Why dream experience is fundamental and so very important

No, frank actually wrote a book. It has reviews as well ranging from critical to profoundly positive.

About gravity constant. It has been taught to me by my teacher at school that gravity has a set value that is widely applied for gravity. Only when you make very precise measurements do you take into account the gravity distance factor when you are further away from the earth.

I'm a high school student who dropped out of school. Currently trying to regain lost time in terms of school-life so don't take my word for it. Here's the gravitational map they have made and it seems to confirm what i am saying, correct me if i'm wrong! Because i didn't fully understand and i actually had a different picture in mind. I thought gravity had to do with density of certain parts of the earth. But it seems to be applied to volume rather than density? Err.. I don't know!?

Check it out : Gravity map reveals Earth's extremes - physics-math - 19 August 2013 - New Scientist

I went to college but I was educated in the US so you're still probably a better authority

BA-ziiiiing!

If you check the numbers on that chart, Dthoughts, I think you'll notice that the reported differences in gravity are miniscule, and don't begin to approach anything that might be considered "half-gravity." In other words, yeah, there might be variations, but earth's gravity still causes falling objects to accelerate toward it at a rate of about 10 meters per second per second, wherever you might be.

And, more to the point of this thread, this information only goes to confirm that gravity is infinitely variable, with its force or influence being defined by the mass or movement of the objects in the vicinity; there is no half-gravity -- which is why I asked Frank if he was being metaphorical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dthoughts

No, frank actually wrote a book. It has reviews as well ranging from critical to profoundly positive.

About gravity constant. It has been taught to me by my teacher at school that gravity has a set value that is widely applied for gravity. Only when you make very precise measurements do you take into account the gravity distance factor when you are further away from the earth.

I'm a high school student who dropped out of school. Currently trying to regain lost time in terms of school-life so don't take my word for it. Here's the gravitational map they have made and it seems to confirm what i am saying, correct me if i'm wrong! Because i didn't fully understand and i actually had a different picture in mind. I thought gravity had to do with density of certain parts of the earth. But it seems to be applied to volume rather than density? Err.. I don't know!?

Check it out : Gravity map reveals Earth's extremes - physics-math - 19 August 2013 - New Scientist

---

There are slight measurable differences depending on where you are but no such thing as Half Gravity.. Thats just stupidity at its finest. Vanity Publishers like Franks will publish anything as long as you pay them. They will even give the book good reviews hoping some sucker will fork out the money to waste on it.

Ah well, I like Frank's idea about Flattened reality on a TV screen. It makes sense when you think about how occupying it is for the brain to focus on a tv screen. It is about fundamentally the same as how much is occupied in the brain when watching reality itself. :) <3

gab, you are playing the jerk you back and forth (good guy/bad guy) game again. This is not a game, unless this forum is a joke. This forum is about advancing the understanding gab, not about you personally ridiculing and insulting me. Who is your supervisor here gab? Who is the site administrator of this forum? Who owns this forum?

In the absence of fundamental inertial and gravitational equivalency and balancing there is (and there can be) no experience or extensiveness of space. Inertia and gravity are held to be opposites. However, the ultimate understanding of physics combines, balances, and includes opposites. The physicists admit that they still cannot explain inertial and gravitational equivalency and balancing. Inertial and gravitational equivalency is established as a fact in physics, however. Full gravity is a collapse of space, and full inertia would disperse space.

Newton believed that inertia must be a property of space itself.

The Earth/ground: Full distance in/of space, full sphere, full gravity, and visible space.
The invisible space above it is half inertia and half gravity consistent with the fact that this is a middle distance in/of space between outer space (full inertia) and the Earth/ground (full gravity). The invisible space above the Earth/ground extends to outer space as well. The visual experience of the space (obviously, it is a space) above the Earth/ground is both visible and invisible/not visible. Invisible and visible space in fundamental equilibrium and balance is the middle distance in/of space (clearly, logically, and fundamentally) consistent with half gravity and half inertia. (This is understood as involving a sort of cancelling/balancing). Inertia and gravity are in then in balance, as position and position relative to distance in/of space are both accounted for/consistent (i.e., as middle distance in/of space). Vision begins invisibly inside the eye/body.

Dreams balance being and experience. Vision begins invisibly inside the eye/body. The experience of the eye is both visible and invisible. Think about it. Dreams may involve visual experience. This visual experience is visible (to the dreamer) and invisible/not visible (to others). The visual experience in/as dream experience is both visible and invisible/not visible. Inertia and gravity are in then in balance, as position and position relative to distance in/of space are both accounted for/consistent; dream experience is that of the middle distance in/of space (seen and felt/touched.)

Dream experience fully and consistently involves the following as well: Invisible and visible space in fundamental equilibrium and balance is the middle distance in/of space (clearly, logically, and fundamentally) consistent with half gravity and half inertia.

I am respectfully requesting a reply from the site administrator and owner of this forum. Author Frank DiMeglio

I am Gab's supervisor, the illustrious Owner. You are currently participating in my forum where thoughts are shared in a respectful manner. From what I have observed, you are confusing a confusion of your point with disrespect. You are inhibiting people from gaining clarification by getting offended by their criticism, which mostly revolves around elaborating on the terminology you use (e.s. half-gravity).

Please remember not to take it personally. Thank you and enjoy my awesome website which I make oodles of cash from owning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dthoughts

Ah well, I like Frank's idea about Flattened reality on a TV screen. It makes sense when you think about how occupying it is for the brain to focus on a tv screen. It is about fundamentally the same as how much is occupied in the brain when watching reality itself. :) <3

---

It isn't originally his idea. Type in "quantum theory pixel" on google and read the first few results. Describes pretty much the same thing, the idea is that when reality is observed, it is "flattened" into a final product, much like the pixels on a computer screen. There are a set of rules, patterns, laws, inputs, outputs, etc. that go on behind the scenes, but when you try and actually observe the final product, what you see is what you get. It's used to explain how light can both be a wave and a particle, among other things.

Shit. OP! I fought this so hard. For 30 whole seconds, I managed to hold back the laughter. Because I hate to sit alone on the couch, laughing like a maniac. But...

http://i1371.photobucket.com/albums/...ps92a2109d.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Original Poster

I am Gab's supervisor, the illustrious Owner. You are currently participating in my forum where thoughts and shared in a respectful manner. From what I have observed, you are confusing a confusion of your point with disrespect. You are inhibiting people from gaining clarification by getting offended by their criticism, which mostly revolves around elaborating on the terminology you use (e.s. half-gravity).

Please remember not to take it personally. Thank you and enjoy my awesome website which I make oodles of cash from owning.

---

I died. Oh my god.

evil gab gently nudges thread back on topic with a hot fireplace poker

nice gab hands everybody a brewski

Thank you gab, I appreciate your hard work and dedication. You are a valuable member of our team. Please, people, let's be respectful to Frank and keep this on topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Thank you gab, I appreciate your hard work and dedication. You are a valuable member of our team. Please, people, let's be respectful to Frank and keep this on topic.

---

I still dont understand what Frank is saying..... sigh.... He mostly copied the Pixel theory , that I do know.
But Im still confused about the Half gravity / Half Inertia garb..

Frank, Please explain in plain terms what Half Gravity is.

Thank you.

Dr. Dave

THIS IS CALLED CHECKMATE IN POKER

In dreams, we are conscious and alive in conjunction with the fundamental experience of our growth and becoming other than we are. It's real simple folks. This is how we fundamentally are constituted and how we fundamentally and ultimately got here (or got to where we are). Dreams are fundamentally related, and dreams are fundamentally linked; and yet dreams are separate as well. It all makes sense. Dream experience grows/increases, and dreams involve our growth and becoming other than we are.

Dreams are quantum gravity. Dreams involve a mastery of physics/physical experience.

Dreams involve visible and invisible space in fundamental equilibrium and balance and half inertia and half gravity in keeping with the experience of the middle distance in/of space and balanced middle strength force/energy/feeling/touch. This is in keeping with instantaneity. Dreams fully involve/are quantum gravity. Full gravity, space collapses. Full inertia, space disperses.
Invisible and visible space in fundamental equilibrium and balance IS the middle distance in/of space in dreams in keeping with half gravity and half inertia.
Dreams balance being and experience.

The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sensory experience is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience. This is true in the case of both dreams and television. Dreams are not a creation of thought, television is. Accordingly, TV is fully like (or fully similar to)thought. Dreams can be fundamentally understood. Dreams improve upon memory and understanding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Thank you gab, I appreciate your hard work and dedication. You are a valuable member of our team. Please, people, let's be respectful to Frank and keep this on topic.

---

Thank you gab, you are a valued member of my army, for all the work you do.

Frank, you are on to something here. I'm convinced that you are on to something. Please elaborate further.

Thanks Deanstar.

FOR MORE IMPORTANT AND RELATED PROOF OF ALL OF THIS, PLEASE GO TO: Extended Discussion, under Science & Mathematics: The Fundamental Comparison of Waking Physics and Dream Physics (by FrankDiMeglio).

Site administrator, your thoughts on my full position in these two threads would be most welcome. Thanks.

Deanstar and Site Administrator:

THIS IS GIGANTIC NEWS IN PHYSICS, AND IT IS ALSO THE COMPLETE, CLEAR, ACCURATE, AND CONSISTENT DESCRIPTION AND UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT DREAM EXPERIENCE REALLY IS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrankDiMeglio

Our experience is necessarily that of the middle distance in/of space, in our waking and dream experience. Dream experience is that of the middle distance in/of space consistent with half gravity and half inertia and fundamentally equivalent and balanced gravity, inertia, and electromagnetism. Dream experience fully involves quantum gravity. Dreams balance being and experience. The ultimate unification of physics combines, balances, and includes opposites. Dreams combine, balance, and include opposites. Unification in physics demands and involves a balancing of being AND experience.

---

Ok, there are a lot of misconceptions and falshoods here but I will stick with your idea of experience, both in dreams and waking being in "middle distance" with space.
Experience does not exist in space, experience is a virtualised abstaction that our brains construct. That is true of both waking and dream experience. The only difference between the two is that during walking life, the virtual construct of our experience is being modulated by our senses. Even so, most of the elements in our experience are either heavily interpretated or outright fabricated by our brains, our senses only contribute in patches.

If you are wondering how we can be so confident of this, with just vision as an example, we have dissected the structure of the eye, the optic nerve and the visual cortex to such a degree that we know now how much the eyes contribute to our visual experience and the answer is far less than you think. Things like lines, edges or basically anything beyond blobs of vague hues (which is what our uninterpreted visual input would look like) is created by our visual cortex.

Quote:

---

Newton believed that inertia must be a property of space itself.

---

Newton also believed in things like phlogiston being the cause of fire and the philosopher's stone. As important a figure as he was, his theory of gravitation has been supplanted by that of Einstien's.

Quote:

---

Nobody, to this day, can truly and fundamentally explain gravitational and inertial equivalency and balancing.[B] Given full inertia, space disperses. Given full gravity, space collapses.[/B} What is at issue here is the very extensiveness of space itself. Physics does not get more important than this.

---

Nobody can explain it because it's in your head. First of all, gravity and inertia do not have a yin yang relationship. Inertia is the resistance a body has to changes in it's state of motion. Given infinite inertia (the only sensical interpretation I can give to what you may mean by "full"), the body would possess infinite momentum too and thus have "full" gravity with an infinitly deep perturbation in the space-time fabric. Gravitational force and inertia cannot exist without each other. There is no such thing as space dispersal. Space is flat by default and it is the introduction of the momentum that causes perturbations on it's fabric.

Quote:

---

Invisible AND visible space in FUNDAMENTAL equilibrium and balance IS the middle distance in/of space consistent with half gravity and half inertia. (Notice the cancelling/balancing that is involved with this unification.) This is a fundamental and huge truth in physics.

---

This is a fundamental and huge blunder in physics.

Quote:

---

This applies to both dream physics and waking physics. The Earth/ground is full gravity. Outer space is full inertia. The invisible space/sky extends/is between both. Notice here that dream experience is consistent with that of the eye/body. Dream experience is the middle distance (and is invisible) in relation to visible waking experience.

---

This applies to no physical behaviour in our universe. Also, even if your dicotomy between gravity and inertia was valid, outer space is not berift of gravitational force.
You see we live in this thing called the solar system which is held in place by the massive nucleur furnace we call the sun in the centre. That homely furnace of fun has a 65 million year orbit around an even bigger structure called the milky way. On a cosmological scale, the structure of our universe resembles that of a great spider web with celestial filliments consisting of millions of galaxies with great voids in between. These sorts of structures cannot exist without the presense of gravity.

There is literally no place in our universe that does not experience gravitational force with the possible and I stress possible exception of the edges of the universe where space is expanding faster than the speed of light. The reason why I believe it is possible for those regions to possess no gravitational forces is because gravitational waves propogate at the speed of light and thus the crest of the wave of expansion would outrace it. (incidently, this is the very reason why it is possible that our universe may be infinite in size despite the finite date of the big bang but I digress). However, even in those regions, you would have nothing to possess inertia in the first place!

People honestly need to stop applying pseudoscience to dream experience. I respect shared dreaming projects and other "out there" stuff but that's because they are actually trying to do shit as opposed to forming elaborate and ill informed theories which even the most rudimentry knowledge of physics would demolish.

What you and Mr. Star need to do is stop trying to sound smart and learn shit, starting with volume one of this:

The Feynman Lectures on Physics

Most importantly, the space above the VISIBLE Earth/ground involves visible AND invisible space in FUNDAMENTAL equilibrium and balance. Accordingly, this invisible space IS middle distance in/of space consistent with half gravity AND half inertia.

Full distance in/of space is in fundamental and natural equilibrium and balance with middle distance in/of space.

The experience of the eye and body is visible and invisible. The experience of another person's eye is visible, but the observer's eye/body is not seen/invisible. An eye is an eye. (The intervening space involves visible and invisible space in fundamental equilibrium and balance.) Dreams balance being and experience. Dream experience is fundamentally consistent with that of the eye/body. Accordingly, dreams involve invisible and visible space in fundamental equilibrium and balance consistent with:

1) Balanced and equivalent attraction and repulsion.
2) Quantum gravity.
3) The experience of the middle distance in/of space (seen and felt/touched).
4) Balanced middle strength force/feeling/touch/energy. (Notice that VISION begins INVISIBLY inside the eye/body.)
5) Instantaneity.
6) Half gravity and half inertia.
7) Equivalent and balanced gravity, inertia, and electromagnetism.

Dream experience is possible/potential and actual.

The self represents, forms, and experiences a comprehensive approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience. This is a very great truth/fact. Dream experience is consistent with this fact. If the self did not represent, form, and experience a comprehensive approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience, we would then be incapable of growth and of becoming other than we are. Dreams involve the fundamental experience of our growth and becoming other than we are. It's real simple. I have way too much here for it to be dismissed. The weight of evidence is more than sufficient to prove what I am claiming.

Quote:

---

It's real simple. I have way too much here for it to be dismissed. The weight of evidence is more than sufficient to prove what I am claiming.

---

If only that evidence could be translated to a language understandable by us mere proletariats. Alas, we will never be able to fanthom the awesome depths of your insight, depths that plunge so deep as to make any entry instantly lethel for the untouchables still constrained by rationality and evidence. I envy you and Mr. Star who seems to really understand everything you've said.

If only all scientific papers were penned with the same beautifully obtuse language that you use. Truely, this is the Qu'ran of Science.

The manifestation that is (and that involves) our growth and becoming other than we are exists. It is real. That is undeniable.

The truth is simple. The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sensory experience is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience. Thought is more like sensory experience in general in dreams. Accordingly, dreams are fundamentally understood in a deep and simple fashion.

Our growth and becoming other than we are is what necessarily, naturally, ultimately, and fundamentally constitutes us and our experience. It is also clear that our growth and becoming other than we are was ongoing/continuous. Also, dream experience grows/increases. There is no getting around this. I have clearly proven these facts with clear, comprehensive, consistent, abundant, and various truths, proofs, and facts.

In dreams, we are conscious and alive in conjunction with the fundamental experience of our growth and becoming other than we are. Accordingly, dream experience is fundamentally linked with (and fundamentally related to) waking experience; and yet the waking and dream experiences are separate experiences as well.

gab, your reply please. Thanks.


by Author Frank Martin DiMeglio

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrankDiMeglio

gab, your reply please. Thanks.

---

Frank, why are you asking for my reply?

As I have said, I am not an authority on whatever is that you are talking about. Administrator is not an academic title.

There are people here that were actually asking you clear questions and were happy to debate with you. Why are you not replying to them? Why are you not using your words? A copy/paste of same reply of a same reply is not using your words. You already presented your case. When someone asks for clarification because he didn't understand something, you need to explain using different words.

Take care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gab

Take care.

---

Sheriff Gab rested her right hand lightly on her ethereal holster, emphasizing the presence of the ban-gun that shone menacingly under the florescent glare of the web sun.

gab, this post and my last post are definitive proof TO ANYONE (I used different words, ok ?.) SOMETHING IS CLEARLY VERY WRONG WITH THE WAY THESE IDEAS (AND MY PERSON) ARE BEING "HANDLED" (including ignored) HERE. IT IS OBVIOUS, AND IT IS VERY WRONG.


THE DEFINITIVE PHYSICS OF DREAMS


There is a fundamental cancelling/balancing that involves invisible and visible space in fundamental equilibrium and balance. This is consistent with the experience of the eye/body. Dreams balance being and experience. (The eye and the body are visible and invisible.) VISION begins INVISIBLY inside the eye/body.

Bodily and visual experience are in balance in dreams. Dreams include and involve bodily experience (including visual).

Invisible and visible space in fundamental equilibrium and balance is the middle distance in/of space in dreams consistent with balanced middle strength feeling/touch/force/energy and half gravity and half inertia. This also involves balanced and equivalent attraction and repulsion. (Notice that instantaneity in dreams is consistent with my position here.)

THIS IS MEGA IMPORTANT.

By Author Frank Martin DiMeglio

FOR THOSE WITH ADVANCED KNOWLEDGE OR EXPERTISE IN PHYSICS: Dreams are quantum gravity (theoretically and actually), and they do involve fundamentally and ultimately equivalent and balanced gravity, inertia, and electromagnetism.

Dream experience is possible/potential AND actual. Ultimately and fundamentally, physics/physical reality is possible/potential AND actual.

I have accomplished THE extensive/complete, natural, permanent, fundamental, ultimate, theoretical, and true/actual UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS. Also, I have proven why this is necessarily the case in/as dream experience.

by Author Frank Martin DiMeglio

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrankDiMeglio

SOMETHING IS CLEARLY VERY WRONG WITH THE WAY THESE IDEAS ARE BEING COMMUNICATED.

---

Fixed that for you.

Frank to be honest with you. It would actually be interesting to be able to try to understand you. And even if all that you say is making perfect sense to you. That dosn't mean it does make any sense at all for anyone else.

I dont write this to make fun of you in any way, so please dont get upset by the following words. All I want to say is that the type of way you explain your ideas in, is a totall mess for us to follow. So if you sincerely consider to reach out to us with your ideas at all. Then you have to totally change your choice of words to begin with. That implyes for example: If you feel like using the word "equilibrium", look for a simpler word or meaning for that instead. And try to explain one thing at time istead of all of the complexity of your ideas at once.

Here is what NOT to do: "A dream is a matter of balance/equilibrium in and out of space in vaccum of the middle distance of half inertia/half gravity upside down and to the left of the invisible but yet visible distance of space." Did this make sense to you Frank if I tell you that it does to me? This is how everybody here see and not understanding your explenations to be super honest with you.

Using complex words might sound more elegant to some people, and probably make it possible to sound like one is intellectual to people who dont have a clue about what the context of the text is about due to complex use of words. So then the actuall point of the text is missing instead of making sense to the one's who read it.

Frank here is my golden advice to you so here we go: Instead of trying to explain everything at once, break your ideas into smaller pieces instead. And start out to explaining one at a time instead. For example it could go Something like this: Dreams contains the memorys of our waken life. And dreams involves all of our sense like seeing with our eyes. Except that we dont use our physical eyes in dreams. But rather what we call memories which is mental pictures of what we once saw. We could call this invisible seeing in dreams, whish would be the replacement of our physical seeing that we use in reality.

You see what we all want you to do now Frank? In the example above, I was explaining the sense of seeing in dreams, and didnt even mention anything about hearing or gravity yet. Take one thing at a time, and explain it so clear that a ten yearold kid could follow what you are saying as well. Then You will start to catch many peoples attention instead of loosing of interset due to complex use of words and lack of explaining. And one last but most important advice to you Frank. Remember that this is a forum where people are exchaining ideas and discuss ideas. Do try to answear peoples questions as much as you can instead of ignore them, if you want to keep the interest about your ideas alive here. And there is not MUCH NEED TO WRITE important/things IN THIS way EITHER.

Hope to hear from you soon Frank. And If you actually try follow the advices above. Then you will make a big difference in peoples attitude towards you, and we could hopfully start to connect, rather than look at eachother with a confused look. Good luck with you new type of writing Frank. C ya around!:cheers: