Scribd Logo
Загрузить

Добро пожаловать в Scribd!

  • "Scientific" Germany: Cheating DFG and The Ombudsmans-Charlatans

    Загружено:

    Rostyslav SKLYAR, Dr. (Eng)
    112 просмотров4 страницы
    The main idea of the article titled "Outside Looking In: Nanotube Transistor Intracellular Sensors" which was compiled at Harvard University (USA) and supported from a DFG Forschungsstipendium STR1119_2 titled "Modification of silicon based nanowires by selective self-limiting surface reactions" for Professor Dr.-Ing. Steffen Strehle at Universität Ulm had been stolen from my paper “A CNTFET-based nanowired induction two-way transducers” (see more at issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/-nwintracellsens12). At last received after 16 months decision #I-PRO-29.05.07 is based on some old rumours inside the DFG itself (pages 1-3, and issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/shapingthefuture ). Also the procedure of consideration the cases by the "Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft" appears completely cheating, without any relation to the highest standards of integrity, accuracy and fairness, as confirmed by issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/lettersl__wer . Hovewer the Ombudsman at Universität Ulm (Prof. Dr. Lisa Wiesmüller and Prof. em. Dr. Hanns-Georg Kilian) prefer to reply by a fudged piece of paper (page 4)! For further reading: It means that an already described gate output bioelectronic transducer ( www.isrn.com/journals/nanotechnology/2012/102783 )has been renamed into some "an active silicon nanotube transistor, ANTT probe", as a result my invention was appropriated in an extremely impudent manner. Also this is further development of their previous impertinent cheating which has been revealed at issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/harvard_mit . This idea was originally published about ten years ago (see www.frontiersin.org/profile/publications/22627947 for the said paper, also its PDF at www.box.net/shared/dab9b3959a47c6108e72 ) (Fig. 2 is meant), and patented in Ukraine (see its PDF at www.frontiersin.org/profile/publications/22628574 . But they copied my FET based transducer of the channel currents into gate voltages as "an ANTT probe inserted into a cell and recording an intracellular action potential (V/cell vs time, t) as a conductance (G) change in the active FET region between S/D contacts" (see their description for Fig. 1 at issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/-nwintracellsens12 ).

    Оригинальное название

    "Scientific" Germany: cheating DFG and the Ombudsmans-charlatans

    Авторское право

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Доступные форматы

    PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

    Этот документ был вам полезен?

    Это неприемлемый материал?

    Пожаловаться на этот документ
    The main idea of the article titled "Outside Looking In: Nanotube Transistor Intracellular Sensors" which was compiled at Harvard University (USA) and supported from a DFG Forschungsstipendium STR1119_2 titled "Modification of silicon based nanowires by selective self-limiting surface reactions" for Professor Dr.-Ing. Steffen Strehle at Universität Ulm had been stolen from my paper “A CNTFET-based nanowired induction two-way transducers” (see more at issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/-nwintracellsens12). At last received after 16 months decision #I-PRO-29.05.07 is based on some old rumours inside the DFG itself (pages 1-3, and issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/shapingthefuture ). Also the procedure of consideration the cases by the "Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft" appears completely cheating, without any relation to the highest standards of integrity, accuracy and fairness, as confirmed by issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/lettersl__wer . Hovewer the Ombudsman at Universität Ulm (Prof. Dr. Lisa Wiesmüller and Prof. em. Dr. Hanns-Georg Kilian) prefer to reply by a fudged piece of paper (page 4)! For further reading: It means that an already described gate output bioelectronic transducer ( www.isrn.com/journals/nanotechnology/2012/102783 )has been renamed into some "an active silicon nanotube transistor, ANTT probe", as a result my invention was appropriated in an extremely impudent manner. Also this is further development of their previous impertinent cheating which has been revealed at issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/harvard_mit . This idea was originally published about ten years ago (see www.frontiersin.org/profile/publications/22627947 for the said paper, also its PDF at www.box.net/shared/dab9b3959a47c6108e72 ) (Fig. 2 is meant), and patented in Ukraine (see its PDF at www.frontiersin.org/profile/publications/22628574 . But they copied my FET based transducer of the channel currents into gate voltages as "an ANTT probe inserted into a cell and recording an intracellular action potential (V/cell vs time, t) as a conductance (G) change in the active FET region between S/D contacts" (see their description for Fig. 1 at issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/-nwintracellsens12 ).

    Авторское право:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Скачайте в формате PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    112 просмотров4 страницы

    "Scientific" Germany: Cheating DFG and The Ombudsmans-Charlatans

    Загружено:

    Rostyslav SKLYAR, Dr. (Eng)
    The main idea of the article titled "Outside Looking In: Nanotube Transistor Intracellular Sensors" which was compiled at Harvard University (USA) and supported from a DFG Forschungsstipendium STR1119_2 titled "Modification of silicon based nanowires by selective self-limiting surface reactions" for Professor Dr.-Ing. Steffen Strehle at Universität Ulm had been stolen from my paper “A CNTFET-based nanowired induction two-way transducers” (see more at issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/-nwintracellsens12). At last received after 16 months decision #I-PRO-29.05.07 is based on some old rumours inside the DFG itself (pages 1-3, and issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/shapingthefuture ). Also the procedure of consideration the cases by the "Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft" appears completely cheating, without any relation to the highest standards of integrity, accuracy and fairness, as confirmed by issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/lettersl__wer . Hovewer the Ombudsman at Universität Ulm (Prof. Dr. Lisa Wiesmüller and Prof. em. Dr. Hanns-Georg Kilian) prefer to reply by a fudged piece of paper (page 4)! For further reading: It means that an already described gate output bioelectronic transducer ( www.isrn.com/journals/nanotechnology/2012/102783 )has been renamed into some "an active silicon nanotube transistor, ANTT probe", as a result my invention was appropriated in an extremely impudent manner. Also this is further development of their previous impertinent cheating which has been revealed at issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/harvard_mit . This idea was originally published about ten years ago (see www.frontiersin.org/profile/publications/22627947 for the said paper, also its PDF at www.box.net/shared/dab9b3959a47c6108e72 ) (Fig. 2 is meant), and patented in Ukraine (see its PDF at www.frontiersin.org/profile/publications/22628574 . But they copied my FET based transducer of the channel currents into gate voltages as "an ANTT probe inserted into a cell and recording an intracellular action potential (V/cell vs time, t) as a conductance (G) change in the active FET region between S/D contacts" (see their description for Fig. 1 at issuu.com/r_sklyar/docs/-nwintracellsens12 ).

    Авторское право:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Скачайте в формате PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    из 4

    Oct.

    1, 2014
    Re: I-PRO-29.05.07 [complaint]

    Dear Dr. Httemann,


    The procedure for the treatment of scientific misconduct by DFG appears
    completely subjective, without any relation to the highest standards of
    integrity, accuracy and fairness.
    First of all, the said "publicly presented concepts" were known to the DFG auditorium
    only, which is confirmed by absence of any citation in further publications. That is why I
    can not be sure in the degree of similarity between the mentioned old presentation and
    the plagiarized paper. Moreover, if even this is true, my method was presented in Sept.
    1999, as a submission titled 'A n SFET Based Transducer of Nerve Impulses (The Living
    Being-Machine Interface Scheme as an Intelligent System's Term)' to Shaping the
    Future project of EXPO 2000 HANNOVER (enclosed please find an evident PDF).
    Secondly, it does not clear, how my arguments could "haven't been specific enough" if I
    have answered your question completely and any your further enquiries were not
    submitted during more than a year? Nevertheless, I am still agree to satisfy your
    requirements in the necessary details.

    A key transducing element which was defined in the poster as "SFET" had
    been presented in XIII IMEKO World Congress and described in the
    relevant

    publication:

    'A cryogenic induction magnetometer', Proceedings of XIII IMEKO World Congress


    (International Measurement Confederation), September 5-9, 1994, Torino, Italy, pp.
    2377-2382.

    Yours sincerely,

    Rostyslav SKLYAR, Dr. (Eng)


    Mr. Rostyslav SKLYAR, Verchratskogo st. 15-1, Lviv 79010 Ukraine
    T +38 032 2762432 E sklyar@tsp.lviv.ua www.tsp.lviv.ua/~sklyar/sklyar

    Prof. em. Dr. Hanns-Georg Kilian


    Abteilung Experimentelle Physik
    Ombudsmann

    D-89069 Ulm, 12. Jul. 201 3


    Albert-Einstein Allee II
    Tel. 0731 502 6072
    Fax. 0731 502 3036
    mail : hanns-georg.kilain@physik.uni-ulm.de

    An Professor Dr. Karl Joachim Ebeling


    (Prsident der Universitt Ulm)

    Betreff: Von R. Sklyar eine ungerechtfertigt scharf formulierte Beschuldigung einer


    Urheber-Verletzung.von Herrn Jun. Prof. Dr. Steffen Strehle.
    Sehr geehrter Prsident,
    lieber Herr Ebeling,
    Da Herr R. Sklyar unstatthaft "universitts-ffentlich" Herrn Jun. Prof. Dr.-lng. Steffen
    Strehle (Institut fr Elektronische Bauelemente und Schaltungen) schriftlich schwerwiegendes
    wissenschaftliches Fehlverhalten vorwirft, finden wir es am besten, jeden der Empfnger ber
    das Ergebnis unserer grndlichen Untersuchung zu unterrichten.

    Die pflichtgeme berprfung durch mich als Ombudsmann in Absprache mit Herrn Strehle
    liefert den sicheren Nachweis, dass die Anschuldigung von Herrn R. Sklyar nicht haltbar ist
    (siehe Einzelheiten im Anhang). Herrn Jun. Prof. Dr.-lng. Steffen Strehle wird daher von mir
    als Ombudsmann der Universitt Ulm unwiderruflich bescheinigt, dass der Vorwurf des
    schwerwiegenden wissenschaftlichen Fehlverhaltens nicht zutrifft.

    Mit besten Gren.


    Ihr

    Вам также может понравиться