If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.
Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.
Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.
Contests Home
Previous Contests
What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discuss • winners
Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discuss • winners
Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American
read/discuss • winners
How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discuss • winners
It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discuss • winners
Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discuss • winners
Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discuss • winners
What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discuss • winners
The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discuss • winners
Previous Contests
What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discuss • winners
Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discuss • winners
Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American
read/discuss • winners
How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discuss • winners
It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discuss • winners
Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discuss • winners
Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discuss • winners
What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discuss • winners
The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discuss • winners
Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use
RSS feed | RSS help
Introduction
Terms of Use
Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.
By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC
Ken Seto: on 4/6/17 at 21:43pm UTC, wrote Hi Peter, Thank you for your comments. I don't know you email address so...
Peter Jackson: on 4/6/17 at 18:21pm UTC, wrote Ken, Thanks for the offer of your E book, that's be great thanks, but for...
Ken Seto: on 4/1/17 at 12:56pm UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir, Thank you for your comments. I am glad that we agree that...
sherman jenkins: on 3/31/17 at 6:53am UTC, wrote Ken, So good. I do approve your approach. However, I do believe that the...
sherman jenkins: on 3/31/17 at 6:21am UTC, wrote Eckard, If you are interested in a solution that works. The short answer...
Vladimir Fedorov: on 3/30/17 at 6:32am UTC, wrote Dear Ken, With great interest I read your essay, which of course is...
Satyavarapu Gupta: on 3/18/17 at 10:27am UTC, wrote Hi Seto, I want you to ask you to please have a look at my essay, where...
Dizhechko Semyonovich: on 3/12/17 at 21:47pm UTC, wrote Dear Кен Хон Сето! I invite you to familiarize yourself with New...
RECENT FORUM POSTS
Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...
Jorma Seppaenen: "Dear Georgina, I think you are perfectly right about the estimate of age..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...
Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...
Georgina Woodward: "Yes. The estimate of age of the visible universe, and age of stars, other..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...
akash hasan: "Some students have an interest in researching and space exploration. I..." in Announcing Physics of the...
Michael Jordan: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Review of "Foundations of...
Anonymous: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Constructing a Theory of...
Robert McEachern: ""all experiments have pointed towards this and there is no way to avoid..." in Review of "Foundations of...
RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles
Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.
Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.
Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.
Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.
Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.
Ken Seto: on 4/6/17 at 21:43pm UTC, wrote Hi Peter, Thank you for your comments. I don't know you email address so...
Peter Jackson: on 4/6/17 at 18:21pm UTC, wrote Ken, Thanks for the offer of your E book, that's be great thanks, but for...
Ken Seto: on 4/1/17 at 12:56pm UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir, Thank you for your comments. I am glad that we agree that...
sherman jenkins: on 3/31/17 at 6:53am UTC, wrote Ken, So good. I do approve your approach. However, I do believe that the...
sherman jenkins: on 3/31/17 at 6:21am UTC, wrote Eckard, If you are interested in a solution that works. The short answer...
Vladimir Fedorov: on 3/30/17 at 6:32am UTC, wrote Dear Ken, With great interest I read your essay, which of course is...
Satyavarapu Gupta: on 3/18/17 at 10:27am UTC, wrote Hi Seto, I want you to ask you to please have a look at my essay, where...
Dizhechko Semyonovich: on 3/12/17 at 21:47pm UTC, wrote Dear Кен Хон Сето! I invite you to familiarize yourself with New...
RECENT FORUM POSTS
Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...
Jorma Seppaenen: "Dear Georgina, I think you are perfectly right about the estimate of age..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...
Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...
Georgina Woodward: "Yes. The estimate of age of the visible universe, and age of stars, other..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...
akash hasan: "Some students have an interest in researching and space exploration. I..." in Announcing Physics of the...
Michael Jordan: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Review of "Foundations of...
Anonymous: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Constructing a Theory of...
Robert McEachern: ""all experiments have pointed towards this and there is no way to avoid..." in Review of "Foundations of...
RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles
Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.
Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.
Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.
Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.
Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.
FQXi FORUM
May 25, 2019
CATEGORY:
Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017)
[back]
TOPIC: The Processes of Life from Model Mechanics by Ken Hon Seto [refresh]
TOPIC: The Processes of Life from Model Mechanics by Ken Hon Seto [refresh]
Essay Abstract
The content of this essay is lifted from my latest book entitled "Model Mechanics: The Final Theory". Model Mechanics posits that all the particles, all processes and all the forces of nature are the results of absolute motions of fundamental mass bearing particles called the "S-Particle" in a stationary, structured and elastic medium called the E-Matrix. Model Mechanics leads to the discovery of a new fifth force called the CRE force. The CRE force is repulsive between objects moving in the same direction in the E-Matrix. The CRE force in combination with the electromagnetic force lead to a new theory of gravity. Most importantly they lead to all the processes of life including the ability of living cells to divide.
Author Bio
Ken H Seto is a graduate Chemical Engineer. He was a product manager for Protective Treatment company and he developed several major adhesive and sealant products for the automatic and construction industries. He obtained two patents on polymer technology. He published three books on physics and cosmology and the latest is entitled "Model Mechanics: The Final Theory".
Download Essay PDF File
The content of this essay is lifted from my latest book entitled "Model Mechanics: The Final Theory". Model Mechanics posits that all the particles, all processes and all the forces of nature are the results of absolute motions of fundamental mass bearing particles called the "S-Particle" in a stationary, structured and elastic medium called the E-Matrix. Model Mechanics leads to the discovery of a new fifth force called the CRE force. The CRE force is repulsive between objects moving in the same direction in the E-Matrix. The CRE force in combination with the electromagnetic force lead to a new theory of gravity. Most importantly they lead to all the processes of life including the ability of living cells to divide.
Author Bio
Ken H Seto is a graduate Chemical Engineer. He was a product manager for Protective Treatment company and he developed several major adhesive and sealant products for the automatic and construction industries. He obtained two patents on polymer technology. He published three books on physics and cosmology and the latest is entitled "Model Mechanics: The Final Theory".
Download Essay PDF File
Dear Dr. Seto,
Please excuse me for I do not wish to be too critical of your fine essay.
Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.
One real visible Universe must have only one reality. Simple natural reality has nothing to do with any abstract complex musings about imaginary invisible quantum particles.
The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.
A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and comment on its merit.
Joe Fisher, Realist
report post as inappropriate
Please excuse me for I do not wish to be too critical of your fine essay.
Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.
One real visible Universe must have only one reality. Simple natural reality has nothing to do with any abstract complex musings about imaginary invisible quantum particles.
The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.
A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and comment on its merit.
Joe Fisher, Realist
Dear Reader,
As far as I know my essay is the first ever to connect physics and physical interactions to life processes. The discovery of the fifth repulsive "CRE" force is the reason I make this claim. Therefore my essay deserves a fair evaluation. Thank you.
Ken Seto
As far as I know my essay is the first ever to connect physics and physical interactions to life processes. The discovery of the fifth repulsive "CRE" force is the reason I make this claim. Therefore my essay deserves a fair evaluation. Thank you.
Ken Seto
Dear Ken Hon Seto,
The contest FQXi is a competition of ideas. You give original ideas. It's the most important.Yours faithfully,
Vladimir
report post as inappropriate
The contest FQXi is a competition of ideas. You give original ideas. It's the most important.Yours faithfully,
Vladimir
Dear Vladimir,
Thank you for your post.
Current physics needs new ideas and I believe that I have provided some new ideas for consideration.
Sincerely,
Ken Seto
Thank you for your post.
Current physics needs new ideas and I believe that I have provided some new ideas for consideration.
Sincerely,
Ken Seto
Dear Seto
Your concept “Cosmological Repulsive Effect (CRE) Force” is good for explaining attractive and repulsive forces at electron proton levels. But at distant Galaxy level it is not required.
Lets do a small experiment which we did in our school days. Take a bucket and half fill it water. Tie a string to the handle; hold it with your hand. Now spin around yourself. As you...
view entire post
Your concept “Cosmological Repulsive Effect (CRE) Force” is good for explaining attractive and repulsive forces at electron proton levels. But at distant Galaxy level it is not required.
Lets do a small experiment which we did in our school days. Take a bucket and half fill it water. Tie a string to the handle; hold it with your hand. Now spin around yourself. As you...
view entire post
Hi Seto,
I want you to ask you to please have a look at my essay, where ……………reproduction of Galaxies in the Universe is described. Dynamic Universe Model is another mathematical model for Universe. Its mathematics show that the movement of masses will be having a purpose or goal, Different Galaxies will be born and die (quench) etc…just have a look at the essay… “Distances,...
view entire post
I want you to ask you to please have a look at my essay, where ……………reproduction of Galaxies in the Universe is described. Dynamic Universe Model is another mathematical model for Universe. Its mathematics show that the movement of masses will be having a purpose or goal, Different Galaxies will be born and die (quench) etc…just have a look at the essay… “Distances,...
view entire post
Dear Mr. Seto,
I enjoyed this essay, as I have other essays of yours. I find your work stunningly original. I can't myself determine whether your theories are correct. But I am so pleased that there are scientists approaching old problems from new angles. A unified theory is a worthy goal--and few minds are able to propose one. Thanks for your inspiring work.
report post as inappropriate
I enjoyed this essay, as I have other essays of yours. I find your work stunningly original. I can't myself determine whether your theories are correct. But I am so pleased that there are scientists approaching old problems from new angles. A unified theory is a worthy goal--and few minds are able to propose one. Thanks for your inspiring work.
Dear Mr. Rosen,
Thank you for your kind post.
I hope that mainstream scientists will give my ideas consideration.
Sincerely,
Ken Seto
Thank you for your kind post.
I hope that mainstream scientists will give my ideas consideration.
Sincerely,
Ken Seto
I thought your paper was really cool. I have a hard time understanding some of the math but I believe I got most of the big ideas. I have a few questions for you to answer if you like...
Do you think gravity is sound vibrations?
Are the e strings laid out in a mesh pattern (like a window screen)?
Is the evolution that God (and I believe it is he and she - light and darkness) designed for consciousness (I AM / one thought = Infinite thoughts) evolving back to Oneness... that split apart in the beginning to create the physical universe? Could it simply be the division of conscious light that created everything we perceive from our senses?
Good luck with your essay,
William Walker
report post as inappropriate
Do you think gravity is sound vibrations?
Are the e strings laid out in a mesh pattern (like a window screen)?
Is the evolution that God (and I believe it is he and she - light and darkness) designed for consciousness (I AM / one thought = Infinite thoughts) evolving back to Oneness... that split apart in the beginning to create the physical universe? Could it simply be the division of conscious light that created everything we perceive from our senses?
Good luck with your essay,
William Walker
Dear Mr. Walker,
Thank you for your post.
No, I don't believe that gravity is sound vibrations. It is a combination of two opposing forces--an attractive EM force caused by the gravitating objects moving in the same direction in the E-Matrix and a repulsive force caused by the gravitating objects are confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrix.
There is only one equation in the essay--what part of it that your don't understand?
The E-Strings are arranged like window screen in two dimensions.
The consciousness processes involve the recognition of geometric patterns stored in the E-Matrix and the neurons in the brain through previously learning processes.
I hope that I answered your questions adequately.
Sincerely,
Ken Seto
Thank you for your post.
No, I don't believe that gravity is sound vibrations. It is a combination of two opposing forces--an attractive EM force caused by the gravitating objects moving in the same direction in the E-Matrix and a repulsive force caused by the gravitating objects are confined to the divergent structure of the E-Matrix.
There is only one equation in the essay--what part of it that your don't understand?
The E-Strings are arranged like window screen in two dimensions.
The consciousness processes involve the recognition of geometric patterns stored in the E-Matrix and the neurons in the brain through previously learning processes.
I hope that I answered your questions adequately.
Sincerely,
Ken Seto
Hey Ken,
Thanks for the response...
yes that one equation... I am just horrible at math formulas so you probably won't be able to explain it so that I could understand it. Plus I have no formal training beyond H.S. math / physics, so I am trying to learn :)
That's what I thought too with the stings laid out with a vertical axis and a horizontal axis. X & Y
I guess my theory is that all forces whether they attract or repel are frequencies - which I'm assuming is the f in your equation. And if everything is a frequency - then wouldn't everything be some form of sound vibration? Even gravity?
So God (consciousness) in my estimation is all sound frequencies... and God went from one frequency (I AM)...in the beginning... to all frequencies (Infinity)... which was TMI... but then balanced them out by separating these frequencies into visible light and hiding a lot of the frequencies in dark matter creating the spatial universe we see today dominated by darkness.
And I promise not to bug you after this... I'm sure we could continue to infinity and beyond ;)
Best of luck in the contest!
report post as inappropriate
Thanks for the response...
yes that one equation... I am just horrible at math formulas so you probably won't be able to explain it so that I could understand it. Plus I have no formal training beyond H.S. math / physics, so I am trying to learn :)
That's what I thought too with the stings laid out with a vertical axis and a horizontal axis. X & Y
I guess my theory is that all forces whether they attract or repel are frequencies - which I'm assuming is the f in your equation. And if everything is a frequency - then wouldn't everything be some form of sound vibration? Even gravity?
So God (consciousness) in my estimation is all sound frequencies... and God went from one frequency (I AM)...in the beginning... to all frequencies (Infinity)... which was TMI... but then balanced them out by separating these frequencies into visible light and hiding a lot of the frequencies in dark matter creating the spatial universe we see today dominated by darkness.
And I promise not to bug you after this... I'm sure we could continue to infinity and beyond ;)
Best of luck in the contest!
Dear Mr. Walker,
I suggest that you write a paper on your theory and submit it to FQXi so that the community can evaluate it.
Thank you for your interest.
Regards,
Ken Seto
I suggest that you write a paper on your theory and submit it to FQXi so that the community can evaluate it.
Thank you for your interest.
Regards,
Ken Seto
Ken,
I read through the comments before reading your paper, encouraged by the feedback of its originality. It's very true, you've put considerable work into a fresh idea.
I'm at the tip of the iceberg reading through some of the entries in this community (new to it), but it is refreshing to see unique approaches to problems. And the problem that you are trying to tackle - finding cracks in the Standard Model of particles and forces - is the same one that I've been tackling as well. It's fun to see new ideas.
I admit that our approaches are quite different, but there were two similarities that I found in your paper. I do agree that there is a medium (your E-matrix) for light to travel across the universe. It still amazes me that the aether was disregarded long ago. And I also agree with you that there is a fundamental particle (what you called the S-particle) if we continue to dig deeper.
On that last note of finding a fundamental particle, you might have interest in some work that I've been doing with my colleagues:
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2765
Regards
,
Jeff
report post as inappropriate
I read through the comments before reading your paper, encouraged by the feedback of its originality. It's very true, you've put considerable work into a fresh idea.
I'm at the tip of the iceberg reading through some of the entries in this community (new to it), but it is refreshing to see unique approaches to problems. And the problem that you are trying to tackle - finding cracks in the Standard Model of particles and forces - is the same one that I've been tackling as well. It's fun to see new ideas.
I admit that our approaches are quite different, but there were two similarities that I found in your paper. I do agree that there is a medium (your E-matrix) for light to travel across the universe. It still amazes me that the aether was disregarded long ago. And I also agree with you that there is a fundamental particle (what you called the S-particle) if we continue to dig deeper.
On that last note of finding a fundamental particle, you might have interest in some work that I've been doing with my colleagues:
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2765
Regards
,
Jeff
Dear Jeff,
Thank you for reading my paper.
I read your paper. It is good that we have a common goal of finding the one fundamental physical description of our universe that can account for all the particles, all the forces and all the processes of nature.
My physical model of the E-Matrix, the S-Particles and the absolute motions of the S-particles in the E-Matrix give rise to all the elementary particles, all the forces and all the processes of nature is one such possible candidate. if you are interested please send me your email address so I can send you a copy of my ebook.
Regards,
Ken.
Thank you for reading my paper.
I read your paper. It is good that we have a common goal of finding the one fundamental physical description of our universe that can account for all the particles, all the forces and all the processes of nature.
My physical model of the E-Matrix, the S-Particles and the absolute motions of the S-particles in the E-Matrix give rise to all the elementary particles, all the forces and all the processes of nature is one such possible candidate. if you are interested please send me your email address so I can send you a copy of my ebook.
Regards,
Ken.
Hello Mr Hon Seto,
congratulations.You had analysed this emergent consciousness with a wonderful creativity playing with strings and this infinite entropical potential if I can say.The matrix of informations and how you interpret it was a relevant reading.
Thanks for sharing and good luck in this contest.
report post as inappropriate
congratulations.You had analysed this emergent consciousness with a wonderful creativity playing with strings and this infinite entropical potential if I can say.The matrix of informations and how you interpret it was a relevant reading.
Thanks for sharing and good luck in this contest.
Hi Steve,
Thank you for reading my paper.
If you are interested I can send you a copy of my latest ebook.
Regards,
Ken.
Thank you for reading my paper.
If you are interested I can send you a copy of my latest ebook.
Regards,
Ken.
Hi Ken,
You are welcome.I liked it.It is nice, I am interested to know more ,it seems relevant in a general point of vue.
you can send me it. my mail is dufournybionature@gmail.com
Regards
report post as inappropriate
You are welcome.I liked it.It is nice, I am interested to know more ,it seems relevant in a general point of vue.
you can send me it. my mail is dufournybionature@gmail.com
Regards
Hi Ken,
Nice to read about your interesting theory again, written in such a clear and well organized way and modified to address the topic. The 'geometrical pattern imprint' solution to memory and consciousness is in agreement with my own.
Indeed I think and hope you'll enjoy reading mine as it shows that the mechanistic solutions we both promote can remove all the weirdness and confusion in quantum mechanics. I also address why it's so difficult for new theoretical approaches to get more that glimpsed by mainstream. I think mankind must learn to employ more rational organised thinking as opposed to the primevally evolved 'instant' pattern matching we agree on.
Very well done.
Peter
report post as inappropriate
Nice to read about your interesting theory again, written in such a clear and well organized way and modified to address the topic. The 'geometrical pattern imprint' solution to memory and consciousness is in agreement with my own.
Indeed I think and hope you'll enjoy reading mine as it shows that the mechanistic solutions we both promote can remove all the weirdness and confusion in quantum mechanics. I also address why it's so difficult for new theoretical approaches to get more that glimpsed by mainstream. I think mankind must learn to employ more rational organised thinking as opposed to the primevally evolved 'instant' pattern matching we agree on.
Very well done.
Peter
Hi Peter,
Nice to hear from you again.
An excerpt from my book:
"In the past 100 years theoretical physics and cosmology development have been conducted almost exclusively on a mathematical basis, leading to abstract mathematical objects or processes such as fields, space-time, curvature in space-time, time dilation, length contraction, virtual particles, action at a distance, curled-up dimensions, Entanglement, Dark Energy, Dark Matter....etc. It is posited that these abstract mathematical objects may not have existence in our physical universe. This led me to formulate a physical model of our universe that can be used to replace these abstract mathematical objects."
If you are interested I can send you a copy of my ebook.
Regards,
Ken
Nice to hear from you again.
An excerpt from my book:
"In the past 100 years theoretical physics and cosmology development have been conducted almost exclusively on a mathematical basis, leading to abstract mathematical objects or processes such as fields, space-time, curvature in space-time, time dilation, length contraction, virtual particles, action at a distance, curled-up dimensions, Entanglement, Dark Energy, Dark Matter....etc. It is posited that these abstract mathematical objects may not have existence in our physical universe. This led me to formulate a physical model of our universe that can be used to replace these abstract mathematical objects."
If you are interested I can send you a copy of my ebook.
Regards,
Ken
Hi Ken Hon Seto,
Your model mechanics assumes a light-carrying medium called ether. Could you please expain to me how to interpret the outcomes of the famous experiment by Michelson in 1881/1887?
Regards,
Eckard Blumschein
report post as inappropriate
Your model mechanics assumes a light-carrying medium called ether. Could you please expain to me how to interpret the outcomes of the famous experiment by Michelson in 1881/1887?
Regards,
Eckard Blumschein
Hi Eckard,
The structure of the E-Matrix is homogeneous and isotropic....therefore it transmits light isotropically in all directions. This means that there is no specific direction of motion of an object in the E-Matrix is detectable. That's why the MMX null result.
Best,
Ken Seto
The structure of the E-Matrix is homogeneous and isotropic....therefore it transmits light isotropically in all directions. This means that there is no specific direction of motion of an object in the E-Matrix is detectable. That's why the MMX null result.
Best,
Ken Seto
Hi Ken,
With Cusanus we both agree on isotropy of space. Michelson's 1881 and his so called MMX 1887 result require to deny the existence of a priori preferred coordinates of space if there is no preferred point of reference to refer to. There is no alternative, in order to define your matrix, you must arbitrarily choose a localization, e.g. a material object at x=0. Once you have chosen x, the distance x_1 from x=0 can be positive or negative. Michelson demonstrated the opposite.
Best,
Eckard Blumschein
report post as inappropriate
With Cusanus we both agree on isotropy of space. Michelson's 1881 and his so called MMX 1887 result require to deny the existence of a priori preferred coordinates of space if there is no preferred point of reference to refer to. There is no alternative, in order to define your matrix, you must arbitrarily choose a localization, e.g. a material object at x=0. Once you have chosen x, the distance x_1 from x=0 can be positive or negative. Michelson demonstrated the opposite.
Best,
Eckard Blumschein
Hi Eckard,
The object is moving in the E-Matrix....therefore the x-axis is not coincide with the same E-Strings that transmit the original light pulse. The light pulse that arrive at x=1 will need to travel an extra distance of gamma to arrive at x=1. This applies to light pulses traveling in all directions.
Best,
Ken Seto
The object is moving in the E-Matrix....therefore the x-axis is not coincide with the same E-Strings that transmit the original light pulse. The light pulse that arrive at x=1 will need to travel an extra distance of gamma to arrive at x=1. This applies to light pulses traveling in all directions.
Best,
Ken Seto
Dear Кен Хон Сето!
I invite you to familiarize yourself with New Cartesian Physic
I appreciate your essay. You spent a lot of effort to write it.
If you believed in the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes, then your essay would be even better.
I wish to see your criticism on the New Cartesian Physic, the founder of which I call myself.
The concept of moving space-matter helped me:
- The uncertainty principle Heisenberg to make the principle of definiteness of points of space-matter;
- Open the law of the constancy of the flow of forces through a closed surface is the sphere of space-matter;
- Open the law of universal attraction of Lorentz;
- Give the formula for the pressure of the Universe;
- To give a definition of gravitational mass as the flow vector of the centrifugal acceleration across the surface of the corpuscles, etc.
New Cartesian Physic has great potential in understanding the world. To show this potential in his essay I gave The way of The materialist explanation of the paranormal and the supernatural . Visit my essay and you will find something in it about New Cartesian Physic. Note my statement that our brain creates an image of the outside world no inside, and in external space. Hope you rate my essay as high as I am yours. I am waiting your post.
Sincerely,
Dizhechko Boris
report post as inappropriate
I invite you to familiarize yourself with New Cartesian Physic
I appreciate your essay. You spent a lot of effort to write it.
If you believed in the principle of identity of space and matter of Descartes, then your essay would be even better.
I wish to see your criticism on the New Cartesian Physic, the founder of which I call myself.
The concept of moving space-matter helped me:
- The uncertainty principle Heisenberg to make the principle of definiteness of points of space-matter;
- Open the law of the constancy of the flow of forces through a closed surface is the sphere of space-matter;
- Open the law of universal attraction of Lorentz;
- Give the formula for the pressure of the Universe;
- To give a definition of gravitational mass as the flow vector of the centrifugal acceleration across the surface of the corpuscles, etc.
New Cartesian Physic has great potential in understanding the world. To show this potential in his essay I gave The way of The materialist explanation of the paranormal and the supernatural . Visit my essay and you will find something in it about New Cartesian Physic. Note my statement that our brain creates an image of the outside world no inside, and in external space. Hope you rate my essay as high as I am yours. I am waiting your post.
Sincerely,
Dizhechko Boris
Dear Ken,
With great interest I read your essay, which of course is worthy of the highest praise.
I'm glad that you have
«The E-Matrix is a stationary and structured light-conducting medium. It occupies all of pure space (pure void). It is comprised of very thin and elastic E-Strings».
Your assumptions are very close to me
«Model Mechanics replaces the math constructs of space-time of Relativity Theories and the fields/virtual particles of Quantum Field Theories».
«All the processes of nature are the results of different absolute motions of the S-Particles or S-Particle systems in the E-Matrix».
You might also like reading my essay , where the fractal principle of the device of matter is substantiate.
I wish you success in the contest.
Kind regards,
Vladimir
report post as inappropriate
With great interest I read your essay, which of course is worthy of the highest praise.
I'm glad that you have
«The E-Matrix is a stationary and structured light-conducting medium. It occupies all of pure space (pure void). It is comprised of very thin and elastic E-Strings».
Your assumptions are very close to me
«Model Mechanics replaces the math constructs of space-time of Relativity Theories and the fields/virtual particles of Quantum Field Theories».
«All the processes of nature are the results of different absolute motions of the S-Particles or S-Particle systems in the E-Matrix».
You might also like reading my essay , where the fractal principle of the device of matter is substantiate.
I wish you success in the contest.
Kind regards,
Vladimir
Dear Vladimir,
Thank you for your comments.
I am glad that we agree that space without a medium is "unthinkable". Physicists invented different terms such as "spacetime" and "fields/virtual particles" to replace the "medium" and the effects of particles moving in the "medium" caused different geometries in the "medium" lead to the current dead ends in the developments of theoretical physics and cosmology.
I read your essay and I enjoyed it very much. I gave it a very high rating.
Best,
Ken
Thank you for your comments.
I am glad that we agree that space without a medium is "unthinkable". Physicists invented different terms such as "spacetime" and "fields/virtual particles" to replace the "medium" and the effects of particles moving in the "medium" caused different geometries in the "medium" lead to the current dead ends in the developments of theoretical physics and cosmology.
I read your essay and I enjoyed it very much. I gave it a very high rating.
Best,
Ken
Ken,
So good. I do approve your approach. However, I do believe that the vacuum structure is built from bits of ‘fractional unit’ charge.
Sherman
report post as inappropriate
So good. I do approve your approach. However, I do believe that the vacuum structure is built from bits of ‘fractional unit’ charge.
Sherman
Ken,
Thanks for the offer of your E book, that's be great thanks, but for after the scoring. We still have much in common and it would be good to check exactly what. I'm just about to score yours with a top mark.
I haven't seen you over on mine yet and hope you get the chance before friday - it really does identify a major advancement this year, see some of the blog posts!
Well done for yours, again.
Peter
PS; after do check out Chandrasekhar Roychoudhuri's essay, it's brilliant!
report post as inappropriate
Thanks for the offer of your E book, that's be great thanks, but for after the scoring. We still have much in common and it would be good to check exactly what. I'm just about to score yours with a top mark.
I haven't seen you over on mine yet and hope you get the chance before friday - it really does identify a major advancement this year, see some of the blog posts!
Well done for yours, again.
Peter
PS; after do check out Chandrasekhar Roychoudhuri's essay, it's brilliant!
Hi Peter,
Thank you for your comments.
I don't know you email address so I will not be able to send you my ebook.
I agree that we have common ideas and we should explore further via email communications.
I gave you essay the top rating and hope you will win.
Regards,
Ken
Thank you for your comments.
I don't know you email address so I will not be able to send you my ebook.
I agree that we have common ideas and we should explore further via email communications.
I gave you essay the top rating and hope you will win.
Regards,
Ken
Login or create account to post reply or comment.