March 15, 2021
Dear Professor Michael Thoennessen,
Thank you for asking my opinion in your Survey on the current editorial condition of APS journals which I did provide. Hoping not to abuse of your courtesy, I additionally provide these comments in an open form because, in my view, the impact of APS publications on the future of our technologically based Country is so crucial to be of direct relevance for all True Americans.
As you may know, I have dedicated my research life to the study of the historical view by Albert Einstein, which he released jointly with his students B. Podolsky and N. Rosen, in Phys. Rev. Vol. 44, page 777, 1935, according to which "quantum mechanics is not a complete theory," as a prerequisite for the possible regaining of classical determinism (EPR argument) .
In fact, I did my Ph. D. studies at the University of Torino, Italy, on the inability by quantum mechanics to represent irreversible processes, such as nuclear fusions, due to the invariance under time reversal (anti-Hermiticity) of quantum axioms and physical laws. Consequently, I published my Ph. D. thesis in 1967 at the Nuovo Cimento of the Italian Physical Society on the EPR completion (also called lifting) of the Lie algebra structure of Heisenberg's time evolution into a Lie-admissible form  which was constructed as an operator image of the historical analytic equations by Lagrange and Hamilton for the representation of irreversible systems, those with the widely ignored external terms.
I then continued these studies for the rest of my research life in the USA, where I was invited in 1967 by the University of Miami, Florida, with support from NASA, precisely for the novelty of these studies, and then at Boston University with support from the USAFOSR, MIT and Harvard University under support from ERDA (that became DOE). I then continued my studies in the verifications and applications of the EPR argument as Chief Scientist of various US corporations which provided funds for experimental verifications of the limitations of quantum mechanics, with ensuing new technologies. All these efforts resulted in over three hundred papers in the field, about twenty post Ph. D. monographs, over one hundred volumes of conference proceedings, etc. (see my CV below).
In 1981, when I was at Harvard University under DOE support, I published my first EPR completion/lifting of Heisenberg's uncertainties toward the regaining of Einstein's determinism, not for electromagnetic interactions for which quantum mechanics is perfect, but for strong interactions for which our current knowledge is minimal at best .
In 2001, thanks to corporate funds, I published  the proof of the last statement of the EPR paper , namely, that "the wavefunction of quantum mechanics cannot describe all elements of reality." I essentially showed that quantum mechanics and chemistry cannot possibly represent the "attraction" between the "identical" valence electrons in molecular coupling since at 10- 13 cm they experience the enormous "repulsion" of 230 Newtons (sic!). The lack of a consistent valence bo then implies the lack of exact representation of molecular data with evident implications for environmental aspects such as combustion. I essentially proved in Ref. , Chapter 4, that the EPR completion of quantum mechanics and chemistry into the covering hadronic mechanics  p26] and chemistry  allows the first known "attractive" force between the "identical" valence electrons in molecular bonds, with ensuing exact representation of molecular data and important applications toward the solution of our alarming environmental problems.
In 1998, I published at the prestigious Acta Applicandae Mathematica my proof for the regaining of classical images under strong interactions  via an explicit and concrete realization of David Bohm's hidden variables in terms of the isotopic element T of the universal isoassociative algebra with product A*B = ATB. I then showed that such a concrete realization of Bohm's hidden variables provides the first known the numerically exact representation of nuclear magnetic moments. In a nutshell, the linear, local and potential Bell's inequality remains fully valid for electromagnetic interactions of point-particles in vacuum. However, the same inequality becomes "inapplicable" (rather than violated) for "extended" hadrons in deep EPR entanglement (as occurring in a nuclear structure) due to the inevitable emergence of non-linear, non-local and non-potential characterizations of strong interactions due to experimentally established mutual penetrations.
In 2019, I published at the prestigious Ratio Mathematica my proof that Einstein's determinisms is indeed progressively regained in the structure of hadrons, nuclei and stars and fully regained at the limit of gravitational collapse . A key ingredient of the proof is the achievement of the first and only known concrete realization of strong interactions via the isotopic element T. In turn, this realization allowed the exact representation of all data of the deuteron, for the first time in "its ground state," with ensuing, much needed, basically new vistas in the search for clean nuclear energies. In 2020, I wrote the general review papers   .
In September 2020, the R. M. Santilli Foundation and the Family of Israel Foundation organized, conducted and recorded an international teleconference on the verifications and applications of the EPR argument . In case interested, you can inspect the Tutorial Lecture in isomathematics , that in the various verifications of the EPR argument  and the nine minutes summary video of our 2020 Teleconference . Thereafter, a knowledge of Refs.  to  is essential for a serious scientific process.
I wrote this letter in an open form for the primary reason of indicating to you as well as to True Americans that, following so man failed attempts with old theories and the use of billions of dollars of taxpayers money, our increasingly alarming environmental problems cannot be solved via the sole use of quantum mechanics and chemistry due to their simplicity (linearity, locality and potentiality), while their solution is technologically possible via EPR completions into covering non-linear, non-local and non-potential theories -  . Consequently, I believe it is crucial for America that, following about one century of lack of clear support for the historical APS paper , APS journals initiate the publication of papers in the verifications and applications of the EPR argument , as well as in the laborious process of trials and errors in the study of the implications of the EPR argument that are nowadays called "new sciences for a new era" .
You should know that, prior to the submission of papers in the EPR argument, I routinely published papers in APS journals either alone or with my graduate students or associates, see my representative papers published in APS journals.  to . All problems started when I published at Phys. Rev. D paper  "Elaboration of the recently proposed test of Pauli's principle under strong interactions," Phys. Rev. D, Vol. 22, p. 892-907 (1980), which paper was, quite transparently in the EPR argument beginning with its title. Note that the paper was submitted in conjunction with my research in the EPR argument at Harvard University under DOE support, see Ref.  with a similar title, and their detailed treatment in Volume II of my Springer-Verlag monographs . A few days following the appearance of the Phs. Rev. D paper , my late friend Prof. Larry Biedenharn called me and stated "Ruggero, I am sorry to tell you that APS journals will not publish any additional paper from you." And so it was.
Clearly deplorable is the lack of due scientific process by APS editors of Phys. Rev. D on my papers in the EPR argument, particularly when the word "completion" was in the title, such as Ref. , under which title editors and referees alike could not claim lack of knowledge of the EPR character of the paper.
Additional lack of due scientific process by APS editors occurred with systematic rejections by Phys. Rev. C of my papers on the applications of the EPR argument t o nuclear physics, in a rather incredible oblivion of the EPR legacy and despite well known insufficiencies or inconsistencies of quantum mechanics in nuclear physics (see Section 1.5 of Ref. ). As an example, Phys. Rev. C systematically rejected my submissions on the first known exact representation of nuclear magnetic moments based on Enrico Fermi's idea that protons and neutrons, when members of a nuclear structure, can be deformed by strong interactions with ensuing deformation of their intrinsic magnetic moments. The APS rejections were apparently due to the strong opposition against Fermi's idea by my former Cantabridgean colleagues , thus showing the dependence of APS editors to academic interests of the moment. For your knowledge, the Cantabridgean opposition propagated throughout the U.S.A., andI I ended up publishing the exact representation of the deuteron magnetic moment at the JINR in Dubna, Russia .
I believe it is important to clarify for non-experts the editorial issues on my 1978 Harvard University papers  . A proton in the core of a star or, for that matter, inside a high energy scattering region, when represented with its actual quite big size (rather than the usual point), cannot credibly spin with the same angular momentum 1/2 as that when it is isolated in vacuum, because of the immense inward pressures on said proton in all radial directions. EPR verifications - have confirmed the 1978 view   that non-linear, non-local and non-potential interactions emerging from the indicated conditions, imply the inapplicability of the entire Lie theory, let alone the SU(2) symmetry, thus prohibiting a consistent definition of the conventional spin under strong interactions in favor of the covering Lie-Santilli isotheory ( , see review ), with ensuing evident inapplicability of Pauli's principle as clearly presented in the 1978 papers   and elaborated in the 1984 book . My disagreement with APS editors of the time and Cantabridgean colleagues is that these issues have crucial implications for our search of new clean nuclear energies . Consequently, we cannot suppress due scientific process on said issues without America paying a price .
As of now, I have submitted no paper to APS journals for decades and, consequently, I have no elements to express any judgment on the current editorial condition at the APS. Nevertheless, I would like to congratulate you because of comments received from colleagues to the effect that you have managed the "miracle" of pulling the APS out of its "dark ages."
Despite such a major contribution to science and to our Country, allow me to say that you and, above all, the APS at large, have resolved only 50% of the problems because the damage caused by the APS "dark ages" continue to linger. In fact, as a clear direct consequence of the protracted APS rejections of all my papers and those of numerous other authors, Wikipedia has dubbed "fringe sciences" our studies on the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen argument on my "article" n, and has stubbornly kept such a dubbing for decades, by rejecting hundreds of revisions of my "article" requested by colleagues the world over to respect the memory of Albert Einstein. Note that the "fringe" dubbing occurred despite the quotation of my paper  in the "Selected publication" of my "article" with the word "completion" in the title, for which Wikipedia editors cannot credibly claim lack of knowledge of the EPR content of my studies. The "fringe" dubbing has been then kept even following our international teleconference on the EPR argument  and has been pushed to the limit of prohibiting the quotation in my "article" of papers   verifying Einstein's determinism (!!!), as you can see in the "talks" of my "article." Additional cyber bullyisms can be seen in several Google entries attached to my Wikipedia "article" despite the few hits (see also the search at Yahoo under my name), which clearly disqualify the bloggers, but succeed in damaging science by trying to cast doubts on my integrity as a person and as a scientist.
I pray you can see the damage to scientific knowledge and to America caused by such a cyber bullyism, and its direct provenance from the APS "dark ages."
Regrettably, I have no suggestion for the containment of such cyber bullyism. However, you can be reassured of my support for anything I can do for you and for the APS within the limitations o my capabilities and knowledge.
I have requested our webmaster to add below the references a Message Box in which interested colleagues may place their signed or anonymous comments.
IMPORTANT NOTE: no message will be uploaded in this Open Letter unless sent via the indicated Message Box or approved in writing via email to admin(at)eprdebates(dot)org.
With my best wishes for your difficult task, I remain
Sir. Prof. Ruggero Maria Santilli
Knighted on September 8, 2011, by the Republic of San Marino
with the Membership in the Millenary Equestrian Order of Sant’Agata.
Awards and Nominations
President, The Institute for Basic Research (IBR)
35246 US 19 North, No. 215, Palm Harbor, FL 34684, U.S.A.
Chief Scientist, Hadronic Technologies Corporation
Editor in Chief,
Hadronic Press, Hadronic Journal, Algebras, Groups and Geometries
 A. Einstein, B. Podolsky and N. Rosen, ``Can quantum mechanical description of
physical reality be considered complete?'' Phys. Rev., Vol.~47,
p. 777 (1935),
 R. M. Santilli, ``Embedding of Lie-algebras into Lie-admissible
algebras," Nuovo Cimento Vol.51, p. 570 (1967),
 R. M. Santilli, "Generalization of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle for strong interactions," Hadronic Journal Vol. 4, p. 642 (1981),
 R. M. Santilli, Foundations of Hadronic Chemistry, with
Applications to New Clean Energies and Fuels, Kluwer Academic
Russian translation by A. K. Aringazin,
 R. M. Santilli, ``Isorepresentation of the Lie-isotopic SU(2) Algebra
with Application to Nuclear Physics and Local Realism," Acta Applicandae
Mathematicae Vol. 50, 177 (1998),
 R. M. Santilli, ``Studies on the classical determinism predicted by A. Einstein, B. Podolsky and N. Rosen," Ratio Mathematica Vol. 37, p. 5-23 (2019),
 R.M. Santilli, ``Studies on A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen prediction that quantum mechanics is not a complete theory," I: Basic methods,"
Ratio Mathematica Vol. 38, p. 5-69, 2020
 R.M. Santilli, ``Studies on A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen prediction that quantum mechanics is not a complete theory," II: Apparent proof of the EPR argument,"
Ratio Mathematica Vol. 38, p. 71-138, 2020
 R.M. Santilli, ``Studies on A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen prediction that quantum mechanics is not a complete theory," II: Illustrative examples and applications,"
Ratio Mathematica Vol. 38, p. 139-222, 2020,
 INTERNATIONAL TELECONFERENCE ON EINSTEIN'S ARGUMENT THAT
"QUANTUM MECHANICS IS NOT A COMPLETE THEORY."
September 1 to 5, 2020s
Announcement in English
Announcement in Hebrew
Recorded lectures and comments
 Tutorial Lecture on Isomathematics,
 Tutoring Lecture on the verifications of the EPR argument,
 "The Legacy of Einstein for New Clean Energies," Nine minutes video on the 2020 Teleconference [10
 I. Gandzha and J. Kadeisvili, New Sciences for a New Era:
Mathematical, Physical and Chemical Discoveries of
Ruggero Maria Santilli, Sankata Printing Press, Nepal (2011),
 P. Roman and R. M. Santilli, "Causality restrictions and O'Rafeartaigh theorem," Contributed paper to APS meeting, Bull. Amer. Phys. Soc. Vol. 14, 502 (1969)
 J. J. Aghassi and P. Roman, and R. M. Santilli, "Relativistic quantum mechanical Galilei group," Contributed paper to APS meeting Bull. Amer. Phys. Soc. Vol. 15, 49 (1970) )
 P Roman and R. M. Santilli, "IU(3.1)-invariant N-point functions," Contributed paper to APS meeting Bull. Amer. Phys. Soc. Vol. 15, 92 (1970)
 J. J. Aghassi and P. Roman and R. M. Santilli, "New dynamical group for the relativistic quantum mechanics of elementary particles," Phys. Rev. D Vol. 1, 2753-2765 (1970)
 R. Roman and R. M. Santilli, "Remarks on the Hermitean extension of the scattering amplitude," Contributed paper to the l971 APS meeting Bull. Amer. Phys. Soc. Vol. 15, 1409 (1971)
 C. N. Ktorides and R. M. Santilli, "Can the generalized Haag theorem be further generalized?" , Phys. Rev. D, Vol. 7, 2447-2456 (1973)
 C.N. Ktorides and R. M. Santilli, "Generalization of the PCT theorem to all discrete space-time symmetries in quantum field theories," Phys. Rev. D, Vol. 10, 3396-3406 (1974)
 C. N. Ktorides, Hyo Chul Myung and R. M. Santilli, "Lie Admissible Approach To Broken Su(2) Spin Under Strong Nonselfadjoint Interactions," , PRINT-79-0056 (HARVARD) submitted to Physical Review D, 40 pages (1978)
 R. M. Santilli, "Isotopic breaking of gauge symmetry," Physical Review D, 20(2), 555-570 (1979)
 C. N. Ktorides, H. C. Myung and R. M. Santilli, "Elaboration of the recently proposed test of Pauli's principle under strong interactions," Phys. Rev. D, Vol. 22, 892-907 (1980)
 R. M. Santilli, "Need of subjecting to an experimental verification the validity within a hadron of Einstein special relativity and Pauli
exclusion principle," Hadronic J. Vol. 1, pages 574-901 (1978),
 R. M. Santilli, Foundation of Theoretical Mechanics,
Volume I: (1978) The Inverse Problem in Newtonian Mechanics,
Volume II: (1982) Birkhoffian Generalization of Hamiltonian Mechanics,
 R. M. Santilli,
Elements of Hadronic Mechanics,
Academy of Sciences, Kiev,
Volume I: Mathematical Foundations (1995):
Volume II : Theoretical Foundations (1995),
Volume III : Experimental verifications (2016),
 R. M. Santilli, "Relativistic hadronic mechanics: nonunitary,
completion of relativistic quantum mechanics,"
Found. Phys. Vol. 27, p. 625-655 (1997),
 R. M. Santilli, Il Grande Grido - Ethical Problem of Einstein
followers in the U.S.A: An Insider's View, (1984) R. M. Santilli Il Grande Grido - Ethical Problem of Einstein
followers in the U.S.A: An Insider's View, (1984) and Documentation of
Il Grande Grido, Vols. I, II and III (1985), Alpha Publishing
 R. M. Santilli, "A quantitative isotopic representation of the
deuteron magnetic moment," in Proceedings of the International
Symposium 'Dubna Deuteron-93, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research,
Dubna, Russia (1994)
 Wikipedia "article" on "Ruggero Santilli,,"
 Wikipedia "talks" on "article" ,
Sir Prof. R. M. Santilli, I have recommended you for the Nobel Prize in Physics every year following the publication in 1998 at Acta Applicandae Mathematica of your historical proof of the inapplicability of Bell's inequalities for strong interactions
with consequential EPR "completion" of quantum mechanics. With all due respect to the Nobel Foundation, I have not seen a discovery since 1999 worth a Nobel Prize more important than yours, for which (and other reason) I am glad your letter was sent out in an open form. Prof. Robert Zzzzz, University of Zzzz
EDITORIAL NOTE: Dear Professor Robert Z., thank you for your support of Prof. Santilli fight for new knowledge and the environment. You should know that Prof. Santilli was Nominated for the first time for the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1981 by Sir Karl Popper precisely in view of papers   that caused the termination of publication at the APS journals of studies in the EPR argument. You can see in the introduction of Sir Karl Popper Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics, Unwin Hyman Ltd (1982) statements to the effect that "Santilli is bringing sanity to physics," "Santilli is of the same level than Heisenberg," and the like. Subsequently, Prof. Santilli has been Nominated for the Nobel Prize in Physics by a ever increasing number of scholars, see the partial documentation in the website
You should also know that Prof. Santilli wanted to send his letter to the APS Editor in Chief in a private form, but he had to succumb to pressures from qualified scholars on the fact that the suppression of due scientific process on Einstein's legacy has been too costly for America to date.
Prof. Robert Zzzz., you are perhaps aware that Prof. Santilli was nominated by the Estonia Academy of Sciences in 1992 (under USSR control) among the most illustrious applied mathematicians of all times precisely because of his 1967 Lie- admissible completion of quantum mechanics for irreversible systems, ref.  of his Open Letter, see my Post 19 of the Debate in Physics
the "only" Italian scientist to make it in the list.
Sir Ruggero Santilli, I would like to do my Ph. D. Thesis in your verifications of the EPR argument and their applications. Could you please guide me through the rather vast literature in the field? Thank you.
EDITORIAL NOTE: Following consultations with Prof. Santilli, you are suggested to view the Debate in Physics
and the Debate in Chemistry
then view theTutoring Lecture I on Isomathematics
and the Tutoring Lecture II on the verifications of the EPR argument
study Refs.  to  of his Open Letter, and then study proofs  . You should be free to contact Prof. Santilli directly for important issues at his email
Copyright © by Ruggero Santilli, May 15, 2021, email research(at)i-b-r(dot)org