|
Tweaker's Asylum
catt anomaly
212.228.152.5
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread:
Display Email Next ] [ Tweaker's Asylum ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by Catt on June 22, 2001 at 07:29:50
Re: catt anomaly
should have been called "The Catt Question". Professor M Pepper FRS and Dr Neil McEwan , Reader in
Electromagnetism, contradict each other on a fundamental feature of classical
electromagnetism, which both of them earn salary teaching. The rest of
academia is split down the middle, between "Southerners" (Pepper)
and "Westerners" (McEwan). They refuse to say whether they agree or
disagree, or to discuss the matter with each other, or with us. In their refusal , they are joined by the
rest of academia who earn salary for "teaching" classical
electromagnetism, which they all refuse to define.
Criticism of Catt's views or technical competence are beside the point. Catt
wants to learn from these salaried luminaries, and they refuse to teach him
or each other.
I accept one posting which asserts that no advances in electromagnetic theory
beyond its status in 1920 are allowed. All I want to know is, what was the
theory in 1920, and so what is it today?
Animation
of The Catt Anomaly
Book on The Catt Anomaly
Letter to silent
luminaries
Power versus
Scholarship
Ivor Catt 22june01
@@@@@@@@@@
Electromagnetic Theory reaches
perfection
Follow Ups:
Tweaker's Asylum
Re: catt anomaly
212.228.152.5
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread:
Display Email ] [ Tweaker's Asylum ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by Catt on June 22, 2001 at 13:18:58
In Reply to: Re: catt anomaly
posted by Catt on June 22, 2001 at 07:29:50:
Animation of The
Catt Anomaly When a TEM step travels at the speed of light down a vacuum
guided by two conductors, electric charge appears on the bottom conductor to
terminate the electric field which appears between top and bottom conductors.
Where does that charge come from?
Pepper FRS says it cannot come
from the west, because it would have to travel at the speed of light.
McEwan , Reader in
Electromagnetism, says is comes from the west, and does not need to travel at
the speed of light.
Catt is not involved, except that he wants to learn from these learned
luminaries, who continue to accept salary for "teaching" the
subject. As one of the people in this www discussion group has said, the
theory was all sorted out by 1920, and has not changed since. Thus, he and
these professionals have had eighty years in which to sort out all the
details of the dogma. However, the question of where the electric charge
which appears on the bottom conductor comes from, is not a detail. I cannot
think of anything which is much more central to the theory. Lacking
information on this, we do not have a theory. For eighty years we have had
blarney and bluster, including some in your www discussion group.
Heaviside is not to blame, because when he was active, it was not clear that
electricity had mass; quite the reverse. He was already busy with his
engrossing war with his cousin Miss Way before the electron developed mass.
[But what about Kragh on
Heaviside in 1889? – IC, 16oct03]
(By the way, my co-author Dr
Lynch, aged 84, tells me that J J Thomson told him (Lynch) about his
discovery of the electron. That is why he [Lynch] gave the IEE Centenary
Speech.)
Pepper and his boss Howie each got their FRS (Fellow of the Royal Society)
for prowess in this very area (and not of course for mutual backscratching
and behind-licking!). Howie says the charge comes from the west, and Pepper
says it cannot come from the west, but comes from the south (thus defying
Gauss's Law, which Pepper seems indifferent to). They refuse to discuss their
difference. Anyway, I'm wasting my time. If Howie FRS, Pepper FRS, McEwan,
Reader in e-m, (and now Nobel Prizewinner Andrew Huxley, see my website) are
ignorant of e-m theory, and just write irrelevant drivel, why should I expect
anything but bluster from the guys in this email discussion group?
Animation of The
Catt Anomaly
Book on The Catt Anomaly
However, perhaps some of you can distinguish between a Theory and a Question.
The Catt Anomaly is a Question. What we want is for all the ignorant FRS's,
Nobel Prizewinners and so on to sing with one voice. They have to talk to
each other, not just give each other prizes. Either they should all become
Westerners, or they should all become Southerners. They don't have to have a
clue about e-m theory. All they have to do is to agree the party line, and
then continue to draw salary without frightening the horses (= young
students). Ivor Catt
Power versus
Scholarship
Follow Ups:
Tweaker's Asylum
Re: catt anomaly
195.92.198.75
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread:
Display Email ] [ Tweaker's Asylum ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by Joe II-V (i) on
June 23, 2001 at 15:44:21
In Reply to: Re: The Catt Anomaly
posted by Catt on June 22, 2001 at 13:18:58:
Ivor, I'm intrigued, but
I'm also wandering if you are simply trying to sell your book . If you are genuine
in this, I hope you will indulge someone who flunked A level physics and
kindly explain the following in as near lay-man's terms as you can manage:
>>When a TEM step
travels at the speed of light down a vacuum guided by two conductors,
electric charge appears on the bottom conductor to terminate the electric
field which appears between top and bottom conductors. Where does that charge
come from?<<
- What is a TEM step
and what is the importance of the two conductors?
- Is what you say
verifiable by an experiment?
- Why is this important
and what is wrong with the explanation from those in the Scientific
establishment?
- isn't it quite normal
in Science for there to be competing theories to explain observed phenomena?
Many thanks in advance,
-Joe.
Tweaker's Asylum
Re: catt anomaly
212.228.152.5
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread:
Display Email ] [ Tweaker's Asylum ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by 1366526650 on July 09, 2001 at 17:14:06
In Reply to: Re: catt anomaly
posted by Joe II-V on June 23, 2001 at 15:44:21:
- isn't it quite normal
in Science for there to be competing theories to explain observed phenomena?
That is not the case
with The Catt Anomaly
Professor M Pepper FRS is a
Southerner. Lago is a
Southerner
Howie FRS is a Westerner. Dr Neil
McEwan is a Westerner.
P, H, M refuse to tell
us whether they agree, or disagree, or whether the question is important or
unimportant. They remain incommunicado, but continue to draw salary for
"teaching" the subject. This is definitely not a normal case of
competing theories. In such a case, the two theories are specified, and the
parties state which theory they cleave to, or that they are uncertain. In the
case of The Catt Anomaly, we have highly salaried shysters taking the Fifth
Amendment, but continuing to draw salary.
Ivor Catt Power versus
Scholarship
Posted by 1366526650 on July 09, 2001 at 17:19:03
In Reply to: Re: catt anomaly
posted by Joe II-V on June 23, 2001 at 15:44:21:
If I wanted to sell my
book Re: catt
anomaly , I would not have put it on my website http://www.ivorcatt.com/ at http://www.ivorcatt.com/em.htm and http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/catanoi.htm
Ivor Catt
Posted by 1366526650 on July 10, 2001 at 09:58:56
In Reply to: Re: catt anomaly
posted by Joe II-V on June 23, 2001 at 15:44:21:
-
What is a TEM step and what is the
importance of the two cunductors?
Answer. The central problem for electromagnetic theory is the suppression of the TEM wave [See “A Lost Concept”
] . It is not even grasped by university lecturers. e-m is a physical, not a
mathematical, subject. The only book which addresses the TEM wave competently
is my 1994 book "Electromagnetism 1" [now at http://www.ivorcatt.com/em.htm . Or] Send me your address and I will mail
it to you. ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk Later, you send ten dollars to my co-author
and co-researcher Malcolm Davidson, who lives in New York. Before you do
this, in deference to the kindly fellow who suggested on this www discussion
that I was only out to sell my books, you ask him to come up with an
alternative book which treats the TEM wave competently. Then buy the
alternative, if you have more confidence in him than in me. If you are
suspicious, you could alternatively check out my many many articles
in Wireless World , particularly july79 , which discusses the two
versions of the TEM wave which split academia down the middle. (Another
split; not the same as the split over the Catt Anomaly.) Another, less
exhaustive article is in WW sep84. Alternatively, look at the animation of
the TEM wave at http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/catanoi.htm
- Is what you say
verifiable by an experiment?
Answer. Nobody has ever shaken hands with an electron. We cannot experiment
if the Establishment refuses to specify their theory. We do not know what we
are experimenting to find out, if, because of the refusal to discuss the Catt
Anomaly, the reigning theory, which according to one of the www discussion
guys has reigned unchallenged since 1920, (which is used to suppress all
other theories) is not stated. The Emperor has no clothes. We cannot discuss
his clothes unless and until he gets dressed.
- Why is this important
and what is wrong with the explanation from those in the Scientific
establishment?
Answer. What is wrong is the refusal
of the Scientific Establishment to explain, or to resolve the contradiction
in their explanations (westerner and southerner). [The TEM Wave is the logic
signal travelling from one logic gate to the next at the speed of light. This
is the fundamental role of electromagnetism in digital systems, which
comprise 95% of all electronic systems today. Failure of academics to sing to
the same hymn sheet on this matter, and their failure to discuss their mutual
contradiction (between westerners and southerners) undermines electromagnetic
theory at its central core and therefore the very centre of science. Einstein
said that relativity was based on Maxwell’s Equations of the electromagnetic
field. Feynemann said that Maxwell’s Equations were the greatest achievement of civilization
. Here we are dealing with “eminent” punkah-wallahs at the central core of
science refusing to get together to clean up their act. IC 17mar03.]
- isn't it quite normal in Science for there to be
competing theories to explain observed phenomena?
Answer. The so-called competing theories refuse to compete. They (westerner
and southerner) just languish alongside each other. This is a betrayal of
innocent young students. It is the duty of teachers to clarify between
themselves what they are teaching. We do not pay them to blithely teach a
muddle, and ignore blatant confusion.
Tweaker's Asylum
Re: catt anomaly
212.228.152.5
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread:
Display Email ] [ Tweaker's Asylum ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by Catt on June 22, 2001 at 13:18:59
*******************************************************************
Tweaker's Asylum
Re: catt anomaly
63.25.20.4
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread:
Display Email ] [ Tweaker's Asylum ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by john curl (i) on
June 22, 2001 at 17:00:41
In Reply to: catt anomaly posted by Catt on June 22, 2001 at 07:29:50:
I have been asked about
the CATT controversy. A few months ago, I was challenged by Steve Eddy to
debate Ivor Catt's issues. I decided that I could not do much with it. Some
on this website have dismissed CATT and his issues, outright. I personally
have found the questions that Mr Catt has addressed to be important, but I
don't know whether he is absolutely correct or not. I think that it is
important to realize that there are many unresolved issues in E/M theory,
that Maxwell's equations (so loved by engineers and physicists) were
formulated approximately 150 years ago, even before the electron was
discovered. This does not make them useless, just not necessarily 100%
accurate in EVERY case. The same argument can be said about Newton's laws of
motion, etc.
I do not think that most on the website at this time will understand much of
what Ivor Catt is getting at, and that includes me as well to some degree.
Posted by 1366526650 on July 10, 2001 at 15:56:54
In Reply to: Re: catt anomaly posted by john curl on June 22, 2001 at 17:00:41:
"I do not think
that most on the website at this time will understand much of what Ivor Catt
is getting at, and that includes me as well to some degree." Not so.
Oliver Heaviside (who was then suppressed for more than fifty years) went up
to Newcastle to help his brother to signal Morse pulses undersea from
Newcastle to Denmark. He found that he could send a new pulse before the
previous one had arrived in Denmark.
A pulse had energy, and a gap between pulses had no energy.
In the same way as we are allowed to say that a perfectly drawn triangle's
angles add up to 180 degrees (even though a perfect triangle does not exist),
so we are allowed to consider a two wire transmission line (e.g. coax) with
perfect conductors and vacuum between them. It is then agreed by all eminent
scientists that the pulses travel at the speed of light, one foot per
nanosecond, guided by the two wires in the same way as a train is guided by
two rails. Even the most stupid Nobel Prizewinner with the most august
forbears will agree that the pulse comprises four constituents; electric
charge, electric current, electric field, magnetic field.
Heaviside, like one of our intellectual leaders of today, Dr McEwan, Reader
in Electromagnetism at Bradford University, could envisage this electric
charge coming along the lower wire from the west, to take up its position in
a further one foot section of the coax, to terminate the newly appearing
electric field in the next foot of the cable, every nanosecond. Our esteemed
Professor Pepper FRS cannot envisage that, saying that the charge would have
to travel at the speed of light. (Heaviside, since electric charge in his
time probably had no mass, had no problem with the charge travelling at the
speed of light. Anyway, at that time, mass did not increase with velocity.)
Other very eminent professors and Nobel Prizewinners take up their places
behind, either Pepper, or McEwan. I admire them all, without reservation.
They are totally unconcerned about the inconsistency between them, and refuse
to discuss it with each other, or with us.
Such persistent effrontry, spread as it is now over decades, deserves
admiration. The ending of the Enlightenment, which is what they are
attempting, will be a great achievement.
Recently, an expert historian of philosophy told me that the start of the
Enlightenment was represented by the introduction of freedom of
communication. He agreed that if communication were now blocked, as I
asserted, it would follow that the Enlightenment was over. The implications
flowing from the ending of the Enlightenment extend far beyond
electromagnetic theory. The proof that the Enlightenment is over, which is
what the book "The Catt Anomaly" shows, is a far greater
achievement than any advance in electromagnetic theory. http://www.ivorcatt.com/28anomp.htm
"I do not think
that most on the website at this time will understand much of what Ivor Catt
is getting at, and that includes me as well to some degree." Anyone who
claims to not understand the discrepancy between such learned scientists, and
the scandal of their refusing to address the matter, is dissembling. Note
that no mathematics is involved. Properly viewed, the Catt Anomaly is a
politico-social phenomenon, not a technical one. It is the refusal of scientific leaders to
address their science, and our failure to apply sanctions to them, and the
implications for the survival of the Enlightenment. Whether Ivor Catt is
polite or not, is a trivial detail.
To put the record straight, Catt was so very careful to avoid being impolite
that he did not communicate directly with any of the key rogues in the saga
for the initial many years, including McEwan and Pepper. Catt got their
bosses to choose whom to so instruct, and then to instruct them to write to
Catt. Thus, these rogues were unable to assert rudeness in Catt's
communications, since Catt had not communicated with them, or even selected
them. This research has been very carefully done by Catt. [In an operation
taking many years, the normal escape routes for an ignorant, decadent
Scientific Establishment were all very carefully closed off. These
precautions were not taken by Velikovsky or Dingle, or even by Harold
Hillman, to mention just a few other suppressed scientists. IC 17mar03]
In any case, I love the idea that, had
Newton been rude , we would not now be using his three Equations of
Motion. Similarly, we only use jet aircraft because the inventor had all the
graces.
Ivor Catt 10july01.
*********************************************
Tweaker's Asylum
Re: catt anomaly
212.228.152.5
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread:
Display Email ] [ Tweaker's Asylum ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by Catt on June 22, 2001 at 13:18:59
In Reply to: catt anomaly posted by Catt on June 22, 2001 at 07:29:50:
When a TEM step travels
at the speed of light down a vacuum guided by two conductors, electric charge
appears on the bottom conductor to terminate the electric field which appears
between top and bottom conductors. Where does that charge come from?
Pepper FRS says it cannot come from the west, because it would have to travel
at the speed of light.
McEwan, Reader in Electromagnetism, says is comes from the west, and does not
need to travel at the speed of light.
Catt is not involved, except that he wants to learn from these learned
luminaries, who continue to accept salary for "teaching" the
subject. As one of the people in this www discussion group has said, the
theory was all sorted out by 1920, and has not changed since. Thus, he and
these professionals have had eighty years in which to sort out all the dogma.
However, the question of where the electric charge which appears on the
bottom conductor comes from, is not a detail. I cannot think of anything
which is much more central to the theory. Lacking information on this, we do
not have a theory. For eighty years we have had blarney and bluster,
including some in your www discussion group.
Heaviside is not to blame, because when he was active, it was not clear that
electrticity had mass; quite the reverse. He was already busy with his
engrossing war with his cousin Miss Way before the electron developed mass.
(By the way, my co-author Dr Lynch, aged 84, tells me that J J Thomson told
him (Lynch) about his discovery of the electron. That is why he gave the IEE
Centenary Speech.)
Pepper and his boss Howie each got their FRS (Fellow of the Royal Society)
for prowess in this very area (and not of course for mutual backscratching
and behind-licking!). Howie says the charge comes from the west, and Pepper
says it cannot come from the west, but comes from the south (thus defying
Gauss's Law, which Pepper seems indifferent to). They refuse to discuss their
difference. Anyway, I'm wasting my time. If Howie FRS, Pepper FRS, McEwan,
Reader in e-m, (and now Nobel Prizewinner Andrew Huxley, see my website) are
ignorant of e-m theory, and just write irrelevant drivel, why should I expect
anything but bluster from the guys in this email discussion group?
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/catanoi.htm
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/w99anbk2.htm
However, perhaps some of you can distinguish between a Theory and a Question.
The Catt Anomaly is a Question. What we want is for all the ignorant FRS's,
Nobel Prizewinners and so on to sing with one voice. They have to talk to
each other, not just give each other prizes. Either they should all become Westerners,
or they should all become Southerners. They don't have to have a clue about
e-m theory. All they have to do is to agree the party line, and then continue
to draw salary without frightening the horses (= young students).
Ivor Catt. 22june01
|