|
21 November 2015
|
4:22 PM (1 hour ago)
|
|
||
|
||||
Ivor and Everyone Else,
Ivor, Before
this goes much further, I would like to say a few things. I am not your disciple
or a supporter as John Dore labels me. As you well know we disagree on many
significant points. It offends me that he says that. My position is this. The
experimental evidence supports your position on some very important points
which I myself have examined very carefully. Now if I accept that the
experimental and the other factual evidence supports
your contentions, that does not make me a follower or believer or some such. I
also will tell you that if it becomes clear that the evidence does not support
your position I will be forthright and let you know that is what I think.
I have said many times
and I will repeat it. The Wakefield Experiments, both of them I and II, are
fully and completely in accordance with the Catt theory hypothesis which I take
to be that there is a circulating wave in the transmission line that creates a
voltage standing wave that has the appearance of a static charged capacitor as
understood in standard mainstream textbooks. That means that you theory is
fully and completely conformed and validated according to the usual rules of
science. In addition, the mainstream theory found in the textbooks is
completely refuted by the experimental results. So the Catt Theory is
accordance with the experiments and the mainstream theory is not. QED
This is my position as
long as there does not appear any additional
experimental facts that contradict the results as they now are known to me.
Harry Ricker.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
I.C.
If an apparently
stationary electric field can be created out of two TEM waves travelling at the
speed of light, then under Occam, do we retain the stationary electric field as
a concept? Is it redundant?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
“Among competing hypotheses, the one with the
fewest assumptions should be selected.”
What is the primary role
of the static electric field, if not in a charged capacitor?
Is Occam part of “Modern
Physics”? If it is, why is it never mentioned? Can professional Knowledge
Brokers (e.g. professors) practicing “Modern Physics” allow Occam to undermine
their knowledge base?
@@
In the case of the
charged capacitor, the Wakefield experiment replaces the stationary electric
field, not with a moving electromagnetic field, but with a TEM wave. Under
Occam, we now have also to look at the “stationary magnetic field”. It is
unlikely that the stationary electric field does not exist, but the stationary
magnetic field still exists, although it could be at least simulated by two TEM
waves.
Ivor Catt