The following is my email reply to KM4LS:

Hello, Bill

Thanks for writing and for your concern regarding Ted's antenna concept.

Bill, I can only say how sorry I am that Ted has misconceived the principles of
electromagnetism in believing that the chronology of the formation of the E and
H fields as they develop along a transmission line or antenna can be changed by
the voltage-current relationship appearing at the input terminals of an antenna.
I know he and other amateurs are using antennas they believe are operating in
the mode Ted calls EH, but it is up to Ted to prove that what he claims is so.

I'm sorry, but there is no way he can prove a concept that violates
electromagnetic theory that has been proved true empirically for more than a
century. Let him place voltage and current probes on a shortened resonant
antenna with the 90-degree phase lag inductance inserted and feed a dual trace
oscilloscope to see the relationship of the fields.

And another experiment. Have him adjust a 1/4 wl vertical over good ground to
resonance with no phase lag inductor in the circuit and then measure the power
delivered to the antenna. Then, without readjusting any transmitter tuning and
loading controls, have him now insert the 90-degree phase lag circuit and
remeasure the power delivered. He will be amazed at the result.

If the 90-degree phase lag circuit will change the chronology of the formation
of the E and H fields in the shortened antennas, as Ted claims, then it will
also change the chronology of the fields in a full length resonant antenna. If
he can prove that the field chronology also changes in the full length antenna
I'll buy into his concept. The burden of proof is on Ted, not me. In my opinion,
the phase lag Ted introduces, which he believes changes the time relationship of
the fields, only compensates for the capacitive reactance in the shortened
antenna, making it resonant, without any change in time relationship in the
normal production of the E and H fields.

73,

Walt