Why the physics of dreams is BETWEEN full gravity and full electromagnetism

[Frank Martin DiMeglio]

Bodily/visual experience in dreams is invisible and visible in balance. Dream experience is semi-detached in relation to touch/tactile experience.
Dreams are more like thought, thereby improving upon memory and understanding. Dream experience is that of the middle distance in/of space.
Dreams are not a creation of thought.

It is the invisible eye/body that experiences television (full electromagnetism), as television is fully detached from touch/tactile experience. Television is fully like thought, as it is a creation of thought. The distance in/of space in the experience of television is ELIMINATED/flattened.
We are out of touch with reality in the experience of television in any event.

Given the fully visible body in the experience of full gravity, the experience of the Earth/ground is not detached in relation to touch/tactile experience. The Earth/ground is fully visible. Full gravity is full distance in/of space as it is seen, felt, AND touched.
(Consider the range of gravitational feeling.)

Invisible and visible space in fundamental equilibrium and balance is the middle distance in/of space consistent with half gravity and half inertia.

Dreams balance possible/potential and actual experience. Dream experience is necessarily that of the middle distance in/of space consistent with the fact that it is semi-detached in relation to touch/tactile experience. Dreams involve ultimately and fundamentally equivalent and balanced gravity, inertia, and electromagnetism (half gravity and half inertia). Dream experience is between (and in the middle of) our experiences of full gravity and full electromagnetism. Dreams are a linked center of body experience. Dreams balance being and experience, and dreams balance conscious and unconscious experience. The space in dreams is stretched/expanded and contracted/flattened on balance. Dreams involve how a larger space is made smaller and how a smaller space is made larger (on balance).

In dreams, we are conscious and alive in conjunction with the fundamental experience of our growth and becoming other than we are.

There is no outsmarting the genius of dreams. The space in dreams is invisible and visible in fundamental equilibrium and balance consistent with half gravity and half inertia. This is the experience of the middle distance in/of space consistent with space that is semi-detached in relation to touch/tactile experience. Accordingly, dreams involve balanced and maximum middle strength force/energy feeling/touch consistent with instantaneity and the experience of the middle distance in/of space.

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 applies to both dreams and television. Dreams are fundamentally described and understood. Television is a form or manifestation of extended dream vision as waking vision.

By Author Frank Martin DiMeglio

[ACG52]

This has been spammed over different forums multiple times. It's simply nonsense.

Edited July 21, 2015 by ACG52

[Phi for All]

!

Moderator Note

No.

 

You've posted here before, you know you can't post non-mainstream guesswork with no supportive evidence in the mainstream sections. I've moved this to Speculations, but even here, you need to support your idea much better than this.

 

If you can't abide by our rules, I'd like to suggest you start a blog. You haven't been discussing science so far, which is what we do here. You've been posting like an author, not someone interested in discussing how your framework stacks up to reality, with a mixture of professional and amateur scientists.

 

Please stick to the parts of your idea you can support with evidence. Please avoid making up terms only you will understand. And please answer any questions members may have.

[pzkpfw]

My hovercraft is full of eels.

[Strange]

By Author Frank Martin DiMeglio

 

That almost sounds as if he were proud of it. I think I would be deeply embarrassed to have come up with something like that.

[Frank Martin DiMeglio]

Phi for All:

It is much easier to be critical than correct. If it is so wrong and insubstantial, which it clearly is not, then you can tell me what is wrong with it. Good luck. You can't.

Invisible bodily/visual experience (the eye) is fundamentally averaged and balanced with visible bodily/visual experience. Accordingly, the space is semi-detached in relation to touch in the experience of the middle distance in/of space. The physics of dreams proves what they are. That is evidence. It is clearly proven. It all makes sense.

Also, in dreams, there is a maximum of half of the feeling/touch that is experienced while waking and standing. That is solid and real proof as well.

We all grow and originate at/from the center of the human body.

So, I want to hear from you exactly why it is all wrong. Be honest. It is correct.

Edited July 21, 2015 by Frank Martin DiMeglio

[Phi for All]

Invisible bodily/visual experience (the eye) is fundamentally averaged and balanced with visible bodily/visual experience. Accordingly, the space is semi-detached in relation to touch in the experience of the middle distance in/of space. The physics of dreams proves what they are. That is evidence. It is clearly proven. It all makes sense.

 

!

Moderator Note

I specifically asked you not to make up phrases in this sloppy, word-salad style. Nobody recognizes any of these concepts but you, you don't support them with anything intelligible, and it's NOT science. We're a science discussion forum.

 

Please go start a blog. You're not welcome here if this is the way you're going to treat this site, and science in general. We ask that discussions here follow a set of rules, and you ignore those. We love ideas here, but wild, unsupported, buzzword-filled guesswork?! Not so much.

 

You aren't debating me in this thread, I'm here to enforce the rules, so please don't respond to this modnote. I'll leave the thread open for a bit for responses to your "challenge", but you need to start supporting yourself with more than guesswork you claim is "proof".

[swansont]

Phi for All:

It is much easier to be critical than correct. If it is so wrong and insubstantial, which it clearly is not, then you can tell me what is wrong with it. Good luck. You can't.

...

So, I want to hear from you exactly why it is all wrong. Be honest. It is correct.

 

It's gibberish. One can't go into more detail than that. To tell what's wrong there has to be something intelligible to begin with.

[Frank Martin DiMeglio]

The BODY/bodily experience may be visible or invisible in dreams. Accordingly, bodily/visual experience is invisible and visible in balance in dreams. (Vision begins invisibly inside the eye/body.) The eye is invisible and visible. Your experience of your eye is invisible, and yet the dome of another person's eye is visible as well. The eye/body has the dual properties of visibility and invisibility in balance. Dreams balance being and experience.

Dream involve fundamentally equivalent and balanced attraction and repulsion.

Dream are a linked center of body experience that combine, balance, and include opposites. Dream experience is consistent with bodily (INCLUDING visual) experience.
Bodily/visual experience in dreams involves visible and invisible space in balance.

Dream experience is possible/potential and actual in balance consistent with the experience of the middle distance in/of space and the fact that we are conscious and alive in conjunction with the fundamental experience of our growth and becoming other than we are. Accordingly, dreams balance conscious and unconscious experience; and dreams balance being and experience as well. It all makes sense, and there is no getting around it. Therefore, dream experience and waking experience are fundamentally related and they are fundamentally linked; and yet they are separate experiences as well.

The manifestation that is (and that involves) our growth and becoming other than we are is real. It exists. That is undeniable. This involves a transcendent and overall mastery of physics/physical experience. My position is consistent, clear, and complete. It all makes sense.

The so-called dream "experts" do not know how dreams are possible. They do not know what they are. They cannot even coherently and accurately describe and understand dream experience as it is. I have explained how dreams are possible, and I have explained what they are (and must be). Also, the physics of dreams proves what they really and actually are.

To say that dreams are a creation of thought is unintelligible and false. It does not provide answers.

My proofs, truths, and facts provide answers.

Discuss what is presented here. Do not evade and deny it all without any basis in fact whatsoever.

137 views of this thread so far, and nobody has been able to find any errors, inconsistencies, or incompleteness. Great !

[Phi for All]

137 views of this thread so far, and nobody has been able to find any errors, inconsistencies, or incompleteness. Great !

 

!

Moderator Note

In point of fact, the whole thing is one big error, inconsistent and incomplete. You should NOT be proud that nobody understands you. You talk about bodily experiences being visible and invisible in dreams, and nobody can correct you because they don't know what that means. Get a clue, you aren't doing science, you're making stuff up and declaring it true.

 

 

The so-called dream "experts" do not know how dreams are possible. They do not know what they are. They cannot even coherently and accurately describe and understand dream experience as it is. I have explained how dreams are possible, and I have explained what they are (and must be).

 

You are woefully misinformed as to our understanding of dreams and consciousness. Just because you don't understand an explanation doesn't make it wrong.

 

Last warning. Read the rules, and the special rules for Speculations. If you don't step up your game and start using terminology everyone else can understand, I'm going to close this thread. Don't bother responding to this modnote here, report it if you have an issue with it.

[pzkpfw]

...

 

By Author Frank Martin DiMeglio

An author should care that his or her readers can understand what they are reading.

 

So far, I think everybody has found your posts (on this and other forums I read) incomprehensible gibberish.

 

(i.e. The lack of on-point replies is not proof that no one can find fault; because the truth is that no one can find the point to start with.)

 

If you care whether anybody understands you, you need to break down your concept into smaller pieces, and get each one understood (if not agreed with) before moving on to the next.

 

You also need to use words in standard ways, or at least properly explain how you use them.

[swansont]

Simply repeating yourself is like shouting at someone who speaks a different language, hoping that person will understand you. It doesn't work.

 

Nobody can find errors if they find the work unintelligible.

[Mordred]

I'm a practitioner of meditation as I find it a great way to relieve stress.

 

I find zero zip value in this post.

 

There are plenty of scientific studies on dreams. Yet you never bothered looking nor including any scientific studies to support your claims.

( In truth at first glance, my first question is) What kind of drugs are you on ? Followed by How stoned are you ?

 

No offense but the above is gibberish

So here's your chance, show me related scientific studies (I'll accept peer review material, hokey sites via Wicca etc don't count). Prove to me that you can formulate an intellectual and educated response correlating your model

137 views of this thread so far, and nobody has been able to find any errors, inconsistencies, or incompleteness. Great !

 

Anyone reading this in the first paragraph will ignore this thread.

 

Half your descriptives refer to astral projection and other such babble

Edited July 22, 2015 by Mordred

[ACG52]

Frank is well known for posting the exact same gibberish on multiple forums over several years. It has been found that the most efficient way to deal with him is to lock the threads and ban him. There is no way to reason with him and his response to all questions is to ignore them or just repeat his nonsense.

Edited July 22, 2015 by ACG52