By Frank Ahrens
Sunday, November 5, 2006; Page F07
“Imagine if, in August 2001, the U.S. intelligence agencies had dumped all of their information into one secure, online resource where it was searchable and accessible to anyone who had the proper clearance.”
“Who knows if the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 could have been averted?”
Academia has allowed Russia to build files on plagiarism by profs in academia. This started in 1925 when Dirac plagiarized Max Born and Pascual Jordan with the aid of Fowler, Rutherford’s son in law. Bohr along with other institute directors in Europe were made Fellows of the Royal Society the next year by Rutherford. This helped them get Rockefeller grants that they needed in their poverty after WWI.
Fowler, Bohr and Rutherford families would stay as house guests of each other. Heisenberg was a house guest of Fowler in July 1925. The plagiarism happened in late October 1925 after the preprints of the Born Jordan paper were available. Fowler rushed the Dirac plagiarism into print in early November 1925 before the Born Jordan paper was published. He did it in the Proceedings of the Royal Society.
Lindemann the scientific adviser to Churchill in the 1930′s and during WWII was a Fellow of the Royal Society at the time and likely heard what happened. It was blatant plagiarism. Born and Jordan changed Heisenberg’s matrix notation and Dirac copied the BJ notation extensively, which showed he had seen their paper.
Dirac kept plagiarizing away. Fermi wrote him a letter about it, this is what is called Fermi Dirac statistics. Dirac later said that spin 1/2 particles should be named fermions.
Klaus Fuchs, Huanwu Peng, Kun Huang, Oppenheimer, and Heisenberg were all Max Born assistants. Peng and Huang went back to China after Fuchs was arrested in 1950. Peng is credited with being a hero of the Chinese bomb project by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.
Kapitza was Rutherford’s assistant in 1925. When Niels Bohr was rescued during WWII, there was a Kapitza letter waiting for him at the Soviet embassy in London in 1944. He met with Churchill who was likely told this history and Churchill was mad. In 1945, Terletsky was sent from Russia to meet with Bohr with another Kapitza letter.
The Russians were pushing the Kapitza story in the 1990′s while they got low interest rate loans from IMF. Sudoplatov had a footnote in his 1994 book to remind the profs in the US of this. They got angry but didn’t tell the truth about this, including Bethe and Teller.
So if a Wikipedia on Russia’s plagiarism files had been available in the 1940′s, Klaus Fuchs might not have been allowed into Los Alamos without more questions being asked. This would have showed that the profs in Los Alamos knew he was a risk.
Bethe was the boss of Fuchs in Los Alamos but also was at Bristol with him in 1936. Fuchs was a Lutheran refugee from Hitler, which meant communist. But Oppenheimer and Fuchs had both been Max Born assistants and knew the above embarrassing details, so Bethe just went along.
The Oppenheimer Security Clearance Hearings were in April 1954. Before Teller testified he and Bethe argued for an hour over what his testimony would be. Teller may have threatened to tell the above. This may be why he was ostracized for his testimony, they were afraid he would tell the above.
Bethe had not told this to the FBI after Fuchs was arrested. Bethe was a known plagiarist and that was already in Physical Review in coy footnotes, including the article on Bethe’s calculation of the Lamb Shift.
Nambu says he was before Bethe Salpeter for the BS equation. But Kita in a footnote tells us he was before Nambu. Kita and Nambu were Japanese and so were easy prey. Nambu is still alive and is a prof at University of Chicago.
Detailed page references on the 1925 plagiarism by Dirac of Born and Jordan, Kapitza’s obituary on Rutherford in 1937 that mentions crediting the work of others, etc. is available in
Russia Used Plagiarism Files to Gain atomic know-how.
Also see Rob Sanchez Vdare H1B DoD for Corson Fock and Chinese assisants of Max Born.
Two Russian profs who may work on these files today are Albert Shiryaev at Moscow State University and Valery Makarov at New Economic School Moscow. Shiryaev does it in finance and Makarov in economics. This includes misconduct at the Federal Reserve, US Treasury, Council of Economic Advisers, US DOJ Antitrust Division Economic Analysis Group, FTC, SEC, IMF and World Bank. This includes profs who may have high level positions there and whose home base university is involved in this, or journals or publishers who they are linked to who are involved.
Aldrich Ames and Robert P. Hanssen tipped off the Russians that they had a mole problem inside Russian intelligence. This is why they had Chubais handle negotiations for IMF loans with Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers.
Boris Berezovsky had a Ph.D. in math from Moscow State University and was a manager at the Institute of Control Sciences, Academy of Sciences, USSR. This is the area that analyzed the 1969 NSF grant papers of Robert C. Merton, Paul A. Samuelson, the Stanley Fischer MIT Ph.D. thesis, and the David Levhari TN Srinivasan paper.
They analyzed this for overlapping with the 1966 Nils Hakansson UCLA Ph.D. thesis received at MIT in 1966 because Karl Shell of MIT was session chairman for Hakansson to present the paper at the Dec 1966 Winter Meeting of the Econometric Society. We are neutral on whether this was plagiarism.
Hakansson’s contribution was a critical step in both finance and the microfoundations of macroeconomics. It was the joint consumption, savings, portfolio decision under uncertainty for multiple time periods using dynamic programming for the first time. It built on, and cited, the Phelps paper, which it found an error in.
search Merton Samuelson 1969 site:harvard.edu 14 hits
search Merton Samuelson Hakansson 1969 site:harvard.edu 0 hits.
So Harvard is not crediting Hakansson even today in this form. (Merton has cited the 1970 Hakansson paper, including in his book Continuous Time Finance.) One can take off the site:harvard.edu and see that Hakansson is credited by some.
Merton Nobel Prize autobio written after fall 1997, and after USAO Mass investigation started in spring 1997 says:
” The research with Paul on warrant pricing introduced me to the expected utility maxim and its application to optimal portfolio selection in a static framework. As a consequence of that effort, I began to think about combining the static theory of portfolio selection with the intertemporal optimization of lifetime consumption under certainty found in the growth-model literature. Ignorant of the important work underway by Nils Hakansson and Hayne Leland, then graduate students elsewhere, I attacked the problem of dynamic portfolio theory in a continuous-time framework without having the benefit of their discrete-time formulations. Despite all the mathematics courses that I had taken, l had seen neither stochastic dynamic programming nor the Ito calculus, both of which turned out to be key mathematical tools needed for this research. Instead, driven by “need,” I found them and learned them on my own. Presented first at a Harvard-MIT graduate student seminar in November 1968, my paper on lifetime consumption and portfolio selection under uncertainty was published the following August as a companion paper to one by Paul investigating the effect of age on portfolio risk tolerance.”
In fact, Hakansson got his Ph.D. thesis in 1966. Merton’s August 1970 MIT Ph.D. thesis available on line from MIT cites Hakansson as forthcoming.
Merton’s Ph.D. thesis is at MIT in a set of Nobel Prize winner theses on-line. Merton’s thesis home page at MIT. (This is 13.5 megabytes, and can be downloaded as a pdf and viewed. This is better than trying to view the pdf online.)
In a 1973 J. SIAM article, Samuelson and Merton cite the Hakansson 1966 Ph.D. thesis. In the Stanley Fischer 1969 Ph.D. thesis, Fischer cites Hakansson 1966 but says he was given a copy late and had already done his work.
Stanley Fischer thesis available from MIT here. (This is over 27 megabytes, and can be downloaded as a pdf and viewed. This is better than trying to view the pdf online.) The thesis is stamped by the MIT Library with the date October 7, 1969. It is signed August 18, 1969. It itself calls itself an August 1969 thesis. It appears the final typed version was not however completed until October 1969. Fischer went on the academic job market late it appears and was hired at University of Chicago in fall 1969 not as an assistant prof but as a post doc in effect. This required a visa.
Was the footnote acknowledge Hakansson added after August 1969? Aug 1969 is when the Merton and Samuelson NSF papers were published by Harvard in the Review of Economics and Statistics. Hakansson presented his paper at Harvard Business School in Jan/Feb 1969 as did Stiglitz. Both were at Yale.
Merton claims that even in 1997 he didn’t know Hakansson got his Ph.D. in 1966 and that Hakansson was still a graduate student elsewhere in 1968.
Fischer’s thesis also contains another chapter extending the results to uncertain date of death. It turns out Hakansson has already done that and submitted a paper from Yale on it.
There were close links between Yale econ and MIT Econ at the time, including Duncan Foley and Joseph Stiglitz. Stiglitz has carried on a feud with Summers and Fischer from the mid 1990′s to date.This has gotten quite personal. Other Harvard econ profs like Rogoff reacted angrily to Stiglitz criticizing IMF policy under Fischer and Summers.
Hakansson has not been made a Fellow of the Econometric Society. See list of fellows. Almost everyone else even remotely close to this was made a Fellow. This is despite most of them not making a permanent contribution to economics the way Hakansson has. Hakansson’s formulas are part of the permanent math of economics.
Stanley Fischer doesn’t really have any such contribution for his entire career. Fischer was made a Fellow in 1977. Most Fellows don’t have a great formula that is a permanent part of economics like Hakansson does.
Even Paul Samuelson arguably doesn’t have a great single formula of the level that Hakansson has. Most Nobel Prize winners don’t have a major mathematical formula reflecting a breakthrough like Hakansson has. Hakansson’s paper and formulas and theorems were some of the great ones of the 20th century.
Almost none of the other participants at MIT, thesis supervisors and commitee members, Ph.D. students at the time, etc. had a formula as important as Hakansson’s or as influential. Yet almost all of them were made Felllows of the Econometric Society.
For a brief period in the early 1970′s, MIT and Harvard pulled back a little.
But then there was the 1972 Warsaw meeting with the Russians with Valery Makarov. From MIT was Martin Weitzman now at Harvard. William Brock from University of Chicago was there, see his CV in pdf. Also there was Martin J. Beckmann. So was Koopmans, now deceased. Attending that conference doesn’t mean they had any knowledge then or now of any attempt by Soviets like Valery Makarov to apply hypothetical pressure to Koopmans or the other Americans.
Did the Russians put on pressure on them to nominate Kantorovich? Vainshtein of the USSR had recently said Leontief of Harvard had plagiarized, in effect, Soviets on input and output. Leontief got the Nobel Prize for this. Kantorovich got the Nobel Prize in 1975 for math econ work. The only prior math econ winners were Arrow and Samuelson.
After this, the tendency to cite Hakansson went down. Hakansson was not made a Fellow of the Econometric Society in the mid 1970′s as he should have been based on comparisons to others. Why? What changed from the early 1970′s when MIT did start to acknowledge Hakansson and the late 1970′s when that became rarer in the economics profession? Was it Russia using this to pressure nominations for the Nobel Prize from math econ winners Arrow and Samuelson, uncles of Larry Summers, that made the change?
Russia got billions in low interest rate IMF loans from Fischer and Summers. Some of the money went missing. Berezovsky got rich from loans for shares in fall of 1995 after the first 10 billion tranche from IMF in spring 1995.
LTCM, other hedge funds, Goldman Sachs and university endowments traded Russian government bonds in the 1990′s. Goldman Sachs paid Bush senior 100,000 dollars to speak in Moscow June 1998. Jack Abramoff took Delay on a trip to Moscow. The oligarchs were paying off Delay in 1998 to keep the IMF funds coming that they were using academic kompromat to pressure out of Fischer and Summers.
Olivier Blanchard, coauthor on textbook from 1989 that cites Merton and Samuelson 1969 but not Hakansson at all, or Fischer.–
John Yoo, Paul Wolfowitz, and possibly George Bush from Prince Bandar were figuring this out in the 1990′s. They got the Iraq Liberation Act in 1998 during the Clinton impeachment hearings, along with hearings on loans to Russia, the Fed bailout of LTCM, and during the USAO Mass investigation of Harvard and Shleifer from 1997 to 2005.
Yoo may have told this to Silberman and Hatch who told Scalia. They may have used it to pressure Gore to go away after the decision in Bush v. Gore. Scalia wrote the lone opinion on why they stopped the vote counting early. That may be because he was the one who heard this.
It is possible that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia knew it at the IMF and used that to pressure Bush after 9-11 to ignore their involvement in 9-11. General Ahmed may have said this to Armitage in their meeting and that is why Armitage got so mad. Saudi Arabia got to airlift out its people from the US after 9-11. In November 2001, Pakistan got to airlift out its generals and ISI and soldiers from Kunduz Afghanistan according to Seymour Hersh. This may have been their use of this leverage.
M. A. B. Beg was a physics prof at Rockefeller University. He knew Pais who wrote about the Fock Corson episode in his 1997 book A Tale of Two Continents. Beg was dead by then. Beg was from Pakistan. Beg was an expert in Fock space and may have passed this on to Pakistan. Its possible the Saudis have profs of Muslim or Arab origins who give them info on this for money in the West.
–Reply to a comment at WaPo
quote There is no archive of entries so that a reader can view the history of entries and form an opinion. end quote. Click on history on wiki.
For example, Manmohan Singh, PM of India. Parts of his bio were taken off relating to his experience going to the Soviet Union in 1980′s, etc. Singh gave a speech at Moscow State University indicating knowledge of some of the above and of the cases in econ.
Singh helps balance Pakistan’s knowledge of this at IMF and World Bank. Pakistan had a VP at World Bank and Shaukat Aziz at Citicorp and they know of the kompromat issues used over the decades at IMF and World Bank because of profs there. This is speculation, as are the other posts.
==Excerpt removed from wiki from Singh’s bio from his cv.
A version of wiki that has this is from August 2006. Someone took out the parts indicating his possible cooperation or observation of the Soviets and his work at IMF and World Bank for India where he likely had access to files on academic misconduct of US profs and Russia’s files on them. His speech at Moscow State University on Dec 5, 2005 indicates his knowledge. Notice he mentions Kapitza. This gave him leverage over Bush and Senator Hatch and others to get the India nuclear deal moving forward.
“It is not surprising that your university should have produced great Nobel laureates like Nikolai Semionov, Igor Tamm, Ilia Frank, Leo Landau and Pyotr Kapitza.”
Tamm Dancoff was one of the things the Russians complained off in their own publications in 1955 as overreaching by Oppenheimer protege Dancoff.
“As a student of economics I have admired the work of such great Russian economists as the Nobel Laureates, Wassily Leontief and Leonid Kantorovich.”
Leontief was accused of plagiarism by Vainshtein of USSR in 1969-70 issue of Matekon. Kantorovich got Nobel Prize nominations from prior winners possibly including math econ winners Arrow and Samuelson, the uncles of Larry Summers. Samuelson was on Fischer’s Ph.D. at MIT and on Merton’s. Samuelson got an NSF grant for one of the 1969 papers and supervised Merton to get another NSF grant for another 1969 paper involved in the MIT incident. Its these two papers that Stanley Fischer credits in his 1989 textbook and not Hakansson at all.
India knew of the plagiarism by Dirac with Fowler’s help of Max Born from the 1930′s from Bhabha. Bhabha was in the UK from 1927 to 1939, much of it at Cambridge where the Dirac Fowler plagiarism happened. Bhabha was head of India’s nuclear program.
The excerpt of Singh’s bio removed from wiki:
|Leader of the Indian delegation to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, Cyprus (1993)|
Leader of the Indian delegation to the Human Rights World Conference, Vienna (1993)
|Governor of India on the Board of Governors of the IMF and the International Bank of Reconstruction & Development (1991-95)|
|Appointed by Prime Minister of India as Member, Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (1983-84)|
|Chairman, India Committee of the Indo-japan ;Joint Study Committee (1980-83)|
|- Leader, Indian Delegation to :|
|Indo-Soviet Monitoring Group Meeting (1982)|
|Indo-Soviet Joint Planning Group Meeting (1980-82)|
|Aid India Consortium Meetings (1977-79)|
|- Member Indian Delegation to :|
|South-South Consultation, New Delhi (1982)|
|Cancun Summit on North-South Issues (1981)|
|Aid-India Consortium Meetings, Paris (1973-79)|
|Annual Meetings of IMF, IBRD & Commonwealth
Finance Ministers (1972-79)
|Third Session of UNCTAD, Santiago (April-May 1972)|
| Meetings of UNCTAD Trade & Development Board,
Geneva (May 1971 – July 1972)
|Ministerial Meeting of Group of 77, Lima (Oct.1971)|
|- Deputy for India on IMF Committee of Twenty on
International Monetary Reform (1972 – 74)
|- Associate, Meetings of IMF Interim Committee and Joint
Fund-Bank Development Committee (1976-80, 1982-85)
|- Alternate Governor for India, Board of Governors of
|- Alternate Governor for India, Board of Governors of the
|- Alternate Governor for India, Board of Governors, Asian
Development Bank, Manila (1976-80)
|- Director, Reserve Bank of India (1976-80)|
|- Director, Industrial Development Bank of India (1976-80)|
|- Participated in Commonwealth Prime Ministers Meeting,
|- Represented Secretary;-General UNCTAD at several
inter-governmental meetings including :
|Second Session of UNCTAD, 1968|
| Committee on Invisibles & Financing Related to Trade,
Consultant to UNCTAD, ESCAP and Commonwealth
|- Member, International Organizations :|
|Appointed as Member by the Secretary-General, United Nations of a Group of Eminent Persons to advise him on Financing for Development (December, 2000)|
This post represents opinion, hypothesis, or speculation. Nothing in this should be considered an aspersion on any person. All statements should be interpreted as restated to give effect to this. All statements in the positive should be restated as questions. All other conceivable disclaimers apply.