Essay Abstract

A new physical model of our universe called Model Mechanics has been formulated. Model Mechanics posits that a structured and elastic medium called the E-Matrix occupies all of pure space. The S-Particles are the only mass bearing fundamental particles that exist in our universe. The different absolute motions of the S-Particles in the E-Matrix give rise to all the different basic particles such as the electron and quarks. Also the different absolute motions of the S-Particles or S-Particle systems give rise to physical explanation for all the forces, processes and interactions in our universe. Specifically Model Mechanics gives rise to a new theory of gravity called DTG and a new theory of relativity called IRT. DTG in combination with IRT provides physical solutions to the following problematic observations of the current theories: 1.The accelerated expansion of the far reached regions of our universe; 2. Dark Energy; 3. Dark Matter; 4. The horizon problem; 5. The galactic rotational curve problem; 6. The Pioneer 10 does not follow the predicted path of the current theories. In short Model Mechanics is a viable candidate for a theory of everything.

Author Bio

Ken H. Seto obtained a Chemical Engineering degree from Queen's University. He worked as a Technical Representative for Polymer Corporation. He obtained a Patent on Polymer Technology. He worked as Product Manager for Protective Treatment Inc and I developed several successful products for the automotive and construction industries. He obtained another patent on Polymer Technology. He established Seto Chemical Co. and qualified as a GM supplier for adhesive and sealant products. He published following books: 1. Model Mechanics: A New Interpretation of Nature. ISBN0-9647136-0-8 2. The Physics of Absolute Motion. SIBN 0-9647136-1-6

Download Essay PDF File

Mr Seto,

Although I have no doubt that your meticulous description of the behavior of abstract forces and elements would work perfectly in an abstract universe, I have gone to great trouble in my essay BITTERS to list all of the real absolutes the real Universe obeys.

One (1) real Universe can only be eternally occurring in one real here and now while perpetually traveling at one real "speed" of light through one real infinite dimension once. One is the absolute of everything. (1) is the absolute of number. Real is the absolute of being. Universe is the absolute of energy. Eternal is the absolute of duration. Occurring is the absolute of action. Here and now are absolutes of location and time. Perpetual is the absolute of ever. Traveling is the absolute of conveyance method. Light is the absolute of speed. Infinite dimension is the absolute of distance and once is the absolute of history.

    Ken,

    While I can't say that this essay is all that compatible with the contest-topic (correct me if I'm wrong), I enjoyed it thoroughly and is the only essay thus far that I've bothered to print out and add to my article collection. All the best to you!

      John,

      Thank you for your kind words. I think that my essay is compatible with the contest-topic becsue it is a proposed theory of everything.

      If you are intersted please visit my website for more papers on my theory.

      Sincerely,

      Ken

      Mr. Fisher,

      I don't think that you can compare my essay with yours directly to reach your conclusions that your assumtpions are real while my assumptions are abstractive and not real. Your essay is more of a philosophical and non-mathematical while my essay have some math and is based on a simple physical model.

      Sincerely,

      Ken Seto

      Mr Seto,

      Let us do a Wheeler.

      Is the Universe real? Yes

      Is mathematics real? No

      Mr Fisher,

      Are you saying that any theory has math is not real? In that case, how does your theory makes prediction?

      Mr. Seto,

      I am a decrepit old realist. I know what reality is because although my eyesight is poor, I can still make out most of the visible stuff whenever I open my eyes. I do not need any information, especially abstract mathematical information to be transmitted to me in order for me to know what reality is. I especially do not need any scientific contraption to enhance my visual acuity so that I may get to see stuff that would otherwise be invisible. My feeble old brain is being challenged enough keeping track of the visible stuff without it being overwhelmed figuring out what the behavior of the invisible stuff could reliably be.

      As I do not have a theory about reality, I cannot give you any predictions. I do know for sure that it will rain or go dark before morning in my locality.

      7 days later

      Ken,

      Is the 'pure void' part of the matrix itself? Do the E-Strings S-Particles compose the entire continuum, or does this 'pure void' constitute a kind of 3rd component? Or are gaps themselves never 'voids' in that they are filled by EM-wave structures if ever a 'void' exists? Hope this makes sense.

      John

      • [deleted]

      • Post #11

      Dear Hoang,

      Model Mechanics is a good candidate for a TOE. I agree that it is unlikely that we can detect the S-Particles directly. However we can detect its effects on massive objects....for example: the anomalous galactic rotational curves are caused by a concentration of free S-Particles in the galactic center. The divergent structure of the E-Matrix gives rise to a repulsive effect between massive objects supports the observed weak strength of the gravitational force compared to the electromagnetic force.

      Please let me know if you have any further questions.

      Sincerely,

      Ken

      John,

      The E-Matrix occupies all the pure void. Yes, the E-Strings the S-Particles compose the entire continuum. The S-Patricles are repulsive to the E-Strings and thus they maintain their motion in the E-Matrix. A photon is a wave-packet in neighboring E-Strings. It follows the geometries of these E-Strings on it way to the target.

      A schematic drawing of the photon is available in the following link:

      http://www.modelmechanics.org/2011experiment.pdf

      Ken

      Hai.Caothoahg,

      I suggest that you read my paper in the following link carefully.

      http://www.modelmechanics.org/2011unification.pdf

      Ken

      Hi John,

      Looks like a lot of time and effort has gone into your ToE. I too am interested in this type of unification of forces. What conclusions did you reach re- It from Bit or vice versa?

      I've not gone down the same route as you on this occasion but utilised geometry crossed with the Fibonacci Sequence. If you get chance I'd be glad to hear your thoughts on my essay.

      Best wishes,

      Antony

        Apologies Ken - I was just reading the last thread you had with John C Maguire.

        Mr. Fisher,

        Good luck with your approach.

        Ken Seto

        Antony,

        No problem. I suggest that you visit my website for more information about my theory.

        http://www.modelmechanics.org/

        Especially the paper in the following link:

        http://www.modelmechanics.ofg/2011universe.pdf

        Best,

        Ken

        5 days later

        Hi Ken,

        Bookmarker it!

        Cheers & best wishes for the contest,

        Antony

        Ken,

        I recall reading about model mechanics before, but not you haven't submitted an essay previously. I must have visited your web page.

        Fascinating theory and original ideas, it's just a shame it's so difficult to prove or even evidence anything at such scales. However the cracks in mainstream doctrine are now showing through the patches so anything credible may be looked at more seriously.

        It's a bit of a shame you didn't address this years topic a 'bit' more directly (lol) and that may contribute to your low placing so far. When I come to scoring I'll base it more on quality than direct relevance or whether my thoughts at the time happen to coincide in every detail with the authors.

        I'd be interested to read your comments on my own essay which finds much empirical evidence and gives a practical test of the power of the proposal. I think our fundamental assumption that there must be something with a 'state of motion' are importantly in agreement. From then on anything becomes possible!

        Well done

        Peter

          Ken,

          If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, "It's good to be the king," is serious about our subject.

          Jim

          Peter,

          Thank you for reading my essay.

          The low rating of my essay is understandable. It represents a complete overturn of mainstream paradigm. In a way, I expected this kind of reaction. I post in the news group sci.physics.relativity. The mainstream physicists there reacted to me violently.

          Although my essay appears to be off topic. However, it is a proposed theory of everything so in that sense it is on topic.

          I agree with you that there is a crack in the mainstream doctrine and in time mainstream physicists will come around and evaluate some of these new ideas presnted in the internet.

          I will read your paper.

          Regards,

          Ken