|
|
From
Exegesis . |
| From Exegesis. Historic. It was staggering to stumble on the great breakthrough. On 26 May 1976, I was standing in front of my desk on the fourth or fifth floor on the north side of the large (then) GEC building in Borehamwood, Herts, looking north. Malcolm Davidson, my co-author, was sitting to my right. I suddenly realised that "electric charge" and "electric current" were merely mathematical manipulations of the edge of a TEM Wave. Like the edges of a cloud, they had no physical existence. However, like a cloud, the TEM Wave had to have edges or it would not exist. Catt on 27 May 1976. Page 1 , End of Page 1 ; Page 2 Page 3 , Page 4 , Page 5 , Page 6 , Page 7 , Page 8 , Page 9 , Page 10 , Page 11 , Page 12 , Page 13 , Page 14 , Page 15 , Page 16 From Transcribed text. In general, what follows will be aspects of Theory C. 1. There is no electric current. 2. A capacitor is a transmission line. 3. An inductor is a transmission line. 4. A transformer is a transmission line. End of segment of statement written on 27 May 1976. Catt already knew that censorship was pandemic in science, as is proved by his giving a misleading title to his first ever publiches article in 1966 in order to get past the referees, which he succeeded in doing. This way, he was the only person who succeeded in publishing on the grave problem of "The Glitch" for many years. In the present context, it was decided by Catt, Walton Davidson (and later Mike Gibson) to attempt to publish just a little at a time, following down the list of four items above. Up to the present time, all have been published in one journal or another, except the transformer (But see p226 and p234 self-published in 1980.) However, Mike Gibson put the mathematics of the transformer onto his website for a decade or two. Unfortunately, it has since disappeared. Extraordinarily, the mathematics for the transformer is the same as that for the inductor. Mike Gibson solved the mathematics for them. Even within this framework, Catt witheld a much simpler treatment of the transformer than the maths Mike solved, to see if the others among the four (CWDG) could come up with it. The Gibson version on his website (since missing) is not the simplest version. Professor Heath once told Catt that the reason why one of his publications was so tortuous was that it would be impossible to get a simpler version past the referees. Thus, a proper research into "The Scientific Reception System" has to involve trying to publish a tortuous version first. The version on the inductor , published in Proc. IEEE in the 1980s, is not the simplest approach, for the same reason. Even in my book, the tortuous version is published, because a tortuous version published in Proc. IEEE will gain more attention than a version which is too simple and refused for publication! Ivor Catt, 9th August 2007.
.
| |
|
| |