Résumé and Conclusion
"Once again let us state that it is impossible to speak of the unknown in our common tongue [Vulgate language and semiotics as abstractions], without changing it arbitrarily into recognizable images. This artificial device [of classical objective, mechanical, formal abstraction] is at the bottom of all 'proofs of existence'.... It is inevitable that our tongues desecrate all that they discuss, because they have their being only in the measurable, in images, appraisements, comparisons. If they were not like this (by virtue of their nature) they would be useless for our modus vivendi, which cannot operate without having an accurate language at its disposal. We know that the decay of these instruments brings social disorders in its train. It is less easy to understand that these disorders also originate from the introduction of profane language into [cultural] matters. ...."
"...In assembling clearly defined words, in surrounding, explicitly stating and isolating the subject under discussion, our languages proceed by methodical exclusion: a subject is defined and clearly indicated by the elimination of everything extraneous to it. This is evident from the fact that thinking dependent on these languages always acts by comparisons.
"The language of The
Sepher Yetsira is anything but this. It treats objects
water, fire, human bodies, planets, the zodiac only in
terms of their situation
and of their role
within an infinitely multiple, hierarchical, systemization of
the one energizing life
Please obtain, in a new quantum~world~view, we must fathom
Taken from Suares' Trilogy, p. 414-415, Shambala 1985 (see bottom of title page) paperback.
Doug's embedded intra text brackets. Doug's ellipses.
Dialectic is Vulgates' linguistic modus vivendi. Doug's opine. Recall, Pirsig refers it, "A genetic defect in human reason."
Doug issi working on a new web page which will answer a question,
"Why, like Autiot,
issi Quantonics n¤t classically abstract?"
Doug - 11,17,22Dec2014, 18,24Aug2015, 14Oct2015.
When we add absoluteness of perpetual quantum~evolutionary choice, chance, and change..."dizzy" borders inadequacy...
And then we add quantum~holographic Value middle~inclusion...
And when we add Suares' Cosmic Consciousness...
(those, in any Heraclitean Gnostic sense, "common to most humans")
...are manifestly inadequate for further progress in Millennium III.
"remedy n. Probably before 1200 remedie way of avoiding temptation; later, cure, relief (about 1340); borrowed through Anglo-French remedie, Old French remede, and directly from Latin remedium a cure. remedy (re- intensive + mederi to heal); for suffix see -Y. -v. Probably about 1400 remedien; borrowed from Middle French remedier, from Latin remediare to cure, remedy, from remedium remedy. n. -remedial adj, 1651, curing or relieving: borrowed from late Latin remedialis healing, curing, from Latin remedium remedy; for suffix see -AL. The meaning of "intended to improve skills" is first recorded in 1924." Some special characters adapted - Doug - 28Feb2010.
Doug directly transcribed above text from Barnhart's Dictionary of Etymology. Thank you.
Our intent in Quantonics is to remediate Classical English Language and many of its dialectical, formal, objective, mechanical ills into Quantum English Language.
If we outright replaced classical English, you would have to learn a novel quantum~language. Instead, Doug chose to do quantum~remediation of English and allow students of Quantonics to evolve gradually, in a quantized manner, from an old English to a newer quantum~English. If you want a summary of what is wrong with English's dialectical basis see Doug's SOM Bases of Judgment and read yellow text cells bottom up.
Some of you have been searching for etymology of 'remediate.' This is it. Barnhart is, "as good as it gets."
Notice too a hint of mediation in remediation. Mediation, in many ways, begs (up to) Planck rate dynamic ephemeral omnivalent quantum~holographic quantum~phasic middle~includings. Now ponder classical 'statement' vis-à-vis quantum~phasementings. See Doug's QELR of 'state.'
On remediation as means of avoiding temptation: humans since their beginnings on Earth have been tempted by dialectic. Heraclitus and others have said dialectic is Error. Quantonics agrees. Dialectic violates quantum~reality in nearly every possible way. If you hate quantum~reality, read no further. You are already extinct! But if you think our global problems are at least partially affective outcomes of bad human thinking methods, and you sense there may be a way out...read on and garner some potentia of further evolution of self.
Thank you for reading.
An author named Heinz R. Pagels (now deceased) who was a premier physicist and quantum specialist, published a book titled The Dreams of Reason in 1988.. Heinz' wife (Elaine Pagels, Harvard chair and professor) is a renowned specialist in world religions. Doug found a Heinz Pagels' text, fresh off some hot printer about 3rd quarter of 1988 and finished reading it prior year end. While Doug was reading this fine work, Dr. Heinz Pagels transitioned into some other omniverse...
It hit Doug hard. Doug became aware of Elaine's work via her 'specials' with Bill Moyers on Moyers' Journal PBS. At that time, Doug was just commencing his serious obsessions with anything quantum. Doug couldn't assiduously work his quantum obsessions then. He owned (January, 1978- December, 1992) a small (about 35 employees) but very successful embedded-real-time software engineering firm (then called SCS, Inc.). Heinz wrote about quantum memes of real process, of stuff which evolved, and he berated physics for having such a non-evolutionary, static and illusionary dialectical approach to studying reality.
What Heinz wrote...always had, at least for Doug, an almost spiritual sensibility to it. Heinz wasn't totally qualitative in his writing, but he was at least thigh deep in quality. Doug liked that, having been a student of Robert M. Pirsig's opus (ZMM and Lila) for about 10 years at that time.
As Doug read Heinz' books and watched Elaine on PBS, little did Doug realize how Elaine's works on gnosis and Heinz' works on physical reality were telling autsimilar stories: tomes of a Bergsonian, Pirsigean, Heraclitean, Chaldæan~Essene~Naassene~gnostic, Planck~occurrence~quantized almost wholly~qualitative wave~change~based EIMA fluxing~reality.
On Heinz' death Doug wrote this poem and sent it through an intermediary at NYAS (Heinz was then-Director of the New York Academy of Sciences which at that time published a great journal, The Sciences...) to Elaine.
Today, CeodE 13Jul2009, Doug pulled Heinz' first edition TDoR off a book shelf, blew dust off it, and opened it. It fell open to this:
If "Dreams of Reason" isn't qualitative, subjective, middle~included and animate...Doug doesn't grasp what is!
Heinz tells us two major memes here: Language symbols are illusory, and reason based upon symbols which are both static and lisr objective excluded-middle is pure illusion. Adepts will see immediately how Heinz is regurgitating Pirsig's "...always keep DQ with your SQ."
Doug calls this page, this Quantonics web page, "A Quantonics Remediation of Millennium III English Language Problematics." Doug's Quantum Remediations of English Language do just that: keep DQ with SQ via linguistic scriptings of quantons(DQ,SQ).
It has taken Doug nearly 30 years to get here. If Doug took that long, he believes it will take another three to five millennia to make progress where about 10 percent of Earth people understand issues involved: classical vis-à-vis quantum. It shouldn't take that long, but classical hylic-psychic humans are thick-headed (essentially programed-retarded by academe which adheres and inheres pure classical dialectic). If Doug could just get one simple message out, regarding this real MIII problematic, it is this, "Dump classical dialectic!" It is deadly of and deadly to human thought and human mentality. It is, as Pirsig wrote, "A genetic defect in human reason."
We see progress... This summer countless professors are diligently studying Quantonics. Are their kids (students) challenging them in their own classrooms re: evils of dialectical thing-king? Doug likes to imagine that happening.
Truth be known, every professor in academe CeodE 2009 should be scared silly! That they apparently are n¤t is a symptom of their own extinction, similar what USA classical society is doing to itself nowings, as global people are watchings...
If you are a professor, and if you teach objectivity based in classical dialectic...you are extinct! If you are a student and professors are pushing dialectic into your brains, you are inheriting their disease and its imminent extinction. Let's curtail this hylic-psychic metastasis of dialectic, NOW!!!
Thank you for reading,
Doug Renselle - 13Jul2009.
PS - One way Doug became obsessed with problematics of dialectic is an issue of Aristotle's excluded-middle. See commentary by Heinz Pagels about 'excluded-middle' on pp. 288-9 of TDoR. Of course, since then, Quantonics has shown irrevocably that Aristotle's three 'laws' aren't just bogus, Aristotle was using sophism to enunciate them! Doug.
Classical dialectic and its associated languages and logics ideally presume free context. Theorists call any context free grammar and logic "independent of context," and "insensitive to context." Why? Rules of grammar and logic presumably have to be "general:" work everywhere. Rules which have to apply everywhere demand a universal, catholic, context. A OSFA context! Classical statemental dialectic assumes absolute 'truth' may be assessed unambiguously as both consistency (always 'states' truth) and completeness ('states' all truths).
Quantonics English Language Remediation presumes that classical dialectical notions of context freeness are bogus! Why? Quantum reality is, in general, sensitive to context. Remediated to uncloak its sensitivity we remediate classical 'context' as quantum~comtæxtings. Quantum phasemental rhetoric assumes absolute flux as comsistænt (always changes) and c¤mplætæ (changes all).
Doug - 2Dec2006.
"The expression of the new quantum concepts is beset with severe difficulties, because much of our customary language and thinking is predicated on the tacit assumption that classical concepts are substantially correct."
"The growth of any discipline depends on the ability to communicate and develop ideas, and this in turn relies on a language that is sufficiently detailed and flexible."
"That whereof we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence."
Ending of Wittgenstein's
Rather, as William James c¤gæntly suggæsts bæl¤w, "That whereof wæ cann¤t speak, wæ muhst ihnvænt n¤vel languagæ, hærmænæutihcs, mæmæ¤tihcs amd heuristihcs ahll¤wing uhs t¤ speak iht."
|"...one of the most important features of the development and the analysis of modern physics is the experience that the concepts of natural language, vaguely defined as they are, seem to be more stable in the expansion of knowledge than the precise terms of scientific language, derived as an idealization from only limited groups of phenomena. This is in fact not surprising since the concepts of natural language are formed by the immediate connection with reality; they represent reality. It is true that they are not very well defined and may therefore also undergo changes in the course of the centuries, just as reality itself did, but they never lose the immediate connection with reality. On the other hand, the scientific concepts are idealizations; they are derived from experience obtained by refined experimental tools, and are precisely defined through axioms and definitions. Only through these precise definitions is it possible to connect the concepts with a mathematical scheme and to derive mathematically the infinite variety of possible phenomena in this field. But through this process of idealization and precise definition the immediate connection with reality is lost. The concepts still correspond very closely to reality in that part of nature which had been the object of research. But the correspondence may be lost in other parts containing other groups of phenomena."|
in his Principles of Psychology
Chapter VII, The Methods and Snares of Psychology
(Our braces in topic title.)
Dear students of Quantonics, William James describes above why, due our English Language
dependencies, humans are innately incapable of unambiguously both describing and understanding quantum reality. Doug - 14Jan2002.
"Since translation, if pursued, allows the participants in a communications breakdown to experience vicariously something of the merits and defects of each other's points of view, it is a potent tool both for persuasion and for conversion..."
p. 202 of 212 total
"...For most people translation is a threatening process, and it is entirely foreign to normal [status quo, stuck in the paradigm] science."
p. 203 of 212 total
Thomas S. Kuhn,
1969 Postscript to his 1962,
The Structure[s] of Scientific Revolutions,
UChicP 1996 paperback edition.
(Our page number annotations, brackets, ellipses, bold, italics and link.)
Note: Reader, please consider Kuhn's description of 'normal' science as a comfortable equilibrium between "paradigm shifts." By comparison he calls 'extraordinary' science that which "paradigm shifts" prefer as their affectors. In other words, 'extraordinary' science Values change and leaving the status quo.
Very quantum, eh?
vis-à-vis more classical,
Doug - 15Jul2001.
and Robert Nadeau
in their The Conscious Universe,
p. 11, Springer-Verlag, 1990.
(Our ellipses, brackets, italics and link.)
Reader, please consider how Bohr insisted that his orthodox Copenhagen version of quantum complementarity is 'exclusive.' Ihn Quantonics ¤ur værsi¤n ¤f quantum c¤mplæmæntarihty issi 'inclusive.' This is precisely where Kafatos and Nadeau fail dramatically in their otherwise marvelous Conscious Universe descriptions of quantum reality. See our two kinds of complementarity.
Remediation Character Dictionary
Wingings and MT Extra fonts required
Note: All these fonts and characters will eventually be replaced by a single Quantonics font.
|'e'||'æ'||Quantum qualihty esthetihc ¤f 'æ' ¤vær 'e.'|
Quantum Plahnck prægma/ahcti¤n
'' (i.e.- "h-bar")
Since vowels 'a' and 'u' have n¤ direct QELR, we permit use of 'h' after them in cases like 'as' and 'us:' ahs, uhs, etc.
|'i'||'ih'||In some cases, like 'minus,' use 'i' t¤ dæpihct anihmatæ, c¤mplæmæntary, ræcursihve, quantum Plahnck ratæ subqjæctihvihty.|
'measure' QELRs to
Without use of 'ø' both 'measure' and 'monitor' QELR
|'x'||''||Quantum umcærtainty ¤f Quantonic's c¤mplementary dual 's' waves making a wave~shaped vis-à-vis classical objectivity of 'x.'|
|'='||''||Anihmacy ¤f quantum 'equality' amd 'identity' concepts vis-à-vis classical inanimacy and state-icity of '=.'|
|'-'||'~'||Anihmacy ¤f quantum wavæ tilde vis-à-vis classical inanimacy and state-icity of hyphen.|
ihn place ¤f classical
Our 'n' t¤ 'm' ræmædiati¤ns
aræ curræntly væry selectihvæ
, e.g., 'and' to 'amd.' In addition 'con' to
'com,' some 'in,' 'im,' and other objective negational prefixes
alth¤ugh ¤ur uhsagæ
to 'ihn' instead of 'in' to 'com'
ræmædiati¤ns n¤w. As
¤n ¤ur QELR pagæ, ¤ur g¤al
issi t¤ d¤ ræmædiati¤ns which aræ
sihmple step changæs
ihn text, amd pærmiht
f¤r typihcal Ænglish
t¤ grashp vahst
aræ strihctly classihcal ihn
m¤re n¤vel quantum hærmænæutihcs f¤r Millænnium III.
Studænts may w¤rry ab¤ut c¤væragæ
¤f ¤ur QELR. Th¤se
t¤ a 250q th¤uhsamd w¤rd dihcti¤nary
aræ væry mætastatihc!
~90q% ¤f ahll
©Quantonics, Inc., 2002-2030
|principle||probability||process||projection vav projected||proof|
the, it, that, one, etc.