"The Catt Question". May 2009

Click for Ivor Catt in "Electronics World" on "The Catt Question" in May 2009.


The ruling mantra in today's science is; "There is obviously nothing fundamentally wrong with theory which has been accepted by everyone for more than a century. It is therefore not necessary to consider 'The Catt Question'. What we can however consider is why Catt tries to rock the boat. He must be using this device to promote his own theory, "Theory C". Let us ask him about Theory C. Also let us ask him his opinion on the allegedly contradictory versions of the theory which has been established for more than a century.

It is obviously ridiculous to think that Catt's opinions on the two conflicting theories answering "The Catt Question" will help to resolve the allegation that students throughout the world are not being told that there is uncertainty. Catt's opinion would merely add him to the host of "southerners" or to the host of "westerners", and the alleged contradiction will remain.

At this point, a good reason why Catt's theories should be disregarded is that no learned journals have accepted his writings on electromagnetic theory for twenty years. Referees have always decided against publication.

Ivor Catt 14 June 2009


Having had all my advances in electromagnetic theory and digital design suppressed for decades, my research migrated to studying censorship, using electromagnetic theory as the central probe. I have established that the British Library primarily supports censorship rather than acting primarily as an archive. That is, regardless of the loss of income which results, it will primarily support censorship. See and . Thus, British Library will act primarily as censor rather than archive regardless of the increasing loss of income to BL that this "decision" entails. Of course, such a "decision" was never made. It merely evolved.

Other allies of censorship have been unearthed as a result of "The Catt Question". It is not only "The Establishment" which suppresses advances in electromagnetic theory. By their actions, even apparent dissidents support it in ways which are rather subtle, and largely unintentional. One way that third parties support censorchip is by doggedly, in the face of so much evidence to the contrary, keeping as the basis for their world view that there is negligible censorship, in spite of so much evidence to the contrary. See for instance and do a Google search for "scientific censorship"

The result is that third parties react to evidence from the point of view of Establishment reactionaries. This is one of the remarkable insights that the project "The Catt Question" has unearthed. Since it is clear that no publication or communication of advances in electromagnetic theory will be tolerated for decades, the chief purpose of "The Catt Question" is as a tool for researchiung into censorship.

Ivor Catt 14 June 2009.



Email to Ian Montgomery, 8 July 2009, in reply to his email (below);.


First, note that it is not Catt's duty to resolve "The Catt Question". The problem is that those with reputation in electromagnetic theory - professors, text book writers - totally contradict each other. This problem has to be dealt with administratively by those who administer science, and more particularly the teaching of electromagnetic theory. Catt's views on "The Catt Question" are irrelevant.

The hidden subtext of "The Catt Anomaly" is that the TEM Wave has disappeared. It is untaught and unknown. This is in spite of the fact that it is the basic electrical building block for digital electronics, which makes up 98% of today's electronics. "A quick check in the indexes of today's text books on electromagnetism will show that, along with Heaviside, the TEM wave has virtually disappeared from today's electromagnetic theory. What little mention there is, is confusing. One book calls the TEM wave a degenerate form!" - this is Jackson, the bible of university courses in the USA.

J D Jackson, "Classical Electrodynamics", pub. Wiley 1962/1975, p341; " .... we take note of a degenerate or special type of solution, called the .... TEM wave .... axial wave number .... [omega] .... e+/-ikz .... " This passage then degenrates further into more typically irrelevant mathematical clutter whose flagship is [omega].

In contrast, Bas Lago ridicules this assertion by Catt, that the TEM Wave is unknown and untaught. See ."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. - B. LAGO"


To return to your question. . "Where does this new charge come from? Not from the upper conductor, because by definition, displacement current is not the flow of real charge. Not from somewhere to the left, because such charge would have to travel at the speed of light in a vacuum. (This last sentence is what those "disciplined in the art" cannot grasp, although paradoxicallyt it is obvious to the untutored mind.) A central feature of conventional theory is that the drift velocity of electric current is slower than the speed of light."

As I say there, it is obvious to the untutored mind that, for instance, if the "Severn Bore", a step of water (both before and after the step the water being flat level) travelling up the river Severn, travels at 10 mph, it is necessary for some molecules of water to travel at the full velocity of 10 mph. This is not a question about electromagnetic theory. It is much more fundamental. Neither is it a question of mathematics. I am afraid it is a question of common sense, only to be avoided by too much "education". Education is not only a matter of causing the student to flower. It is also a procedure for entrapping the student.

Allied to the erosion of the common sense needed to agree with the last paragraph is the development of the idea that E causes H causes E ("The Rolling Wave"). . I am developing this subject more at present, seeing it as going back to the wrong conclusion from Faraday's discovery. . The way his discovery is stated is false, falsely giving the idea that H causes E. E and H do not cause each other. They coexist, and the one cannot exist without the other. They are the two lateral dimensions of "Energy Current" which is a two dimensional wafer travelling in the third direction at the speed of light.

Heaviside writes about a "slab of energy current", which is the proper description of the TEM Wave, and actually the description of all cases of electromagnetic energy, falsely called "electric energy" and "magnetic energy".


----- Original Message -----
From: Ian Montgomery
To: ivor catt
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 6:03 AM
Subject: Charge from the west

Dear Ivor,

I haven't received a later version of the at the bottom below (maybe it's that pesky email address of mine that keeps floating around). Anyway, I'm sure he's busy and a month will be gone before we know it.

Could you help clear something up for me regarding the 'Catt Question' charge from the left for me, quoting you below;

"Not from somewhere to the left, because such charge would have to travel at the speed of light in a vacuum."

I'm still not sure why the electrons would have to travel at light speed for the 'effective' net charge to do so. Using 'Newtons Balls' as a rough analogy, the momentum will travel almost instantaneously from one end to the other whereas the balls in the middle of the stack hardly move at all. I'm not quite sure if this is truly analogous, but (with conventional theory) as charges between electrons are repulsive, couldn't there be something similar going on? The electron drift velocity is slow but the extra charge is a matter of charge density increase, with that density increase (rather than the electrons themselves) travelling at c from the left. Or is it, in fact impossible for that charge density increase to travel at c without the initial far west electrons travelling at c in the first instance. It would be good if you help me with this.

Best regards,



Additional material.

Ian Montgomery questions whether, if a TEM Wave guided by two conductors travels at the speed of light, it is necessary for the electric charge on the conductors terminating the resulting electric field to travel at the speed of light. I replied that that was a matter of common sense, not of electromagnetic theory or of mathematics.

We now go back to the origin of "The Catt Question", then called "The Catt Anomaly" , , stated consistently since 1982. However, a key portion was omitted later on. After "Where does the new charge come from?" there was the following; "Not from the upper conductor, becasuse by definition, displacement current is not the flow of real charge. Not from somewhere to the left, because such charge would have to travel at the speed of light." This was replaced by; "Sir Michael Pepper, knighted "for services to Physics", says it comes from the south. Nobel Prizewinner Professor Josephson says it comes from the west."

Before Pepper briefly entered the fray, the idea of charge coming up from the south did not arise. There had been only one possible source for the charge, from the west, from the battery. The "anomaly" was that it would have to travel at the speed of light. Once Pepper opened the Pandora's Box, Lago followed behind him. ; "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."

"The Catt Anomaly" changed into "The Catt Question", and now Catt was irrelevant. It was now necessary for luminaries to discuss the contradiction between westerners and southerners among themselves, and agree to sing from the same hymn sheet, or to tell students there was uncertainty. (Again, the hidden agenda, which no luminary could admit, was that the student was not taught about the TEM Wave anyway; not taught about the basic building block of the new digital electronics. One reason why it was not taught was that it was not grasped by the lecturer.)

In my book "The Catt Anomaly" , we note that the mad southerner view came from Pepper two years before the orthodox westerner view was stated by McEwan. I then said; "McEwan was the orthodox response that I had been waiting for. I had not previously had it styled 'ex cathedra'; that is, stated by the accredited expert from an institution (Bradford University), under instruction from the appropriate top official of the institution (Dean of Engineering). I was now in a position to approach the accredited learned institution and ask them to help."

The southerner view is incompetent because it defies Gauss's Law, which is that a specific amount of electric flux is emitted by a specific amount of electric charge. Rearrangement of the charge in the bottom conductor would not lead to it terminating a different amount of electric flux.

We are left with "The Catt Anomaly", which is that once electric charge devloped mass, and mass increased with velocity, perhaps in around 1905, the classic TEM Wave broke down, because it required that electric charge travel at the speed of light, which today means it has infinite mass.

We are left with the question you raise, which is whether a step of water, the transition from a plane of flat water to a new plane of flat water ten feet higher, the step travelling up the Severn river at 10 miles per hour, requires that some molecules of water travel at the full 10 miles per hour. That is the core of "The Catt Anomaly", and you are uncertain as to the answer. My comment is that it is a question of common sense, not electromagnetism or mathematics. This should have been the core discussion questioning the viability of classical electromagnetism. Pepper then moved the goal posts by introducing the mad southerner view, and others followed him. We now realise that the TEM Wave is not grasped by Pepper, Lago and a host of others. We are addressing a knowledge void. , . This knowledge void is at the centre of Modern Physics. There are other lacunae.


Ivor Catt 9 July 2009






Homepage | Electromagnetism1 | Old Website