**From:** Forrest
Bishop

**Sent:** Monday, February 27, 2012 4:05 PM

**To:** Toptorsion@aol.com ; ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk ; kc3mx@yahoo.com

**Cc:** the.volks@comcast.net ; rmlaf@comcast.net ; forrestb@ix.netcom.com

**Subject:** Re: nutter, basic
topological electromagnetics

Kiehn, Koein,

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.

Forrest Bishop

-----Original Message-----

From: Toptorsion@aol.com

Sent: Feb 25, 2012 3:14 PM

To: ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk, forrestb@ix.netcom.com,
kc3mx@yahoo.com

Cc: the.volks@comcast.net, rmlaf@comcast.net

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.

Thank you

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.

Dear Sirs

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.

See http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/catq.htm

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
respond.

*

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
temperature.

*

**Recall that Catt does not describe the process
details of how the**

**"energy" flux
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
of phase.

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,

(http://www22.pair.com/csdc/pdf/timerev.pdf)

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.

Regards

R. M. Kiehn

**In a message dated 2/26/2012 12:36:15 P.M. Central
Standard Time, kc3mx@yahoo.com writes:**

All, 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
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 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. Harry Although I am no expert in wave guide theory, some references that
have appealed to me are:
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, rather than 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. ** regards RMK PS 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