Return to Quantonics English Language Remediation Index Page                                  Arches

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

Quantonics' Quantum Remediation
English Language Problematics
Millennium III
by Doug Renselle
: 20Jul2002
Master Index
Most recent additions-revisions marked add and rev.


English Language Problematic

Quantonics' Quantum

©Quantonics, Inc., 2001-2029

: Process, processed, processes, processings, etc.

Classicists assume that processes may be dichotomized EOOO dichon(assemblage, elementary). Notice how that dichotomy echoes their larger dichon(macrocosm, microcosm) and its attendant failure of classical thought:

dichon(classical_macrocosm_process_certainty, classical_microcosm_process_uncertainty).

Physicists put nearly all their energies into studying elementary mechanical processes. Why?

Feynman, in his QED says it like this, "I would like to again impress you with the vast range of phenomena that the theory of QED describes: It's easier to say it backwards: the theory describes all phenomena of the physical world except the gravitational effect...and radioactive phenomena...I must clarify something: When I say that all the phenomena of the physical world can be explained by this theory, we don't really know that. Most phenomena we are familiar with involve such tremendous numbers of electrons [and photons] that it's hard for our poor minds to follow that complexity." Pages 7-8, PUP, 1985 paperback. Our bold, brackets and ellipses.

That is why physicists primarily exert effort on 'elementary' processes.

There is a huge issue here which many philosophers and theoreticians are unaware. You may have read our critical review of EPR to which our comments here are relevant.

Boris Podolsky wrote a letter to Physical Review Letters in response to E. C. Kemble's "acrid" criticism of EPR. Said letter, for unknown reasons was never published until Max Jammer offered its text, with Podolsky's widow's permission, in his The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics, pp. 192-3, which we subquote here, "I believe that Einstein and Rosen would agree with me that quantum mechanics is, in the view of our present knowledge, a correct and a complete statistical theory of such [quantum mechanical] assemblages. A statistical mechanics, however, may not be a complete description of elementary processes—and it is of these that we speak. If [statistical mechanics'] validity as a complete description is restricted to assemblages,..." Our brackets.

Simple explanation of this issue is that there are no elementary processes in quantum reality! Another way of saying this is that "Waves, however simple, are statistical assemblages!" By saying it that way, we also commence glimmering why a matrix approach vis-à-vis a wave approach to explaining quantum reality is more mechanical (objective and quantitative) and less physially (subjectively, qualitatively) exegetic.

Podolsky offers us another classical dichon(quantum_mechanical_process, physically_real_elementary_process).

And Podolsky concludes accordingly, " that case we are not dealing with the same reality." In other words, a classically "simple" 'particulate' reality is 'not same' as a simple, yet ensemble stochastic, quantum wave reality.

Physicists assume there are two realities. One quantum mechanical. Another classically physical, and that physical reality may be explained using elementary process analysis. Results then may be massively induced to classical assemblages. Classical physics is bogus Classical Thing-king Method folks!

How can we show that explicitly in EPR? Recall that EPR insisted "We shall be satisfied with the following criterion, which we regard as reasonable. If, without in any way disturbing a system, we can predict with certainty (i.e., with probability equal to unity) the value of a physical quantity, then there exists an element of physical reality corresponding to this physical quantity. It seems to us that this criterion, while far from exhausting all possible ways of recognizing a physical reality, at least provides us with one such way, whenever the conditions set down in it occur."

What does that quote show us? EPR are telling us that classical process certainty in their physical reality demands a probability equal to unity to vindicate local realism's 1-1 correspondence! H¤wævær, quantum ræhlihty issi umcærtain! N¤ pr¤cæss ihn quantum ræhlihty issi ¤hr can bæ 'classically certain,' offering verifiable and valid probability equal to unity to vindicate classical naïve realistic maltuitions about reality.

In balance of his letter to PRL, Podolsky went on to show that elementary processes can be stopped for purposes of measurement and thus have "state."

Atoms, nucleons, electrons, photons are PMMs, quantum perpetual processes, and have no ideal classical 'state.' Their assemblages are seldom considered perpetual. Why? Their assemblages, faster and slower, evolve, emerge, change — perpetually.

For Kemble reality as a process is dichon(external, internal), dichon(nonlocal, local) and dichon(subjective, objective). Classical physicists only study internal, local, objective processes which may be conveniently stopped and held still. Quantum wave functions, therefore are nonphysical, subjective!

Now we can commence understanding why Schrödinger's work is almost wholly missing from QED and QCD research and texts. Wave mechanical processes are apparently 'subjective,' and matrix mechanical processes are acceptably 'objective.'

Just think, that fundamental objectivist, Parmenides started all this... Ugh!

: Pr¤cæss, pr¤cæssed, pr¤cæsses, pr¤cæssings, etc.

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'process' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'pr¤cæss.'

In classical contexts we shall use 'process.' In Quantonics~quantum comtexts we shall use 'pr¤cæss.'

Classical process is simple and and often microscopic. Classical process depends upon 'elementary' determinate, closed, isolated, local, manufactured process scenarios, which may be induced to macro scales. Quantum pr¤cæss is classically complex and macroscopic, based upon statistical ensembles. (Remember: classically "state is simple and flux is complex;" while quantumly "flux is simple and state is complex." Doug - 4Mar2009.) Try doing this Poisson Bracket wMBU™ problem yourself:

  Flux Complexity
Flux Simplicity
 State Simplicity
State Complexity 




To help you get unstuck in your initial thinkqing recall that state 'simplicity' assumes reality holds still as 'state.' What is quantum's push~back on that classical delusion?
Also see complexity~simplicity discussion under our A 3D Fuzzon. See our A Quantum Pendulum discussion on simplicity.

You want a fledged example? Look here.

Classical '-process-' always has a begin- and an -end, an alpha- and an -omega. Classical 'process' can start [classical state] and stop [classical state]. Classical reality viewed as 'process' is conveniently and conventionally (re)startable and (re)stoppable like a movie film or a video tape or a CD-ROM-DVD or a digital computer.

Quantum 'pr¤cess' assumes abs¤lute ensehmble flux, abs¤lute ensehmble changæ with¤ut demarcable, measureable, lisr starts and st¤ps.

See Henri Louis Bergson's remarkable comments on, "you can analyze a [classical] thing, but n¤t a process."

Classically time is a space proxy. Einstein made time and space an 'identity.' We must realize that classical notions of time and space are bogus: wr¤ng, incorrect, ill-thought. Quantumly, time is not classical space. Time rather is pure duration, pure process, unstoppable process. See Doug's c. 2008 prescient remarks on Bergson's cogent, "Motion...eludes space." Quantumly, we can say that like this, "Time as pure quantum~pr¤cæss eludes classically stoppable space." Doug - 29Jan2008.

See OEDC. See MoQ I Reality Loop. See MoQ II Reality Loop.

See Zeno on stoppability.

Page top index.

©Quantonics, Inc., 2001-2029

Return to Quantonics English Language Remediation Index Page                                  Arches

To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

©Quantonics, Inc., 2001-2029 Rev. 25Jun2015  PDR — Created 20Jul2002  PDR
(20Nov2001 rev - Extend 'process.')
(29Aug2002 rev - Update 'process.')
(7Feb2003 rev - For browser compatibility, substitute GIFs for some Wingdings and Symbol fonts. Reset red text.)
(25Aug2003 rev - Extend 'process.')
(21Oct2004 rev - Reset red text. Allow all table and cell bounds to adjust freely.)
(1Nov2004 rev - Add QR_Loop_GIII link to 'process.')
(17Jun2005 rev - Reset red text.)
(31Oct2005 rev - Update 'process.')
(27Mar2006 rev - Reset legacy red text.)
(22Dec2006 rev - Adjust colors.)
(29Jan2008 rev - Reformat slightly. Update description of quantum~process.)
(4Feb2008 rev - Add 'Time is not Space,' anchor.)
(4Mar2008 rev - Add 'complexity,' vav 'simplicity' Poisson bracket comments.)
(20Sep2009 rev - Add intra page link to recent QELR of 'wave.')
(25Jun2015 rev - Add 'quantum' link to QELR of 'quanta.' Make page current. Adjust color.)