|
|
Comment on Letter to those
responsible for electromagnetic theory May04 |
|
1 The ongoing project differs fundamentally from previous work on the Scientific Reception System. Below is the key letter. It proves that my research, which now proves that the Enlightenment is over, gives us an open conclusion that can be refuted by anyone into the future. All they have to do is to show that the situation has changed, and an accredited luminary will after all comment on the elementary fundamentals of his craft. In the past, research led to conclusions that were closed, and not refutable by new evidence arising later in time. In this case, in contrast, there remains an open challenge to refute the conclusion. The key factors contained in the letter below are; “4. Should Ivor
Catt have approached the matter differently, and if so, how? How should he
approach the matter now?” It is
possible that the continuing refusal to answer these two questions proves
that in general the thesis, that the Enlightenment is over, is generally
known but must not be admitted. “What is Truth?” said Pilate, and would not
stay for an answer. I will not
accept a cut-and-run assertion that Catt approached the matter wrongly. To be
valid, he who makes such an assertion has to stay to discuss his assertion,
perhaps by taking over the experiment and then showing that he can elicit
comment or clarification by accredited luminaries. 2 For more
than ten years, I have offered money to any student who elicits written,
signed comment on The Catt Question from an accredited luminary. I
gradually increased the amount. I propose that this offer be put on a more
solid footing, perhaps with the Editor
of Electronics World as Mediator. The idea is to demonstrate more and
more clearly that no student is willing to risk his academic career by trying
to get his accredited lecturer to supply meaningful, written, dated, signed
comment on The Catt Question. As I
upload this document, I increase the payment to the first successful student
to £250. There is
now a lesser prize of £100 to each of the first three students who supply
documentary evidence that they tried and failed. “Accredited” means Reader in Electromagnetism, author of published text book, or similar. Professor of Electronic Engineering will do, but not Professor of Electrical Engineering. Ivor Catt 16may04 |
|
|
Ivor Catt, 121 Westfields, St. Albans AL3 4JR, England. (01727 864257 +44 1727 864257 email ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ 31dec99 Second
copy sent 4feb00 except to [10], [13] and [14]
25feb00, copies sent to [15] and [16] Further copy sent to all addressees below in early
2004 Dear Sirs, by I. Catt, pub. Westfields Press, 1996, ISBN 0 906340 13 6 (To exclude the
possibility of personality problems, I have not until now communicated with
the main parties direct.) The book with the
above title was published in 1996. It is available on my website, and there
is a copy in Trinity College Library, Cambridge. Since then, the Lynch-Catt paper
on the problem was given at the IEE Group S7 Conference on 10 July 1998. This
paper was later published in the Conference Proceedings, and is available on
my website, (the key diagram, p3 of the book
The Catt Anomaly, being enclosed herewith). Your responsibility
in this matter is discussed in the book, which is about to be re-issued. You are invited to
send me your comments for inclusion, unedited, in the new edition of the
book. Your comments will also go onto my website. You may also want
to avail yourself of "Riposte", which is explained on my website
Home Page. This enables you to have a hyperlink from anywhere on my website,
to a website of your choosing, to rebut any assertion made on my website. You may or may not
wish to respond to these specific questions; 1. Is the Westerner
view (Howie, McEwan) incompatible
with the Southerner view (Pepper)? 2. Are you a
Westerner or a Southerner? 3. Should a
conference be convened to discuss The Catt Anomaly? (See p55 of my
book.) If so, who should organise it, who finance it, and who should be guest
speakers? (I note that G De Santillana, in The Crime of Galileo, pub.
1955, writes that the main mistake in handling Galileo [the earth moves] was
to approach it administratively, which is your mistake over The Catt
Anomaly. ".... if a decision had to be taken, a council was in
order. To deal with the question on an administrative level [Note 1] was not
only an arbitrary procedure; it was an inexcusable mistake, which is the
necessary premise to the graver mistake of the trial sixteen years
later...." - De Santillana, p137) 4. Should Ivor Catt
have approached the matter differently, and if so, how? How should he
approach the matter now? Best wishes, Ivor Catt cc Professor JG Gardiner, Dean of Engineering,
University of Bradford, BD7 1DP, UK 2] Dr. N.J. McEwan, Reader in Electromagnetics,
University of Bradford, BD7 1DP, UK Professor M Pepper FRS, Cavendish Laboratory,
Cambridge CB3 0HE Professor A. Howie FRS, Cavendish Laboratory,
Cambridge CB3 0HE Professor Broers, Vice Chancellor, Cambridge
University. Professor Atiyah, Emeritus Master, Trinity College,
Cambridge Professor A Sen, Master, Trinity College, Cambridge The Secretary, IEE, Savoy Place, London, WC2R 0BL Professor Secker, IEE, Savoy Place, London WC2R 0BL 10] James W Mink, IEEE, Chairman MTT-15, North
Carolina State University, Box 7911, Raleigh, NC 27695-7911 Robert T Wangemann, Managing Director, Technical
Activities, IEEE, 445 Hoes Lane, PO Box 1331, Piscataway, NJ 08855-1331 Note 1. ".... Dr. Mink generously took his personal
time to provide you with a reply. With respect to the views of Professor
Pepper and Dr. McEwan, he stated that "I am in general agreement with
their assessment of the "Catt Anomaly"." We do not believe it to be appropriate to again search
out a volunteer to review another volunteer's reply." - RT Wangemann....
5feb97. 12] Dr. P T Warren, The Executive Secretary, The
Royal Society, 6 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1Y 5AG "Two Fellows of the Royal Society, Professor A
Howie and Professor M Pepper, give diametrically opposed versions of a
rudimentary aspect of electromagnetic theory, the subject central to their
expertise which led to their appointment as Fellows of the Royal Society
...." - IC to Dr PT Warren, Royal Soc, 24sep95 23jan00, copies sent to [13] and [14] 13] Chief Executive, Institute of Electrical and
Electronic Engineers, 345E 47th St., New York, NY 10017, USA The President, Institute of Physics, 76 Portland
Place, London W1N 3DH 14] Professor Ken Collier (Wheatstone Lecture
Dec97), University of Kent, Canterbury 25feb00, copies sent to [15] and [16] 15] Professor Malcolm Longair, The Cavendish
Laboratory, Cambridge. 16] Richard Friend, Cavendish Professor of Physics,
The Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge |
|