Go to 3 hours in https://www.lewrockwell.com/2024/04/no_author/tucker-carlson-and-joe-rogan/
www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8apomerta4.pdf
https://www.spaceandmotion.com/physics-censorship-nobel-prize-laureate.htm https://www.ibiblio.org/haselhurst/
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x81hop.htm
https://vixra.org/pdf/1405.0301v2.pdf
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x0113.htm
https://dailysceptic.org/2024/02/12/intellectuals-for-sale/
https://dailysceptic.org/2024/
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/parasites.htm
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x343.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3APeer_review%2FArchive_2?oldformat=true
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/theo2.pdf
https://worldradiohistory.com/UK/Wireless-World/00s/Electronics-World-2003-06-S-OCR.pdf
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/ned6.htm
- “The problem, as I see it, is that we are not
doing very much to remedy these issues, and that a lot of people have already
accepted that “true science” is simply an ideal that will inevitably disappear
with the current system proceeding along as it is.”
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x949.htm
The
Parrot.
Having gained only a 2-2, though admittedly in
Cambridge, I am somewhat inhibited when developing the model of the parrot. However,
everyone else, whatever their exam and other results, is inhibited for an array
of reasons, each reason applying to their own case.
Here is a rough-and-ready analysis. Illiterate
farmworkers moved to the city and worked in factories. It was now necessary for
them to read (the notice “danger” etc.). So an educational system developed to
teach the three R’s – reading, writing and arithmetic. All of these were stable
subjects, alongside the Latin and Greek, also stable, that the elite sons were
already being taught.
Science was the hobby of the rich businessmen and
the like. Science advances by revolution – for instance by destroying caloric
or phlogiston. The evolved education system, teaching stable subjects, formed a
misalliance with science. Those “teaching” science had to defend themselves
from scientific revolution, even minor advances. They trie
resolved the paradox by using some of the increasing funding from the grateful
taxpayer to pay for the addition of minor decorations on a static body of obsolescent
“scientific” knowledge, the ruling Canon. This was enshrined in text books and
lecture notes, and had to be defended. There was only room for one, orthodox,
canon. This might be added to a little, but not subtracted from. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/d.htm
Heaviside was not properly trained as a parrot, and
so was somewhat outside the box. His uncle Wheatstone was under a cloud at the
time, and probably failed to help to educate Oliver, who anyway left school
aged only 15, and had no further parrot training.
Heaviside pioneered sending pulses down wires, and
developed a revolutionary electromagnetic theory. This was immediately followed
by Marconi, signalling without wires, which was much more glamorous. There
being only room for one canon, one orthodoxy, the more glamorous Marconi won,
and Heaviside was suppressed. Heaviside disappeared, unmentioned in any text
book for more than half a century. This problem recurred a century later, when
I pioneered the interconnection of high speed digital systems in the 1960s. I
did not know Heaviside had made any contribution to electromagnetic theory, and
had to develop it over again – energy current as opposed to electric current.
In my turn, I was silenced and disappeared – prevented from publishing for half
a century.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Kuhn “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (SSR) was originally printed as an article in the International Encyclopedia
of Unified Science, published by the logical positivists of the Vienna
Circle. In this book,
Kuhn argued that science does not progress via a linear accumulation of new knowledge,
but undergoes periodic revolutions, also called "paradigm
shifts" (although he
did not coin the phrase),[18] in which the
nature of scientific inquiry within a particular field is abruptly transformed.”
9 April 2019
15.4.2020. I found this today. Go to 34 minutes
in to find The Parrot.
As to priority, fortunately x949 means 9 april 19 . x is the Roman 10, meaning I put this on the www on 9 april 2019. When did this David Icke movie go on the www?
This dating system gets my documents into date order; year first, then month, then day of the month in alphanumeric.
There once was an old man of Esser
Whose knowledge grew lesser and lesser.
It at last grew so small
He knew nothing at all
And now he's a college professor. Noam
Esser
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
|
12:34 PM (1 hour ago) |
|
||
|
Ivor
Please feel free to forward this mail to others who may be concerned.
1. I am completely convinced that there is a fundamental problem
with Maxwellian electrodynamics as identified most clearly in the
'Catt Question' and similar. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm
. The problem is that, when a TEM step is propagating along a two conductor
transmission line, there is no mechanism whereby the charge can flow at
sufficient speed (ie at the velocity of light)
in order to provide the additional charge needed to account for the electric
field.
2. There is an additional problem with Maxwell, in that vacuum must
contain a polarisable medium (ether?) in order to account for the phenomenon of
capacitance and displacement current.
3. I believe a new theory is required in which electromagnetic energy is
taken as the fundamental quantity and so-called static electric and magnetic
fields are constructed from it.
4. In a simple circuit energy flows from the source of EMF to the
load by travelling through the space between the conductors,
(see Poynting Vector). In my view it is not necessary, nor is
it helpful to discuss the reality or otherwise of the current in the wires.
I trust this is helpful to all concerned.
Kind regards .................... Dave Walton 2015
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x9492.htm
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Below,
Ivor Catt 8.8.2023
The Mathematician and Parrotalk
The relationship between the mathematician and parrotalk
is not clear. The scientist is necessarily innovative, or at least open to
innovation a la Kuhn.
Perhaps our dilemma is resolved if we accept what a senior peer reviewed
science journal editor once told me. He said that a peer reviewed published
article was on average read four times, but if it had a lot of maths, it was
read on average 1.5 times. (100 peer reviewed articles by a professor greatly
enhances his career).
Massimiliano Pieraccini graduated in physics in 1994
(‘Nello Carrara’ degree
prize) at the University of Florence, Italy, and received his PhD in
non-destructive testing in 1998. In 1995, he joined the Department of
Electronics and Telecommunications of the University of
Florence, Italy, where he is an associate professor. He has been principal
investigator and manager of several research projects funded by the European
Community, the Italian Research Ministry and private companies. He is the
author of ∼100 scientific
articles, including more than 60 in peer-reviewed international journals. Pieraccini wrote peer reviewed nonsense on cattq. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x5as2.pdf
- “Let us make this concept rigorous.” – i.e.
mathematical.
Someone reading a heavily mathematicised
article does not check the maths. In 50 years, only once has a mathematical
error in one of my peer reviewed articles been pointed out to me. Perhaps
articles get past peer review if they have a heavy dosage of mathematics, which
the unpaid peer reviewer cannot afford to check. (The IEEE listed me as one of
its peer reviewers.) Mathematics takes a very long time to check. “Let us make this concept rigorous.” Meant “Add some maths to get us past peer review.” Every
little helps.
An example of parrotalk;
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/tong2.htm
https://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/em/electro.pdf figure
12. This implies that a charged
capacitor has a stationary electric field. The parrot Tong will not discuss
this. He is not a “Scientist”, searching for the truth.
Google About 260,000 results (0.36
seconds)
Search
Results
“Science is the search for truth”
Science is the search for truth and knowledge
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Fictions
is not the problem I address.
“I use the
acronym SRR to describe the language of Parrots. SRR - Self
Referential Rubbish. Dave Walton's comments (see above) in your 'parrot' document are succinct
and clear. We all agree that the ExH TEM signal is the primitive, from whence
all other manifestations of electricity are created.” –
Malcolm Davidson
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/parrot8.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Fictions
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/mol.pdf
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/oppo.htm
https://vixra.org/pdf/1805.0135v1.pdf ; https://vixra.org/abs/1805.0135
https://rxiv.org/author/stephen_j_crothers
January | 2020 | Alex's EnyMoCo ivorcatt.co.uk/x344.htm
Parrots All ivorcatt.co.uk/parrot9.htm