What follows is the key item among those quotes from
Feynman very helpfully quoted by Forrest Bishop below. It is a clear
statement of "The Rolling Wave". This subject is extremely
well covered in my
article http://www.ivorcatt.com/2604.htm . The decription of
"The Rolling Wave" in my article mirrors that of Feynman's
TEM Wave.
RF: “Now let us ask what happens if we suddenly stop the motion
of the charged sheet after it has been on for a short time, *T*…
“In short, we have a little piece of field a block of thickness
*cT* which has left the current sheet and is traveling through
space all by itself… The caterpillar has turned into a butterfly!
“How can this bundle of electric and magnetic fields maintain itself?
The answer is: by the combined effects of the Faraday law, [curlE
= dB/dt], and the new term of Maxwell, [c^2curlB = dE/dt]. They
cannot help maintaining themselves. Suppose the magnetic field were
to disappear. There would be a changing magnetic field which would
produce an electric field. If this electric field tries to go away,
the changing electric field would create a magnetic field back again.
So, by a perpetual interplay BY THE SWISHING BACK AND FORTH FROM
ONE FIELD TO THE OTHER they must go on forever. It is impossible
for them to disappear*. [*footnote ‘well not quite’, they can be
absorbed] They maintain themselves in a kind of a dance one making
the other, the second making the first propagating onward through
space.” [Note 1]p 188, Vol II (emphasis added)
[Note 1. By Ivor Catt. But in the TEM pulse, or
even more in the TEM step in Figure
9.4 , Feynman's "Suppose the magnetic field were to disappear."
(above) cannot be supposed, because behind the step, for a very
long time, E field and H field are constant. Do the E field and
the H field suppose that the other might disappear? This
is obviously nonsense in the context of a steady TEM step, as in
Figure
9.4 .]
Feyman here extends from the sinusoidal TEM Wave to the narrow
pulse, or spike, or "Dirac function" of TEM Wave. See
Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feynman_Lectures_on_Physics
"material presented in a twoyear introductory physics course
given in the early 1960s by Feynman at Caltech."
He did not know the standard logic signal, step, or pulse, travelling
from one high speed logic gate to the next. He was lecturing in
the early 1960s, and high speed logic (ECL) was developed in the
1960s by Motorola. Also, he would never have read Heaviside, who
was suppressed. Anyway, Heaviside only mentioned "energy current"
twice in his five volumes. (The other mentions, pointed out by Mike
Gibson, were in the early volumes, and did not treat the full concept
"energy current" as Heaviside later developed it. In his
first two or three volumes, "energy current" was a general
term, not the specific one that I take from late Heaviside.
The TEM step, or pulse, destroys the "Rolling Wave" as
propounded by Feynman, and discussed by me in http://www.ivorcatt.com/2604.htm
I was isolated, and it did not occur to me that the TEM step, or
pulse, would be uncertain in high places then and fifty years later.
The nearest I have to pictures of the logic step is at http://www.ivorcatt.org/digihwdesignp58.htm
, where I was researching the much more difficult subject, crosstalk.
However, the steady step can easily be seen (unseen by Feynman)
travelling unchanged for 234 inches. 100 inches beyond the start
of the step, there is no change of E or change of H, which is required
in the Feynman TEM Wave, i.e. the Rolling Wave. So according to
Feynman the TEM Step seen there cannot propagate because he requires
change of E and change of H.
Of course, if we were sure that Feynman was at the top of the tree,
to be taken seriously by all, it would be very worthwhile to study
him in detail, as we are doing here. However, The Establishment,
when one of its gurus comes under fire, can easily retreat from
his pontification, demoting him to a lower level of The Establishment.
Ivor Catt 16 December 2008
 Original Message 
From: Forrest Bishop
To: David Tombe
Cc: icatt@btinternet.com ; epola@tiscali.co.uk ; bdj10@cam.ac.uk
; jvospost2@yahoo.com ; monitek@aol.com ; kc3mx@yahoo.com ; knalty@io.com
; Ian Montgomery ; Jack Graham ; sraddhalu@auromail.net ; ernest@cooleys.net
; lukas.nemec@czi.cz ; krystof.nemec@czi.cz ; johnrdore@googlemail.com
; pwhan@atlasmeasurement.com.au ; jackw97224@yahoo.com ; george.hockney@jpl.nasa.gov
; floylilley@bellsouth.net ; fredrothwarf@comcast.net ; temiles@cox.net
; andrewpost@gmail.com ; raetowest@hotmail.com
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 4:18 AM
Subject: Re: You'll all get nowhere so long as you persist in confusing
transmission line waves with TEM waves
Ivor, Bishop, and most of the Establishment appear to agree that
a wireless, or free space, TEM wave (radio, light, etc.) is the
same thing as a captured TEM wave propagating along wires. The Established
are hard to pin down on this point, however. Catt and Bishop disagree
with Tombe on this point.
I agree with Tombe, Feynman, et al, that a newlygenerated freespace
TEM wave propagates sideway from a wire, which is therefore acting
as an antenna. Feynman explains this generation process, sort of,
while showing where the sacred equations have left him in a state
of confusion. He can't make up his mind where E causes B, and vice
versa or not, so here is a sort of hybrid between the Rolling Wave
and the Slab Wave He never put this all on a single page in the
vaunted Feynman Lectures, I had to do that for him:
Subject: Feynman on the TEM Wave "a terrible confusion"
From: Forrest Bishop <forrestb@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 23:13:49 0800 (GMT08:00)
To: David Tombe <sirius184@hotmail.com>, etc
The Dancing Swishing Wave
Ivor Catt wrote:
Thank you for the clarification below. Here you have absolutely
clear evidence of the chaos in the Establishment view, as propounded
by Feynman. It remains for us to dissect his statements.
...
Using my two articles; "Maxwell's Equations Revisited"
and "The Hidden Message in Maxwell's Equations", we can
show how it all went wrong. The bit we now write has to be attached
to the www editions of those two Catt articles. The implications,
theoretical and political, are massive. We show how the love of
mathematics blinded the whole of the Establishment to physical reality.
We can see (what we suspected before) the massive historical importance
of the fact that those two Catt articles were published 20 years
ago (worldwide circulation 60,000) and then ignored. This means
that at the very heart of the mathematicisation of physics lies
confusion and nonsense. It is most important to show that the mathematical
physicists are not using maths in a scholarly way, but rather as
a talisman. The Emperor has no clothes. IC
We have all that is necessary to go forward with a concise thesis.
This will be different from the analysis in the Catt article "Displacement
Current" and in "The Catt Question", which start
with statements by Catt. In the case under discussion here, we start
with statements by Establishment figures, and show that in their
own terms, with no reference to Catt, they are hoodwinking themselves
and us. IC
=============
Richard Feynman on the TEM Wave (selected excerpts)
FB: [bracketed item below are FB additions. Feynman establishes
that the E and B fields are transverse to the propagation direction,
and mutually orthogonal. p206, Vol II]
FB: Ode to Maxwell; equations govern reality; ignoring crucial
experiments:
Chapter 18, “The Maxwell Equations”
RF: “It was not yet customary in Maxwell’s time to think in terms
of abstract fields… Today, we understand better that what counts
are the equations themselves and not the [aether] model used to
get them. We may only question whether the equations are true or
false. This is answered by doing experiments, and untold numbers
of experiments have confirmed Maxwell’s equations… He brought together
all of the laws of electricity and magnetism and made one complete
and beautiful theory.
“Let us show that the extra term [displacement current] is just
what is required to straighten out the difficulty Maxwell discovered…”
p 182, Vol II
FB: Heaviside energycurrent slab:
RF: [when an infinite current sheet is suddenly turned on] “after
the time *t*, both [vectors] E and B are uniform out to the distance
[x = ct], and zero beyond. THE FIELDS MAKE THEIR WAY FORWARD LIKE
A TIDAL WAVE, with a front moving at a uniform velocity which turns
out to be *c*…” p 186, Vol II, (emphasis added)
FB: The Feynman Dancing, Swishing Wave is caused by the equations:
RF: “Now let us ask what happens if we suddenly stop the motion
of the charged sheet after it has been on for a short time, *T*…
“In short, we have a little piece of field a block of thickness
*cT* which has left the current sheet and is traveling through
space all by itself… The caterpillar has turned into a butterfly!
“How can this bundle of electric and magnetic fields maintain itself?
The answer is: by the combined effects of the Faraday law, [curlE
= dB/dt], and the new term of Maxwell, [c^2curlB = dE/dt]. They
cannot help maintaining themselves. Suppose the magnetic field were
to disappear. There would be a changing magnetic field which would
produce an electric field. If this electric field tries to go away,
the changing electric field would create a magnetic field back again.
So, by a perpetual interplay BY THE SWISHING BACK AND FORTH FROM
ONE FIELD TO THE OTHER they must go on forever. It is impossible
for them to disappear*. [*footnote ‘well not quite’, they can be
absorbed] They maintain themselves in a kind of a dance one making
the other, the second making the first propagating onward through
space.” p 188, Vol II (emphasis added)
FB: Confusion with math when visualizing the TEM Wave:
Chapter 20, “Solutions of Maxwell’s Equations in Free Space”
RF: “I’ll tell you what I see. I see some kind of vague shadowy,
wiggling lines here and there is an *E* and *B* written on them
somehow, and perhaps some of the lines have arrows on them an arrow
here or there which disappears when I look to closely at it. When
I talk about the fields swishing through space, I have a terrible
confusion between the symbols I use to describe the objects and
the objects themselves…” p 2010, Vol II
Reference
Feynman, Richard Phillips, *The Feynman Lectures on Physics*, Vol
IIII, (Commemorative Issue), (1989, 1964), AddisonWesley Publishing
Co., ISBN 020151049 (v. 2)
=============
 Original Message  From: "Forrest Bishop" <forrestb@ix.netcom.com>
To: "Ivor Catt" <ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk>;
<ivorcatt@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 7:51 PM
Subject: The Swishing Wave (Re: electron and other)
Ivor Catt wrote:
...
"Even Feynman Himself (EFH), Nobel for quantum electrodynamics,
appears to be a rollingwave proponent (!). EFH is not entirely
clear about this,
though. He waffles around about causality in the Feynman Lectures,
Vol 2. EFH goes on about visualizing a TEM wave, and says he isn't
able to."  Forrest
"not entirely clear about this" is an extremely important
statement. Please supply complete reference. It needs to go on my
website.
==========
Richard Feynman on the TEM Wave
Chapter 18, “The Maxwell Equations”
FB: Ode to Maxwell; equations govern reality; ignore crucial experiments:
“It was not yet customary in Maxwell’s time to think in terms
of abstract fields… Today, we understand better that what counts
are the equations themselves and not the [aether] model used to
get them. We may only question whether the equations are true or
false. This is answered by doing experiments, and untold numbers
of experiments have confirmed Maxwell’s equations… He brought together
all of the laws of electricity and magnetism and made one beautiful
and complete theory.
“Let us show that the extra term [displacement current] is just
what is required to straighten out the difficulty Maxwell discovered…”
p 182, Vol II
Heaviside energy slab:
“[when an infinite current sheet is suddenly turned on] “both
[vectors] E and B are uniform out to the distance [x = ct], and
zero beyond. THE FIELDS MAKE THEIR WAY FORWARD LIKE A TIDAL WAVE,
with a front moving at a uniform velocity which turns out to be
*c*…” p 186, Vol II, (FB emphasis added)
The Feynman Dancing, Swishing Wave is caused by the equations:
“Now let us ask what happens if we suddenly stop the motion of
the charged sheet after it has been on for a short time, *T*….In
short, we have a little piece of field a block of thickness *cT*
which has left the current sheet and is traveling through space
all by itself… The caterpillar has turned into a butterfly!
“How can this bundle of electric and magnetic fields maintain itself?
The answer is: by the combined effects of the Faraday law, [curlE
= dB/dt], and the new term of Maxwell, [c^2curlB = dE/dt]. They
cannot help maintaining themselves. Suppose the magnetic field were
to disappear. There would be a changing magnetic field which would
produce an electric field. If this electric field tries to go away,
the changing electric field would create a magnetic field back again.
So, by a perpetual interplay BY THE SWISHING BACK AND FORTH FROM
ONE FIELD TO THE OTHER they must go on forever. It is impossible
for them to disappear*. [*footnote ‘well not quite’, can be absorbed]
They maintain themselves in a kind of dance one making the other,
the second making the first propagating onward through space.”
p 188, Vol II (emphasis added)
Confusion with math terms when visualizing the Swishing TEM Wave:
Chapter 20, “Solutions of Maxwell’s Equations in Free Space”
“I’ll tell you what I see. I see some kind of vague, shadowy, wiggling
lines here and there is an *E* and *B* written on them somehow,
and perhaps some of the lines have arrows on them an arrow that
disappears when I look to closely at it. When I talk about the fields
swishing through space, I have a terrible confusion between the
symbols I use to describe the objects and the objects themselves…”
p 2010, vol II
Feynman, Richard Phillips, *The Feynman Lectures on Physics*, Vol
IIII, (Commemorative Issue), (1989, 1964), AddisonWesley Publishing
Co., ISBN 020151049 (v. 2)
==========
Forrest
David Tombe wrote:
No Ivor, you are wrong. Real TEM waves do radiate out into distant
space wirelessly. Your conversation with Professor Josephson is
pathetic. You are both having a little exclusive Trinity College
Cambridge old boys chat, and neither of you know what you are talking
about. I am drawing attention to the distinction between the near
field and the far field, and you are both behaving like a couple
of children. You with your pathetic one line response below, and
Professor Josephson with his blatant refusal to respond at all.

From: icatt@btinternet.com
To: epola@tiscali.co.uk; etc.
Subject: Re: You'll all get nowhere so long as you persist in confusing
transmission line waves with TEM waves
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 23:18:38 +0000
"Real TEM waves radiate perpendicularly out from a wire into
distant space."  Tombe
Dreadful stuff.
Ivor
From: David Tombe
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 1:34 AM
To: bdj10@cam.ac.uk ; etc.
Subject: You'll all get nowhere so long as you persist in confusing
transmission line waves with TEM waves
Dear Professor Josephson,
&a mp;a mp;n bsp; I've already explained this to the circulation
list on a number of occasions.
& ; ;nbs p; &a mp;a mp;n bsp; (1) The wave that propagates
alongside a transmission line is not a TEM wave. It's E and H vectors
are out of phase by 90 degrees. It is a near field linear polarization
wave. It is a capacitance phenomenon.
&am p;am p;nb sp; & amp; amp; nbsp; ; ; ; (2) EM radiation
is an inductance phenomenon and the E and H vectors are always in
phase. Maxwell's wave equation only applies to this scenario. Maxwell's
wave equation does not apply to the near field transmission line
waves that you have all wrongly been referring to as TEM waves.
Real TEM waves radiate perpendicularly out from a wire into distant
space.
&a mp;a mp;n bsp; This seems to be the source of the never ending
confusing. You are refusing to segregate two distinct phenomena.
And I have no doubt that there will be some on the circulation list
who will continue to make this error.
&a mp;a mp;n bsp; Yours sincerely
&am p;am p;nb sp; & amp; amp; nbsp; ; ; ; David Tombe
