AIP to Marwan, Oct. 5, 2010:
Director Special Publications and Proceedings
American Institute of Physics
Suite 1NO1, 2 Huntington Quadrangle
Melville , NY 11747
October 5, 2010
Dr. Jan Marwan
Forschung & Entwicklung
Rudower Chaussee , 29
D-12489 Berlin, GERMANY
Dear Dr. Marwan:
Having received the technical presentation and PDF files related to the “New Energy Technology Symposium”, AIP’s Publisher’s Office has had a chance to evaluate the contents of the material presented. Based on this evaluation, AIP has decided to exercise its right under Section C.1(a) of the Publishing Contract to decline publishing the proceedings and materials as an AIP publication.
As an accommodation to the Symposium Organizers, AIP would be willing to facilitate the printing of the Volume book for the attendees of the Symposium,
including the title page, table of contents, and index, which will be otherwise prepared in accordance with the technical specifications. Because we are declining the print or electronic publication of such materials as an AIP publication, we will not seek any copyright rights, nor will AIP include its name on the book materials. If the Symposium Organizers would like to have the Volume book printed, AIP can prepare and provide such print proceedings at a reduced price of $27 per copy. This reduction in price is being offered strictly as a courtesy. The Symposium Organizers are also free to find another printer or publisher for its materials.
As an additional courtesy to assist the Symposium with finding a suitable publisher, AIP can provide you with a PDF file of the entire Volume so that you may use it at your discretion for online applications. No affiliation with AIP should be stated or implied in connection with any such publication.
Please let me know if you would like any of the books printed, and if so, how many. If you have any other questions, please feel free to contact me. I look forward to hearing from you.
Thanks and best regards,
Marwan to Colleagues, Oct. 7, 2010:
Same as you I am disappointed that at final stage our AIP conference proceedings, although already published on the AIP web site (Table of content, title, abstract, ISBN and price), has been declined. As you noticed, from the email by the AIP that I forwarded to you, the director of the AIP publishing service is missing a detailed explanation for her unexpected decision. I leave it to you to require specific details on that issue from the AIP.
Jed Rothwell suggested to publish this volume on his website and Scott Chubb suggested to publish it in his journal. I am sending both the whole volume
that I submitted to the AIP on June 29.
Marwan to AIP, Oct. 18, 2010:
AIP proceedings withdrawal - explanation required
Dear Maya Flikop and AIP colleagues,
The fact that the AIP has declined to publish our conference proceedings on Low Energy Nuclear Reactions at the very last moment has raised many questions. My colleagues are wondering what is the true reason for this unexpected decision and why was our AIP conference book advertised on the AIP web site (title, table of content, ISBN, price etc) from end of August until Oct 04 and then suddenly removed and cancelled for publication. Until now, the AIP is missing a plausible detailed explanation.
On Dr Ed Storms polite request (Oct 07) to provide an explanation Maya Flikop, the director of the AIP Special Publication and Proceedings, wrote: "After a customary review by our editorial office, the content of the planned proceedings volume entitled "Symposium on New Energy Technology" was judged not to meet the minimal editorial standards that have been established for the AIP Conference Proceedings program." In his letter (Oct 11) to Dr Dylla Ed Storms was asking for specific details but to my knowledge has not been given any answer yet. Our AIP colleagues (Maya Flikop, Dr Dylla and so on) should know that their behaviour to handle our request for detailed explanation why the content of the planned proceedings volume "was judged not to meet the minimal editorial standards" looks quite strange and more and more my colleagues and contributors to this AIP book are wondering what is really going on behind the scene.
Having been in Zürich, Switzerland, over the last couple of days I had the chance to go through my office correspondence that I have had with Maya Flikop over the last 14 months. Putting this email correspondence and the actions taken by the AIP regarding our proceedings in a chronological order, I came to a very strange conclusion, and I hope the AIP can give clarification on this matter.
* Mid of July 2009 Maya Flikop contacted me and asked me to edit and
publish the conference proceedings with the AIP based on the New
Energy Technology Symposium at the ACS in San Francisco 2010. I
let her know that I would be on holiday during much of August and
would get back to her in September.
* Mid of September 2009 when I came back from vacation I contacted
Maya Flikop saying that I need to think about her offer as I am
having another offer from the ACS (Oxford University Press) volume
3 on my desk
* On Oct 05 Maya Flikop wrote in her email: "Please let me know if a
decision has been reached regarding publication of the proceedings
of the Symposium on New Energy Technology. I look forward to
hearing from you soon." She offered me a contract that I signed.
* On June 29, I submitted the whole AIP proceedings volume right on
* During July I was waiting for any complaints, any errors I need to
correct, any minor details (the AIP editor questionnaire says that
the editor in case of any corrections required should be available
for 4 weeks after he submitted his volume). But nothing happened
except some clarification regarding Dr Pam Mosier Boss' signature
on the AIP copyright form (that Dr Mosier Boss handled on the
phone with the AIP Production editor).
* On July 18, I sent Maya Flikop an email asking to replace Prof
Nagel's introduction paper with an updated version (Prof Nagel
found 2 errors in his paper and kindly asked me to use the updated
version). Maya Flikop responded: "We will replace the paper.
Please stay in touch and let me know if I can be of any help while
the Volume is in Production."
* During the last week of July Maya Flikop directed me to the AIP
Production Editor, Tina Choy, who was in charge to design the
cover and frontmatter page (see attached - on the frontmatter page
it has been written, all papers are peer reviewed).
* On August 23, the AIP Production Editor Tina Choy wrote: "During
the final press check for CP1273, we found a file that may have a
font problem (see attached) and would like you to confirm the
content before we begin printing. Please let me know if the file
is ok as is or if you would like to submit a new file." (This was
about Prof Kim's paper who, after 2 days, sent me a corrected
* End of August the AIP advertised this book on their we site (Table
of content, title, ISBN, price of 209,-- USD etc)
* On Sept 09, I received a box sent by the AIP, a box that contains
a bunch of copies of papers as part of our conference proceedings
printed by the AIP. In my email to Maya Flikop I wrote that I had
ordered books and not paper copies (the contract includes an
offprint order of 150 AIP books to be paid by the editor and
distributed to my colleagues and contributing authors). Maya
Flikop responded immediately and wrote: "Let me check with the
* On Sept 13 an invoice of about 5500,-- USD was issued by the AIP
and sent to me that I balanced on Sept 29. On Oct 01 the AIP has
withdrawn the amount of 5500,-- USD from my account. The contract
says: "The total charge is payable to AIP in U.S. dollars at the
time the Volume is published, i.e., within 30 days from receipt of
* On Oct 05, couple of hours after the noble prize for physics was
announced in Stockholm, Maya Flikop informed me about the
withdrawal of our conference proceedings.
Again, I am quite struggling with the explanation given by Maya Flikop that "the content of the planned proceedings volume was judged not to meet the minimal editorial standards". If that's the case why, on earth, wasn't I informed during July after I had submitted the volume to the AIP? After having received the volume, within a time frame of about 4 weeks the AIP editorial board, because this volume "was judged not to meet the minimal editorial standards", should have been able to evaluate the content of the proceedings and to come to a final decision, namely to reject this book for publication. But that did not happen. Instead, we were working on the cover design, we eliminated the font problem concerning Dr Kim's paper right before print production, I received printed copies, and I was sent the invoice of 5500,-- USD issued by the AIP, and on top of all that the money had been withdrawn from my account 4 days before I was informed about the cancellation of our AIP book.
This all together does not make sense considering the explanation given by the AIP. As a consequence, there must another reason that only the AIP can clarify.
Our estimated AIP colleagues will understand my confusion, and they are very welcome to shed some light on this mystery to enlighten me. Otherwise, I would tentatively assume that this decision to finally reject our volume has nothing to do with science but is rather politically motivated. It is now your turn, dear AIP colleagues, to explicitly name the reasons why this volume has been withdrawn at that very final stage. It is your responsibility to clarify this matter for all those interested in New Energy related subjects. We would very much appreciate to discuss with you science related issues that forced you to reject our volume.
The way I see it, refusing our volume or not, giving detailed answers to our questions or not. the AIP is already totally involved in the topic of Low Energy Nuclear Reactions and cold fusion whenever this topic is debated in New Energy related discussions and whenever it comes to the question: why was this volume rejected. Which way you choose, my dear estimated AIP colleagues, you won't be able to return.
Forgive me that I've been choosing this way of communication. I have been thinking a lot over the last couple of days in Switzerland how to deal with this situation.
But the fact that I promised my colleagues an AIP book for which they came to San Francisco to give their presentations, did not leave me with any other choice. From the first moment I created this New Energy Technology Symposium at the ACS I intended to encourage the scientific debate on Low Energy Nuclear Reactions and Cold Fusion, and I want to invite you to join this discussion.
I am copying this message to Christy Frazier (Infinite Energy), Jed Rothwell, Dr Swartz, Dr Chubb (LENR web site), the ACS Press Centre, ACS Book Department, ACS Environmental Division and many of my colleagues.
Dr. Marwan Chemie
Forschung & Entwicklung
Rudower Chaussee 29
Tel: +49 30 6392 2566
FAX: +49 30 6392 2566
AIP to Marwan, Oct. 19, 2010
AIP has declined to publish the conference proceedings volume entitled "Symposium on New Energy Technology" based on an internal scientific review of the final material delivered to us. Our conference proceedings series, like most others, does not provide the authors access to an external peer review process. If the authors involved in this symposium are interested in receiving detailed reports on their work from the scientific community, we encourage them to submit their work to one of the scholarly journals in the appropriate field.
We do recognize that we have informed you of this decision late in the process, which is why, in our letter of 18 October 2010, we offered "to facilitate the printing of the Volume book for the attendees of the Symposium." We understand that you declined this offer.
AIP considers the matter closed and will not enter into further correspondence.
Mark Cassar, Ph.D.
Publisher, Journals & Technical Publications
American Institute of Physics
|Marwan to Researchers, Nov. 1, 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dear colleagues and friends,
I appreciate very much Jed's comments and I totally agree with him.
Let me make my comments before I close this subject.
There is no doubt that there is still strong resistance against our field, but it is also true that there is on the other hand a great deal of support for cold fusion. I can see it on my own, I recently started a collaboration on cold fusion with a well recognised governmental institute in Germany, we have been working closely together on analysing additional elements to palladium in my samples after electrolysis, resulting from LENR effects. This means a lot, and I hope this can be reached in many countries.
Like Jed I feel the same concerning our enemies. Let them do what they want to do. The most important issue here is that we keep on going that we move on, but this is actually what all of you have been doing over the last 20 years in your ICCF conferences and proceedings. I always admired you because of that, you created your own society, your own proceedings and you did well.
I always considered this New Energy Technology Symposium at the ACS as a support to the ICCF to encourage the scientific debate on cold fusion and to invite and involve as many people as possible. With this symposium we had a better chance to publish our work in mainstream science. I was hoping for this AIP book, it would have meant a lot for this field and especially for those who have been working in this field for more than 20 years. It is a shame how badly this science has been treated by the majority of scientists worldwide.
This AIP fiasco proves that it is not about the quality of your scientific work and results, it is about politics that finally did not make this book happen, and this fiasco strongly indicates that over all the years it has been always about politics that hampered cold fusion science to become accepted.
Concerning our AIP book we obviously have not succeeded, but on the other hand, it has become obvious to everyone interested in New Energy related subjects that cold fusion is regarded as competitor to old physics and established lobbies. In this context, I think we reached a lot, not the maximum of course, but a fairly good optimum. Therefore, I found it necessary to compose this letter (2 weeks ago) to specifically address the situation and make clear what is it about. I know the AIP's decision is final, but the way how it evolved, provides a good basis of facts and evidence that will help us to get our field accepted and recognised in the future. I am sure it is still a long way to go, but we are doing fine and have made alltogether significant progress. That's the way I see it.
Christy is working on an article about this AIP fiasco, if she needs any help, we should assist her. Our AIP volume is going to be published with JCMNS and on Jed's website. Selected papers will be published in Infinite Energy.
It is important for us now to move on. Therefore I would suggest to close this subject so that we can focus on our scientific work and prepare the next conference meeting. I hope that in a half years time the ACS will show interest in publishing with us.