https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Oscillator_block_diagram.svg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chetvorno
Straight falsification by Chris Burks. (Chetvorno)
The second diagram in the Article shows
electric current entering the capacitor. It should also show the electric
current spreading out across the capacitor plate. http://www.ivorcatt.org/icrwiworld78dec1.htm ; http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x18j41.pdf . This current should be discussed in the article. Ivor
Catt, February 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.171.64 (talk) 23:20, 21 February
2014 (UTC) The second diagram in the Article wrongly shows the
electric field as uniform. It is not. http://www.ivorcatt.org/icrwiworld78dec1.htm . Ivor Catt, 1 March 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.171.64 (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2014
(UTC) It is not important. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x436.htm , Ivor Catt 5 March 2014
Chris Burks has inserted “It is not important”,
attributing it to me. It is very important indeed, and undermines classical electromagnetism. This bears on
the Royal Society article http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/yak.htm
Ivor Catt 29.7.2020.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
The system of
censorship in Wikipedia by its Thought Police is interesting. The founder Jimmy
Wales says he wants “peer reviewed” information. His honorary workers like
“Chris Burks” remove all material which contradicts peer reviewed information.
Thus, in particular, major scientific advances, silenced by the academic mafia,
are removed. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x6611.pdf
On 3.2.2020 I
attempted to put http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x436.htm
on the Wikipedia entry on “Ivor Catt”. This brought up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Authority_control
and I was blocked.
A
few years ago, I was allowed to put http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/72w.htm
on the home page on Ivor Catt. It was allowed at the bottom, not the top, which
I had requested. However, it has now been removed. The thought police rapidly
remove any factual or other corrections I try to put on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivor_Catt
The
suppression is indicated by an automatic insertion called “Authority Control”
at the bottom of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivor_Catt
. Let us see how long before this addition “Authority Control” is removed.
I now understand how the Thought Police works. In my case, the
man monitoring the web page on “Ivor Catt” is called “Chris Burks”. He says he
monitors and corrects many websites. In http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/72w.htm
I pointed out the many errors in his “summary” of my work at the top on the
article on Ivor Catt. Burks responded by removing all discussion of my most
important work, which is on electromagnetic theory. He did not remove the
massive amount of discussion of my work in the “Talk” pages.
Chris
Burks says he corrects anything which differs from “peer reviewed” information.
He does not know that “peer review” blocked all my work for 40 years. Then
there was a breakthrough into “peer reviewed” journals with what Burks would
see as heresy. Thus, material blocked by peer review got into the top peer
reviewed journal.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/yak.htm . Yakovlev praised
his peer reviewers for letting him publish peer reviewed heresy. Will Chris
Burks now let my work back into the home page on “Ivor Catt”? Or will there
continue to be no mention of my massive work in electromagnetic theory?
Of
course, as a leading silenced scientist, I should be grateful to be allowed in
Wikipedia at all. Another leading scientist, superior to me, Stephen Crothers,
is kept off Wikipedia altogether, and merely rubbished in https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Stephen_J._Crothers
. The academic mafia (Pop Scientists) should congratulate the founder of
Wikipedia for helping them to hold the line against scientific advance like http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/yak.htm
, which is very destructive.
While
doing this on 3.2.2020, I stumbled on an automatic algorithm for blocking
criticisms of Wikipedia. Very interesting. The trouble is, Chris Burks and the
others can put more time into misrepresenting people like Catt and Crothers
than they themselves can to correcting them. We don’t know how many Wik thought police there are.
The plot thickens.
Drawing by Chris Burks. From the Wikipedia article,
“Cavendish Experiment” spring. Using a
I, Chetvorno (Chris Burks), release this image to the public domain
for any use whatever.
The
Wikipedia Thought Police.
Google for “wikipedia
thought police” has 4,000 hits.
Google search for “displacement current” had
200,000 hits. Wikipedia was no. 1, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Displacement_current and Ivor Catt was no. 2 http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/z001.htm
, published in 1978. (Surprisingly, it sometimes suddenly drops to no. 19, and
then back to no. 2.)
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chetvorno “My name is Chris Burks. I concentrate on writing and improving articles in
my areas of interest: electronics, physics, horology, history of technology, pacifism, and international folk dance. Lately I have
specialized in making technical, scientific and engineering articles more
understandable for the general reader,”
However, he did contribute to the Wikipedia article “Displacement Current” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Displacement_current in spite of his many other “commitments”. He
aborted my attempt to point out a flaw in classical, text book theory in the
“Talk” page. Since my attempts to insert anything in the “Article” proper have
been quickly removed for a many years, I tried the “Talk” page. The third
paragraph below is my attempt, and the Thought Police responded with the fourth
paragraph, which restates the text book version of the subject, dismissing the
point I made as “not important”. He writes; “Lately I have specialized in making technical, scientific and engineering
articles more understandable for the general reader.”
He correctly brought my entry “back into the fold”, the fold being the text
book version which has survived for more than a century. His behaviour is in line with the founder of Wikipedia, who has
said he wants “peer reviewed material”. It is true that my article
“Displacement Current” http://www.ivorcatt.org/icrwiworld78dec1.htm
could not be published in a peer reviewed journal. It was published in Wireless
World . However, it is usually no. 2 hit in Google. Should
there be a hyperlink to it from the Wikipedia page “Displacement Current”? My 1978 article http://www.ivorcatt.org/icrwiworld78dec1.htm
says “The flaw in this [text
book] model is revealed when we notice that the electric current entered the
capacitor at one point only on the capacitor plate.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Displacement_current
“Origins
of Displacement Current[edit]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chetvorno
Articles
Chris Burks say he has been involved in.
