Electricity and the Professor

In May 1976, while researching with my colleagues Dr. David Walton and Malcolm Davidson, David suddenly said on the telephone one night; ”So that gets rid of Displacement Current.” This was a major advance. Then only a day later, I took the next step, realising that not only Displacement Current, but also Electric Current was no more.

Four years later, in December 1980, I published The Death of Electric Current in Wireless World.

Next year, in August 1981, in a letter to Wireless World, Peter G M Dawe of Oxford led me to The Catt Question , which I outlined in my published reply, and again outlined in August 1982, where I ended; “Ergo, classical electromagnetism .... is dead.”

A decade later I managed to get two administrators to choose their top experts and tell them to comment on The Catt Question . This was an elementary question about Classical Electromagnetism. Their answers were totally contradictory. One was in June 1993 by (later to become) Sir Michael Pepper , knighted “for services to Physics”, and the other in April 1995 by Dr. Neil McEwan , Reader in Electromagnetism. They both went incommunicado for more than a decade, and Pepper remains so to this day.

We now move forward another twenty years to 2010, when I stumbled on a much clearer, major flaw in classical theory, presently called The End of Electric Charge and Electric Current as we know them . My article was submitted to the world’s three leading refereed journals, who behaved in an unseemly way, not properly accepting or rejecting it. Finally, an unrefereed journal Electronics World (which Wireless World had become) published it in January and February 2011.

Thirty Professors of Electronics (or Electronic Engineering) were asked to comment in two emails separated by one month, but none replied. However, one retired professor asked for £5,000 per day “consultancy fee”.

It is obvious from its title that the article suggests paradigm change, so every accredited professional knows that he must not read it. If he should read it, he must not become associated with paradigm change by commenting. Thus we see The End of The Enlightenment.

http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x6611.pdf

Ivor Catt 20 February 2011.