The distinction between Theory C and Catt’s theories.

Ivor Catt  17 August 2016

 

http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/site/harryricker/2015/12/12/the-wakefield-experiments-background-and-motivation/

“In other words the standard textbook theory that a capacitor produces an exponential decay of current is not observed in the Wakefield experiments and that the experiments do produce results that confirm the Theory C of Ivor Catt.

 

I have been inconsistent in the past. My objective is to make the words implied by “Theory C” very limited, as follows;

 

Theory C. When a battery is connected to a resistor/lamp by two wires and the lamp lights, electric current is not involved.

 

 

This limits it to being in the sequence Theory N, Theory H, Theory C.

 

Heaviside failed to notice that with his “We reverse this .... ”, electric current dropped out of the Theory N sequence, which is Battery – current – field – lamp lights.

 

Theory H is the sequence; Battery – field – lamp lights.   As a peripheral effect, field causes current. This is not involved in lighting the lamp.

 

Theory C just says; Battery – field – lamp lights. It is not interested in current, and makes no assertions about it, whether it exists or not.

 

As contrasted with Theory C, Catt may have theories including the assertion that electric current or electric charge does not exist. But they would be Catt theories, not Theory C. The key point is that Heaviside failed to notice that electric current had no role in lighting a lamp. Whether it existed was another matter. He failed to make the obvious transition from Theory H to Theory C.

 

 

http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x3117.htm  In Heaviside's magnificent, regal statement, "We reverse this." In his Electrical Papers, vol. 1, 1892, page 438, Heaviside wrote;

Now, in Maxwell's theory there is the potential energy of the displacement produced in the dielectric parts by the electric force, and there is the kinetic or magnetic energy of the magnetic force in all parts of the field, including the conducting parts. They are supposed to be set up by the current in the wire [Theory N]. We reverse this; the current in the wire is set up by the energy transmitted through the medium around it [Theory H]….  1 , 2

By the way, is there such a thing as an electric current? Not that it is intended to cast any doubt upon the existence of a phenomenon so called; but is it a current – that is, something moving through a wire – Oliver Heaviside, “Electrical Papers”, vol. 1, page 434, 1892.