|
|
Accountability in Science Ivor Catt 29May2006 |
| Summary of the situation as of June 2006 The situation can be analysed in two ways. First, the way the Scientific Establishment should see it. The Establishment view. After purporting to contribute advances, minor and major, in electromagnetic theory and digital design, Catt conceded that his alleged contributions, particularly in the more sacred area of electromagnetic theory, should be dismissed as of no value. This view is reinforced by the fact that none of his work has been published in any relevant learned journal for more than thirty years. Further, none of his work has figured in any relevant college course in the world during that period. In his newly found humility, Catt requests instruction in the classical theory, which numerous text book writers and other commentators say reached perfection a century ago. At the start of Catt's request is “The Catt Question”, previously, and arrogantly, called “The Catt Anomaly”. In 1993 The Master of (Newton's college,) Trinity College, Cambridge, was also President of the Royal Society. He instructed (Now Sir) Michael Pepper F.R.S, Fellow of Trinity and a Professor at the Cavendish, to comment. In 1995 the Dean of Bradford University instructed his Reader in Electromagnetism, Dr. Neil McEwan, to comment. McEwan totally contradicted Pepper. In 2005, Nobel Prizewinner Brian Josephson, Fellow of Trinity and Professor at the Cavendish, volunteered a comment on “The Catt Question” which echoed that of McEwan and totally contradicted the comment of his close colleague Pepper. The Scientist's and Sociologist's view. There is a collapse in competence in electromagnetic theory as a result of the suppression of Oliver Heaviside's work on digital design in the nineteenth century, for instance his concept of "energy current". Because he was suppressed, Heaviside's advances had to be rediscovered by the early workers on high speed (1 nsec logic) electronic computers in the twentieth century. These repeat advances were in turn ignored and again suppressed by academia and even by the relevant learned journals and societies. Independently of the worldwide academia and learned societies, electromagnetic theory had to be taken further by those pioneering high speed digital systems. Today, massive progress is evaded and ignored by academia and learned journals, who have developed a laager defence against a half century of progress, exampled by three books on my websites. The Catt Anomaly - now called "The Catt Question". None of the material in these three books or in Heaviside's 19th century (also digital) work on electromagnetism is used in any university course in the world or in any text book in the world. Heaviside, the pioneer of digital electronics, is only mentioned cursorily in one text book on electromagnetic theory after around 1920. [However, this single author told me he had not read Heaviside. He only read about Heaviside in Whittaker.] Heaviside's work on electromagnetism is unknown to relevant professors and text book writers. They do not have a grasp of the Transverse Electromagnetic Wave ( TEM Wave ), the Primitive on which digital electronics builds. Their technical incompetence - the confusion shown by relevant professors when asked "The Catt Question" should not allow them to fail in their administrative role, which requires that they hold a conference to discuss the question. They must not be allowed to buttress their technical incompetence with adminstrative incompetence. Ivor Catt 6June 2006 @@@@@@@@@@@@@' [From "The Catt Anomaly." ] To the Chief Executive, IEE Savoy Place, London WC2R 0BL Dear Sir, The Catt Anomaly .... .... I am certain that Catt only wants the IEE [or Trinity College Cambridge - IC 6.6.06] to fulfil its role .... - an IEE [or Cambridge] Journal announces forthcoming discussion; discussion occurs; agreed summary of discussion is reported in an IEE [or Cambridge] Journal. Please advise if financial considerations are restraining the IEE [or Cambridge] from doing its duty. Yours faithfully [signed] Eugen Hockenjos, B.Sc., DipHE. 25/11/95 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@ .
| |
|
| |