When did it all go wrong?
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/28anomt.htm
Yesterday I had a
remarkable lecture from Harry Ricker on Skype. He said that electromagnetic
theory fell apart when the electron was introduced, and was “force-fitted” into
the [valid?] electromagnetic theory developed by Faraday, Maxwell,
Heaviside. It was very convincing, and I kept telling him he must write it
down. He replied half-agreeing, but saying it would be a lot of work, and that
he had said it all in www interviews with Baxter, which are available in voice
on the www. I still said he should write it down, even briefly, warts and all.
This was a new
angle for me, or so I thought. However, two things then happened. First, I
stumbled on my www page http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/28anomt.htm
. Extraordinarily, I have no recollection of writing it, or its content from
2001, 14 years ago. Second, this morning, I remembered the Second Catt
Question. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x22j.pdf
.
So, the question
is, did the whole thing, previously elegant under Faraday – Maxwell –
Heaviside, fall apart with the introduction of the particle, the electron?
Harry said that opened the door to more particles in the 20th
century. He correctly said the correct theory is based on waves, not particles.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x22j.pdf says the
particle (the electron) came in in two stages, that Heaviside’s particle
initially had fixed mass, which did not signal the end of classical
electromagnetism via “The Catt Question”, http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm , which is only lethal if the electron has variable mass.
This morning I realized that the whole Heaviside structure was fatally flawed
before the introduction of the electron (and then other particles). I have said
that Heaviside should have seen the fatal flaw in his structure, and I have
written about why he failed to do so.
Buried in the
pre-electron theory is the underlying fatal flaw; “A capacitor is a
transmission line”. http://www.ivorcatt.org/icrwiworld78dec1.htm
. Displacement current has to act differently
in a capacitor (generating magnetic field) and a transmission line (in the case
of a TEM step, (generating no magnetic field). In my forgotten piece, http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x22j.pdf
, or elsewhere, I
say Heaviside calls Maxwell “the heaven-sent Maxwell”, and also that Maxwell
did not notice that the TEM wave was dealt with in incompatible ways in the
capacitor and in the transmission line..
“A capacitor is a
transmission line” is much like Forrest’s “forbidden equation”, i=qc, only mentioned by Palmer on page 6; http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x2bg.pdf
. I told May Chiao, who said she was editor of Nature Physics, that if an editor published an article which
contained the statement; “A capacitor is a transmission line”, that would be
the end of her editorial career, certainly if it mentioned “displacement
current”.
Classical theory,
Faraday – Maxwell – Heaviside, was fatally flawed before the appearance of the
particle. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x22j.pdf
.
Ivor Catt. 15 November 2015
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/yak.htm
2018. Now an editor self-destructs. “A capacitor
is a transmission line.”