Posted by Catt on June 22, 2001 at 07:29:50

"The 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?
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/catanoi.htm
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/zc048.htm
Ivor Catt 22june01

Posted by Catt on June 22, 2001 at 13:18:58

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

---

Posted by Joe II-V (i) on June 23, 2001 at 15:44:21

In Reply to: Re: 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 cunductors?

- 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.

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.#
Pepper FRS is a Southerner.
Howie FRS is a Westerner. 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 saslaried shysters taking the Fifth Amendment, but continuing to draw salary.
Ivor Catt

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 "The Catt Anomaly", I would not have put it on my website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ at http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/catanoi.htm and
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/wbbanbk1.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. 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". 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 suspisious, 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).

- 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, anhd ignore blatant confusion.

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

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.

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.

"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 instruct them to write to Catt, and also to choose whom to so instruct. 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 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.

*********************************************

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