Arches

If you're stuck in a browser frame - click here to view this same page in Quantonics!

 

Quantonic Thinking Modes
A New Way of Thinking for Millennium III
—

For a 'Definition' of Quantum Reality see.

See Quantonics English Language Remediations of: absolute, affectation, change, choice, circle, coherence, concrete, consensus, coquecigrues, duration, emerq, excluded-middle, formal, intellect, intelligence, interrelate, judge, law, line, logic, machine, phase, point, quanta, quantum~coherence, quantum~stage, reason, right, select, suppose, true, truth, uncertainty, wrong, etc. Doug - 18Dec2006.

This artwork has been extended by our October, 2004
Quantum Reality Loop Generation III Graphic.

This artwork revises and extends our previous work titled,
A Map of a New Reality.
—
We show our latest heuristic of what we think a quantumesque,
Pirsigean
Metaphysics of Quality
Reality
looks like.
—
You should notice these changes in our M3K map:
a. Our "Face of Change"
b. Local SQ and Nonlocal DQ overlap
c. Quality Events/Measurement/Commingling as:
Value In DQ and DQ In Value
d. Nonactuality's isoflux as symmetric and
self-canceling, thus cloaked to SQ/actuality
(consider new memes for thermodynamics)
e. Actuality's latched flux as asymmetric (e.g., fermions wobble),
thus uncloaked
...
(Consider new memes for thermodynamics,
especially a fix for its three laws, e.g.:
1. conservation as both a local and nonlocal comcept, with
nonlocal energy density almost unlimited;
2. entropy as both a local and nonlocal comcept;
3. entropy as an omniflux comcept, not just a temperature concept.)
...
f. Nonactuality-actuality measurement
(tiny bubble 2; emersion of SQ),
is nonlinear (due to Planck rate quantization)
excitation measurement of isoflux into latched (~solitonic) flux
g. Actuality-nonactuality measurement
(tiny bubble 1; immersion of SQ),
is diffraction/unlatching/measurement of latched flux into isoflux
h. Actuality-actuality and nonactuality-nonactuality measurements
are not yet shown or described. Our actual experience represents
both actuality-actuality and actuality-nonactuality measurements.
We can only imagine nonactuality-nonactuality measurements,
but we may infer their presence based on an assumption of
actuality and its primal creation.
—
From our previous work, A New Map of Reality, you saw how
we depicted SOMthink or classical thought only perceived
a tiny substance-based portion of a larger quantum reality.
SOMthink also caused a few other problems, a few which we can mention here.
SOMthink is homological or unilogical. It claims absolute, universal
truth may be known in SOM's presumed all-encompassing,
one global context. As a result SOM sees
(a small portion of Quantonic) actuality above as
the reality. SOM calls actuality, "order," and claims order's demise is
"disorder." How could SOM have done this, now that we can see a
new map of reality as depicted above?
Also SOM sees its reality as "equilibrium." SOM says states or transitions which
appear non-real are called "far from equilibrium, or non-equilibrium" conditions.
Again, how could SOM do this, how could SOM think like this?
—
Simply, it happened because SOM put truth over Value, SOM put dialectic over rhetoric.
SOM cut whole reality into two chunks, called those chunks "subjects" and "objects,"
and claimed only objects are real. SOM eliminated a part of reality which is crucial:
SOM eliminated and homologically denied reality's subjective part!
From that huge and unfortunate SOM schism, pours all of our currently inept classical philosophy and science.
—
Homological SOMthink created fundamental classical measurable "concepts" called:
time, space, mass, and gravity, all based on an objective view of reality.
SOM's modern classical philosophy and science edifices build from these four objective measurables.
Because SOM uses objective thought as its philosophical and scientific
foundation, SOM is disabled from definition of its concepts.
To this day, time, space, mass, and gravity are physics' great undefinables.
Physics can relatively measure each, but physics cannot define them.
Why?
Their definition depends on what SOM tossed out: subjective reality.
Time, space, mass, and gravity cannot be defined without foundation
knowledge which only comes from subjective reality!
—
As you know, we do not call it subjective and/or objective reality.
We, instead use terms: both nonactuality and actuality.
Pirsig calls them both DQ and SQ (both Dynamic and Static Quality).
They overlap, they commingle, they interpenetrate. They are both local and nonlocal.
—
And Pirsig tells us DQ is absolute change! Our nonactuality is flux
(i.e., isoflux)!
Once you grasp this, some phenomenal and wonderful things begin to happen.
Classical physics' undefinables may suddenly be defined in terms of flux!
We see new light! Flux is crux!
Many quantum phenomena which appear totally paradoxical and paralogical to
SOM, suddenly become "reasonable," and even, "understandable."
—
These are just a few reasons and examples why this
New Millennium III Map of Reality
is so crucial to adopt for new
Quantonic Thinking Modes.
—
Caveat: In our artwork for a new Millennium III Reality above, we placed gravitons with fermions and bosons in actual reality.
Our intuition tells us this may be incorrect! Our heuristic for superluminal gravity is a phenomenon more like this:

Actuality's comstituents are latched flux. We intuited elsewhere in Quantonics m, l, t, and g are all f(flux).
We intuit gravity is isoflux (nonactuality's) mediation of actuality's comstituents whose
gravitational 'pull' or attraction depends on comstituents' mass = m = f(flux). Greater flux implies greater mass.

Classically, some scientists perceive gravity as g = f(t), i.e., they see gravity as a
function of time. Even Einstein classically conjectured an identity of gravity and acceleration.
But gravity does not act like that! Gravity's affects are superluminal.
From this we infer gravity may be mediated by isoflux.

Recently we saw an experiment on APS' website which shows Bose Einstein Condensation of atoms.
It shows energetic, individual atoms in a cryotrap whose wall height may be adjusted.
Reduced wall height allows cooling to proceed more rapidly and at a certain temperature
and atomic energy level all atoms co-here into a single BEC atom.

Go here:

http://timeline.aps.org/APS/index.html

then find in the index
Matter, Bose-Einstein Condensate State(1995 - 1995),
click on that index entry,
and next click on the atomic multimedia graphic.
It takes a few seconds for a Java Script to load and run, so be patient.
Slowly reduce trap height (move bar control to your left).
You will see trap energy go down. Eventually remaining atoms will condense.

Imagine that co-herence which you just observed as a metaphor of 'gravity.'
But it is a special kind of gravity metaphor, because all quantum numbers cohere in a BEC.
Now ask yourself, "What would happen if only one or some of these atoms' quantum numbers cohered?"

We think we may have seen an example elsewhere!
In APS' 27Dec99 PRL, Rongjia Tao of Southern Illinois University at Carbondale
describes an experiment where superconducting particles of ~microns diameter
were suspended in liquid nitrogen and a strong electric field.
What happened when a strong field was applied?

All particles 'gravitated' into a tightly-packed, rough spheroid!
Experimenters did not predict this!
They expected one of two other possible outcomes!

One may quite easily infer from this that gravity is partial quantum coherence!
Where did we get partial quantum coherence from Rongjia's experiment above?
From Cooper pairs superconducting in each micron-sized particle.

Given these recent results, we warn you, gravitons may not manifest in actuality,
thus searching for them may be moot.
It appears that gravitons may indeed be superluminal manifestations of quantum isoflux!
If so, we will remove 'gravitons' from our list in our graphic art above.
Again, this is pure intuition and comjecture!

Comsider possible enormous impacts on current approaches to antigravity!

Also, comsider that what appears as 'gravitation attraction' may be something else — i.e. partial quantum coherence.

Thanks for reading,

Doug. (12Jan2000)

 

by Doug Renselle

---

To contact Quantonics write to or call:

Doug Renselle
Quantonics, Inc.
1950 East Greyhound Pass, Suite 18, #368
Carmel, INdiana 46033-7730
USA
1-317-THOUGHT

©Quantonics, Inc., 1999-2009 — Rev. 30Jan2008  PDR — Created 3Dec1999  PDR
(16Dec99 rev - Red parenthetical added under SOM discussion. Correct Title.)
(12Jan2000 rev by Doug: Added gravitation caveat at end of text.)
(17Mar2001 rev - Change some 'con' prefixes which are in quantum comtexts to 'com.' Add selected relevant links.)
(10Jul2001 rev - Add 'fermionic wobble' comment to item e. above. Change 'cooper' to 'Cooper,' just above.)
(14Dec2001 rev - Add top of page frame-breaker.)
(1Nov2002 rev - Add link to 'gravitation' discussion under our quantum remediation of 'borne.' Reset all red text to black.)
(20Oct2004 rev - Add link to our recent QR Loop Gen III. Alter some page colors.)
(18Dec2006 rev - Add page top links. Adjust format and colors.)
(30Jan2008 rev - Add page top link to Quantonics' 'definition' of Quantum 'Reality.')

Arches

---