Ideas
|
11:48 (7 hours
ago) |
|
||
|
||||
Satu,
My ideas are developing fast at the moment.
The enemies of science are threefold. mathematicians,
careerists, instrumentalists.
"careerist" maps onto academia plus
qualified "scientists". Thus, academia gives
"qualifications" - bits of paper - which those "qualified" use to get jobs. which
are gained by the parrots mastering old theory and, parrot-like,
returning the old information (which is what the examiners know) in exams.
The exams classify the parrots for the right jobs and status, in academia
and elsewhere. Those qualified, with their bits of paper, pay membership
to institutions which "publish", and protect the qualifications by
blocking scientific advances, only publishing decorations of old theory.
Stable information - Latin, the three R's, functioned reasonably in such
a stable environment, where information and skills did not change rapidly. The
1890s move of illiterate farm workers from country to city factory massively
increased the demand for the (stable) three Rs. It
was not appreciated that science could not be articulated onto the educational
system unless it was frozen.
The system would be threatened by, (and would protect itself by fair
means or foul against) rapid changes in the information or skills. Initially
resisting, academia stabilised "scientific" knowledge on the 1905
ideas of Pop Scientist Einstein, which became academic orthodoxy. The later
Einstein 1970 was excluded as "senile". http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/9101.htm "We all of us have
some idea of what the basic axioms in physics will turn out to be. The quantum or
particle will surely not be amongst them; the field, in Faraday's and Maxwell's
sense, could possibly be, but it is not certain." - Einstein in "The
Born-Einstain Letters" by Max Born, pub.
Macmillan 1971. p164. See "Nobel disease". https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nobel_disease
The biggest shock was the sudden appearance of high speed digital
electronics in 1960. During the next half century, academia, already realising
that change (and worst, scientific revolution) threatened it, completely shut
the door on such drastic change - for example a signal from your computer
telling your printer to print, which is not a sine wave. The only permissible
signal, in Wikipedia and everywhere else, is the sine wave. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_line The
most fundamental physics is electromagnetic theory, and the canon collapsed
when the signal changed from the sine wave to the step, or cattq http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_series
It is not that when presented with such a step, an academic blocks it,
or suppresses it. He does not even see it, or comprehend it. The
device used to blind him is called the Fourier Series. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_series By the time he is presented with cattq,
he has undergone decades of brainwashing, called "education". A heavy
part of the brainwashing is that only sine waves exist in the physical
world. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/91.htm "stated to me by
Professor Howie, then Head of the Cavendish, that "Physical reality is
composed of sine waves."" ; http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/91d.htm
A Google search for "transmission line" + fourier gives 500,000 hits. In
every discussion of a transmission line, omega ω (= sine wave)
appears unannounced and without any justification. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/91d.htm
A series of accidents protected me from the full brainwashing, including
the death of the tutor in Cambridge who was supposed to tutor me in
electricity. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/2809.htm
On leaving college and going to design one of the first digital
computers, I asked my new boss Charlie Portman what I should read. He replied;
"Nothing. It's all new." http://s3data.computerhistory.org/brochures/ferranti.sirius2.1961.102646235.pdf ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferranti_Sirius
My brainwashing was imperfect, although I had the Cambridge bit of paper
- a passport to any job.
Ivor Catt 7.10.2019
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
|
06:26 (13
hours ago) |
|
||
|
||||
"What is needed to save science is the total obliteration the
academic social class." -SC
That's a great start.
1. Yes, we are still awaiting a reply from Chris Palmer. He said he would
get back to me several months ago- April. 21, 2019.
2. John Dore has failed to acknowledge that i=qc is a mainstream equation. He has also failed to
retract his assertion that it is dimensionally incorrect.
3. Hawking is as fake as the Hawking brand. The 'actual' Hawking died in
the mid-1980's. Non-speaking actors played the part
ever since, until the fake death.
4. Steve, there is plenty of hope. All of this pomp & fakery shall
be burned to the ground in the upcoming global wars which they have caused and
prosecuted, Chris. Their destruction of Science is merely one aspect of it,
John. All of their accolades and titles shall be mocked forevermore, Archie.
5. Whomsoever subscribes to the 'mainstream' view, on anything
whatsoever, is a suspect. "They are judged accordingly."
6. For the larger picture, The Pleistocene Murders is completed-
The Pleistocene Murders
Part 1, Introduction
Part 2, The Spring of Life
Part 3, The Summer of Life
Part 4, The Autumn of Life
Part 5, The Winter of Life
Part 6, The Carbon Wars
Part 7, Judgment Day
There Will Be War,
Forrest
-----Original
Message-----
From: Ivor Catt
Sent: Oct 6, 2019 9:34 AM
To: Steve Crothers
Cc: John Raymond Dore , Forrest Bishop ,
Alex Yakovlev , Archie Howie
Subject: Re: you or I?
(Hawking eqn. faulty) " Now that they know
about it they have invoked the cone of silence." - S Crothers
I need your exegesis on my website, or the www address where you do the
analysis, that the eqn. on Hawking's grave is faulty (specifically requested
for his grave by Hawking). Remember I first heard of "intrinsic" and
"extrinsic" a month ago, from you.
Bear in mind that John jumped on Forrest when John thought the eqn. i=qc was Forrest's. He backed off
when it was pointed out to him that it was produced by an Oxford lecturer who
got prizes for being the bestest
and mostest lecturer. Everyone and his brother will
not believe the eqn on Hawking's grave is faulty, and
will try to shoot you down, as you know well. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x2bg.pdf
By the way, Palmer has failed to comment on cattq2 and
cattq3. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x59q.htm
Ivor
On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 10:57, Steve Crothers <sjc7541@gmail.com>
wrote:
Dear Ivor,
Ten years ago I had a
little hope. But now there is no hope. Science is a dead duck. Just look at the
embarrassment of Hawking's gravestone equation. Now that they know about it
they have invoked the cone of silence. The same goes for the non-existence of self resonant frequency of a capacitor and that a capacitor
is a transmission line. To protect their careers and reputations the academics
always ignore the truth and take measures to suppress it, including fraud. What
is needed to save science is the total obliteration the academic social class.
Steve
|
|
Virus-free. www.avg.com |
On Sat, Oct 5, 2019
at 7:42 PM Ivor Catt <ivorcatt@gmail.com> wrote:
Stephen,
I had no recollection
of writing this remarkable piece (91d below) 10 years ago. [ http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/91d.htm
] When you said it to
me recently, I thought it was completely new; the idea that it is too late to
save science.
The enemies of
science, I now realise, are threefold; the triumverate
- mathematicians, careerists, instrumentalists. Together they control all the
commanding heights of "science".
Of course, you do not
have to keep to the blocking of "Theory C" (or actually D http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8cbwash.htm ) . Come downmarket, and
still important disclosures are blocked. For instance; "A capacitor
does not have a self-resonant frequency". Even that is too threatening to
the triumvirate. This block means that a lot of unnecessary capacitors
are added to all circuit boards throughout the world, in order to save the canon.)
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/2603.htm ; https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1135992 .
Tony Davies http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/ieeetonycard.pdf and
I met his colleague in the IEE/IET HQ in London. Tony mentioned the idea that
"A capacitor does not have a self resonant
frequency". The colleague looked frightened, and ran away. I heard nothing
more about it from Tony, ex board of directors of the IEEE. Are all these guys
running so extremely scared? http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x949.htm .
Is Tony concerned about https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1135992 ? http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8cktony.htm
Ivor
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/91d.htm "The behaviour
of all our institutions when confronted by "The Catt Question"
delivers a bleak message for the future of science. Institutionalised failure
to deal with "The Catt Question" and other fundamental lacunae
threatens the survival of science." [e.g.
the block on "A capacitor does not have a self resonant
frequency.]
|
11:17 (9 hours
ago) |
|
||
|
||||
Dear Ivor,
Hawking's nonsensical gravestone equation is exposed here:
http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Hawking-Catt.html
The terms in thermodynamics are 'intensive' and 'extensive', not
'intrinsic' and 'extrinsic'. The size of a sample has nothing to do with its
temperature. Divide a uniform sample in thermal equilibrium into two equal
parts. The temperature does not change, but the mass and the volume are halved
- this is an experimental fact beyond dispute. Temperature is intensive, volume
and mass are extensive. Now look at Hawking's gravestone equation. He has temperature
varying inversely with mass. He violates both the 0th and the 2nd laws of
thermodynamics, in which the intensive character of temperature is
embedded. Cambridge is a laughingstock, writ large in stone in
Westminster Abbey! Do you see any Cambridge dons admitting the invalidity of
Hawking's gravestone equation now that it has been so clearly revealed to
them and the world? Not a one. Cambridge is a fraud. And why did the Cambridge
dons not see Hawking's violation of thermodynamic? Because
they are incompetent. Here is another example of Cambridge dons'
incompetence:
[1] Stephen J. Crothers and Pierre-Marie Robitaille, Presentation
at Ohio Meeting 2019 of the American Physical Society: Stellar Mass-Luminosity
and its Violation of Thermodynamics,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0eINoQdk0I&feature=share
[2] Stephen J. Crothers and Pierre-Marie Robitaille,
Eddington’s Mass-Luminosity Relationship:
A Violation of the Laws of Thermodynamics, OSS19 Meeting of The American
Physical Society (F02.00005) March 30, 2019, http://vixra.org/pdf/1903.0563v1.pdf
[3] Crothers, S.J. and Robitaille, P.-M., Eddington's mass-luminosity
relation and the laws of thermodynamics, Physics Essays, Vol. 32,
No. 3, 2019,
Steve Crothers
|
|
Virus-free. www.avg.com |