Talk:Ivor Catt/Archive 2

message: x = electronic switch
             
           _____________________________
          /x                            |
         / x                            |
        /  x                            |       
       /   x direction of incident waves| 
      /    x    <------------>    |
     /     x                            |
 GEN/   <-- matching sect               |
    \      x                            | 
     \     x                            |
      \    x                            |
       \   x                            |
        \  x                            |
         \ x                            |
          \x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x|
           \             ^             /
            \            |            /
             \      dir of o/p       /
              \     waves|          /
               \         |         /
                \                 /
                 \   Matching    /
                  \  section    /
                   \     |     /
                    \    |    /
                     \  \ /  /
                      \     /
                       \   /
                        \ /
                     LOAD & 
                     DETECTOR
Well no I dont think so becuase the switches (x) in the bottom row are all open. So how can there be diffraction? Or are you talking about when the bottom row of sitches are closed?--Light current 17:22, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so.  I'm not sure; I'd have to simulate it.  But most simulation software would treat the "wave" as DC, so I'm not sure how you would do that.  Pfalstad 20:19, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

text: No, what I'm saying is that I'm not going to try, because I don't understand your theory well enough.  This is why we need a mathematical presentation of it.  If you could do that, I could simulate it.  But part of the problem with your theory is that there are "hidden variables" which you haven't elaborated on yet.  Like, consider the TL with counter-propagating waves in it.  It is identical to a TL with DC.  Normally, I would say that if you know the E and M field at all points in and around a TL, that is enough to describe its current and future state.  But it seems that with your counter-propagating wave theory, that is no longer true; there may be waves hidden in the TL, and just looking at the fields doesn't tell you if they are present or not, right?  So there must be some additional field or state present at all points in space which tells you about the counter-propagating waves that are present.  This needs to be developed mathematically or I haven't any hope of simulating it.  Pfalstad 03:42, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diagram of setup 

message: This is pretty standard stuff, in all the textbooks I think.  Pfalstad 18:12, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes probably but its an unfamiliar concept to some people and Catt has embraced it at the the expense on ordinary (charge) current. That why I included it.--Light current 21:53, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poynting Vector = Energy Current 

message: A lot of this stuff doesn't seem controversial at all.  Maybe just mistated?  For instance, 
:"He also quoted as reasoning that any charge caused by such displacement current in a capacitor would need to appear at all points on the capacitor plates instantaneously and therefore needs to travel at superluminal velocities from the leads to the extremities of the plates."
This is obviously true, not controversial.  All components can be modeled as transmission lines, but it's usually not important to be that detailed, and just treat them as if the charges travel instantaneously.  They can be modeled in an even more detailed way than the transmission line model, too, if desired.  
I don't really like the tone of the article.  Stuff like the public arguments section needs references. — Omegatron 15:32, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the article doesn't do a good job of identifying which ideas are controversial and why.  See my poynting vector = energy current comment above.  Pfalstad 20:29, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it getting controversial enough now? Have you seen this before?
The five </s!> six stages of theory acceptance:
a) Its not true, it cant be true
b) It might be true, but it has no importance.
c) It is true, but has no real meaning 
d) It is true and maybe its important
e) I thought of it first 
f) Its not controvertial at all - it obvious!
--Light current 20:43, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversial 

message: I believe these additions have been made by a reputable and knowledgable contributor on this subject by the name of Mr Nigel Cook. Who may shortly be getting his own page!!--Light current 03:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In now have some doubt as to the originator of these posts from URL 172.216.12.45.--Light current 04:40, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

text: God forbid that he should get his own page on Wikipedia.
 
Why not? --Light current 20:26, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I think he will get more support when his ideas are properly understood. This page on him is probably the biggest break he has ever had! However, this page will not be a propaganda page for Catts ideas but will be neutrally written piece with no points of view expressed one way or the other. It is up to the readers to decide o for themselves the validity of Catts arguments--Light current 18:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent addition of large amount of new material by 172.216.12.45 

message: That whole section seemed full of irrelevant details and innuendo.  If you want to talk about Catt's ATC proposal, the need for it, and the "suppression" of it, be my guest.  But stick to the facts.  But leading with some story about an ATC disaster (taking for granted that it wouldn't have happened if people had listened to Catt) seems very POV.  And what does that email have to do with anything?  Pfalstad 19:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe this was added by Nigel Cook and probably needs some POV removals. However, it will take some intensive reseasrch to establish the unbiased story I feel.--Light current 20:29, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATC stuff 

message: Pfalstad and Light current, is there any way to get a photo of Catt on the site, say the small Electronics World http://www.ivorcatt.com/illus/ivor_anam.jpg (which is openly published and is can be used under fair-trading copyright law provided credit is given Electronics World magazine) which shows Catt with the "product of the year award" from a magazine for his 1988 160 MB spiral WSI product?
:Yes. Just upload the image giving it a suitable name and fill in the copyright details (use the upload file tab and follow instructions). Then the image can be put into the article. Picture credits are not normally included on the article pages though!--Light current 18:02, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images of Catt 

message: What is it?  Pfalstad 19:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[EMC]]