Censorship

Yet More on Censorship
Ivor Catt 6July 2007. 
" 'The Lateral Arabesque' makes it possible for an academic subject’s content to end up with no overlap at all onto the real subject from whence that branch of academia sprang." http://www.ivorcatt.com/2809.htm In this research, my friend Kurt Metzer is being very helpful. I read Sander's book, where he takes some two pages or more of tortuous mathematics to arrive at the TEM Wave. He then would have read my Macmillan book in order to decide whether he should grant me a further Cambridge degree. On page 5 , long before he brought out the second edition of his book, he will have seen my very short, simple derivation of the same thing from first principles. Why did he not; 1 Discuss this with me when he interviewed me for my further degree? 2 Raise a question about it when I was guest speaker to his university, with him sitting in the front row and all his students behind him? 3 Allow the much shorter, rigorous, clearer derivation to influence the second edition of his book? The answer, I suggest, is not a matter of deceit. He and all the rest who now control academia and publishing are incapable of understanding my derivation. (However, why did he not make this point, if it is true?) Study of their pathology will help us to understand how for a thousand years all theory had to be funnelled through Aristotle's four fundamentals, Earth, Air, Fire and Water. Today, all theory has to start with Mathematics, not with fundamentals of Physics. Note that my derivation comes directly from two fundamentals; the Conservation of Electric Charge, and Faraday's Law of Induction. Today, all those who lecture, and all those who write text books, have been educated out of starting with fundamental laws of physics. They start with mathematical equations!  Ivor Catt 7july07 [Later that day] They then hope to map the results of mathematical manipulation onto the physical reality they see. But they only investigate physical reality after doing the mathematical manipulation. All this is bizarre, and it taxes credulity to conclude that they have betrayed so many of of the fundamental precepts of science. However, if they really are incapable of working their way through the few lines of maths at page 5 , then either that, or something else equally bizarre, has captured them and intellectually castrated them; all of them, not merely some of them. I would point out that they dispute the possibility, or the physical reality, of a pulse or step, seeing only an array of (Fourier Series) sine waves. Howie FRS, Head of the Cavendish, actually said to me; "Physical reality is composed of sine waves." Ivor 7july07 bis
@@@@@@@@@@@@@
The late Arnold Lynch was a big name in the London IEE. He said Catt had
not been properly treated by the IEE, and proposed a joint paper, about which
more politics could be recounted relating to suppression. Last Tuesday I went to a reunion of my college, Trinity College,
Cambridge. I knew Howie ("physical reality is composed of sine
waves") would be there among the 200 attending, so I put my name down
for a place at table at the earliest opportunity, when the adjacent seats
were still unclaimed. In the event, I found Howie sitting opposite me. http://www.ivorcatt.com/2698.htm .
We talked a little on trivia.  Original Message 
[I published this statement in Wireless World
without attributing it to Howie.  Ivor] [Post tells me he was a protege of Feynman.  Ivor] @@@@@@@@@@@ The key point is that more fancy maths can be constructed out of a small plastic bag full of sine waves than can be found in an acre of physical reality.  Ivor, 7 July 2007. @@@@@@@@@@@@ 8 July 2007 My good friend [the late] Kurt Metzer is obviously smarting. He phoned me again today to say that both Newton and Einstein were delayed for 10 or 15 years in their work, in the second case on General Relativity, because they were poor mathematicians. Each had to borrow maths from another party  in Newton's case The Calculus  before they could formulate their Grand Theory, in Newton's case the inverse square law. I recommend that he read what I wrote in 1985 ; " .... Faraday could not and did not really effect his discovery of electromagnetic induction. Rather, he stumbled into it, but it could only be properly exploited decades later, after Professor Maxwell had placed a mathematical structure upon Faraday’s fumbling, unscholarly ideas. Thus, according to the Platonic interpretation of history, Professor Maxwell, not Faraday the technician, paved the way for massive exploitation of electromagnetism in transformers, motors and generators. The deeper message in Maxwell’s Equations is that, do what they will, the local yokels will not replace mathematical academia as the fount of knowledge and progress. In my previous article I posed two questions: Do Maxwell’s Equations contain any information about the nature of electromagnetism? Why do academics and practitioners think that Maxwell’s equations are useful? .... " Yes. They made it possible for people like Kurt and Josephson to take note of, and even attempt to grasp, their discoveries. As Journal Referees, it would now be possible for them to recommend publication. In contrast, the reason why Catt's work on electromagnetic theory could not be published in any learned journal for thirty years (or for that matter more or less anywhere else) is that his work has not been take through the process of mathematical obscurantification. This makes it comprehensible to the layman, but incomprehesible to the Knowledge Broker  an unacceptable situation, for obvious reasons. The key question, of course, is whether their style of ubscurantification merely dresses it in mathematics, or also makes it nonsense because their maths, although impressive from afar, is nonsensical. See for instance "The hidden message in Maxwell's Equations" ; " .... The crosslinkage of electric and magnetic fields E and H in Maxwell’s Equations only obscures the issue. There is no interaction between E and H. (Similarly, the width of a brick does not interact with its length.) They are coexistent, cosubstantial, coeternal (refs. 12, 14). .... " Did the mathematical claptrap which was required to get the discovery published make the discovery unintelligible because now shrouded in mathematical nonsense?  Ivor, 8 July 2007 A remarkably prescient part of my December 1995 article The deeper hidden message in Maxwell’s Equations is reproduced here; "If at any moment the professors administering a discipline happen to be weak in one branch of it, they will tend to not examine their students in it, and so will tend to select out those up and coming students who have that subdiscipline as their strength. Positive feedback down the generations of students will further the retreat from that particular subdiscipline. (Sir James Jeans and Einstein could be said to be telling us that academia have selected out budding scientists who showed a grasp of the physics, rather than the maths, of their subject.) Similarly, the whole of academia will move deeper and deeper into any misconception or aberration, and there is no corrective force. In my view, ‘The Lateral Arabesque’ makes it possible for an academic subject’s content to end up with no overlap at all onto the real subject from whence that branch of academia sprang." The recent offerings by Josephson and Metzer reinforced the evidence from Pepper in 1993 . (Note that Pepper writes; "If I understand the position correctly, your question concerns .... ", and; " .... If I may restate the basis of your question, what is the maximum frequency .... ".) All of them mention "frequency" when thinking they are responding to "The Catt Question" , which involves no frequency whatsoever. Although my 1995 article, quoted above, is prescient, it excludes the idea of the collapse of understanding of past wellknown material. However, this is in my earlier writing, "The Rise and Fall of Bodies of Knowledge" ; "The central body of knowledge ossifies, becomes brittle and disintegrates." "Positive feedback down the generations of students will further the retreat from that particular subdiscipline," above, was a general statement. We now make an important advance in our research. We have found out the specific item of knowledge/confusion which trains, or "educates", Pepper/Josephson/Metzer to be incapable of "seeing" a voltage step, or a pulse, or a narrow spike of electromagnetic energy , Figure 9.2, bottom trace. What they see is an array of sine waves summing to that unlikely waveform. "There were six men of Hindustan , to learning much
inclined, However, the Hindustan precedent is not complete. McEwan, Pepper, Josephson, Metzer, are not blind. They are blinded by their mathematical/sinusoidal training, ad by bright light. "The Catt Question" does not catch these Rabbits in the headlights. Rather, in the blaze of the mathematical headlights they see, and learn, some weird and wonderful fantasies. They are correct to proclaim that their fantasies are beautiful. However, this does not entitle them to retreat from physical reality, taking what few innocent young students remain willing to travel with them, as Physics declines rapidly in student uptake and college faculties close down. @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Practical effects of burying physics or engineering in suffocating mathematics. Around 1980, the large Tigerfish torpedo had a problem. As a modern torpedo, it travelled under the target, where it exploded and lifted the ship so as to break its back. Sensing a ship overhead was achieved by sending a 1kHz (say) signal out from the front of the torpedo and picking up the reflection at the back. A narrow band amplifier was used to sense the 1kHz reflected electromagnetic energy. During tests along a Scottish loch, the receiving electronics would periodically tell the torpedo to explode for no clear reason. The signal received at the received before the amplifier was studied, and showed merely the occasional blip of noise. In GEC/Marconi Portsmouth, when the problem was dumped on me, a team of engineers had struggled with the problem for seven years, principally by narrowing the receiver's frequency response and increasing gain. Obviously, the amount of mathematics that could be pumped into the problem was impressive. I found that the receiving circuit contained inductors and capacitors (tank circuit) to give a narrow pass filter, and amplifiers. I inputted a single narrow pulse, and found that the "filter" outputted a nice sine wave of 1kHz. I telephoned my best analog circuit designer friend, Peter Gorrod, and pressed him on this. After a while, I said to him that surely the socalled "filter" was not a filter at all, but rather a resonator. He replied, "Yes, of course." Far from stopping other frequencies than 1kHz (say), it took any input energy and turned it into an output of 1kHz. If you push your child on the swing with random impulses, and someone else in front of you pushes her back towards you with random impulses, occasionally the swing will oscillate a great deal. It is statistically inevitable. Similarly, the "narrow band amplifier" would inevitably call for firing the explosive at some random time. Narrowing its frequency response and increasing its gain, which was being done, would only exacerbate the problem. I replaced the linear components  resistor, inductor, capacitor and op amp  with one of the new, then rather slow, microprocessors, plus a circular shift register of eight "counters" (actually stores of an increasing binary value), making the number in one counter get all the way round in 1 msec. An analog to digital converter digitised the received signal eight times per msec, and added it to the passing counter. Every millisecond, all eight cumulative counts were reduced by some factor  say 10%. The signal was expected to grow out of the noise. In particular, one counter should be a maximum, and the counter half way round from it should show a negative maximum. [Note 1.] At no stage was mathematics significant. Further, it is difficult to see how any mathematics could be applied usefully to the real problem, which was intellectually taxing. [Note 1.] Because of the dead hand of mathematics lying astride radio (sinusoidal, or resonant) design, no orthodox designer could see where the problem was for seven years. They were all misled by having a resonator circuit wrongly described as a filter. The mathematics did not help, but only obscured, the key point for seven expensive years.  Ivor Catt, 10 July 2007 Note 1. The central problem is that the "narrow band filter", or "narrow band amplifier" was indifferent as to which positive half cycle it received input energy in. If it received double in one positive half cycle of 1kHz and none in the next positive half cycle, it would output exactly the same. By taking out the resonator, it was possible to start to analyse the received signal properly. One could make sure that the profile of numbers trapped in the eight "counters" correctly reflected the proper profile for a sine wave. However, this approach could not begin until the dead hand of tradition, which assumed that "physical reality is composed of sine waves", as Howie told me, was evaded. Since I came out of the digital stable, I could solve the problem. However, the radio man prevent me from publishing about it, so the same mistake will be continually repeated. Lucky Gorbachov stopped the hordes before we tried to. However, the Russians, like everyone else, slavishly follow the Mathematical Myth, even more than we do. Even their Sputnik described a "Pure Form", beloved of Mathematical Hobgoblins. When I found that the English did not want to learn that we could probably predetonate incoming missiles with a very narrow, powerful electromagnetic pulse, I tried the Israelis, who were experiencing just that at the time. I found that the Israelis insisted on keeping within the bounds of Western technological illusions, however much it might cost them in lives. After all, the next job of an Israeli scientist might be in England or the USA. He must not jeopardise his career and his family's future by cheating! Dear Kurt, the massive cost of obstruction of communication by mathematical hobgoblins is illustrated by the problem of trying to kill Russians with weapons devoted to mathematics rather than to war. This is probably the document you need to send to your "Mathematical Association". Tell them that mathematical obfuscation castrates out technology and aids the terrorists.  Ivor, 10 July 2007. 

