Life in Mathverse


I make the commitment that anyone wishing to counter any assertion made on this site will be guaranteed a hyperlink to a website of their choosing at the point where the disputed assertion is made.

Ivor Catt. 18june02


Scandals in Electromagnetic Theory



I Catt, 1june02;

Big tells us that in his mathematical universe, called “Mathverse”, E and H are 90 degrees out of phase. He says they have to be, because the change of E causes H and the change of H causes E.


In Mathverse, everything that happens is caused by one elegant equation or another.



A Thought experiment in Mathverse.


In Mathverse, a TEM Wave proceeds at the speed of light as follows.

It has to be sinusoidal, since the sine wave prompts the maximum amount of elegant mathematical thought and discourse. Elegant thought and discourse make up the deepest reality in Mathverse. It is awesome to contemplate a universe wholly composed of mathematics.


Let us consider a TEM wave travelling from the direction of the north pole via Mathverse’s Greenwich (named after our Greenwich, in our world) towards the south pole. At midnight Greenwich Mean Time (00.00 GMT) at Greenwich, the E field is at zero and increasing at its maximum rate. Immediately behind, towards the north, is the highest value of E. (This is the value that will reach Greenwich shortly after 00.00.) Returning to Greenwich at 00.00, we find that H is at its maximum. This is because an increasing E causes H. Soon after 00.00, the maximum positive value of E comes from just to the north and reaches Greenwich, then proceeding towards the south.


So far, so good.


A little bit after 00.00 GMT at Greenwich, because H has just peaked, H is falling at Greenwich, causing a negative value for E at Greenwich.


But after 00.00 GMT, we have already said that immediately after 00.00, E reaches its maximum, not its minimum.


It follows that, in Mathverse, E causes H, but H cannot cause E.


Heaviside said that mathematics was an experimental science.


With the help of Big, I have discovered two new fields, each discovery being worth a Nobel Prize. I am very willing to give the cash value of one of the two to Big, and retain only one. After all, he helped.


The discovery is of two further fields, G and F.


In Mathverse, the truth is that increasing E causes H, as has always been thought by competent mathematicians. Because of causality, they are 90 degrees out of phase. Increasing H causes a further, previously unknown field, the G field, which is 90 degrees behind H. The increasing G field, in its turn, causes the F field, 90 degrees behind the G field. Finally, the increasing F field causes the already known E field.


These four fields are beautifully, elegantly spaced out, equidistant, at 90 degree intervals. As that celebrated Cambridge mathematician Jeans said in his book “The Mysterious Universe”, “…. The universe appears to have been designed by a pure mathematician.”


As a very young boy, I had the great good fortune to meet my mentor, that great Cambridge mathematician Sir James Jeans, on his deathbed.

(“Whether good mathematicians, when they die, go to Cambridge, I do not know.” – Heaviside.) When I asked him about the above quote, “…. The universe appears to have been designed by a pure mathematician,” he whispered to me that he was of course referring to Mathverse, not to our universe. They were his last, memorable words. His dying hint, coupled with the promptings of Big, bid fair to gain me two Nobel Prizes, not one. They should be called the G Prize and the F Prize, in that order. Truly, I stand on the shoulders of giants.


Let us put the above mathematically. We will discuss the value of E, F, G, H at Greenwich at and after 00.00 GMT.


Since at 00.00 GMT at Greenwich, the E field is at zero and rising,

E = sin wt.


Field H is proportional to the rate of change of E,

so H = k1 dE/dt =k1 cos wt.


Field G is proportional to the rate of change of H,

so G = k2 dH/dt = k2 (- sinwt).


Field F is proportional to the rate of change of G,

so F = k3 dG/dt = k3 (- coswt).


Finally, we get back to E,

which is proportional to the rate of change of F,

so that E = k4 dF/dt = k4 sinwt.


Note how beautifully the four fields work out. Also note that k4 = 1 . (Actually w4).


Here is yet another example of the way in which pure mathematics leads us to ever more discovery of nature of the physical world in Mathverse.  - Ivor Catt, 1june02




If the differential of sin were cos and also the differential of cos were sin, the mathematical high jinks imposed on electromagnetic theory would be a trifle less ludicrous. However, the fact that the differential of cos is –sin, not just plain sin, means that hifalutin mathematicians have been behaving in a gross manner for more than a century. The Emperor that is mathematics has no clothes. Mathematicians appear to be grossly incompetent when they impose mathematics onto physical reality.

Ivor Catt    25nov02



Copied from Big’s website


on 1june02

The basic transverse electromagnetic wave, as shown to the left, involves both a varying electric field and a varying magnetic field, appearing at right angles to each other and to the direction of travel of the wave. This figure represents a single photon traveling through space (and time).

Note especially that the electric and magnetic fields are not in phase with each other, but are rather 90° out of phase. Most books portray these two components of the total wave as being in phase with each other, but I find myself disagreeing with that interpretation, based on three fundamental laws of physics: .… ….


Because the differential of sin is cos and the differential of cos is minus sin, half-witted mathematicians have invaded the physics of the TEM wave and imposed a spurious story that E causes H causes E. Since sin, cos and -sin are 90 degrees out of phase, part of their phoney baggage is to imply that E and H are 90 degrees out of phase. (See my article in Wireless World in March 1980.) Because the sin wave is amenable to mathematical high jinks, another part of their baggage is to imply that a TEM wave is sinusoidal. It's time we cleaned the claptrap out of electromagnetic theory.

Ivor Catt, Wireless World, feb84.



Copied from Big’s website at

on 1june02

From me [Mr. Big]:
Here we have a major piece of academic nonsense. Since Mr. Catt claims to be correct, he needs to be able to prove it with verifiable mathematics. By denying any need to prove his stance in the question, he denies the scientific method in general. He also throws his own position into considerable doubt.
I certainly want my Website to be accurate, and quite frankly I believe it is in this regard. If Mr. Catt or anyone else can offer valid, demonstrable math to demonstrate otherwise, I'll be more than pleased to check it out and update my site in accordance with the results. However, by denying any need to present a mathematical proof of any kind, Mr. Catt only implies that he is unable to do so. Therefore, his claim remains unsupported opinion and carries no academic weight.
This is the third time I've asked Mr. Catt to provide his supporting mathematics.

Thus far I've seen none. It's time to put up or shut up, Ivor. - Bigelow



Copied from Big’s website at on 1june02


From me [Mr. Big]:
Dr. Lynch, if you see this page before writing a reply, by all means I invite your comment. The only thing I ask is that if you agree with Mr. Catt as to the phase relationship between the E and H fields in a transverse electromagnetic wave, you state the mathematics that correctly describe the phase relationship and explain how and why the energy in the wave can fluctuate all the way down to zero twice a cycle without vanishing permanently. I have repeatedly asked Mr. Catt for this supporting background, and his only reply, as you can see on this page, is that he doesn't have to answer this challenge.
Meanwhile, the mere fact that Mr. Catt found it necessary to write the above letter to you implies to me that he lacks the academic background required to be considered any kind of authority on the subject. Accordingly, I will leave this page in place and unchanged until somebody produces a mathematically verifiable theory in accordance with all known Laws of Physics, that refutes my position on the matter.
There is also the fact that Mr. Catt seems unwilling to accord me the politeness of using at least my full last name. I'd expect this sort of behavior from a 10-year-old, but not from a mature adult in an academic discussion. This plus his petulant refusal to say anything about the mathematical basis of his claim (and indeed his insistence that he must be right regardless of the evidence) suggest that Mr. Catt still has some growing up to do. If this is the way he made his claims to the IEE 20 years ago, I'm not surprised that they ignored him.
I look forward to receiving a reply that consists of more than an empty demand from a self-appointed authority that I take their word for it without evidence.
Ken Bigelow




On Ivor Catt's ideas; Electronics World (London) (was Wireless World), aug2002, pp46-49


"…. In the Dec. 1978 issue of Wireless World, p51,.... Catt, ....Davidson and .... Walton produced the most original and brilliant theoretical calculation since Maxwell’s day …. ...."


My 1994 book Electromagnetism 1 is at