buchinger to have the collection assessed, and began to procure funding for a preliminary inventory and catalog, ClosureThen equally unexpectedly in December 2015 the Vatican announced the closure of this papal monastery. Shortly thereafter the dissolution began. This still working monastery, housed in a historic architectural complex including a nuns’ gallery and other specifically Birgittine details, the last major work of the rococo architect Johann Michael Fischer, with furnishings, was closed to scholars and journalists. Internally, locks and steel doors were installed prohibiting even the remaining nuns from entering the chapter house, the library and other portions of the monastery. Many significant works of art were removed from their long-standing locations in what remains of the nuns’ tract.See news articles: http://www.sueddeutsche.de/kultur/forschungskrimi-der-buecherschatz-in-der-einkaufstuete-1.3132831http://bigstory.ap.org/article/81cd01800c3f49bab3f959ffe4171863 HistoryThe Birgittenkloster, Altomünster, is one of only three remaining foundations from the original order founded by Saint Birgitta of Sweden in the 14th century. Altomünster is the only Birgittine monastery continuously inhabited since its initial settlement. It is believed that the present library constitutes over 500 books, including manuscripts and incunabula, as well as associated archival sources. With at least 14 late-medieval antiphoners, possibly as many as 30 processionals, and a large collection of 18th-century liturgical manuscripts, the collection promises to more than double the known sources documenting the performance of Birgittine chant. The unique illuminations, made for or by nuns, will serve to extend current understanding of women’s religious practices during the late Middle Ages and early modern periods. PetitionWe, the undersigned, ask the papal administration of monastic orders and the diocese of Munich and Freising to guarantee the preservation and protection of the ensemble of manuscripts, printed books and associated archival documents of the Birgittine monastery at Altomünster. The protection of this collection and scholarly access to it must be guaranteed for present and future generations. Any cleaning or restoration must be undertaken by specialists in compliance with current guidelines of the Bayerische Amt für Denkmalpflege and the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek and cataloging according to the standards set by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.

Volker Schier
2,322 supporters
Update posted 5 months ago

Petition to Jonathan Friedland (Netflix Chief Communications Officer), Benjamin Statler Jr., Reed Hastings

Remove the fictitious movie "Soaked in Bleach" from the market

Dear Mr. Statler, We are a bunch of Nirvana fans who saw your movie "Soaked in Bleach". It has come to light that three experts in the movie were heavily edited to fit into the murder narrative. The truth is that Kurt Cobain took his own life. This case was investigated by several experts and overlooked by independent experts. Krist Novoselic spoke out what he thinks about the movie, as well did many others like Nirvana's first manager Ryan Aigner. To this day Tom Grant has not presented any valid evidence that shows that Kurt Cobain was murdered in a conspiracy plot improvised by his wife Courtney Love Cobain. Tom Grant strongly plays with hearsay and stories that do not match with content in the Seattle Police Department reports on the case. Furthermore it appears that Tom Grant violated very serious and important laws criminalizing electronic eavesdropping. And you had no problem to use this material in "Soaked in Bleach" (in an edited form). People who will watch your movie will clearly in large numbers mistake the fictitious documentary (as well mentioned in the end credits of your very own movie) as a true event and continue to "fight" for something that does exist only in a few heads like Tom Grant's or Richard Lee's. Those people have never been questioned about their motives to see a woman and her supposed conspirers go to prison for a crime they didn't commit. Since 22 years these people experience immense bullying on the internet (and on a few occasions in real life, too) by people who believe in the murder narrative. And even Kurt Cobain's daughter is the victim of the same terrible behaviour of "Soaked in Bleach" fans. As if it is not enough to already have lost a loved one by suicide. But to get wrongly accused of murder without valid evidence is a step too far. Especially when the suicide is consistent with the investigation of the Seattle Police Department Homicide Unit and independent experts who were shown in your movie but their information was omitted. We would like you to rethink your "entertaining work" that didn't include journalistic work. Many people are not aware of what a documentary drama is. It is more drama than a documentary. Please Mr. Statler, remove this movie from the market. It is a disservice to the general public by misrepresenting the facts of the case. Furthermore we would not be disappointed if you would present the entire interviews from the experts in an uncut form. The editings in the movie are now public knowledge. But the content of the omitted information is still not fully available to educate the public about the #CobainCase and to restore the reputation of the entire Seattle Police Department Homicide Unit and edited experts and friends of Cobain in your movie. Further links for understanding the petition: http://spdblotter.seattle.gov/2014/03/31/detectives-reviews-cobain-case-which-remains-closed/ http://www.cobainevidenceblog.com/uncategorized/carole-chaski-linguist-in-soaked-in-bleach-greenhouse-note-metaphor-for-kurt-cobains-death/ http://www.cobainevidenceblog.com/uncategorized/i-tape-all-my-calls-considerations-bearing-on-tom-grants-1994-eavesdropping/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soaked_in_Bleach#Controversy http://knowsnotwhatitmeans.blogspot.com https://www.instagram.com/soakedinbullshit/ http://www.vh1.com/news/32913/soaked-in-bleach-review/ http://www.alternativenation.net/kurt-cobain-conspiracy-theorists-backtracking-murder-claims/ http://www.nytimes.com/1985/02/14/arts/tv-docudrama-questions-of-ethics.html http://www.museum.tv/eotv/docudrama.htm Thank you very much. We are looking forward to an adult like reaction from you, Mr. Statler, in the same way like you demand it from the Seattle Police Department.

Jan Röhmermann
63 supporters