Doug's review text responding to a philosopher's key thermodynamic phrases from pp. 91-92 of Suares' Cipher of Genesis. Genesis is a book of creation, and thus a book of Big Bangs, and thus a book of thermodynamics:

In script Doug may write:

• Thermodynamics issi quantons(Aleph,Yod),
• Thermodynamics issi quantons(n¤nexistence,existence).
• Thermodynamics issi quantons(open,closed).
• Thermodynamics issi quantons(dynamics,statics) issi stindyanics.
• Thermodynamics issi quantons(isocohera,cohera).
• Thermodynamics issi quantons(isoentropa,entropa).
• Thermodynamics issi a straddle, a quantum~straddle of reality's main antinomial~complements.
• Thermodynamics issi quantons(scin,quan), realityings' viability which depends upon,
• Thermodynamics issi quantons(Aleph,T[h]av), complementary antinomialism of both vital impetus and vital resistance without which there would be n¤ existence (Yod), n¤ life (Hay). (JC Penny's five and ten...)

Vistas of th~ought unboxed, unmoored, unwrapped, uncaged and freed from thani's web... via that quantum~view of thermodynamics are so telling and provocative they tend to exceed any limited imagination, be it classical, be it quantum.

We call it "wonder." Aleph issi wonder~full. William James as paraphrased by William James Durant, wrote that wonder is hyper its absence, and paraphrased, "...any [uncertain, Aleph~borne] multiverse has infinitely more wonder than a universe."

Those who want "A New World Order" are simple-mindedly-retarded in their hypocrisy_c. Aleph will off them, period. Doug's opine. (Roughly, hypocrisy means, "bottom-dwelling judgment.")

But, but, but, perhaps they (the demiurgic powers that be_c) mean "A New World Awrder." If they did, they wouldn't be demiurgic (they_c [cw]ouldn't bæ_q without Aleph).

They miss crux (crucial~exegesis) that Aleph wedded with Raysh is multiversal AWRder! (light, logos, n¤væl g¤ldæn~wayves of livings_q...A Quantum Life Motif™) We already have what demiurges want to state-ically, hylically-hypocritically impose. AQLM™ is already t~here, but it isn't 'in' their 'order_c' mindset.

AWR ciphers as Aleph~Waw~Raysh: 1.6.200. (A Qabalic Life Motif™ (AQLM™)) Recognicence of Jung's Libido, his Amor Triumphat, what Doug coined as quantadulation.

Something hasn't been clear to Doug until he started working on this ensemble of very challenging paragraphs (pp. 91-92 CoG). Doug never (cosmically) understood Qabalically Autiot's semiotics 100 to 900. Suares appeared to refer them Archetypes' 1 to 9 "exalted n¤nexistential projections_q." Doug took that literally, but it isn't that simple.

Qof, Raysh, Sheen, and Thav (100 to 400) all thermodynamically straddle both existence and n¤nexistence. By comparison, finalKhaf, finalMem, finalNoun, finalPhay, and finalTsadde are semiotics of (more like Aleph's) pure n¤nexistence absent that thermodynamic~straddling (both being and n¤n being) qua of Qof thru Thav. Doug isn't sure about this yet, but that seems to be "how it is." For n¤Wings, Doug assumes that heuristic hermeneutic. Doug offers his own illeatic creative rendering of quantons(N¤wings,Wings). "To fly and n¤t to fly, that is a question?" Shakespeare, forgive me...

Illeatic Thermodynamics

quantons(	N¤Wings	,	Wings	)
quantons(		,		)
quantons(	N¤nexistence	,	Existence	)

Saying quanton(Aleph,Yod) and quanton(DQ,SQ) is quoting both Suares and Pirsig and their autsimilar portrayals of stindyanic quantum~reality. This to Doug, is astonishing in its brevity and eloquence of reality's everywhere and everywhen both~anding of antinomial_q and complementary_q c¤mplæmænts Aleph,Yod and DQ,SQ.

Suares' "(...as infinite animation and as its own physical casting...)" frightens me a little. Since Yod is existential, but it isn't just classically 'physical.' Again, I sense Suares (and his translators) were, at least partially, locked-in ( Sabakah-ed and Thani-ed) to a classical and thus objective, formal, mechanical, etc., view of actuality. This bulwark of classicism has affected many disadvantagously.

David Bohm had this same omnifficulty with his implicate order (nonmechanical) vis-à-vis explicate order (mechanical). Problem here, again, is SOM's wall imposing itself 'logically,' 'scientifically,' twixt them. David Albert made this problem apparent to me in his book on David Bohm. See Quantum Mechanics and Experience, David Z. Albert, 1992, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Massachusetts and London. It's a huge problem. Suares' subsequent uses of 'physical' should be treated in this 'light.' Jungians consider it the psychological problem. Pirsig refers it, "A genetic defect in human reason." Heraclitus calls it "war." Doug calls it, "classical social hegemonic_c retardation_c."

Suares' "AWR is the equation of their symbolic wedlock" is very Chaldæan. Chaldæan cosmic emerscitecture looks like this in script:

Those compound quantons always make Doug think of Aut~iot as "two lives." I.e., quanton(pneuma,quanton(psyche,quanton(living,dead))), where quanton(living,dead) represents hylic, dialectic choice_c. Two lives then become quanton(pneuma~psyche,psyche-hyle), simply quanton(living,dead).

Life 1: Living issi quanton(Aleph,Yod) (quantum~middle~inclusion of Aleph and Yod as wave~functional).

Life 2: Dead, SOMitic, Mawt~Hamawt is, classically, dichon(Aleph, Yod). (Aristotelian middle-exclusion of Aleph and Yod as objective, a choice_c to deny Iht.) See Doug's list of Church's False Claims.

Perceive Life 2 and its Thomas Aquinas like (basis Aristotelean) dialectic is what drove (in Doug's view) Irenæus, Constantine, and Hippolytus to take a strong stand against heretics (those who believed in freedom to choose). Cathars, Merovingians, and witches suffered massively from this, let alone Ç a t h o l i ç hatred (then and now) toward women in general. This is one strong reason why Doug hates 'the church.'

Two lives! ([Again in Doug's opinion:] Actually, this is a strange phenomenon borne of pair wise 'dialectical' antinomialism (usually referred classically as 'opposition.'))

Two trends! Yavdel! Voila! Another way to say, "antinomialism pairwise." Compare Autiot's Nasha.

We observe Suares here describing light (Awr, Yin) and dark (Layla, Yang) in a very similar manner. Light as Jesus. Dark as subconscious, unconscious, allegorical cave-dwelling. [I love Clapton's Unplugged version of Layla.]

Made apparent, Yavdel of Awr and Yin. We have to fathom too Nasha of Awr and Yin. We see complementary_q~antinomialism_q of hologra[[il][lex][m][mma[r][t]][ph][view]]ic_q quantonic~twoness (Yavdel: n¤n exclusive_c (n¤n dialectical) bivalency_q) and manyness (Nasha: EIMA omnivalency_q which may be pondered "many Yavdels." See many Yavdels as fractal~recursive 'pipes' among EWings in A Reservoir of Wave Functions.).

Memes here attend a huge entourage of philosophical challenges. E.g., maths' uses of conjugation as excluded-middle, e.g., Abelian groups and Hermitian conjugate operations. Issues involved beyond conjugation include all middle-excluding equivalence relations, plus all middle-excluding association relations (bivalent comparison, stability, negation, contradiction, proof, etc.). See Foulis and search for <Abelian.>.

Suares' "In Genesis I, 6-8, which we are now considering this entire process is seen as from the point of view of BAYT.2, so-called the second 'day';" answers many self~questions.

An apparent relevancy is Day one as millennium one, Day two as millennium two, and Day three as millennium three. Suares writes about Second Coming during millennium three: cosmic chronological, temporal sway of nigh re dialectic. If we ostense this approach to all Aut archetypes, perhaps only Doug sees this, great potential for an 10 millennial ontology unfolds. Unsure that is compatible thinking with Qabala and its Sepher Yetsira. (Please be aware that heritage of Autiot, Gematria, Qabala, Sepher Yetsira, etc. all have two traditions: Oral and Written. Oral histories are ancient compared to Written histories. Written tradition of Sepher Yetsira, for example, is fairly recent, roughly during first millennium. Comparing Qabala and Sepher Yetsira, then can be problematic, if you don't re cognize what Doug just wrote.)

Doug has used Hofstadter's fractal~recursive population logistic equations to estimate (a Doug uncertain guess) arrival of neo Sapiens replacing homo Sapiens. It happens, per Doug's guess, during millennia three through ~five. See Hofstadter's Gödel, Escher, Bach, and his Metamagical Themas. Hofstadter regularly published via Scientific American. Some of his narrative resonates quantum memes well. He had much to do with contemporary evolution of computer viruses, etc. 'Effective' viral behaviours depend heavily on fractal maths, self~other~referencings, recursion, etc. Viruses actually can do good stuff, not all are bad. Mechanical version of 'artificial intelligence,' depends, again, heavily on those classes of 'technology.'

I am disturbed by Suares' unwillingness to do middle~inclusion with Aleph here. I may be confusing what he means by duration. I think he thinks of duration as continuous-linear. But we may choose to think of duration as quantized. For Doug this is a serious issue. Maybe it's a translation problem again.

Clearly when Suares writes "keep Aleph with Yod," at least to Doug, he is (appears to be) implying middle~inclusion.

I agree with his using Qof as a replacement in this situation. We already covered Qof through Thav as straddling existence and nonexistence. I agree that Yod is existential. But I view Aleph as capable of middle~including all via quantum~memes of middle~inclusion, as I see Jesus meaning, "I am in God and God is in me, therefore God is in you." Farewell Discourse.

Re Raysh and Aleph as protagonists, scripted quanton(Aleph,Raysh), and using Second Coming jargon (8 prop's.) quanton(Inspiration,technique). Since 'technique' may be conceived as dialectical, we may use a comma-space twixt Aleph and Raysh. Similarly Aleph and T[h]av.

Again, I take issue with Suares' uses of continuous vis-à-vis durational. Doug chooses (heretically) to view continuous as classically linear. Doug thinks that when we take a quantum~view of Suares' general tenor, his general tone, we must admit quantization and scintillation of all transmutative (including spiritual) interrelationshipings. Without quantization and scintillation of quanta there is no coaffectation of wave packets (which, technically, would deny QED). So to Doug duration is quantized in order to accomplish these non classical phenomena Suares is attempting to describe using classical lingo (again, an issue of potential translation semantics).

Thinking more about Suares' use of duration, he apparently is viewing duration and continuous both as temporal.

If so, that is putting time in SOM's linear One Time Fits All Box. Now I get it. Suares' time_c is continuous_c and durational_c, but n¤t quantized_q. Quantum~time is quantized. All flux in quantum~reality is quantized.

We shall see this issue tautologously throughout much of Suares' writing, his opus. We have to learn to trans[mu]late as we read and write. We have to learn to adapt our hermeneutics and semasiologies of Suares' opus. This applies to all n¤n quantumesque authors, which means most of them. See transmute. See chance.

To finish Doug's narrative on this set of CoG quotes, Doug keys on Suares' quantons(timelessness_q,time_q) and paraphrased, "energy cannot cope with its own con[m]tainment," [Doug's brackets] a phenomenal metaphor to use is a nuclear bomb explosion (possibly, too, a supernovæ, too a Big Bang...). Those phenomena_q, one earthly, two cosmic cann¤t occur_q without avalanche (analanche) runaway, cascading (rapidly, very rapidly, chaotically_q) atomic and subatomic quantons(scin,quan) on relatively_q enormous scales of mass_q and energy_q. Parts_q of those phenomena_q are really_q timeless_q since they tap (via quantons(scin,quan))) into negentropy_q and atemporally_q transmute_q all matter_q and energy_q in their quantum~locales.

Thermodynamically a Big Bang lowers isoflux energy (QCD: TBSCUD) ihnto a quantum~realm of flux actuality. Thermodynamically a Black Hole inverts that process and hides lower energy actuality (QCD: DUCSBT) ihn n¤n actuality's isoflux (unlimited energy: Zaynesque~Hhaytesque energyings as 'isoflux quanta').

Doug - 30Nov, 2-5Dec2014, 28Feb2015, 4Oct2015.