Eric Dollard, probably has passed along the track I follow before me

The Transverse Electro Magnetic Wave has been a particularly difficult model to correct. Firstly very few people even know what it is, and what it is used for. Those that do tend to design our logic circuits! They sometimes wish they could reset some of their scientific colleagues circuitry too!

Secondly, most of us think of the sinusoidal wave when we hear the term, because we are taught to do so, but the more observant may think of the waves on the surface of a body of water.

Thirdly, what the hell is transverse?

Fourthly, what has it got to do with electric " juice" that flows out of a plug "longitudinally", and which oscillates back and forth longitudinally? ( what the hell is longitudinally?)

And finally light is a wavicle, polarised, that is spinning around the axis of travel and made up of waves of electric fields and magnetic fields at right angles to each other and out of phase. This is Maxwells insightful notion of "displacement current" transmission of electromagnetic wave phenomena called electromagnetic radiation, which includes our ability to get warm and see, and get sunburnt, get cancer and die in a nuclear fusion/fission chain reaction event in a flash!

This wavicle is the photon.

These are all the popular onions that come about when electromagnetism is touched on in any scientific educational material, and it seems pretty comprehensive. Only it does not hang together for subtle reasons. Empirical data does not agree with this description cobbled together during the pre war and war years, and having as its only justification the huge loss of life at Hiroshima and Nagasaki!

In thebMeantime the sun is creating Tsunamis and earthquakes on an ntirely different principle, and the scientific club does not want to know.

Electromagnetism 1

by Ivor Catt

Westfields Press 1994

"The main body of the text is devoted to transmssion lines ….

There are numerous examples of sloppy argument in the text. …. The flaws in these arguments are easy to see. ….

The author sees an anomaly in the conventional view of the transmission line. This he calls the 'Catt anomaly' and it is the starting point of his proposals for an improved theory.

The 'Catt anomaly': When a TEM wave travels along a transmission line, there must, according to conventional theory, be charge distributions on the surfaces of the conductors behind the wavefront. For a vacuum dielectric the speed of the wavefront is the speed of light so that, according to Catt, the charges on the conductors must travel at the speed of light, which is impossible. This is the 'Catt anomaly'. Since the wavefront does travel at the speed of light, so do the charges, which then have infinite mass. It follows that there cannot be charges on the conductor surfaces and conventional theory must be wrong.

The flaw here is the assumption that the charges move with the wave. whereas in reality they simply come to the surface as the wave passes, and when it has gone they recede into the conductor. No individual charge moves with the velocity of the wave. The charges come to the surface to help the wave go by and then pass the task to other charges further along the line which are already there and waiting. This is the mechanism of guidance and containement. There is no anomaly.

But Catt goes on. Having removed charges from the surfaces of his conductors, he can no longer apply Gauss's law and the displacement current in the wave has to go somewhere. Catt's solution is typically ingenious: the current must continue as displacement current in conductors, which are actually dielectrics with a very high permittivity; there is no conduction current in conductors – ever! Catt's Ockham's Razor has been wielded to remove conduction current as well as electric charge from electromagnetic theory. There is of course the small problem of a value for the permittivity of copper. Catt is equal to the challenge …. the permittivity of copper must be extremely large. ….

…. It is significant that, having introduced his new theory and abolished charge and current …., he then proceeds to use these concepts quite unashamedly in the rest of the book. ….

There are many other items in this book which give cause for concern, for example the false statement that 'The TEM wave has virtually disappeared from today's electromagnetic theory'.

Catt's belief in his own work is clearly sincere, but this reviewer, after lengthy and careful consideration, can find virtually nothing of value in this book.


In fact , Lago has not given it careful consideration, but rather compared it with his accepted beliefs about the established theory and found it convenient to maintain the status quo. However, he has given a clear description of Catts deduction from the anomaly.

Catt has to undermine the model of the wave. This is surprisingly easy, but not readily understood. Mathematically he attacks the sine wave and the complex function form of the EM wave. This is usually portrayed as an out of phase electric and magnetic component wave structure. This structure is now presented as a helical transport structure.

What's the difference?

Catt calls the old interpretation the rolling wave form. This was a correct description of the way it was presented earlier in the 1900's. Feynman and Einstein in particular had this oscillating wiggling snake concept. It did not really matter what it looked like, the scientific club wanted some explanation for waves in empty space, there being no aether!

Einstein apparently struggled to restore the aether concept after the widespread acceptance of the Michelson Morely results. Through one avenue or another he succeeded in returning a kind of aether to physics, but it had a highly symbolic form. It was made thus partly to protect it from any experimental evidence against it!

Aether is a modelling " clay" a tool analysts use to soak up the limits of their analytical approaches and from which they can develop synthetic models. Aether does not have to exist, just as reference frames do not have to exist. They are useful artefacts for and of our modelling process.

How many times have you woken from the dream of Cartesian Space? Cartesian Space does not exist except as a concept, and the same applies to aether. However Plasma does exist and is a very good empirical substance on which to base an aether model.

The complex and Quaternion functions are our best mathematical models of plasmas, but it requires a "sophisticated" understanding of these models, and what they describe. What they describe is the relationships between vectors in an orthogonal reference frame. The reference frame is dynamic in a way Cartesian space is not. These dynamic reference frames were invented by Hermann Grassmann and by Sir William Rowan Hamilton.

It is entirely possible that Maxwells equations were ignored because these reference frames are fiendishly difficult to manipulate mathematically, especially in their original conceptions! Now physicists and mathematicians, but physicists in the main have come up with an enabling notation rather than a disabling one. The advent of computing power to do the numerical modelling has also helped. However a deep mathematical antipathy to Grassmann, Dirac and computers has had to be overcome. What has not been reversed is the disenchantment with mathematical pedagoguery!

These complex models tell us nothing new. They set out Newton's active principles in a modern combined form, but essentially that is all. We have used spheres as tools of measurement since we started tracking the stars, and we have noted and used spirals or cones and vortices. The other five platonic forms have also been utilised as Metrons or measures, and finally we have used logarithms to represent spirals ever since Napier invented them.

The classical out of phase solution to Maxwells equations have another physical interpretation, they are the components of a constant helical transport. This was not discernible in the mathematics until it was combined as a quaternion . The complex version of the equations do not model 3d space, they restrict the equations to 2. When time or velocity is removed from the solution you get what looks like a rolling wave solution. The experience is not like the components, the experience is like a constant cylindrical potential with electric and magnetic potentials whirring in a commingled state in a common surface differentiated by orthogonal force interactions!.

The measurement of Equipotential surfaces , revealing their spatial disposition holds the key to the conundrum. These Equipotential surfaces are the lines of the so called magnetic " flux" . In fact thet are limit lines of empirical magnetic dipoles, and they have a rotational sequence which we have called flux. . Thus the dielectric equipotentials are the magnetic flux lines. Similarly the diamagnetic equipotentials are the electric field lines. These are difficult to measure by the voltmeters and ammeters because these actually measure magnetic force! However if the old gold leaf meters are used we have a possibility of confirming this.

The significance of this is that the quaternion formulations can now be modified so that exponential complex functions are used, this gives results that show the effect of vorticular dispositions as opposed to circular ones. Using a 3d fractal generator by Terry Gintz at Mystic Fractal .com is an inexpensive way to visualise these complex magneto electric dynamics without wasting expensive upper computer time and over egging the pudding with complex inferential and integral equations.

Also Laz Plaths Tee Roe Koid blog spot will give you some inexpensive ways to model the interactions around a spherical object.

Now I come to the difficulties, and there are a few.
The helical Equipotential model I have mentioned is a model of the polarisation of light. The electric field is assumed sinusoidal so as to get a changing magnetic flux orthogonally. Now this is drawn coeval with the electric field. This makes it a sinusoidal variation. To get this particular arrangement complex coefficients have to be used and a differential of of one of the complex coefficients. Thus the magnetic field is calculated as a differential of the electric field.
Now a second differential of the electric field produces a –sin which matches a reflected wave. The phase shift in the differential of the magnetic field has to be selected to get an electric field component pointing in a direction so that it adds vectorially to electric field of the source. When this is done the resulting electric fields act in the electric direction! Thus you get circular motion along the axis of travel due to the magnetic field change! Thus you get spherical balls moving in space time, helical but not constant amplitude!

In addition the rotation around the velocity vector is just added, and used to set up a tangential vector to the curve rotating axialy to establish a rotating electric potential. Nothing seems to derive from the Maxwell equations other than calculated values. The vectors are all put in by hand.

Technically the quaternions are ditched in favour of 2 complex coordinates. These are said to be equivalent to a quaternion description, but in fact they are not a representation of 3d space. To obscure what is being done these are said to be in "phase space", or even "Clifford algebra space". Goodness knows what that is!

The pretty helical pictures are drawn in by hand, by pulling a 2d plane through space time!

The pretty pictures are a secret symbol of the supposed inner workings of nature, and a secret affirmation of the aether.

So now, what do we physically experience? The rule still is to take the real components and discard the imaginaries! Then match the real parts to experimental data.

It is all made up and then retrofitted. If you get this far on your strange journey at least you get some pretty pictures to look at.
The Catt analysis therefore, while not perfect, especially because it is linked to Heaveside as a fallen hero, has the nub of the issue. What is the empirical data? What are Maxwells equations doing? And what is the fundamental wave transport in any medium?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s