• [deleted]

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

      6 days later

      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

        5 days later

        Hi All,

        I am disappointed that there is only ONE public rating on my essay.

        Ken Seto

        6 days later

        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

        Ken,

        I truly enjoyed your insight and innovative theory of Model Mechanics. Although you have a different approach than I do, I find your analytical findings inspiring and most worthy of merit.

        I have visited your web site and have bookmarked it for future reading. I wish you good luck with your entry.

        Best wishes,

        Manuel

        Dear Ken,

        Thanks for your kind comments on my essay and also for rating it very highly. Just now I have also rated your essay accordingly with maximum possible points.

        Sincerely,

        Sreenath

        Ken

        Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech

        (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1965/feynman-lecture.html)

        said: "It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show the relationship. And example of this is the Schrodinger equation and the Heisenberg formulation of quantum mechanics. I don't know why that is - it remains a mystery, but it was something I learned from experience. There is always another way to say the same thing that doesn't look at all like the way you said it before. I don't know what the reason for this is. I think it is somehow a representation of the simplicity of nature."

        I too believe in the simplicity of nature, and I am glad that Richard Feynman, a Nobel-winning famous physicist, also believe in the same thing I do, but I had come to my belief long before I knew about that particular statement.

        The belief that "Nature is simple" is however being expressed differently in my essay "Analogical Engine" linked to http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1865 .

        Specifically though, I said "Planck constant is the Mother of All Dualities" and I put it schematically as: wave-particle ~ quantum-classical ~ gene-protein ~ analogy- reasoning ~ linear-nonlinear ~ connected-notconnected ~ computable-notcomputable ~ mind-body ~ Bit-It ~ variation-selection ~ freedom-determinism ... and so on.

        Taken two at a time, it can be read as "what quantum is to classical" is similar to (~) "what wave is to particle." You can choose any two from among the multitudes that can be found in our discourses.

        I could have put Schrodinger wave ontology-Heisenberg particle ontology duality in the list had it comes to my mind!

        Since "Nature is Analogical", we are free to probe nature in so many different ways. And each of us surely must have touched some corners of it.

        Good luck and good cheers!

        Than Tin

        Dear Ken,

        A model worth looking at. In particular I will study more your mechanism for action-at-a distance. Will appreciate a look at my essay and rate if you like it.

        Thanks,

        Akinbo