Re: Is Ken Seto Genius or Madman?
From: kenseto (kenseto_at_erinet.com)
Date: 02/18/05
- Next message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: zetasum: "R*volume*raduis2 c3po "Theroy of everything""
- In reply to: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Is Ken Seto Genius or Madman?"
- Next in thread: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Is Ken Seto Genius or Madman?"
- Reply: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Is Ken Seto Genius or Madman?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 20:24:36 GMT
"Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> wrote in message
news:%I6Rd.32829$6u.27726@fed1read02...
> kenseto wrote:
> > "Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> wrote in message
> > news:izIPd.21589$6u.6591@fed1read02...
> >
> >> kenseto wrote:
> >>
> >>> "A.S." <arnoldschrod68@go.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:1108246357.454845.92340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>>> kenseto wrote:
> >>
> >> <brevity snip>
> >>
> >>>> You stated in your paper that there is only one particle in the
> >>>> universe called S-Particle and the way it moves around the
> >>>> E-String give rises to all the particles and forces in physics.
> >>>> You also mentioned about E-Matrix.
> >>
> >>> The E-Matrix is a term used to represent all the E-Strings
> >>> occupying all of space. IOW the E-Matrix is space.
> >>
> >> And this "E-matrix" must not move in whole or in part, otherwise
> >> there's no background against which to measure Absolute Motion.
> >> Right?
>
> > Not right. Absolute motion is that motion of an object (an S-Particle
> > or an S-Particle system) wrt the wave packets (photons) in the
> > E-Matrix. Each of these wave packets are being transmitted by the
> > neighboring E-Strings at a speed c.
>
> Ah, you have Absolute Motion wrt light.
>
> How can anything be transmitted from one E-string to a "neighboring"
> one if the E-strings fill _all of space_? What's between the E-strings?
Lights are wave-packets in E-Strings. Each wave-packet (a photon) is
composed of blocks of waves in neighboring E-Strings and these blocks of
waves move coherently along these neighboring E-Strings at speed c to give
the apparent of a particle. This is the reason why light appears to have
duality characteristics. For a description of a photon please visit my
website and click on to the section entitled "Past Experiments Detecting
Absolute Motion".
http://www.erinet.com/kenseto/book.html
There is void between the E-Strings.
>
> >>>> So in your hypotheses that we are all moving with respect to
> >>>> the Aether.
> >>
> >>> The E-Matrix is the aether. The E-Matrix is stationary and
> >>> elastic. It can be deformed with the passage of particles and the
> >>> deformation is recovered after the passage of the S-Particle.
> >>
> >> Then the part of this "E-matrix" in the act of being deformed or
> >> recovering from a deformation has motion WRT the part(s) of it not
> >> being deformed or recovering from a deformation.
>
> > No....there is no motion between different regions of the E-Matrix.
> > Any local deformation becomes global deformation due to the fact that
> > the E-Strings are elastic and are repulsive to each other.
>
> What definition of "deform" are you using that does not include motion
> of component parts wrt each other?
You push on a piece of rubber you get deformation (distortion) throughout
the rubber. That's what I mean by deformation (distortion)
>
> How can a deformation propagate in a medium whose parts are incapable
> of moving wrt each other?
The deformation will move along with the particle that deforms the
surrounding E-Strings
>
> FTM, what do you propose as the propagation velocity of these
> deformations?
The deformation move at the same speed as the motion of the particles in the
E-Matrix.
>
> >> How do you tell if the part of this "E-matrix" you're doing your
> >> measurements in isn't already deformed and by how much?
>
> > The S-Particle system is doing the measurements. The measurement
> > result is dependent on the deformation of the E-Strings to which the
> > S-Particle system is confined.
>
> Then it can also measure the deformation of "neighboring" E-strings
> via the photons propagated from them.
Yes it measures the deformation as well as the wave-packets that are being
transmitted by the E-Strings.
>
> >> IOW, if an "S-particle" is orbiting an already-deformed "E-string",
> >> its motion must differ from that of one orbiting an undisturbed
> >> "E-string".
>
> > An orbiting S-Particle will react to the deformation or waves in the
> > E-String(s) to which it is confined by the orbiting motion. This
> > reaction of the orbiting S-Particles to the geometry of the E-Stirngs
> > is the observed action-at-a-distance.
>
> How does the geometry of the E-strings change without them moving wrt
> each other?
They all deform together as the particles are moving through them.
>
> >>>> Is the E-Matrix itself moving too
> >>
> >>> No...the E-Matrix comprised of the E-Strings is not moving. That
> >>> means that the E-Strings are not moving. But thye E-Strings can
> >>> be deformed (or distorted) by the passage of the S-Particles.
> >>
> >> Then when "deformed", some part of it has motion WRT the rest of
> >> it. How do you tell if the part of space you're doing your
> >> measurements in isn't already "deformed"?
>
> > I already explained this earlier.
>
> No, you didn't. How can anything deform when its constituent parts
> cannot move wrt each other?
The E-Strings are repulsive to each other. So if one is deformed the other
next to it will also be deformed.
>
> >>>> or is it just the E-String or S-Particle?
> >>
> >>> Only the S-Particles are moving in the stationary E-Matrix.
> >>
> >> Except those "E-strings" in the act of being deformed, or
> >> rebounding from that deformation.
>
> > No...the E-Matrix is like a giant rubber ball if one region is
> > distorted the whole ball is distorted.
>
> Poor analogy. The parts of a rubber ball do indeed move wrt each other.
You can say that if you want.
>
> >>>> And how the hell would S-Particle moving around the E-String in
> >>>> a moving E-Matrix (?) create matter?
> >>
> >>> An S-Particle orbiting around an E-String in the counterclockwise
> >>> orbiting motion is negatively charged particle such as the
> >>> electron.
> >>
> >> "Counterclockwise" as seen from which end? Does your system give
> >> Absolute Direction as well as Absolute Motion?
>
> > There is no outside observer. Each orbiting S-Particle will react
> > with another orbiting S-Particle according to the direction of
> > orbiting motion.
>
> Who said anything about outside observers? I take your explanation to
> mean another S-particle orbiting the same E-string.
>
> Here's an E-string with an orbiting S-particle:
>
> ^
> |
> ------------S------------
>
> The arrow indicates that its orbiting that seen from the left end of
> the E-string is counterclockwise. However, seen from the right-hand end,
> it's orbiting clockwise.
The S-Particle is in a left handed (counterclockwise) or a right handed
(clockwise)cork screw like motion along an E-String. This is also known as
chirality. To us as an observer the S-Particles of an electron is in a
state of counterclockwise orbiting motion around an E-String.
>
> BTW, if the E-matrix fills all of space, where's there room for the
> S-particles to orbit the E-strings?
Between the E-Strings and the S-Particles and the E-Strings are repulsive to
each other.
>
> > If they are orbiting in the same direction then they will attract to
> > each other. If they are orbiting in the opposite direction then they
> > will repel each other. I assigned the counterclockwise orbiting
> > motion to represent a negatively charged particle because an electron
> > neutrino shows a left handed cork screw (counterclockwise) like
> > motion in space.
>
> Why didn't you just say that? BTW, neutrinos are right-handed when
> seen from behind. They don't move at c.
>
> >>> An S-Particle orbiting around an E-String in a clockwise orbiting
> >>> motion is a positively charge particle such as the up-quark.
> >>
> >> "Clockwise" as seen from which end? Does your system give Absolute
> >> Direction as well as Absolute Motion?
>
> > See above explanation.
>
> Fine, except seen from the other end of the string it's going
> counterclockwise. Is it therefore negatively charged on that side?
No....the negative charged particle is a left handed cork screw orbiting
motion. This is true no matter which end you are looking at it.
>
> Mark L. Fergerson
- Next message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: zetasum: "R*volume*raduis2 c3po "Theroy of everything""
- In reply to: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Is Ken Seto Genius or Madman?"
- Next in thread: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Is Ken Seto Genius or Madman?"
- Reply: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Is Ken Seto Genius or Madman?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|