Comments on Chapter 2_1 of Ivor Catt, “Electromagnetism 1”
I made a 23 minute video for the Acorn Master PC some fifteen years ago. I sold only one copy, to Sheffield Polytechnic.
A follow-on video was never offered for sale.
This second video showed the action of an oscilloscope probe when used to monitor the voltage at a point in a coaxial cable. The tip was attached to the inner, and the earth attached to the outer of the coax. If we remove the bottom branch from Figures 21 and 22, we get a picture of the situation, except that a 500 ohm probe, going up to the north, has a miniature 450 ohm resistor at the tip feeding into a 50 ohm cable. Thus, the characteristic impedance of the cable to left and right is 50 ohms, but the impedance of the probe is 500 ohms. The result is that 90% of the signal is lost across the 450 ohm resistor, and only 10% proceeds up the coax to the north, towards the oscilloscope.
In the video, I showed that a 10 volt pulse coming from the left would be deflected to the north and reduced to 1volt (to be magnified again on the oscilloscope screen, to give 10v).
A 10 volt pulse coming from the right would be deflected to the north and reduced to 1 volt.
Superposition applies, so that if two pulses, one from the left and one from the right, passed the centre at the same instant, both pulses would be reduced to 10%, deflected through 90 degrees, and fed to the oscilloscope, one on top of the other. However, it was the oscilloscope probe which deflected a small portion of each pulse through 90 degrees, and made them travel in the same direction. Had the probe not been there, the signals would not have changed direction and appeared to reinforce each other.
The 2v to the scope (enlarged to 20v) is an artefact of the method of measuring. There is no justification for saying that, if the two 10v pulses overlap, they create a voltage of 20v.
All the above ideas were in my Acorn Master disc fifteen years ago.
What is new is the following.
Whichever direction the pulse came from, it will be deflected north, always with the same polarity, towards the oscilloscope.
Now let us consider the Catt, or Contrapuntal, model for the charged capacitor, figures 10, 65 and 66.
The contrapuntal model for the charged capacitor fails to fully address the problem that a charged square capacitor should surely have energy current flowing north-south-north as well as east-west-east.
The present discussion of how an oscilloscope probe (or any other voltage measuring instrument) behaves is indifferent to this problem. Whichever direction energy current comes from to the middle node in Figure 21, a part of it will always be fed on to the north, to the instrument, with the same polarity.
It follows that we have no evidence that voltage (actually energy current) signals passing a point in opposite, or in any different, directions, combine to created a voltage which is larger than one or other of the energy currents. This idea is the result of an illusion created by our measuring instruments. Similarly, the number of cars travelling south on the MI, if added to the number of cars per hour travelling north, are added, it leads to a figure which has no practical or theoretical value.
If a capacitor is charged (necessarily at the speed of light) with energy current, and appears to have a voltage of 20v, but delivers a 10v signal when discharged (Figure 35), it never was really charged to 20v. It always had a 10v energy current vacillating from end to end, no more.
Ivor Catt 2dec02
Many years ago I realised that there was no such thing as electric potential, or voltage. Only potential difference, or voltage difference, existed.
The above web page http://www.ivorcatt.com/c2_1.htm is the next stage. If two 10v pulses of energy current pass through each other, we have instruments which will give a reading of 20v. However, that reading is an artefact of the instrument. It is no more true than it is true that if two pulses of opposite polarity pass through each other, this leads to a momentary voltage of zero.
The flaw in all of this is indicated by the formula [v (squared) / R] for the power dissipated in a resistor. In the same way as the length of a side of a square of carpet does not directly give a measure of how much carpet we have, so the voltage in an energy current does not give us a measure of the energy involved. As with the carpet (length and width), energy current has two dimensions, E and H.
Our voltage measuring instruments only look at the E dimension. Our instruments ignore the H dimension. When two energy currents pass through each other, giving a measurement of double the voltage on our instruments, the H dimensions are ignored by the instrument. Similarly, when two pulses of opposite polarity pass through each other, the two E fields are ignored by the instrument, because after being manipulated by the instrument, they lead to a null reading. However, that does not mean they do not exist. It only means that our voltage measuring instuments measure something which is not really much linked to what is actually there.
Every one of our electrical measuring instruments manipulates what is actually there between two (nearby) points, and we have become used to the false measurments that they give us. On my web page, above, I point out that energy currents passing a point are manipulated by the measuring instrument; sent off in a new direction, before the measuring instrument completes its task. It is the initial redirection of direction which causes the falsification of the registered result.
Our inability to measure voltage difference strengthens my assertion that it does not exist. All that exists is energy currents travelling at the speed of light (for the medium).
However, retreat from the concept of a single velocity universe undermines the argument above.
Ivor Catt 3dec02