The Case of Research, a Science Magazine associated Journal

I submitted my article "The Hypergeometrical Universe Theory." I separated the main body of the article from the Appendices to comply with the journal page number requirement.

The article presents my theory.

https://zenodo.org/records/14047261 # HU-The Big Pop Cosmogenesis

https://zenodo.org/records/14047097 # The Kinetic Energy of Relativistic Particles

https://zenodo.org/records/14047049 # The Hypergeometrical Universe

WHAT DID I EXPECT FROM THE RESEARCH JOURNAL?

Publishing a revolutionary theory is difficult. Editors are PROFESSIONALS only concerned with the advancement of Science.

In fact, who am I kidding? The job of an editor is to find suitable articles that can be packaged to please the readership. In other words, it is a business like any other.

My article is like suddenly forcing the "Fox and Friends" people not to lie... Nobody would watch the show anymore.

Similarly, the Research editors have a fiduciary duty to the Publisher, which is to allow the publication of what people are interested in reading.

I submitted the article according to all of their requirements, including accepting paying the publishing fee.

Here is the exchange:

One might consider that "a more favorable response elsewhere" means that there was a negative review or a critical comment. There wasn't.

For a critical comment to exist, a peer review has to take place. People have to place words behind slights like this one.

Here is my reply:

TO BE CONTINUED

IN SUMMARY

Catch 22...:)

One cannot publish the theory in small segments because people will complain about this or that. If you publish, the very basic (the article mentioned, without the Appendices) had the bare bones of the theory but included the Derivation of Natural Laws!!!

This submission is being fought because one has to put up a fight at some point.

THE QEIOS CASE

This is a short update on the QEIOS case. I will write a full article on it.

QEIOS's business model is to post preprints and let people provide public peer reviews. It sounds like the perfect place for me to post my work and have the opportunity to kick some asses in public.

GUESS WHAT?

QEIOS, not only blocked my preprint but also blocked me from submitting anything...:)

They blocked my work using a distinct requirement - something they don't apply to anyone else. They claimed I was not a Peer in the field.

I showed, just by inspection, that the authors on their site not only lied about their associations/qualifications but also had less education.

I will present the exchanges soon.