La valvola antisismica di Pier Luigi Ighina
Ad ogni terremoto, cioè più o meno ogni 5-6 anni, ci si pone le stesse domande. Si poteva prevedere? Si poteva evitare che accadesse?
La risposta alla prima domanda è: no, i terremoti non si possono prevedere, esistono dei segnali precursori, ma sono estremamente casuali (ci sono spesso senza che arrivi il terremoto, e possono non esserci anche se il terremoto arriva), il che li rende sostanzialmente inutili. I sismologi ci stanno lavorando, e quindi è inutile dire “ma si potrebbe guardare il radon, il comportamento degli animali, le scosse che precedono quella grossa”, sono tutte cose abbondantemente studiate e non usabili per dare un allarme.
La risposta alla seconda è un attimo più complessa. Possiamo ridurre i danni procurati da un sisma con un’opera di prevenzione, di messa in sicurezza degli edifici. Ma costa. Se ne è discusso fino alla nausea in questi giorni, sicuramente in modo più competente di come possa farlo io. Ma se esistesse un metodo semplice, economico (poche migliaia di euro), che agisse direttamente sul terremoto, riducendone l’intensità? Sarebbe fantastico. Un sistema del genere è stato proposto, ed addirittura installato in alcuni luoghi. Si tratta della colorata valvola antisismica inventata da Pier Luigi Ighina. Ma quando qualcosa è troppo bella per essere vera, prudenza vorrebbe che si controllasse se sia vera o solamente una bufala.
Cominciamo dall’inventore. Pier Luigi Ighina era un simpatico vecchietto, morto nel 2004 a 95 anni. Di professione radiotelegrafista, affermò di aver lavorato con Guglielmo Marconi (1874-1937), ma non esiste nessun documento che provi questo rapporto, né nei carteggi del fisico bolognese né nei documenti della Fondazione Guglielmo Marconi. E’ naturalmente possibile che Ighina, date le sue competenze, abbia lavorato per Marconi ma sicuramente non come collaboratore. Questo non gli impedì di affermare che la morte di quest’ultimo fosse in realtà dovuta ad esperimenti che avrebbe effettuato utilizzando le sue teorie, senza la necessaria supervisione.
Si stabilì poi ad Imola (BO), dove cominciò a costruire strani apparecchi. Nel 1946 comparve sulla stampa nazionale, con una serie di articoli che descrivevano le meraviglie del “dottor Ighina”. Uno fu pubblicato sul settimanale bolognese (fondato da Enzo Biagi) Cronache del 24 agosto (in prima e seconda pagina) con il titolo “C’è un uomo ad Imola che neutralizza l’atomica”: Ighina sosteneva di non pubblicare le sue teorie e le sue scoperte in quanto “è ancora troppo presto”, la gente rideva di lui. In un trafiletto sul Corriere della Sera del 27 agosto si raccontava, a partire dal precedente articolo, di “metalli fusi a distanza”. Il Corriere d’Informazione, il 4 ottobre invece prendeva le distanze dal fenomeno Ighina, in un articolo intitolato “Il mago burlone” che esaminava le grossolane incongruenze delle affermazioni del “dottore” e la totale mancanza di riscontri fattuali.
Nel 1954 e, in forma ampliata nel 1960, Ighina pubblicò l’opuscolo La scoperta dell’atomo magnetico in cui presentava le sue teorie. Questo libriccino chiarisce diverse cose. Ighina non aveva la minima idea di come gli scienziati studiassero l’atomo, immaginandosi che utilizzassero potenti microscopi per vedere i singoli atomi. Fornisce anche indizi su come dovesse funzionare il suo “microscopio atomico”, che appare costituito da una serie di microscopi ottici messi in cascata. Evidentemente Ighina ignorava le leggi dell’ottica, che impediscono di raggiungere ingrandimenti maggiori di qualche migliaio, e le immagini di “atomi” riportate nel libro non sono che riflessi e giochi di luce prodotti all’interno del suo “microscopio”.
Le teorie di Ighina sono una collezione di speculazioni, di discorsi vaghi che attingono a piene mani dal linguaggio dell’elettromagnetismo. L’atomo sarebbe composto da due poli isolati magnetici, uno positivo, proveniente dal Sole, e uno negativo, proveniente dalla Terra. I due poli pulserebbero con un ritmo spiraleggiante, creando nel loro incontro la vita. Il resto dell’Universo sostanzialmente non esiste, e difatti Ighina era uno degli ultimi geocentristi, sosteneva che il Sole giri intorno alla Terra. Come in molte pseudoscienze, non esiste nessun esperimento che confermi queste teorie, nessun calcolo per prevedere quantitativamente cosa dovrebbe accadere, nessun confronto con le teorie comunemente accettate per evidenziare dove le due si discostano e per riottenere i risultati degli esperimenti dei normali laboratori usando la nuova teoria, solamente disegni colorati di spirali che si incontrano e i racconti dell’autore. In altre parole siamo davanti ad un classico esempio di “cargo cult”, un insieme di frasi e concetti che scimmiottano un testo di divulgazione scientifica, ma senza tutto il lavoro retrostante fatto dagli scienziati.
A differenza di molti altri pseudoscienziati, Ighina era una persona relativamente modesta, che non cercava di affermare le sue teorie, non lamentava persecuzioni da parte del mondo accademico ottuso e retrogado. Restava nella sua casa, a costruire colorate e pittoresche macchine, e a chiacchierare amabilmente con chiunque passasse a trovarlo. E se nessuno voleva credergli, a cominciare dalla moglie che ha sempre dichiarato ai visitatori che “erano tutte sciocchezze”, peggio per loro. Le sue invenzioni servivano alle cose più disparate: far piovere o evitare la pioggia, purificare l’aria (anche da eventuali piogge radioattive), vedere gli atomi, curare malattie, produrre energia ed immagazzinarla in dischi fonografici, e naturalmente evitare i terremoti. Erano basate su spirali, che appunto si ricollegavano al moto a spirale degli atomi magnetici, e sui colori dell’arcobaleno, sempre e rigorosamente sette. Ighina infatti non aveva molto chiaro come i colori che vediamo siano solo una piccolissima parte dello spettro elettromagnetico, e che i colori non sono un numero definito, quei colori sono stati scelti solo perché sette è un numero perfetto.
Il funzionamento di questi apparecchi non è mai spiegato in modo chiaro. Non ci sono teorie su come funzionino i fenomeni che dovrebbero controllare, o quando ci sono queste sono palesemente sbagliate. Ad esempio i terremoti non sarebbero dovuti a movimenti di faglie nella crosta terrestre, ma a “pressione di gas sotterranei”. Quindi l’idea di una valvola che permetta loro di sfogarsi.
Va bene, non potrebbe mai funzionare, ma poi in pratica funziona? Qualcuno l’ha provata? In realtà ne esistono diversi esemplari ed in rete si trovano alcune relazioni che decantano l’efficacia di queste installazioni. Il problema è: come possiamo capire se funziona? Dal fatto che non c’è stato un terremoto dove era posta? O dal fatto che magari c’è stato, ma più debole che altrove? Ma davvero c’è stata una riduzione, o è solo un’impressione soggettiva di chi ha investito soldi e reputazione in questi apparecchi?
La valvola antisismica [fonte: meteoweb.eu]
La prima valvola è stata installata ad Imola, nella casa dell’inventore. Un sito riporta come prova della sua efficacia:
Basti pensare al 2 gennaio 1996. La notizia del giorno riguardava un terremoto con due epicentri che aveva colpito Faenza e Modena, saltando letteralmente Imola, che si trova in mezzo a queste due città.
Ma cosa è successo davvero? Il 31 dicembre 1995 si verificarono alcune leggere scosse nel modenese. Lo stesso Ighina, in un filmato, mostra un giornale in cui si vede indicato l’epicentro tra Modena e Reggio Emilia e si riportano i sismi avvenuti in precedenza a Macerata e in Lunigiana. Ighina poi cita un epicentro, non indicato nel giornale, a Faenza. Quindi la valvola avrebbe evitato un sisma ad Imola, proteggendo la zona per un raggio dichiarato di efficacia di una cinquantina di km. Ma pure a Bologna, nonostante l’assenza di valvole antisismiche, non abbiamo avuto scosse. In realtà i sismi erano eventi indipendenti, generati da faglie distanti nello spazio e nel tempo che non ha senso mettere in relazione tra di loro, e non c’era nessun motivo per aspettarsi un epicentro anche ad Imola in quella particolare occasione.
Un’altra valvola è stata istallata a marzo 2014 in località Pian di Pieca, nelle Marche, 50 km a nord di Amatrice. Il proprietario del terreno dichiara che
sembrerebbe che l’intensità del sisma fosse stata molto contenuta rispetto alle zone circostanti. Inoltre si noterebbe un effetto attenuante fino a 1,5 Km.
Inoltre località più distanti dall’epicentro risulterebbero maggiormente colpiti. Ma, ancora, non c’è nessuna ragione per aspettarsi un calo regolare dell’intensità delle scosse con la distanza. Si ricorda infatti che l’energia di un terremoto può essere stimata attraverso il calcolo della Magnitudo, che è indipendente dalla distanza a cui viene misurata. Differente è l’intensità di un terremoto (misurata dalla scala Mercalli-Cancani-Sieberg) che misura i danni che causa e che è sostanzialmente funzione della qualità degli edifici su cui impatta indipendentemente dall’energia del terremoto stesso (un terremoto ML=6.0 come quello del 24 agosto se fosse avvenuto nel deserto avrebbe avuto una Intensità MCS = 0, in centro a Tokio MCS = 4-5, ad Accumuli MCS= 10-11 – Si ricorda che con MCS = 6 iniziano le lesioni agli edifici e con MCS = 8 si hanno le prime vittime).
Inoltre durante il passaggio di un’onda sismica si possono avere i cosiddetti fenomeni di amplificazione locale. L’energia dell’onda sismica è infatti direttamente proporzionale alla sua velocità e ampiezza. Generalmente i modelli crostali dell’Appennino prevedono una velocità dell’onda P di circa 3,5 km/s. Quando l’onda sismica passa da un mezzo rigido (roccia con Vp=3,5 km/s) a un mezzo non rigido (sedimenti fluviali/lacustri con Vp di 200-300 m/s) si ha una drastica diminuzione della velocità dell’onda la quale, per il principio di conservazione dell’energia, aumenta la sua ampiezza facendo così aumentare i potenziali danni (e per questo motivo il sisma è stato avvertito anche a Siena, Arezzo e Firenze, a centinaia di chilometri dalla zona epicentrale)
L’effetto di un sisma dipende quindi fortemente dal tipo di terreno, dalla conformazione del sottosuolo, e naturalmente dalla qualità degli edifici. Danni a “macchie di leopardo” sono la norma, in questi casi, e naturalmente esistono anche numerose zone più vicine all’epicentro che hanno riportato danni minori di quelli osservati vicino alla valvola. Secondo la teoria di funzionamento della valvola, inoltre, questa non potrebbe limitare i danni, in quanto dovrebbe ridurre l’energia complessiva del sisma, che è quella che è stata indipendentemente dalla distanza. Infine colpisce la riduzione dell’efficacia, dai 50 km dichiarati da Ighina a meno di 2 km, e il cambiamento dell’effetto (dall’evitare la scossa a limitarne i danni).
Si può riportare in un grafico la distanza dalla valvola degli epicentri dei terremoti, segnalati dall’Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV), prima e dopo la sua installazione. E si nota come non cambi assolutamente nulla: se non ci fosse il colore differente ad evidenziarlo non sarebbe possibile capire quando questa sia avvenuta.
interviste a Inghina
https://youtu.be/Ax0_PZJRmao
For each earthquake, that is more or less every 5-6 years, the same questions are asked. Was it possible to foresee? Was it possible to prevent it from happening?
The answer to the first question is: no, earthquakes can not be predicted, there are precursor signals, but they are extremely random (there are often without the earthquake, and there may not be even if the earthquake arrives), which makes them basically useless. The seismologists are working on it, so it's useless to say "but you could look at the radon, the behavior of the animals, the shocks that precede the big one", they are all abundantly studied and not usable to give an alarm.
The answer to the second is a more complex moment. We can reduce the damage caused by an earthquake with a work of prevention, of securing buildings. But it costs. It has been discussed up to the nausea these days, certainly in a more competent way of how I can do it. But if there was a simple method, economic (a few thousand euro), which acted directly on the earthquake, reducing its intensity? Would be great. A system of this kind has been proposed, and even installed in some places. This is the colorful anti-seismic valve invented by Pier Luigi Ighina. But when something is too good to be true, caution would be to check if it is true or just a hoax.
Let's start with the inventor. Pier Luigi Ighina was a nice old man, who died in 2004 at the age of 95. As a radiotelegraphist, he claimed to have worked with Guglielmo Marconi (1874-1937), but there is no document proving this relationship, neither in the correspondence of the Bolognese physique nor in the documents of the Guglielmo Marconi Foundation. It is naturally possible that Ighina, given her skills, worked for Marconi but certainly not as a collaborator. This did not prevent him from asserting that the latter's death was in fact due to experiments he would have made using his theories, without the necessary supervision.
He then settled in Imola (BO), where he began to build strange devices. In 1946 he appeared in the national press, with a series of articles describing the wonders of "Dr. Ighina". One was published in the weekly Bologna (founded by Enzo Biagi) Chronicles of August 24 (first and second page) with the title "There is a man in Imola who neutralizes the atomic": Ighina claimed not to publish his theories and his discoveries as "it's still too early", people laughed at him. In a short article on the Corriere della Sera of 27 August it was told, starting from the previous article, of "fused metals at a distance". The Corriere d'Informazione, on October 4, however, distanced itself from the phenomenon Ighina, in an article entitled "The magician prankster" that examined the gross inconsistencies of the statements of the "doctor" and the total lack of factual feedback.
In 1954 and, in an enlarged form in 1960, Ighina published the booklet The discovery of the magnetic atom in which he presented his theories. This little book clarifies several things. Ighina had no idea how scientists studied the atom, imagining that they used powerful microscopes to see individual atoms. It also provides clues about how its "atomic microscope" works, which appears to consist of a series of cascaded optical microscopes. Evidently Ighina ignored the laws of optics, which prevent to reach magnifications greater than a few thousand, and the images of "atoms" reported in the book are only reflections and plays of light produced within his "microscope".
The theories of Ighina are a collection of speculations, of vague discourses that draw heavily on the language of electromagnetism. The atom would be composed of two magnetic isolated poles, one positive, coming from the Sun, and one negative, coming from the Earth. The two poles would pulsate in a spiraling rhythm, creating life in their encounter. The rest of the Universe substantially does not exist, and in fact Ighina was one of the last geocentrists, claimed that the Sun revolves around the Earth. As in many pseudosciences, there is no experiment that confirms these theories, no calculation to quantitatively predict what should happen, no comparison with commonly accepted theories to highlight where the two deviate and to regain the results of the normal laboratory experiments using the new theory, only colored drawings of spirals that meet and the author's stories. In other words, we are dealing with a classic example of "cargo cult", a set of phrases and concepts that mimic a text of scientific divulgation, but without all the work done behind by scientists.
Unlike many other pseudoscientists, Ighina was a relatively modest person who did not try to assert his theories, he did not complain about persecution from For each earthquake, that is more or less every 5-6 years, the same questions are asked. Was it possible to foresee? Was it possible to prevent it from happening?
The answer to the first question is: no, earthquakes can not be predicted, there are precursor signals, but they are extremely random (there are often without the earthquake, and there may not be even if the earthquake arrives), which makes them basically useless. The seismologists are working on it, so it's useless to say "but you could look at the radon, the behavior of the animals, the shocks that precede the big one", they are all abundantly studied and not usable to give an alarm.
The answer to the second is a more complex moment. We can reduce the damage caused by an earthquake with a work of prevention, of securing buildings. But it costs. It has been discussed up to the nausea these days, certainly in a more competent way of how I can do it. But if there was a simple method, economic (a few thousand euro), which acted directly on the earthquake, reducing its intensity? Would be great. A system of this kind has been proposed, and even installed in some places. This is the colorful anti-seismic valve invented by Pier Luigi Ighina. But when something is too good to be true, caution would be to check if it is true or just a hoax.
Let's start with the inventor. Pier Luigi Ighina was a nice old man, who died in 2004 at the age of 95. As a radiotelegraphist, he claimed to have worked with Guglielmo Marconi (1874-1937), but there is no document proving this relationship, neither in the correspondence of the Bolognese physique nor in the documents of the Guglielmo Marconi Foundation. It is naturally possible that Ighina, given her skills, worked for Marconi but certainly not as a collaborator. This did not prevent him from asserting that the latter's death was in fact due to experiments he would have made using his theories, without the necessary supervision.
He then settled in Imola (BO), where he began to build strange devices. In 1946 he appeared in the national press, with a series of articles describing the wonders of "Dr. Ighina". One was published in the weekly Bologna (founded by Enzo Biagi) Chronicles of August 24 (first and second page) with the title "There is a man in Imola who neutralizes the atomic": Ighina claimed not to publish his theories and his discoveries as "it's still too early", people laughed at him. In a short article on the Corriere della Sera of 27 August it was told, starting from the previous article, of "fused metals at a distance". The Corriere d'Informazione, on October 4, however, distanced itself from the phenomenon Ighina, in an article entitled "The magician prankster" that examined the gross inconsistencies of the statements of the "doctor" and the total lack of factual feedback.
In 1954 and, in an enlarged form in 1960, Ighina published the booklet The discovery of the magnetic atom in which he presented his theories. This little book clarifies several things. Ighina had no idea how scientists studied the atom, imagining that they used powerful microscopes to see individual atoms. It also provides clues about how its "atomic microscope" works, which appears to consist of a series of cascaded optical microscopes. Evidently Ighina ignored the laws of optics, which prevent to reach magnifications greater than a few thousand, and the images of "atoms" reported in the book are only reflections and plays of light produced within his "microscope".
The theories of Ighina are a collection of speculations, of vague discourses that draw heavily on the language of electromagnetism. The atom would be composed of two magnetic isolated poles, one positive, coming from the Sun, and one negative, coming from the Earth. The two poles would pulsate in a spiraling rhythm, creating life in their encounter. The rest of the Universe substantially does not exist, and in fact Ighina was one of the last geocentrists, claimed that the Sun revolves around the Earth. As in many pseudosciences, there is no experiment that confirms these theories, no calculation to quantitatively predict what should happen, no comparison with commonly accepted theories to highlight where the two deviate and to regain the results of the normal laboratory experiments using the new theory, only colored drawings of spirals that meet and the author's stories. In other words, we are dealing with a classic example of "cargo cult", a set of phrases and concepts that mimic a text of scientific divulgation, but without all the work done behind by scientists.
Unlike many other pseudoscientists, Ighina was a relatively modest person who did not try to assert his theories, he did not complain about persecution from...For each earthquake, that is more or less every 5-6 years, the same questions are asked. Was it possible to foresee? Was it possible to prevent it from happening?
The answer to the first question is: no, earthquakes can not be predicted, there are precursor signals, but they are extremely random (there are often without the earthquake, and there may not be even if the earthquake arrives), which makes them basically useless. The seismologists are working on it, so it's useless to say "but you could look at the radon, the behavior of the animals, the shocks that precede the big one", they are all abundantly studied and not usable to give an alarm.
The answer to the second is a more complex moment. We can reduce the damage caused by an earthquake with a work of prevention, of securing buildings. But it costs. It has been discussed up to the nausea these days, certainly in a more competent way of how I can do it. But if there was a simple method, economic (a few thousand euro), which acted directly on the earthquake, reducing its intensity? Would be great. A system of this kind has been proposed, and even installed in some places. This is the colorful anti-seismic valve invented by Pier Luigi Ighina. But when something is too good to be true, caution would be to check if it is true or just a hoax.
Let's start with the inventor. Pier Luigi Ighina was a nice old man, who died in 2004 at the age of 95. As a radiotelegraphist, he claimed to have worked with Guglielmo Marconi (1874-1937), but there is no document proving this relationship, neither in the correspondence of the Bolognese physique nor in the documents of the Guglielmo Marconi Foundation. It is naturally possible that Ighina, given her skills, worked for Marconi but certainly not as a collaborator. This did not prevent him from asserting that the latter's death was in fact due to experiments he would have made using his theories, without the necessary supervision.
He then settled in Imola (BO), where he began to build strange devices. In 1946 he appeared in the national press, with a series of articles describing the wonders of "Dr. Ighina". One was published in the weekly Bologna (founded by Enzo Biagi) Chronicles of August 24 (first and second page) with the title "There is a man in Imola who neutralizes the atomic": Ighina claimed not to publish his theories and his discoveries as "it's still too early", people laughed at him. In a short article on the Corriere della Sera of 27 August it was told, starting from the previous article, of "fused metals at a distance". The Corriere d'Informazione, on October 4, however, distanced itself from the phenomenon Ighina, in an article entitled "The magician prankster" that examined the gross inconsistencies of the statements of the "doctor" and the total lack of factual feedback.
In 1954 and, in an enlarged form in 1960, Ighina published the booklet The discovery of the magnetic atom in which he presented his theories. This little book clarifies several things. Ighina had no idea how scientists studied the atom, imagining that they used powerful microscopes to see individual atoms. It also provides clues about how its "atomic microscope" works, which appears to consist of a series of cascaded optical microscopes. Evidently Ighina ignored the laws of optics, which prevent to reach magnifications greater than a few thousand, and the images of "atoms" reported in the book are only reflections and plays of light produced within his "microscope".
The theories of Ighina are a collection of speculations, of vague discourses that draw heavily on the language of electromagnetism. The atom would be composed of two magnetic isolated poles, one positive, coming from the Sun, and one negative, coming from the Earth. The two poles would pulsate in a spiraling rhythm, creating life in their encounter. The rest of the Universe substantially does not exist, and in fact Ighina was one of the last geocentrists, claimed that the Sun revolves around the Earth. As in many pseudosciences, there is no experiment that confirms these theories, no calculation to quantitatively predict what should happen, no comparison with commonly accepted theories to highlight where the two deviate and to regain the results of the normal laboratory experiments using the new theory, only colored drawings of spirals that meet and the author's stories. In other words, we are dealing with a classic example of "cargo cult", a set of phrases and concepts that mimic a text of scientific divulgation, but without all the work done behind by scientists.
Unlike many other pseudoscientists, Ighina was a relatively modest person who did not try to assert his theories, he did not complain about persecution from...
For each earthquake, that is more or less every 5-6 years, the same questions are asked. Was it possible to foresee? Was it possible to prevent it from happening?
The answer to the first question is: no, earthquakes can not be predicted, there are precursor signals, but they are extremely random (there are often without the earthquake, and there may not be even if the earthquake arrives), which makes them basically useless. The seismologists are working on it, so it's useless to say "but you could look at the radon, the behavior of the animals, the shocks that precede the big one", they are all abundantly studied and not usable to give an alarm.
The answer to the second is a more complex moment. We can reduce the damage caused by an earthquake with a work of prevention, of securing buildings. But it costs. It has been discussed up to the nausea these days, certainly in a more competent way of how I can do it. But if there was a simple method, economic (a few thousand euro), which acted directly on the earthquake, reducing its intensity? Would be great. A system of this kind has been proposed, and even installed in some places. This is the colorful anti-seismic valve invented by Pier Luigi Ighina. But when something is too good to be true, caution would be to check if it is true or just a hoax.
Let's start with the inventor. Pier Luigi Ighina was a nice old man, who died in 2004 at the age of 95. As a radiotelegraphist, he claimed to have worked with Guglielmo Marconi (1874-1937), but there is no document proving this relationship, neither in the correspondence of the Bolognese physique nor in the documents of the Guglielmo Marconi Foundation. It is naturally possible that Ighina, given her skills, worked for Marconi but certainly not as a collaborator. This did not prevent him from asserting that the latter's death was in fact due to experiments he would have made using his theories, without the necessary supervision.
He then settled in Imola (BO), where he began to build strange devices. In 1946 he appeared in the national press, with a series of articles describing the wonders of "Dr. Ighina". One was published in the weekly Bologna (founded by Enzo Biagi) Chronicles of August 24 (first and second page) with the title "There is a man in Imola who neutralizes the atomic": Ighina claimed not to publish his theories and his discoveries as "it's still too early", people laughed at him. In a short article on the Corriere della Sera of 27 August it was told, starting from the previous article, of "fused metals at a distance". The Corriere d'Informazione, on October 4, however, distanced itself from the phenomenon Ighina, in an article entitled "The magician prankster" that examined the gross inconsistencies of the statements of the "doctor" and the total lack of factual feedback.
In 1954 and, in an enlarged form in 1960, Ighina published the booklet The discovery of the magnetic atom in which he presented his theories. This little book clarifies several things. Ighina had no idea how scientists studied the atom, imagining that they used powerful microscopes to see individual atoms. It also provides clues about how its "atomic microscope" works, which appears to consist of a series of cascaded optical microscopes. Evidently Ighina ignored the laws of optics, which prevent to reach magnifications greater than a few thousand, and the images of "atoms" reported in the book are only reflections and plays of light produced within his "microscope".
The theories of Ighina are a collection of speculations, of vague discourses that draw heavily on the language of electromagnetism. The atom would be composed of two magnetic isolated poles, one positive, coming from the Sun, and one negative, coming from the Earth. The two poles would pulsate in a spiraling rhythm, creating life in their encounter. The rest of the Universe substantially does not exist, and in fact Ighina was one of the last geocentrists, claimed that the Sun revolves around the Earth. As in many pseudosciences, there is no experiment that confirms these theories, no calculation to quantitatively predict what should happen, no comparison with commonly accepted theories to highlight where the two deviate and to regain the results of the normal laboratory experiments using the new theory, only colored drawings of spirals that meet and the author's stories. In other words, we are dealing with a classic example of "cargo cult", a set of phrases and concepts that mimic a text of scientific divulgation, but without all the work done behind by scientists.
Unlike many other pseudoscientists, Ighina was a relatively modest person who did not try to assert his theories, he did not complain about persecution from For each earthquake, that is more or less every 5-6 years, the same questions are asked. Was it possible to foresee? Was it possible to prevent it from happening?
The answer to the first question is: no, earthquakes can not be predicted, there are precursor signals, but they are extremely random (there are often without the earthquake, and there may not be even if the earthquake arrives), which makes them basically useless. The seismologists are working on it, so it's useless to say "but you could look at the radon, the behavior of the animals, the shocks that precede the big one", they are all abundantly studied and not usable to give an alarm.
The answer to the second is a more complex moment. We can reduce the damage caused by an earthquake with a work of prevention, of securing buildings. But it costs. It has been discussed up to the nausea these days, certainly in a more competent way of how I can do it. But if there was a simple method, economic (a few thousand euro), which acted directly on the earthquake, reducing its intensity? Would be great. A system of this kind has been proposed, and even installed in some places. This is the colorful anti-seismic valve invented by Pier Luigi Ighina. But when something is too good to be true, caution would be to check if it is true or just a hoax.
Let's start with the inventor. Pier Luigi Ighina was a nice old man, who died in 2004 at the age of 95. As a radiotelegraphist, he claimed to have worked with Guglielmo Marconi (1874-1937), but there is no document proving this relationship, neither in the correspondence of the Bolognese physique nor in the documents of the Guglielmo Marconi Foundation. It is naturally possible that Ighina, given her skills, worked for Marconi but certainly not as a collaborator. This did not prevent him from asserting that the latter's death was in fact due to experiments he would have made using his theories, without the necessary supervision.
He then settled in Imola (BO), where he began to build strange devices. In 1946 he appeared in the national press, with a series of articles describing the wonders of "Dr. Ighina". One was published in the weekly Bologna (founded by Enzo Biagi) Chronicles of August 24 (first and second page) with the title "There is a man in Imola who neutralizes the atomic": Ighina claimed not to publish his theories and his discoveries as "it's still too early", people laughed at him. In a short article on the Corriere della Sera of 27 August it was told, starting from the previous article, of "fused metals at a distance". The Corriere d'Informazione, on October 4, however, distanced itself from the phenomenon Ighina, in an article entitled "The magician prankster" that examined the gross inconsistencies of the statements of the "doctor" and the total lack of factual feedback.
In 1954 and, in an enlarged form in 1960, Ighina published the booklet The discovery of the magnetic atom in which he presented his theories. This little book clarifies several things. Ighina had no idea how scientists studied the atom, imagining that they used powerful microscopes to see individual atoms. It also provides clues about how its "atomic microscope" works, which appears to consist of a series of cascaded optical microscopes. Evidently Ighina ignored the laws of optics, which prevent to reach magnifications greater than a few thousand, and the images of "atoms" reported in the book are only reflections and plays of light produced within his "microscope".
The theories of Ighina are a collection of speculations, of vague discourses that draw heavily on the language of electromagnetism. The atom would be composed of two magnetic isolated poles, one positive, coming from the Sun, and one negative, coming from the Earth. The two poles would pulsate in a spiraling rhythm, creating life in their encounter. The rest of the Universe substantially does not exist, and in fact Ighina was one of the last geocentrists, claimed that the Sun revolves around the Earth. As in many pseudosciences, there is no experiment that confirms these theories, no calculation to quantitatively predict what should happen, no comparison with commonly accepted theories to highlight where the two deviate and to regain the results of the normal laboratory experiments using the new theory, only colored drawings of spirals that meet and the author's stories. In other words, we are dealing with a classic example of "cargo cult", a set of phrases and concepts that mimic a text of scientific divulgation, but without all the work done behind by scientists.
Unlike many other pseudoscientists, Ighina was a relatively modest person who did not try to assert his theories, he did not complain about persecution from...For each earthquake, that is more or less every 5-6 years, the same questions are asked. Was it possible to foresee? Was it possible to prevent it from happening?
The answer to the first question is: no, earthquakes can not be predicted, there are precursor signals, but they are extremely random (there are often without the earthquake, and there may not be even if the earthquake arrives), which makes them basically useless. The seismologists are working on it, so it's useless to say "but you could look at the radon, the behavior of the animals, the shocks that precede the big one", they are all abundantly studied and not usable to give an alarm.
The answer to the second is a more complex moment. We can reduce the damage caused by an earthquake with a work of prevention, of securing buildings. But it costs. It has been discussed up to the nausea these days, certainly in a more competent way of how I can do it. But if there was a simple method, economic (a few thousand euro), which acted directly on the earthquake, reducing its intensity? Would be great. A system of this kind has been proposed, and even installed in some places. This is the colorful anti-seismic valve invented by Pier Luigi Ighina. But when something is too good to be true, caution would be to check if it is true or just a hoax.
Let's start with the inventor. Pier Luigi Ighina was a nice old man, who died in 2004 at the age of 95. As a radiotelegraphist, he claimed to have worked with Guglielmo Marconi (1874-1937), but there is no document proving this relationship, neither in the correspondence of the Bolognese physique nor in the documents of the Guglielmo Marconi Foundation. It is naturally possible that Ighina, given her skills, worked for Marconi but certainly not as a collaborator. This did not prevent him from asserting that the latter's death was in fact due to experiments he would have made using his theories, without the necessary supervision.
He then settled in Imola (BO), where he began to build strange devices. In 1946 he appeared in the national press, with a series of articles describing the wonders of "Dr. Ighina". One was published in the weekly Bologna (founded by Enzo Biagi) Chronicles of August 24 (first and second page) with the title "There is a man in Imola who neutralizes the atomic": Ighina claimed not to publish his theories and his discoveries as "it's still too early", people laughed at him. In a short article on the Corriere della Sera of 27 August it was told, starting from the previous article, of "fused metals at a distance". The Corriere d'Informazione, on October 4, however, distanced itself from the phenomenon Ighina, in an article entitled "The magician prankster" that examined the gross inconsistencies of the statements of the "doctor" and the total lack of factual feedback.
In 1954 and, in an enlarged form in 1960, Ighina published the booklet The discovery of the magnetic atom in which he presented his theories. This little book clarifies several things. Ighina had no idea how scientists studied the atom, imagining that they used powerful microscopes to see individual atoms. It also provides clues about how its "atomic microscope" works, which appears to consist of a series of cascaded optical microscopes. Evidently Ighina ignored the laws of optics, which prevent to reach magnifications greater than a few thousand, and the images of "atoms" reported in the book are only reflections and plays of light produced within his "microscope".
The theories of Ighina are a collection of speculations, of vague discourses that draw heavily on the language of electromagnetism. The atom would be composed of two magnetic isolated poles, one positive, coming from the Sun, and one negative, coming from the Earth. The two poles would pulsate in a spiraling rhythm, creating life in their encounter. The rest of the Universe substantially does not exist, and in fact Ighina was one of the last geocentrists, claimed that the Sun revolves around the Earth. As in many pseudosciences, there is no experiment that confirms these theories, no calculation to quantitatively predict what should happen, no comparison with commonly accepted theories to highlight where the two deviate and to regain the results of the normal laboratory experiments using the new theory, only colored drawings of spirals that meet and the author's stories. In other words, we are dealing with a classic example of "cargo cult", a set of phrases and concepts that mimic a text of scientific divulgation, but without all the work done behind by scientists.
Unlike many other pseudoscientists, Ighina was a relatively modest person who did not try to assert his theories, he did not complain about persecution from...
Commenti
Posta un commento