Heisenberg was a Fraud

by Miles Mathis

First published December 29, 2023

If you have been following my papers on both sites, you have seen the entire 20 th century fall apart
before your eyes, so this shouldn't surprise you. For the rest of you, put on your mucking boots: you
are going to need them.

Heisenberg wasn't a fraud on the level of Oppenheimer. He wrote some papers and some of them
weren't much worse than what his colleagues were publishing. But he isn't at all what he has been sold
as.

We will start with the fact that I have seen it claimed that Heisenberg is the youngest Nobel Prize
winner in physics, taking it at age 24. Not true. He won it in 1932 at age 31 for work he [didn't] do at
age 24. He is famous for expressing Schrodinger's equations with matrix “mechanics”, but they now
admit he didn't even know how to do matrices when he was 24. All that was in an appendix by Born
and Jordan. So why didn't Born and Jordan win as well, or instead? Nobody will say, but I assume it is
because Heisenberg outranked then and had been tapped as the front for this project.

That was a huge fraud, but it wasn't the biggest of his life, not by a longshot. As usual, I will start by
going down his Wikipedia page, then jump to many other sources from there. We are told his father
Kasper Ernst August Heisenberg [four names] was a highschool teacher who became a Greek professor
in the university system. Strange wording there, already indicating they are hiding something. He was
a highschool teacher only part-time in his twenties, so I don't know why they lead with it. Or, I do
know why, but they shouldn't. By age thirty he was already habilitated at the University of Wurzburg
and was soon teaching there as an honorary professor. What is an honorary professor? Some sort of
bye, I guess, for special people, same thing we always see. At age 40 he founded the Byzantine Studies
department there, the only one in Germany. He was also a member of the Russian Academy of
Sciences. Very strange and a big clue here. Werner's mother Anna Margarethe Frieda Katharina
Wecklein (five names) was also tied to Russia, speaking Russian and also working as a scientist.

Why are they hiding that on Werner's page, trying to convince us the father August was a highschool
teacher of Greek? Well, it's because Byzantium is a clue here. Heisenberg was studying and teaching
his own forebears, the Comnenes/Cohens/Phoenicians, who ruled Byzantium for centuries.

Strange that Werner's father went by this third name, eh? Not really, since that is his big Phoenician
name. August ties him back to the Augustus Caesars of the Roman Empire, who were also
Phoenicians. That last photo confirms that, since I guess you spotted the helmet. Pretty strange for a
college professor of Greek or Byzantine culture. But not so strange for this crypto-noble family not
that distant from the Kaiser.

We should also ask why Werner only has three names while his father has four and his mother has five.
They must be hiding one of them, right? What could it be? Must be even better than August, since
they don't hide that with his dad. I don't know (yet), but on his mother's side he was a Zeising,
Frankenberger, Griesbauer, and a Petri. His maternal great-grandfather Adolf Zeising was also famous,
being a writer under the penname Richard Morgan. Very weird. What is Heisenberg's link to the
Morgans? Adolf was supported by the Schiller Foundation and was a member of the Academy
Leopoldina, the top German academy of sciences. Not coincidentally, 189 Leopoldina members have
won the Nobel Prize, the greatest of any organization in the world. Adolf's great-grandson Werner was
also a member, of course.

A simple search on “Heisenberg Jewish” at Bing takes us to a promoted listing in the second spot from
the UCLA physics department by S. A. Moszkowski, who tells us that although the Nazis came near
sending him to an internment camp as a Jewish scientist, Heisenberg was saved from that fate because
his mother was personal friend of Himmler's mother. That interests us because in my long paper on
Hitler's genealogy, we also looked at Himmler. You will remember that Himmler was named Heinrich
for his godfather, Prince Heinrich of Bavaria.

Hmmm, same helmet Heisenberg's dad is wearing in the photo above. This Prince visited the Himmler
house many times, which means he must have been a relative. But since he was a very high ranking
Wittelsbach, son of Princess Theresa of Liechtenstein, we have a problem.

Princess Droopy Schnoz. She looks like a load of joy, right?

What was Himmler, the head of a workers party, doing related to and godson of a Wittelsbach prince?
As I say, the things they expect us to believe. We are told Himmler's father was just the Prince's tutor,
and that was the only relationship. But we are also told this Gebhardt Himmler was a deputy principal
at a grammar school in Landshut, and that the Himmlers were middle-class Catholics. You have to
laugh at the stupidity of it all. Middle-class grammar school deputy-principals don't also work as tutors
to the Prince of Bavaria. Such a tutor would be a lower-ranking member of the extended family, just as
we saw with a lady in waiting in my previous paper on Nietzsche.

The same problem applies to Heisenberg's mother, a Wecklein being a personal friend of this mother of
Himmler. What was the connection? It can only have been one of blood, as we are seeing. Mrs.
Himmler would have no reason to do such a huge favor for some Russian-speaking middle-class
nobody supporting her husband by grading papers.

The Schiller Foundation is another clue, since it was founded not by a Schiller, but by a Hammer.
Julius Hammer, writer, who started the foundation with his wife's fortune. Who was this wife? She is
scrubbed everywhere, a big red flag. Armand Hammer's father was also named Julius, so we are
probably looking at a cousin.

According to Geni, on his father's side Heisenberg is a Meyer, Spiel, Rewer, and Holste. Werner's
half-brother is a Lenz, which means his mother later married a Lenz. Lenz is Jewish and I assume the
rest are as well.

Werner married Elizabeth Schumacher, but her mother is the clincher: Zitelmann. Not only Jewish, but
noble, since she was from the von Erdmanns, von Kuhns, von Krockows, von Brusewitz, von Sydows,
von Schonebecks, von Rederns, von Oppens, von Contas, von Derenthalls, and von der Marwitz. The
von Contas are so named because they were Counts of Rudolstadt, supposedly Huguenot immigrants.
And I guess you spotted the Kuhns, since Kuhn=Kohen. That was all through the maternal line. In the
paternal, we find Schumacher was also a Fricke, a Heise, a Lambrecht, a Kruger, a Caesar, a
Meyerhoff, an Ehrenstein, a von Buren, a von Post, a von Line, a von Rheden, and a Zernemann. So it
is even easier to prove his wife was Jewish.

Heisenberg had thirteen kids, but all are scrubbed at Geni and Findagrave, though most are now dead.
Why are they scrubbed? Probably because they don't want you seeing they all married Jews as well.
Actually, I found Martin Heisenberg, still alive, and his wife is given at Wiki as Apollonia, Countess of
Eulenberg. So there. Does that name look familiar? It should. See the Eulenberg Affair, which we
discussed in my papers on Hitler. This was the famous incident in 1907 involving the Prince of
Eulenberg, the Kaiser Wilhelm, General Kuno (the Graf von Moltke), and countless others accused of
being a band of homosexuals.
That's the Prince of Eulenberg, who was accused by Bismarck himself of being the Kaiser's lover.
That's the real reason Bismarck was fired.

The Eulenbergs had toned down their noses in some lines by the time of the Eulenberg Affair, but that
is an earlier one, where it is very obvious. The Eulenbergs were also von Kleists through that guy.
They had been governors of the Spandau Citadel. They in turn came from the Dukes of Pomerania,
who were Piasts, Kings of Poland.

The Countess in our story, Apollonia, is a cousin of Sophie, the Princess of Liechtenstein. Sophie is
also a Bavarian Duchess, and is second in line in the Jacobite Succession. That means she is a. . .
quick, you know this one. . . a Stuart. I also point out that is the second time the Liechtensteins have
infiltrated this paper. Anyway, all that confirms what I am telling you about these Heisenbergs. They
aren't the middle-class Gentiles you have been sold.

By age 17 Werner Heisenberg was already a member of the Freikorps, and they admit he was called up
(allegedly) to fight the Bavarian Soviet Republic in 1919. This too is very strange, and they have to
gloss over it like everything else in his early bio. They quote Heisenberg saying all he did at the time is
seize bicycles or typewriters. But we have also seen the Freikorps in previous papers. They are now
sold as a paramilitary group raised from the middle or lower classes, but they weren't. Historically they
came out of German Intelligence or Special Ops, and were mainly upper class. In 1919 they were
composed largely of “retired” officers from the First World War, with younger men recruited from the
upperclasses—such as Heisenberg. Knowing that helps you make sense of that picture of Werner with
his dad, doesn't it?

This should be obvious in 1919, since the Freikorps wasn't putting down any Bavarians, or Soviets,
either. It was suppressing and infiltrating popular uprisings by real middle and lower-class Germans,
who saw the fall of the Kaiser as an opportunity to bypass the Phoenicians. In other words, the
Freikorps was, in many ways, the opposite of what you are now told. It was a tool of the aristocrats
and bankers, to keep any real revolution from forming. The aristocrats and bankers wanted a
revolution, or the appearance of one, but not that one. So Heisenberg was doing exactly what you
would expect the son of hidden aristocrats to do.

Here's the next big fraud, poorly cloaked:

From 1920 to 1923, he studied physics and mathematics at the Ludwig Maximilian University of
Munich under Arnold Sommerfeld and Wilhelm Wien and at the Georg-August University of
Göttingen with Max Born and James Franck and mathematics with David Hilbert. He received his
doctorate in 1923 at Munich under Sommerfeld.

But wait, that's just four years. You would expect him to get his Bachelors in 1923, not his Doctorate.
That's all we are told about his years in school. So like everyone else we have looked at, he was
apparently just gifted his doctorate, in some sort of bye for Jewish aristocrats. They admit his doctoral
dissertation was anemic and poorly defended, but it didn't matter. He completed his habilitation in
1924 and was thrust upon the world.

Since he was only about two years away from his Nobel Prize winning paper, you would think his
doctoral dissertation would be on quantum mechanics, or at least the atom. Nope, it was on turbulence
and laminar flow. Again, very strange.

This may interest you in that regard:

Habilitation is usually awarded 5–15 years after a PhD degree or its equivalent. Although in some
countries Doctor of Sciences degree correlates with a position of Docent (i.e. Associate Professor),
it is closer in practice to the position of a Full Professor in the USA.

Look up “habilitation” at Wikipedia and you find that. It isn't hard. Just type it in the box. So how did
Heisenberg achieve that in just one year? Another bye, I guess.

In 1924 Heisenberg immediately became a privatdozent at the University of Gottingen, which means
he was a teaching professor without a chair. Taught standing up, you know. At the same time he was
awarded a Rockefeller Foundation Fellowship, at age 23. For what?! That poorly defended thesis on
turbulence? The Fellowship was to work with Bohr in Copenhagen that entire school year, from Sept.
1924 to May 1925. But wait. He was just hired as a professor at Gottingen, but they let him ditch his
first year? That's pretty cushy. The following summer he wrote his famous paper (or let Born and
Jordan and Sommerfeld write it, we don't know), and the rest is history.

Wikipedia all but admits the paper is a hash:

Heisenberg's paper establishing quantum mechanics[41][a] has puzzled physicists and historians.

All the interest is in the appendix, and they admit that as well, since the original part of the paper is just
Heisenberg trying to fit quantum numbers to anharmonic oscillators using Fourier series and
perturbation tricks he got from Bohr. It is a huge mess and is basically where they got the idea (that
they are still selling) of explaining the atom using springs. It is all pathetic, and was even then. It is
doubly pathetic now that I have diagrammed the nucleus and shown it is channeling charge. None of
the Bohr orbits even exist, so everything Heisenberg did is just busywork.

Even stranger is that Einstein nominated Born and Jordan along with Heisenberg, but the Nobel
committee honored only Heisenberg. Why, when the main part of the paper is clearly garbage? Plus,
why would Einstein nominate Heisenberg for this when Einstein hated matrices and couldn't possibly
have been impressed by the main part of the paper fitting the atom to springs? None of it makes any
sense. I suppose Einstein was doing his tit for tat, since he had already won his prize in 1921, being
nominated by Bohr. Cosy, ain't it?

And of course we would expect the Rockefeller Foundation to be behind this fraud, since that is what
they do. That by itself explains everything.

It may also interest you to know that the man whose equations Born and Jordan were rewriting in the
appendix, Erwin Schrodinger, was not impressed. He could see it for the propaganda it was and did
everything he could after that to distance himself from these people. Same for Max Planck, who
dismissed these matrix solutions as “disgusting”. Basically no one but the math department and the
Rockefeller Foundation liked these matrix solutions, but I assume the Nobel committee had been
ordered or bribed to play along, so it didn't matter. Physics was purposely being taken out of the hands
of professionals and given to these Rockefeller funded propagandists and nitwits, who were being
instructed to torpedo the field. As with the field of art, the Rockefellers and other billionaires wished to
take over physics for their own purposes, which we can now see was to rape the treasuries of the world
with less and less oversight. To do that they needed a physics that was as incomprehensible as
possible. Once you make art and science as illiterate and illogical as possible, no one can rationally
object to the billions being poured into both.

They now try to tell us matrix mechanics came first, coming before Schrodinger's mechanics, but that
isn't true. It is another fantastic lie. Yes, Heisenberg's original paper without the appendix was
published in September 1925, before Schrodinger's paper of January 1926. But Schrodinger's paper
had already been completed and submitted in late 1925, and the editors at Physical Review almost
certainly leaked it to the other camp. I believe this is why Born was in such a rush to add his matrix
mechanics to an already accepted paper, republishing it in 1926. Remember, Born and Schrodinger
never liked eachother. They were both up to replace Planck in Berlin in 1926, and Schrodinger was
given that position over Born. Planck himself was part of the decision, since he had just retired, not
died, and Planck never cared for Born or his math. That may explain some of the politics of that time,
including this appendix and the attempt to pre-empt the Schrodinger equation in that year.

In the next section, Academic Career, they list some of the other things Heisenberg is credited with,
including the Uncertainty Principle, a solution to the Zeeman Effect, solving ferromagnetism using the
Pauli Exclusion Principle, and a theory of the positron. What they don't tell you is that he was wrong
about every single one of them. I have covered each of them in its own paper, and we will cover all of
them below. If you are coming from my art site and don't want to get into it, skip ahead.

In 2011 experimenters violated the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and swept it quietly under the rug,
not even bothering to change the promotion or encyclopedia pages. Most of those outside of academia
don't even know it, though I reported on it here.

These other things Heisenberg wrote about couldn't be solved without a model of the nucleus and a
firm understanding of the charge field, neither of which they had in the 1920s. The mainstream still
doesn't have those things, which is why mainstream theory on those topics hasn't advanced much in the
past century. You will say I can't blame Heisenberg for being of his time, but his theories were rotten
even by the standards of the 1920s. If he had simply been mistaken, in the way Schrodinger was
mistaken—by not having the resources to solve these things—I would leave him be. But he was
nothing like Schrodinger. Heisenberg was the opposite of Schrodinger, since he allowed himself to be
promoted as this towering genius while knowing he was nothing of the sort.

Speaking of Schrodinger, I believe Heisenberg was promoted to bury Schrodinger, especially after
Schrodinger began spilling the bean on quantum mechanics. Like Feynman did late in life, but much
moreso, Schrodinger soured on quantum mechanics and began airing their dirty secrets. He said he
wished he had never been a part of it. Conveniently, the Heisenberg people later claimed to find a
diary of Schrodinger called Ephemeridae, where he listed all the underage girls he had raped.
Strangely, none of this came out until 2013, when John Gribbin and Michael Green almost
simultaneously made these claims in their biographies of Schrodinger. Seeing that this is the MO of
Intelligence, I find these claims hard to believe. Supposing Schrodinger really was an acting pedophile,
do you suppose he would keep a written record of it and not burn it on his death? I guess we are
supposed to believe it was normal a hundred years ago, but it wasn't. It looks to me like the usual
Phoenician project to destroy their enemies. I would guess this Ephemeridae is a fake, written from the
dungeons of Langley or somewhere like that at the behest of the Bohr/Heisenberg camp.

All the more reason to think this is the timing. 2013 is soon after I myself began promoting
Schrodinger over Heisenberg and Bohr. That Heisenberg paper I just linked came out in early 2012,
and so did my important paper on the Copenhagen Interpretation. I had previously hit Heisenberg hard
in 2005 in my paper Quantum Mechanics and Idealism.

Confirming that guess is that they admit Schrodinger's notebooks for 1925 have somehow disappeared.
That was his annus mirabilis, so it is kind of strange those were lost among all the others. It again
indicates skullduggery.

You will say they wouldn't stoop so low, but we saw the Phoenicians do a similar thing in the battle of
Newton and Hooke, Hooke being buried for centuries by unscrupulous biographers, so that their man
Newton could get all the promotion and glory. They even hid Hooke's portrait and his journals. This is
now admitted. Wikipedia and most other outlets now skew strongly to Heisenberg over Schrodinger,
with Heisenberg's page much longer and detailed. Schrodinger's page is dominated by the
unsubstantiated pedophile charge, and other parts of the page also skew negative.

They will probably invent a similar story for me once I die, since it is the only way they can deal with
me. Slander, libel, and bury. For the record, I keep no journal or diary. I keep no notebooks but these
papers. I have never written about my “conquests” and have no underage conquests. I lost my
virginity to an eighteen-year-old when I was seventeen and a half, and I doubt anyone would call that
statutory rape on her part. We later lived together for a year and I asked her to marry me. We didn't
get married. I have never slept with anyone younger than that. Nor have I “fondled” anyone younger
than that. If anyone claims I did they are lying.

But back to Heisenberg. He famously wrote about the Zeeman Effect, but I solved that using the
charge field in 2016 in my paper on the Stark Effect. The Stark Effect and Zeeman Effect are basically
the same, with one caused by M and the other caused by E. I have also solved the Hall Effect in a
similar way. Since these solutions require a diagrammed nucleus channeling the charge field, they
trump anything Heisenberg or anyone else wrote on the matter, including Schrodinger.

That is my diagram of Tin, for instance, with red being double alphas, blue being single alphas, and
black being protons. The main line of charge channeling is in the poles and out the equator, but
conductive elements also channel heavily pole to pole, this “through charge” creating current.

They claim Heisenberg explained ferromagnetism. Did he? No. I wrote the definitive paper on
magnetism in 2019, and although it is mainly about diamagnetism, it also applies to ferromagnetism. It
has nothing to do with the PEP, Pauli Exclusion Principle. The current answer to this question is
“unpaired electrons”, but I have proved in dozens of papers electrons are just along for the ride in all
these problems. Everything is explained by a channeled charge field and by real photons being
recycled through the nucleus. Also see my paper on Period 4 of the Periodic Table, where I first
explain the magnetism of Iron. That is what ferromagnetism is, since “ferro” means Iron.
That is the Iron nucleus, with the green balls representing neutron positions. That is an older,
simplified diagram, but blue still represents alphas. So why is Iron magnetic and Tin not? Does it have
something to do with unpaired electrons? No. We don't need electrons to solve this at all. The nuclear
structure explains it by itself. At first, Iron and Tin look somewhat similar, since they are both blue at
the poles. They both have two protons on each end pulling in charge, and that means that, in the first
instance, they qualify as magnetic. In a balanced field, they will both pull in about the same amount of
charge N and S, maximizing the meeting of charge along the pole. But that is assuming charge meets
along the pole. That is to say, it assumes we have a strong through charge, from pole to pole. But with
Tin we don't. Notice that Iron has a weak carousel level (on the equator). That carousel spins and pulls
charge out. But Iron has half the protons there that Tin does, so some of Iron's channeled charge will
have to go pole to pole. More is coming in the poles than can go out the equator, as you see. Blue
channels twice as strongly as black. But with Tin, that isn't true. Tin is completely balanced in the six
directions, and it has the same number of protons/alphas pulling charge in and it has pulling out. So it
has nothing left over for through charge, pole to pole. Since the polar charge creates magnetism, Tin is
a poor magnet.

You will say Tin shouldn't be a good conductor in that case, but it is. It is, but its configuration is
precisely what keeps it from being as good as copper or silver. Copper and Silver have a proton
differential from top to bottom, giving conducted charge a boost in one direction. Tin doesn't have that
differential, so charge doesn't immediately know which way to go. That's why Tin doesn't create much
of a current on its own. Left to itself, it will channel charge mostly pole to equator. But if you apply a
field in the right way, Tin can easily accept it through those double protons north and south. Unlike
Iron, the Tin nucleus is big in the belly—meaning that while the north and south poles are blue, the
interior of the nucleus is red. Twice as big, like a fat man with skinny arms and legs. So the interior
can actually take more charge than the poles can feed into it, which is also important here. It means the
blue carousel positions can get overloaded in a strong EM field, not being able to pull charge out as fast
as charge is coming in. They are receiving charge from red positions, which are twice as strong, you
see. You will say there can't be more going out than is fed in, which is true, but some charge gets into
the nucleus in other ways than the poles, especially in a strong field. Some charge can get in through
those cap positions top and bottom (the first reds top and bottom), and other charge can leak in the
interior holes, where the neutrons and interior protons are. Once that happens, Tin becomes an active
conductor, since that extra charge can only be channeled pole to pole.

Which brings us to Heisenberg's theory of the positron, which again was never good, but which now
looks awful. I have proved the positron is just an electron spinning the other direction, but they don't
admit that even now. They still hire bozos to go on Youtube and claim the electron/positron don't
actually spin at all—despite having quantum spin numbers. Why not? They tell us it is because
fundamental particles—not composed of anything smaller—can't spin by definition. It would imply
outer parts of the particle were spinning faster, and that is impossible, they say. That is a non sequitur
and doesn't even require a response. It is true neither a priori nor a posteriori, since we have no
evidence for it. And lots of evidence against it. In other words, we have lots of evidence the electron
DOES spin with a real physical spin, since how else can it have polarity or chirality? If not spin, then
what? What is causing the various states and spins if not real spin? They refuse to tell us, getting mad
and calling us classicists. Ooh, that hurts!

That is the mainstream's own photo/diagram of pair production, taken from bubble chambers. That is
an electron and positron spinning out in a field. In opposite spirals with different radii. One radius
being twice the other. Just a coincidence, I guess, and not proof of real spin? How does a particle spin
out in a field, creating a spiral, but do that with virtual spins that don't really exist? You can see these
people are just paid to act retarded and say stupid things.

Amazingly, they still don't give the positron a spin opposite the electron. They say they are both spin
½, and explain the difference as a difference in charge, the positron being positive, of course. The
positron DOES have a charge opposite the electron, but that is because they are spinning opposite. The
positron is upside-down to the electron, so it is emitting a photon field that is reversed. That is what
charge is: a real field of real photons. And yes, the electron and positron are both recycling the charge
field, just like the proton and nucleus.

The mainstream doesn't even know that is what charge is: real photons being recycled. So when they
say these particles are charged, they just mean they have different signs etched on them: + or -. Just as
they don't allow for real spin, they don't allow for real charge. If you ask them what these quantum
numbers like spin and charge actually stand for, they get mad at you for asking questions. Don't you
know that physicists are now too important to answer mechanical questions. Grow up!
Does that indicate these particles are composed of smaller particles? No. In my theory the electron
and positron are spun-up photons, but they are composed of only one photon with multiple spins. NOT
multiple photons. Then how can one photon channel multiple photons? Because these leptons
(electrons and positrons) are composed of multiple spins, and the spin levels are rapidly increasing
sizes. So the lepton is a lot larger in its outer spin radius than a photon with only one spin. There is
plenty of room for many photons to channel through its spin architecture.

Beginning in 1932, Heisenberg published the first of three papers modeling the nucleus using the just
discovered neutron, building a neutron-proton model. Wikipedia claims this model explained the
puzzle of nuclear spins, but it didn't explain much of anything, which is why on the page for nuclear
shell model Heisenberg isn't even mentioned. Ivanenko first proposed a shell model for the nucleus in
that same year, but it didn't really come together until 1949, when Jensen and Mayer filled it out,
winning the Nobel in 1963.

Even this later model is incredibly naive, and it is once again based on a harmonic oscillator or spring.
Since these guys didn't have a working model of the charge field or anything else, they had to build any
atomic theory up from pretty much nothing. That is why they always started with springs. They now
start with eggs or balloons. These people can't visualize to save their lives, as we know. Amazingly,
nuclear modeling pretty much ended after that. The mainstream gave up and they haven't done
anything since 1949. They admit this shell model is mostly useless, so you would think that when I
showed up with my nuclear diagrams everyone would jump for joy. Nope, just the opposite. I got the
welcome of a leper at a Hollywood pool party.

Just do you know, when I entered physics from left field, I completely ignored all previous theory,
except as something to critique. I didn't know about any of these nuclear theories, though I discovered
some of them later. That shouldn't be hard to believe, since by reading my papers you can see I didn't
use even the smallest part of these previous theories. I used the Periodic table and a few known
properties of the elements like electronegativity, conductivity, and ionization energies. But mostly I
was trying to build visual and mechanical pathways through the nucleus, since I knew going in the
strong force was fake and that the nucleus must be channeling charge. I had already come to that
realization long before I began trying to model anything. None of these previous people were trying to
build the nucleus as a charge channeler, so there was very little crossover between their methods and
mine. Obviously, the easiest way to do that was to treat charge as a wind or river, and to use the
spinning protons and neutrons as funnels or fans. The direction of channeling could be indicated by a
series of male/female plugs, which would represent movement of charge from high densities to low
densities. That is what those models above are.

Heisenberg wrote very little of importance for the rest of his life, and Wikipedia pretty much admits
that, moving directly into his work on the bomb for the Nazis in the 1930s. Heisenberg was in his 30s
in the 30s, so he should have been peaking, but Wikipedia only mentions five papers in that period, one
on cosmic rays and four in the footnotes. All the papers are very short, the first being two pages on
energetic corpuscles moving through the nucleus. I know, it sounds like charge channeling, but it isn't.
It is about baryons hitting the nucleus. The others are about cosmic radiation again. In 1939,
Heisenberg was allegedly hired to work on the German nuclear weapons program, which curiously
began on the very day WWII started. Also curious is that they admit Heisenberg was in the US in the
summer of that year, taking a meeting with Samuel Goudsmit of University of Michigan. Goudsmit
was Jewish of course and soon moved to MIT during the war. He was editor of PRL for twenty years,
up to 1974. Amusing for us here is that Goudsmit is most famous for proposing electron spin. His
model was thrown out because a real spin would exceed the speed of light. I have since proved that
isn't true. All their equations were wrong, so they were miscalculating all these numbers. It was at that
point and for that reason they decided to sell all quantum particles as “point-like”, including the
nucleus itself. Anyway, it is assumed Heisenberg was here to be propositioned by the Manhattan
Project, but that isn't my assumption anymore. I assume he was here to get his orders for the upcoming
war, in which he would play the pretend opposition. Remember, I have proved the Nazis were just a
troupe of gay actors, and Heisenberg, being a close cousin, would of course know that. So the entire
Nazi bomb program was just another vaudeville, invented to drain the German treasury in one more
way. Same thing the Manhattan Project did here.

Amusingly, they admit [Macrakis, p. 172] Heisenberg obtained his first professorship in 1942, at age
41, when he was appointed head of the project at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physics in Berlin.
But wait, earlier they told us he had finished his habilitation by age 23 and became a professor in
Leipzig at age 27, being immediately named head of the physics department. The head of the physics
department wasn't a full professor? Sorry, I don't skim, I actually read these things for sense.

Also strange is that by that time, 1942, the Army had actually relinquished its control of the nuclear
program, basically mothballing it. Although 70 scientists were allegedly assigned to the project in
1940, by 1942 most of them were gone. Heisenberg also didn't take it very seriously, despite allegedly
being director. That year he published a three-part series on the S-matrix. This was again an attempt to
explain the behavior of light nuclei by applying scattering matrices to them. Wheeler was the inventor
of this method, but because it still didn't include any knowledge of the nuclear structure or of charge
channeling, it was another big waste of time. It was just fancier math thrown at the problem. It
allowed them to dispense with springs and graduate to big ugly operators instead. We are told
Heisenberg independently discovered the S-matrix three years after Wheeler. Right. Books and
journals quit being shipped across the pond in 1937, so Heisenberg didn't realize Wheeler beat him to it
by three years.

You would think being head of the physics department in Leipzig and the director of the nuclear
program would be work enough for Heisenberg, but no: in the middle of the war he was appointed
Chair of Theoretical Physics at Friedrich-Wilhelms University in Berlin as well. That was early 1943.
But Heisenberg wasn't even living in Berlin at that time, or Leipzig either. He was living in retreat in
Urfeld, on the north shore of the Walchensee. His staff at KWIP was also in retreat in the Black Forest.
So they were really not taking this bomb building seriously. This is just a continuation of the joke, and
they make no effort to hide it at Wiki.

Conveniently, the US managed to bomb all the German uranium facilities like KWIP, despite the fact
we are told the Alsos Mission immediately came in searching for the facilities. Like Building 7 on 911,
all the paperwork was destroyed, so we have to rely on tapes the captured Nazi scientists including
Heisenberg allegedly made while at Farm Hall in England. That sounds believable.

After the war Heisenberg became director of the Max Planck Institute in Berlin (later Munich). Did
they concentrate on the nucleus or atomic physics? No, “The core research focus of the institute
was cosmic radiation.” Wow. He was there until 1970, doing pretty much nothing. Well, not exactly
nothing. He became a big propaganda and funding whore, in 1951 working with UNESCO to build a
particle accelerator. This was the beginning of CERN, one of the world's largest money pits. CERN
and these other hugely expensive machines like the LHC have been running for almost 70 years, but in
that time they never figured out the nucleus was channeling charge, or that it had a definite architecture
for each element that was nothing like a bag of marbles. Amazing. I figured that out with a pencil and
a notepad, for free.