Search FQXi

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.

Forum Home
Introduction

Order posts by:
chronological order
most recent first

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

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

sridattadev: on 6/22/11 at 16:01pm UTC, wrote Dear Frank, We have successfully divided intelligence and conscience...

sridattadev: on 6/22/11 at 15:40pm UTC, wrote Dear All, Answers to all the scientific questions lie in the answer to...

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio: on 6/21/11 at 18:09pm UTC, wrote To the extent that one dislikes and denies [natural] reality and truth, one...

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio: on 6/21/11 at 0:55am UTC, wrote Smaller and larger space are combined in dreams in keeping with inertial...

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio: on 6/18/11 at 20:47pm UTC, wrote Admit that I unified gravity, electromagnetism, and inertia FQXi.org....

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio: on 6/18/11 at 20:25pm UTC, wrote What's wrong FQXi.org -- Is the truth seriously opposing your vested...

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio: on 6/18/11 at 20:08pm UTC, wrote Gravity enjoins and balances invisible and visible space, and gravity is...

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio: on 6/18/11 at 18:00pm UTC, wrote Understanding that the self represents, forms, and experiences a...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Dufourny: "E=m(c²+Xl²)+Y=2 mc² the gravitation originates from the energies..." in The Noise of Gravitons

Cabal Owen: "I have learned this while my research - What are the types of BCI’s ..." in Expanding the Mind...

Georgina Woodward: "Compare: "Wild', existentially free particle, unmeasured, unperturbed, in..." in Quantum Physics and the...

Georgina Woodward: "1. The 'magic rabbit' does not come into being, upon the photo being seen...." in Quantum Physics and the...

Deserdi Chapas: "Report on ongoing Holographic Physics work at deserdi.xyz As humanity has..." in Alternative Models of...

umair zaheer: "Travel is the movement of people between distant geographical locations...." in Anatomy of spacetime and...

robin 435: "rsvsfascxseaczcfadv" in Anatomy of spacetime and...

David Vognar: "Electron Doping? by David Vognar I think it helps to visualize physics so..." in The Present State of...

RECENT ARTICLES

The Entropic Price of Building the Perfect Clock: Q&A with Natalia Ares
Experiments investigating the thermodynamics of clocks can teach us about the origin of time's arrow.

Schrödinger’s A.I. Could Test the Foundations of Reality
Physicists lay out blueprints for running a 'Wigner's Friend' experiment using an artificial intelligence, built on a quantum computer, as an 'observer.'

Expanding the Mind (Literally): Q&A with Karim Jerbi and Jordan O'Byrne
Using a brain-computer interface to create a consciousness 'add-on' to help test Integrated Information Theory.

Quanthoven's Fifth
A quantum computer composes chart-topping music, programmed by physicists striving to understand consciousness.

The Math of Consciousness: Q&A with Kobi Kremnitzer
A meditating mathematician is developing a theory of conscious experience to help understand the boundary between the quantum and classical world.

FQXi BLOGS
December 9, 2022

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Our Human-Shaped Universe, by Mark Wyman [refresh]

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on Sep. 11, 2008 @ 16:53 GMT
What “shape” is the universe? Cosmologist Mark Wyman ponders whether the cosmos is smaller than we might imagine and “shaped” like a human. And how we may never know for sure.

From Mark Wyman:

If I look up into the night sky with a strong enough telescope, could I see the back of my head?

Sounds bizarre, but I was reminded of that question when I came across a new...

view entire post

this post has been edited by the forum administrator

Anonymous wrote on Sep. 12, 2008 @ 08:01 GMT
'You could say that humans are topologically doughnuts because we also have one “hole” passing through us.'

I can honestly say that I had never, ever thought of it that way before.

report post as inappropriate

Homer wrote on Sep. 17, 2008 @ 14:55 GMT
Mmmmmm donuts...

report post as inappropriate

paul valletta wrote on Sep. 22, 2008 @ 13:29 GMT
Doh..noughts.. maybe? (0)(0)(0)(0)(0) ;)

report post as inappropriate

Plato wrote on Sep. 28, 2008 @ 11:15 GMT
Jules Henri Poincare (1854-1912)

The scientist does not study nature because it is useful. He studies it because he delights in it, and he delights in it because it is beautiful.

report post as inappropriate

Plato wrote on Sep. 28, 2008 @ 21:20 GMT
From a philosophical position one might like to characterize the problems with inductive/deductive attempts to reason, and see "the human relation" with the world around them.

So I redid some pictures to highlight this exchange.

Best,

attachments: bubble.jpg, inside1.jpg

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 22, 2009 @ 01:01 GMT
I have stated in my writings that the body is both visible and invisible.

With 7 photons for night vision, and 10 photons for color (or day) vision being required, how do we know that string theory is not exploring the electromagnetic components (i.e., photons) --- after, and in keeping with, the 4th dimension (i.e., electromagnetism) that unifies gravity and electromagnetism/light? Consider:

4th space dimension to 10th space dimension = 7

And, at the same time, the TOTAL number of space dimensions is 10.

So, a theory that unifies gravity and electromagnetism /light would have to account for a smaller and larger space at once. Note that electromagnetic space

(e.g., the Sun and photons) is both larger and smaller than typical or ordinary space (including the Earth).

Isn't the basic question answered when we examine/describe how space manifests as energy? Isn't the space/energy relation what string theory is examining?

Isn't the higher gravity in astro. obs. related to the repulsive aspect ON BALANCE?

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Aug. 22, 2009 @ 04:05 GMT
Frank,

You mentioned, "...how space manifests as energy...". I've been trying to understand how the laws of physics are implemented within a region of space. I would think that energy (a conserved quantity) will manifest in whatever way is most readily available. Sometimes energy manifests as matter; other times, energy manifests as electromagnetic radiation; sometimes as heat or even motion. I would be interested in your thoughts on how energy manifests as space.

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 22, 2009 @ 23:31 GMT
Re. Shape of the universe, this is how I see it, briefly.

EM radiation gives images showing 3D vector space over time. 4th dimension of material universe being spatio-energetic rather than time itself gives change in 3D space position and simultaneous change in 4th dimensional position. So the universe we see as an image spread out over time has actually proceeded along the 4th dimension with the rest of the material universe and does not exist way out across 3D vector space. It is an image, an illusion, as real as a mirage.

Travel out into space and the material reality is different from the image.We see EM we do not see material substance. We can touch material substance but not way out in space. The perception of reality is limited by the senses and hence the sensory input we are able to achieve. The Prime Reality Interface frustrates the cosmological models. What we see has since evolved into the unobservable material universe of today.The material universe has not rushed away from us but we have moved with it along the 4th spatio-energetic dimension and away from the 4th dimensional position from which the EM radiation was emitted.

Shape of the universe if Einstein's space-time model is modified to space-space model is a hypersphere.A 4 dimensional quaternion geometric object. Plane of 3D space forming a sphere, its surface represented mathematically by the imaginary numbers. 4th dimension running from exterior to interior, being mathematically represented by the real number line.This is the actual unseen material universe not an EM derived image.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 23, 2009 @ 00:17 GMT
Hi Jason. Electromagnetism involves extremes of feeling, brightness, visibility, size, and energy. Gravity and electromagnetism/light are united at the [gravitational] mid-range of feeling between thought and sense.

Demonstrate gravity as attractive and repulsive -- in keeping with relatively constant (and proper) lighting, energy, and brightness -- in a space that is at once understood to be larger and smaller. The space must also be invisible and visible at once.

You now have electromagnetism/light as gravitational space. Space manifesting as BOTH gravitational AND electromagnetic/light energy. (Constant energy as well.)

The union of gravity and electromagnetism/light in a fourth spatial dimension

completes, balances, and extends Einstein's theory. It demonstrates thought that is more like sensory experience in general. The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the integrated extensiveness of thought, experience, and being. Indeed, the ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience.

Dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general. Dreams involve a fundamental integration and spreading of being and experience (including thought) at the mid-range of feeling between thought and sense.

This entire post, including the first paragraph, is describing dream experience. Dreams demonstrate space manifesting as energy.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 23, 2009 @ 01:38 GMT
"Just when you think you have all the answers, I change the questions."

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Aug. 23, 2009 @ 10:25 GMT
Frank,

I do entertain the idea that consciousness has roots that go very deep into the laws of physics. The exact mechanism, however, is not something I can articulate at this time. Feelings, emotions, dream, and senses are all activities within the nervous system. The nervous system is primarily an electrochemical system. Physicists have tried to destroy God and convince us that we have no soul. In that, they are gravely mistaken. When they pass on, they will have the plenty of time in the spirit world to think about and discuss how they totally missed the mark. In some humorous astral dimension, layperson spirits will float by these athiest physicists, point at them, and say, "who is the dummy now?"

I do believe that the universe, and God, get a good chuckle out of our folly.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 23, 2009 @ 16:44 GMT
Jason: Lose God, find yourself. It is time to grow.

The eye of genius see things/reality as it is, and not from preconceived notions and/or fear. Courage is a prerequisite for great thinking.

The truth is shocking, so many people are naturally resistant to deep and original ideas. Keep your minds open.

FQXi participants/Jason -- We were supposed to be talking about space manifesting as energy, remember?

When scale is balanced, as I have described in my last post, gravity is repulsive and attractive as electromagnetic energy/light and feeling.

I have demonstrated invisible and visible united at the mid-range of [gravitational] feeling between thought and sense. The INVISIBLE space of the body/eye is consistent with its positioning at the top of the body -- that is, thought and invisible space are felt more weakly in the range of feeling of the body.

See: The Dream Fundamentally Balances and Unifies Gravity and Electromagnetism

3.htm

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 24, 2009 @ 08:15 GMT
Hello ,

Frank

What I find very relevant in your ideas ,it's the fact to have an universal link between polarizations of evolution .

I think what all times all polarizes and continues to evolve .

Thus indeed the electromagnetism is fascinating because the weak interactions are a piece of the building ,like a frequence of light where very very weak particles goes to centers of gravity like our Erath ,I like too the link between our sun and our planet ,like an invisible and visible building towards ultim harmony .

In this case I understand your link with dreams ,specifics and universals ,because all is linked since the begining like an universal memeory in all things .

It's a beautiful extrapolation I think ,and it shows us what your work is a long search of truth in several centers of interest ,it's important to encircle the whole .

It's interesting about neurology and brain studies .Our 1/2 spheroids of our brain is a captor of informations intrisic and extrinsic ,it's there I like your model and psychology analyze .It's relevant .You have understood the ultim strong force and the light ,our Gauge thus the rule of things....

Since I class all and study the biology ,the brain is incredible in its evoution since the first cells and the differenciation in Times by complexification and diversification (reproduction,locomotion,nutrition) .

When I have seen this evolution and the different steps ,even our brain spherificates itself .

Our brain thus in this logic is correlated with your conclusions about dreams ,indeed all brain has this universal memory .We could say thus two kind of dreams or 3 too are necessary ,the universal dreams of all ,the human dreams and the animal and vegetal primitif dreams .....where it exists an universal correlation with Times space evolution and the unification .

Sincerely

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Aug. 25, 2009 @ 03:31 GMT
Frank,

Lose God? Are you insane?

As for the truth, most of the time it's really dull and boring. Alot of time, it's the most inconvenient thing you didn't want to deal with.

Space manifesting as energy? What exactly is space? ...other than a 3 degrees of translation?

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 00:15 GMT
Jason,

your current discussion has some relevance to my former comments on subjective reality and how some people have a very different experience of reality than others.This can sometimes be identified as inability to comprehend the full meaning of words, although proficient at putting sound bites together. Observed as inability to rephrase the words that have been used or to explain the meaning of them, using alternative language or analogy.As well as inability to fully comprehend abstract emotional meaning of words, trying to give simplistic concrete explanation of complex emotional concepts.

I do believe in freedom of thought and freedom of speech but not in allowing bullies to tell other people how they should think and insulting their intelligence.The following demonstrates the level of discussion that will follow if Frank is taken seriously.

PhysForum Science, Physics and Technology Discussion Forums

Why Does String Theory Presuppose 4d Spacetime?

Frank Martin DiMeglio

25th April 2009 - 09:43 PM

I told and warned you all -- this discussion serparates those of us who can think from those of us who can't think. Some good advice:

2) Assume that what I am saying is correct.

Moderator: Wrong on both counts, banned for 3 days as proof.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 00:54 GMT
Hi Steve: Thank you for your support and encouragement.

Do you agree with the following? Have you seen Dr. Christian Corda's credentials? He agrees with me that I have unified gravity and electromagnetism, do you?

Where Einstein failed, DiMeglio has succeeded:

Gravity and electromagnetism united:

1) Electromagnetism involves extremes of feeling, brightness, visibility, size, and energy. Gravity and electromagnetism/light are united at the [gravitational] mid-range of feeling between thought and sense.

2) Demonstrate gravity as attractive and repulsive -- in keeping with relatively constant (and proper) lighting, energy, and brightness -- in a space that is (at once) understood to be larger and smaller. The space must also be invisible and visible (at once). When scale is balanced, gravity and electromagnetism are repulsive and attractive.

3) You now have electromagnetism/light as gravitational space. Space manifesting as BOTH gravitational AND electromagnetic/light energy. (Constant energy as well.)

4) The union of gravity and electromagnetism/light in a fourth spatial dimension completes, balances, and extends Einstein's theory. It demonstrates thought that is more like sensory experience in general. The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the integrated extensiveness of thought, experience, and being. Indeed, the ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience.

5) Dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general. Dreams involve a fundamental integration and spreading of being and experience (including thought) at the mid-range of feeling between thought and sense.

See: 6) The Dream Fundamentally Balances and Unifies Gravity and Electromagnetism

3.htm

Isn't it interesting that the FQXi participants cannot even begin to point out a single thing that is wrong with my above published article? They do not even attempt it. Christian Corda, who says it is right, says it is "philosophically excellent". He did not say that he saw anything wrong with the article. He also said that he took the time to carefully read the article.

I have stolen the show. Admit it folks.

report post as inappropriate

Ray Munroe wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 01:46 GMT
Dear Frank,

We Physicists still prefer real mathematics and testable hypothesis.

Certainly, a lot of Philosophy and some Theology (or reactionary anti-theology) has been absorbed into Modern Physics because current experiments can only do so much, can only go so far in proving or dis-proving Scientific Laws/ Theories/ Hypothesis / Axioms/ Postulates/ Assumptions.

IMO, the proper approach is to learn the details and methods of the field with the detached attitude of "what is truly proven and what can be overthrown", and then go attack the weakest link.

I am also proposing a "TOE" - as much as I hate the implications of that name. There is much more to reality than just the Electromagnetic and Gravitational forces. Even the great Theodor Kaluza realized 80 years ago that it required at least 5 dimensions to unify those two forces. Interestingly enough, the number of 5 dimensions also ties into Octonion algebra with 5-vectors, and M-Theory with a 5-brane.

My own Theory has too much math for my liking. I prefer to "Keep It Simple", but I am presenting a significant amount of mathematical framework behind this TOE - it seems to be a "necessary evil".

Physics is bilingual in nature. First, you state the problem in English (right-brained communication skills), then you develop the mathematical language for the problem (left-brained logic skills), then you use this math to solve the problem (left-brained logic skills), and then you translate the math results back into English to explain what you did (right-brained communication skills).

IMO, your communication (right-brained) skills are sufficient, but you need to further develop you math logic (left-brained) skills to convince me of your theory. I won't comment any further until your published math skills are up to par with your language skills.

Ray Munroe

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 03:18 GMT
Ray,

The language centres are in the left hemisphere as well as mathematical skills and logic. The right hemisphere is non verbal but the location of imagination and intuition and creativity. The left hemisphere translates the visualisation of the right hemisphere into language or mathematics for communication of those ideas originating in the right hemisphere.(Just to be accurate, as is required in science, not to undermine your discussion of the bi-lingual nature of physics, which gives a valid description of a particular methodology.)

If one understands the meaning of the language communicated one would be able to explain it or use alternative phraseology to aid communication. That is why I suspect that the person communicating supposedly important ideas, who is unwilling or unable to explain or rephrase or give any evidence in support of those ideas, does not actually understand the meaning but has amalgamated sound bites meant to appeal to others.

Saying that another person who does not agree with the comprehensibility or content is unable to think is demeaning and may be intimidating to those who are afraid that they may appear ignorant for questioning the content.To then deny that anyone has found room for improvement in the work presented is a clear break with reality or attempt at deception. Frank says, "Isn't it interesting that the FQXi participants cannot even begin to point out a single thing that is wrong with my above published article? They do not even attempt it."

Mathematics is another language entirely. If an idea is sensible and comprehensible the language verbal or mathematical does not matter scientifically except that higher precision and un-ambiguity may be possible with mathematics.In my opinion. Mathematics is the preference because physics is heavily dominated by mathematics and attracts those with a mathematical thinking style.Incomprehensible mathematics is no more use than incomprehensible words. The meaning is what is most important. When did the importance of meaning get lost in physics?

report post as inappropriate

Georgina parry wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 09:41 GMT
Hi Zeeya Merali,

you said "However, if the universe started out super small, which we know it did, the three huge dimensions we have also were originally curled up in a twisted pattern, too. So, when our three dimensions got picked out and blown up, they carried with them the shape that they had back in the earliest time."

We do not know that it started super small that is assumed, as it is a generally accepted hypothesis.For brevity of this post, to get to the final hypothesis a sequence of 3 prior assumptions have been made.Is that too many in your opinion? Do you see any danger of building a huge science mythology out of a continuously growing collection of assumptions that each attaches to prior assumptions.What happens when a foundational assumption is removed?

You also say "the expansion of space is accelerating, thanks to dark energy dominating the universe." Hypothesis, assumption (based on current interpretation of evidence), hypothesis. Not fact, fact, fact. Do you see any danger to scientific credibility in presenting scientific theory as fact? Particularly when such theories may in time be superseded by new ideas and developments, as is the nature of scientific progress.

report post as inappropriate

Georgina parry wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 09:46 GMT
Sorry the quote "However, if the universe started out super small, which we know it did, the three huge dimensions we have also were originally curled up in a twisted pattern, too. So, when our three dimensions got picked out and blown up, they carried with them the shape that they had back in the earliest time."should have been attributed to Mark Wyman of the Perimeter institute.

I am still interested to know Zeeya Merali's opinion on the questions raised.

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 09:56 GMT
Georgina,

I'm reading Frank's posts. He is transfixed on the idea that states of consciousness are correlated with the laws of physics. I believe in the importance of the Golden Rule, so I will be gentle with my comments.

The idea that consciousness can have power over the Laws of Physics is not a new idea. There are only two possible ways this is possible. One is the obvious way: brain->nervous system-> motor nerves.

The second way is more akin to the spiritual. God exists as a conscious entity within and beyond the laws of physics. By becoming unified with God, perfectly attuned to this life force, one can begin to overpower the default laws of entropy, age and death.

I've never met, face to face/in person, anyone who has done this. However, my personal and spiritual experiences have proven to me that God exists, spirits exist, and the supernatural exists.

As for gravity and electromagnetism being unified by states of consciousness, I'm not convinced even if Dr. Christian Corda says I should be.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 10:41 GMT
Jason ,

Yes it exists something ,but the supernatural is a speculation I beleive .

The consiousness is important but needs limits of understandin too .All is possible but with limits No ?

This entity exists everywhere and has a code of building .The laws of physics where we are a part in fact shows us this incredible entropy behind .

But our rule is not to understand this unknew now but act like catalyzers of the ultim balance between spheres .

If the conscious is a real fact ,it's that ,act in harmony and by complemenatrity to improve the interactions .

Let's take the ecology ,the hands ,the eyes ,the intelligences understand the rules of symbiosis of optimization .

Sincerely

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Ray Munroe wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 12:36 GMT
Dear Georgina,

Thank you for the physiological clarification. You ask "When did the importance of meaning get lost in physics?" I agree that both the math and its meaning are important. In my prior posting review of how to solve a Physics problem, converting the results of math into language is the final step. The meaning is always important, but you need to be able to back-up the meaning with math, data, etc.

You also said "We do not know that it (space) started super small that is assumed, as it is a generally accepted hypothesis." Of course, this is a hypothesis derived from the Big Bang Theory. The Big Bang Theory has faced many challenges over the decades. Einstein shared your perspective of an "infinite" static Universe until Lamaitre and Hubble convinced him otherwise. But observation of the Cosmic Microwave Background settled the question - the Universe was smaller in the distant past.

Have Fun!

Ray Munroe

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 13:36 GMT
Ray,

I do not disagree with you. Data from observation is important in science. Quantitative or qualitative.(I asked Frank, have you conducted any research or do you have any data concerning the chimpanzee dream states? but got no reply.) My point to you was that converting meaningless words (pseudo philosophy) into meaningless maths and back again is not going to provide meaning. Words alone or maths alone do not provide the meaning, or scientific or logical proof.

The data must be placed in a coherent structure that is mathematically correct or logically sound and can thus be interpreted to provide that meaning or proof.If the maths is wrong or the logic invalid or unclear then it is honest to say so. It is not unreasonable for a person to ask for an explanation or clarification.

You said "Einstein shared your perspective of an "infinite" static Universe until Lamaitre and Hubble convinced him otherwise." That is not my perpective at all.

You also said "But observation of the Cosmic Microwave Background settled the question - the Universe was smaller in the distant past." I do not agree that it is settled. Data always has to be interpreted. The data may stay the same but interpretations can change and frequently do. That is the nature of science.

Science is portrayed to the general population as factual and the truth but it is hypotheses, interpretations and shifting sands of understanding. When that ceases to be remembered science has become just like a religion. Where great truths are held as an act of faith and can not be questioned.

I agree that the EM radiation that is observed to be spreading out across 3D vector space giving an apparent expansion. It is my contention and always has been that that image is not the material universe. The material universe is moving towards the centre of the hypersphere along the 4th dimension and so is contracting but not directly in 3D space.This change in spatial position and only this change could give rise to the force of gravity as observed in 3D vector space, in my opinion. Mechanism explained to Jason in out of Plato's cave.

report post as inappropriate

Ray Munroe wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 14:18 GMT
Dear Georgina,

I understand your 4-D to 3-D analogy. Because chalkboards are two-dimensional surfaces, we usually draw this as a two-dimensional light cone with 3-D space collapsed to 1-D and time along the second coordinate. This analogy is helpful, and is not new. See

Light Cone

I agree that interpretation of data is critical. Hubble's Law assumes that stars of a certain size and type have always had the same absolute magnitude, and the same spectra. However, if the gravitational "constant" inceases (decreases), stars will burn brighter (dimmer) because stars are balanced between gravitational and thermonuclear heat pressures, and the concept of a "standard candle" may be flawed. Likewise, if the fine structure "constant" changed in the distant past, the spectra would have also changed, and we cannot easily determine how much of the redshift is from the relativistic Doppler Effect, and how much is from a changing spectra.

Most Physicists ignore these effects of changing "constants". I think the effects are relatively small, but large enough to possibly explain Dark Energy. I don't think these ideas can completely erase the effects of cosmological expansion and the basic idea of Hubble's Law. Over the years, I have heard many ideas (other than the relativistic Doppler Effect) as to how the spectra may get redshifted. They never convinced me otherwise. You haven't convinced me otherwise - maybe I bought into the "religion of the big bang".

Your arguments regarding Time sound more reasonable than Frank's ideas. But like Frank, you need more data and mathematics. I disagree with your analysis of a strictly 4-D Spacetime and no Hubble expansion.

Have Fun!

Ray Munroe

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 26, 2009 @ 21:46 GMT
Ray, we agree then on the importance of the interpretation of data.

The problem with the current space-time model is the large number of unresolved problems. Grandfather paradox, arrow of time, how universe arose, infinity, eternity, mass energy, inertia, mechanism of gravity. If you are comfortable with the logical and mathematical difficulties of infinity and eternity then perhaps it is easier for you to accept the current status quo of scientific belief. If to your mind all of the problems are outweighed by the need to retain a certain interpretation of the data then I can understand your opinion.I have seen a rabbit materialise out of an empty top hat but that does not make it a fact. I now know how it got there and understand how appearances can be convincingly deceptive. It is the interpretation that is important not just the evidence.

Disagreement is OK but specific logical or scientific error would help me to re-evaluate my ideas. This is a model consistent with all observations within 3D vector space. Any data that can be interpreted with the space-time model could be reevaluated with this model. What specific data do you deem necessary to show that it is consistent with observations?

It gives an explanation of gravity that the space-time model can not do and solves the grandfather paradox. The mathematical expression of the quaternion geometric structure already exists as do Maxwell's quaternion electromagnetic equations and the mathematics pertaining to time dilation within an spherical object. There may be other mathematics that pertains to this model.What mathematics do you deem necessary? Depending on the requirement I may or may not be able to produce or locate it. I certainly do not have the expertise to write the equivalent of Einstein's work in quaternion mathematics nor to construct a quaternion "string type" theory. However I can show where there is correspondence with existing scientific theory and mathematics as well as observations in 3D vector space.

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 01:22 GMT
Ray,Re. ambiguity of astronomical data and gravity interpretation, Interesting?

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 06:09 GMT
Scientific_modelling wikipediaScientific visualisation (computer garaphics) Wikipedia

Fantastic images created with quaternions.The correspondence with natural forms emphasising to me the possibility of similar natural quaternion processes of growth and development.

New fractal surrealism

Ray Tracing Quaternion Julia Sets on the GPU

This may be the way for me to go so that I can actually demonstrate what I mean rather than using verbal description which seems to have been found incomprehensible and inadequate.May take a while to put together adequate graphical animated demonstrations but the result may be a lot more comprehensible than description alone.Time, money ,hassle.Costs...benefits?

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 09:36 GMT
Dreams involve a fundamental integration and spreading of being and experience at the mid-range of feeling between thought and sense. Accordingly, thought and feeling are proportionately reduced during dream experience. This proportionate reduction of thought and feeling is consistent with the fact that the dream is an emotional experience. (Thoughts and emotions are differentiated feelings.) The...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 10:39 GMT
M Sachs-Quaternion unified field equations

Article linked above explains that "any law of nature , whether in particle physics or cosmology - the physics of the universe that is compatible with the symmetry required by relativity theory, in special or general relativity, must be in terms of spinnor and quaternion variables. This is a requirement of the algebraic logic - the group structure - of the theory of relativity ......The correspondence of the quaternion metric field and the the metric tensor of Einstein's formulation is then in terms of the product of ds and its quaternion conjugate ...corresponding to its time (or space) reflection......Thus the quaternion formulation in general relativity....is a factorisation of the metric tensor formulation of the standard Einstein theory.

M Sachs general relativity and matter (Reidel 1982)

This agrees with my conviction that quaternion mathematics could be used for this task.So Einstein's work has already been converted into quaternions and from the 16 equations the results of 6 of them give one to one correspondence with Maxwell's electromagnetic equations and 10 give one to one correspondence with Einstein's original tensor equations. Both physical phenomena are incorporated into a single 16 component quaternion field. Information in above paragraph from M Sachs quantum Mechanics and gravity (springer 2004)

"One important new feature of this is the torsion of space-time. it predicts as examples the rotation of the galaxies and the Faraday effect regarding the propagation of electromagnetic radiation......Both observed astrophysical effects not predicted by the then standard Einstein tensor formulation. M Sachs Physics of the universe.

The rotation of the plane of polarisation identified here may also have relevance to red shift as well as 4th dimensional change in spatial position, in my opinion.

Interestingly this quaternion formulation predicts anisotropic expansion and contraction of the universe in a spiral fashion. According to M sachs in the above article. As this is still a "static geometry" of the universe expressed in quaternion mathematics, the unidirectional continuous motion along the 4th spatial dimension towards the centre of the hypersphere has not been incorporated.That would in my opinion tend to drive spiral contraction of the material universe (not the EM image)in 3D vector space.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 10:58 GMT
Einstein had understood many things .The spherical waves and the finite Universe .

The 3 D design is essential with the general relativity .

The rotations of Galaxies go towards this ultim balance of contraction.

The spheres Georgina ,the quantum spheres ,the stars spheres ,the planets spheres ,the moons spheres our Universal Sphere .3D and that's all .

Happy you begin to insert rotations and contraction and others ...

Could you tell me more about automorphic forms and Galois representations with zeta function and too the fourier series .

I am interested to know your point of vue .

I have read the article ,it's well .That's all .

Sincerely

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 11:33 GMT
Can I have too a description of finite rotations of quaternions with Euler parameters please ?

I d like too have a description about the sequences of rotations if it s possible ?

What is the link too with the Hamilton matrix ?

And the differences between imaginaries and reals too ,it's important in my opinion.

Can I have too a link with the The unit quaternion ,norm ,inverse ,conjugate .....and thus the correspondance with vectors and quaternions and all that with mass and rotations if it's possible of course ?

Sincerely

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Ray Munroe wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 15:57 GMT
Dear Georgina,

I agree that there are holes in our theories and holes in our data.

The theoretical holes are obvious due to the apparantly inconsistent and opposite natures of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity. One or both of these theories must be invalid at certain scales. Why?

The data holes are caused by our biases. "What to leave in, what to leave out?" One of my...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 16:46 GMT
Hello Dr Cosmic Ray ,

"I also recommended fractals to Steve, but he chose not to pursue that route."

hihihihi ,in our discussions about that ,I have said my perception of fractals which are for me specific in their numbers like an universal link between spheres and their numbers .....the physicality can be inserted too with volume ,density ....

I admit what El Nashie is a big physician ,the only thing where I don't agree ,it's about the chaos and solitons .In all case his work is relevant .

What I find important is the limit ,even if the Universe is finite ,the space is infinite ....I have many questions about that ....thus the fractal only goes to the infinity by human extrapolations .Thus the infinity in our physic dimension is just a human extrapolation.

We can't go more far than our Panck units in my opinion.

On the other side with computing ,it's intersting .

Thus it's always a question of pragamatism and rationality .In conclusion thus even the space is finite .

The infinity like the zero are humans inventions .But in physics ....they don't exist I beleive .Let's take the Universe ,before ,now or after ,and let's assume the number 1 for all that .Can you imagine 0 X 1 Impossible it has no sense .About infinity ,only behind our walls and furthermore at this ultim sphere finished where appears the eternity of creation .

Sincerely

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Ray Munroe wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 17:10 GMT
Dear Sphere-keeper Steve,

In my opinion, infinty is a mathematical concept that is not fully realized in our Universe, but rather is best represented by Dirac's large number:

$10^{40}$

and its powers.

My latest paper (or non-paper, I am having difficulties getting it published - Is it that controversial?) utilizes Klein's Chi(7). If we compare Chi(7) with Hyperbolic Heptagonal Tiling, we find that it has a fractal order of 339+16k (an El Naschie result) at the circular (2-D sphere) limit of heptagonal tiling. The difference between 339 vs. 339+16k may represent the difference between our large and finite Universe vs. Infinity or the difference between my E12 and El Naschie's E-Infinity. Either way, the "Planck scale wall" is there, and is a perfect circle in the case of heptagonal tiling.

I am travelling to Las Vegas for business next week, so you will not hear from me then.

Dr. Cosmic Ray

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 17:27 GMT
Dr Cosmic Ray ,

A last question before your travel ,do you think it's possible to find the number of spheres ,10^40 is the maximum for you ??

This number I think is the same in the number of quantum spheres and cosmological spheres .

I can't find this number ,that makes me crazzy in fact .this gravity always

If t=10^40.....for electron 4.4 10^-40

What I find bizare it s about the fusion for exemple ???

The quantum gravity changes inversement in Times thus ....

If all is linked thus it's possible to find this specific number of cosmological spheres .I am going to try a method .

I will tell you soon .T

report post as inappropriate

Ray Munroe wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 18:11 GMT
Dear Steve,

There are hierarchies of importance. First you have the "spheron", then you add the number of nearest-neighbors in whatever "lattice" you are using. My "E12" lattice is closely related to the Coxeter-Todd "K12" lattice (with 756 roots). In your case, "nearest-neighbors" are kissing spheres. Then you add the number of next-nearest-neighbors (which is 4,032 for K12), and keep adding spherical shells of lattice sites until you approach infinity. I do not see how your model can duplicate 10^{40} - you might as well take the limit to infinity and assume that the difference is minimal. My model assumes that 10^{40} is the number of "lattice sites" on the gravity-brane.

Have Fun!

Dr. Cosmic Ray

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 18:21 GMT
Thanks Ray ,

I am going to superimpose some ideas to find this number .A sure thing I won't find it this year .

The entanglement is difficult to find but .....

Good travel ,until soon

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 21:15 GMT
Steve and FXQi:

My understanding/description of how the dream constitutes the union of gravity and electromagnetism/light is complete, fundamental, simple, comprehensive, and consistent. It is lacking nothing.

I have even mathematically demonstrated/proven it in a fundamental fashion; as I have shown the three to one (one third) relation of BOTH space (the three space dimensions in...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 21:17 GMT
Ray,

thank you for your opinions and advice.I appreciate the time spent. I'm sorry if I have sounded somewhat adversarial in some of our conversations. I have just been tying to explain a particular way in which I view the foundational problems, current thinking in science and how a particular solution might work. Which appears, to my mind, be a sensible, self consistent idea with...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 22:17 GMT
Lawrence (B. Crowell),

thank you too for your time. I am sorry I have not been able to engage in more conversation with you. I am just not qualified or sufficiently gifted in mathematics to have in depth mathematical conversations. However I have appreciated your thoughtful and relevant replies. Good luck in all of your endeavours,

Georgina.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 23:24 GMT
Gravity and electromagnetism/light are united when scale is balanced, in keeping with both gravity and electromagnetism/light being repulsive AND attractive. The space is both LARGER (or additive) and SMALLER (relative to waking experience/space) at once; and this is in keeping with the space being both invisible and visible (at once). This ALL occurs in the dream. Think!

THE DREAM FUNDAMENTALLY BALANCES AND UNIFIES GRAVITY AND ELECTROMAGNETISM

It is common sense that the union between gravity (general relativity) and electromagnetism/light (Maxwell's theory of light) -- that is proven by the addition of a fourth spatial dimension -- must be plainly and significantly obvious in our experience. Indeed, it is readily evident in dream experience.

Talk about a lack of common sense!!? -- I am to belive that this union is only evident/present/manifest in ultra microscopic strings? Wake up people! Stop denying reality/truth out of fear and misinformation.

report post as inappropriate

Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Aug. 27, 2009 @ 23:38 GMT
I try to keep some of these discussions within the channel of established physics.

Ray mentions lattice on p-branes. I might try to get my paper on the essay site tonight or tomorrow. I have to, I have a backlog of MySQL work to catch up on. Bousso and Polchinski worked out such field coincedences on D7-branes and computed the sensitive dependency on the value of the cosmological constant with these transversalities.

arXiv:hep-th/0004134v3

The results indicate a very delecate fine tuning is involved. My paper I will post indicates how this condition is established by a quantum critical point on a dual M2-brane. The M2-brane is a tachyon condensate that forms a quantum form of the singularity. This is dual to fields on the black hole horizon, which (to make a long story short) is dual to fields exterior. This has the effect of establishing the fine tuning of the universe and fine tuning according to a Fermi-Landau liquid phase on M2.

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 28, 2009 @ 02:31 GMT
Lawrence says: "I try to keep some of these discussions within the channel of established physics." What are you referring to Lawrence? My discussions and published article are within the channel of established physics. I have clearly demonstrated this. The truth is not divided into categories of convenience Lawrence. I teach you about the unification of electromagnetism/light and gravity Lawrence.

You cannot even begin to justify (with specifics) how I have failed to explain said unification. Ask Dr. Christian Corda, Ph.D why it is correct? You do not want to know anything about the unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light?

None of you can even begin to explain how I am wrong; and that is because the evidence/facts/explanation that I have provided is so thoroughly true, simple, comprehensive, and consistent.

Dr. Christian Corda, Ph.D is the only one among you who agrees with me on this?

I doubt it; but, if it is true, it is really pathetic.

report post as inappropriate

Florin Moldoveanu wrote on Aug. 28, 2009 @ 04:23 GMT
Dear Frank,

I am curious. You mention Dr. Christian Corda. Is he the same person who is participating in the current essay contest?

You also state: “THE DREAM FUNDAMENTALLY BALANCES AND UNIFIES GRAVITY AND ELECTROMAGNETISM” My question is: what happened before the first ever dream, when no living organisms were present, or even earlier when planets were yet to be formed? Thanks.

Florin

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 28, 2009 @ 08:57 GMT
hi all ,

Dear Frank ,

I find really interstings your ideas because it's a correlation with the evolution which is so important .

The problem is what many people don't work with the evolution point of vue and their works are focus on local analyzes .

Your works are in the whole,thus you are going to have some people against you ,it's normal ,don't worry ,the most important is to continue your work and improve it .

Your conclusion is relevant about the social and civilization responsability and the need to help the others creations around us .

In fact ,a chimpanzee evolves too thus he dreams too ,it's the same with my dog for exemple ,when he sleeps ,he dreams ,I see that with some songs during its night .

In fact a superior intelligence permits to harmonize the interactions and can help to evolve them .

All is linked and has the universal memory ,it's evident .

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 28, 2009 @ 09:07 GMT
oopsss sorry error of posting.

I am continuing ,the electro magnetism is still secret ,I agree about the fact to have weak polarizations of evolution.

Thus if we link all ,we are going all towards the ultim harmony between mass and lifes .

If the gravity is coded like an intrinsic code of evolution and the electro magnetism too thus the code have the ultim dream of ultim connectibility ,the ultim physical 3D sphere for me .

The electro magnetism in this case is taken like an evolution .....thus indeed you are right .But for the understanding of your model ,you must use some new things or new words too ,because some people shan't understand .

In all case ,your work show us a long reseach in several topics .

Sincerely

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Aug. 28, 2009 @ 10:04 GMT
Georgina,

Like I said before, don't give up. Don't get discouraged. The Quaternion model, from what I can tell, is mathematically justified; it is compatible with General Relativity. All it needs is for someone to breathe life into it. As it turns out, hyperspheres and additional dimensions are just ways that the mathematical physics tries to express itself. But it takes a special talent to be able to place those additional dimensions in a way that reveals the objective reality, that which is manifesting everything that we observe.

The physics arena is a parched and dried wasteland for ideas that really need a fertile and creative place to grow. IMO, I think that physics could use some creativity and imagination.

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Parry wrote on Aug. 28, 2009 @ 11:27 GMT
Jason,

thank you for your encouragement.I have enjoyed our conversations.I need to re-evaluate my ideas and writing.There is lots to do. Don't you be discouraged either. Bye,Georgina.

report post as inappropriate

Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Aug. 28, 2009 @ 12:26 GMT
What happened before the dream? This is the obvious question with respect to consciousness dependent ideas. Anthropic principles or consciousness dependent coincidence arguments for the nature of the universe are highly problematic. It might ultimately turn out that the universe is of this nature, but a unification of consciousness with cosmology is probably the end to the foundations of physics. I honestly hope we are not there yet.

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Aug. 28, 2009 @ 15:20 GMT
Lawrence,

Do you know anything about Dp-branes that can slip across one another? This is the idea: there are two branes, one that represents the physical universe, the other represents an FTL hyperdrive. Can the two branes slide across each other superluminally? If not, can one or more intermediate branes appear between the two original branes that will prevent FTL slipping between any two branes, but not restrict FTL slippage between the first and the last branes?

report post as inappropriate

Lawrence B Crowell wrote on Aug. 28, 2009 @ 20:27 GMT
I worked out some basic stuff a few months ago involving an Alcubierre warp drive on an AdS spacetime. I thought it would provide some constraints or information on "braney physics." In particular with in 11-dim supergravity there is AdS_4xD7, and the D7-brane contains field information and charges associated with QFT. I might some day get back to this in order to see if my original insight turns out to be right.

Cheers LC

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 29, 2009 @ 05:26 GMT
Steve -- Thank you, you are correct that what I wrote about the Common Chimpanzees in relation to humans -- in the numerous posts (in the other thread) -- is even bigger than my unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light. In fact, I have said this before.

My understanding/description of how the dream constitutes the union of gravity and electromagnetism/light is complete,...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Aug. 29, 2009 @ 09:59 GMT
Frank,

I'll take a swipe at your theory.

You said: "I have demonstrated a comprehensive union and balancing of gravity and electromagnetism/light."

What does that mean? In what way did you demonstrate the union and balancing of gravity and E&M? Was anybody there to watch? What were their observations?

You said: "Dreams improve upon the integrated extensiveness of experience and thought." I like dreams. What does this have to do with unification?

You said: "THE DREAM FUNDAMENTALLY BALANCES AND UNIFIES GRAVITY AND ELECTROMAGNETISM." In what way does dreaming balance and unify gravity and E&M?

Frank, forgive me. I appreciate your enthusiasm. But I want something juicy that I can sink my logic and imagination into. It frustrates me when I talk to New Age idealists whose brains are on electrochemical overdrive. I've been there. But I want to hear a cool idea that can bear the weight of careful inspection. I want the magic to be real. Instead, the magic always dissapates under close scrutiny.

Perhaps both cannot be done. So, either dazzle me with the magic of your ideas, or logically defend them with specifics. If you can do neither, then come back when you can. Until then, your theory shall be smashed upon the rocks of perpetuity.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 29, 2009 @ 15:50 GMT
All FQXI participants, the following is very important.

Steve mentioned memory. The topic of memory is vast. MEMORY INTEGRATES EXPERIENCE. Any credible and complete discussion of memory begins with that statement/great truth. (Francis Bacon speaks of the important need for definitions, and so do I.)

Steve said:

1) "In fact a superior intelligence permits to harmonize the...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 29, 2009 @ 17:50 GMT
Hi Frank and all ,

I see a lot of works in your analyzes .

It's evident what to have this conclusion shows us a big research of truth .

And when we search and work hard ,the seeds imply a beautiful garden ,simply,evidently,fortunaly....

The world needs universal truth and we must act to harmonize our systems around us .

I think really what the hour is serious on Earth and it's time to work with new global fundations ,balanced ,harmonized ,optimized in correlation with universal laws and its evolution towards complexification and ultim harmony .

Let's take the Africa for exemple,I don't understand ,we can search some water on Mars and people don't have a simple drop .

Incredible reality of our reality .

The humanity is like a Rainbow ,a diversity of colors united in the light and it's difficult to turn off a big fire with one water drop ,nevertheless a whole of drops makes cean .....all is there in my opinion .

It's time to change some fundattions and that for all even the leaders of our planet,I have a message for them ,please friends ,understand what you too you are going to loose all if the exponential of chaotics effects continue to develop itself .

This step is important to change fundamentally our Earth .

The social and civilization responsabilities are importants at this moment and the world must be in the hands of scientists ,of course universal scientists and not capitalist scientists without consciousness.

The solutions exist and we must put them into practice quickly .

It's what i try to do via some platforms ,unite people to act for our fellow man by adapted sciences on ground .They needs help ,I have invented several inventions in Energy ,biomass ,composting(a sphere of composting),ecology ,education,agricultural .....

It's impossible to continue like that on Earth ,it has no sense ,universally .

It's so difficult to unite people in fact ,the individualism is a bad habit correlated with our past evolution,and if we had given instead of exchanging.....it's complex and so simple in the same time .

In all case I continue to create this International Humanistic Sciences Center and I will arrive and all people are welcome if the universal conscious is a personal reality .Frank you are welcome in the future of course ,with pleasure .

I like a word of Dr Naima Benali ,ONE4ALL&ALL4ONE......

Friendly

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 29, 2009 @ 21:07 GMT
I have proven that the Common Chimpanzee is in between (i.e., in the middle of) our dream and waking experiences with regard to what is the integrated extensiveness of their being and experience -- including in time. I have shown this in detail and WITH SPECIFICS. That is gigantic. I put it together again for you all -- in loose form. Some of this info. is repeated more than once, and some of my...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 30, 2009 @ 09:33 GMT
Hello Frank ,all ,

What do you think about the differences between the sleeping dreams and the waking up dreams ?

Like a balance between the imaginaries and reals in fact .

Our imagination .....

Cordially

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 30, 2009 @ 17:30 GMT
Hi Steve. Thanks for your messages and the invite. I appreciate it and might take you up on it one day. I'm glad that you seek to grow and learn, and that you have the open mind that is the requirement of same.

The dream is structured like memory. However, a new and much expanded definition/understanding of memory is definitely in order. (I have clearly shown this). Memory adds to the integrated extensiveness of experience and thought; memory integrates experience.

The dream seems to allow for what happened in the past -- to occur as a comprehensive approximation/likeness thereof -- in the future. The dream involves, and is demonstrative of, our becoming other than we are. Dreams add to the integrated extensiveness of thought, being, and experience. Clearly Steve, this is why they unify electromagnetism amd gravity. Electromagneitsm/light and gravity are fundamental to life; they are united in the dream. You will not admit that this is correct? My unification is fundamental, simple, comprehensive, complete, and consistent. In fact, my unification is more true or accurate/complete than either Einstein's theory or Maxwell's theory because it completes both of these theories and also enjoins the whole. You physicists, of all people, should know that you have to consider the totality of the system/experience.

You have to be bold when it comes to the truth.

The distinctions that I have made/identified -- between dream and waking experience -- are very useful/important (as I have shown) -- these distinctions are not to be confused, obliterated, or removed. I did not say that waking experience is a dream; dreams fade as do memories; importantly, we ultimately fade in time as well. Dreams are real; they are what they are. If our experience is not real, then what is? No two people ever see or experience the same thing anyway, whether while waking or in the dream.

THINK about it. There is then, ultimately, no true distinction between interior and exterior. The integrated and natural extensiveness of being and experience go hand-in-hand in and with time. It is that simple.

Note that the constant energy and lighting during dream experience --- and no fatigue, tiredness, or lack of energy --- is consistent with unifying and fundamentally balancing electromagnetism/light, energy, and gravity/feeling.

Reality must be understood (in varying degrees, of course) as involving (or pertaining to) what is the integrated extensiveness of being and experience (including thought). There is another critical dictionary definition. This definition clearly identifies the dream as real.

Look at how bizarre and pathetic it is that you Steve are the only one with any questions for me.

FQXi participants, who among you has the spine, brain, and heart to admit that I have unified gravity and electromagnetism/light? Stop lying, and start telling the truth.

I am open to any questions.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 30, 2009 @ 18:11 GMT
Steve, also, it was wise of you to point to "imagination" in your prior post, in reference to my ideas on dreams and waking experience. Similarly, here is what Dr. Christian Corda, PhD said about my unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light:

"Ok Frank, I signal and endorse your essay to colleagues within the scientific community. Cheers, Ch."

and...

" Dear Frank, I have carefully read your essay in last weekend. Here are my comments: 1) from the philosophy's point of view it is excellent, it looks written by following the famous Einstein's aphorism "Imagination is more important than knowledge" "

Dreams add to the integrated extensiveness of being, thought, and experience (and space) in and with time by making sensory experience in general (including electromagnetism and gravity) more like thought. This is seen in the past/present/future extensiveness of the thoughts of true genius, and in keeping with the increased predictability of events/experience as well.

The above paragraph is yet another example of the superior thoroughness of my explanation regarding said unification.

This is why the dream is unfathomably brilliant; for this is in keeping with the fact that it is the manifestation/experience of the unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light. On balance, however, thought is reduced in the dream.

In the case of the highest/true/ideal form of genius, the integrated extensiveness of thinking/thought towers over others. This form of genius is

exceedingly rare.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Aug. 31, 2009 @ 08:32 GMT
Hi Frank ,all,

Indeed I am on Earth to learn ,it's my reason of life ,learn and act .Because for me there is any Faith without acts .Here on FQXi I learned from all ,Lawrence ,Ray ,Jason ,Georgina,Amrit ,Frank ....The sharing of knowledges and imaginations,ideas is so ,so important .I take in fact what I think is foundamental .All ideas ,theories can be improved whith this simple fact ,the complementarity towards truths and truth .

I have some ideas for you Frank ,in Neurophysiology.

If we resume our brain ,here is some parameters for attraction and repulsion .The feelings are near the language in specifics brain areas .In fact we have in resume 4 main areas ,the sensitive area,the memmory ,the motion,the language .If we take thus the wake up with its electro encephalogram.The cortex with stimulis and the thalamus thus are in a specific phase ,very short .It's relevant about the electric frequences .Thus we can go more far with the electric links with Thalamus ,the center and with the little brain behind .The perception thus can be extrapolated with this limit of peception,in deed the interactions corticals and subcorticals with the different impulsions .It's relevant I think about the imagination.

Let's go more far with the rule of acids like alpha cetoglutaric acid with H20 and NH3 ,the amination is relevant ...in resume alpha cetog acid+NH3 H2O---other acid(hydrogenation)...NAD+..NADH+H(+)....glutamic acid ...still an amination(NH3..H2O)...there the decarboxylation(CO2),amination(NH3..H2O) and an other interexting the transamination and the pyruvic acid.....the alanine ,the glutamin,and the amino butyric acid are relevants for the captors .Let's take too the rule of NA K Cl.....

If we take the stimulis and the different + and - ,with the frequence ...thus .....it's possible to link all .

Sincerely

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Aug. 31, 2009 @ 23:12 GMT
Hi Steve, all:

Very IMPORTANT facts/truth on language and genius/improved thinking:

"Given the successful and increased involvement of the unconscious, the self is able to increase consciousness by representing, forming, and experiencing more consistent, desirable, and extensive (or accurate) approximations of what is a greater totality of experience. Memory and attention are then improved, and this is how language becomes possible."

AND...

"Given the relatively advanced consciousness (and desire) of the ideal (or highest) form of genius, experience and the self are extended and balanced at a shared and higher level of feeling, and experience becomes increasingly desirable, intentional, and concerning. Experience becomes more extensive and comprehensive as a reflection of desire, for the self then represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive and consistent approximation of reality. Language then becomes possible in the different sensory modalities."

These two paragraphs are required reading/knowledge for all who want to better understand genius (or improved thinking) and language.

--------------------

Balance and completeness/comprehensiveness go hand-in-hand. That is a great rule of thumb to employ in the development of improved understanding/theories.

I am glad that you see that the unification of opposites involves balance and completeness.

--------------------

In astronomical observations, isn't the higher gravity in astro. obs. related to the repulsive aspect ON BALANCE? In other words, can we say that the added gravity is offset/balanced by increased repulsion/detachment? We can -- what most people do not know/understand is that astro. obs. (say, of galaxies) are of a larger and smaller space at once.

----------------------------

I am not really familiar with what you posted in the two paragraphs under neurophysiology; but, I hope that my ideas were a help to you with same.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 1, 2009 @ 00:28 GMT
ALL FQXi participants: I'm not nearly finished with your lessons. These first lessons are just the beginning; but you need to master these basics first, just like in mathematics; I will then be in a position to teach/enlighten you even more.

The fundamentally interactive nature of being, experience, and thought is undeniable, as follows:

The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sensory experience is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience. Dreams make sensory experience in general (including gravity and electromagnetism) more like thought. Accordingly, the unification of Maxwell's and Einstein's theories (in a fourth spatial dimension) is plainly and significantly evident in/as the dream. Dreams involve a fundamental integration and spreading of being and experience at the [gravitational] mid-range of feeling BETWEEN thought AND sense. Dreams add to the integrated extensiveness of being, experience, and thought in and with time.

The natural and integrated extensiveness of being and experience go hand-in-hand -- in and with time as well. I have proven this definitively.

The self, represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive approximation of experience in general. Also, the self represents, forms, and experiences comprehensive approximations of experience in general. If the self did not represent, form, and experience a comprehensive approximation of experience in general, we would be incapable of growth and of becoming other than we are.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 1, 2009 @ 11:27 GMT
Hi Frank ,All ,

It's important to learn and teach .I think what it's a important parameter against our global reality which is the individualism .Our past habits imply a decrease of the speed of evolution .It's sad for the global scientific community and humanity too .

But We evolve fortunaly and the future will be better .The hope is a fact ,rational and logic .

The main problem is our human nature and our young universal age .

The scientists are always check by the system ,it's sad ,the sciences aren't there for that but I repeat hihhi we evolve ,this sad planet will shine one day and all these sad realities shall be a simple past .

Fortunaly for all hihi

Take care Frank

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 1, 2009 @ 23:20 GMT
Hi FQXI participants. Any credible (TOE) is going to have to address, and admit to, the following. What follows in this post has tremendous and undeniable implications/significance.

"The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sensory experience is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience." AND "Dreams make thought more like sensory...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 3, 2009 @ 09:28 GMT
Hi Frank ,

What do you think about the fact what we are going to a beautiful sphere in optimized harmony between mass.This Universal spheres with their cosmological spheres built by quantum spheres and their specifics rotations and rules .

The ultim code of building is in all quantums centers ,the spheron for me ,the fact to have a building by electromagnetism in time in relevant in my opinion .

There is an ultim aim ,our universal dream to all in fact .

Sincerely

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 4, 2009 @ 01:03 GMT
Hi Steve, the extensivness of our being, experience, and thought is tied to the comprehensiveness and consistency of our intention and concern (in relation to experience in general). This relates to truly elevated and sustained desire/intentions.

Steve -- do we not see the following on this forum? Those who think from a position of selfishness involving narrowness of mind often do so because their desires/attention/thoughts are narrowed, shifting, and unsustained/unsustainable.

Some words now on mathematics.

My technique/training, when it comes to mathematics, is not advanced enough to comment upon what you have written. I did not receive advanced training in mathematics. My ability to see [overall] mathematical relationships/balance when it comes to the "big picture" is advanced, however. Indeed, on mathematics aptitude/ability tests, I have scored extremely high in the past.

Explain your ideas to me on this in as simple and straightforward a manner as you can please, and I would be glad to give you my thoughts on it.

Mathematics plays a subordinate role when it comes to truly great thinking involving the highest/ideal form of genius. Generally speaking, mathematics requires narrow thinking (and often, very narrow thinking), in comparison with the highest form of TRUE genius.

Growth and openess (expansiveness) of mind/thinking are inseparable.

Do we not see this closed mindedness in the denials of my unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light here at FQXi?

I am glad that you seek to truly grow Steve, and that you are not so narrow minded and selfish in your interests, concerns, intentions, and intelligence.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 17:28 GMT
Hi all ,

Dear Frank ,

I invite you to read my discussions with Ray ,it's difficult to resume the Spherisation in fact .It's in the articles where there is 101 threads .

If you want you can ask me some details .I will answer you with pleasure .But my Theory is global ,all centers of interest are analyzed ,the maths,the physics,the biology,the chemistry,the astronomy and cosmology,the philosophy,thus you can imagine the difficulties to resume ,In fact I see spheres and its correlations everywhere.In the nature too there are many correlations .The spheres ,the spheroids ,the tori ,the circles ,ellipses ,ellipsoids ...it's fascinating ,I don't see any reason to have an other logic for our ultim geometry in 3D.The sphere is fundamental and facilitates so many things in the quantum dynamic and towards the cosmological dimension.More I search more I find correlations ,and that in all topics .

About the growth ,yes indeed we evolve all days .We learn still and still .And the synergies with reals are very relevant .

Regards

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 19:07 GMT
Steve, don't you think that string theory and the PHYSICIST'S Theory of Everything are lies? Isn't that clear? Both of these claims are meant (and designed) to generate tons of different, conflicting, and never-ending ideas in order to maximize funding, grants, and university positions. String theory is garbage -- an abyss into which money is poured.

The "truth" has increasingly become directed, based, and dependent on power, politics, and money. Look at peer-review. The academics HAVE to assert that they have all the supreme truths in order to justify the increasing money that you pay for THEIR truths. But, I present a problem. My unification is a "show/money/position stopper/reducer". What if one can attain to a

higher and better understanding FOR FREE, without any degree(s)? This devalues educational costs/value/authority significantly. The academics get all sorts of funding, press, and recognition with their garbage ideas.

Money is made by non-attainment and non-consensus of truth these days in order to maximize the money that is available in conjunction with same.

I will check out your ideas. I am a little tied up today.

My unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light in/as dream experience

is largely denied or ignored due to envy, selfishness, stupidity, politics, money, and power/control rights.

Why has the FACT of the definitive mathematical union of gravity and electromagnetism/light been denied for so long? The mathematical proof is there ALREADY -- the physical significance and reality of this union and proof is the dream. I have proven this definitively.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 19:21 GMT
ok Steve, how would your theory account for the fact that electromagnetic space (e.g., photons and the Sun) is both larger and smaller than ordinary or typical space (including the Earth)? How do you relate this to shape, size, and gravity? Note Steve, any unification of gravity and electromagnetism is proven by balancing scale by making gravity attractive and repulsive as electromagnetic energy/light.

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 19:22 GMT
Frank,

Don't you think that String theory is an attempt to make sense out of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity, two foundation stones that are completely incompatible with each other, yet they predict every physics experiment ever performed.

I can assure you that physicists are not in this for my money or power because they have neither. They are in it both because it's fun, and because, deep down, they want fame. Most of them want to figure out the real secrets of the universe so that their name will be remembered like Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein.

Money and power always play a roll, but not for the reasons you think. The money will pursue the idea that has the best chance of being correct. Furthermore, there is no secret advanced technology that the government and/or the rich hide from everybody else. There is no cure for cancer or UFO technology, other than the best guess of a few.

FUNDAMENTAL FACT: The rich and powerful always get first opportunity to try new technology because they are the ones who fund it and risk the money; hence, the cost is always high. BY NATURAL LAW, the rich and powerful know they can make more money and accumulate more power if they bring the cost down until the middle class and the poor can afford it.

Frank, If you know how to truly unify GR and QM, then present a hyperdrive technology. Explain how you would do it. I'd really like to read something thoughtful and articulate on the subject.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 19:37 GMT
Jason, answer his please, since none of you will or can, for some bizarre reason: The unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light is proven by balancing scale by making gravity attractive and repulsive as electromagnetic energy/light. Do you agree?

Too much money is made by never ending arguments (like string theory and TOE) and by changing experience from what is natural (to too much of an extent). FACTS. I advocate the advancement of life and consciousness and understanding -- not its disintegration, fragmentation, and division.

Most people are not as honest as they should and can be. You must be very honest (generally) and strong in order to see great truth. Too many people make lying/evasion/deception/dishonesty habitual -- or they do this to too much of an extent I mean.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 19:51 GMT
You see (clearly) the impediment to great truth/understanding that fear/weakness is. Bacon speaks of that. The truth is shocking.

THIS IS REALITY: Reality is (and must be) properly understood as pertaining to/involving (in varying degrees, of course) what is the integrated extensiveness of being and experience (including space and thought).

Generally speaking, reality is not about controlling/reducing experience!!!!

Get it??? -- Think about astro. obs. My excellent new theory is consistent with this, but it seems like you folks on here are too out of it/fearful/weak to get it.

Remember the idiotic arguments with me over whether or not we should propose definitions in disputations so we know the truth and what it is that we are discussing!! Have you seen Florin and Corda's recent antics? What do you think?

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 20:03 GMT
Frank,

I considered an attractive and resulsive gravity in two ways. First, one can consider regular mass and then, also negative mass; opposite mass-charge would repel instead of attract, as it does with Coulomb charges. Second, by manipulating space itself through the Cosmological constant. This is speculative on my part, but it fits with the general idea of Big Bangs, inflationary and expanding universes, and it is compatible with GR. As for unifying GR with QM, from what I read, I think you need to go deeper into the two subjects to find something more specific to work with. I am always here if you want to bounce around some creative ideas. IMO, GR might be explained in terms of inflatable universes and a dynamic Cosmological potential. As for unification, I'm starting to get a bad feeling that h-bar cannot be gauranteed to be the same for every brane/universe. If there was another universe whose h-bar was different from ours by 30 orders of magnitude, it could pass right through us, and doubt we would ever notice it.

Money has its own kind of truth; it flows through the lives of those who don't know how to save it or cannot find a way to save it. Money is used by a few very brilliant individuals to make more money. The rich are more honest that the poor give them credit for being. The rich have to be very careful about how they invest their money because there is always a hungry lawyer somewhere looking for a few c-notes to munch on. Hiring lawyers to defend one's wealth gets expensive as well. In the long run, it's better just to obey the law.

As for honesty, it takes a tremendous amount of though, hard work and angst to expose one's own ideas to scrutiny; it's like sharpening a sword that feels every stroke of the stone.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 20:08 GMT
None of you can even begin to object to the following: Dreams add to the integrated extensiveness of being, experience, and thought. In fact, dreams involve a fundametal integration and spreading of being and experience at the mid-range of [gravitational] feeling between thought and sense. It is not only in dream that the vision of everyone is different. Reality pertains to/involves (in varying degrees, of course) what must be understood as the integrated extensiveness of being and experience (including thought). Dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general (including gravity and electromagnetism). The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience.

The known union of gravity and electromagnetism/light -- in the fourth dimension of space that unites Einsten's theory of gravity with Maxwell's theory of light/electromagnetism -- must be understood as balancing scale by making gravity both repulsive and attractive as electromagnetic energy/light.

Einstein's theory is already balanced, extended, and properly completed/verified by said union.

This union of gravity and electromagnetism is already mathematically proven/demonstrated by the addition of the fourth spatial dimension; and, this must be plainly and significantly obvious in our experience; and, it is -- in the experience of dreaming.

Why would you all not have any questions on this? This is so important for many reasons! None of you agree with this? Open your minds. Stop only thinking what you are told! -- that is one of the big shortcomings of physicists. What good is a PhD if you can only regurgitate what you have been taught? You PhD's, in fact, have all of these ideas that you were taught so hammered/engrained in your minds, that it has significantly narrowed, reduced, and obstructed your ability to think more expansively/differently/creatively.

Sad to say, I'm sorry, yet true.

Frank Martin DiMeglio

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 20:25 GMT
To the extent that money is overvalued, people and labor are devalued. Multiculturalism is not separate from dividing the American people (including labor), so wages/spendable income has dropped. The MNCs, government, and the mass media are spreading dissatisfaction and divisiveness in accordance with increasing profits and spending. The President is the fall guy for the broken political system. Look at the Obama(good guy)/Bush(bad guy) charade. The Americans are weakening rapidly -- look at how fat they are already!

No Jason, I have explained the ALREADY known/proven unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light (in/as dreams) in a clear, mathematically consistent, fundamental, simple, and comprehensive fashion. Period.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 20:31 GMT
Jason: The unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light is proven by balancing scale by making gravity attractive and repulsive as electromagnetic energy/light. I have clearly proven this in/as dreams Jason. Admit it.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 20:33 GMT
What is mass Jason? Anybody?

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 20:43 GMT
Jason: Look at this, that you say:

I considered an attractive and resulsive gravity in two ways. First, one can consider regular mass and then, also negative mass; opposite mass-charge would repel instead of attract, as it does with Coulomb charges. Second, by manipulating space itself through the Cosmological constant. This is speculative on my part, but it fits with the general idea of Big Bangs, inflationary and expanding universes, and it is compatible with GR. As for unifying GR with QM, from what I read, I think you need to go deeper into the two subjects to find something more specific to work with. I am always here if you want to bounce around some creative ideas. IMO, GR might be explained in terms of inflatable universes and a dynamic Cosmological potential. As for unification, I'm starting to get a bad feeling that h-bar cannot be gauranteed to be the same for every brane/universe. If there was another universe whose h-bar was different from ours by 30 orders of magnitude, it could pass right through us, and doubt we would ever notice it.

VERSUS this:

The unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light is proven by balancing scale by making gravity attractive and repulsive as electromagnetic energy/light. I have clearly proven this in/as dreams.

.... and this is detailed and clearly proven in this:

The Dream Fundamentally Balances and Unifies Gravity and Electromagnetism

Now look at, comparatively, the intelligibility, simplicity, thoroughness, lack of contradiction, and clear correctness of my ideas on this.

I clearly deserve the Nobel Prize in physics. Admit it.

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 20:51 GMT
Frank,

I glanced at your political philosophy. I didn't see anything drastically different from what I believe. American wages are going south and there may be nothing that Obama can really do about it.

Your preoccupation with dreams, thought, sense, feeling, etc make me curious. Are you trying to keep track of the laws of physics using states of your own consciousness? There is only one really good and reliable way to shift between states of consciousness; that is with medication. Other ways are often subject to environmental stresses.

As for making gravity both attractive and repulsive, how do you think we should do that? I've already suggested that the Cosmological constant is really a Cosmological gas that inflates our universe and causes particles/forces and fields to change with respect to time. By allowing one region to inflate and another nearby to deflate, you can create a space-time curvature and therefore a graviational force. The Alcubierre drive relies upon exotic particles and negative energy to make space expand. That will provide useful clues to figuring out if my proposed mechanism is correct, or if some other mechanism makes more sense.

report post as inappropriate

Jason Wolfe wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 21:14 GMT
Frank,

Brevity does not equal wit, elagance or correctness. It only provides a simple target to shoot at, and very few pieces to rebuild with into something useful. It's also a little bit short on HOW.

I am enormously pleased that you asked the hard question: what is MASS. I have not completely solved that riddle. However, E2 = p2c2 + (mc2)2 relates mass and momentum/velocity to energy in a way that appears incomplete; I expect a third term that will reveal the behaviour of a spherical cross section to a hypersphere. The Higgs field, if it exists, will be fundamentally related to this Schwartzchild hypersphere in the same way that quivers and vertices depict particles and forces.

I am still fitting pieces to the puzzle. If you can fit those pieces in some specific and meaningful way, I'd like to hear it. If you are going to be vague and just repeat dreams and unification, without getting specific, I'll have to move on to something more stimulating and useful.

report post as inappropriate

Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Sep. 7, 2009 @ 21:31 GMT
FQXi participants and Jason, did you even bother reading the article? Evidently not.

The unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light is proven by balancing scale by making gravity attractive and repulsive as electromagnetic energy/light. This is very clearly shown/proven in the article below.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 8, 2009 @ 07:54 GMT
Hi all ,

Frank,

I beleive what the rotations of spheres link all like a frequence of polarisation.

I think what the mass is directly proportional with these rotations of quantum spheres .If it's correct ,all is unified .Now of course I have many improvemets to make but I am persuaded it's fundamental .

Even the sense of rotations and the angle imply the sense of attraction and of repulsion.

You know Frank ,there are many interesting people here on FQXi who can help you to improve your model mathematically,I think what a model is never finished and can be always optimized by the complemenatrity .

Best Regards

Steve

report post as inappropriate

Marsha wrote on Jun. 17, 2011 @ 16:06 GMT
New evidence shows that the universe is "clumpier" than theory of relativity would predict. I've thought for a long time that the universe is human shaped. Why not? Makes perfect sense to me.

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-06-universe-clumpier-tho
ught.html

Hope this article and comments pop to the top somewhere in the cyber universe. This is an interesting discussion.

report post as inappropriate

Alan Lowey wrote on Jun. 18, 2011 @ 09:39 GMT
Hi Marsha,

I agree that it's an intersting topic for discussion. The visible universe must show signs of it's overall 'shape' but more importantly it's overall evolution. I believe that the clumpiness is a tell-tale sign of mega structures imploding BEFORE the big bang event. It fits as good as any other proposition at present. More details are given here as well as in the discussion posts Reality Was Born Analog But Will Digital Die?

report post as inappropriate

Alan Lowey wrote on Jun. 18, 2011 @ 09:42 GMT
Here's Marsha'a source: New data suggests the universe is clumpier than thought, June 17 2011

report post as inappropriate
Alan Lowey replied on Jun. 18, 2011 @ 10:54 GMT
Here's something which seems relevant: Collective gravitational pull of these neutrinos influenced the development of the universe, June 17 2011

report post as inappropriate

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Jun. 18, 2011 @ 18:00 GMT
Understanding that the self represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive approximation of the totality of experience by combining conscious and unconscious experience is crucial to ULTIMATELY understanding mathematical description and physics, and the limits thereof. This includes dreams and waking experience.

If the self did not represent, form, and experience a comprehensive approximation of the totality of experience by combining conscious and unconscious experience, then we would be incapable of growth and of becoming other than we are.

We, and our experience, originate at/from the center of the human body.

report post as inappropriate
sridattadev replied on Jun. 22, 2011 @ 16:01 GMT
Dear Frank,

We have successfully divided intelligence and conscience into scientific and spiritual communities. Intelligence or science alone cannot answer the fundamental questions of who we really are and what is the purpose of the creation. Scientific community is terming the self or conscience as singularity and is unable to define it mathematically to fit in its theories. Some of these scientific theories suggest that there is no singularity and some of them thinnk it is infinite. In fact conscience is both "absolutely" nothing and "relatively" infinite at the same time. I am posting in these forums for the future generations to understand the significance of scientific spirituality and importance of self realization and beauty of love. It is out of love of the self or singularity that everything emerges and eventually has to merge back in it.

Conscience is the cosmological constant.

Intelligence is the cosmological variant.

Hence several inelligent or complex theories of the truth.

Truth or conscience is simple, accepting it is not.

"We, and our experience, originate at/from the center of the human body."

Yes, I is in the heart which is the center of the human body and the universe.

Love,

Sridattaev.

report post as inappropriate

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Jun. 18, 2011 @ 20:08 GMT
Gravity enjoins and balances invisible and visible space, and gravity is key to balanced attraction and repulsion in conjunction with distance in/of space. Just look down at your feet and the ground. Again, gravity is key to distance in/of space. Vision begins invisibly inside the eye/body. Gravity, invisible and visible, is key to distance in/of space. That is fundamental.

Inertia is key to balanced attraction and repulsion in conjunction with fixed distance in/of space.

Half strength/force gravity and half strength/force inertia balance attraction and repulsion in conjunction with [equivalent] middle distance in/of space.

report post as inappropriate

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Jun. 18, 2011 @ 20:25 GMT
What's wrong FQXi.org -- Is the truth seriously opposing your vested interests?

report post as inappropriate

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Jun. 18, 2011 @ 20:47 GMT
Admit that I unified gravity, electromagnetism, and inertia FQXi.org. You're still lying. Here is the proof:

To summarize, space manifests in/as the middle distance in/of space in conjunction with half gravity and half inertia, and space is contracted/flattened and stretched/expanded in keeping therewith. A smaller space is then made larger, and a larger space is then made smaller. Quantum gravity is present with balanced/equivalent attraction and repulsion, in keeping with equivalent/balanced inertia and gravity; as this all relates to/involves the middle distance in/of space. Dreams achieve electromagnetic/gravitational/inertial equilibrium.

report post as inappropriate

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Jun. 21, 2011 @ 00:55 GMT
Smaller and larger space are combined in dreams in keeping with inertial and gravitational equivalency and balancing. This balances attraction and repulsion in keeping with the experience of the middle distance in/of space.

The increase in inertia proportionately balances the decrease in gravity, so this makes [middle] force/energy equivalent with [middle] distance in/of space.

I have fundamentally unifed gravity, inertia, and electromagnetism, and I have demonstrated quantum gravity in keeping therewith.

FQXi.org, you cannot deny and ignore this. WHAT ARE YOU DOING?

report post as inappropriate

Author Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Jun. 21, 2011 @ 18:09 GMT
To the extent that one dislikes and denies [natural] reality and truth, one is detached and removed from reality and truth, and one then also seeks to replace/remove/reduce/alter it.

Seek natural and typical [foundational] experience as the requisite basis for reality and truth in physics. Dreams and waking.

report post as inappropriate

sridattadev wrote on Jun. 22, 2011 @ 15:40 GMT
Dear All,

Answers to all the scientific questions lie in the answer to a smiple question

who am I?

I am one of our kind I is everyone of all kinds

I am manifested in all sizes and shapes I is the artist

I am geometry of love I is the sigularity of love

I am a 3-sphere I is n-sphere

I am virtual reality I is absolute truth

Love,