If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.
Special Thanks To:
Aaron Holmes
Aaron Wheeler
Adam Horden
Alan Scrimgeour
Andre
Andrew Haynes
Anonymous000
asabase
Austin Weil
barney
Barry
Bert Hickman
Bill Kukowski
Blitzorn
Brandon Paradelas
Bruce Bowling
BubeeMike
Byong Park
Cesiumsponge
Chris F.
Chris Hooper
Corey Worthington
Derek Woodroffe
Dalus
Dan Strother
Daniel Davis
Daniel Uhrenholt
datasheetarchive
Dave Billington
Dave Marshall
David F.
Dennis Rogers
drelectrix
Dr. John Gudenas
Dr. Spark
E.TexasTesla
eastvoltresearch
Eirik Taylor
Erik Dyakov
Erlend^SE
Finn Hammer
Firebug24k
GalliumMan
Gary Peterson
George Slade
GhostNull
Gordon Mcknight
Graham Armitage
Grant
GreySoul
Henry H
IamSmooth
In memory of Leo Powning
Jacob Cash
James Howells
James Pawson
Jeff Greenfield
Jeff Thomas
Jesse Frost
Jim Mitchell
jlr134
Joe Mastroianni
John Forcina
John Oberg
John Willcutt
Jon Newcomb
klugesmith
Leslie Wright
Lutz Hoffman
Mads Barnkob
Martin King
Mats Karlsson
Matt Gibson
Matthew Guidry
mbd
Michael D'Angelo
Mikkel
mileswaldron
mister_rf
Neil Foster
Nick de Smith
Nick Soroka
nicklenorp
Nik
Norman Stanley
Patrick Coleman
Paul Brodie
Paul Jordan
Paul Montgomery
Ped
Peter Krogen
Peter Terren
PhilGood
Richard Feldman
Robert Bush
Royce Bailey
Scott Fusare
Scott Newman
smiffy
Stella
Steven Busic
Steve Conner
Steve Jones
Steve Ward
Sulaiman
Thomas Coyle
Thomas A. Wallace
Thomas W
Timo
Torch
Ulf Jonsson
vasil
Vaxian
vladi mazzilli
wastehl
Weston
William Kim
William N.
William Stehl
Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
From: Denis Rancourt <dgratphysicsuottawaca> Subject: Victory in Disciplined Minds case Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 23:54:54 -0400
Dear fellow physicist,
Your courage to take a public stand on a close-to-home issue has won justice for a fired fellow physicist and has promoted free expression within the physics community.
Over five years ago we sent you an appeal beginning: "Physics Today magazine recently gave a punishing review to a book written by physicist Jeff Schmidt..."[1] For 19 years Jeff was a staff editor at our professional journal, Physics Today -- until his supervisors saw his book Disciplined Minds. Based upon examples from physics graduate training and beyond, it provocatively critiques workplace hierarchy in general and the politically subordinate role of people hired to do creative work.[2] The magazine's review: "...[they] fired him."
The resulting appeal to physicists and others landed in fertile soil and, through your efforts, justice has finally been done. You will not read about it in Physics Today, and so we are writing now to give you the story and to thank you for your support.
Your public response, from over 35 countries, was unprecedented. More than 1000 scientists, activists, and others in many fields -- including the largest number of physicists ever to speak out on a freedom-of-expression issue in the United States -- sent the American Institute of Physics (AIP), which publishes Physics Today, strongly worded demands for justice, all now public.[3] A human-rights committee of scientists affiliated with a unit of the IEEE investigated and issued a public report[4] condemning Jeff's dismissal.
Bringing such public judgment on Jeff's firing was already a form of justice because of the toll on AIP's image. Such punitive justice is available to any wronged individual unafraid to go public. Jeff deeply appreciates and thanks you for your support.[2] You can contact him at **link**.
*Compensatory justice*
Encouraged by your passionately expressed view that our institutions should uphold our community values, we continued the campaign for free expression -- with the goal of compensatory justice.
We took your protests to the American Physical Society, which plays a major role in governing AIP, and asked[5] the organization to oppose Jeff's dismissal, as it does when dissident physicists outside the United States are punished for expressing their views. APS officials, in what amounts to tacit approval of Jeff's firing, refused even to investigate the same issue close to home. This prompted us to urge Jeff to take legal action. campaign for free expression -- with the goal of compensatory justice.
We took your protests to the American Physical Society, which plays a major role in governing AIP, and asked[5] the organization to oppose Jeff's dismissal, as it does when dissident physicists outside the United States are punished for expressing their views. APS officials, in what amounts to tacit approval of Jeff's firing, refused even to investigate the same issue close to home. This prompted us to urge Jeff to take legal action.
Hence, Jeff approached the most prominent Washington, D.C., civil-rights law organization, which, impressed by your protests, took the case pro bono publico. ("That's Latin for 'free,'" says Jeff.) The lawyers filed suit[6] and obtained internal AIP documents. After AIP handed over the embarrassing and incriminating documents -- which are now public[7] -- it capitulated and signed a legally binding settlement agreement. Some highlights:
1. Payment. AIP paid Jeff what we estimate[8] to be at least half a million dollars.
2. Public settlement. AIP agreed to Jeff's demand that the settlement agreement be a public document.[9]
3. Symbolic reinstatement. AIP reinstated Jeff to his position at Physics Today magazine.[10] A few hours later Jeff resigned.
4. Public statement by AIP. The American Institute of Physics publicly acknowledged that Jeff's supervisors and others praised his work and that AIP fired him for his provocative expression.[11]
5. Employment reference. AIP has given Jeff a positive reference letter.[12]
6. Discrimination remediation. While employed at Physics Today, Jeff led a contentious effort to force the magazine to change its long-standing pattern of hiring and training only whites as editors, and to live up to its claim of being an affirmative- action employer. These actions were part of the expression for which Jeff was fired.[6,13] Thus, to settle the case, AIP agreed[14] to...
..Support the National Society of Black Physicists (NSBP) and the National Society of Hispanic Physicists (NSHP) in becoming a member society of AIP and appointing a member of the AIP governing board.
..Encourage each of the ten AIP member societies to work with the NSBP and NSHP diversity council.
..Offer a science-writing course at an NSBP annual conference, which will increase the pool of talented minority-group editors.
..Maintain a program of mandatory diversity training for all AIP employees.
*Freedom of expression not embraced*
Although AIP's repressive behavior backfired, the organization has not welcomed free expression within the physics community. To settle the case, AIP demanded various censorships, including deleting text from critical articles published by the American Physical Society and by the Canadian Undergraduate Physics Journal.[15] AIP's behavior prompted the Canadian Undergraduate Physics Journal to lodge a strong, public protest.[16] It is posted at <http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/sanjoy/
schmidt/chronology/aipletter.pdf>
After the settlement, the American Institute of Physics, represented by the notorious union-busting law firm Jackson Lewis, slapped Jeff with a half-million-dollar legal action[17] to silence him and to prevent physicists from discussing the settlement. AIP claimed that snippets of text posted at the disciplinedminds.com website (such as the two words, "symbolic reinstatement," and the five words, "Schmidt's concessions to AIP's demands") each did $20,000 worth of damage to AIP, for a total of half a million dollars. AIP told Jeff that it would stop its legal action if he removes those phrases from the web and refrains from "all commentary regarding the settlement." We therefore regard AIP's legal filing as a SLAPP action (strategic lawsuit against public participation), one whose primary purpose is to stifle discussions of public interest.
We found this repressive behavior unacceptable for an institution of physics, which should show the public that physicists come to the truth through free discussion, not through censorship and intimidation. We wrote to AIP twice[18] demanding that it drop its SLAPP action and reverse the censorship of articles published by the American Physical Society and the Canadian Undergraduate Physics Journal.
AIP has not undone the censorship or compensated Jeff for the legal costs of defending against its SLAPP action, but -- in another victory for free expression -- AIP announced, in its response to our letters, that it would stop pursuing the legal action.
*We would like to hear from you*
Thank you for taking a public stand.
We hope that you will share your thoughts with us. Please share your thoughts with AIP too. (Send us a copy and, with your permission, we'll post it on the web.) Do let us know if you would like to know about further developments in this case or about similar cases. You can reach us at **link** (Denis Rancourt), and you can reach AIP at **link** (AIP governing board chair Mildred Dresselhaus).
Sincerely,
Denis Rancourt for
Fay Dowker, Physics Department, Imperial College London, UK Sanjoy Mahajan, Physics Department, University of Cambridge, UK Talat Rahman, Physics Department, University of Central Florida Denis Rancourt, Physics Department, University of Ottawa, Canada George Reiter, Physics Department, University of Houston
Registered Member #10
Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 09:45AM
Location: Bunbury, Australia
Posts: 1424
This is just distasteful reading I'm afraid. People suing each other for astronomical amounts way beyond reality (and certainly a crappy book review). As a scientist wannabee I find it really disturbing and in no way helpful to science. What a stuffed up society the US is in this regard. Australia is not far behind. (I've been sued successfully twice). In both cases I was doing my job. You see 20,000 people and you are bound to have someone sue you.
Now, wouldn't life be different if you got paid a huge amount more if you did a fabulous job. Think; I saved your life. You now have to pay half a million since I did so well and so much better than my peers. The whole of societies values might change.
(note: could one of the other mods shift this to Chatting forum perhaps)
Banned on April 7, 2007 Registered Member #277
Joined: Fri Mar 03 2006, 10:15AM
Location: Florida
Posts: 157
Recognizing discrimination within the scientific community is of paramount importance! The above re-post from Physicist Denis Rancourt, now being circulating throughout the scientific community, is yet another example throughout history that educated people are no more or no less immune to dispensing discrimination against people and ideas that they don't like. It's human nature, it's hardwired in, it's primordial cave-man mentality to repel those that are different. TRUE intellectuals, in my opinion, are those who have trained themselves to overcome the inherent desire to censor, delete, modify or discriminate against those people and ideas that don't fit perfectly into their worldview. Any caveman can boink (censor, modify, delete) another person on the head with a club in order to squelch his/her free speech, but it takes more highly evolved individuals to allow other's viewpoints, which may not perfectly match up to current worldview, to be expressed, unmolested. The lesson history teaches over and over and over, when going to battle against the extremists, whether you decide to call them pseudo-scientists or cranks, be very careful, lest ye yourself become an extremist at the opposite end. CM
Registered Member #30
Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706
Bill Beatty and CM: The two of you seem to have a colossal axe to grind. Can't you get your heads round the following:
1) This is an amateur science forum with a focus on practical hobbyist projects. It's NOT Nature or Physics Today!
2) We have no obligation to give you a right to free speech. You didn't pay to join. Since we provide 4hv.org as a free service, we can run it exactly how we please. We run it the way that we have found to be effective, in terms of retaining membership and minimizing flame warring.
3) If you don't like that, go start your own forum, and try to keep it running successfully for 8 years with 500+ members and over 100,000 posts. You'll soon see that you have to be as heavy-handed as we are, if not worse, to stop it degenerating into chaos.
To sum up: You might think we are cavemen, but when it comes to running a forum, we know what we are doing. You guys are probably the thin end of a wedge that would turn us into IU or JLN Labs if it was driven home, and we're not about to let you pull that off.
Banned on April 7, 2007 Registered Member #277
Joined: Fri Mar 03 2006, 10:15AM
Location: Florida
Posts: 157
Steve:
The point that this site has no obligation to provide free speech is clearly understood by pretty much everyone here at 4hv.org because it's been demonstrated so very, very often. "It's our site, we censor, because we can", doesn't come across as very enlightened... to more than a few, quite the opposite. Because you have the ability to squelch ideas, scientific worldviews, and other people's opinions that you don't like, doesn't mean that you should. "Might does not make right". Each time I see my posts and fellow member's posts being modified, or deleted, and I decide it's time to leave because of the muzzle on free speech here, one of the handful of true intellectuals here makes a insightful, thought-provoking post that keeps me hanging on. There are a handful of people here that bless this site with their input, which without that small handful; my guess is this site would be a ghost-town. Putting the cards on the table now... I know we've all been disgusted by the hair-brained Bermuda triangle alien conspiracy folks out there that say the silliest things in the world. 4hv.org is a great way to give safe haven to those of us who don't want to be exposed of that mindset anymore. For that, we are thankful. However, (me thinks) the noose on the dog is too tight, he can't breath easily, therefore he can't think clearly... it comes down to this, there are members, including me, that enjoy this site, but wish the censorship noose on this site could be loosed up a bit, let us breath, let us discuss a bit more easier, minus the fear of retribution, deletions or mods. One small example, I authored a several page paper on ElectroStatics explaining a hypothesis on how the combination of peak sky voltage, low-humidity, low-soil moisture, and wearing shoes that provide strong electrical isolation from the ground, can rationally and scientifically explain the 'force' behind Parts Scavenger's Dowsing question. My paper explained AWAY the pseudo-science and voodoo associated with dowsing and replaced it with a reasonable scientific hypothesis for members to ponder, consider and discuss... yet the censors here deleted the entire paper... wouldn't even permit fellow members to read it... and justified the deletion by pulling out and dusting off the seldom used 'Double Blind Test' as justification. Just another tactic used to squelch anyone who dares stretch the thought envelope even when stretched using basic scientific thought accepted at the high school level. By deleting my post, the 4hv censors assured that nobody could conduct a double blind test. Can you see how censorship can be counter-productive and inhibit scientific growth if abused? I think most everyone here are adults, maybe a few smart teenagers too, but the point is, let THEM read members posts and collectively decide if it's bunk or science. By deciding what grown adults can and can't read on this site, it's literally evolving into "Big Brother". I think we ALL agree… please do delete any posts about Tesla being from Venus, or that Doc. Brown really invented a working flux capacitor, or that you can build a working Star-Trek transporter from a handful of capacitors and a tesla coil, but please slacken up on the snipper fire, mods, deletions directed at anyone who happens to mention an idea, or hypothesis that isn’t necessarily in a college text book, but that is still based in the general realm of science. If you have to modify the site rules to loosen the noose, then do so. In closing, an analog is kind of like wearing a belt that is too tight, you can’t breathe easily, and can’t bend over easily… solution? You simply loosen it up a notch or two. That is all I and a few others are saying. Cheers. CM
Registered Member #162
Joined: Mon Feb 13 2006, 10:25AM
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3140
You could loosen the belt, but your trousers may then fall off- healthier to trim the fat for a good fit.
I have been a silent fan of Bill Beaty for many years -lots of thought provoking stuff, I have enjoyed reading your (CM) posts when you give us practical information about your projects, but this is the ONLY forum on the net that I regularly join/visit PRECISELY for the attitude of the moderators (most of the time)
My favourite electronics magazine in the 70's and early 80's was Electronics World, very informative leading-edge electronics. (I started with Practical Electronics and Everyday Electronics, later moved to Elektor) It was also the only magazine that gave endless space to readers interpretations of relativity which ultimately led (I believe) to it's demise. (along with the rise of the internet) It's still alive in the form of Electronics and Wireless World but I no longer subscribe, and very few newsagents carry it now. I wouldn't want 4HV to go that way.
However, Ideas that members can experiment with are excellent contributions, long may they live.
I hope that I'm not insulting any members, but I feel that this forum is mainly for amateur/profesional technicians/engineers - not really scientists. I'm sure that other aspects of members interests will have alternative forums on the net.
Sorry for the long rant, but I like 4HV and don't want it to change too much.
With reference to the thread of this topic (so I don't fall foul of the moderators) Yes - good that some alternative views are not totally supressed! But I hate the rise of litigation in society.
Registered Member #69
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 07:42AM
Location:
Posts: 116
CM wrote ...
I know we've all been disgusted by the hair-brained Bermuda triangle alien conspiracy folks out there that say the silliest things in the world. 4hv.org is a great way to give safe haven to those of us who don't want to be exposed of that mindset anymore.
I agree with this. This is what the rules and all the moderator interventions are for. It's not just the Bermuda triangle people though. Much more common are the people that know just enough to 'hypothesize' and but not enough to actually go anywhere with it. And are too lazy to bother trying. For example 'might static charges cause the effects seen in d0wsing?' blah, blah, blah with zero model building / quantitative analysis. Threads can meander on infinitely with such unexplored hypothesizing and have zero redeeming value.
If the Information Unlimited forum were still open I could show you some stupendous examples of what this leads to. It was a true bastion of Free Speech and if Free Speech is really what you want then man, you can have it... I would rather see moderation, even if that means my toes get stepped on from time to time.
Registered Member #15
Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 01:11PM
Location:
Posts: 3068
The forum is devoted to the discussion of amateur science projects and the practical application thereof.
If your posts were censored, or deleted, it is not that we don't accept your scientific views or ideas, but rather that they don't have a place in this particular forum. You certaintly wouldn't attend your local RC airplane club meeting, and then start talking about new ideas for deep space exploration propulsion systems, now would you? I'm pretty sure the members of that RC club would put a stop to those discussions quickly. Same goes here. We do respect your ideas and views, however, they should be discussed in a forum devoted to those topics.
And I find it especially rude and disrespectful to come onto this forum and accusing the members and staff of intellectual bigotry.
Geometrically Frustrated Registered Member #6
Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 04:18AM
Location: Bowdoin, Maine
Posts: 373
CM wrote ... Any caveman can boink (censor, modify, delete) another person on the head with a club in order to squelch his/her free speech, but it takes more highly evolved individuals to allow other's viewpoints, which may not perfectly match up to current worldview, to be expressed, unmolested.
As Dan said, 4hv has a set of topics that we cater to (mainly tesla coiling and high voltage). It is not an arena for you to post your ridiculous speculations. Dan said that we respect your views, but I'm going to disagree there. I don't respect you. You're a moron. The crap that spews from your mouth isn't rejected because you have a 'differing worldview,' it's rejected because you don't have a leg to stand on. We accept new science. We do not, however, entertain wild ideas that haven't seen a glimpse of the scientific method.
Oh, and you think we're squelching free speech? I call bullshit. You can dump the putrid fictions that you call science anywhere else but here. Make your own forum if you want to. Let people ramble on about hairbrained theories, blissfully unaware of the function of laboratory testing. A couple former 4hv users have tried their hand at that. I'd link you to their sites, but they don't exist anymore. It turns out that you have to have standards.
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.
Scandal: AIP & Physics Today found guilty, $500,000 judgement
