21st century comments on my books

Ivor Catt June2006


This website will comprise hyperlinks to a series of web pages, each one devoted to comments on one of my books.

Ivor Catt June 2006.


Electromagnetic Theory Volumel 1

From p17 onwards is the the article The Heaviside Signal which appeared in Wireless World in July 1979. However, in that article, the order of pages 17-34 is somewhat different and the content somewhat different. See a discussionm of the very important pp30/31 below.

p17 The Heaviside Signal This is most of the article The Heaviside Signal which appeared in Wireless World in July 1979. Heaviside says Maxwell "cut the Gordian Knot". Do we find anything more specific in Maxwell himself about why he invented displacement current? Paul J Nahin; "Oliver Heaviside .... " pub. IEEE 1988 p87, or the same pub. Johns Hopkins 2002 p87, bears on this.


p27 "Definitions" succinctly explains much of the history of electromagnetic theory. It is absolutely fundamental and extremely important. However, the student can get along without most of it, and nearly every student will, hopefully to return to it repeatedly much later. We are here close to the underlying paradox, or confusion. Electromagnetic Theory is thought to originate with static fields, then progressing via slowly changing fields. In fact, moving forward from the Contrapuntal , or Catt, model for a charged capacitor, the Primitive is the TEM Wave travelling at the speed of light, and any static field is an illusion caused by overlapping TEM Waves.

The discussion continues in Volume 2 , where the idea is presented that permittivity and permeability are not the Primitives, but are derived from the true primitives, velocity and the impedance of free space. The way this is done is most clearly presented in the top line of page 241. The LHS of each formula is directly measurable. As shown lower down, permittivity and permeability are mathematical constructs easily derived from velocity and impedance

Since in the nineteenth century it was not possible to study moving electromagnetics, (which according to "Theory C" is the only electrmagnetism which exists",) conventional electromagnetic theory was built up from Primitives which are thought to be seen and measured from "static" fields. The two key "Primitives" are electric permittivity (EP) and magnetic permeability (MP). Under today's rationalised system of units, which Heaviside campaigned for, the permittivity and permeability of a vacuum are not unity. Their values can be seen at the bottom right corner of "Electrical Formulae" in my book Digital Hardware Design

Electric permittivity links with voltage, which I have shown elsewhere cannot be measured. Its measurement is an illusion

The same impossibility arises when a magnetometer is used to measure amagnetic field. The fact that the true Primitives, velocity of light, 300,000 and the "constant of proportionality for the medium", the impedance of space, 377, can both be measured, is a strong argument for retreating from E and voltage (and H) when building a sound electromagnetic theory.

In the middle of page 241 we see how permittivity and permeability are derived from 300, 000 and 377. However, there is a further twist in the story. Velocity, 300,000, is dropped in favour of intervals of time. Finally, the pair of primitives are Zo and t.

p30 These two pages have important information. They were first published as a appendix to my article The Heaviside Signal in Wireless World in July 1979. They help to explain the confusion existing between static fields and the TEM Wave. This is a complex issue which does not bear on new theory, but only illustrates some of the problems with (1) old theory and (2) with trying to relate old (static field theory N) with new (speed of light field theory H or C). The reader should merely take note that there is a problem over mathematical signs, which has a bearing on the construction of Maxwell's Equations. It also indicates that the idea of causality in Faraday's Law of Induction, or in Lenz's Law, is not soundly based. Note on p28; "Pressure in a liquid in direction x does not cause pressure in the y (and z) direction; they coexist." Thus, in other contexts, the idea of coexistence is accepted, as under the new theory we need to accept the coexistence of electric and magnetic fields, forming the new electromagnetic field as our Primitive.

I attempted to publish this item, pp30/31, for many years. Two versions can be seen at p112 in this volume and at p313 in volume 2. All learned journals in the world rejected it for publication. Elsewhere I have written about how the editor of "New Scientist" said it was well known, and was in the writings of Paul Davies. He was then obstructive when I tried to find out where it was in his books. Obviously it is not there, or anywhere else. See p112 in Extract from Electromagnetic Theory volume 1

p32 The Rolling Wave. This is also part of my July 1979 article in Wireless World. It is the smoking gun, where we see "The Rolling Wave" stated by a the writer from Berkeley Calif. of a well kinown text book. ".... this H variation acts back to cause the postulated variation in E." It is of course convenient to not mention that E and H are in phase; a fact which creates great difficulty for The Rolling Wave.

p33 " .... line integral .... " . But see p59

p36 "It follows that they do not know that a capacitor is a transmission line." Since the fact is suppressed (see May Chiao) , even today, Professors snd text book writers do not know that a capacitor is a transmission line. Those few who repeat (with diagram) Heaviside's surmise as to why Maxwell invented "the extra current", Displacement Current, usually do not state that the field between the plates is uniform, although they all believe it is. Note that they have never ead Heaviside or Catt, so they have never heard of the idea of the energy, or signal, entering the capacitor sideways - that Heaviside turned the whole subject through 90 degrees (vol 2, p253)

Kip came closest when he said "that the energy dissipated in a resistor entered it sideways, and was transported into the resistor by the TEM Wave", but he did not realise the same for a capacitor (or a diode ).

p41 Recently, Forrest Bishop was very positive about this analysis of Jackson. The question of how devastating it is is not too important, because the reader can rest assured that text book writers are like the Sorcerer's Apprentice, as even some of them say. This is proved by their inability to relate in any way to "The Catt Question".

p44 " This is a false statement .... " Also see The German Lecture

p46 Catt's parody on textbook maths.

p51 Also see page 13 of my book "Computer Worship", pub. Pitman 1973

p58 " .... if other text books follow suit, .... ". They did not do so. I suspect that today, 30 years later, no text book today points out the problem. - Ivor Catt, July 2006.

p97 See Wireless World article, March 1980.

p98 So far, this very important diagram does not exist anywhere else.

p103 Theocharis pointed out that the word "almost" should be omitted.

p104 One commentator actually said we should so arrange passengers in a train!

p106 See pp 101, 112, 313.

p109 In 1979 I knew about the more important problem of interference between parallel beams, but for some reason I omitted this, putting in the less important "change in cross-section". Strange.

At the centenary conference held by The Royal Institution to celebrate the M-M experiment, where Prof. Kilmister was one of the speakers, I spoke from the floor. I raised the problem of interference between parallel beams, not the problem of change of corss sectional area ahead of the beam. I said; "It appears to me that for the experiment to have any value, the light must act as particles during its travel, because parallel waves would interfere with each other and ruin the experiment; but it has to act as waves on arrival in order to determine transit time difference by interference fringes." In the Michelson-Morley centenary seminar, speaker Professor Kilmister said, "That has never been mentioned before". It has never been mentioned since - being suppressed for good reason.


p112 Dec. 1979. See p313 , Oct 1980

p137 My finest writing. Also in two copies on the www. Also read "The Clever take the Brilliant".

Also "The Conquest of Thought" and "The Conquest of Truth"






Electromagnetic Theory Volume 2

Go to some extracts from Volume 2

p207 Compare with autobiographical information in my books "The Catt Concept", pub. Putnam 1972, and "Computer Worship", pub. Hart-Davies 1973. The key steps in scientific advance were carefully documented and countersigned at the time.

p210 " .... my experiment to prove the point had a flaw in it .... " I think that was a diplomatic statement by me in my 1980 book. "heavily damped" comes from the foreign, sinusoidal Universe of Discourse.

p211 We can be sure that this account is accurate. To check Dave Walton's and Malcolm Davidson's recollection, read them. For the electron, see section on the electron in my 1994 book.

p214 First disclosure of "Theory C". Book publication date October 1980. (It had been held back for four years from May 1976.) It had been disclosed in code in previous volumes, for instance the last series of numbers in volume 1, published December 1979.

Obviously the late Tom Ivall, Editor of Wireless World, had undertaken to publish. It was published in the December 1980 issue of Wireless World, two months later. However, such an event - the first disclosure of the most important advance in electromagnetic theory for a century, and possibly the most important scientific advance in the 20th century, had to be handled carefully. After all, only a year before , the Institute of Physics had broken its contract to publish "History of Displacement Current" , later published in "Wireless World" in March 1979. Prior to the publication of "Displacement Current" , a great deal of manipulation was necessary to get it published even after the Editor Ivall had accepted it. I believe I have discussed the successful, tortuous strategy elsewhere.

I think that the whole drama of the successful strategy devised to get Tom Ivall to publish "The Death of Electric Current" , which involved the playwright Chris Penfold, is also recounted elsewhere, I believe.

The realisation, Theory C , came to Catt in 1976, but was held back for four years. It appeared in code on the last page of earlier books, for instance March 1979 , last item on the last page. Today, it might be fun to try to decipher the other coded messages, which we regarded as our most important breakthroughs.

p215 Theory C. Publication date for the volume, October 1980

p216 There is confusion limited to three days over exactly when Walton said Displacement Current was at an end and then when Catt said Electric Current was at an end. The documents written at the time were counter-signed by Catt and Davidson. All three, Catt, Davidson, Walton, have copies, but one of the copies has to be unearthed for the exact days to be confirmed. They are all within the range 26-28 May 1976. The exact days will be inserted here when the contemporary signed and countersigned documents are found.

p217 This pursue the train of causality, and notes that when Heaviside replaced electric current by energy current, "electric current" fell outside the necessary causality sequence when energy is transferred from battery to lamp.

p218 This echoes some of the Catt dec 1980 article "The Death of Electric Current" published in Wireless World Dec 1980. However, the article says ".... a cloud cannot exist without edges ...." but the article says " .... a cloud cannot exist without edges ...."

p222 Qualititative description of the transmission line model for the inductor and then (p226) the transformer.

This next comment written on around 10 June 2006.

p226 This book deals qualitatively with the transformer. However, a rigorous paper on the subject was written by Catt and Gibson some decades ago. The mathematics for the one turn transformer turns out to be much the same as that for The Inductor as a Transmission Line , the two turn inductor, published in Proc. IEEE. It was used by Mike Gibson in his graphs which in the past were reached from my book Electromagnetism 1 dated 1994, but Gibson has since removed them.

There is a sting in the tail of this subject which I have not disclosed, except to Forrest Bishop and Mike Gibson. I think I have not disclosed it to anyone else. [However, yesterday 18June06 I came across a letter which is now on the first CD archive of my files photographed by Forrest Bishop last month; It is discussed in a letter written to the then Editor of Electronics World, dated around 1987. The idea of a series of papers, where the one published in Proc IEEE 1987 is the first, is discussed. This was to be followed by the one turn transformer paper, already written, and then by a third paper making a passive simplification in the one turn transformer, which would presumably be rejected fror publication because too simple/elegant.]

p234 The one turn transformer was fully developed by Catt and Gibson, but witheld from publication when the very similar problem of the two turn inductor was published by them in Proc. IEEE vol 75 no. 6 June 1987, p849. Forrest should be uploading the rigorous article on the two turn inductor this month June 2006. It has never been published although it was written twenty years ago

p237 This chapter contains essential material if there is going to be progress in the art. It is typical of key material which would not get past a single referee for a learned journal. This is most unfortunate, because it goes to the very heart of the subject.

p241 This is also a very important fundamental chapter. It develops the argument from page 27 of Volume 1.

p244 Also very important.

p247 attempts to explain why, when the only possible velocity is related to permittivity and permeability (for instance if we "solve" Maxwell's equations), no more and also no less, it appears that lower velocity occurs when there is material (trapped energy current) in the medium to be traversed.

p251 Discusses the implication of saying that energy current traverses a Cathode Ray Tube at right angles to the cathode - anode direction, as it must. In that case, what is what is said to be an electron hurrying from cathode to anode?

Look at the wave travelling towards to shore. We see white foam apparently travelling along to the right, at right angles to what we know is the real direction of motion. [This idea is actually mentioned on p254.] This is an analogy for the "electron" travelling in the wrong direction from, the direction between cathode and anode, while we know that the real motion is in the direction of the EHT energy current and the low level energy current directed towards the space between cathode and grid.

It is useful to study the diode when getting to grips with the real nature of what we see in a Cathode Ray Tube.

p258 A great deal follows from this chapter, the core of which was published in Wireless World.in 1985, five years later. It has not been noticed, for instance by Heaviside. Today it is ignored.

It is one of the key ideas on which my future work is based.

The CRT picture referred to.

p265 Proves that the dielectric constant of copper is infinity. This unites insulators with conductors (which latter Heaviside called "obstructors".

269 There follows padding. Each book was manufactured when a significant number of major breakthroughs were blocked by the refereeing process in learned journals. If a batch did not fill a 100pp book, they were padded out with already published material.

281 Discussion of the reactions to publication of my first article to criticise, or analyse, Maxwell's Equations. It was Maxwell's Equations Revisited

I suggest that the footnote on p281 should refer to The Hidden Message in Maxwell's Equations , nov85, not nov84.

293. Relativity.

I found that Popper, in his late writings, said that there was philosophical incompetence in the "Great Scientists" like Heisenberg. I am not sure whether he criticises "Modern Physics" pundits in general, or only Heisenberg.

299 The rigid rod which is assumed in "Special Relativity" defies "Special Relativity" because it is a device which causes instantaneous action at a distance. That is the purpose of a rigid rod.

303 The Heaviside Signal, or "Energy Current", bridges the gap between incompatible wave and particle. Perhaps ignorance of it led to the postulation of wave and of particle.

313 The Sign of Time. This is very similar to "Negative Time"

One or other of these articles was rejected for publication by "New Scientist" on the grounds that "the idea that time was reversible was well known". The Editor of New Scientist directed me to the writings of "Paul Davies", who ten years pater received the Templeton Prize of one million dollars "for contributions to religion"! I wrote to Paul Davies to ask where I would find it, and he answered that it was in his first book. After reading it, I wrote to say that I could not find it there. He then told me to read his second book. When I wrote again to tell him that I could not find it there either, he replied that he had nothing to add to the contents of those two books.

Extraordinarily, he proceeded to publish many books, as you will see in the book stores. The ban on my publishing discussion on the sign of time remains, however. I suggest that no editor would publish such a discussion and expect to survive professionally. However, a small portion of the article was published towards the end of Maxwell's Equations Revisited .

320 This is the second of a pair of articles published in the journal of professional librarians, The Journal of Information Science , which changed its name between the two articles.

325 I made a cumulative index of some of my writings on electromagnetism and digital design, but did not continue beyond around 1980. However, it is useful. It is repeated in a number of my books of that vintage.

Ivor Catt 10 June 2006




Electromagnetism 1

Comments on Chapter 2_1 of Ivor Catt, Electromagnetism 1

Comments on Introduction www.ivorcatt.com/2924.htm

Discussion of Chapter 1_1 www.ivorcatt.com/emd1_1.htm Battery and resistor. Steady state

Discussion of Chapter 1_4 www.ivorcatt.com/emd1_4.htm Partial reflection in a transmission line

Discussion of Chapter 4_5 www.ivorcatt.com/emd4_5.htm Dynamic capacitor

Discussion of Chapter 4_6 www.ivorcatt.com/emd4_6.htm Simplifying the transformer

Discussion of Chapter 1_1 www.ivorcatt.com/emd1_1.htm

Discussion of Chapter 1_1 www.ivorcatt.com/emd1_1.htm

Discussion of Chapter 1_1 www.ivorcatt.com/emd1_1.htm

Discussion of Chapter 1_1 www.ivorcatt.com/emd1_1.htm

Comments on Introduction www.ivorcatt.com/emicintro.htm See www.ivorcatt.com/2924.htm



Electromagnetic Theory, Vol. 1 is at- http://www.forrestbishop.4t.com/EMTV1/EMTVolumeI.htm

Electromagnetic Theory, Vol. 2 is at- http://www.forrestbishop.4t.com/EMTV2/EMTVolumeII.htm

Digital Electronic Design, Vol. 1 is at- http://www.forrestbishop.4t.com/DEDV1/DEDVolumeI.htm

Digital Electronic Design, Vol. 2 is at- http://www.forrestbishop.4t.com/DEDV2/DEDVolumeII.htm

Oliver Heaviside, the Man is at- http://www.forrestbishop.4t.com/OHM/Heaviside_the_Man.htm

This page is- http://www.forrestbishop.4t.com/DEDV2/DEDVolumeII.htm


Homepage | Electromagnetism1 | Old Website