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
Millennium III
by Doug Renselle
: 20Jul2002


Alphabetical Reference Index Quantonics English Language Remediation Pages
©Quantonics, Inc., 2001-2028

( says, "You are here!")

Master Index

Index to Quantonics English Language Remediated S Terms
Most recent additions-revisions/updates marked add and rev.
same science select
selection, natural
semiotic separable similar simplicity simultaneity
singularity, e.g.,
the, it, that, one, etc.
sophism space rev - 6Jan2015 Doug - square square root
stable (subset of 'state') start state static (i.e., state-ic)
stochastic stop
subject subjectiv subjective subtraction superpose
suprapersonal synthesis


English Language Problematic

Quantonics' Quantum

©Quantonics, Inc., 2001-2028

TBD. See identity.

Page top index.



  • systematized knowledge
  • physical knowledge
  • assessment of propositions which are 'true'
  • etc.


"Science n. About 1340 science knowledge, branch of learning, skill; borrowed from Old French science, from Latin scientia knowledge, from sciens (genitive scientis), present participle of scire to know; for suffix see -ENCE. A branch of learning based on observation and tested truths, arranged in an orderly system, is first recorded in English in 1725, developed from the sense of a particular branch of knowledge (logic, grammar, rhetoric, music, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy) as distinguished from art (1678), and related to the sense of a recognized branch of learning (before 1376)." Page 692, The Barnhart Concise Dictionary of Etymology - The Origins of American English Words, by Robert K. Barnhart, Harper Collins, 1995.

: Science, sciences, scientific, etc.

Classical science seeks to know what is true. That which is classically 'true' is physically, concretely, immutably, paradigmatically veritable, verifiable, and valid — provisionally — until its verity is verifiably contradicted.

Classical philosophy seeks to know what is truth. Clearly, 'truth' is a metanotion of 'true,' in a similar sense as Gödel's 'provability' is a metanotion of 'proof.'

Classical science deliberately disable's Planck's quantum flux, i.e., "zeroes h-bar," in order to enable antique classical notions about a non fluxing, classically concrete 'reality.'

: Scihænce, scihænces, scihæntihfihc, etc.

have n¤ appr¤priatæ quantum mætaph¤r ¤f 'classical science.' Sihmihlarly as wæ have saihd elsewhere, "quantum logic is an oxymoron," have t¤ sahy sihmihlarly hæræ, "quantum 'science' is an oxymoron." Yæt that w¤rd 'science' issi s¤ ingrained that wæ g¤ ahead amd juhst QELR iht amd accæpt quantum scihænce as a quantum mætamæmæ ¤f 'classical science.'

Quantum scihænce sahys that classical truth d¤æs n¤t 'exist.' Rather, quantum abs¤lutæ changæ issi ræhlihty. But classical truth is state-ic. Ideal classical state is objectively stable, immutable. Wæ cahll 'classical state' "ESQ" ihn quantum hlihty.

Re: quantum and philosophy, we adore how Jim Baggott says it, "It is my opinion, expressed in this book, that quantum theory is philosophy." And, "Beneath the [quantum mechanical] formalism must be an interpretation and the interpretation is pure philosophy." Preface, p. x - The Meaning of Quantum Theory.

In our view, in Quantonics, any study of quantum reality is metaphysics, even better metaphysi.

Page top index.

'selection, natural'

Synonyms - classical:

  • segregate
  • separate
  • localize
  • isolate
  • reduce
  • mark
  • discriminate
  • choose
  • cull
  • approve
  • etc.

Synonyms - quantum:

  • quantum~holographic omniscriminationings,
  • quantaldulation, quantadulation (~adulate: flatter, adore), quantalation (~alate: winglike), quantaphilation, quantaphialation (we like 'phi' and 'phial,' i.e., latter is vessel, especially 'God number's' vessel, here) — but which one or another?
  • this one is incredibly omnifficult — we have no English language word of which we are aware that describes what we intend here, so in our missing word's place we offer...
  • we need entendres for what in technical jargon we call delta-modulation; delta mod is used almost ubiquitously in WWW's internet to A/D and D/A usart communications protocols; in a sense that delta mods mediate A/D and D/A, quantum~selection mediates, based upon local memes and memeos of quantum~better, emersion and immersion and emergence and demergence (can think of both as quantum~squarings and quantum~square~rootings with quantum~awareness and ~ch3ings implicit); quantum selectionings mediate "whatings happenings nextings" at all quantum edgings of nowings. (A/D is analog-to-digital vis-à-vis our quantum need for actualn¤nactual pr¤cessings, isoisot then isop ; delta mod is a clock rate dependent signal follower which uses a slope change rate base of 1.618..., too, delta mod is ~unique in its hermaphrodicity: a single soft switch (allele) changes its electronic sex! Doug.)

    Based upon our electronic analogue, tentatively, let's coin quantaldulation, contracted 'dulation, similar Bergson's quantum duration. Planck rate edgings of nowings peaQLOings' OEDCings REIMARings ensemblings followings.

    un dulation
    mo dulation
    fecun dulation
    quanta(l) dulation

    undula tion
    modula tion
    fecundula tion
    quantaldula tion

    Latin - unda - wave
    Latin - undula - small wave

    See OEDC, Reality Loop I, Reality Loop II, and our 2004 Gen III Reality Loop.

Etymology - classical:

"Select v. 1567, borrowed from Latin selectus, past participle of seligere choose out, select
adj. 1565, borrowed from Latin selectus, past participle.
selection n. 1623, act of selecting; borrowed from Latin selectionem (nominative selectio) a choosing, selection, from select-, stem of the past participle of seligere;
selective adj. 1625, formed from English select, v. + -ive." From Barnhart's 1995 Dictionary of Etymology, p. 701.

Etymology - quantum:

See above under quantaldulation.

: Select, selection, selective, etc.


Dialectical Assessment

Ideal Classical Reality
stability Selection is a stable act  Classical actuality is stable. Classical actuality is stoppable.
independence Selected objects are lisr  Objects in classical reality are independent of one another.
excluded-middle Selected objects are lisr  No object in classical reality can be both itself and not itself.
EOOOness Selection is classically logical  Classical predicate logic is absolutely dialectical.
H5Wness Selection is active voice
Selection is passive voice
 H5W are all always lisr, stoppable, stable, analytic, etc.
lisrability Selection requires lisr  Objects are ideally, classically lisr. Objects are analytic.
causation Selection is predicable  Spatial motion is change. All classical motion is caused.
certainty Certainty attends selection  All classical causation is determinately 1-1 correspondent.
EEMDivity Selection is syllogistic  Due independence & excluded-middle objects are everywhere-dissociative.
observation Selection requires nondisturbing unilateral observation  Classical objects may be unilaterally observed, while undisturbed.

Darwin was afraid of publishing his own theory of natural selection since it evokes inferences of heterodoxy, choice (heresy), and pluralism. Of course all three violate fundamentalist religious convictions. But Darwin's theory of evolution is very quantum!

Fundamentalist natural selection requires an a posteriori view of reality, and that view must be unitary-historical. Fundamentalists insist that there is only one valid history of reality, only one valid past. (See Clifford Geertz' assessments of SOM's "Absolutism removes judgment from history," and CR's "Relativism disables judgment." Browser search for <judg> at that Geertz link.)

How can they believe that? Simple. Classical science says there is only one time, the time.

Interestingly, though, even if we assume only a single 'time' we can easily demonstrate unlimited histories and unlimited pasts.

Classical conspectives of selection as monistic (non heterogeneous) thus demand that any use of probability to predict any future event must depend upon a single thread ensemble of sequential historical events. Classicists do not view past, now, and future as heterogeneous ensembles.

Darwin's natural selection put all of this classical bogosity into major question, and we are still feeling and reeling from consequences of it. Quantum scihænce is one of these consequences, in our view, toward better.

However, classically, Darwin's natural selection yet suffers some major issues. We doubt that Darwin saw adaptation as an ensemble result of b¤th species', their genes', and nature's choices amd selections. Most descriptions we have read of Darwin's natural selection shows nature as choosing outcomes, vis-à-vis b¤th nature amd ahll quantum~ihndihvihduals ch¤¤sing~selecting t¤gether. If so, with nature viewed objectively separate from genes and species, then this is a classical and anti quantum view of Darwin's natural selection. We can perhaps best illustrate what we mean here with words of Lourens Bass-Becking, "Everything is everywhere; the environment selects." In Quantonics we would alter Becking's assumption thus, "Eværythingings aræings æværywhereings; they ahllings aræ ihn quantum~selecti¤nings pr¤cæssings."

We interpret classical views of Darwin's natural selection as nature doing all selection and species having little to do but obey nature's classically predicable commands. This is nature as hegemonist, which we decry vociferously.

Classically, selection is one past, certainly determining at one now, one future.

Classical selection is determinate, causal-effective, effectational, effectoring, dialectic, etc.

Quantum selection is uncertain, ensemble-affective, affectational, affectoring, holographic, etc. See our QELR of holograph.

See cause, etc.

: Select, selecting, selecti¤n, selecti¤nings, etc.
: Quantadulatæ, quantadulati¤n, quantaldulatæ, quantaldulati¤n, ...ings, etc.

All quanta adulate (adore) all quanta. Scintillation (crudely put, energy copulation, impregnation (e..g., QED quantum~leap AKA analanche), delay, birth of a quantum AKA avalanche (wavicle, possibly EWings re emission), etc. Photons fux with electrons, etc. Cuneiform anyone?) may result: implication quantum~uncertainty.

An easy comparison of quantum~quantadulation vis-à-vis classical selection (choice AKA 'heresy') is:

  • classical certainty attends 'selection,' and
  • quantum~uncertainty attends 'quantadulation.'

Classical dialect deludes its practitioners they can be a posteriori certain of their 'decision's' a futuriori (a priori) inductive and inertial effects. We refer this dialectical 'classical social retardation.'

Quantum rhetoric stochastically and partially offers its practioners ensemble pastings, nowings, and futurings' (PNFings') affectationings as likelihoodistic yet partially~uncertain quantum~anticipation. We refer this coquecigrues(ical) "enthymemetic gn¤stic quantum~expectationings."

Quantum~sælæcti¤n~quantadulation issi omniscriminationings (discrimination is bivalent dialectical state-ic formal English linguistic garbage) among quantum~energy~wellings of quantum~holographic nexi which emerq as Poisson~Bracketings among any hologram's energy~wellings.

Quantum~sælæcti¤n~quantadulation intrinsically involves dynamic hermeneutics hovering countless radically asymmetric quantum~comtexts and their relentless choosings, chancings and changings. David A. Granger, interpreting Pirsig and Dewey describes what we mean here rather well in his October, 2006 MacMillan-Palgrave-published Dewey, Pirsig and the Art of Living, p. 74:

"Since reflection and inquiry always involve a purposive act of selection from within a larger situational whole, the fact-value distinction is bound to dissolve at some point and with it the supposed autonomy of facts and factual discourse."

Granger's words beg quantum~included middlings of quantum~flux. His use of 'dissolve' is a classical way of saying "quantum~phase~encodings" among ensembles of many kinds of quantum~fluxings, including timings, massings, spacings, and gravityings. He eschews gently SOM's wall as "the fact-value 'di' stinction," which is, for Doug, just brilliant. "Reflection" begs probability. "Inquiry" begs both plausibility and likelihoodings of both anticipation and expectation all borne of selectors' affectationings. That spread of thinkqing illustrates how quanton(ought,th) issi fluxings which EIMA~compenetrate~spread and holographically quantum~correlate arbitrarily (offering vast ensembles of quantum~sælæcti¤n~quantadulation opportunities) over boundless temporal and other flux spectra.

See PPL. For an example of Doug's use of "vast ensembles of quantum~sælæcti¤n~quantadulation opportunities," see our recent, c. 2007, quantum~scintillation.

Quantumly, selec(adula)tionings are many pasts, many nowings, and many potential futurings quantum~radically~stochastically and quantum~fractally and quantum~uncertainly selectings quantadulationings better nowings with expectations of better potential futurings:

As you may readily assess, there is much to ponder here. We shall evolve this living text, persistently.

Adepts will notice Mae-wan Ho here. All quantum pings, b(n)ings, and fings (pastings, nowings~beings, futurings) are locally autonomous (issues of quantum~partiality here) while systemically quantum~coherent. Pings, bings, and fings are massively heterogeneous! Pings, bings, and fings are massively quantum~sorso and thus fractal. Quantum reality shows us he~r massive, scaling quantum~temporal uncertainties! (Authors, painters, pianists, violinists, marksmen, tennisers, runners, et al., all are personally k~nowings how that graphic feels qualitatively when they cohere with their instruments and sports and simultaneously cohere with reality and "everything just happens well.") Petzinger (The New Pioneers) calls it "Becoming one with one's tools."

See time, ensemble attractorings, choice.

Page top index.


TBD. See memeotic.

Page top index.


: Separable

: Sæprægmable, sæprægmabilihty, sæprægmabilihties, etc.

See rational.

Page top index.


: Similar, etc.

Classical objects are ideally identical to themselves.

Classical objects are ideally, measurably, scalarbatively similar to other objects.

Classical similarity is a scalar quantity.

Classical similarity finds its bases of reason and judgment in taxonomies of static, zero momentum, durationally stopped objective properties.

: Sihmihlar, sihmihlarly, sihmihlars, sihmihlarings, sihmihlarihties, etc.

Quantum~sihmihlarihty is an assessment of our quantum~uncertainty about holographic~interrelationshipings among quantons.

Since sihmihlarihty is close kin of uncertainty we can say sihmihlarly , resemblance is an assessment of quantum~uncertainty. That leads us to a more gænæral phasæmænting that synonyms of sihmihlarihty are assessments of quantum~umcærtainty. Mimicking Hume we may then make an inference of sihmilarihty and ræsæmblancæ as assessments of degrees of Quality.

Given that inference we may say, even more quantum~simply, " Ræsæmblancæ issi QSOistic!" and " Sihmihlarihty quantum~wave~phasistic."

All quantum flux is sihmihlar other quantum flux. No quantum flux is identical any other quantum flux. No quantum flux is identical to itself longer than a few Planck moments. Why? Change is absolute, evolution is absolute, evolution is perpetual, change is perpetual.

Quantum~similarity is evolving interrelationshipings among two and more quantons. Quantum~waves can phase encode all quantum~interrelationshipings for monitorings by quantum~computationings.

Quantum~sihmihlarihty finds its bases of reason in taxonomies of quantum~fluxings' phasistihc~sihmihlarihties.

We can now describe quantum~reality in its simplest quantum~phasementings as proprietary Quantonics Hotmemes™.

Quantonics AutSimilarity HotMeme
"Quantum~reality issi autsimilarityings. Too, quantum~reality issi auturgyings of autsimilarityings."™
Quantonics AutSimilarity HotMeme

Compare identical, identity.

Search for applied uses of 'similarity' in these Quantonics web pages.

Page top index.


: Simplicity

Classical simplicity is analytic. Culturally it is often referred as "objective simplicity" and "state-social simplicity (often taking cultural forms as nationalism, fascism, socialism, communism, etc.)." Actually it is "locally naïve realism," "'unambiguous' classical judgmentism," and "naïve logical positivism" simplicity.

Scientifically and philosophically, again, simplicity is analytic. It assumes OGC. It assumes stoppable classical state, stateism, status and staticity. What we in Quantonics refer as "stux sux, stux is classical crux," and "abysses of staysses."

Ockham's razor is a blatant and blundering blunted SOM's knife example of CTMs which adhere 'simple objective thing-king.' To Ockham (Henry of), simplicity is just another classical 'rule,' (akin 'common sense,' and 'generality') to which we respond not altogether humourously,




Classical stasis-simplicity induces inexplicable phenomena, paradice, infinities and zeroes. Classical simplicity obfuscates reality.

An example here of classical simplicity is a classical notion of 'absolute truth.'

Recently Mitch offered an example of this kind of classically simple thingking.

A SOMite said to Mitch, "There is fighting in the world and that is an absolute truth." This is a fine example of what dialectic does to classical minds.

Mitch needed to respond to his antagonist that if that statement is an "absolute truth," then classically, simply, its 'opposite' must be an absolute truth too!

Clarifying aside - 7Oct2005 - Doug:

If, classically, dialectically,

  • "there is fighting in the world" is absolutely true, then
  • "there is 'no' fighting in the world" absolutely false must be absolutely true too.

Even classically, however, there are places and times in our world where there is fighting and there are places and times in our world when there is no fighting!

End aside.

Dialectic claims EOOO is an absolutely state-ic classical tautology. Implication? Either there is fighting in the world or there is not fighting in the world. But by simple dynamic observation we can easily fathom that:

  1. "there is fighting in the world" is true, and
  2. "there is no fighting in the world" is true, and there may be times when
  3. "we do not know whether there is fighting in the world," is true.

Let's use some quantonic script to wrap this up:

dichon(there is fighting in the world, there is no fighting in the world)

and quantumly,


Said dichon is simply, classically, statically, dialectically wrong when either statement is claimed as absolute truth!

Saihd quanton issi sihmply, quantumly, dynamihcahlly, rhet¤rihcahlly c¤rrect whæn claimæd as a comtextuahlly umcærtain truth!

How can we more easily understand this? Dialectical classicists assume negation is objective. Wr¤ng!

Quantum reality shows us that negation is subjective. Rihght!

Our uses of wr¤ng and rihght are quantum English language remediated (QELRed). Why? Same reasoning we used above:

dichon(right, wrong) (EOOO objective EEMD negation)

and quantumly,

quanton(wr¤ng,rihght) (BAWAM subqjæctihvæ EIMA nægati¤n).

Quantumly, in a plethora of quantum comtexts wr¤ng is rihght, and in a plethora of other quantum comtexts rihght is wr¤ng, and in a plethora of other quantum comtexts "Mu!" This shows how quantum reality is quantum uncertain.

Classically, there is only one local, naïve context. See OGC in OGT. This is classicism's only means of maintaining classical certainty.

Simply, whatever any classicist is statically certain about, we can show is quantumly, dynamically uncertain. To use dialectic to claim absolute classical certainty is, to put it mildly, unintelligent. To put it less mildly, "DIQheaded."

Static simplicity says that dialectical, formal truth is both immutable and absolute where absolute truth is both:

  • complete, and (i.e., 'states all truths')
  • consistent. (i.e., 'always states the truth')

Classicists use that 'absoluteness' to declare unambiguity of their work products, communications, logic, etc. That view may, on its face, appear quite classically simple, however, it is wrong.

Kurt Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems (there are two; one for completeness and a second for consistency) show us unambiguously that dialectical, formal truth absoluteness, completeness, and consistency are classical delusions. Henri Louis Bergson says it metaphorically something like this, Classicists suffer "a delusion that reality is stable and objects in reality are independent." Paul A. M. Dirac says it like this, "Causality [unambiguous 'foreseeable 'effects''] applies only to a system which is left undisturbed [i.e., a 'simple, inert, static system']." We have to posit immutability and 'positive' social consensus to render dogmatic said 'static simplicity.'

See EOOO. See EEMD. See stop. See state.

: Sihmplihcihty

Quantum thinkq-king dæclaræs quantum sihmplihcihty as flux. Quantum flux issi crux. Sæmpær flux.

Quantum sihmplihcihty issi Pirsigean dynamihc sihmplihcihty. Iht issi Bergsonian flux sihmplihcihty.

Quantum sihmplihcihty sahys thæræ issi n¤ classical state simplicity. Rather, quantum abs¤lutæ changæ issi sihmple, ahctuahlly sihmpler, sihmplihcihty ihtsælf. Quantum sihmplihcihty eliminatæs 'inexplicable phenomena, paradice, infinities and zeroes.'

F¤ll¤wing Kurt Gödel, Quantum sihmplihcihty sahys sihmply that dynamism amd changæ aræ abs¤lutæ amd aræ b¤th:

  • c¤mplæte, amd (i.e., changæs ahll)
  • comsistænt. (i.e., ahlways changæs)

Sææ Bergson on Stateism Simplicity vis-à-vis Dynamism Sihmplihcihty. F¤r eamples ¤f h¤w quantum flux QTMs sihmplihfy ¤ur thinkqing amd ¤ur abilihties t¤ 's¤lve' pr¤blæms, sææ:

Sææ BAWAM. Sææ EIMA. Sææ Heraclitus.

Page top index.


See our Quantonics' quantum~coined "simulphase."


  • isochrony
    • temporal event identity
  • common group think
    • social assessment identity
  • parallel agency
    • registrated alignment of process
  • temporal equality
    • ability to measure equality of parallel events
  • temporal measurement
    • ability to measure time unambiguously

: Simultaneity, simultaneous, simultaneously, etc. Classicists tend to view simultaneity in at least these notional categories: parallel agency, equality of temporal events, arbitrary precision of temporal measurement, social contemporary common sense group thought, and isochrony.

Let's look at those alphabetically ordered and examine classical assumptions, presumptions, and normatives surrounding each:

  • common group thingk

    Classical socialists believe that social groups can share 'common sense' normatively together, isochronously, in general. Some examples here are any scientific paradigm, any religious paradigm, any cultural paradigm, etc. Simultaneous group think is usually enforced by 'laws,' 'disciplinary matrices,' 'constitutions,' 'commandments,' etc.

  • isochrony

    Classicists are trained and educated to believe that they can (are capable of) assessing identity of any two and any N time measurements, taken against a common standard global time reference, as identical, in general.

  • parallel agency (especially public, exoteric, exegetic, social agency)

    Classicists are trained and educated to believe that they can achieve (are capable of) dialectical agreement, concord, accord, and harmony, in general.

    In Quantonics, we call this a "tragedy of commons sense." It is group-thingk. It is herd and hive thing-king.

  • temporal equality

    Classicists believe that mechanical isochrony of any pair of timed events can be measured to arbitrary precision, in general. Ditto 'arbitrary accuracy.'

    Students of Quantonics must learn to omnistinguish what classicists mean by genericity and specificity vis-à-vis what we in Quantonics infer and hermeneuticize as quantum genærihcihty amd quantum spæcihfihcihty. See specific.

  • temporal measurement

    Classicists are trained and educated to believe that they can be (are capable of) measuring time and timed events to arbitrary precision and accuracy, against an absolute standard reference, in general.

    Classicists intuit that measurement can be a zero latency event itself. To any classicist no objective measurement should require duration to be a viable measurement. Indeed, to any classicist, durational measurement is non objective: "subjective," and thus "absurd." Ideal classical measurement requires Aristotelian t0 = t0 simultaneity! It requires ideal Aristotelian zero latency eventism. It requires a non durational hold and sample, locally naïve Aristotelian, Newtonian, Einsteinian 'reality.' A great recent example of application of this invalid classical notion appears in a AAAS Science, VOL 307 25Feb2005, Report titled 'Simultaneous State Measurement of Coupled Josephson Phase Qubits.' That title tells an enormous story all by itself. Today's scientists see measurement, not as quantum process, rather as zero latency classical event. They are doing quantum work using classical notions and paradigms and disciplinary matrices. Ugh! Doug.

    See Doug's recent CeodE 2009 QELR of occur which offers students a much more emergent processings view of quantum~relativity memes re: 'event simultaneity.'

    But quantum reality shows us all that is classical hocus bogus...classical simultaneity does n¤t quantumly exist!

    See time.

: Phasihcihty (vis-à-vis classical simultaneity), phasihc (vis-à-vis classical simultaneous), phase (vis-à-vis classical state), etc. Wæ uhphas as ¤ur r¤¤t intueme hæræ.

Ihn place ¤f classical 'simultaneity' subqstihtute quantum~simulphasihcihty., unQELRed: simulphasicity.

Ihn quantum ræhlihty thæræ issi n¤ such classical notion n¤r quantum mæmæo which ¤mniscrihbæs what classicists intend when they say "simultaneity." Why? H¤w can wæ flux~sihmply ¤mniscrihbæ a non-classically-simultaneous quantum ræhlihty? Quantum_ræhlihty issi a heteroprægmap¤lytehmp¤ral parthæn¤fluxihc (at læast) quatr¤æntr¤pihc (at læast) quatr¤c¤herænt st¤chastihc ænsehmblings REIMAR hlihty.

Ihn Quantonics wæ ch¤¤se t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'simultaneity' wihth quantum phasihcihty. Sihmihlarly classical 'simultaneous' wihth quantum phasihc, amd classical 'state' wihth quantum phase.

Quantonics' pærspæctihvæs ¤f quantum phas issi ¤næ ¤f abs¤lutæ changæ amd anihmacy. Thæræ issi n¤ classical unitime multiversal temporal registrational reference.

As students of Quantonics we view reality as absolute flux. Banesh Hoffmann uses his word "frequency" in place of our more generic "flux," to give us his rendition of why classical simultaneity is problematic, "We cannot measure frequency in an instant. We have to wait a little while, to watch an oscillation or two, at the least. Thus if energy is akin to frequency, we may not measure energy in an instant but must spend a little time in doing so." Page 153, The Strange Story of the Quantum. We love this Hoffmann quote! Iht sh¤ws why wæ sahy wavæs aræ pr¤babilihty amd lihkælih¤¤d ¤mnistrihbuti¤ns. Iht sh¤ws why wæ muhst ahlways uhsæ quantum mæmæos, mæmæ¤tihcs, mæmæol¤gy, amd quant¤l¤gy t¤ ømniht¤r quantum ræhlihty.

Æssænce: Wæ cann¤t ¤mniht¤r flux ihn an ihnstant. Wæ cann¤t ¤mniht¤r quantum ræhlihty ihn an ihnstant. Ahll quantum ¤mniht¤rmænt (ømniht¤ring) ræquiræs Bergsonian Duration f¤r hl viabilihty! See our 1st quarter 2005 QELRs of duration, monitor, and relativity.

Onæ ¤thær præscihænt p¤ihnt: Ahll quantum phasihcihties aræ b¤th QVP amd QTP, amd their QVPnessings amd QTPnessings aræ quantum umcærtain at ahll scalæs ¤f ræhlihty.

See phase, entropa, cohera, MoQ, CR, and SOM, time, etc.

Page top index.

singularity, e.g., 'the,' 'it,' 'that,' 'one,' etc.
  • Quantonics ch¤¤ses to remerq most occurrences of classical homogeneities with more quantum heterogeneities. CTMs usually impose unilogical linguistics, e.g.:
  • one past (the past)
  • one future (the future)
  • one cause (the cause)
  • one effect (the effect)
  • one truth (the truth)
  • one way (the way)
  • one size fits all
  • etc.
  • Frequently, this de facto classical homogeneity evokes a kind of ex cathedra "inappropriate singular and monistic notion," which denies a more quantum heterogeneous amd plural actuality. See our treatise on thelogos for our Dyson and Miller examples. Essentially, each of our 'ones' above may be remerqed by plural quantum memes like many, any, all, etc. Let's do our list using plurals:
  • many pasts
  • any futures
  • all preconditi¤ns
  • many ¤utc¤mes
  • many truths
  • many ways
  • many sizes fit many p¤ssibilities
  • etc.
  • Quantum reality's ¤nly memes ¤f unificati¤n, which we k-n¤w ab¤ut, are:
  • Abs¤lute quantum is¤flux (AKA Quantum Vacuum Flux), amd
  • Quantum included-middle c¤hesion ¤f all reality via QVF.
  • Als¤ see Pirsig vis-à-vis Bergson on Monism and Pluralism.
  • Page top index.
  • 'society'

    : Social, society, socialization, etc.

    Classical society is an invalid and improper classical abstraction of ensemble individuals. Classicists view 'society' as OSFA cultural objects which are behaviouristically-herded EOOO-mechanically via 'the law,' and a monistic global society's 'cultural guidance.' In Doug's view this approach, a çatholiç approach, is failing now, globally. It will become extinct due its abject failures and its lack of qua to assiduously adhere quantum~reality's changing, its absolute~changings.

    Classical socialization is monism's state-ic OSFA Either Organization. Classical managed social ORganizations are utopically immutable, ideally 'stable': they possess, Platonically and ideally, absolute 'state.' An elite (eleat) few tell all hoi poloi plebe hive drones canonically what to do: "Our way or the highway!" Islam does this. Christianity does this. Culture wars anyone?

    : S¤cial, s¤ciety, s¤cialihzati¤n, etc.

    Quantum society is quantum~coherence of quantum~autonomous~individuals. See Mae-wan Ho on quantum~coherence and her omniscriptionings of a society as coherent autonomies. See Danah Zohar's excellent text Quantum Society.

    There is a quantum~horn~of~plenty more to say here... Doug just wanted to make a quick and apparent juxtaposition of classical 'notions of society' and quantum "memeos of s¤cihæty."

    Quantum~socialization issi pluralism's fluxic hologra[[il][m][ph]]ic MSFA BAWAMganization: quantum~coherent~islandicity, quantum~coherent~individuality. (Just for fun compare island and islamd. Then compare Autiot's Noun (quanta) to Mem (water). How would we do this in Arabic? What would it mean? Please note how Doug's QELR of 'and' is 'amd.' Aleph~Noun~Dallet vis-à-vis Aleph~Mem~Dallet. Again, in Arabic? Quanta nissin water? :)

    Page top index.


    Etymology - classical -

    Etymology - quantum - As far as we know, Quantonics is first to remediate classical 'solve' into quantum~s¤lvæ.

    Synonyms - classical:

    • answer
    • assimilate
    • decipher
    • decode
    • expose
    • find
    • interpret
    • isolate
    • remediate
    • uncover
    • etc.

    Synonyms - quantum:

    • enthymeme
    • evolve
    • graduate (as relentless process, unending process...)
    • improve
    • meliorate
    • memeticize

    : Solve, solution, etc.

    Classicists believe that when a problem is 'solved' it is 'solved' forever.

    Original etymology of 'solve' does not carry this later mathematical tenor. Originally 'solve' meant to 'dissolve' in a liquid, to loosen a whole into its solubilities... Mathematics in its Platonic idealities viewed 'form' as 'final' and formal solutions as 'solved.' Merely classical dialectical B.S.! Some call it 'Enlightenment,' but now we, some of us at least, are beginning to grasp it as endarkenment.

    Doug recognized here that an easy 'test' for you, as students of Quantonics, to use is to ask whether 'some word' is intended as 'state'-ic. If it is then it is probably bogus dialectic. Then ask whether some word is intended as process. If it is then it is probably quasi quantum rhetoric. That test works here: solve as 'state' is bogus. Solve as process (especially pr¤cæss) is quantum. Easy, eh?

    To classicists, especially in their Platonic mindress, nature is naught but ideal state-ic forms which all humans need do is 'discover.' Intention? Nature is a formal puzzle which humans must seek to 'solve' once and for all. Of course that is just bogus, since as we have shown quite fruitfully here in Quantonics: dialectic is bogus, so all formal thought based upon it is bogus. Ideal solutions simply do not 'exist.' Plato fuxed up.

    : S¤lve, s¤luti¤n, etc.

    Quantum reality evolves. Quantum reality is unending pr¤cæssings of emerqancies and transemerqancies of n¤væl quantons. How? Quantum reality is abs¤lutæ flux whose spectrum spreads from almost imperceptibly slow changings up to Planck's frequency and even chaoæquil [quantons(chaos,equilibrium)] phasæ~ænc¤dings of that. Doug's first usage of his coined "chaoæquil,"

    In quantum~reality all s¤luti¤ns, all solubilities are ongoing pr¤cæssæs. N¤ s¤luti¤n can hold still and n¤ s¤luti¤n can ævær be final. (Our last sentence is what ethical 'science' means when it refers self "always provisional.")

    Quantum~partiality is a great way to describe what we mean by "s¤luti¤ns are nævær 'done'." All reality issi quantum~æv¤luti¤nary~pr¤cæssings. Æv¤luti¤n issi nævær 'done.' Æv¤luti¤n issi always partial, quantum~partial.

    Like house cleaning s¤luti¤ns are nævær 'done.'

    Like PhD's. there are n¤ Laurels.

    Like CVs they always grow.

    Like learning there is n¤ end. We all are always students, n¤ levels above studentings. Most 'teachers and professors' forget that. They have arrived. Tenure is their final Laurel-resting 'solution.' Then they are 'done.' Their personal 'social education' is 'done.' Society wants them elevated above individuals, however, they never are, are they?

    Like living~dying~resurrecting~rebirthing, etc., we cann¤t 'stop' our endless anabolic~catabolic~anabolic~catabolic quantum~flux cycles...

    Now apply what we just wrote to 'facts.' Do facts 'exist?' N¤! Why? Facts are based upon 'final' 'solutions,' fixed-stable 'answers' to theoretical questions. N¤ 'answer' is 'or' can be 'fixed.' There are n¤ stable monisms! There are n¤ stable pluralisms! There are n¤ Platonic 'facts' which 'exist!'

    N¤ solution can be fixed, finished, and done since all s¤luti¤ns are quantum~pr¤cæssæs.

    Now, in Pirsig's world, in MoQ, are classical 'solutions' Value? N¤! Why? Value is Dynamic: quanton(DQ,SQ). Classical solutions are ideal ESQ: dichon(SQ, SQ) with SOM's wall firmly instantiated to prevent any changes muxing and fuxing with ideal Platonic formal 'solutions.'

    Value is quantum~flux. Value issi n¤t final, formal, ideal classical 'state.' Solutions and facts are ideally state-ic! Vulgi opinio Error!

    HotMeme™ "Solutions are never 'done!' Therefore, there are n¤ 'facts'!" HotMeme™. Evolution issi quantum~real!

    Similarly, HotMeme™ "Inquiries are never 'done!' Therefore, there are n¤ 'final data sets'!" HotMeme™.

    Solutions, inquiries, facts, and data are always partial, quantum~partial. Why? They are all relentless and unstoppable quantum~flux~pr¤cæss emerqancies of quantum~flux. It is dialectical illusion and self-delusion to adhere classical notions of stoppable 'state.' All issi æv¤luti¤n borne of abs¤lutæ flux. Naught is, naught can be state. ESQ 'exists' n¤t.

    Thank you for reading,

    Page top index.


    Etymology - Classical -

    Etymology - Quantum - Probably first in Quantonics as a quantum~philosophical metaphor of Pirsig's MoQ.

    Synonyms -


    • affective thought,
    • antilogy,
    • claptrap,
    • contradiction in terms,
    • evasion,
    • illogic,
    • jesuitry,
    • mystification,
    • paralogism,
    • vicious (as in 'mind loops'),
    • ignoratio elenchi,
    • etc.

    Synonyms -


    • QTMs,
    • recapitulation, love of evolutionaryq rethinkqing,
      • re - do again, recurse,
      • capit - Latin 'head,'
      • ula - Latin 'small:' e.g., quanta,
      • ulate - Latin 'love,' Jungian libido,
      • see quantadulation (as scintillation of quantal libido) under 'select' above,
    • recursive~thinkqing,
    • self~other~reference,
    • included~middle thinkqing,
    • heterogeneous thinkqing,
    • everywhere~associativity,
    • holographic thinkqing,
    • absolute change thinkqing,
    • evolutionary empiricism,
    • etc.

    : Sophism, Sophist, etc.

    Classically any 'thing' referred as a sophism is:

    • False,
    • A lie,
    • Wrong,
    • Bad,
    • Evil,
    • Insane,
    • Corrupt,
    • An illusion,
    • Self-delusion,
    • Whacko,
    • Religiously: "the devil," (Çatholiçs use this one a lot. Actually, if you do your homework, you will find that they represent the antichrist, since Jesus was/is a quantum~gn¤stic sophist!) )
    • Etc.

    Classicists view all people who speak using rhetorical sophisms "unstable," at best and "morons" at worst.

    Pirsig teaches us that Parmenides, Plato, and Aristotle used sophists as strawmen against whom they could direct their version of 'truth's' sophist antivenin. Socrates was committed to death by hemlock for his mentoring of sophism to his younger students.

    Classically, a sophism is any 'kind...' duh, er, ummm '...category' of thinking which makes finding 'truth' difficult.

    "Hey Doug, how can we detect these untruthful categories?" Actually it is quite easy to do. Doug has been attempting that by example in several omniffering pages in Quantonics' web site.

    A great way to omniscover sophist phasements is to look for self (and contextually tight-close self-other) references in one sentence or in close-context sets of sentences. An example of a single sentence is "This sentence is false." It is a verbal example of a stairs illusion. It is a verbal Escherian!

    An example of two sentences is:

    1. Sentence two is false.
    2. Sentence one is true.

    What makes that combination sophist is most classicists attempt to make both 'state' ments fit a single context. When one does that, one's mind goes into this infinite 'vicious' loop which has been known to drive some folks into da loony bin.

    It is easy to solve that kind of sophism simply by treating each sentence as a separate context. See Doug's now old Many Truths to You. Zeno's first paradox (sophism) is also a great example of what we are showing you here.

    A third example is 'male' sexuality. Male chromosomes are actually both female (X) and male (Y), so a male is actually a sophism(female,male) in one human body. "Hey guys, now you can explain all those feminine feelings you are always attempting to hide."

    There are enormous varieties of 'kinds' of sophisms. Here is a list which will cover most of them in quantonics:

    John Buridan, based upon his Aristotelian education, found all sophism false! Quantumly, that is an unfortunate assessment since all in quantum~reality issi a sophism. "Doug, What!!!?" Yes, classically, partial logic is false, regardless H5W said logic becomes ¤r is partial, it is false by dialectical canonic dictates. However, and demonstrably, all of nature is enthymemetic, i.e., all of nature is partial works in progress. We colloquially refer it as "evolution." Buridan would have likely claimed any nature that evolves, "False." N¤ne of us is a 'finished' piece. Classical perfection may never be achieved, it is relentlessly, always only partially, 'done.' All of us are works in progress. All critters, humans, planets, stars, galaxies, etc., all are enthymemetic: sophist! Believe iht! Stable 'truth,' absolutely stable truth as Buridan sought as his ideal, then, is impossible in any quantum~reality.

    Parmenidean, Platonic, Aristotelian 'truth' denies sophisms and claims all of them are false. Why? All three 'great thingkers' believed that truth is dialectical: either-or with an excluded-middle, substantial, material, factual, verifiable, provable, sustainable, objective, etc.

    Sophism shows that a greater reality exists, a greater reality than naïve dialectic truth. Sophisms break Parmenides', Plato's, and Aristotle's sillygistic dialectisms.

    Recall Pirsig's map experience in Lila?

    If you omniscover 2+2=5, don't jump to a conclusion that it is just 'wrong,' 'false,' etc. Look for another con(m)text which adds one.

    : S¤phism, S¤phist, etc.

    Quantum reality is a sophist reality. It is fractal, self~referent, a vastly plural holographic network of animate self~other EIMA interrelationshipings, bettershipings. All flux is self~ and ~other~referent. We call it self~other~phase~encoding...and its absence. Quantum reality is partial~presence~absence of phase~encodings of quantum flux.

    To a classical mind, all quantum miracles are "sophisms!"

    Change your mind. Make it a quantum~stage. Become a believer in and a practitioner of sophist thinkq~king!

    Thank you for reading,

    PS - Jesus as Sophist! N¤t to go religious on you, rather to express a spiritual realism: Essene, Tribe of Judah, House of David (Dahveed) Gn¤stic Jesus (Light, logos) routinely spoke in quantum~sophisms. That's why Roman protoçatholiç inquisitors, et al., simply could n¤t grasp his elect, pneumatic quantum~lingo. That's why they killed him! That's why dialecticians today, pseudo-Christians and others, still HATE him! Believe it — else become extinct! Essene Gn¤stic Jesus was perhaps Earth's greatest quantum~sophist! In a way his profound gn¤sticism made him Earth's first quantum~scientist, quantum~philosopher! If Magdalene is Sophia, then Essene Gn¤stic Jesus literally Philo (loved) Sophia (Magdalene)! Çatholiç derivative patriarchal and misogynous 'christians' today, c. 2008, hate, despise, denounce all philogynous gn¤stics and gn¤sticism. Çatholiç derivative patriarchal and misogynous 'christians' are anti-scientists, anti-Christs of first magnitude! Doug. These are Doug's opinions based upon his personal pneumatic Chautauquas via Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln's Holy Blood - Holy Grail, Elaine Pagels' vast opus on gnosis, Kathleen McGowen via her The Unexpected One, Dan Brown's efforts in his Angels & Demons and his The Da Vinci Code, Barnestone & Meyer's Gnostic Bible, Stephen A. Hoeller's opus on gnosis, G. R. S. Mead's gnostic opus, etc., etc., etc. See our Classical vav Quantum~Gnostic Recommended Reading. All of this, folks, finds its Essene~ce in sophism as rudimentary thinkq~king!

    Page top index.


    TBD. (Classicism depends upon an illusion/delusion of homogeneous spatial extensity which is analytic (infinitely divisible, continuously differentiable, continuously integrable), numerable, countable, measureable (stoppable; conveniently holds still, etc.), conveniently stable, objectively independent, lisr, etc.)

    Page top index.


    Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt a classical interpretation of 'square' and remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'squaræ.'

    In classical contexts we shall use 'square.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use 'squaræ.'

    Classical square assumes reality is stable and objects in reality are independent. Classical square further assumes reality is inanimate/stoppable, excluded-middle, analytic, etc.

    Quantum squaræ assumes reality is anihmatæ and quantons in reality have quantum c¤mplementary, included-middle, unstoppable interrelationshipings.

    It is very, very important to grasp an quantum~essential: all of what we call (touchable, feelable, seeable, hearable, tasteable, fermionic) actualityq issi quantumly "squarings of n¤n actuality." We thus liveq and evolveq in quantum~reality which issi positiveq (squared). Any memes of idealc negativec don't exist classically anywhere~anywhen ihn quantum~reality. Cancellationq existsq, but n¤t ideal classical binaryc relationsc and operationsc. Dichons and dyadsc as ideal-pure Platonic, Newtonian, Pythagorean and Aristotelian syllogistic (sillygisticc) relationsq are forbidden, verboten ihn quantum~reality! Doug - 6Jan2015.

    For application, and descriptions of relative importances of these terms, see our 7Jun2002 Möbius 3-Primæ Fermion.

    See addition, differentiation, division, integration, multiplication, prime, recursion, square, square root, and subtraction.

    Page top index.

    'square root'

    Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt a classical interpretation of 'square root' and remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'squaræ r¤¤t.'

    In classical contexts we shall use 'square root.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use 'squaræ r¤¤t.'

    Classical square root assumes reality is stable and objects in reality are independent. Classical square root further assumes reality is inanimate/stoppable, excluded-middle, analytic, etc. Classical square root assumes a bivalent EOOO plus or minus answer.

    Quantum squaræ r¤¤t assumes reality is anihmatæ and quantons in reality have quantum c¤mplementary, included-middle, unstoppable interrelationships.Quantum square r¤¤t assumes both plus and minus contrarotating BAWAM outcomes for potentially all ranges of quantum isoflux.

    See our Quantonics square root symbols.

    For application, and descriptions of relative importances of these terms, see our 7Jun2002 Möbius 3-Primæ Fermion.

    See addition, differentiation, division, integration, multiplication, prime, recursion, square, square root, and subtraction.

    Page top index.



    Consider begin, end, stop, ever, never, alpha-, -omega, -process-, stoppability, startability, ~reversibility, start as a tentative latched (tentatively persistent) view of QVF's omnidirectional isotropos, etc.

    Page top index.


    Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'state' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'stindyan.'

    In classical contexts we shall use 'state.' In quantum comtexts we shall use 'stindyan,' 'stindyanic,' 'phase,' 'phasic,' and phasemental.

    In quantum reality there is n¤ classical 'state.' Quantum reality is anihmatæ. All quantons are b¤th-all/amd dynamis/stasis. We sh¤w this as quanton(dynamis,stasis). Quantum stindyan is emerqant vis-à-vis classical stasis is objectively inanimate (assumes zero macro/meso/micro momenta).

    Analytic classical reality assumes it can 'stop' reality for convenience of observation and measurement. That assumption is a SOM delusion. It arose from Aristotelianesque CTMs, as depicted by Thomas Kuhn in his SoSR, "Contemplating a falling stone, Aristotle saw a change of state rather than a process." p. 124 of 212 total, UCP paper bound 3rd ed., 1996. (Our bold color. See our review of SoSR.)

    We want to offer some good examples of classicists' 'use' of 'state.' P. A. M. Dirac is one of 'the' preeminent quantum theoreticians, and in a real sense 'the' Father of theoretical QED. Allow us to offer two Dirac comments regarding 'state' as it attends system analysis.

    "Thus a state of an atomic system must be specified by fewer or more indefinite data than a complete set of numerical values for all the coordinates and velocities at some instant of time." Page 11, The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, by PAM Dirac, 4th ed., OUP, 1958. Our bold and violet classical problematics.

    Dirac clearly complains here that classical 'state' is complex, too complex to measure, adequately!

    Probably Dirac complained since any classical 'object,' including ideally 'independent' classical 'points' themselves, composes an uncountable infinity of classical Newtonian 'spaceless' yet spatially unambiguous 'points,' in aggregate, induce-viewed as a massive 'homogeneous' classical 'point object' requiring extended space.

    Voilá! We have a Diracian classically state-ic 'infinite complexity.'

    We agree, and this is why we say, "Classical state is complex (rather, in-credible, even ludicrous) and quantum flux issi simple!" State's stux sux! Flux' crux issi simple!

    You may find it additionally interesting that ideal classical 'state' actually and quite paradoxically denies classical metanotions of observability and measurability. Think about it... Observation and measurement (monitorings) require flux to assess relative changings in quantum~real quantized~timings! Absent quantized change, we can measure naught!

    Doug's last sentence begs another stability relevant HotMeme™:

    A Quantonics HotMeme™ "State cann¤t relate."™ A Quantonics HotMeme™.

    And another:

    A Quantonics HotMeme™ "Relativity depends upon fluxic wave-based quantized change, n¤t classical state."™ A Quantonics HotMeme™.

    Einstein's 'relativity' (both SR and GR) depend upon 'invariant, i.e., state-ic, geometric interval' AKA 'state.' Ultimate hylic, dialectical, facile, ersatz, inept objective retardation! Kindergarten tiny mindedness! Blue text updates and 'quantized' added to second HotMeme™ for purpose of segueing 'state' into a memeo of 'stability.' See 'order.'

    'State' is absolute classical naïveté. It is naïve, stoppable, frame-reference-able realism. It is naïve, stoppable frame-reference-able localism.

    See our Quantum Pendulum. Read there about impossibility of 'classical static reference frames,' i.e., quantum reality issi absolute flux, semper fluxio.

    We complain elsewhere that Dirac denigrates philosophy as a starting point for any good science. We see here, that classical parochialism has cost him dearly. He clearly tells us that he assumes reality is stoppable, and lisrable. I.e., reality is classical, not quantum! Time may be stopped for classical analytic convenience at any instant. He tells us that stopped numerical values for coordinates, time, space, and thus velocities are stoppable scalar magnitudes.

    It is odd that Dirac continued to adhere these classical notions. If you read our reference for these quotes you will find that Dirac completely re-wrote his chapter on QED. In that re-write Dirac's own analysis acknowledges that genuine QED depends upon a view of reality which portrays reality as both absolutely-nonstationary and nonexclusive. His classical assumptions used earlier in writing other chapters in that text deny his later more quantum stindyanic/included-middle portrayals. Strangely, he retained his earlier classicism and concluded that such a more quantum reality is "impossible." So as a classicist, he found any nonclassical portrayal of quantum reality "impossible." Today, we see similar waffling in most other physicists.

    See analytic, con-, instant, magnitude, number, order, stop, and Zeno. See Dirac's The Principles of Quantum Mechanics. Dirac also has this to say about 'state.'

    "A state of a system may be defined as an undisturbed motion that is restricted by as many conditions or data as are theoretically possible without mutual interference or contradiction." Ibid.

    In quantum reality, it is impossible for any system to be 'undisturbed.' All quantum systems aræ n¤nlisr. All quantum systems aræ being as perpetually~ubiquitously~changing evolutionary processings. Reality disturbs itself endlessly because quantum reality changæs all of itself and always changes itself as endless coobsfective-self-other~aware-self-other~referent EIMA ensehmble pr¤cessings. That is why we say any classical notion of stable 'state' or stable state-ic linear motion is ludicrously naïve. Dirac's motion assumes unitemporal linear but stoppable motion of independent objects. But quantum reality is n¤t classically objective, n¤r unitemporal n¤r analytically stoppable. Further, contradiction may n¤t be assessed in quantum reality. Why? Classical contradiction depends upon objective negation. In quantum~reality negation is subjective. See Aristotle. See negation. See negation is subjective. See subjectiv. See subjective. See complement. See contradict. See Zeno. Also see more recent CeodE 2014 chaos, equilibria, and cancel (as how quantum~reality apparently, and only tentatively, 'negates' its wholly positive fluxings). See stable, classical vis-à-vis quantum, under quantum~coquecigrues.

    Quantum reality insists that measurement ¤f reality must be dynamic, because quantum reality is a n¤nstatic evolving pr¤cess, s¤ when we measure quantum reality we must bec¤me c¤herent with its dynamis t¤ d¤ s¤, rather than classically assuming we can make reality temporarily static while we classically measure it. (See some relevant commentary on classical vis-à-vis quantum measurement.)

    Page top index.

    'static' (i.e., state-ic)

    See state.

    Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'static' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'stindyanic.'

    See our Bases of Judgment and our What is Wrong with Probability as Value?

    Page top index.


    Etymology - classical:


    Etymology - quantum:


    Synonyms - classical:


    Synonyms - quantum:

    : Stochastic, stochastics, etc.

    Classical probability theory depends upon classical, objective, EEMD mathematics. Classical stochastics 'operate' on state-ic scalar samples, which implies classical reality is 'stoppable.' See Zeno. See scalarbation, number, ensemble, stoppability, etc.

    : St¤chastihc, st¤chastihcs, st¤chastihcings, etc.

    Key to understanding quantum~reality in terms of stochastics as Pirsigean Value is a simple phasement: "All quantum~stochastics are positive." No energy in quantum~reality is negative. All quantum~energyings are flux, flux may tentatively cancel, but never permanently negate. So classical notions of waves as plus-minus flux are entirely bogus, kaput. See Bruno de Finetti on subjective probability.

    Quantum pr¤bability hermeneutics apply quantum, subjective, EIMA memes amd anihmatæ semi¤tics. Quantum st¤chastics aræ unst¤ppable, s¤ we need t¤ (must) view quantum st¤chastics as (present participle) st¤chasticings. Quantum st¤chasticings aræ quantum pr¤cessings.

    Quantonics evolves a novel quantum~semantic for stochasticings, like this - Stochasticings are PNFings:

    See our QELR of time.

    Page top index.


    See state.

    : Stop, halt, decease, zero momentum, immobile, immutable, unchanging, etc.

    : St¤p, st¤ppable, ihmmotuhs, etc.


    CTMs assume reality may be 'stopped' for purposes of objective observation. CTMs assume reality is stable, and in any sense it isn't stable it is classical 'science's' duty to make it stable! Keynesians and dialectical Marxists call this "planning for stability." Über bogosity!

    QTMs deny analytic 'stoppability.' All quantons are anihmatæ, ensehmble c¤mplementary, ensehmble everywhere-ass¤ciative, stindyanic, amd emerqant, amd thus in a quantum real sense 'unstoppable.' Latin for unstoppable is 'not stoppable,' i.e., non immotus. We may bastardize that to inimmotus.

    See Zeno's Paradice on quantum n¤nstoppability.

    Page top index.


    Etymology (From Barnhart's The Concise Dictionary of Etymology, p. 771, by Robert K. Barnhart, Harper Collins, 1995.):

    "subject II. Before 1333 sugge person under the rule of another, subordinate; later subgit (about 1380), subiecte (before 1398); borrowed from old French suget, subgect, later subject a subject person or thing, representing various stages of borrowing from Latin subjectus noun use of the past participle of subicere to place under (sub- under + -icere, combining form of jacere to throw).

    "Some of the specific senses as in logic and philosophy, are early borrowings in Middle English from Latin subjectum foundation or subject of a proposition, from neuter of subjectus, past participle, and eventually this spelling replaced the Middle English spelling from French in all uses. The Latin is a loan translation of Greek to hypokeimenon, literally, that which lies beneath.

    "-adj. Before 1338 suget owing allegiance or obedience (to); later subgit (before 1393), and subject (about 1386); borrowed from Old French suget, subgiet, subject, from Latin subjectus inferior in status, subject, from past participle of subicere to place under. The meaning of prone (to), likely to have, is first recorded in Middle English about 1380.

    "-v. before 1382 subjecten to subjugate; borrowed from Old French subjecter to subject, subjugate, from Latin subjectare throw under, subjugate, frequentative form of subicere to place under. The meaning of expose, lay open (to), is first recorded in 1549.

    "-subjection n. About 1375 subieccioun dominion, control, domination; borrowed from Old French subjection from Latin subjectionem (nominative subjectio) a placing under, reducing to obedience. from subject-. past participle stem of subicere to place under; for suffix see ­TION.

    "-subjective adj. Probably before 1450 subiective submissive, obedient; borrowed from Latin subjectivus. from subjectus subject, n.; for suffix see -IVE. The meaning of existing in the mind is first recorded in English in 1707,"

    Synonyms - classical:

    • subordinate
    • beneath
    • after
    • lower
    • inferior
    • effect
    • servant
    • necessary
    • vis-à-vis predicate
    • excluded-middle
    • trash
    • etc.

    Synonyms - quantum:

    • above
    • evolutionary
    • changing
    • animate
    • flux
    • quantum~associative
    • quality
    • included~middle
    • Value
    • etc.

    (Classical problematics: Classicism assumes that reality is quantitative-objective. That which is qualitative-subjective is to be thrown out or conveniently/CTM-conventionally converted to objective ideas and concepts.) See: measure, number, quantity, quality, etc.

    : Subject, etc.

    Classically 'subject' is below and after object. See our Pirsig relevant comments there.

    To any classicist, objective thought rules any subjective notions. (Our best recent (2005) exemplar is Patrick Fitzgerald's indictment of I.L. Libby. Fitzgerald used dialectical objectivity to indict.)

    'Subject' as may be seen from etymology to left, is a pure dialectical 'form.' It is ideally and materially 'oppositive' classical notions of 'object.' See our SOM Valuation of subject.

    Greeks used dialectical notions and nounesque objective maltuitions to separate and hierarchically order object above subject. This hierarchy and scission are just and plainly wr¤ng. Wr¤ng especially from any quantum reality perspective.

    Greeks, et al., constructed bogus SOMitic rules for judgment. CTMs find their bases in those bogus rules.

    : Subqjæct, etc.

    Etymologically, as you can read just left, classical subject is dungeonesque! From any classical conspective 'subject' is below and subservient 'object.' Quantum reality changes all that classical locus-hocus-bogus! Quantum reality inverts that classical hierarchy! Quantum reality takes us from CTMs to QTMs. Quantum reality stomps and subsumes classical dialectic and classical bases of judgment. Where CTMs subjugate and suborn (i.e., from a quantum~perspective CTMs commit perjury; SOMites and CRites endlessly and 'certainly' suborn via their inured practice of CTMs), QTMs set us free, literally and actually, through their fluxio adherences to quantum uncertainty. Classical dialectic perjures quantum~reality.

    Quantumly subjective apparencies are Value~evolutionarily above objective apparencies.

    Quantumly 'subject' and 'object' are quantum~complements, e.g., quanton(subjective_wave,objective_particle).

    We use quantonics' scripts to show quantum complementarity of subject and object like this: quanton(subject,object).

    See animacy, associate, attract, autonomy, certain, interpretation, logic, reason, truth, uncertain, etc.

    For a much larger quantum~perspective of social and cultural affects of S~O hierarchies and evolution, see our 2003-2004 Value Chautauqua.

    Page top index.


    : Subjectiv, subjectivist, subjectivity

    Technically this spelling of subjectiv is unique to non personal subjectivity. Subjectiv is about ensemble stochastics of events. We are talking classical probability here. Bruno de Finetti says it like this, classical probability is a "theory of additive and non negative functions of events." Quote taken from his paper, Foresight: Its Logical Laws, Its Subjective Sources, Translated by Henry E. Kyburg, Jr., and published in Studies in Subjective Probability, Wiley, 1964, from a series of lectures given by de Finetti in May, 1935, subsequently published in Annales de l'Institut Henri Poincaré,1937. Allow Doug to make some huge and very important quantum~inferential~heuristics re that bold green text. Let's do our heuristics as a list of Doug's composite of an ensemble of HotMeme™ assumptions:

    • quantum~waves are flux,
    • quantum~waves are Value,
    • Value is stochastic,
    • quantum~probability is a subspecies of stochastics,
    • probability is a "theory of additive and non negative functions of events,"
    • quantum~reality is stochastic,
    • quantum~reality is n¤n negative,
    • quantum~waves are n¤t subject to bogus and endarkened classical dialectical CTM notions of plus-minus wave alternations,
    • quantum~reality may n¤t be classically negated,
    • quantum~waves are wholly positive metaphors of quantum~energy,
    • quantum~energy is positive,
    • quantum~waves and quantum~energyings may only be tentatively phase~interrelationshipings canceled...never classically negated.

    Allow Doug to make this overly simple using linguistics:

    • Subjectiv - objective subjectivity, vav (subjectiv as formal, mechanical, canonic, fixed, stable, stopped, independent, etc.)
    • Subjective - subjective subjectivity. (subjective as hermeneutic by sentient interpretation, heuristic, and conjecture...)

    Latter is closer to our quantum English Language remediation: subjæctihvæ. Former is ideally dialectical, analytic, Platonic, Aristotelian, Parmenidian: classically 'defined' so well as to have but a 'single' interpretation. Under those conditions said interpretation is always two-valued, either subjectiv 'or' 'not' subjectiv. EOOO(subjective, not_subjectiv). Dichon(subjective, not_subjectiv). Hermeneutic subjectivity by comparison is classically 'sophist.' For quantonics, latter is always quantum real: BAWAM(subjective,only_apparently_classically_subjectiv), quanton(subjective,only_apparently_classically_subjectiv).

    Classicists at that time saw personal subjectivity as a dichon(external, internal). They assumed an Aristotelian excluded-middle.

    Most of them saw probability as classically objective (in terms of probabilities' mechanical mathematics, e.g., "theory of additive and non negative..." used above; 'additive' assumes an Aristotelian excluded-middle, and 'not' presumes ideal objective negation, both based on two classical delusions of 'real' stability ("'reality' conventionally and conveniently holds still") and objective independence), where de Finetti and others saw a strange kind of objective subjectivity in probability (i.e., cultural, individually relative conspectives: see our Quantonics' HotMeme™ of Thomas Kuhn on Immutability and Solipsism). Of course, this makes us think of Dr. Stein's Chautauqua from object to quantum object in his The Concept of Object as the Foundation of Physics. What we see here is an intellectual journey using classical CTMs plus intuitive imagination to gradually dénouer nature's quantum dénouements. Re~cognize how this is an apparent proto~quantum Chautauqua away from classically ideal ESQ toward more quantum memeotic DQ!

    Subjectiv events, classically are independent, stable, state-ic, stoppable, analytic, lisr, etc. Viz. a flipped coin. Assume a zero momentum unidirectionally observable reference frame. Assume two ideal classical analytic hold-still states: either heads or tails. EOOO(heads, tails). Viz. an archer and 100 arrows shot. Viz. an ideally analytic target whose 'hits' may be objectively measured precisely and scalar magnitudinal unambiguously. All, just CTM axioms, doctrine, dogma... Viz. Challenger and Columbia spacecraft. Booster O-rings as stable, independent classical objects. Temperature as scalar magnitudinally unambiguous in relation to countless other classically state-ic, independent, objective 'variables.' Ice formation and shedding as classically analytic... Determinate, 1-1 correspondent, cause-effect...improbable. Viz. 100 geographically and contextually disparate courtrooms deciding guilty, innocent, hung on one 'same' set of ideal classically identical objective unit-case parameters.

    This classical version of subjectiv suffers most of CTMs' ills. Notice de Finetti's use of 'event' as lisr, stoppable, stable, state-ic, etc.

    De Finetti exposes another classical illness regarding subjectiv probability: it should only be viewed as theoretically objective and scientific. He implies there are two points of view:

    1. subjectiv: "...the most commonly accepted, considers the subjective element of the naïve notion of probability which is found in everyday life as a dangerous element which ought to be eliminated in order that the notion of probability be able to attain a truly scientific (read CTM) status;
    2. subjective: "...the opposite point of view considers, on the contrary, that the subjective elements are essential, and cannot be eliminated without depriving the notion and theory of probability of all reason for existing." Our parentheses. (Note abundant QELP in de Finetti's language.)

    Philosophically, de Finetti continues, "...according to one, probability is an element which partakes of the physical world and exists outside us; according to the other, it only expresses the opinion of an individual and cannot have meaning except in relation to him." I.e., solipsism! Here we see a deluded Aristotelian innate classical assumption that humankind are objectively lisr from physical reality, indeed, human mind is lisr from physical reality. We are 'not' in reality and reality is 'not' in us.

    We see classical bogus assumptions-presumptions dichon(personal, scientific). EOOO(personal, scientific). EEMD(personal, scientific). Dichon(internal, external). EOOO(internal, external). All just and naïvely and locally 'realistic' classical SOMwittedness!

    However, De Finetti, as others, exhibits quantum avatars. We offer a potent one from third paragraph of Chapter VI, 'Observation and Thought,' of his paper, "We are sometimes led to make a judgment which has a purely subjective meaning, and this is perfectly legitimate; but if one seeks to replace it afterward by something objective, one does not make progress, but only an error." Wow! Were he to only append that reality is purely subjective and that objectivity is an apparition...

    : Subqjæctihv, subqjæctihvist, subqjæctihvihty

    Our QELRed version of subqjæctihv changæs classicism's dichons ihnt¤ Quantonic quantons. Classical subjectiv 'events' bæc¤mæ quantum ævæntings. Subqjæctihv ævæntings bæc¤mæ anihmatæ quantum pr¤cæssings. BAWAM(headings,tailings).

    Quantum subqjæctihv ihmpliæs anihmatæ, heterogæne¤uhs, EIMA quantum pr¤babilihtyings amd lihkælih¤¤dings. Quantum subqjæctihvæ pr¤babilihtyings amd lihkælih¤¤dings aræ quantum fuzz¤nihc s¤rs¤ amd peaqlo ænsehmbles. See our recent (2004) What is Wrong with Probability as Value?

    We see a quantum quanton(personal,scientific). BAWAM(personal,scientific). EIMA(personal,scientific). Quanton(internal,external). BAWAM(internal,external). Quantum! Probability is quanton(subjectiv,subjective). Likelihood is quanton(subjectiv,subjective). See Margenau above in What is Wrong with Probability as Value? Quantum reality is hermeneutic which begs heterogeneities of views as quantum~ensemblings, n¤t just a single 'unambiguous' classical 'scientific' subjectiv view.

    In Quantonics people are (all actuality is) quantons. Understanding is quantonic. Individuals' understandings have similar yet unique fuzzonic probability and likelihood omnistributions! Quantum animate, EIMA, ensemble human epistemological subjectivity plays a significant coobsfective observational and affectational role in quantum reality.

    Visit Martin Ryder's and others' works on issues of subjectivity at his site at Colorado University, Denver. Quality!

    Page top index.


    : Subjective

    Classical reality, in Quantonics' strawman version of it, is classically objective. What does that mean? It means classical thingkers worship objective reality while mostly denigrating 'subjective' reality.

    Classicists, our strawmen whom we call "SOMites," believe that subjective reality can be measured quantitatively, and to any extents it may not be measured quantitatively it is valueless from any logical conspective.


    Dialectical Assessment

    Ideal Classical Reality
    stability Classically subjective-stability exists not  Classical actuality is stable. Classical actuality is stoppable.
    independence Classically subjective-independence exists not  Objects in classical reality are independent of one another.
    excluded-middle Classically subjective-excluded-middle exists not  No object in classical reality can be both itself and not itself.
    EOOOness Classically subjective-EOOOness exists not  Classical predicate logic is absolutely dialectical.
    H5Wness Classically subjective-H5Wness exists not  H5W are all always lisr, stoppable, stable, analytic, etc.
    lisrability Classically subjective-lisrability exists not  Objects are ideally, classically lisr. Objects are analytic.
    causation Classically subjective-causation exists not  Spatial motion is change. All classical motion is caused.
    certainty Classically subjective- certainty exists not  All classical causation is determinately 1-1 correspondent.
    EEMDivity Classically subjective-EEMDivity exists not  Due independence & excluded-middle objects are everywhere-dissociative.
    observation Classically subjective-observation exists not  Classical objects may be unilaterally observed, while undisturbed.

    Classical subjectivity is a dichon(subjective, objective). That which is classically subjective is immaterial, insubstantial, 'not' objective, unreal, phenomenal, etc.

    : Subqjæctih

    Quantum reality, in Quantonics' interpretation of it, is quantum~subjective. What does that mean? One extraordinary exemplar is what we call "Bell Inequalities." Another is "quantum uncertainty." From any classical conspective quantum~animacy itself is 'subjective' since it violates a classical axiom of 'stability.' Ditto quantum~heterogeneity which for us implies quantum ensembles of ensembles whose constituents are fuzzon attractors whose peaqlos are all potential quantum~likelihood~omnistributions. Another is arbitrary quantum~likelihood~omnistribution of quantons; see QLO. Classical objects by comparison have absolute locus, context, size, mass, etc. Another is action~at~a~distance. In classical reality, a naïvely-local reality, quantum real action~at~a~distance is not permitted. Another is QTMs. See our recent (2004) What is Wrong with Probability as Value? Latter is a wholly quantum~subjective critique.

    Quantumists believe that subjective reality is qualitative, and that quantum reality is predominately qualitative. Too, they believe that any quantitative aspects of quantum reality are only classically ideal delusions and illusions including: stability, independence, 1-1 correspondence, induction, cause-effect, ideal analysis, ideal synthesis, excluded-middle, everywhere-dissociation, etc. See criteria above. See Bases of Judgment.


    Vis-à-vis Assessment
    anihmacy Quantum subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤n issi (hærmænæutihcs aræ) abs¤lutæly anihmatæ is¤flux.
    c¤mplæmæntarihty Subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤nings c¤mplæmænt ahll ahctualihty. Ræhlihty issi a quanton(subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤n,ahctualihty).
    ihncludæd~mihddlings Quantum plurahl subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤nings aræ Valuæ ihnterrelati¤nshipings which aræhlihty's ihncludæd~mihddle.
    BAWAMings C¤¤bsfæctihvæ subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤nings pr¤vihde~mædiatæ quantum c¤herænce~c¤mpænetrati¤n ¤f~f¤r ahll ahctualihty.
    H5Wings Subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤n nurtures amd æmærses p¤tæntia f¤r ahll ahctual h¤wings, whyings, whænings, whereings, whatings, wh¤ings
    lisrings Quantum subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤nings aræ a Dirac sea ¤f is¤flux ihn which ahll lisr~n¤nlisr quantum ihslands 'float.'
    affæctati¤nings Subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤n issi (subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤nings aræ) is¤~qualihtatihvæ, ~affæctihve, ~heterogæne¤uhs, ~sælf~referænt, ~frahctal, ~s¤phist, etc.
    umcærtainty Quantum umcærtainty issi ihnterrelati¤nshipings quantons(subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤nings,ahctualihty).
    EIMAivityings Subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤n issi is¤h¤l¤graphic amd thuhs æværywhere~ihncludæd~mihddle~ass¤ciatihve.
    c¤¤bsfæcti¤n Subqjæctihvæ~ihnterpretati¤n pr¤vihdæs amd mædiatæs mæans f¤r ahll quantons t¤ qualihtatihvæly c¤¤bsfæct p¤tæntiahlly ahll quantons.

    Quantum subjectivists carry a huge reality advantage. They simply do n¤t accept classical-provincial-parochial dogma, doctrine, Boole, principia, rules, principles, laws, edicta, and all that other objective classical bilge. Adult quantum subjectivists deny any organizations' rights to deny their individual rights to personal individual freedom of thought. Adult quantum subjectivists deny any other individuals' rights to deny any quantum subjectivist's individual rights to personal individual freedom of thought. See Women's Ways of Knowing. See John Stuart Mill.

    Page top index.



    • deduct
    • take away
    • decrease
    • cut
    • reduce
    • exclude
    • cut
    • pare
    • divide
    • differentiate
    • dissociate
    • disjoin
    • disunite
    • separate
    • etc.

    Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt a classical interpretation of 'subtraction' and remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'subtracti¤n.'

    : Subtract, subtracts, subtraction, etc.

    In classical contexts we shall use 'subtraction.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use 'subtracti¤n.'

    Classical subtraction assumes reality is stable and objects in reality are independent. Classical subtraction further assumes reality is inanimate/stoppable, excluded-middle, analytic, etc.

    Classicists assume and presume reality is both positive and negative. Further, they assume and presume that to negate and to posit are objective acts. Further, they assume and presume that positives may be ideally negated and that negatives may be ideally posited. Classicists assume and presume that negation is objective and they assume and presume posit-ion is objective. How? They assume and presume Bergson's two classical delusions:

    1. reality is stable (reality is stoppable and can hold still), and
    2. (reality is objective, and) objects in reality are separably independent of one another.

    Classical subtraction assumes and presumes classically ideal reduction: subtraction "takes away, removes, deletes." If a classicist subtracts an elephant from a giraffe said classicist gets mostly part of a negative elephant (think, or at least try to thingk about it). Weigh methods of classical subtraction, giraffe-elephant. What happens when we do it quantumly? (E.g., DNA omnifferencings. )

    A mobster classically-thingks subtracting a hit makes his target disappear.

    To any classicist 1-1 = 0. To any classicist A-A = 0. (Further assumptions of identity (identicalness) of both 1 and A. Thence that 'zero' exists as a stabile objective ideal notion.)

    : Subqtrahct, subqtrahcting, subqtrahctings, subqtrahcts, subqtrahcti¤n, subqtrahcti¤ning, subqtrahcti¤nings, subqtrahcti¤ns, etc.

    Quantum subqtrahcti¤n assumæs ræhlihty issi anihmatæ amd quantons ihn ræhlihty have quantum c¤mplæmæntary, ihncludæd-mihddle, umst¤ppable ihnterrelati¤nships.

    As ¤f 2004q, Quantonics cahlls th¤se ihnterrelati¤nshipings "peaqlos." Peaqlos aræ pr¤babilihty~lihkælih¤¤d ¤mnistrihbuti¤ns.

    Quantum pr¤babilihty issi p¤sihtih! Quantum ræhlihty issi p¤sihtihvæ! Thæræ aræ n¤ idæal classical negatives ihn quantum ræhlihty!

    Wæ can quantum~subqtrahct, but whæn wæ d¤, wæ d¤ n¤t classically eliminate, zæro, null, empty, dæstroy, etc. Quantum nægati¤n issi subjectih! Quantum subqtrahcti¤n issi quantum~pr¤cæssings ¤f heterogæne¤uhs, anihmatæ, EIMA ¤mnihfferæncings. Wæ cann¤t classihcahlly ihdæahlly subqtrahct, eliminatæ, zær¤, null, æmpty, kill, etc.

    Quantum subqtrahcti¤n (e.g., 'killing' y¤ur ænæmy, giraffe mihnuhs elephant, A mihnuhs Aq.q) d¤æs n¤t eliminatæ, rather iht issi a cræatihvæ pr¤cæss ihn a sænse that n¤vel spawn æmærgæ fr¤m any attæmpt t¤ quantum~subqtrahct! Amd folks, ræhlihty issi quantum!

    For application, and descriptions of relative importances of these terms, see our 7Jun2002 Möbius 3-Primæ Fermion.

    See, in quantum analogy, minus.

    See addition, differentiation, division, integration, multiplication, prime, recursion, square, square root, and subtraction.

    See subjectiv, subjective.

    Page top index.



    • above (classical)
    • addition (classical)
    • cover (classical)
    • overlay (classical)
    • pack (classical)
    • etc.

    • co here (quantum)
    • entangle (quantum)
    • middle~include (quantum)
    • etc.

    Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'superpose' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'superp¤se.'

    In classical contexts we shall use 'superpose.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use 'superp¤se.'

    In classical contexts superposition usually means classical addition. Classical superposition is logical.

    Ihn quantum comtexts supærp¤sihti¤n mæans quantum ihncludæd-mihddle addqihti¤n amd ¤ftæn quantum herænce, amd næarly ahlways (¤f at læast n¤nahctualihty amd ahctualihty; quantum n¤nahctualihty supærp¤sæs ahll ahctualihty) quantum partihal c¤herænce. Quantum supærp¤sihti¤n issi coquecigrues.

    Classical 'superpose' assumes classical, objective, state-ic, coincident, excluded-middle superposition of dichons.

    Quantum 'superp¤se' assumes quantum, quantonic, anihmatæ, coinsident, included-middle superp¤siti¤n ¤f quantons.

    Page top index.



    "Suppose v. About 1303 supposen hold an opinion, assume, incline to think; borrowed from Old French suposer to assume (from Medieval Latin, to assume), probably a replacement of *suppondre (by influence of Old French poser put or place) from Latin suppõnere put or place under (sup- under + põnere put place)

    "Supposition n. 1410 supposicioun assumption, hypothesis; borrowed probably from Middle French, and directly from Late Latin suppositiõnem (nominative suppositiõ), from Latin, act of putting under, from supposit-, past participle stem of suppõnere put under; The sense of Late Latin suppositiõ assumption, hypothesis, was influenced by Greek hypóthesis hypothesis."

    From Barnhart's Concise Dictionary of Etymology, Harper-Collins, 1995.

    Synonyms - classical:

    • guess
    • estimate
    • socially consense
    • etc.

    Synonyms - quantum - animate ensemble REIMAR:

    • stochastics
    • probability (a posteriorai)
    • plausibility (a iamai)
    • likelihood (a priorai)
    • etc.

    Antonyms - classical:

    • know
    • certainty
    • concrete
    • genuine
    • etc.

    C¤mplæmænt¤nyms - quantum:

    : Suppose, supposition, etc.

    Classical supposition involves ideal, concrete dialectical opposition between ideal objects in a 'state' -ic 'reality.' Supposition, classically, "accords primacy to objectivity above subjectivity." Commutative paraphrase of Philip R. Wallace from his Paradox Lost.

    Classical sup pose ition concretely 'poses' objects state-ically to one another. Classical supposition assumes logical quantitative, 2-valued, 1-1 correspondence of objective properties. In Quantonics we call them 'dichons.'

    : Suhpp¤se, suhpp¤ses, suhpp¤sings, suhpp¤sihti¤n, suhpp¤sihti¤ns, suhpp¤sihti¤nings, etc.

    Quantum suhpp¤sihti¤n ihnv¤lves quantal, flux~æssæntial st¤chastihc complementation am¤ng quantons ihn dynamihc ræhlihtyings. Suhpp¤sihti¤n, quantumly, "acc¤rds prihmacy t¤ subqjæctihvihty ab¤ve 'objectivity.'" Paraphrase of Philip R. Wallace from his Paradox Lost.

    Quantum suhp~p¤s~ihti¤n phasistihcahlly s¤rs¤ p¤sæs anihmatæ SOrON ænsehmbles ¤f flux quanta (i.e., quantum~holographic networks of quanta; viz. ensembles of fuzzons animately interrelating and adaptively emerging among many another). Quantum suhpp¤sihti¤n qualihtatihvæly suhpp¤sæs c¤quecigrues ihnterrelati¤nshipings am¤ng flux quanta. In Quantonics we call them "quantons."

    Let's ponder our following list of supposition synonyms and their synonyms as to their classical semantics (use our classical pulldown above) and their quantum hermeneutics (use our quantum pulldown above):

    • assume - deduce, reason, think, understand,
    • believe - accept, confidence, credence, opinionated-thought, trust, truth, ween (opinionated supposition),
    • conjecture - assume, postulate, presume, speculate, suppose, surmise,
    • deduce - assume, conjecture, divine, infer, intuit, presume, reason, understand,
    • expect - assume, believe, imagine, presume, surmise, think,
    • faith - belief, confidence, conviction, hopefulness, optimism,
    • imagine - conjure, conceive, conceptualize, envision, ideate,
    • hypothesize - concept, conjecture, idea, notion, possibility, postulate, premise, proposition, supposition, theorem, thesis
    • ostensible - alleged, apparent, purported, superficial, supposed,
    • plausible - credible, feasible, likely, logical, possible, rational, reasonable, tenable,
    • presume - believe, conjecture, expect, guess, judge, imagine, postulate, presuppose, speculate, suppose, surmise, think,
    • putative - accept, alleged, assume, common-sense, presume, suppose, reported, reputed, rumored,
    • speculate - guess, hypothesize, muse, surmise, theorize, think, wonder,
    • theorize - conjecture, hypothesize, philosophize, propose, postulate, posit, speculate, suppose,

    Each link above takes us to a QELR of that word which compares classical semantics to quantum hermeneutics and remediation.

    Simply, classical assumption, belief, conjecture, deduction, expectation, faith, imagination, hypothesis, ostentation, plausibility, presumption, putation, speculation, and theory all are CTMed dialectically. What does that mean? It means: EEMD, EOOO, inanimate-determinism, -certainty, -concrete truth, -disambiguation, etc.

    Sihmply, quantum assumpti¤n, bælihæf, comjæcture, dæducti¤n, æxpæctati¤n, faihth, ihmaginati¤n, hyp¤thesis, ¤stæntati¤n, plauhsihbihlihty, præsumpti¤n, putati¤n, spæculati¤n, amd thæ¤ry ahll aræ QTMæd mæmæ¤tihcahlly. What does that mean? It means: EIMA, BAWAM, animate~ensemble~uncertainty, ~memeticity, ~ambiguity, etc.

    All of that classical linguistic dialectical vocabulary essentially distills to semantic quantum~stochasticity!!! Which begs another:

    Quantonics' HotMeme™ "All facts, 'scientific' and otherwise are quantum~stochasticings."™ HotMeme

    "What are some examples Doug?"

    1. One, '1,' is suppositional, quantum~stochastic.
    2. 'One minus one,' '1-1,' AKA 'zero,' '0,' is suppositional, quantum~stochasitc.
    3. All 'constants' are suppositional, quantum~stochastic.
    4. All reality is suppositional, quantum~stochastic.
    5. etc.

    See our quantum Hamiltonian.

    What is genuinely interesting here is that we commence fathoming how quantum~supposition is as good as it gets in quantum reality in any efforts to assess what classicists dialectically refer as 'truth.' Quantum reality is change and change is waves and waves are qualitatively, subjectively, n¤n mechanically quantum~stochastic.

    Notice too how classical science and philosophy are both founded in classical-supposition (social consensus), but then they belie that foundation by claiming reality is dialectical! Social tragedy of commons dialectic (Vulgi opinio error!) is an enormously flawed deign to feign. Apparently SOMites see no flaw in their notions of 'absolute truth' based upon classical supposition. Notice further how omnifferent and omniffering are classical and quantum supposition.

    Quantum supposition builds animate EIMA (holographic sorso associating SOONs) fuzzonic omnistributionings via dynamic, flux is crux durational monitoring of quantum reality using quanta, real qubits. Quantum supposition is radically stochastic naturally (physially) intrinsic emerscitecture and emerscenture of stindyanic reality.

    Classical supposition, by comparison, reproduces concrete EEMD dichonic 'di' stributions via state-ic stux is crux spatial measurement of classical reality using 'di' gital bits. Classical supposition is radically mechanistic human-innate (physical) design and manufacture of concrete reality.

    Page top index.


    : Suprapersonal, etc.

    This QELR is Doug's response to Carl G. Jung's classical use of this term in his The Psychology of Unconscious Process and his reviewer's use of suprapersonal in Jung's Red Book which Doug is currently attempting to review.

    As quoted by Sonu Shamdasani (his RB reviewer, translator) Jung apparently uses 'suprapersonal' dialectically 'separating' and 'differentiating' his I from his non-I. We see Jung's implicit of classical negation as objective. To Doug, this is a major faux pas of Jung's. It denies countless quantum memeos, including:

    • hologra[[il][m][ph]]icityings,
    • EIMA of I and n¤n~I,
    • middle~inclusionings of I and n¤n~I as begged by Suares'
      • perpetual~ubiquity of and faith in cosmic~con(m)sciousness,
      • "Aleph in blood,"
      • "Satan as Error," (Dialectic as Satan, as Error, e.g., Peter's 'bad thinking' of Jesus as a Greco-christ. See Pagels' text on Satan.)
      • Jesus' "I am in you, you are in me, I am in God, God is in me, therefore God is in you," (refer farewell discourse, NT, John~Mary)
      • intrinsics of quanton(n¤nactuality,actuality) antinomialism.

    Jung as so many others, exposes his innate dialectical schizophrenia regarding objective separation of unconscious, subconscious, and conscious.

    : Suprapærs¤nal, etc.

    Until Doug encountered 'suprapersonal' in Red Book's Introduction, p. 209, penultimate paragraph, Doug intuited Jung's middle~inclusion of 'Spirit of this time,' and 'Spirit of the depths.' His dialectical usage of suprapersonal, to Doug, forbids dogmatically that quantum~middle~inclusion.

    Suprapærs¤nal ihn quantonicsese middle~includes both I and n¤n~I as quanton(n¤n~I,I).

    Jung's dialectical perversion conceives it as dichon(non-I, I). SOM's Knife (HFC: High Frequency Cuisinart) separating, logically, objectively, all individuals from their quantum~real~complementings. Pure classicism. Pure dialectical garbage.

    Page top index.


    TBD. (Classical problematics: Classicism assumes that reality is synthetic. Classical synthesis adheres a classical concept of radical formal mechanism. Formal mechanism demands that objects in classical reality may be manufactured, assembled/integrated/synthesized, and reproduced. Synthesis is a rearrangement of building blocks process which produces 'new' rearrangements of 'existing' classical objects. Classical synthesis both denies and disallows emergence of quantum phenomena. Indeed, classical synthesis/manufacture is deemed 'failed' if any novel, n¤n-objective phenomena (Murphies) arise during or after manufacturing of a product.)

    See: emerscenture.

    Page top index.



    • order
    • alignment
    • registration
    • correlation
    • (classical) beauty
    • affinity, uniformity, similarity, nexus, topology
    • (maths) equivalence relations

    : Symmetric, symmetric, symmetrical, etc.

    Classicists view changeless symmetry as beautiful, orderly, definitive, simple to understand, etc. Examples are geometric symbols like triangles, circles, squares, etc.

    Classical symmetry requires objective state-icity. For example a classical 'circle' is rotationally 'symmetric.' If one starts at one locus on a 'circle' and travels around said 'circle' a full 360 degrees, one returns, verifiably, to exactly same locus, independently of how much time it takes to make said peregrination around said 'circle.' Time, space, speed, and velocity of said journey may be analytically assessed and measured reference-frame-locally, stoppably and repeatedly. Analytic verification, validation and proof of said metrics 'exist,' to arbitrary accuracy and precision. Circumference of said circle is constant. Diameter of said circle is constant. Their ratiocination evokes an irrational classical constant: .

    Classical 'science' foundations rest on some ludicrous 'symmetries,' e.g., Aristotle's tautologous identity, A=A. Ask your self "A=A H5W?" Ludicrous is just too nice a word for this classical abomination. We can offer countless similar examples of maltuitive classical thing-king methods.

    : Wæ d¤ n¤t have an anahlogue ¤hr QELR ¤f symmætry t¤ ¤ffer hæræ.

    Wæ aræ k~n¤wings quantum ræhlihty issi æssæntiahlly quantum n¤n symmætrihc.

    N¤nahctualihty amd ahctualihty aræ asymmætrihc ihn quantum ræhlihty. Any quanton's c¤mplæmænt amd ihts comjugatæ aræ asymmætrihc ihn quantum ræhlihty. Quantum flux amd is¤flux c¤mplæmænts sharæ sæværalty t¤ mahssihve plurahlihty quantum ensemble REIMAR ihnterrelati¤nshipihcihties. Sææ ¤ur 2005 How MoQites Monitor Reality.

    Page top index.

    ©Quantonics, Inc., 2001-2028

    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., 2001-2028 Rev. 10Mar2105  PDR — Created 20Jul2002  PDR
    (23May2001 rev - Extend 'state,' & 'state-ic.' Add 'stop.' Add some local links. Correct some spelling errors.)
    (13Jun2001 rev - Add TBD for 'semiotic.')
    (21Jun2001 rev - Add 'start.' )
    (2Dec2001 rev - Add 'superpose.')
    (31Dec2001 rev - Add some links to 'start.')
    (19May2002 rev - Add 'space.')
    (19May2002 rev - Add 'same.')
    (21May2002 rev - Add 'synthesis.')
    (7Jun2002 rev - Add 'square,' 'square root,' and 'subtraction.')
    (17Jul2002 rev - Extend 'state' comments.)
    (4Aug2002 rev - Extend 'state.')
    (4Sep2002 rev - Extend 'stop.')
    (20Sep2002 rev - Remediate all quantum comtextual occurrences of 'animate' on this page.)
    (26Sep2002 rev - Remediate all quantum comtextual occurrences of 'ensemble.')
    (26Dec2002 rev - Minor self-referent remediaiton of 'state.')
    (31Jan2003 rev - Extend 'subtraction' in red.)
    (21Feb2003 rev - Extend 'stop.' Convert Wingdings fonts to GIFs for browser compatibility.)
    (15Mar2003 rev - Add Dirac quotes to 'state.')
    (17Mar2003 rev - More refinements of 'state.')
    (5Sep2003 rev - Add 'stochastic.' Reset legacy red text.)
    (13Oct2003 rev - Reset legacy red text.)
    (12Nov2003 rev - Reset dates and red text.)
    (9Jan2004 rev - Under 'state' put bold violet problematic coloration back.)
    (24Mar2004 rev - Add 'simplicity.')
    (18Apr2004 rev - Add 'generality' link to 'simplicity.')
    (2May2004 rev - Add Heraclitus In Quantum Lightings link to 'simplicity.')
    (1Jul2004 rev - Reset updates.)
    (13Jul2004 rev - Extend 'static.')
    (21-23Jul2004 rev - Extend 'semiotic,' add 'separable.')
    (19Aug2004 rev - Reset update notifications.)
    (20-25Oct2004 rev - Add 'subjectiv,' 'subjective.')
    (3-5Nov2004 rev - Repair typos in last two additions. Extend 'subjectiv.')
    (8Feb2005 rev - Add page top indices. Add 'subjectiv,' and 'subjective' links under 'state.')
    (20Feb2005 rev - Repair some unintentionally QELRed subscripts. Reset red text backgrounds.)
    (3,8,11,16,18,19Mar2005 rev - Add and update 'simultaneity.' See red text updates. Add 'symmetric.' Update 'superpose.' Add 'science.' Update 'state.' Update 'simplicity.')
    (15,19Apr2005 rev - Reset some updates. Reset 'science' and 'state' updates.)
    (10Aug&20Sep2005 rev - Update 'simplicity.')
    (20,24,25Sep2005 rev - Add 'select.' Repair typos. Add red text extensions. Add coined 'quantaldulation' synonym for quantum~selectionings. Update Temporal QLO gif under select. Add link to Perspic & Perspec.)
    (7,13,31Oct2005 rev - Update 'simplicity.' Typos under 'select.' Add 'index' link under 'science.' Add 'simple' anchor.)
    (1Nov2005 rev - Update 'subject.')
    (23Nov2005 rev - Repair 'select' typos. Add links to 'point,' and 'line' under state.)
    (27Nov2005 rev - Add Becking quote under 'select.')
    (21,30Dec2005 rev - We egregiously failed to refer Barnhart's etymology of 'subject,' above. Repair grave error. Doug. Add 'interpretation' link under 'subject.')
    (14,20Jan2006 rev - Reset red text. Reformat page top.)
    (23Feb2006 rev - Update 'select.')
    (7,29-31Mar2006 rev - Reset legacy red text. Add 'suppose.')
    (2,5,8Apr2006 rev - Add semantic to recent QELR of suppose. Update 'suppose.')
    (6May2006 rev - Update 'state' with a link to our 2006-coined 'phasement.' Reset legacy red text.)
    (30Jul2006 rev - Add 'quantum dynamic simplicity' link under 'simplicity.)
    (5Sep2006 rev - Add 'superposition' anchor.)
    (11,28,30Dec2006 rev - Update 'suppose.' Minor contemporaneous update to 'stochastic.' Add 'partiality' link under 'select,' quantum.)
    (19Feb2007 rev - Update 'simultaneity.')
    (8May2007 rev - Update 'stop.')
    (15Aug2007 rev - Update 'select.')
    (19Oct2007 rev - Spell.)
    (7-10Dec2007 rev - Update 'select.' Add new 'solve.' Add new 'sophism.' Repair publish date of Granger's book from August, 2006 to October.)
    (18Dec2007 rev - Add 'Problematics' link to page top.)
    (19Feb2008 rev - Update 'subjectiv.')
    (20Mar2008 rev - Reset legacy red text.)
    (30Oct2008 rev - Replace wingdings and symbol fonts with gifs. Reset legacy markups.)
    (14-15,20Dec2008 rev - Revise 'science.' Revise 'select.' Add 'Quantum~Awareness' anchor under 'select.')
    (16Jan2009 rev - Add 'omniscrimination' link to our QELR of 'discrimination' under 'select.')
    (18-19,23Feb2009 rev - Reset legacy markups. Add 'What is Gnosis?' link. Reset legacy markups again. Under 'select' add link to recent QELR of 'aware.')
    (20Mar2009 rev - Update 'simultaneity.')
    (27Apr2009 rev - Add links under 'suppose.')
    (11,13,15May2009 rev - Add 'similar.' Reset cell heights. Add red text updates to QELR of 'similar.')
    (26Jul2009 rev - Add some missing page index links.)
    (18Oct2009 rev - Add 'society.' Reset legacy markups.)
    (2-3Nov2009 rev - Add 'Jesus as Sophist' anchor under our QELR of 'sophism.' Extend 'Quantum Selection.')
    (20Feb2010 rev - Add Errol E Harris link on 'auturgy.')
    (13Apr2010 rev - Update 'stochastic' and 'subjectiv.')
    (20Jul2010 rev - Reformat page. Make page current.)
    (6,16May2011 rev - Add 'chancings' link under 'select.' Add 'radially asymmetric' phrase and 'asymmetric' link under 'select.' Add 'asymmetric' link under QELR of 'symmetry.')
    (18Jul2011 rev - Add 'fractal' links to "How to do quantum~fractals.")
    (1Oct2011 rev - Minor text punctuation adjustments.)
    (10Dec2011 rev - Update 'solve' for Doug's first coining of "chaoequil.")
    (10May2012 rev - Add 'State Cannot Relate' anchor and HotMeme™ text under 'state.')
    (14,23Aug2012 rev - Update 'stop.' Add '
    stability relevant' aspect to 'State cannot relate' HotMeme™. Move 'state cannot relate' anchor up one paragraph.)
    (28Aug2012 rev - Update 'society' with classical and quantum descriptions vav omniscriptions of 'socialization.')
    (11Sep2012 rev - Repair title under quantum~social. Add links under 'social.')
    (16Sep2012 rev - Add 'hologram's energy wellings' link to 'A Reservoir of Wave Functions,' under 'select.')
    (17Sep2012 rev - Replace 'select' with 'quantadulate' under select's quantum~omniscriptionings.)
    (5Oct2012 rev - Minor updates to 'state.')
    (14Jan2013 rev - Add 'Quantaldulation' anchor under 'select.')
    (1,4Apr2013 rev - Add 'suprapersonal' based on Doug's encounter of it in Jung's Red Book. Repair Samu to Sonu.)
    (16,24,27Mar2014 rev - Add 'Quantadulation' anchor. Reset legacy markups. Make page current. Add 'quantadulate' anchor. Add 'Stable' anchor under 'state.')
    (16Sep2014 rev - Expand 'recapitulation' under 'sophism.')
    (4Dec2014 rev - Reset legacy markups. Make page current. Adjust colors.)
    (6Jan2015 rev - Update 'square.')
    (10Mar2015 rev - Add 'Probability of absolute truth vav absolute uncertainty' graphic under 'science.')