Frightening ;

The background to this paper is here; capacitor In the early 1960's I pioneered the inter-connection of high speed (1nsec) logic gates at Motorola, Phoenix, Arixona (ref.25).” The laboratory has had a huge influence on research in the disciplines of physics and biology.

As of 2019, 30 Cavendish researchers have won Nobel Prizes.[2] Notable discoveries to have occurred at the Cavendish Laboratory include the discovery of the electron, neutron, and structure of DNA. (JJ Thomson talked about his discovery of the electron to my co-author the late Arnold Lynch.)

On 14 August Professor A Howie, one time Head of the Cavendish, wrote this, below, to Malcolm Davidson, named as an author of the paper  published 40 years ago. This situation keeps waking me (and Alex) up at 5am. My feeling is difficult to describe. I don’t know what it is. Admittedly Howie wrote it when over 80, as I am. But listening to him on the telephone recently, I know he is compos mentis. Anyway, he is not alone. His attitude is replicated in Brian Josephson and Tony Davies. Josephson for one recently endorsed what Howie is saying. I think Malcolm has described theirs as a psychological problem. I know my feeling this morning at 5am includes fear. We all need to hold onto the assurance that those in high positions have at least some rationality at the core of their minds. What we see here is the kind of intellectual shambles that would inevitably lead to the intellectual shambles at the core of the following escalating scams; CERN, HIV, Climate change, Covid 19.

Ivor Catt  15.8.2020

Prof. A Howie

14 Aug 2020, 18:18 (10 hours ago)

to Malcolm, Brian, HARRY, me, Forrest, Alex, Steve, Anthony, John, Jack

Dear Malcolm,

The formulae you refer to all apply to a DYNAMIC EM wave with electric
and magnetic fields liked together in the way they vary with time and
indeed have to propagate at the velocity of light.  This has nothing to
do with a static E field of which I have plenty of direct scientific
experience.  I have already explained why I am convinced that the idea
of accounting for the static E field in a charged capacitor with EM step
functions travelling to and fro has to be nonsense.  Clearly however we
have reached an impasse and further discussion is rather a waste of

Archie Howie.

On 2020-08-14 15:44, Malcolm Davidson wrote:
> Hello Archie,
>  I had suggested in the email below that your reluctance to embrace
> fully the ideas of Guillemin were more for psychological reasons that
> scientific ones. Ivor, Harry, Alex, Tony Wakefield, Forrest and others
> base our models upon bedrock principles as H. J. Josephs once said to
> me back in the 1970's.
>  As has been repeated many times, and I will continue to repeat the
> following;
>  The TEM signal the ExH step, energy current wave can only travel at
> the speed of light for the medium, it cannot stand still, be
> stationary, it has to move. If it is perceived as stationary, that is
> an illusion, just like so many magicians who perform; they make us see
> one thing when something else is happening;


Recently Howie said photons travel down a transmission line. – Ivor Catt  15.8.2020


Next morning 15.8.2020

At its core, this is a moral issue. Howie gave us a clue when he very recently talked to me about my: “Your absurd ego trip”.

At every level in society, urge to serve rubs shoulders with urge to power, or self. As with Johnson, Trump, Macron, Hancock, the urge to power can come to dominate, leading to incompetence in the role; destruction of the role, then destruction of society. Too many self-seekers gained control of electromagnetism, then HIV, then climate change, then Covid 19. The CERN scam comes in somewhere.

The disintegration of “science” was lengthy. A recent marker was the Bruce Charlton book; “Not even trying”

(Looking for it, I stumbled on an apposite letter; . Howie recently used the same word “outrageous” about my article )

I continue to tell Alex that if S only cooperates a little bit in advancing science, all will be forgiven. I address the three members of the club here. They only have to cooperate with us in grasping the mechanism of the decline of science as we see it, for instance by supplying a counter-model which puts their behaviour in a better light (or argue that science is not in decline, perhaps giving examples; the vaccine against HIV?), then all will be forgiven.

1995 Many medical science representatives attended the symposium because the smoking gun of misconduct in Australia at that time was in medical science. A senior AIDS scientist had just forecast a vaccine for HIV in two or three years. It was a target I couldn't resist. In the course of the panel discussion, I referred to Duesberg's writings-and predicted that an in vitro vaccine would not work in vivo. "There will be no vaccine," I said.

Ivor Catt  15.8.2020