How dreams theoretically AND actually unify gravity, inertia, and electromagnetism

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by Frank M DiMeglio, Feb 1, 2011.

?

Is this the unification of physics in general?

Poll closed Apr 2, 2011.

  1. Is f=ma fundamentally demonstrated?

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%

  2. Are inertia and gravity shown as balanced/equivalent?

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%

  3. Are generally balanced attraction and repulsion shown?

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%

  4. Is quantum phenomena fundamentally/generally shown?

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%

  5. No.

    5 vote(s)
    100.0%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 9 of 10
  1. James R

    James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    38,009
    Frank:

    Why? You keep making unsupported claims like this. I keep asking you to support them with mathematics or other argument/evidence, but you seem incapable of presenting any.

    One last chance, Frank, then I give up on you.

    This seems nonsensical. What are y and z and A and v? Explain.

    It's not obvious to me. Explain why it cannot do that. It's ok. I'm comfortable with maths. You can make a detailed mathematical argument if you like.

    Since neither you nor I have the ultimate understanding of physics, neither of us is in a position to agree or disagree with this claim of yours.

    How? Explain.

    How so?

    How is this evident? Explain the evidence for me.

    Does it? What is required for vision?

    This doesn't seem to be true in my dreams.

    What is this middle distance you are referring to? Explain.

    And how can something be both invisible and visible at the same time?

    I asked you last time when you planned to start teaching me.

    Will you start with your next post, please.

    I can't keep waiting for you to begin forever.

    You can start by answering my questions, so I can learn from you.

    Is this a mystery I'm supposed to solve on my own, or will you teach me your ideas?

    If I have to do all the work, then I don't think I'll need you any more.

    What is this if not a response?

    I've given you a few posts worth of my time. You're beginning to bore me with your lack of response. I'll give you one more post to start explaining. If nothing is forthcoming, then I'm done with you.

    How is my credibility on the line? I have made no claims. All I have done is asked you questions. It seems to me that it is your credibility that is very much on the line here.

    I'm so glad you're finally willing to help me. Please answer my questions in your next post so I can start learning. I'll even thank you in anticipation. Please don't disappoint me, O Teacher.

    Are we playing chess? Please explain.

    This is already published - right here on sciforums.

    By the way, I own the copyright to my posts here. I do NOT give you permission to republish my words on any other site on the internet or to copy them in any correspondence or other writings of yours published elsewhere. If I find that you have done this, you will be in breach of copyright and subject to potential legal action. Just so you know.

    If I find an error, I'll ask about it after your explanations in your following post.
     
    James R, Dec 12, 2011
    #161

  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Frank M DiMeglio

    Frank M DiMeglio Guest

    The gravity is reduced to the extent that the inertia is increased. The space is fundamentally, generally, and on the whole semi-visible/semi-invisible. The space is equally (and it is both) invisible and visible in conjunction with equivalent/balanced inertia and gravity (both at half strength force/energy), instantaneity, and equivalent /balanced attraction and repulsion. Fundamental instantaneity and gravitational/electromagnetic/inertial equilibrium, balance, and equivalency are present.

    There is no way around this.

    Moderator -- your credibility, honesty, and profesionalism are really on the line here.

    Respond.
     
    Frank M DiMeglio, Dec 12, 2011
    #162

  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. AlexG

    AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    This really has to be cesspooled.
     
    AlexG, Dec 12, 2011
    #163

  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Dywyddyr

    Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,244
    Yet to be shown.

    On the contrary: it's YOURS that's at question here. You have, so far, failed to substantiate (or even support) a single one of your contentions.
     
    Dywyddyr, Dec 12, 2011
    #164
  8. MacGyver1968

    MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    The problem is with induced bi-radial co-thesis in the phase band. Coriolis drift in the polymer/non-polymer basis will override any stagnant matrix alignment. Since this happens on a quantum level, instaneity will be instantly standtized.
     
    MacGyver1968, Dec 13, 2011
    #165
  9. Dywyddyr

    Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,244
    Can't a left-handed framistat reverse the neutron polarity and alleviate some of the problem?
     
    Dywyddyr, Dec 13, 2011
    #166
  10. AlexG

    AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Don't need a framistat as long as you have one of these

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    AlexG, Dec 13, 2011
    #167
  11. James R

    James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    38,009
    Frank:

    You didn't answer any of my questions. Are you incapable of answering questions?

    Your credibility, honesty and professionalism are really on the line here (as they say).
     
    James R, Dec 13, 2011
    #168
  12. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,713
    Come on Frank!

    As gravity is reduced inertia is modulated/harmonized in conjunction with the quantum dipole!

    This is only true when the polarization/flatuation of the constituent strings occurs on the submicron level.

    Wong again. The equivalent/balanced attraction and repulsion are due to a fluctuating field resulting from the expulsion/absorption of the fundamental curvature of space-time in/around the displacement of the of nano particles made up of virtual neutrino-tachyon antiparticles.

    OK, this one is correct but only when all 7 dimensions are included and the 7-D space is defined by the Higgs Bison at a mass of 213.8 TeV

    As my uncle use to say, "it does not matter how big the pile of crap is - there is always a way around it."

    Frank -- your credibility, honesty, and profesionalism are really on the line here.

    Well, actually you have no credibility or professionalism. I do however think that you honestly believe what you are saying, but that only makes it bit scarier...
     
    origin, Dec 13, 2011
    #169
  13. Frank M DiMeglio

    Frank M DiMeglio Guest

    Gravity and inertia are both fundamental to distance in/of space. Stand up James R Moderator, and look directly downward at the ground. Full gravity is full distance in/of space.

    The gravity is reduced to the extent that the inertia is increased. The space is fundamentally, generally, and on the whole semi-visible/semi-invisible. The space is equally (and it is both) invisible and visible in conjunction with equivalent/balanced inertia and gravity (both at half strength force/energy), instantaneity, and equivalent/balanced attraction and repulsion. Fundamental instantaneity and gravitational/electromagnetic/inertial equilibrium, balance, and equivalency are present.

    There is no way around this.

    Moderator -- your credibility, honesty, and profesionalism are really on the line here.
    Where is your reply James R Moderator? Checkmate buddy. You cannot refute this.

    Author Frank Martin DiMeglio has clearly, generally, and fundamentally unified gravity, inertia, and electromagnetism in conjunction with the fundamental, true, and generalized demonstration/inclusion of both instantaneity and quantum gravity.

    Respond to THIS POST James R Moderator -- fully, directly, and specifically. Good luck.
     
    Frank M DiMeglio, Dec 14, 2011
    #170
  14. Dywyddyr

    Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,244
    Repeated empty bullshit claims and no support whatsoever?
    What does go on in your fevered little mind?
     
    Dywyddyr, Dec 14, 2011
    #171
  15. Pincho Paxton

    Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    You need to change the way you explain this. I had to read it about 6 times before I realised what you were talking about. What it has to do with dreams I have no idea.
     
    Pincho Paxton, Dec 14, 2011
    #172
  16. AlexG

    AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    I think James is just having fun with this.

    There have been many threads cesspooled and locked which made much more sense than this one.

    Frankie is a major league, well recognized internet science wacko, and I think James just likes having him around to laugh at.
     
    AlexG, Dec 14, 2011
    #173
  17. wlminex

    wlminex Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    AlexG: ". . . . I think James just likes having him around to laugh at."

    . . . .Et Tu Brute! . . . .
     
    wlminex, Dec 14, 2011
    #174
  18. AlexG

    AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Whereas Wl is a minor league, unkown, unrecognized internet science crank, but he's trying.
     
    AlexG, Dec 14, 2011
    #175
  19. Frank M DiMeglio

    Frank M DiMeglio Guest

    Instantaneity is fundamental to physics. Gravitational and inertial equivalency and balancing are fundamental to physics. Gravity and inertia are fundamental to distance in/of space. Indeed, for all of these facts, it is shown that Einstein's understanding/conception of gravity is fundamentally unsound, incomplete, and unbalanced.

    Physics happens in and with time. A simple, and yet important, fact. Time and no time. Accordingly, instantaneity needs to be demonstrated in conjunction with gravitational and inertial equivalency and balancing and the fact that gravity and inertia are fundamental to distance in/of space. Combine, balance, and include opposites.

    The fundamental unification of physics requires the fundamental demonstration of instantaneity. "Our growth and becoming other than we are" will be shown to generally unify physics. DREAMS DEMONSTRATE "Our growth and becoming other than we are".

    Indeed, to what extent can physics demonstrate "Our growth and becoming other than we are"? This is THE question?

    "Mass" FUNDAMENTALLY involves gravitational and inertial equivalency and balancing in conjunction with balanced and equivalent attraction and repulsion. This explains F=ma FUNDAMENTALLY. GRAVITY AND INERTIA ARE BOTH FUNDAMENTAL TO DISTANCE IN/OF SPACE. AUTHOR FRANK MARTIN DIMEGLIO HAS GENERALLY AND FUNDAMENTALLY UNIFIED PHYSICS.

    Gravity and inertia are both fundamental to distance in/of space.

    Stand up James R Moderator, and look directly downward at the ground.
    Full gravity is full distance in/of space.

    The gravity is reduced to the extent that the inertia is increased.
    The space is fundamentally, generally, and on the whole
    semi-visible/semi-invisible. The space is equally (and it is both)
    invisible and visible in conjunction with equivalent/balanced inertia
    and gravity (both at half strength force/energy), instantaneity, and
    equivalent/balanced attraction and repulsion. Fundamental
    instantaneity and gravitational/electromagnetic/inertial equilibrium,
    balance, and equivalency are present.

    There is no way around this.

    Moderator -- your credibility, honesty, and profesionalism are really on the line here. Where is your reply James R Moderator to this entire post? Checkmate buddy.
    You cannot refute this.

    Author Frank Martin DiMeglio has clearly (theoretically AND actually), generally and fundamentally, unified gravity, inertia, and electromagnetism in conjunction with the
    fundamental, true, and generalized demonstration/inclusion of both
    instantaneity and quantum gravity (in/as dream experience).
    Clearly and obviously, dreams are physics.

    Physics Today, FQXI.org, and you (James R Moderator) are all evading and lying about this fundamental and general unification of physics that I have definitively, completely, and clearly shown.

    STATE YOUR EXACT AND SPECIFIC REASONS AS TO WHY THIS UNIFICATION IS FUNDAMENTALLY INCORRECT MR. MODERATOR.
     
    Frank M DiMeglio, Dec 14, 2011
    #176
  20. Frank M DiMeglio

    Frank M DiMeglio Guest

    DREAMS DEMONSTRATE "Our growth and becoming other than we are". I have fundamentally and generally unified physics.

    I have also demonstrated, and included, all of the following in as/dream experience:

    "Mass" FUNDAMENTALLY involves gravitational and inertial equivalency and balancing in conjunction with balanced and equivalent attraction and repulsion. This explains F=ma FUNDAMENTALLY. GRAVITY AND INERTIA ARE BOTH FUNDAMENTAL TO DISTANCE IN/OF SPACE. ACCORDINGLY, AUTHOR FRANK MARTIN DIMEGLIO HAS GENERALLY AND FUNDAMENTALLY UNIFIED PHYSICS.

    Moderator, reply in full to this entire post -- and to my prior post as well -- in full, and with with clarity and specifics. Be honest.
     
    Frank M DiMeglio, Dec 14, 2011
    #177
  21. AlexG

    AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    This paragraph is so totally meaningless it's breathtaking.
     
    AlexG, Dec 14, 2011
    #178
  22. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,713
    The way Frank is yelling about nonsense, it reminds me of this clip for some reason....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ows9E0-yUOI&feature=endscreen&NR=1
     
    origin, Dec 14, 2011
    #179
  23. Pincho Paxton

    Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    I think that this is actually a self generating word algorithm. I've written them before, and this seems to look the same. In fact I might upload mine for a laugh.
     
    Pincho Paxton, Dec 14, 2011
    #180
Page 9 of 10
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page