The Rising Star that didn’t.

Prestige figures in science have the same function as charismatic figures in politics and religion, or celebrities in entertainment. - Letter from the late Hiram Caton

A syndrome surrounding major scientific advance has never been noted, and those caught up in it deserve our sympathy. In the case of Oliver Heaviside, an example is his friend Oliver Lodge. In the case of Ivor Catt, we find two; Nigel Cook and John Dore.

It was a great achievement to discern a star before it rose, and attach oneself to it. The first step was to praise him, privately and publicly, in order to speed up the rise and advance the time when the disciple could bathe in its reflected glory. The budding disciple knew that he was prescient in discerning the new star before others did, and also knew that, living in a reasonably functioning milieu, such an obvious star was bound to rise.

"Truth Management"

"Rise and Fall .... "

However, payback time never seemed to come. This meant that either the would-be disciple has made a mistake, and the star was not a star, or the potential star himself was determined to not rise; “You don’t want to be recognised”; his rudeness alienated society, he refused to make his work clear, etc. See "Nutter" .

What is then extraordinary is the level of venom launched against the reluctant star – paranoid, rude, he lied, and so on, culminating in the charge that his work is wrong anyway. For a period, such a would-be disciple threatens the historical record. In around 2050, when the inquest into the decline of science comes, the unsullied historical record will be important. However, fortunately, the level of venom finally undermines the image of the previous disciple himself, not of the reluctant star. (However, I don’t know that Oliver Lodge descended to venom, so venom might be more recent.)


In the 1920s Oliver Heaviside was given the first Faraday Medal by the IEE London, so his contribution was recognised, as shown by the letter from the IEE .  However, he was quite rapidly “disappeared”, so that in 1960 I had no knowledge that he had made any contribution to electromagnetic theory beyond proposing “The Heaviside Layer”. In 1960, that was all that was known about Heaviside’s Electromagnetic Theory, and he was not mentioned in any text book for more than half a century. So the pathology developing from the professionalisation of science was already evident.

More generally, the new breed of professional scientists, who took over from the rich amateur along with a very small number of dedicated “searchers after truth” like Faraday, took remarkably long to realise that professional science had to be stabilised in order to protect professionals’ salaries, reputations, pensions. Even lesser scientific advance, let alone paradigm shift, had to be blocked. There will be no future paradigm shifts in today’s professional science like those traumatic shifts from phlogiston and caloric.

The Rise and Fall .... "

Clever take the Brilliant

Ivor Catt, 27 August 2014


29 Jan 2016

John Raymond Dore

Jan 29 (3 days ago)

to ivor, David

Adolf Hitler Adolf Hitler

“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”

This is exactly what you are attempting to do eventually leading your cabal/coterie over the cliff edge into oblivion.

I do encourage you to  wake up to reality but, alas, you are too convinced of your own infallibility that you listen to no one who does revere you as some god-like being and repeats your mantra.

If you replay your address at Newcastle University the first part you ramble through your distant past experiments in the USA as an introduction to establish some credibility followed by the unfounded 'Snake Oil' sales pitch on your current suggestions. The fact you think it was a good address shows the degree to which you are unaccustomed to listening to good addresses.

Meanwhile those of us who have an interest in making a meaningful contribution proceed unabashed (albeit decried by you).

If only you could show but one advantage of your supposed insight it would be a fantastic step forward ... but you do not --- so what is the point of what you do?

The only end result is the waste of as many peoples' time that you can contact.

Maybe it all because you live in an 'Alice in Wonderland' world where your thoughts are magnified into huge world impacting results. I guess 'Gulliver's Travels' may be another world too.

There are problems to be solved but you lack clearly any ability to make a meaningful contribution in so many years.

Ivor Catt 

Jan 29 (3 days ago)

to Libuse.Mikova, David, bcc: Alex, bcc: Anthony, bcc: Forrest, bcc: brian, bcc: Brian, bcc: Stephen, bcc: Christopher, bcc: Christopher, bcc: Cameron, bcc: Corinne, bcc: David, bcc: Dana, bcc: Malcolm, bcc: mike, bcc: erin.pizzey, bcc: foggitt, bcc: Mike, bcc: HARRY, bcc: Jennifer, bcc: Hock, bcc: harold.hillman, bcc: Ian, bcc: John

For some decades John said I should get a Nobel Prize.

John stayed in my home a month or so ago.

Why am i not allowed to be a normal person?

Malcolm Davidson

Jan 29 (3 days ago)

to me, libuse.mikova, Dave



John Dore continues to interact with you, yet keeps telling you he wants nothing more to do with you at the same time? He is conflicted for reasons he alone knows. Part of him wants to believe and another part is afraid to. I find it fascinating that so many people are intrigued by these issues but then find them to be psychologically too extreme. There is a force of gravity pulling individuals in towards the center of what we might call conventional thinking. In John's case it is greater than his desire to embrace some new ideas.


He therefore has to attack Ivor to justify his position.









1 February 2016


John Raymond Dore

12:08 PM (6 hours ago)

to ivor, David

There was a man - his name was Catt

He thought he'd cause a stir

He made no difference - that's a fact

He could only purr

So much time wasted by so many

With what result you ask

The sad fact is you may reflect

He cannot match the task

But on he goes both day and night

Fixated on his dream

Alas poor Catt he does not know

Another will get the cream.




Ivor Catt <>

Feb 4    2018

to Stephen, Alex, Forrest, Tony, David, Malcolm, Anthony, Christopher, Monika, Christopher, Mike, HARRY, Brian, theotheocharis., g.l.oppo, mary.bennett, rudolf.sykora, maxwellsociety, mikegi,, massimiliano.p., stefano.selleri, giuseppe.pelosi, g.pelosi, mahta




6:03 AM (3 hours ago)


to Stephen, Alex, me, Forrest, Tony, David, Malcolm, Anthony, Christopher, Monika, Christopher, Mike, HARRY, Brian, theotheocharis., g.l.oppo, mary.bennett, rudolf.sykora, maxwellsociety,, massimiliano.p., stefano.selleri, giuseppe.pelosi, g.pelosi, mahta


If you want people to ignore you, keep it up. They have no obligation to tolerate name calling.


Argue your case. If people listen, great! If they don’t, fine. Harassing people doesn’t make your case stronger. Solving real problems makes your case stronger. I pointed to Compton Scattering ... .... "



The enemy within.

Perhaps in 1975, Mike Gibson wrote to me to say his University of Texas threatened to throw him out if he continued to spend so much time reading Heaviside and Catt in the library. Catt told him that if and when he was thrown out, he should come to stay with Catt for a month.  He was later thrown out and came to me for a month. He programmed at the same speed as others play the piano. He was the world's top expert on Heaviside's five volumes. I do not know what drove him later, but he joined Microsoft very early and did the fonts and other things. If he got a stock option very early, he will be very rich. I have virtually not heard of Compton scattering. Where are his publications promoting Heaviside?

My co-author Dr. Dave Walton put an enormous amount of time and energy into electromagnetic theory. He has removed himself from the present imbroglio because "he knew I wanted a fight".


The Peer Review Cartel has blocked more or less any publication by Catt (and the politer Gibson and Walton) for fifty years. Recently peer reviewed journals comprehensively defamed and misrepresented Catt (but not Gibson or Walton). (pour encourager les autres?) One short ground breaking publication during that time has Catt and Gibson as co-authors. It is very important, and has been ignored.

Mike and Walton need to tell us about the later publications their gentlemanly behaviour has led to. I will add their location here;




So much for the rewards for politeness.

It took me many decades to realise that major scientific breakthrough is extremely damaging for all concerned. Even minor advance is damaging, and students don’t like it..

Crothers told his university in Australia that he was going to go to the heart of Relativity. He did some lecturing at the time. The university held a secret meeting and threw him out of university.

Some decades before, Theocharis told me he told Imperial he was going to the heart of Relativity. He was rebuffed, and held court in the corridors and coffee shop in Imperial for some years, living on benefits.. In the end he gave up, returned to Cyprus, and was lost to science.




These people are among the leading scientists of the 20th century, and some of them believe they should take it and show that they continue to be gentlemen "or they will be ignored"!!!! Get real! They were too good, unfair competition, so the rabble (the Pop Scientists, whom the public prefer to real science) shut them out. (Pop scientists; Rees, Hawking, Cox, Penrose, Pepper etc. etc.)


I have just noticed that a Nobel prize winner is among this circulation. He is prevented from publishing because he tried to bring the paranormal into science. Should a Nobel Prize winner be prevented from publishing because he did not keep to the party line? Is he blocked because he is polite, or impolite? What has politesse to do with it?  I know that when I met him he was polite. I cannot find his compendium of great scientists from the past who wrote about being blocked. Of course, it is worse today. The "science establishment", or "peer review mafia" (do a Google search for them) has moved from blocking to outright attack.


When the Italians, to get past peer review, got into the gutter defaming and misrepresenting Catt, Catt was willing to get into the gutter as well since he decided that was needed to save science. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Saving science is a dirty business. Pop science has just received $100,000,000 of private money to look for aliens. CERN gets billions. CERN is now more powerful than governments. My visitor yesterday, a real scientist, cannot stand watching Brian Cox. Spineless scientists betray science.




John Raymond Dore

2020 entists confront omerta.Mon, 2 Mar, 18:51

to me, Anthony, Alex


The error in your thinking is that you have something important to say!!!

In 1961 I saw digital pulses travelling at the speed of light through the dielectric.

Inter door wiring and clock signal wiring at 2MHz worked reliably in 1964.

You have been successful in causing disruption wherever you have ventured in all aspects of your life rather than making a profit for your employer. You failed to heed the indication that you should leave for some years before repeated zero salary increases conveyed the message at Ferranti.

It is your sheer arrogance for which you will undoubtedly be remembered.

Many people manage to make multiple if relatively small contributions in their life.

You know you are unfit to manage staff and thus are not able to multiply any effort you may make.

You bite the hand that feeds you eg GEC

You wish to modify teaching in schools with your thoughts which do not lend themselves to computation.

When will the torture end?


PS you need to structure access to those papers you hold dear because no one will bother to follow all the trails and cross references you have indulged in.

PPS It is amazing that you did not set up a demonstration of metastability which could readily show what happens. I was involved with a dunking sonar about 30 years ago where an engineer fell foul of that but fortunately he spoke to me and it did not delay the project which is important if you have booked the Italian navy to steam past ... we only had Christmas day off.



On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 18:10, Ivor Catt <> wrote:  To change the metaphor, a body of knowledge is like a large raft on which all kinds of violent games can and must be played, but no one must attack the raft on which they stand, because then everyone would drown in new ideas.



Decades ago I should have realised that talking to people like you is talking at cross purposes. You publish perhaps five articles per year for say 40 years, and so say there is no censorship. That is true, because you write and publish within the canon.

I am unable to publish, because I consistently try to publish outside the canon. That is, I always have something important to say which threatens the canon. In contrast, you are a creature of the canon, and reinforce, or decorate it. .... .... See  




John Raymond Dore <>

Tue, 17 Sep 2019, 11:11

to me


I hope you will assist in helping to provide a compact yet comprehensive précis of each of your achievements for submission with your nomination for a Faraday Medal.

I have already established a number of supporters in this regard.

I view this as a precursor for a Nobel Prize but suspect that this would be aided if it could be made clear how some application was developed as a result of your insightfulness which would not otherwise have arisen.

Congratulations after such a long hard struggle!

See you Thursday this week.