Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Frank DiMeglio: on 10/5/12 at 5:39am UTC, wrote My essay should win this contest in keeping with the following great...

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 4:53am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Georgina Parry: on 10/1/12 at 4:47am UTC, wrote Dear Frank, I'd like you to know that I have read your essay from...

Frank DiMeglio: on 9/24/12 at 19:54pm UTC, wrote This essay fundamentally and generally unifies physics. George Ellis and...

Frank DiMeglio: on 9/21/12 at 14:55pm UTC, wrote George and FQXi.org, our FUNDAMENTAL (and general) growth and becoming...

Frank DiMeglio: on 9/21/12 at 7:51am UTC, wrote The ultimate understanding of physics (as it is proven in this essay)...

Frank DiMeglio: on 9/19/12 at 3:17am UTC, wrote George Ellis said in response to my essay: "But dreams can't be significant...

Frank DiMeglio: on 9/18/12 at 17:55pm UTC, wrote ATTENTION: ALL FQXi.org members, readers, reviewers, and all people who...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "State latency is an explanation for the results of Stern Gerlach experiment..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Eckard Blumschein: "Isn't symmetry simply closely related to redundancy even if physicist may..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Robert Rise: "Meet many types of women on ihookup. Some dates better than others. It is..." in Time in Physics & Entropy...

Steve Dufourny: "FQXI you too I need your help, come all too we have a work to do there..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Steve Dufourny: "lol REVOLUTION SPHERISATION everywhere at all scales,REVOLUTION..." in Alternative Models of...

Georgina Woodward: "The kind of time required, over which the material change is happening, (to..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
October 24, 2019

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: This is the Definitive and Fundamental Unification of Force/Energy by Frank Martin DiMeglio [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 4, 2012 @ 11:15 GMT
Essay Abstract

This paper examines the physics of waking and dream experience in conjunction with the following main ideas. Dreams fundamentally involve, incorporate, and include instantaneity. The space is visible, invisible, and not visible in a balanced and equivalent fashion (as it is both seen and felt) in conjunction with gravitational, electromagnetic, and inertial equivalency and balancing. (This includes balanced and equivalent attraction and repulsion.) Both F=ma and true/real quantum gravity are fundamentally demonstrated in dreams. Space manifests as fundamentally equivalent and balanced gravitational/electromagnetic/inertial force/energy in dreams, thereby demonstrating both F=ma and real/true quantum gravity. All of us originate (and grow) at/from the center of the human body. The physics of waking experience is also closely and fundamentally examined in relation to that of dream experience.

Author Bio

B.S. degree (cum laude), Geography and Environmental Planning, Towson University, 1987. Finishing second book. Broad and diverse knowledge base including many published areas of interest.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 6, 2012 @ 16:11 GMT
Dear readers -- This essay is a major and fundamental breakthrough in physics. The essential link between waking and dream experience is clearly shown. Moreover, the physics of waking experience in this essay is also a major and fundamental advancement in physics.

Some other important points to consider when reading the essay:

1) My actual (personal) experience has shown/demonstrated/represented that the actual FIELD OF VISION (visual experience) is reduced by half in dreams.

2) Only you experience what you experience, and only YOU experience YOUR body.

Dream experience and waking experience are typical, common, ordinary, and (importantly) SHARED experiences.

3) In the absence of gravity, we are literally out of touch with reality.

4) As the philosopher Bishop Berkeley said (very importantly) "The purpose of vision is to advise of the consequences of touch in time." Consider this when reading the essay.

5) Physics happens in and with time.

Questions are quite welcome. Thanks!

Bookmark and Share



Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 9, 2012 @ 03:06 GMT
Two more very important points when reviewing and considering this essay:

1) Space is ALSO NOT VISIBLE when the EYES ARE CLOSED. GIVE THIS CAREFUL AND COMPLETE [COMPARATIVE] CONSIDERATION IN THIS ESSAY PLEASE. Thanks.

2) The black space of the eye basically/almost goes down to a point in comparison with the ground. The comparative notion/concepts of something and nothing are quite helpful here when reviewing this essay.

Let's get some ratings, comments, questions, and reviews going here folks, please. Thanks. This essay is clearly fundamental and central to physics.

Bookmark and Share



Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 11, 2012 @ 16:26 GMT
Reality is fundamentally potential, actual, and thoughtful/theoretical. My essay proves this definitively, generally, and fundamentally. This is most fundamental to physics. Ultimate reality involves the truth.

Bookmark and Share



Constantinos Ragazas wrote on Sep. 12, 2012 @ 02:56 GMT
Dear Frank,

'Flying dreams' were my favorite while a boy. They still are. But rarely have them anymore. Your efforts for a physics of/in/about dreams are applaudable. But here is where I get stuck! Are my dreams the same as your dreams?

Still, your essay presents new possibilities understanding human nature. Well worth the effort!

Best wishes,

Constantinos

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio replied on Sep. 12, 2012 @ 15:09 GMT
Hi Constantinos. Thank you for your good question. The dream has a SHARED and fundamental SAMENESS of physical structure that is extremely well ordered. On balance, there is increased variability/difference of dream experience as well.

My essay fully and fundamentally accounts for the physics of dreams, and the link between waking physics and dream physics is demonstrated/shown as well.

Bookmark and Share



Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 13, 2012 @ 00:49 GMT
I have fundamentally demonstrated F=ma in my essay by demonstrating fundamentally balanced, averaged, and equivalent inertia and gravity (both at half strength/force) that involves fundamentally balanced and averaged acceleration as well. This is a huge accomplishment/breakthrough in physics. Indeed, combining, balancing, and including opposites IS the way to fundamentally and truly unify physics. My essay proves this.

Bookmark and Share



Member George F. R. Ellis wrote on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 05:34 GMT
Dear Frank

Dreams are an outcome of physics, not the basis of physics.

"Dreams demonstrate quantum gravity. Dreams involve how a larger space is made smaller, and how a smaller space is made larger. Quantum gravity requires that opposites be combined and balanced. Inertial and gravitational equivalency and balancing involves fundamentally balanced and equivalent attraction and...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Sep. 16, 2012 @ 17:34 GMT
Hi Frank,

Dreams are just another way of our perception of what we call "reality".

When I dream I am using the input from the same Subjective Simultaneity Sphere as when I am awake, mankind is not yet able to become "hyperawake", and to control our non-causal consciousness (I know you read my essay, thanks for tha comments, I answered them there). Although I had dreams where I got information that was not on my SSS, but came directly from the TS and my non causal consciousness, which was one of the initial causes that made me construct my perception of Total Simultaneity.

best regards

Wilhelmus

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sridattadev wrote on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 17:43 GMT
Dear Frank,

To the truly awakened, one who experiences the singularity, there are no more dreams but the reality of the self. For those who are still in duality, dreams are alternative possible realities (multi verses and parallel worlds) if they really wish to make them realize.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 15:31 GMT
George, thought is integrated and interactive in and with the range of feeling (and physics) that is experienced by the body. Thought, emotion, AND feeling. Dreams are not a "creation of thought". What does this mean anyway George? The "brain" is a visual experience, so what exactly do you mean by this term? How do you "derive laws independent of the human mind" (as you say) George? Thoughts and emotions are differentiated feelings. George, read and consider THE WHOLE ESSAY. You are incompletely, inconsistently, and unsuccessfully trying to pick it apart in pieces of your own design. Anybody can see that.

Define "brain", "thought", and "mind" (exactly and precisely) George. I want to know what you mean by these terms as you are using them. Also, tell me how they are understood apart from each other as well. You think they all mean the same thing? You said: "Science is to do with reproducible phenomena that can be used to derive laws independent of the human mind." This sentence doesn't make any sense. Mind involves thought, right? Seriously George, what are you talking about? Do you even know?

Sridattadev -- The self is conscious and yet relatively unconscious in the experience of the dream. Dreams are demonstrative of our growth and becoming other than we are IN AND WITH TIME.

Wilhelmus -- We disagree. I do not understand your position. It is not intelligible, and it is certainly incomplete. Watch using undefined words that do not have clear, precise, and generally understood meaning/significance.

Modern physics is about controlling, reducing, replacing, and reconfiguring sensory experience in conjunction with making money. The proof that I have offered here, and in my other related and supporting works as well, is about our [real and true] natural GROWTH and development as this relates to the true ADVANCEMENT of ourselves and our understanding. This essay constitutes definitive and final proof as to why BOTH the [GENERAL/OVERALL] approach AND understanding of modern physics is so lost, fragmented/inconsistent, divided, unintelligible, and floundering. We must consider the unhealthy effects of [significantly] making our experience inanimate and unnatural. Indeed, this essay is extremely important for many reasons.

It is amazing how little of my essay is being discussed. The essay places clear, inevitable, and ultimate limits on our ability to predict, describe (including mathematically), reconfigure, and realitically control [sensory] experience. This essay is all about the proven and demonstrated limits of physical understanding GENERALLY and FUNDAMENTALLY.

READERS -- Also see my comments to George on his essay page as well please. This essay is about physics. DREAM PHYSICS, WAKING PHYSICS, AND THE ESSENTIAL [PROVEN] LINK BETWEEN THE TWO STATES.

Bookmark and Share



Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 17:55 GMT
ATTENTION: ALL FQXi.org members, readers, reviewers, and all people who will rate this essay:

Our growth and becoming other than we are fundamentally, generally, and necessarily involve the laws of physics at a most fundamental, extensive, comprehensive, and basic level in keeping with the fact that the self represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience. My essay clearly and thoroughly proves this.

The self represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience. (Even George Ellis has already agreed that this is true.)

If the self did not represent, form, and experience a comprehensive approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience, we would then be incapable of growth and of becoming other than we are. Obviously, this is/involves physics. My essay proves it.

Dreams are demonstrative of our growth and becoming other than we are in and with time.

Bookmark and Share



Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 19, 2012 @ 03:17 GMT
George Ellis said in response to my essay: "But dreams can't be significant for how physics operates: its the other way round, in the end physics underlies dreams somehow because physics underlies the brain."

George, you have said/implied that dreams are the physics of the brain in your clever and evasive wording; as my essay clearly proves that this is entirely untrue. George, I'm going to have to caution you here on being honest, fair, and up front. You have ignored many of my posts/points in your essay discussion page, and the Community Ranking of my essay is a joke and is outrageous. George, do not misrepresent and twist facts. Look at your pathetic post on this essay page. Is that what my essay says and proves? No, it is not. It's not right, and it's not fair George. The physics/reality of dream experience includes all 5 senses, gravity, feeling, bodily experience, thought, emotion, desire, electromagnetism, inertia, vision/sight, hearing/sound, minor pain, language, etc., etc.

The physics of dream experience fundamentally and generally unifies physics, and it demonstrates F=ma FUNDAMENTALLY. This is clearly proven in this essay.

Now, let's get some fair, accurate, and honest reviews, ratings, questions, and comments. I want some other members of FQXi.org to put real, complete, honest, intelligible, and accurate reviews of my essay on this essay page. JUST TELL THE TRUTH.

Bookmark and Share



Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 21, 2012 @ 07:51 GMT
The ultimate understanding of physics (as it is proven in this essay) combines, balances, and includes opposites. Mathematics cannot do this.

This essay definitively and clearly proves that mathematics cannot ultimately and fundamentally describe physics/physical phenomena.

FQXi.org members, can I get a true, realistic/real, honest, accurate, thorough, fair, and competent review of this essay from one or more of you?

If not, why not?

Bookmark and Share



Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 21, 2012 @ 14:55 GMT
George and FQXi.org, our FUNDAMENTAL (and general) growth and becoming other than we are is what is central and fundamental to [unification in] physics. This is consistent with:

1) Direct bodily experience (seen, felt, and touched). This is fundamental to physics, thought/understanding/theory, and to unification in physics. Thought is integrated and interactive in and with the range of feeling as it is experienced by the body.

2) The self represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive approximation of experience in general by combining, including, and balancing opposites and by combining conscious and unconscious experience. If the self did not represent, form, and experience a comprehensive approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience, we would then be incapable of growth and of becoming other than we are. This is fundamental to physics and to unification in physics.

3) The ultimate unification and undertstanding of physics combines, includes, and balances opposites. Mathematics cannot combine, include, and balance opposites.

Is this not all clearly true George and FQXi.org members?

How would your essay ideas account for this George? You clearly cannot. My essay accounts for ALL of it.

Bookmark and Share



Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 24, 2012 @ 19:54 GMT
This essay fundamentally and generally unifies physics. George Ellis and FQXi.org do not even attempt to refute this. This is because they cannot. My essay is rated low (Community Rating) and is ignored here at FQXi.org because it fundamentally and generally unifies physics.

Readers of this essay will want to see my numerous and very important posts/points in support of this/my essay at George Ellis' essay page as well. On more than one occasion, George Ellis has misrepresented my position as well.

Since thought is interactive and integrated in and with the range of feeling that is experienced by the body, dreams (and my essay proves this thoroughly with various points/facts) ARE NOT a "creation of thought" or "the physics of the brain" (to quote George Ellis). This is very important.

A note to the readers, reviewers, and raters of this essay: Time requires the PRESENT. Physics happens in and with time. Physics (along with the notion of George Ellis' "causation" or "causes") does not, and cannot, FUNDAMENTALLY step outside of time. Time requires gravity. Time requires thought. Time requires space. Time requires us. Time ultimately relates to and involves the fundamental, integrated, and interactive extensiveness of being, thought, and experience (and space). My essay proves this, and this is most important too.

Bookmark and Share



Georgina Parry wrote on Oct. 1, 2012 @ 04:47 GMT
Dear Frank,

I'd like you to know that I have read your essay from beginning to end. It is inclusive of FQXi to post it, giving us all the opportunity to consider for ourselves the level of its quality and your problem solving skill, as you address the essay question that was set.

The meaning of words and how they are put together to convey ideas is important to me. Your essay is a...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 04:53 GMT
If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is [equation] and [equation] was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have [equation] of points. After it anyone give you [equation] of points so you have [equation] of points and [equation] is the common quantity of the people which gave...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Oct. 5, 2012 @ 05:39 GMT
My essay should win this contest in keeping with the following great truths:

1) BOTH gravity AND electromagnetism enjoin and balance visible and invisible space.

2) The self represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience.(This is a great fact of physics.) Now, only our growth and development (our becoming other than we are in and with time) -- as it is PROVEN to be linked with/tied to the [present] waking reality/physics -- can theoretically, fundamentally, AND generally unify physics. My essay proves all of this.

3) The key here is to describe thought [fundamentally and generally] in conjunction with/relation to physics, force/energy, and sensory experience (in general and fundamentally). My essay does this. Mathematics cannot do this. Thought is integrated and interactive in and with direct bodily experience (seen, felt, AND touched). My essay proves this. Accordingly, dreams are not a creation of thought. Only YOU experience YOUR body; AND, only YOU experience YOUR experience.

4) The ultimate objective is to have a seamless and undivided whole, as true unification in physics combines, balances, and includes opposites. MATHEMATICS CANNOT COMBINE, BALANCE, AND INCLUDE OPPOSITES. Simplicity/order/sameness AND randomness/variability.

5) Fundamental gravitational and inertial equivalency and balancing (both at half strength/force) fundamentally demonstrates/proves F=ma. (Acceleration is fundamentally balanced and averaged in keeping with fundamental force/energy.)

6) Clearly, this essay fundamentally and generally unifies physics.

Bookmark and Share



Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.