This Document in pdf at: https://bit.ly/3lZpY7H
Facebook in English:
Crosetto provides the reference to innovations solving more efficiently at lower cost the problem of the speaker at the 2021 IEEE-NSS-MIC-RTSD Conference, Levin does not read the information, Ma does not speakup
450 million Europeans want to know from scientists what works best
in reducing suffering, deaths and costs of cancer
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT – Parliamentary questions
21 June 2021 (Translated in 24 languages) https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2021-003244_EN.html
Craig Levin and Tiamyu Ma, Conveners M-09, High Resolution Imaging Systems, 21 Oct. 2021 IEEE-MIC Conference
Dear Levin and Ma,
Please read the report about the suffering and pain of the person dear to me (https://bit.ly/3Aks5bd; blog: https://bit.ly/3AwJj5z) like millions of other people who suffer because they discovered tumors at stage 3 or 4.
We are not on this planet to show our power in suppressing others but to use logical reasoning to understand the laws of nature for improving the quality of life to everyone and to use compassion to alleviate suffering.
I am asking the organizers of the 2021 IEEE-NSS-MIC-RTSD Conference for transparency and scientists to take responsibility for providing logical, truthful and scientific answers.
At your Session on 21 Oct. 2021 I asked the following question in the chat window:
“There is cost-effective solution to your problem of sharing data from neighboring pixels: “Are you aware of the fully programmable, technology-independent, 3D-Flow architecture/system for L-1 Trigger, officially and formally recognized a breakthrough invention in 1993, which every 15 years gains ten times in speed, consumes 1/10 and costs 1/200, which is more efficient and lower cost than any current L-1 Trigger design/implementation, but has been suppressed for 28 years as reported in https://bit.ly/2X4XVuc?” What would you suggest changing to be fair to Science, taxpayers and future researchers? “.
Instead of reading my question to the participants as you did for other questions, taking responsibility and expressing your consideration, you dismissed my question.
Craig Levin skipped my question that was the first in the list out of two total questions, stating to the audience that there was a very long question (less than 500 characters like several other questions, which is the limit imposed by the system), inviting the speaker to respond in a private communication, but the speaker never did.
Levin, then read the second question from another participant, he spent a few minutes asking more details regarding the second question and the he stated: “Because there are no more questions, I have a couple of questions” and continue for 4 minutes until he was stopped by his Co-Convener Tiamyu Ma, because it is very unusual in a total time slot per presenter of 15 minutes to spend 4 minutes on a single question. (You can hear Levin 4-minute comment at https://youtu.be/zvQXIjYBSFQ).
While Levine was addressing for a long time the other question, I wrote in silence in the chat window: “Could you Please read my question?”, but Levin never did with the result that my question is not going in any record of the conference. The messages on the chat window are dismissed after the session, only the video recording remain for one to two months, but what people can hear is Levin stating that there was a question without ever knowing who asked the question and its content.
My question was pertinent and very important to the speaker and for the advancement in technology of the scientific community and Tiamyu Ma did not speak up although he knew I had an innovative/advantageous solution to the problem presented by the speaker, because Tiamyu Ma sent me a letter of invitation to give a seminar on May 2018, that I gave at his group at his Tsinghua University, in Beijing on June 19th, 2018.
My Seminar at Tsinghua University was videorecorded and I sent a copy of my slides (goo.gl/7Kefay) to him and his colleagues in his group.
After my one-hour seminar and one-hour discussion, Ma’s associate Professor at Dept. of Engineering Physics of Tsinghua University, Prof. Guanghua Gong who led the discussion after my seminar wrote the following in an email:
“…Crosetto’s 3D processing structure is an innovation in electronics, the similar ideas we can only seen 10 years later and with much complex implementation. The deployment of this technology to PET instrument could greatly improve the detection efficiency and processing speed. It will also be very interesting to see the technology find its application in other fields such as parallel computing or neural network. Your 3D idea is quite interesting and provides a high-efficient solution to certain problems… I mean the FTK system of ATLAS, for me the idea is quite similar to yours.”
We continued with email exchange where I wrote:
“Dear Guanghua, Thank you for pointing out the Atlas FTK system developed more than 10 years later to my invention. I was not aware of it.
I read some pages of the Atlas TDR at https://cds.cern.ch/record/1552953/files/ATLAS-TDR-021.pdf and in fact I have found it very similar, although much more complex with respect to my 3D-Flow invention described in the peer review article “LHCb base-line level-0 trigger 3D-Flow implementation”. NIM-Sec. A, vol 436, (1999) pp.341-385. See goo.gl/bqhD4R.
Here are a few features of the architecture of my 3D-Flow system that one can find more than ten years later in the Atlas FTK:…”
See full email exchange (https://bit.ly/3dM38fi) detailing an idea similar to my 3D-Flow system only seen 10 years later at CERN and with much complex implementation.
This fact prove clearly that my 3D-Flow architecture and system breaking the speed barrier in real-time applications, although was recognized a breakthrough invention by a panel of experts from academia, industry and research centers in a public scientific review at FERMIlab was censured and suppressed because none of the physicists and engineers from Tsinghua University working at CERN experiments such as Atlas were aware of it and their expertise could also evaluate that only 10 years after my invention CERN used a similar approach but much more complex.
This is the damage to science and society by spending more money in less efficient and more complex approaches for censuring and suppressing my invention for decades not only from funding it, but also from presenting to IEEE-NSS-MIC-RTSD conferences and from publishing in IEEE journals.
This is not the only time Craig Levin censured and suppressed my presentations and innovations. He did it again at the same conference 2 days later. See the reported fact in pdf at: https://bit.ly/2ZoGUw7 Screenshots at: https://bit.ly/3GhYMcU, in-depth dialogue at: https://bit.ly/2X4XVuc
In that occasion I explained Craig Levin his misconception in developing submillimeter spatial resolution PET to make beautiful pictures which are useless to reduce cancer deaths and cost and he blamed Physicians, oncologist and surgeons for requesting high resolution pictures from PET. I told Levin that it is his responsibility to understand the principle of operation of an instrument and explain users how to use it appropriately. PET is counting all possible valid signals received from a cluster of body cells emitting tumor markers within a time unit, is not measuring a dimension.
My dialogue with Craig Levin goes back to 2013 IEEE-NSS-MIC conference when he was Chair of one of the conference and rejected all my papers on PET high sensitivity. I attended to his talk about the submillimeter PET for mammography and asked the question how much was the efficiency, the radiation given to the patient and the cost of his device and which marked and how many lives he estimated to save with his device annually (https://bit.ly/3GHEadd). He was embarrassed to state that had very low efficiency, required high radiation and had a high cost.
The truth came year after that after spending millions of dollars of taxpayer money his device was not commercialized because was too inefficient, required hazardous radiation and had a high cost not competitive with other devices. However, spending millions of dollars was functional for him to present many articles to the IEEE Conference and receiving many awards.
As my calculations and claims of the 3D-CBS in my book of the year 2000 could detect clusters with only 100 cancerous cells turned out to be true 20 years later, also my other claim that the combination of my three invention 3D-Flow, 3D-CBS and TB-CAD could save millions of lives and trillions of dollars will be confirmed experimentally to be true.
I have nothing personal against Craig Levin or Tiamyu Ma, but I am defending the interest of taxpayers and cancer patients and instead of having them ignore, censure and suppress my 3D-Flow and 3D-CBS innovations effective for an efficient, low radiation, low cost, cancer screening I expect they refer to the ethic of a scientist in providing their calculations e logical reasoning countering mine, proving their point scientifically and not using their authority to discover later that crushed science and damaged humanity.
I am available to discuss any time with them scientific issues with respect for science and taxpayers, with no fury or anger and if we come to some disagreements that cannot be settled with calculations and logical reasoning, we should let the result of the experiment be the judge about who is right and who is wrong, but for no reason anyone should use authority to crush innovation, censure or suppress science. If nothing else: “Whoever deliberately delays and conceals reports will forever be nailed to history’s pillar of shame” as it was disseminated by the Associated Press (https://apnews.com/0bf5cd116c250483a8232533d41edc69) and published by several newspapers (The Times, The Australian, KFF, PBS, CNBC, The Guardian, etc.).
Below I provide the screenshot of the online chat window at the conference.
Kind Regards,
Dario Crosetto
President of the Crosetto Foundation for the Reduction of Cancer Deaths
900 Hideaway Pl
DeSoto, TX 75115
Email: crosettodario@gmail.com