Little Office of Research Integrity

.

  Canadian Journal of Physics, 87: 933-944 (2009), Paul Scott and RW Smith 

Editor: Dr. Michael Steinitz — St. Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, Nova Scotia, Canada

The authors present experimental data in Figure 14 and 15 of the published paper and claim that diffusion coefficients measured in space under isolation conditions show a linear relationship with temperature. But the data used are fabricated. The data used are coming from sample # 2, 3, 4, and 5 in the Final Report (p.80).

 According to the Final Report, the processing temperature for these samples could not be measured in space (p.92). According to the Final Report (p.92), it was hoped that the oxide film on the tubes would provide specific information about the furnace temperature, the treatment time, and the degree of container insertion into the furnace.

How was it possible to scientifically find these three parameters by looking at the color of an oxide film after samples were returned to earth?

The subjective and private procedure that was used to determine the processing time and temperatures is not disclosed in the published paper. An accurate account of the research performed is not presented.

The scientific community has been led to believe that temperatures given in Fig.14 and 15 are real temperatures and were scientifically measured in the MIR space station. But according to Smith, "the only method which remained was visual comparison" (p.97).

In the Final Report, Smith concludes on page 101 that the experimental results from lead-gold diffusion couples (sample # 1, 2, 3, and 4) should be of “particular concern”. But this serious concern is not disclosed in the Canadian Journal of Physics.

Despite the fact that temperatures and diffusion coefficients could not be scientifically determined and despite the fact that the author himself has expressed concerns about the validity of his own experimental results in the Final Report, the data presented in Fig.14 and 15 of the published paper show a remarkably perfect linear relationship for these samples! The results are too good to be true.

Data points are made up to fall on a straight line. The conclusion in the paper that the theoretical models are in close agreement with the space results is misleading. The theoretical models presented are only in close agreement with a set of experimental data that are fabricated. This matter needs to be appropriately redressed for the scientific community so that it can draw its own conclusions.

Selective reporting of data 

Conflicting data have been eliminated from Fig.14 and 15 in order to claim a linear relationship between D and T. 

Omitted data are shown in Acta Astronautica 64, 256-263 (2009). When one includes the omitted data in the analysis, a non-linear relationship will emerge that undermines the main conclusions in the published paper. This brings into question the overall integrity of the results and conclusions.

Canadian Space Agency should correct the records for the scientific community.