viXra Disclaimer

Articles available on repositories such as are pre-prints that may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should therefore be treated as preliminary. Nothing stated within should be treated as sound unless confirmed and endorsed by an independent qualified expert. In particular anything that includes financial or legal information or proposed medical treatments should not be used as such by anyone without sufficient relevant knowledge. will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of application of any documents on this website. is an open repository for scientific e-prints. We believe that the principle of free speech applies to scientific research so we do not filter or endorse submissions on criteria of correctness or usefulness. Nor do we make judgements based on who the authors are, where they come from and work, or what qualifications they have. Submissions may be rejected for other reasons including legal issues. See our submission page for more details of our submission policy. We cannot be expected to discover all instances where there may be legally objectionable or harmful content in a submission before acceptance but we will remove them when notified. Responsibility for the content of the e-prints remains with the authors and viXra provides no warranty of any sort.

We, the administrators of, often disagree strongly with the content of e-prints submitted to this site, but we recognise that our judgement may not always be right. Furthermore, a paper that contains some clearly wrong ideas can also contain other ideas that are useful to the someone else in the scientific community. In our opinion it is impossible to draw a clear line between what is good and bad science in a way that can be used to moderate the contents of an archive without a high risk of excluding some useful research. Allowing incorrect research to remain available is considered by us to be much less harmful than removing work that could contain a brilliant insight. The usefulness and correctness of scientific research can often only be settled over time via peer review, experiment and the analysis of the scientific community that will eventually lead to a consensus of opinion. In some cases this process can take many years because the subject matter is beyond what we can currently test.

When reading e-prints on this site you should therefore be aware that they may be very speculative or even contrary to established scientific facts. There are certainly also many papers here of a very high scientific quality. If you do not have the expertise to make your own judgments then you should seek the opinion of others who do, or search for papers on the subject that have been accepted after being peer-reviewed. We do not force, request or suggest that scientists or anyone else read what is included here. We merely make it available in a permanent form for anyone with a shared interest so that they can find it and make reference to it if they wish. We welcome criticism and you can add comments on the abstract pages. Most authors are very happy to receive polite comments. We will not accept requests from authors to remove critical comments except where they do not mention any specific fault or include personal attacks.

We take care to record dates of submissions and any changes so that might be considered a valid repository for establishing priority of credit on any discoveries that may later be considered as important. However, authors should be aware that this validity may be disputed. Although we are committed to making this a permanent repository, there is a risk that unforeseen circumstances could result in the discontinuation of this site at some future date and it would be wise to seek other forms of distribution in addition to this site. We suggest that any research with a commercial value should not be published here before all necessary patent rights have been established if the authors wish exclusive rights of exploitation. is not connected or affiliated in any way with or Cornell University. The similarity of web design is a form of parody to highlight the endorsement and moderation policies of which we believe are a hindrance to scientific progress. We reverse the name and colours as a symbol of our opposing policies and to ensure that there is no confusion between the sites. Despite our opposition to the filtering policies of, no personal offense is intended towards its owners or administrators.