First, thanks greatly to Cyril for his good work on this introductory paper.
I would agree with Cyril's intention at the end of the paper that a new thread be started. May I suggest "Magnetic Compression Studies" as a title for the thread?
I would not agree that an "effect" be named an "effect", before it is proven by replication that "the effect" actually exists.
In other words an "effect" should be observable and testable by anyone who sets up the experiment, based on a full disclosure of the details of the experiment by the party that first notices the "effect"
In light of the fact that Graham, although given ample time to fully disclose either to this community or elsewhere, has not done so, I believe the title should be changed to something more generic e.g. "Magnetic Compression Study" by Cyril Smith.
I use the word "study" because that is exactly what it should be. A hypothesis is presented and it should be studied to see if an "effect" can be demonstrated and observed in the lab and then replicated, which could thus lead to a "theory".
When it is determined that such a study leads to an novel "effect", then IMO, it should be first named "The Smith Effect" after Cyril who has hypothesized and identified and freely given the necessary structure for replication, without reserve.
When it is determined that the Gunderson transformer and associated circuitry is indeed operating according to Cyril's named effect, then perhaps Gunderson's name can be included in the title or perhaps in the text, but again, only if he fully co-operates with Cyril and / or the community with full disclosure and participation.
It is sad to see that because of Gunderson's non-cooprative stance, much guesswork has ensued and time has been wasted, when everything could have moved along much more quickly. This is not the way of science.
There is a somwhat a danger in posting a paper with such a title, because there are those entities that are poised looking for something exactly like this to buttress the next commercial release, which will probably be named " Beyond The Secrets of the Implosion Transformer" .You can be certain this paper and anything that follows will be scooped up by certain for profit entities and used in future commercial releases as a "proof positive", even though such proof has not yet been established, and worse yet, even if the hypothesis fails it will be probably be given a "pass" by those entities.
I have given this a lot of thought and believe that we should work the science of discovery carefully, and not skip the proper steps.
FWIW, do as you will.
Kind Regards ION
« Last Edit: 2016-09-28, 12:34:53 by ION »
---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
|