On Bernoulli and the determinism of thought

Hi Miki.
I feel the need to share with you an interest related to both physics and something related to psychology and neuroscience.
I may have already told you that since I entered the realm of physics, and especially the aerodynamics department, I have witnessed a puzzling phenomenon: airplanes have been flying for over 100 years, and there is still no consensus regarding the power that allows them to fly. I am currently focusing only on creatures and machines the size of a small bird and up, because insects fly because of other physical phenomena!
My inexhaustible audacity led me to drive scientists from the Faculty of Aeronautical Engineering at the Technion crazy about 37 years ago.
I had certain theories about aviation. And look at this wonder – every few years the explanation for aviation would change!
One of the scientists' favorite explanations was the vortices that form in certain areas around the wing, and they are what create the lift.
And in any case, most scientists claim that lift must be a reaction to a downward vertical momentum. I must admit that it was too late for me to tell my fellow company members, with whom I would have argued mightily and tremblingly, befitting their exalted status as academics while I was nothing more than a peasant [quite ignorant!], that according to the law of conservation of energy, work cannot be expended twice for the same action.
If I immerse an empty, closed bottle in water – whether in a small container or in the ocean – while applying vertical pressure to the bottle, as soon as I stop the pressure, the bottle will bounce upward, because I invested work in advance in immersing the bottle, which has now bounced [according to Archimedes' principle!]
In short – over 30 years ago, I conducted countless experiments to prove my claim that lift is a result of Bernoulli's principle: I designed a cardboard wing profile, and added a shelf to the back that rises at a moderate angle backward. I would ride my bike with the model hanging by wires from a light fixture I built and held in my hand. This wing was held at a 0 angle of attack, and suddenly the wing rose!
Are you familiar with the phenomenon that when you hold a spoon vertically parallel to a stream of water, when the curve of the spoon lightly touches the water stream, the spoon is "sucked" into the stream. I attributed this phenomenon to Bernoulli's law, but my group claimed that the horizontal movement of the spoon into the water stream is a result of the reaction of the water stream flowing down the spoon and the moment it falls from it, it has a horizontal component in the opposite direction. I tried to refute their claim, and I fashioned a flat thin sheet of tin with a curve in the middle. When I held this sheet vertically, parallel to a vertical water jet, when the water "kissed" the sheet, the sheet was "sucked" into the stream, even though the water flowed in a straight line down next to the sheet, and provided no cause for any horizontal motion!…
It didn't help me, and I couldn't change the example of those scientists [also from abroad!], even though sometimes I would read an article in which an argument exactly like mine was made.
Since the development of the propulsion method I am working on is based solely on pressure differences, I usually present my idea to aviation engineers, and they do not deny the feasibility of my idea – even though it does not mention the matter of action-reaction.
When I demonstrated my argument to my friend/colleague Prof. Tanchum Weller, using a tiny wing that I blew air onto from my lungs, he responded by saying, "What's wrong with that?" and showed me the textbook he had learned from about 50 years ago, in which lift is indeed explained according to Bernoulli's law.
But then I went and presented this phenomenon to Moti [who is an experienced flow engineer], and he claimed that perhaps something was wrong with the experiment.
And he spent a lot of time explaining the vortex thing to me.
We both agreed that if a piece of wool were attached to the back of the wing, and tilted back and down as the wing rose, it would be a good indication that the lift was due to vertical momentum.
In short – I built a small wind tunnel, in which I could easily prove my claims. I think I managed to do it. But what – this tunnel that I built with my meager strength [with my left hands…] is very far from meeting strict scientific criteria, which means that my wind tunnel needs to be very precise to prevent another external factor from influencing the tests. Oh well – this is already a bit too much for me. Therefore, I do not dare to rely on these experiments in my arguments with the aerodynamicists at the Technion. Maybe, maybe, maybe I will be able to "snorkel" some small wind tunnel in civil engineering.
But one more thing – I mentioned the issue of vortices. Aerodynamicists often justify lift by the existence of vortices.
I would always nod politely and wonder to myself where the hell does it say that a vortex is supposed to create lift.
Until I watched some videos where you see a plane taking off and there are indeed vortices around the tips of its wings. That is, the vortices are a fact. Can this fact explain how the vortex causes lift?!
Then I remembered that when I was a teenager I read a book describing the development of medical science, which claimed that in the Middle Ages, doctors believed that the healing process of wounds must be accompanied by the secretion of pus.
Why? Because that's what they knew, and therefore they were pleased when pus appeared. There are probably other examples, although at that time medicine was not yet based on organized scientific thinking as is customary today. Nevertheless, I argue that sometimes even thinking that claims to be scientific can lead us to completely irrational and delusional realms. In this context – yesterday I read a fascinating article about the Nazi regime's teaching materials, which claimed to be based on science.. Creepy – that's an understatement!
In conclusion – I hope I was able to be careful and not draw the target around the impact site.
So have a good week to you and all your family members.