There are two forces sustaining fake physics : 1. "publish or perish" 2. preserve credibility capitalization (scientist's karma points) The former is

There are two forces sustaining fake physics : 1. "publish or perish" 2. preserve credibility capitalization (scientist's karma points) The former is what generates fake science, and the later is what let it prosper. I would nevertheless be very cautious when someone claims he can make the difference between true and fake physics. There is a risk of error, and a higher risk of manipulation by introducing a bias by leveraging the credibility force (2). His book where he spit in the soup, and his promotional web site where we have been directed too, looks very like what he condemns. I'm curious to see if that author is able to recognize real physics [1]. [1](http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2017.81004 http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2017.81004)