Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

The Origin of Life as Interpreted by Model Mechanics.

4 views
Skip to first unread message

kenseto

unread,
Nov 18, 2012, 11:39:34 AM11/18/12
to set...@att.net
A paper entitled "The Origin of Life as Interpreted by Model Mechanics"
is available in the following link:
http://www.modelmechanics.org/2011life.pdf

Sam Wormley

unread,
Nov 18, 2012, 12:36:19 PM11/18/12
to
Seto's first section starts out, "The Current State of Our Universe
Model Mechanics supposes that a stationary substance, called the
"E-Matrix", occupies all of pure-space (void) in our Universe.

I would like Seto to recall that Galileo pointed out, "Hidden
in the law of inertia is the fact that whether a body is in motion
or at rest depends strictly on the point of view of the observer".

So the idea of "a stationary substance" begs the question, stationary
with respect to what?

Einstein showed that the idea of an absolute space and time is not
the way the universe is. There are no preferred frames and no
absolute references.


alie...@gmail.com

unread,
Nov 18, 2012, 1:01:27 PM11/18/12
to
Internal consistency fail.

If your E-matrix is elastic, bits of it can move WRT each other,
hence it can not be stationary.


Mark L. Fererson

Jimmy Kesler

unread,
Nov 18, 2012, 4:14:49 PM11/18/12
to
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 11:36:19 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote:

> Seto's first section starts out, "The Current State of Our Universe
> Model Mechanics supposes that a stationary substance, called the
> "E-Matrix", occupies all of pure-space (void) in our Universe.

You just cant have a matrix that pops out of nowhere, not having vectors
and scalars involved, I suppose

--

kenseto

unread,
Nov 18, 2012, 6:56:01 PM11/18/12
to
On Sunday, November 18, 2012 12:36:20 PM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 11/18/12 10:39 AM, kenseto wrote:
>
> > A paper entitled "The Origin of Life as Interpreted by Model Mechanics"
>
> > is available in the following link:
>
> > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2011life.pdf
>
> >
>
>
>
> Seto's first section starts out, "The Current State of Our Universe
>
> Model Mechanics supposes that a stationary substance, called the
>
> "E-Matrix", occupies all of pure-space (void) in our Universe.
>
>
>
> I would like Seto to recall that Galileo pointed out, "Hidden
>
> in the law of inertia is the fact that whether a body is in motion
>
> or at rest depends strictly on the point of view of the observer".

Hey wormy I don't care what Galileo said. In Model Mechanics
all objects in the E-Matrix are moving within it.
>
> So the idea of "a stationary substance" begs the question, stationary
>
> with respect to what?

Stationary wrt all the objects moving inside it.
>
>
>
> Einstein showed that the idea of an absolute space and time is not
>
> the way the universe is. There are no preferred frames and no
>
> absolute references.

Einsteinis wrong and that's why his SR/and GR are full of
self-contradictory paradoxes.

kenseto

unread,
Nov 18, 2012, 7:01:04 PM11/18/12
to
You misunderstood....the E-Matrix is not in a state of absolute rest
It is stationary wrt all the objects moving within it.

kenseto

unread,
Nov 18, 2012, 7:05:20 PM11/18/12
to
You failed to undertand that all theories must have fundamental
assumptions and the E-Matrix is my fundamental assumption.

Big Dog

unread,
Nov 19, 2012, 4:05:37 AM11/19/12
to
On 11/18/2012 5:56 PM, kenseto wrote:
> On Sunday, November 18, 2012 12:36:20 PM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:

>>
>> So the idea of "a stationary substance" begs the question, stationary
>>
>> with respect to what?
>
> Stationary wrt all the objects moving inside it.

Classic Seto.

Big Dog

unread,
Nov 19, 2012, 4:06:54 AM11/19/12
to
On 11/18/2012 6:01 PM, kenseto wrote:

> You misunderstood....the E-Matrix is not in a state of absolute rest
> It is stationary wrt all the objects moving within it.

No, I take it back, this is even better Seto.

0 new messages