1
Acta Astronautica 48, 59-70 (2001), Trygavasson et al.
Data Falsification
Data points labeled "QUELDI & QUESTS (MIM not isolating)" in Fig. 7 of
the above article are all altered version of the data presented on p. 73 by
Zhu in his Ph.D. thesis (X. Zhu, " Diffusion in Liquid Binary alloys", Ph.D.
Thesis, Queen's University, Canada, 1996). Using statistical analyses, Zhu
concluded in 1996 that the measured diffusion coefficients derived from
space experiments fit the Arrhenius law (D ~ exp. (A/T)). In Acta
Astronautica, the authors have altered Zhu's original temperatures to claim
a non-linear relationship that fits the fluctuation theory (D~ T2). No
reference is given to Zhu's original work!! The measured temperatures
have been changed in such a way that the relationship between D and T
changed from a D ~ exp. (A/T) to a D~ T to power 2.
More evidence that data in Fig .7 of the Acta Astronautica paper are copied
from other publications and are falsified:
2
Data Fabrication- Part 1:
Data points indicated by arrows in Exhibit ‘A’ below correspond to sample
number 2, 3, 4, and 5 in the Final Report (page 85) which was submitted to
the Canadian Space Agency in 2000 (available).
These data points have been made up to claim a linear relationship.
According to the Final Report, temperature of the samples could not be
measured in space. 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
Acta Astronautica (Fig.7) are real temperatures and were scientifically
measured in the MIR space station.
3
In the Final Report (P.101), it is concluded 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
published paper.
Despite the fact that temperatures and diffusion coefficients could not be
scientifically determined and despite the fact that the author of the report
himself has expressed concerns about the validity of his own experimental
results in the Final Report, the data presented in Fig.7 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 conclusions in the
paper are based on a set of data that are fabricated. Temperatures could
not be determined by visual inspection!
Note that the Final Report has been used as a reference in at least two
papers by one of the authors (RW Smith). This report is available for
checking the original data and observations.
Data Fabrication -Part 2
Data points representing "3 mm dia. specimens" (QUELD II, MIM isolating)
in Fig.7 do not correspond to any diffusion couples assembled and tested
by Queen's University.
4
A list of the samples assembled and tested by Queen's University is given
on page 80- 85 of the final report that was submitted to the Canadian
Space Agency (CSA) in 2000. The list gives the sample number, date of
delivery to NASA, type of diffusion couple, and the MIM mode for each
sample delivered to NASA.
The '3mm dia. specimens (MIM isolating)' have not been delivered to
NASA for testing on MIR. Documents available show various samples
being tested on MIR but there is no information about "3 mm dia.
specimens" (QUELD II, MIM isolating). Furthermore, CSA is unable to find
the sample numbers or the date of delivery to NASA for these specimens.