Figshare vs. the Record: My Riemann Proposal, a $1,000,000 Claim, and a False "Terms Violation"

An Open Record for the Clay Mathematics Institute: Figshare removed my Riemann proposal and told readers it 'did not adhere to' 'Terms'—that statement is false, defamatory and potentially unlawful.

To CMI and the Research Infrastructure Community,

A false "Terms Violation" banner replaced my Riemann proposal’s timestamp—here is the evidence. (Note to CMI readers: If you are evaluating priority, please consider the Wayback timestamps and mirrored materials linked below in this article.)

A 1,000,000 million dollar claim needs a time stamp. Figshare removed mine.

SUMMARY

Very shortly after publishing a new update to my Super Information Theory (SIT) manuscript—containing a proposal toward the Riemann Conjecture and a neutral comparison to Causal Fermion Systems—Figshare disabled my account and took items offline. Support then pointed to an older “Neuroscience in Review” piece and labeled it “self‑promotion/non‑academic,” closing my tickets without a clause‑level explanation. This post publishes timestamped evidence (including Wayback Machine captures) and asks for transparency, restoration, and preservation of the scholarly record. Whatever one thinks of my ideas, a preprint repository should not erase timestamped priority evidence or replace it with a vague and false "Terms Violation" message that tells the public my work did not adhere to standards.

WHAT CHANGED

1. I posted a new SIT update with a Riemann Conjecture solution proposal and a CFS comparison.

2. Shortly after, my account was disabled and items were de‑listed.

3. When I asked for reasons, support pointed at an older neuroscience review and called it self‑promotion/non‑academic, without addressing the new SIT update or identifying specific clauses or sentences.

4. My tickets were then closed without a clause‑level statement of reasons.

WHY THIS IS NOT “SELF‑PROMOTION”

Self Aware Networks (neuroscience) and Super Information Theory (physics) are academic theories. My work compares theories with citations, operational definitions, and testability. I do not sell products and I do not link to sales pages. Author‑authored comparative reviews are normal in scholarship when they are neutrally framed and properly cited. Calling this “non‑academic” or “commercial” in the abstract is inaccurate and harmful.

WHY THIS MATTERS (THE MILLION‑DOLLAR STAKES)

The Riemann Conjecture is a Clay Mathematics Institute Millennium Prize problem with a 1,000,000‑dollar award. For claims like this, timestamped public records are essential to establish priority and to enable scrutiny. Removing the public landing page while citing a different, older item creates confusion and the appearance of suppressing priority evidence at precisely the moment a new proposal was posted. That is why a clause‑level explanation and preservation of the record are not optional niceties; they are central to scientific integrity.

WHAT VISITORS SEE NOW

If someone follows my Figshare links, they see a generic notice that “the content did not adhere to Figshare’s Terms and Conditions.” In my view this is inaccurate and reputationally damaging because it suggests misconduct rather than a disputed policy interpretation. I contest that characterization and reserve all rights.

Why removing my Riemann proposal from a public preprint record harms priority, misleads readers with a false "Terms Violation" banner, and contradicts the purpose of a scholarly repository

“The content did not adhere to Figshare’s Terms and Conditions.”

I assert that this statement is false as applied to my work. My manuscripts are academic, cited, openly licensed, and intended for reuse; they are not advertising and they contain no sales links. Placing this banner on my item and DOI pages misleads readers and damages reputation. Because the message is written, the accurate legal term is “libel”; to avoid legal conclusions here, I will simply say it is false and defamatory, and I dispute it in full.

Why this is a scandal

• Million‑dollar stakes. The Riemann Conjecture carries a $1,000,000 prize. Public timestamps are essential for priority. Taking down my new proposal at the moment it was posted undermines the record the community relies on.
• Basis switch. Support pointed to an unrelated older neuroscience review while the triggering event was my new SIT update with the Riemann proposal. That mismatch looks like a cover story.
• False public messaging. Replacing my pages with a stock "Terms Violation" notice tells the public something untrue about my work.
• Defamation risk. Labeling legitimate comparative scholarship as “non‑academic” or “self‑promotion” injures reputation among colleagues and readers.

What a fair remedy looks like

• Publish a clause‑level explanation that names the exact item(s), version(s), and sentences at issue.
• Restore compliant items and their DOI landing pages; where withdrawal is unavoidable, maintain tombstone pages so citations and provenance remain intact.
• Correct the public message so it does not falsely imply misconduct.
• If a single record needs adjustment, identify it precisely so I can revise it without jeopardizing the rest of the scholarly record.

Independent captures below show that these items and DOIs existed and resolved before the takedown; signed S3 URLs may have since expired, but the captures establish timing.

Evidence of priority

Independent Wayback Machine captures preserve the existence and timing of my Figshare items and DOIs (see the archive links listed above). These external timestamps corroborate that my SIT update and related works were publicly posted before the takedown.

TIMESTAMP EVIDENCE (WAYBACK MIRRORS)

Below are Wayback Machine captures that preserve the existence and timing of my Figshare items and DOIs. Readers can independently verify these URLs.

Author profile
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://figshare.com/authors/Micah_Blumberg/20605550

Super Information Theory (SIT) — item page
https://web.archive.org/web/20250409112344/https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Super_Information_Theory/28379318?file=53205446
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Super_Information_Theory/28379318/1
Direct file capture (time‑limited signed URL at the time of capture)
https://web.archive.org/web/20250408081018/https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/pfigshare-u-files/53209763/SuperInformationTheoryDraft35.pdf

SIT — DOI resolver
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28379318

Super Dark Time — item page
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Super_Dark_Time_Gravity_Computed_from_Local_Quantum_Mechanics/28284545
Example file captures
https://web.archive.org/web/20250202080744/https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Super_Dark_Time_Gravity_Computed_from_Local_Quantum_Mechanics/28284545?file=51707741
https://web.archive.org/web/20250312020728/https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Super_Dark_Time_Gravity_Computed_from_Local_Quantum_Mechanics/28284545?file=52745579
https://web.archive.org/web/20250415000633/https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Super_Dark_Time_Gravity_Computed_from_Local_Quantum_Mechanics/28284545?file=1864155

Self Aware Networks — file capture (from the original Figshare storage)
https://web.archive.org/web/20250725002526/https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/pfigshare-u-files/54589349/SelfAwareNetworksOCAFirstDraft.pdf

Super Dark Time — DOI resolver
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28284545

Micah’s New Law of Thermodynamics — item page and file
https://web.archive.org/web/20250416163746/https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/_b_Micah_s_New_Law_of_Thermodynamics_A_Signal-Dissipation_Framework_for_Equilibrium_and_Consciousness_b_/28264340?file=47191498
https://web.archive.org/web/20250203083847/https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/pfigshare-u-files/51876611/Micahs_New_Law_of_Thermodynamicsv2.pdf

Micah’s New Law — DOI resolver
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28264340

Neuroscience in Review (CTW → SAN) — item page
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Neuroscience_in_Review_Mapping_Cortical_traveling_waves_in_time_and_space_2025_to_Self_Aware_Networks_2022_/29817383

Coincidence as a Bit of Information — item page
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Coincidence_as_a_Bit_of_Information/29369432

2025 US–China Tariff Crisis — item page
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/2025_US_China_Tariff_Crisis_Economic_Outlook_Strategic_Insights/28861763

ORCID (identity reference)
https://web.archive.org/web/20250826004755/https://orcid.org/0009-0004-5175-9532

WHAT I AM ASKING FIGSHARE TO DO

1. Publish a clause‑level statement of reasons that identifies the specific item(s), version(s), and passages at issue.

2. Restore all compliant items and their DOI landing pages; where removal is unavoidable, maintain tombstone pages so citations, metadata, and provenance remain intact.

3. Confirm that author‑authored comparative scholarship, neutrally framed with citations and open licensing, is in scope for the free platform.

4. If one record requires adjustments, identify it precisely; I will revise it immediately without jeopardizing the rest of the scholarly record.

WHAT I AM ASKING THE COMMUNITY TO DO

1. If you cited any of these works, keep your citations and, if a DOI stops resolving, add a note pointing to the Wayback links above.

2. Mirror this post and the Wayback links; add new captures if you find missing versions.

3. Encourage repositories, DOI providers, and publishers to uphold persistence and transparency when items are restricted or withdrawn.

NEW DIRECTION FROM EARLIER POSTS
This is not just another letter; it is a public documentation effort focused on priority and timestamping for the Riemann proposal, backed by independent web archives. Previous posts:
https://www.svgn.io/p/why-my-figshare-preprint-comparing
https://www.svgn.io/p/why-i-mirrored-several-key-papers

CLOSING

Figshare invites researchers to share preprints and links so the community can read and cite our work. Replacing those links with a vague "Terms Violation" banner misleads readers and damages reputations, especially when a high‑stakes Riemann proposal is involved. I am asking for transparent reasons, immediate restoration (or at least tombstones), and a fair application of policies. Open science depends on it.

AUTHORSHIP AND AI DISCLOSURE

My neuroscience theory (Self Aware Networks) and my physics framework (Super Information Theory) are original research programs I have developed since 2005. I began making them public in 2017 (podcast) and, starting in 2022—before ChatGPT was available—I published thousands of pages and supporting materials on public GitHub repositories. None of these theories were generated by artificial intelligence. If any modern tools were used, they were limited to minor editorial assistance; the scientific content, equations, analyses, and comparisons are mine. I can add this disclosure to each record for clarity.

EXPANDED AUDIT TIMELINE (PDT)

1. 2025-02-10 — “Super Information Theory” (SIT) appears in ORCID feed with DOI (source: ORCID screenshot).

2. 2025-08-14 — SIT Draft 73 updated with Riemann proposal and CFS comparison (PDF header).

3. 2025-08-21 10:18 — Figshare auto-ack: “Ticket Received – Please tell me why my account is disabled and how I can get it restored?” (Gmail screenshot).

4. 2025-08-22 — Figshare email: “Ticket Resolved – Please tell me why my account is disabled…” (Gmail list screenshot).

5. 2025-08-23 — Email from Andra referencing the older neuroscience review as “self-promotion/non-academic” (support message screenshot).

6. 2025-08-24 — New ticket linked to #500029 requesting clause-level reasons and the audit trail (portal shows “reported a day ago” relative to 2025-08-25).

7. 2025-08-25 16:10 — Figshare auto-ack: “Ticket Received – Escalation and preservation notice…” (Gmail screenshot).

8. 2025-08-25 ~15:50 — Portal shows “Being processed | 6 hours ago” for the escalation (relative to your evening screenshot).

9. 2025-08-25 ~05:00 — Portal shows “This ticket has been Closed | 17 hours ago” (relative to your evening screenshot).

10. 2025-08-25 21:59 — Current local time when assembling this timeline (America/Los_Angeles).

I previously wrote an open letter to the Founder of Figshare, Mark Hahnel about this million-dollar scandal, and I hope he gets to the bottom of what’s happening and restores my account.

Note to Figshare: If a single item needs edits, identify it precisely; do not erase timestamps on unrelated items.

I also wrote two other articles about this