The
Crunch
Summary. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/thecrunch.htm
When
a capacitor charged to +8v is shorted at both ends, it alternates between +8v and
-8v. The problem is to explain this if the previously charged capacitor had a
stationary +8v electric field.
Explanation.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8b5w1234.htm
The Dénouement. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8b2wd.htm
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x31j.htm
Wakefield 1. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x343.pdf
Still,
today, decades later, no accredited expert, professor or text book writer, has
commented on Wakefield 1.
The
challenge. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x6ar.htm
Dialogue
(actually monologue) with accredited experts round the world.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x344.htm
In
Wakefield 1, a 1m 50 ohm coaxial cable charged to 10v is discharged into a very
long 50 ohm coax cable. Out comes a 2m 5v pulse. Admittedly no “expert” dares
to comment. However, if he did, he would argue for a voltage divider between 50
ohms and 50 ohms. Here is the Instruction Manual for such a Tektronix device
sold in 1963, and immediately used by Catt. The manual states that the output
is half amplitude double length, but does not discuss why. http://ivorcatt.co.uk/x212.pdf
Wakefield 2.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x3a922.pdf
W1
and W2 compared. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x3216b.pdf
Wakefield
3. Apply a short at the right hand end, and monitor the mid
point.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x854w3.pdf
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8b1w3.JPG
Result
predicted by Catt; http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x84swak.pdf
Same
result predicted by Professor Alex Yakovlev; http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8b1alex2.pdf
, page 3. His written explanation is unclear, but his diagram clearly shows the
way a capacitor with reciprocating energy behaves when shorted. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x2ab.pdf confirming that a charged
capacitor does not have a stationary electric field. We now wait for a
clear explanation of Wakefield results, based on the classical assumption
(which is wrong), that a charged capacitor has a stationary electric field.
Don’t hold your breath!
Wakefield
4. Apply a short at both ends.
Mid point.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8b2w4.jpg
25%
point. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8b2w41.jpg
Perhaps
W4 is the definitive experiment. When the shorts are applied, the 4v (half)
signal currently travelling to the right inverts and reflects. At the same
instant, the 4v signal travelling to the left inverts and reflects. The
inverted signals arrive back at the mid point at the
same instant, leading to a full switch from +8v to -8v (at the mid point).
Perhaps
someone like Professor Tony Davies, FIEEE, FIET, ex IEEE Board of Directors etc., http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/ieeetonycard.pdf
need only peruse W4.
A capacitor charged to
+8v, when shorted, switches to -8v.
1. Is
this important?
2. If
he thinks it is important, will he say whether he is able to help to get it published
by the IEEE or IET? Or will he say he is unable to do so? Obviously such
information would not get past traditional peer review. It would do too much
damage to the careers and reputations of peers.
Are
our institutions out of control? This is The Crunch.
Ivor Catt 2.10.2018
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Academic Omerta.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8apomerta.htm
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Dear
Ivor The
reason why I cannot answer this tripod question: +++++++++++++ Then I remembered that, after hearing me and Dave for four hours, you
never answered whether in your opinion 1 There was something fundamentally wrong with classical
electromagnetism. 2 There is nothing wrong 3 You are not sure. ++++++++++++++ is that I
don't know classical EM. So, if you,
on this basis, demand I should answer with no.3, take this no. 3 (I am not
sure) as my answer. I am
learning EM from what I read in Heaviside, your papers, and my regular
discussions with Chris. I would
not say that everything fits well in my head but at least I find this process
interesting. I tried
to describe the Wakefield experiments with discharging a coax cable section
using spatio-temporal diagrams, tried to
accommodate them to what I had heard from you and also tried to look for
other ways of modelling energy current such as Petri nets. I am also trying to tell about your theory and
Heaviside other people at all suitable occasions. Kind regards Alex The Wakefield results are much more fundamental than “classical
electromagnetism”. “is that I don't know classical EM.” – Professor Alex
Yakovlev, FIEEE, FIET. In school in St. Peterburg at the age of 14, was Professor Alex Yakovlev
taught that when a battery lights a lamp, electricity flows down one wire and
back on the other? He also needs to know that while the lamp is lit, there is
positive charge on the top wire and negative charge on the bottom wire. What
he will have learnt at a later age, particularly since he is involved with
Heaviside, is that the energy emitted by the battery proceeds to the lamp at
the speed of light. “ …. is that I don't know
classical EM.” – AY, sidesteps the issue, which is simple, and does not involve
“classical electromagnetism”, but involves the obvious. Alex has never
commented on cattq. Will he now comment clearly on
Wakefield? The Wakefield issue is whether a charged capacitor has a
stationary electric field, Yes or No? His predictions of the Wakefield
results contradict the idea of a stationary electric field. Will he confirm
this? Certainly Spargo will not, but then Spargo says there is nothing fundamentally wrong with
classical electromagnetism. – Ivor Catt From: Ivor Catt <ivorcatt@gmail.com> Dear Alex, Your bringing in the electron into the Figure 9.3 issue threw me. The issue is based on Faraday's Law and the law of conservation of
charge. Faraday did not have electrons. The electron is only mentioned once in
all my writing - articles and books. Then I remembered that, after hearing me and Dave for four hours, you
never answered wherther in your opinion 1 There was something fundamentally wrong with classical
electromagnetism. 2 There is nothing wrong 3 You are not sure. Chris Spargo did say there was nothing wrong
with classical electromagnetism, after hearing us speak for four hours.. This uncertainty blights all dialogue between us. If in your opinion there is nothing wrong with classical
electromagnetism, there is no point in going beyond "The Catt Question" .http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm All my effort
should go into understanding that from my point of view you fail to grasp the
fatal flaw pointed out in cattq, that the charge
cannot get to where it is needed. Neither Westerner nor Southerner are right. When trying to light a lamp, electricity is not
fit for purpose. Ivor.
|
||||||||||||
