On Jan 18, 3:36 am, "Ed Cregger" wrote:
snip

Many of you are far more educated than I, but many of you
demonstrate precisely why I chose not to be brainwashed with
a formal education. Many cannot see past the end of their
noses, yet they insist upon laying down the law regarding
what is acceptable science and what is not. As though anyone
actually knows anything at all.

snip

Let's not forget that one's educational level has nothing to
do with native IQ.

Ed, NM2K

You are correct to say that education has nothing to do with IQ.
Faraday had little formal training, yet his arduous work is now
exalted by naming one of the basic electromagnetic laws after him. But
I take issue with the idea that you can't actually know anything at
all. For instance, electrodynamic theory was developed 150 years ago,
and the KNOWN successful results of that are numerous.

Newtonian mechanics held up well for hundreds of years. A whole
industrial revolution was built on it. Yet some pesky observations by
Michelson and Morley regarding the invariant speed of light found it
wanting. Relativistic mechanics subsumed Newtonian mechanics, but
Einstein didn't invalidate Newton. I believe the mathematical term
"embedding" applies.

I am currently re-studying the original theory of Maxwell, et. al.,
with the intent of finding some chink in the armor. Tesla reported
longitudinal electromagnetic wave phenomena, which contradicts the now-
standard theory that EM waves can ONLY be transversal. Using Maxwell's
original quaternion equations, before Heviside simplified them into
the now-standard vector form, one can derive longitudinal wave
components. If those exist, does that prove you don't know how to
operate a ham radio? No, it just means you're radiating something in
addition to what you expect.

You CAN know something and apply it. You just need to realize that
what you know isn't complete, and never can be.