Mr Seto,
Let us do a Wheeler.
Is the Universe real? Yes
Is mathematics real? No
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.
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
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
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
Hello, Ken,
The most important thing in the FQXi-new ideas. You have a lot of new revolutionary ideas. We are close to you in spirit, especially the idea of "absolute motion." Excellent rating. Best regards, Vladimir
Hi Vladimir,
Thank you for your comments and the rating. I hope that others will join in the revolution.
Please visit my website for more papers on my theory.
http://www.modelmechanics.org/
regards,
Ken
Hi All,
I am disappointed that there is only ONE public rating on my essay.
Ken Seto
Dear Ken Hon Seto,
I will give you high rating if you go through my essay and post your comments on it in my thread.
Regards and good luck in the contest,
Sreenath
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827
Hi Ken,
I invite you to read my essay and also put a fair rating. I read with interest the study on your site. Regards, Vladimir