The step proposed to be taken by the International Association of Scientists to keep a record of even the discoveries mentioned in the books which don’t get sold
--
Though there may be many reasons why some science books sell and some books don’t sell but the most alarming thing about the books which do not sell such as my two books on science is about the discoveries described by their authors in the books written by them.
Though their authors describe the discoveries made by them in their books, nobody may come to know about them unless some people may read such books.
Just writing about their discoveries in their books is not enough.
So writing about such discoveries in their books does not let anybody come to know about such discoveries.
As such a question arises, “Can this problem be solved, somehow?”
Sure enough, it is not a problem which can’t be solved.
Many books do not sell just because people have a notion that it is a waste of time to read the books written by non-PhDs.
Though non-PhDs don’t have the experience of writing research papers written by the people who pursue PhD in science nor do they have the experience of getting their papers reviewed by any peers, it does not imply that they can’t make any worthwhile discoveries.
To presume that they can’t make any worthwhile discoveries amounts to believing that science has already made all discoveries of the “grass-root level” and now any further discoveries may be made only by the people who are well versed with the techniques of using mathematical models of the type Albert Einstein should have used to enunciate the theories of relativity and the concept of dilation of time but the fact is — it is not so.
It is enough to have a look at the article https://amp.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2013/apr/17/grassroots-innovnation-solutions” to believe that it is only a misconception to have such a notion.
If I take my case, though I am not a PhD in science I am, anyway, a Double Graduate — a “Science Graduate” as well as an “Engineering Graduate”.
I graduated in science in the year 1957 and graduated in mechanical engineering with Honors in the year 1961.
I may refer you to the following discoveries made by me — both of which happen to be of grass-root type since I did not have to use any mathematical models to discover them.
One of the discoveries relates to the discovery of converting the classic three-axis Cartesian system which does not let us define more than three coordinates of any multidimensional object into a system which lets us define all coordinates of an object which may have more than three dimensions or more than three coordinates.
It is capable of taking even an infinite number of coordinates into its ambit.
Is it not true that almost everybody has taken it for granted that the Cartesian system may take care of only three dimensions — the X-dimension, the Y-dimension and the Z-dimension?
In my book “Revolutionizing Science: Uncovering the Potential of Science’s Untapped Territory”, I have described a method of converting the classic Cartesian system into a multi-dimensional system.
Here is a brief description of the system evolved by me which makes it possible.
A brief description of how we may convert the classic Cartesian System into a multidimensional system
It would not be out of place to tell that much in the same way as the idea of using the lines where two walls and the ceiling of the room of René Descartes met, as X-axis, Y-axis and Z–axis had struck him — the idea of branching X-axis into XY and XZ-axes, branching Y-axis into YX and YZ-axes and Z-axis into ZX and ZY-axes, as shown in the following diagram, struck me by looking at the manner in which two or more than two branches grow on various branches of a tree.
If you look at the end of the X-axis where it meets the XY-axis and the XZ-axis in this diagram, do the XY-axis and the XZ-axis not look like two branches of a tree which may have grown at the end of the X-axis?
Precisely, the YX-axis and the YZ-axis meeting at the end of the Y-axis also look like two branches of a tree which may have grown at the end of the Y-axis.
In the same way, the ZX-axis and ZY-axis also look like two branches of a tree which may have grown at the end of Z-axis.
As shown in this diagram, we may branch out even the XY-axis into XYX-axis and XYZ-axis; and even XYX-axis into XYXY-axis and the XYXZ-axis.
Likewise, we may treat even the XYZX-axis and XYZY-axis as branches of the XYZ-axis.
The coordinates measured along the XYZY-axis may be treated as the XYZY coordinate of the object, the coordinates of which may be shown using such a system.
OF COURSE, MORE THAN TWO BRANCHES CAN’T GROW AT THE END OF ANY AXIS.
Though I have described this system in this book, which got published this very year but of what use because not even a single copy of this book has been sold until now?
This book is available not only in US dollars on amazon.com, but its Indian edition (which has been published by notionpress.com), is also available online on flipkart.com as well as on amazon.in.
But because not even a single book has been sold, my discovery has not come to notice of anybody, until now.
The fact is — what is true about the proverbial horse which may be brought to a pond to let him drink the water but can’t force him to drink the water if he may not be willing to drink, is also true about the books we may write.
Though we may write about such discoveries in our books, we can’t force anybody to read them if they don’t want to read them.
However, just because nobody bothers to read the science books written by non-PhDs these days, is it not tragic that nobody comes to know about all such discoveries?
Another discovery which has also met the same fate
The other discovery is about the use of bigger complex numbers than only the “a ± ib” type of complex numbers. When the “a ± ib” type of complex numbers came into vogue, nobody ever thought that someday, we may be able to use such numbers in the manner in which we use them, say, in Electrical Engineering. In the same manner, though we, presently, don’t know how we may use the complex numbers of the type “a ± ib ± jc ± kd ± le”, in which “j” stands for the “Cube root of Minus 1”, “k” stands for the “Fourth root of Minus 1”, and “l” stands for the “Fifth root of Minus 1”, we can’t rule out the possibility of using even such complex numbers sooner or later.
Though this system has been also described in detail in the same book, it has also met the same fate as the discovery of how we may convert the classic Cartesian system into a multidimensional system.
Since not even a single copy of this book has been sold as yet, if anybody rediscovered these possibilities, nobody would ever come to know that these discoveries had been already made in the year 2023 by someone.
THEREFORE, WOULD IT BE WRONG ON MY PART TO CAUTION THAT NOT KNOWING ABOUT THE DISCOVERIES DESCRIBED BY NON-PHDS IN THEIR BOOKS AMOUNTS TO CLOSING A FEW GATES THROUGH WHICH KNOWLEDGE MAY ENTER THE ORB OF SCIENCE THOUGH WE SHOULD, IN RIGHT EARNEST, KEEP ALL GATES OPEN?
But don’t you think — some records of such discoveries should be also kept by some international agency so that it may be possible to keep a track of them?
If we look for some agency of this nature, there may not be any agency better than the “International Association of Scientists”.
IT IS FOR THIS REASON ONLY THAT I WANT TO PROPOSE THAT AT LEAST, THE “INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SCIENTISTS” MAY SAFEGUARD SUCH DISCOVERIES INSTEAD OF LETTING THEM LICK THE DUST BY CREATING A WING WHICH MAY BUY A FEW COPIES OF ALL SUCH BOOKS AND NOT ONLY ARCHIVE THEM BUT ALSO KEEP A RECORD OF ALL SUCH DISCOVERIES.
