From: Forrest Bishop
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: nutter, basic topological electromagnetics
I would like to quote you in a future publication, with your permission, on some of your defamatory assertions below and elsewhere. Who is Koein? This can't be a keyboard slip.
We didn't mention any of the processes below, as none of them are involved in the questions about how energy travels from a battery to a light bulb. Nor did we "not recognize" them or "cry out" or add exclamation marks to the assertions, or "rant", or "have gall", whatever that is supposed to mean. The "disservice to science" bit is not original to you, btw. Defenders of the faith, no matter what that faith, consider "heretics" to be vandals. http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/th26hcat.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ipub002a.htm
Basic Topological Considerations
1) Electron flow and ion flow in each of the processes called out below moves at right angles to energy current (the TEM step-wave). This is a topology problem in 3D space. Consider the CRT, a type of capacitor. Energy current enters at right angles between cathode and anode; the wavefront is more or less parallel to the axis between the two electrodes, exactly as in any Catt Contrapuntal Capacitor. The electrons are at right angles to this 'Poynting' energy flow. They are a loss mechanism, a leakage current. They do not have anything to do with power delivery, which is the topic.
2) By a topological transform, without tearing, we can get from any shape of capacitor to any other shape. A two-wire capacitor can morph into a parallel-plate, or into a "pointy" cathode-anode as in the CRT and fluorescent lightbulb. (As an aside, the Catt Capacitor makes it easy to see at once why Tesla was able to power a free-standing bulb of this type.) I've been wanting to animate this. Notice the physics is the same regardless of the topology of the conductors.
Each of your or Koein's arguments below for the existence of charge "presumes the conclusion". Please see a book on logic for a definition of this common fallacy.
Sent: Feb 25, 2012 3:14 PM
To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: nutter
I have tried to respond to over 100 emails, and I must admit I still believe in charge and currents.
I have come to the conclusion that people who do not recognize the Millikan oil drop experiments,
and the fact that you can see an electron beam in the old fashion TV tubes,
and you can guide beams of charged protons in a van de Graf generator to impinge on targets
and control their kinetic energy of impact,
and you can separate charged isotopes in a mass spectrometer,
and you can see the Cherenkov radiation emitted from charged currents of electron beams
traveling at speeds near the speed of light,
and you can observe the creation of charge particle pairs due to energetic photons,
and have the gall to cry out that "charge does not exist, currents do not exist" (to quote Catt)
and then later to cry out that such statement is not what they said, (even though it is written on their website),
are people that do a disservice to science.
I will no longer waste my time to answer anymore emails.
Professor R. M. Koein
Kiehn says First, I repeat my email of Feb 22 directed to Ricker and Catt, and add
a comment update here and there.
If you do not read references that include theory and experiments,
there is no way in which you and I can come to a reasonable understanding.
The question of the Catt anomaly is not in the modeling of the
Lecher two wire push-pull solutions.
The visual modeling is clever (but I find out that the animations were not done by FB or Catt.).
However, the origin of the propagating discontinuity Eikonal solution to the wave equations
(which is not C2 smooth and represents a step singular solution --- a signal) is not discussed by Catt or Ricker.
IN other words, the E and B fields in front of the propagating step discontinuity (switch on) are zero,
and behind the propagating step discontinuity the E and B fields are not zero. The propagating phase velocity surface is a surface of tangential discontinuities.
The step discontinuity phase velocity surface is an Eikonal singular solution to the PDE system called the wave equations. These Eikonal solutions come in conjugate pairs which following Osserman can be shown to be Minimal or Maximal surfaces.
My references to V. Fock evidently have been ignored, where most of the basics
for Eikonal solutions is laid out by a world expert.
I favor Neil McEwan's points (in his letter to Catt), on displacement currents,
but I am not an expert in antenna or wave guide design.
However, for Catt to declare that the concept of charge, and currents, is vacuous is IMO outrageous. The declarations of a "nutter".
The very idea of a displacement current is based upon the internal charge distortions in media.
A time dependent dielectric ripple of Polarization orthogonal to a wave ripple has the appearance of a current.
Let me point out that I have no problems with the clever digital animation
of the Lecher two-wire push-pull transmission line.
The field vectors are propagated from the source to the load by the Eikonal Push-Pull solution at the phase velocity C. This is not a sine wave solution.
I see now that Forrest Bishop was not the animator, as I originally had supposed.
The animation was created by Eugen Hockenjos in 2000.
Note that the theory of the Lecher system is given in detail in Electromagnetism by
Arnold Sommerfeld, pages 198- 211, Academic Press, 1952.
There are two distinct (EIKONAL) solutions; a symmetric and an antisymmetric solution. The antisymmetric Eikonal solution yields the famous push-pull eikonal solution, which I presumed (mistakenly) was animated by Bishop.
Sommerfeld presents both the Push-Pull asymmetric solutions as well as the symmetric solutions.
HOwever, making the light bulb glow consists of two parts. The first part transports
the field intensities source to load with phase velocity C, and the second part is how
do the field quantities cause the filament to heat up.
Catt does not answer this question at all.
The superposition of the two solutions, with group velocity directional factors (z -ct) and (z+ct),
yields double the amplitude in the direction of phase velocity, and zero amplitude for the component
with a group velocity in the opposite direction.
* Catt's Question
Now to the question of how to light a light bulb via the Lecher 2-wire wave guide.
First the Lecher two wire wave guide is subsumed to describe
the signal step function propagation (which is not a continuous wave
function) from source to load.
But then what makes the lightbulb filament glow is NOT explained by the Catt anomaly.
For example, suppose the long two wire Lecher Push Pull wave guide is not attached to the filament
(at the end of the wave guide far from the battery source).
Does the light bulb light up when the battery contact is made? The
answer is essentially NO, even though field energy is in the Neighborhood of the filament.
Even though the field energy is transported to the location of the filament,
the filament does not heat up (very much).
The temperature of the filament does not yield the hot body radiation temperature
with the emission of radiation in the frequency band that makes the eye
However, If the ends of the two wire "wave guide" are attached to the filament,
then, indeed, the filament gets hot, lights up and can radiate at an elevated
Recall that Catt does not describe the process details of how the
raises the temperature of the filament.
My references to the work of Bateman (evidently ignored) offer a possible solution
(both conceptually and mathematically) of how the filament heats up.
It may come as a surprise that a 1914 publication of H. Bateman has shown how
a solution to the wave equation in a 4-dimensional topology
can be transformed to solutions of the dissipative diffusion equation of heat conduction
in a 3-dimensional topology, by means of a simple projective mapping of coordinates,
which changes the topological dimension from 4 to 3.
The process is thermodynamically related to the concept of "emergence"
where in the 3 dimensional topological domain a macroscopic coherent structure
(i.e., the macroscopic resistive filament) thermodynamically appears as a solution
to the dissipative diffusion equation of heat conduction.
Hence the propagation in the z direction (parallel to the direction of the two wires)
stops by ohmic interaction with the filament structure,
that "maps the wave equation solution into the heat diffusion equation solution."
The ohmic heating then brings the filament up
to temperature such that it glows.
Thermodynamically, this "emergence" process, forming a coherent structure
in a topological 3D contact domain by irreversible processes in a topological 4D symplectic domain,
is a conjecture that won Prigogine a Nobel prize.
Now to other things.
I can not accept the Catt heresy (which is not the digital Catt anomaly)
"that charge does not exist and current does not exist", and
"that alternate math
methods are useless to science"
I have read and scanned much of Catt's writings on the web.
He points out (his and Ricker's ) confusion between the question
are the E and B fields in a wave guide in phase or out of phase.
The simple answer can be attributed to Linearly polarized waves versus Circularly polarized waves.
Linear polarizations are thermodynamically equilibrium states with E and B in phase.
Circular polarization states are non-equilibrium states, and they are
not uniquely integrable. The E and B fields are out
Mathematical realizations of these concepts are in chapter 4 of my monograph ebookvol4.pdf
Catt can use the analytic solution examples to make his plots.
It is remarkable that it is possible to deduce
(depending upon the definition of the constitutive media properties)
that in the general case there are 4 optical waves, 2 outbound circular RH and LH polarization states,
as well as 2 inbound circular RH and LH polarization states.
These waves can coexist such that their four different phase velocities are distinct
and in media two are faster than C and two are slower than C. IN order to get 4 modes the constitutive equations must contain components that produce both Optical Activity and Faraday rotations.
Such effects have been measured with a dual polarized Sagnac ring laser.
See Ch 8 in monograph 4. or the Physical Review publcation by
Kiehn, R. M., Kiehn, G. P., and Roberds, B. (1991) Parity and time-reversal symmetry breaking, singular solutions and Fresnel surfaces, Phys. Rev A 43, 5165-5671.
or download a copy as,
Catt has mentioned he cannot read pdf files. I
recommend that it is time he downloaded the free Acrobat reader.
I repeat, many examples are worked out in chapter 4 of monograph 4, which was made available to all.
Now I have answered Catt's question about the light bulb to the best of my ability,
yielding a math and conceptual description of how and why the filament heats up, (after the phase propagation of the E,B,D,H fields from source to load at speed C in the simple cases)
when physically connected to the end of the Lecher wave-guide, but does not heat up
when exposed to the same field energy without being connected to the transmission line
-- a point that Catt does not address.
In addition I would like to have Catt define what he means by a TM wave versus a TEM wave with
different states of polarization. What is the effect of propagating Spin states? What does
Catt have to say about propagation of Fermion Spin states, and about the rational valued Hall impedance,
and the Topological Torsion of the electromagnetic fields, and the measurements of Doll on superconducting Tori, and Debeaver's measurements of the torque induced on superconducting tubes in the Einstein-DeHaas effect.
I suggest that Ricker read
Kiehn, R.M. (1974) Extensions of Hamilton's Principle to Include Dissipative Systems, J. Math Phys. 15, 9.
to see how Quantization enters electromagnetism, through the theory of topological defects and DeRhams theorems.
R. M. Kiehn
In a message dated 2/26/2012 12:36:15 P.M. Central Standard Time, email@example.com writes:
My initial reaction to this rather long mail was that it doesn't answer the question. One answer that I found was in Lessons In Electricity and Magnetism Franklin and MacNutt, 1919 page 2 which shows a battery lighting a lamp. Simply put they say the effect is produced by an electric current which is said to flow through the wires. Everything that Dr Kiehn has said is that he adheres to this claim.
The statement by Ricker that Kiehn has said that he adheres to this FRanklin Mcnutt claim is FALSE.
He insults us in the process of avoiding saying this. This simple answer would have sufficied rather than the long exchange of mails going nowhere. Perhaps this is not the entire story.
Kiehn has said that the propagation of fields is via the Eikonal solutions, which are the time and space dependent characteristic singular solutions, upon which the fields are discontinuous and multivalued. The reference to the Push-Pull solution is the case in point.
So looking at Sommerfield in the cited pages we find the problem referred to is not the one asked. The citation refers to AC electricity. Darn! In the introduction he says that E and B are the fields, but in the sections on waves he uses E and H. That is a contradiction.
Again Ricker is propagating his opinion. It is quite evident that Sommerfeld
recognizes the possibility of both "wave" solutions and the possibility of Eikonal solutions which are not related to AC electricity, and sinusoidal solutions to the Linear wave equations. The sinusoidal wave solutions to the linear problem are unique. The Eikonal singular solutions are not unique, and describe solutions of the E and B and D and H fields, in both three and four topological dimensions. In 3 topological dimensions the fields are transverse to the direction of propagation, and represent a tangential discontinuity.
IN 4 topological dimensions, the fields are not transverse, but come in conjugate pairs, which are in fact minimal surface, such as conjugate helicoids. The there are component projections of the 4 fields that are in the direction of the field propagation. MOreover E dot B is not zero.
In the reference to Bateman page 6, it says that energy is transferred by the electromagnetic waves according to the Poynting vector formulation, which contradicts that it is carried by the current.
The concepts represented by Bateman relate to Congugate pairs of solutions
which are indeed the eikonal solutions. not the sinusoidal solutions.
The reference to page 36 also refers to waves. So Kiehn has contradicted his conclusion that the energy is carried by the charge in the form of current with this citation. Also Bateman uses the vectors E and H which Kiehn severely criticised during the presentation and rebuked me when I objected to that criticism.
I looked at Formal Structure of Electromagnetics by E.J. Post p 190. I did not see the relevance of that citation as it was not about waves on wires.
The whole point is that signal propagation of a phase front has nothing to do with sinusoidal waves on wires.
Post was a Crystal cutter (for RF oscillators) and a student of Schouten in the days when tensor analysis was being created. He knew from his experience with crystals that certain piezo effects would not be observed if there was a crystalline center of symmetry, unless the electron charge had the property that it was a pseudo scalar and not a scalar. His experiments indicated that charge is a pseudo scalar.
The literature of elementary physics still ignores this experimental result of Post and his theoretical analysis.
He also investigated Eikonal propagation of signals.
The reference to Landau and Lifschtz is not specific.
Too bad that Ricker did not read the table of contents or the index in his search for truth.
The reference to Stratton was examined. Stratton seems to use the vector H as magnetic field, contrary to what Kiehn claimed was correct. He uses H in the cited section. Here the theory seems to be that the EM waves carry the energy contrary to what Kiehn objected to in the presentation.
I (Kiehn) have said that the propagation of E and B and D and H to the end of the line is via the Eikonal solutions , which come in conjugate pairs, and are not the unique sinusoidal "wave" solutions.
Although not cited, I looked at Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics. Jackson talks about plane waves using E and B, but uses E and H when discussing energy flow in the form of EM waves. Jackson seems to contradict himself and Kiehn. But since he discusses power flow using E and H I think that must be the right way to do it, so Kiehn was wrong to contradict me during the presentation.
Kiehn sent me several mails privately wherein he rebuked me. I am merely asking for a clear answer. The above doesn't give a clear answer. The citations seem to contradict what Kiehn claims. They all say the energy flow is in the waves not the current.
IT is not the "waves", it is the singular solution set that is multivalued , and capable of representing a propgating discontinuity that transports the fields down the wave guide.
They also contradict Kiehn with regard to the use of E and H in the presentation. In conclusion all of the citations I examined seem to say that what was presented was correct.
Although I am no expert in wave guide theory, some references that have appealed to me are:
1. Electrodynamics by Arnold Sommerfeld, Academic Press, especially p. 198 -211
2. Electrical and Optical Wave Motion by H. Bateman, Dover, especially p. 6 and p. 31
3. Formal Structure of Electromagnetics by E.J. Post, Dover, esp p. 190 et. seq.
4. The Theory of Space Time and Gravitation by V. Fock, Pergamon Press, especially the first 15 pages.
5. The Classical Theory of Fields by Landau and Lifshitz, Pergamon Press. The whole book
6. Electromagnetic Theory by J. Stratton, McGraw Hill, might be of interest but
note that is was written before the ideas of radar and wave guides at MIT matured.
p 527 et seq should interest you.
7. You can also download my 4th monograph at http://www22.pair.com/csdc/download/ebookvol4.pdf
which has numerous solutions relating to TM and TEM field propagation starting from
the concept of potentials (energy) which produce fields which (may) produce charge and current distributions,
starting with charges and currents to produce the fields which produce the potentials (energy).
This concept of potentials which produce fields that produce charges and currents
is due to the influence of quantum mechanics (and non-equilibrium thermodynamics).
In short to the Bohm-Aharanov effect, and the rational Hall effect.
Note that the problems of diffraction also point out the non-uniqueness associated
with wave propagation. Shine a laser beam at a pair of slits to produce wavelets diffracting
from each slit. The envelope solution of the wavelets produced on the far side
of the diffracting slit pair is an indication of the non-uniqueness of (singular, or characteristic)
solutions to the wave equation. The Envelope solution represents a discontinuity surface
that propagates forward with no wave energy ahead of the envelope and a finite step at
the surface of the envelope. This is not a sinusoidal solution!
The experiment is easier to observe in water waves, which also admit both tangential and longitudinal discontinuities in the acceleration (~E) and vorticity (~B) fields.
Longitudinal discontinuities occur when E dot B is not zero. In fluids the longitudinal discontinuities are called Shock "waves". See Landau & Lifshitz for details of tangential and longitudinal discontinuities. IN fluids, the tangential discontinuities are related to shear viscosity, and the shock discontinuities are related to bulk viscosity (google Eckart bulk viscosity). The same thing happens in Plasmas where the value of EdotB (not E x H) is not zero.
A lot of the concepts bandied about amongst the flood of emails sent to me
can be described nicely in terms of topological concepts. However, my impression is that
the topological expertise is not a strong suit amongst the local group of correspondents, especially Catt and Ricker.
For example, the concept of the "edge of a cloud" is topologically expressed by the
concept of a topological "boundary" and "limit points".
Topological boundaries imply that the thermodynamics of such bounded domains are "closed"
(another topological word that has precise topological properties).
Physically, such closed domains with a boundary can be far from equilibrium,
and do not exchange particles with their environment,
but they can exchange radiation with their environment. These closed domains with boundary appear only in topological spaces of Topological dimension 3
There exist thermodynamic systems which can exchange both radiation and particles, but they are unbounded "Open" domains (another topological idea).
These Open domains without boundary appear only in topological spaces of Topological dimension 4
The bounded domains in a plasma require that E dot B is zero.
The unbounded domains have E dot B not zero.
Both are states that are far from equilibirium.
The key idea is that Open domains can continuously evolve to Closed domains which
can continuously evolve, causally, into equilibrium thermodynamic states. However, the reverse process
from equilibrium to non-equilibrium states is not continuous (topologically speaking).
Both the Bounded Closed domains and the Open domains are such that solutions
are not deterministically unique. Given initial data, a unique prediction is impossible.
The non-equilibrium systems have multiple singular solution possibilities (for example, envelopes)
which do not decay immediately. Solitons in fluid systems are examples.
See chapter 13.4 Falaco Solitons in Ebookvol4.pdf
I will not