From: "ivor catt" <email@example.com>
To: ""Ian Montgomery"
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 12:31 PM
"Would anyone on this list have an idea as to how we may in
the future get down to direct observation at the femtoscale?"
- Ian Montgomery
It looks af though Pepper
is your man. " .... He will show how
single-electron processes and wave-functions can be detected
....". [But he's unable to handle a
whole row of them. ]
CERN and similar approaches to measurement are scams, and have nothing
to do with advancing science. As discussed in my book "Computer
Worship" , pub. Pitman 1973, when Mrs. Goodship, librarian,
IEE London, unlocked the door to the Heaviside Library, containing
Heaviside's marginal comments on his own copies of Maxwell's books,
all the books were thick with dust. Nobody from the multi-billion
dollar doughnuts being excavated on the Swiss-French border, or
in Texas, had touched Heaviside's books since before CERN began.
They have still never heard of "energy current", Heaviside's
Energy Current ; Wikipedia
on Energy Current
I got the fastest sampling scope in 1964, the Tek 601 with 4S2
(100picosec) plug-in. The pictures I gained looking at high speed
electromagnetic signals have been ignored for the next 40 years,
and by this circulation. Nobody in CERN knows about them. Their
implications do not figure in any college course or text book in
the world. Digital
It is important to distinguish between (1) science, and scientific
observation, and (2) scam. Lower echelons in a scam often do not
know they are involved in a scam. The former (1) is not done any
more. However, there is a lot of money to be made in the entertianment
industry (Modern Physics) by talking nano and femto. My hero Pepper
is at it. That's where the money is, and even more, where the prestige
is - in the entertainment industry.
I should be very grateful that Sir ever condescended to write some
drivel on "The Catt Question".
Do a Google search for "pepper frs", and then try to get
back to real science. For instance, you can write to Pepper and
ask him if he now believes his 1993
exegesis on Cattq is faulty.