Transcript Advances in Electromagnetic Theory

Advances in Electromagnetic
Theory and the Decline of Science
Ivor Catt. 30 August 2014
For a copy of this Powerpoint lecture, please apply to
[email protected]
Further background is at www.ivorcatt.com/n.htm
•
•
“If something were published in that journal by someone
who did not accept virtually all the precepts enshrined in
previous issues of the journal, it would carry little meaning,
or communication, because having broken with the
traditional agreed premises of the journal, no reader would
any more know what was still agreed; no one would even be
sure what the words in the revolutionary article meant.”
“The Rise and Fall of Bodies of Knowledge.”
•
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ipub002a.htm
•
Does the professor pretend to not understand? Or does he really not
understand? Can he understand something outside the paradigm? Please would
NPA members address this issue.
•
•
•
Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold
of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing
to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are
inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is
capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective
stupidity.
- George Orwell, “1984”, pub. Chancellor, 1984 edn., p225
•
•
•
•
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x41t.htm
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x417.htm
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/Y65BRILL.htm
“The mind should develop a blind spot whenever a dangerous thought presented itself. The
process should be automatic, instinctive. Crimestop, they called it in Newspeak.
He set to work to exercise himself in crimestop. He presented himself with propositions -- 'the
Party says the earth is flat', 'the party says that ice is heavier than water' -- and trained
himself in not seeing or not understanding the arguments that contradicted them.”
Orwell also describes crimestop from the perspective of Emmanuel Goldstein in the book “The
Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism”
•
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_and_Practice_of_Oligarchical_Collectivism
•
•
•
•
Tore Wessel-Berg; “Electromagnetic and Quantum Measurements. A Bitemporal
Neoclassical Theory”, pub. Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001”
Page xv
Forward by Peter A Sturrock, Emeritus Professor of Applied Physics, Stanford
University. President of the Society for Scientific Expoloration
“The distinguished astrophysicist Thomas Gold has written about the pressures
on scientists to move in tight formation, to avoid having their legs nipped by the
sheepdogs of science. …. .... I have learned that many interesting topics have
been ignored by Twentieth Century science for inadequate reasons.”
•
•
•
Science and Politics. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x28b.htm
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/91.htm ; http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x3cn.htm
•
This presentation is a modification of some of the four hour seminar my coauthor Dr. David Walton and I gave in Newcastle University on 9 October 2013.
That seminar is now at http://async.org.uk/IvorCatt+DavidWalton.html
However, that lecture was on electromagnetic theory, and hardly touched on
the Politics of Knowledge.
•
•
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x433.htm
•
•
“Peer Review outlaws Paradigm Shift.”
I begin by discussing a minor advance in
electromagnetic theory. It will show that the
Science Establishment cannot even accommodate
relatively minor advances. A minor advance is too
great a threat to their lecture notes, text books,
reputations, careers and pensions. However, the
situation is worse than the epigram “Peer Review
outlaws Paradigm Shift.”
•
•
•
Should an accident happen, and a significant advance (which means
heresy) happen to get through peer review, like my 1965, 1966 and
ProcIEEE 1980s papers, it will be ignored, or lost.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/97sglit5.htm ,
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x0305.htm ,
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x22k1.pdf . I am confident that none of
the content of those papers (or the content of my six books, all on
the www) is in any “Computer Science” or “Electromagnetic Theory”
university course or text book in the world, even though the first
paper, about “The Glitch”, admittedly heavily camouflaged, points to
a fatal flaw in digital systems. The late Professor Kinniment wrote a
book about “The Glitch”;
http://www.async.org.uk/David.Kinniment/DJKinniment-He-WhoHesitates-is-Lost.pdf . However, it will not be taught.
Electromagnetic Theory is frozen at 1950. The third paper, x22k1, is
obviously very important, but its two articles, published in the top
peer reviewed journal in the world, ProcIEEE, will be unknown to
every professor and text book writer in the world. It has to be
ignored (“unknown”) because, for instance, one article sheds new
light on Faraday’s discovery of electromagnetic induction.
Investigation of such fundamentals is not permitted, so the ProcIEEE
articles should not have been published.
The letter by Dunkley takes my breath away.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x162.pdf . Bizarre. How can all journalists
around the world ignore this kind of thing?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
My next point is new.
I am convinced that no journalist at any level will touch this material.
The Fourth Estate, the Media, must keep at arm’s length from the
political class, otherwise we have a totalitarian government.
Today, the Media are in the hands of Establishment Science, so we
have totalitarian science.
Case study. I have sent what will be very interesting material to this
journalist with The Times, and am confident that she will not reply
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x484.htm
The following communities feed off Establishment Science for
funding, prestige etc. They will do nothing to damage, or study,
Establishment Science, or “Modern Physics”.
Sociology of Science
History of Science
Philosophy of Science
Politics of Knowledge
They are all Whiggish, and none of those communities will have
anything to do with my work.
•
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history#In_the_history_of_science
•
•
The following is stated in Wikipedia’s entry for “Whig History”;
“It has been argued that the historiography of science is "riddled
with Whiggish history."[”
•
MacRoberts and MacRoberts say in
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x145.pdf that during a paradigm
shift, the Defenders of the Faith, defenders of mainstream
dogma, do not understand the new paradigm, but those
promoting the new paradigm understand both the old and
the new. In contrast, my research shows that the Defenders
of the Faith do not even understand the dogma, or old
paradigm, they are defending. The TEM step first arose with
the introduction of digital computers in around 1950. No
professor or text book writer in the world has a grasp of the
TEM step (or pulse) as it would, or rather should, be
described in their classical electromagnetic theory.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x145.pdf I shall give a number of
reasons why.
•
•
•
•
•
However, first I shall give you case studies which proves that accredited
professors lack grasp of the TEM Step.
“The Catt Question” is an elementary question about the fundamentals
of classical electromagnetism. No accredited expert on classical
electromagnetism will put anything in writing about “The Catt
Question”. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm
Thirty years ago I put in a lot of effort to get accredited experts to
outline the fundamentals of their theory. I finally prevailed on four high
level administrators to select their top expert and instruct them to
write to me. They were Pepper, McEwan, Mink and Secker. They
contradicted each other, and wrote nonsense.
Forrest Bishop has pointed out that since classical electromagnetism is
irrational, any defence of it has to be irrational. The four irrational,
contradictory “answers” are in my 1995 book
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/28anom.htm . Of particular interest is
Pepper, “knighted for services to physics”, and now editor of the top
Royal Society journal http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/2812.htm . Since his
single letter to me in 1993, he has been doggedly incommunicado, like
the rest of them. (Except that once McEwan wrote that he disagreed
with Pepper. He wrote to me, but refused to communicate with Pepper.
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/01051.htm ). More than a
decade later, Nobel Prize Winner Josephson emailed to me that Pepper
had changed his mind, but Pepper does not confirm this.) Lago and
others support early Pepper. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/9_review.htm
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/91c.htm
•
The problem extends into NPA. I wrote to the two most senior
members of NPA who were said to be expert in electromagnetic
theory and also academics, and they did not reply.
•
Although the Transverse Electromagnetic Wave was known in 1950,
it was limited to the sine wave. The only TEM waves discussed in text
books and in the www are sinusoidal.
That is, the voltage step travelling down a USB cable or from one
logic gate to the next, and also the pulse, do not exist.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm
All illustrations of the TEM Wave on the www are of the sine wave.
Even such sine wave illustrations are missing from text books.
No text book contains the crucial diagrams in my book, Figures 4 and
5 in http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/1_2.htm .
Central to my theories is the negative charge on the bottom
conductor during a TEM step. In virtually all illustrations of the TEM
Wave on the www, this negative charge is not shown.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
An example of the mathematical rubbish which
masquerades as discussion of the TEM wave is here;
http://whites.sdsmt.edu/classes/ee481/notes/481Lecture1
0.pdf
The result is catastrophic. Not only you, but all professors
and text book writers in the world, are incapable of grasping
the TEM wave in a digital system.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Nobel Prizewinner Brian Josephson, a theoretical (mathematical)
physicist, has written 100 emails to me about “The Catt Question”.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm
As to the Second Catt Question, http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x22j.pdf ,
Josephson was asked whether the displacement current on the front
face of a TEM step caused magnetic field. His answer was
remarkable and instructive. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x23p.htm
I wrote;
The displacement current is in a vertical direction. This causes magnetic
field in a horizontal plane, some of it lateral, some of it in the forward
direction.
Concentrate on the forward direction.
We are dealing with a Transverse Electromagnetic Wave, which by
definition only has magnetic field in a transverse direction. Thus, we must
either remove displacement current from classical electromagnetism, or
remove the TEM Wave.
If would be extremely valuable for the future of science if you, Brian
Josephson, commented on this.
Ivor Catt
•
•
•
•
That is easy to answer at least. curl H is proportional to the sum of
the ordinary current and the displacement current, so the latter must
be associated with a magnetic field if Maxwell's equations are correct.
Brian J.
•
This is the smoking gun. Nobel Prizewinner Professor Brian Josephson
(as usual for him) talks confusingly of curls and divs, but he does say that
the Displacement Current dD/dt at the front face of a TEM step causes
magnetic field. This is the first time we get an admission from anyone that
the displacement current in the front face of a TEM step causes magnetic
field. However, indulging as he does in curls and divs, he is unable to see
its significance. The significance is that by definition a TEM step ( =
transverse electromagnetic) cannot have magnetic field in the forward
direction. So the definition of a TEM Wave is incompatible with
displacement current. – Ivor Catt 21 May 2012
•
For the next reply from Josephson, go to the end of
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x22j.pdf
In this reply, Josephson makes the extraordinary statement;
“This is the problem if you work with simplified physics rather than follow
the maths.” - BJ
Here we see a clear recommendation that we retreat from physical
reality and replace it by mathematics.
•
•
•
•
•
A Google search shows that “Galileo’s famous statement”,
“mathematics is the language of science” has 200,000 hits. “Galileo
+ mathematics” has 2 million hits. So if we want a science which is
based on physical reality, we are up against at least one big hitter,
Galileo, a man whom I strongly support in general, particularly in my
dialogue with Harry Ricker over “the truth that there are no truths”.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x231.pdf . Both parties in the Galileo
debate, in which Establishment Modern Physics is on the side of the
church, not the side of Galileo, feel very strongly indeed about it. I
think dissidents like you should be on the side of Galileo. Unlike the
Establishment, you do not have to prevent scientific advance
(pursuit of the truth) from obsoleting your text books and lecture
notes.
•
On the vary rare occasions when I have been able to present
this work, I have never before given this historical
approach, showing how my ideas originated and have
developed over fifty years. This should make them easier to
understand, and more credible.
•
• Classical Theory
• Motorola Phoenix made the fastest logic, ECL
(Emitter Coupled Logic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emittercoupled_logic ). A logic gate switched in
1.35nsec.
• A logic signal
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm travels at 6
inches per nsec across a printed circuit board.
Thus, the time a logic gates switches equalled
the time it took for its output to travel 8 inches.
•
•
•
•
In Phoenix, Arizona, Motorola were semiconductor experts,
but lacked expertise in digital electronics. So in 1964 they
hired me because of my five years of expertise in digital
electronics to investigate whether by switching logic faster
than it took for signals to propagate across the system, they
might fall off a cliff into massive crosstalk.
Who in this audience says that the crosstalk between one
signal line and another in a USB cable is a dv/dt or di/dt
spike?
Who says it is a flat topped pulse?
•
•
I thought in terms of (1) two voltage planes, one for ground and
the other for 5v. http://www.ivorcatt.org/x0312.jpg . When
designing the Ballman Scratchpad Memory for the NSA, I built
these planes into every printed circuit board. I also thought in
terms of (2) two parallel conductors above a ground plane.
http://www.ivorcatt.org/digihwdesignp56.htm . I decided that
these were the fundamentals I must address. If a 5v logic step
travelled down one conductor, how large was the crosstalk into
the parallel conductor? The formula in the main publication, by
Jarvis, cited in http://www.ivorcatt.org/x0331.jpg , said that the
crosstalk could be greater than the original signal, which I knew
must be wrong. Surely we did not have an amplifier?
After some puzzling results, and with the help of the late Ken
Johnson, I made the major discovery, that the signal broke up
into two signals, Even Mode and Odd Mode, travelling at
different velocities. I published this, with photographs and
mathematical proof, in 1966 in the IEEE. This result is generally
unknown today. http://www.ivorcatt.org/digihwdesignp57.htm
• Who in this audience knew
that when a signal travels
down a conductor above a
ground plane in the presence
of another parallel conductor,
two velocities are involved?
•
• Who in this audience knew
that the crosstalk to the other
conductor can rise to 50%,
however far apart they are?
• Let us return to the 5v supply
by two voltage planes.
• Would someone in the
audience like to suggest what
is the source impedance at a
point when a logic gate lying
between a 5v plane and a 0v
plane wants to suddenly take
current from the 5v supply
plane and dump it in the 0v?
•
•
I asked Bill Herndon what was the source impedance at a point
between two voltage planes, one at 0v and the other at 5v. He
replied; “It’s a transmission line.” I said, “Is that your idea?” He
said, no it wasn’t; he wished it was. He said it came from
Stopper in GEC, whom I never met. Bill previously worked with
Stopper at GEC across town.
To understand this, think in terms of the two rectangular voltage
planes, 5v and 0v, supplying 5v to a switching logic gate at one
corner. Then we see that at their corner, they represent a two
conductor transmission line whose width increases with
increasing distance from the corner, and whose Zo decreases.
Thus, after 1.35 nsec, the source impedance of the 5v supply,
Zo, has fallen to the characteristic impedance of a quarter circle
of the pair of conductors at a distance from the corner where a
signal could make the round trip in 1.35 nsec. Thus, the
switching load sees a rapidly diminishing source impedance for
the 5v supply.
•
•
Perhaps this is the realisation which led me to the fact that a
capacitor, which is composed of two parallel plates, is a
transmission line. (No peer reviewed journal will publish the
statement; “A capacitor is a transmission line.”
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/64maychiao.htm ) I remember
that at that time, in order to turn a very narrow negative 150
picosecond pulse (generated by my EH125 pulse generator) to a
positive pulse, I introduced two tantalum capacitors into a
coaxial cable, one from inner to outer, and the other from outer
to inner. The pulse happily inverted unchanged, presumably
because the capacitors had not read about the standard LCR
model for a capacitor with its series inductance L and its self
resonant frequency http://www.ivorcatt.com/2603.htm .
Capacitors cannot read.
The development of my ideas has been extraordinarily slow,
extending over fifty years. Since so little has been published,
and what little has been published is not read, I have been
increasingly distanced from my colleagues.
•
We do not connect to a capacitor plate in the middle, and the standard
diagram has led to a lot of confusion, going as far back as Maxwell and
Heaviside. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x2ab.pdf The real picture was;
I illustrate a transmission line divid
The 150 picosecond pulse divided into three pulses, two into the capacitors,
and one into the right hand coaxial cable, or transmission line. Since the
Zo of a capacitor is very small, only a tiny amount went that way. Similarly,
if you put a voltage across three resistors in series, 1 ohm, 1,000 ohms
and 1 ohm, very little of the energy ends up in the 1 ohm resistors. It is
illustrated here, at http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/illus/fig014.gif Figure 14.
•
•
•
•
The transient impedance of a capacitor is resistive, since it is a
transmission line, not reactive (or inductive). It has no series
inductance. The LCR model for a capacitor is nonsense. See Figure 2
in http://www.ultracad.com/articles/esrbcap.pdf . I published “a
capacitor is a transmission line” in 1978, 36 years ago.
http://www.ivorcatt.org/icrwiworld78dec1.htm . No professor or
text book writer knows this, and he needs to not know it. My
remark, which is Google hit no. 3 out of 5 million, is called
“Nonsense about self resonant frequency”. It is ignored.
“self resonant frequency”, based on the LCR model, has 5 million hits
on Google. Many tell the innocent student how to measure it.
The reason why the professor and text book writer must not know
that a capacitor is a transmission line is because the classical
treatment of one is incompatible with the other
Maxwell invented “Displacement Current” dD/dt in order to ease the
flow of current through a capacitor by saying dD/dt causes magnetic
field. However, for 150 years nobody, including my hero Heaviside,
noticed that the front face of a TEM step has changing electric field,
or dD/dt , which must cause a forward magnetic field. But by
definition a TEM wave has no forward magnetic field.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x22j.pdf . I published on the problem in
1979, 35 year ago. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x18j41.pdf . At the
time, Wireless World had a circulation of 60,000.
•
•
Until well after 1967 I avoided the formidable Maxwell
Equations, even though they were written more simply then –
such as dB/dt (e.g. in Professor Kip
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x2671.pdf in 1962), rather than the
more awe-inspiring divs and curls of today, which further
divorce the student from physical reality. In my 1966 paper, I
merely used Faraday’s Law v=dφ/dt and the Law of
Conservation of Charge. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x0305.htm
Later, after I had 100% failed to pass Peer Review for decades, I
changed from trying to publish my theories to asking questions
about classical electromagnetism. I will now present these
questions to you, preceded by the results of an experiment
recently published in a non-peer reviewed journal. It is called
“The Wakefield Experiment.”
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x343.pdf ;
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x3216.pdf . The results show that a
charged capacitor does not store its energy in a static electric
field [contradicting Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor which says; “{A capacitor is}
used to store energy electrostatically in an electric field.” ]
•
•
•
•
•
In the Wakefield Experiment, a very long piece of coaxial cable,
representing a charged capacitor, was discharged into a piece of cable of
the same characteristic impedance Zo. Already in 1963 the Tektronix
manual http://ivorcatt.co.uk/x212.pdf said;
“p2-2 "The output pulse duration is equal to twice the transit time of the
charge line used, plus a small built-in charge time due to the lead length
from the GR panel connectors to the mercury switch contact point.
The transit time of the cable is defined as the time required for a signal to
pass from one end of the line to the other. For a 10-nsec charge line then,
the duration of the output pulse would be 20 nanoseconds
p2-3 "The pulse amplitude obtained will be approximately one-half the
power source voltage .... "”
For the next fifty years, nobody else pondered this strange behaviour. In
1980 I published the suggestion http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/97rdeat4.htm
that “ .... a steady charged capacitor is not steady at all ; it contains
energy current, half of it travelling to the right at the speed of light, and
the other half travelling to the left at the speed of light.” After 47 years I
realised that if we tapped into the charged capacitor along its length, we
would get the proof, that a charged capacitor did not have an electrostatic
field, and half of its energy was in a magnetic field.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x3216.pdf .
• Now let us return to the three
unanswerable questions, which
expose fatal internal flaws in classical
electromagnetic theory.
• First, “The Catt Question”.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm
• When a TEM step travels down a
transmission line at the speed of light,
where does the negative charge which
appears on the surface of the bottom
conductor come from?
• Next, The Second Catt
Question.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x22j.pdf . When a
TEM step travels along a transmission line, the
electric field at the front edge goes from
nothing to a 5v field between the two
conductors. This field is D, so at the front edge
there is a dD/dt ,which is Displacement Current.
This was invented by Maxwell in order for it to
create magnetic field. However, the magnetic
field created by this particular dD/dt is in the
horizontal plane, some of it in the forward
direction. But a TEM Wave only has magnetic
field in the vertical direction. So we have to
exclude either the TEM Wave or Displacement
Current from classical electromagnetism.
dD/dt both must and
must not create
magnetic field. So the
statement; “A capacitor
is a transmission line”
will never be published
or taught.
• Now The Third Catt Question.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x3761.pdf .
When a capacitor is charged, energy enters
it at the speed of light.
http://www.ivorcatt.org/icrwiworld78dec1.
htm . There is no mechanism for the
energy, once inside the capacitor, to slow
down. When discharged, see The Wakefield
Experiment, the energy exits at the speed
of light. Why does classical theory say that
the energy in a charged capacitor is
stationary?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor
• New Theory
•
•
•
When a TEM step travels in a transmission line guided by two
conductors, there are four features involved;
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm
- electric current in the conductors i
- magnetic field, or flux, surrounding the conductors B
- electric charge on the surface of the conductors +q , -q
- electric field, or flux, in the vacuum terminating on the charge
(Figure 2), D
• Theory N
•
•
Traditional theory, which I call “Theory N”, says that the electric
current and charge cause the electric and magnetic field.
Who in this audience believes that when a battery is trying to light
a lamp, it wants to send electric current or charge down the
conductors, and that if successful, the current causes the Poynting
Vector field ExH between the conductors?
•
•
•
•
•
Theory H
In 1892, Heaviside reversed this. His Theory H says that the field
causes the electric current.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x3117.htm
In Heaviside's magnificent, regal statement, "We reverse this" in his
Electrical Papers, vol. 1, 1892, page 438, Heaviside wrote;
Now, in Maxwell's theory there is the potential energy of the
displacement produced in the dielectric parts by the electric force,
and there is the kinetic or magnetic energy of the magnetic force in
all parts of the field, including the conducting parts. They are
supposed to be set up by the current in the wire [Theory N]. We
reverse this; the current in the wire is set up by the energy
transmitted through the medium around it [Theory H]…. 1 , 2
•
•
•
•
Heaviside’s “Theory H” disappeared from the record, along with all his
work on pulses down cables. He was not mentioned in any text book for
more than fifty years. (But his operational calculus survived.) This was
because not long after 1892, in 1897, Marconi achieved wireless
signalling, which was much more glamorous, and led to the development
of ever more sophisticated mathematics, which exclude the pulse. Today,
text books tell you that in order to understand electromagnetic theory,
you must first master the mathematics of vectors and other mathematics.
A Google search for “mathematics is the language of science”, 200,000
hits, will reinforce this advice. In contrast, look for the mathematics in my
talk. My talk is about physics, not mathematics. The TEM step is central to
digital electronics, which is 95% of today’s electronics. It is what goes
down a USB cable in every home.
The maths pushers who control education call the TEM pulse
“degenerate”. In the U.S. university bible, J. D, Jackson, “Classical
Electrodynamics”, pub. Wiley 1692/1975, p341, says;
“ .... we take note of a degenerate or special type of solution, called the
.... TEM Wave. .... axial wave number .... Ѡ .... e+/-ikz ....”.
When Catt was drawn in 1964 into Heaviside’s problem, the transmission
of pulses, in Heaviside’s case undersea from Newcastle to Denmark, Catt
did not know that Heaviside had made a contribution, and he had to
rediscover Heaviside’s concept of “Energy Current” travelling in a
transmission line guided by two conductors. He only came upon
Heaviside’s work twelve years later.
•
J A Fleming
• Theory C
•
In 1976 Catt made the next advance, which is unknown to any professor
or text book writer today.
•
Theory N. The battery yearns to send out electric current. If is
•
•
succeeds, the current creates the Poynting Vector ExH. This energy is
delivered to the lamp, which lights.
Theory H. The battery yearns to send out energy current – Poynting
Vector – into the space between the conductors. If it succeeds, the energy
enters the lamp sideways, as Professor Kip said. The Poynting Vecor, or
field, also creates the electric current and electric charge.
Theory C. The critical path is for energy to be transferred from battery to
lamp. This is via the intermediary of ExH field, Poynting Vector. Electric
current and charge are not in the path of energy, from battery to field to
lamp. When a battery is connected to a lamp by two wires and the lamp
lights, electric current is not involved. Heaviside came close 116 years
earlier, but missed Theory C. He wrote; “By the way, is there such a thing
as an electric current?”. Had he not been suppressed, someone would
have come to Theory C earlier. Even today, Heaviside’s switch from
electric current to energy current is virtually unknown.
http://www.forrestbishop.4t.com/DEDV2/DEDV2p324-5.jpg ,
http://www.forrestbishop.4t.com/DEDV2/DEDV2p326-7.jpg . Note that
Heaviside worked in digital electronics. Of course, not only Theory H,
but also Theory C is unknown today.
•
•
•
•
•
•
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/2608.htm
“Although a cloud cannot exist without edges, the edges of a
cloud do not exist. They have no width, volume, or materiality.
However, the edges of a cloud can be drawn. Their shapes can
be manipulated graphically and mathematically. The same is
true of the so-called ‘electric current’.
....
Half of the primitives in electromagnetic theory disappear, and
it ceases to be a dualistic theory. ρ and J disappear, becoming
merely the physically non-existent results of the mathematical
manipulation of E and H, with no more significance than
“circularity” [see Letters in Wireless World, June 1979, p82, next
slide.]
For the creation of “electricity” by mathematical manipulation,
use Maxwell’s Equations, for instance;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_equations , which gives you the
mathematical fantasy “charge”, mathematically derived from a
real electric field. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x39k9.pdf . Compare
charge with “slopiness”.
•
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x39k10.pdf . Is
physically real?
slopiness, or charge,
•
•
•
•
•
In science, there is no precedent for a mathematical derivation
of something real being wrongly thought to be real.
A good example where mathematical manipulation takes us
from the real to the fantasy is in the sequence; distance,
velocity, acceleration, rate of change of acceleration, rate of
change of rate of change of .... . Another example is length, area,
volume, fourth dimension, fifth dimension. Mathematical rigour
does not give us a dividing line between the real and fantasy.
The mathematical manipulation of something real does not
always give us something real.
Since today the ruling dogma is “mathematics is the language of
science”, which has 200,000 hits on Google, such an issue
cannot be discussed.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x37h.pdf ; “ .... it was said that whereas in
the nineteenth century scientists were interested in whether a
mathematical construct did or did not have a basis in physical
reality, today scientists no longer care.”
• Ivor Catt 15 September 2013.
• Lecture given in 2011 to
the EMC group in the
U.K. Branch of the IEEE.
Diagrams of a charging
capacitor from
Wikipedia’s
“Displacement Current”
• Where
Wikipedia say ID
or E, they should
say dD/dt
• For 150 years after
Maxwell, nobody, not
even Heaviside,
noticed that when
electric current/charge
entered a capacitor it
first had to spread out
across the capacitor
plates. After this was
pointed out, the fact
http://www.forrestbisho
p.4t.com/EMTV2/EMTvol
2p318-9.jpg
A capacitor is like 1, not 2..
dD/dt both must and
must not create
magnetic field. So the
statement; “A capacitor
is a transmission line”
will never be published
or taught.
Self resonant
frequency?
• Since a capacitor is a transmission line, it has
no series inductance and so no self resonant
frequency. Although Google for “self resonant
frequency” puts Catt’s observation above
Wikipedia’s at the front of two million hits,
any link to Catt’s hit put in Wikipedia is
removed.
• http://www.ivorcatt.org/ic2603.htm
• [September 2013 update. In Google, Catt is
still no. 1 hit out of 4 million for “self resonant
frequency”. Wikipedia have removed their
web page for “self resonant frequency”! Yet
Wikipedia does not ban entries on what does
not exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost .
Ghosts does better with 70 million hits.]
This is how a
capacitor charges
Illustrations of the
TEM step.
• Regard D and E as the same,
and B and H as the same B
• A battery was connected
to the wires off at the
left, and the wires are
infinitely long.
• Traditionally. when
a TEM step (i.e.
logic transition from
low to high) travels
through a vacuum
from left to right,
guided by two
conductors (the
signal line and the
• - electric current in
the conductors, i
- magnetic field, or
flux, surrounding
the conductors B
- electric charge on
the surface of the
conductors +q , -q
- electric field, or
The TEM Wave
• Traditionally. when a TEM step (i.e. logic
transition from low to high) travels
through a vacuum from left to right,
guided by two conductors (the signal
line and the 0v line), there are four
factors which make up the wave;
• - electric current in the conductors, i
- magnetic field, or flux, surrounding the
conductors B
- electric charge on the surface of the
conductors +q , -q
- electric field, or flux, in the vacuum
terminating on the charge, D
• The key to
grasping the
Question is to
concentrate on
the electric
charge -q on the
• The step advances
one foot per
.
nanosecond. Extra
negative charge –p
appears on the
surface of the
bottom conductor
to terminate the
new lines (tubes)
of electric flux D
which appear
“The Catt
Question.”
•Since 1982 the
question has
been: Where
does this new
charge -p come
.
• Sir Michael Pepper,
Knighted "for services to
Physics", says it comes from
the south.
• Nobel Prizewinner Professor
Josephson says it comes
from the west.
• Accredited experts line up,
half behind Pepper
(Southerners) and half
behind Josephson
(Westerners).
• Both are wrong.
Since the charge –
p would have to
travel at the speed
of light, it would
have infinite mass.
• Electricity is not
fit for purpose, its
progress to “Theory C”.
If a TEM step travels
down in a dielectric
guided by two
conductors, electric
current is not involved.
(Some field would
penetrate an imperfect
conductor.)
• Although a cloud
cannot exist without
edges, the edges of a
cloud do not exist.
They have no width,
volume, or materiality.
However, the edges of
a cloud can be drawn.
Their shapes can be
manipulated
• This error, of thinking
that the mathematical
manipulation of
something which is real
(the field) is also real
(electric current and
charge) has is unique in
the history of science. We
know that the field is
real, because it conveys
the power ExH from
battery to lamp, which
• Is the
mathematical
manipulation of
something which
is real always
also real?
• Science has today been
hijacked by
mathematics. Within
today’s culture of
mathematical physics,
the question cannot be
asked. It can no longer
be admitted that
mathematics might
move us from the real to
the unreal.
• In The Mysterious
Universe, p113, Professor
James Jeans says; “….
Field between the two
conductors
• The field pattern above was published
in only one text book in the 20th
century. Perhaps that helps to explain
why;
• Pepper (Southerner) and Josephson
(Westerner) cannot grasp “The Catt
Question” because they see a sine
wave, not a pulse. They mention
“frequency”. “The Catt Question”
becomes hopelessly confused.
The move from “Slab”
to “Rolling”
• Until this point, you saw
“The Heaviside Signal”. We
had “a slab of (unchanging)
energy current.” But now
sinusoidal change of E
causes H which causes E
E causes H causes E?
• In the middle of a pulse, with
no changes, this is
impossible. So the pulse is
excluded from
electromagnetic theory. Also,
the professors and text
books must not point out
that E and H are in phase.
Now E causes E!
• Omitting the
constants,
• dE/dt= -dH/dx and
dH/dt= -dE/dx.
• (When Catt points out
that also,
• dE/dt= - dE/dx, he has
to be ignored)
• The real reason for the –
sign in the formulae,
thought to indicate a
spurious causality
between E and H, has to
be suppressed. Like the
length and breadth of a
brick, E and H coexist.
They are in fixed
proportion.
• http://www.ivorcatt.com/2613.htm
Key formulae missing from all
text books
Guide to Theory C
Electromagnetics Computer
Simulations
Forrest Bishop, May 27, 2006
All images and animations are Copyright © 2006,
Forrest Bishop, All Rights Reserved
http://www.forrestbishop.4t.com/THEORY_C_ANIMATIONS/THE
ORY_C_ANIMATIONS.htm
Field test
More
accurate
representations of a
slab of energy current
moving along two wires
at the speed of light.
The reddish cylinders
represent the electric
field
between
the
wires;
the
blueish
cylinders around each
wire represent the
magnetic fields.
Field test 3
The purple boxes of energy
current in other simulations
are a substitute for these
complicated fields.
The Catt Question
Traditionally. when a TEM step travels through a
vacuum from left to right, guided by two conductors,
there are four factors which make up the wave:
• electric current in the conductors I
• magnetic field, or flux, surrounding the
conductors B
• electric charge on the surface of the
conductors +q , -q
• electric field, or flux, in the vacuum terminating
on the charge (Figure 2), D
The key to grasping the question is to concentrate
on the electric charge -q on the bottom conductor.
The step advances one foot per nanosecond. Extra
negative charge appears on the surface of the
bottom conductor to terminate the new lines
(tubes) of electric flux D (figure 2) which appear
between the top (signal) conductor and the bottom
conductor.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.
uk/cattq.htm