The Possibility for Answers from Physics by Jonathan J. Dickau

Hi Jonathan. Thank you for your reply. Two statements of Einstein come to mind, and one by J.C. Maxwell:

"It is the theory which decides what we can observe..."

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

James Clerk Maxwell - "The only laws of matter are those that our minds must fabricate and the only laws of mind are fabricated for it by matter."

Schroedinger was puzzled by life enough to suggest "a new type of physical law." -- p. 258 -- See Paul Davies' book The Fifth Miracle. Also see De Duve: "Life and mind emerge...as natural manifestations of matter, written into the fabric of the universe." -- p.252 thereof. And Darwin: "The principle of life will hereafter be shown to be a part, or consequence, of some general law" -- p.252 thereof. Look at the words "GENERAL law"! --- PERFECT!

IMPORTANTLY, now consider ALL of the above with what follows.

This physical law is said unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light. The physical (and sensory) reality/experience/basis/correspondence of/to this law is dream experience, whereby thought is more like sensory experience in general (including gravity and electromagnetism/light). 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 clearly relates to memory, art, genius, dreams, being "one with the music", and telescopic/astronomical observations.

To think that the unification of General Relativity and Maxwell's Theory of Light -- that is mathematically proven by the addition of a spatial dimension to Einstein's theory -- is not readily and significantly apparent in our experience is one of the greatest oversights or blunders of common sense that has ever occurred.

Do you not agree; for if I am correct (and I am), would I not be entitled to/deserving of the Nobel Prize in Physics?

Also, you apparently agree with the following?:

In relation to the increased transparency/invisibility of space in astronomical/telescopic observations (that makes these observations

possible) -- see my prior post(s) please -- is there not a uniformity of gravity/acceleration (that would provide an additional binding energy) regarding the outer stars accelerating more than they should be (in, say, spiral galaxies)? Consider objects near Earth in the invisible/transparent space/sky. Isn't the redshift consistent with/indicative of the increased transparency/invisibility of space that makes such astronomical/telescopic observations possible? Is all of this not true as well?

Can you circulate or mention these very important ideas at the conference that you are attending this week? Thanks. I await your reply. Frank

Hi Jonathan. In addition to my last post, closely consider the following post as well, if you would. You will love the proof contained herein regarding the importance of time.

I have demonstrated the equivalency of extension in time and space at a three to one ratio in keeping with the following (below). I have shown that the integrated extensiveness of being and experience go hand-in-hand in and with time. What I will now demonstrate with regard to time alone is GIGANTIC.

Dreams unify gravity and electromagnetism/light by involving what is [the gravitational and electromagnetic/light] mid-range of feeling between thought and sense. Gravity and electromagnetism/light are both attractive and repulsive in the dream.

I have demonstrated 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/additive and relatively smaller. The space is also invisible and visible at once. The distance (or size) of space in the dream is dynamic or variable as well.

Electromagnetism/light is not only associated with extremes of size (e.g., photons and the Sun, in comparison with the Earth and typical/ordinary space), but also with extremes of gravity (or gravitational influence).

I have demonstrated electromagnetism/light as gravitational space; as space manifests as both gravitational and electromagnetic/light energy (involving constant energy as well).

Now comes definitive and further mathematical proof regarding said unification; and, importantly, this comes in addition to what is the already known/demonstrated mathematical union of Maxwell's and Einstein's theories in a fourth dimension of space.

This further mathematical demonstration/proof of the subject unification is now provided in what is also a fundamental, simple, and convincing fashion; as I have shown the three to one (one third) relation of both space (the three space dimensions in relation to the fourth space dimension) and time (3 to 1 in Einstein's theory of gravity) in dreams; as dreams occur during the one third of our lives that we spend sleeping. In other words, the extension in space (three to one, or one third) is consistent with extension in time as well. Note: there are three parts of time -- past, present, future.

Since the self has extensiveness of being and experience (in and with time) in conjunction with the integrated and natural extensiveness of sensory experience, we spend less time dreaming (and sleeping) than waking. The integrated extensiveness of being and experience go hand in hand.

Dreams are an emotional experience that occur during the one third of our lives that we spend sleeping, because emotion is one part (or one third) of feeling, emotion, and thought. Consistent with this, both feeling and thought are proportionately reduced in the dream. Thoughts and emotions are differentiated feelings. Dreams are essential for thoughtful and emotional balance, integration, comprehensiveness, consistency, and resiliency. Indeed, emotion that is comprehensive and balanced advances consciousness. 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.

The reduction in the range of feeling that occurs during dream experience is associated with a reduction in both thought and experience in general.

Thought involves a relative reduction in the range and extensiveness of feeling. In keeping with this, dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general. Accordingly, both thought and also the range and extensiveness of feeling are proportionately reduced in the dream. (This reduction in the range and extensiveness of feeling during dreams is consistent with the fact that the experience of smell very rarely occurs therein.) Since there is a proportionate reduction of both thought and feeling during dreams, the experience of the body is generally (or significantly) lacking; for thought is fundamentally rendered more like sensory experience in general. Thoughts and emotions are differentiated feelings. By involving the mid-range of feeling between thought and sense, dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general. The reduction in the range and extensiveness of feeling during dreams is why there is less memory and thought therein.

What is ultimately possible in physics (including mathematically) is necessarily tied to the integrated, interactive, and natural extensiveness of being, thought, and [sensory] experience. In fact, reality must be understood (in varying degrees, of course) as pertaining to (or involving) what is the integrated extensiveness of being and experience (including thought).

It is readily apparent that my essay rating is ridiculously incompetent/unfair/inaccurate. Thanks again Jonathan. Thank you for having a free/open mind and for truly caring to learn, help, and grow. Frank

Dear Jonathan,

I just finished reading your essay for the second time. It was still interesting.

Energy-time could be tied into the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which relates Entropy and Time. Entropy measures how much Energy is or isn't useable.

You related Matter-Time to the life trajectory of a particle. Similarly, Matter-Time could be tied into Dirac's Large Numbers Hypothesis (LNH) and the Gravity-brane. Dirac's LNH says that the age of the Universe (relative to typical atomic transitions) and the inverse Gravitational Coupling (relative to the inverse Electromagnetic Fine Structure) are both ~1040. I think this large number arises from properties of the Gravity-brane, and thus some of hyperspace's matter content.

You quoted Alex B. Mayer as saying "the nuclear strong force and gravitation are the identical phenomena (spacetime geometry in the context of wave mechanics) operating at different length scales." It is no coincidence that String Theory first started as an approach towards a theory of the Strong Nuclear force, and later became an approach towards the theory of Gravity. Lawrence Crowell's next paper utilizes these similarities.

You also talked about Philip Gibbs' "Theory of All Theories" as being the sum total of all possible models. Mohamed El Naschie defined "E-Infinity" as the sum of all one and two Stein spaces. My K12' is closely related to his E-Infinity. The difference is one degree of freedom that could be some Grand Higgs that breaks the original symmetries.

You have a good paper, and you deserve to be one of the winners. Good Luck!

Ray Munroe

Hi Jonathan:

I have faith in your ability to advance the understanding. You say:

"the wave-like aspect of things is preserved and becomes a part of physical reality, rather than being supplanted by the particle-like aspect.

However; even the massless carriers of energy known as photons must be quantized or made particle-like, in order to exist in physical reality. This is a reminder that matter, energy, space, and time, must coexist for reality to be as it is."

Time is ultimately dependent upon the integrated extensiveness of being, experience, thought, and space -- so yes, time is central. Distance in/from space is related to the size of space(s) -- this makes the unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light possible. Dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general. Dreams are sensory experience/physics; and, as such, they are a gold mine for physical ideas. My ideas, when coupled with yours, give excellent and very broad/organizing perspective to the thinkers and physicists on here.

Consider the blackness of outer space (and blindingly bright, white stars). Now consider the invisibility/transparency of the eye (and of the daytime space/sky as well) in relation to the clear visibility of the body and Earth.

Visibility and brightness are central to unifying and advancing our understanding of sensory experience/physics in general. Invisible, visible, particle, and wave UNITED is critical.

How a larger space is made smaller, AND how a smaller space is made larger is also key. -- Hot/cold need to be (and are) then balanced as well.

How space manifests as electromagnetic/gravitational energy is the central and most valuable physical idea. (I have proven this in my essay.) Do you see how this concept, this post, your essay, and my essay cover/include: space, time, matter, energy, wave/particle, balancing/varying scale, repulsive/attractive, and visible/invisible when taken together?

Understand how all of this (and dreams) contribute(s) to the integrated extensiveness of being, time, thought, space, and experience in general.

Hello again Jonathan.

In reply to the further info. you wanted on invisible/visible, I offer the following. You said that you liked the idea of linking the telescoping/narrowing of vision in dreams and telescopic/astronomical obs.

You will like this:

The unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light merges and includes invisibility and visibility as a requirement of balancing/uniting scale. Particle/wave also. Space manifesting as electromagnetic/gravitational energy.

Compared to the blackness of space, the increased transparency/invisibility of space in astronomical/telescopic observations is very important. This allows us to see farther. But this also means, again, that space is becoming increasingly invisible/transparent. This occurs in dreams, as space is increasingly invisible in dreams; in fact, the experience of space in dreams is both invisible AND visible. (This is why you may or may not touch what you see in the dream as well.) Astronomical observations, to a significant extent, are interactive creations of thought. My essay talks about this.

The reduction in the range and extensiveness of feeling in dreams and the increase in the invisibility/transparency of space therein not only relate to the sensory experience [therein] being more like thought, but this also relates to/is consistent with the relative reduction in the brightness/feeling of the red Sun (including the redshift). Astronomical/telescopic observations have significant similarities with dreams.

Note the transparent space/sky around the larger and red [setting] sun.

The line (or feeling) of gravity is altered/reduced -- in comparison with the Sun being overhead, when it is brighter -- so the Sun appears differently (and is not as bright) when it is in front of us. This is consistent with the reduction of gravity/feeling/brightness in the dream, with the increased invisibility/transparency of the space therein, and with the eyes being (basically) locked forward. (Telescopic/astronomical observations make the objects larger, or they could not be seen at all.)

(Note that thoughts are relatively shifting and variable, so dream vision is also relatively shifting and variable.) In relation to the increased transparency/invisibility of space, is there not a uniformity of gravity/acceleration (that would provide an additional binding energy)regarding the outer stars accelerating more than they should be (in, say, spiral galaxies)? Consider objects near Earth in the invisible/transparent space/sky.

Dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general, thereby unifying gravity and electromagnetism/light. Note that the Earth is in a relatively smaller space (the transparent/invisible sky) compared to that of the Sun.

The setting Sun looks more like the Earth because it feels more like the Earth WHEN SEEN. (And because it is also seen in/with a transparent/invisible sky.)

The integrated extensiveness of being and experience go hand-in-hand.

The world requires and involves man.

Hi Jonathan, remember you wrote to me:

"I just re-read your second post above and it made a bit more sense of something you were saying in the earlier post. Your statement at the end "How space manifests as electromagnetic/gravitational energy is a central and very valuable physical idea." is right on. Perhaps the key, as you say, is to recognize that there is both an attractive and repulsive component at work - which changes the effective action at different levels of scale. This makes unification simpler."

"We end up 1) Balancing/unifying scale and 2) Balancing attraction and repulsion in conjunction with space manifesting both gravitationally and electromagnetically. (Think wave/particle)."

When you consider the extremes of electromagnetic energy/space (e.g., photons and the [relatively disintegrated] Sun) as they relate to extremes of scale, invisibility AND relatively disintegrated come to mind. Comparatively, look at the [relatively integrated] Earth and the clear/transparent/invisible sky. Disintegrated and integrated go hand-in-hand (along with particle/wave) in conjunction with balancing and uniting invisible/visible AND scale. That is huge, is it not? See how this connects with space manifesting as electromagnetic/gravitational energy?

Thanks Jonathan.

Dear Jonathan,

I forgot an obvious one - Energy-Time is related to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Relation and Planck's constant, which may be our "resolution" scale of reality.

Thank you for your positive comments and references.

Good Luck in the contest!

Ray Munroe

Come on Jonathan. How about this idea?

Time is ultimately dependent upon the integrated extensiveness of being, experience, space, and thought.

Please consider the aspect of space then, in keeping with the above. This is consistent with your idea(s) on time, or is it?

Thanks.

Dear Jonathan,

I found arxiv articles by Baez and Barrett from 1999 and 2001 (both attached). Both of these articles tie in the 4-simplex, which is the key to E8 pentality symmetry. I want to better understand the fifth vertex of the 4-simplex because this seems to be the origin of tachyons. The older article has 4 j's, but not 10 j's. I would be interested in similar articles.

Thank You!

Ray MunroeAttachment #1: 1_9903060v1.pdfAttachment #2: 1_0101107v2.pdf

Dear Jonathan Dickau,

I have responded on my page to a comment from Narendra Nath. It is an extended comment and one that you may find interesting. Thank you for your comments and exchanges in this forum. I have enjoyed all of them immensely, especially your last communication with me.

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Hi Jonathan. Previously, you had replied to me as folllows:

Your statement at the end "How space manifests as electromagnetic/gravitational energy is a central and very valuable physical idea." is right on. Perhaps the key, as you say, is to recognize that there is both an attractive and repulsive component at work - which changes the effective action at different levels of scale. This makes unification simpler."

"We end up 1) Balancing/unifying scale and 2) Balancing attraction and repulsion in conjunction with space manifesting both gravitationally and electromagnetically. (Think wave/particle)."

My reply to you is: Electromagnetic space (e.g., photons and the Sun) is both larger and smaller than ordinary or typical space(s)/objects (such as the Earth). When space manifests as gravitational/electromagnetic energy (as it does in dreams), scale is then balanced; and space is particle/wave, invisible/visible, and larger/smaller. Accordingly, space is both repulsive and attractive as well. Witness the variable size/distance of space in dreams. Energy is constant, brightness is adjusted perfectly, and vision/visibility is very well adjusted/discernible. Note that the space is integrated and yet disintegrated as well. Is it hard to see how my ideas apply to physics? Not hardly. This is way too much to just pass over Jonathan. Dreams make sensory experience (including gravity and electromagnetism/light) in general more like thought. Couple this with the fact that the ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience, and it is readily apparent that the known mathematical union of Einstein's gravity and Maxwell's electromagnetism/light in a fourth spatial dimension requires dreams. (Note that thoughts are relatively shifting and variable, so dream vision is also relatively shifting and variable.) This is why I deserve the Nobel Prize in Physics.