1. | AQO | Actualized Quantum Object |
2. | DQ | Dynamic Quality |
3. | MoQ | Pirsig's new philosophy, a Metaphysics of Quality. |
4. | NQO | Nonactualized Quantum Object |
5. | QE |
Quality Event (in MoQ), AKA Special (Planck) Event (in quantum science), Collapse, etc. AKA in quantum science: a special event, a correlation event, or a measurement event. Quality Event, is Pirsigs term for a transformation of DQ (latching) to SQ in his new philosophy, his MoQ. See our Problematic Pirsigean Memes, esp. top of page on quantum measurement. 4Aug2002 rev - 'Quality Event' may be viewed classically as a 1-1 correspondent, causal, determinate, stoppable event. In Quantonics we deny all those classical delusions! We remediate a more classical 'Quality Event' with a more quantum, present participle, animate, complementary, included-middle Quality Ævæntings. See event, process, state, stop, and uncertain. See our July, 2002 Quantonic Ensehmble Quantum Interrelationships. |
6. | Quanton |
A term coined by Mario Bunge of McGill University. Also quon, qwf, wave-particle superposition. Quanton is a most primal quantum entity (we call it quantum physics' least unit of action: a "Planck Quantum") and can scale via evolutionary emergence to a most complex quantum entity. Quantons are c¤mplementary entities: their c¤mplements are both real and not real simultaneously (from a classical perspective). In quantum science perspective quantons are real, period, and possess both actual and n¤nactual c¤mplements. (Reader note - 27Nov2000: We changed 'conjugates' to 'c¤mplements' here in bold. Conjugation is a method which works in actuality. Quantum c¤mplementation or c¤mplementarity are compenetrating modes of reality which our Quantonics heuristics call "both n¤nactuality and actuality." In Quantonics, conjugation, for now, is limited to classical methods, e.g., mathematics, used in actuality. Classical methods assiduously ignore quantum n¤nactuality and its concomitant intrinsic sophist phenomena. C¤mplementarity applies to a more general quantum reality's quantons, each of which may experience unlimited n¤nactual modes, and each of which is both n¤nactual and actual.) |
7. | quon | A term coined by author Nick Herbert note its relationship to quanton. |
8. | qwf | A term coined by author Fred Alan Wolf quantum wave function. |
9. | SOM | Subject-Object Metaphysics; dichotomizes reality into either subjects or objects. |
10. | SQ | Static Quality |
ITEM | TOPIC | ||||
|
|
|
|
||
1. |
Before QE | Quantons exist but with non-existent attributes | Quantons exist partly in real space and partly in configuration space but with non-entangled attributes in configuration space | Quantons exist, but every quanton has an M-Recording waveform correlated with it | |
2. |
At QE | Definite quantonic interrelationship attributes manifest only when measured | Observation creates reality | Quanton proxy waves merge, co-observe each other and form entangled phase interrelationship attributes in configuration space | One quanton encounters another with its M-Recording waveform set to measure one of its attributes |
3. |
After QE | Quantons exist but with non-existent attributes |
|
Quantons proliferate into multiverses. If the measured attribute has N values, the resulting measurement does not collapse into one value, but splits into N new quantons each representing a different value in a different universe | |
4. |
Quanton Attributes | Interrelationships with and defined by the entire measurement context | Attributes seen depend upon choice of attributes to observe | Interrelationships reside in the entire experimental arrangement | Interrelationships spawn and reside in parallel universes forming a multiverse |
5. |
Measurements | Observable interrelationships |
|
Whole multiverse implicated in measurements |
|
6. |
Measurement Device | Privileged, actual measurement device that is non-quantonic and objective (but objectless) to satisfy classical reality which we experience directly | Merger of quanton proxy waves in the multiverse | M-Recording attribute-sensitive waveform correlate of all quantons | |
7. |
Deficiencies |
|
Both CI-I and CI-II suffer a major classical epistemological delusion: i.e., Protagoras' assumption that "...man is the measure of all things." We deny Protagoras' assumption. Instead, in our Quantonics' view of quantum reality, nature measures he-r self. Humans do n¤t have to look at reality (i.e., 'measure' it) in order for reality to 'exist.' Reality 'observes he-rself,' and has done so for an eternity before humans emerged. Key to our assumption here is that reality's most fundamental quantons, including photons, nucleons, electrons, etc., coobsfect reality. That is our basis for an assumption that nature observes he-rself. See our note on Anthropocentric Observation near bottom of this page. |
Its
apparent extravagance to legacy-addled classical thinkers. All things are possible? |
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM | TOPIC | ||||
|
|
|
|
||
1. |
Before QE | Quantons exist with both Boolean and quantum logical measured and unmeasured interrelationship attributes | Ordinary objects exist | Quantons exist. No quanton is unique, e.g., as a measuring device. | Quantons exist as a superposition of possibilities |
2. |
At QE |
|
Superluminal (non-neorealistic) object interrelationship attributes change ordinary objects |
|
Measurement transforms some possibilities into actualities |
3. |
After QE |
|
Changed ordinary objects exist | Changed quantons exist in the new reality | Quantons exist as actualities |
4. |
Quanton Attributes | Unlimited Boolean and quantum-logical interrelationships among classic-logical attributes | No quantonic attributes, just ordinary object attributes | Attributes seen depend upon conscious choice of attributes to observe | Quanton interrelationship attributes become real at the QE |
5. |
Measurements | Boolean and quantum-logical interrelationships among classic-logical attributes | Superluminal (non-neorealistic) attribute interrelationship events | By conscious observation | By QE |
6. |
Measurement Device | Any device which computes Boolean and quantum logic | Undefined | ||
7. |
Deficiencies |
|
|
Contains oriental and transcendental sensibilities which some consider far removed from quantum science | |
|
|
|
|
ITEM | TOPIC |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||
1. |
Before QE |
Reality is a SOM dichotomy of either space or nonspace. Quantons are either in space or nonspace. QEs may elicit no change, change in nonspace only, change in both nonspace and space. In momentary
equilibrium, evident classical objects (actualized quantum objects,
AQOs) exist in space between QEs. |
Quantons exist. No quanton is unique, e.g., as a measuring device. | Reality is a quanton of both unknown and
known. Unknown contains proemial, co-aware quantons. Unknown's quantons are ubiquitous, omnimensional (Hilbertian), n¤napparent isotropic flux. Unknown quantons are pure isotropic unlatched flux (energy: zero average, unlatched; ~1093 gm/cm3 , latched.) Latched quantons' are c¤mplementary with latched isop c¤mplements in actuality and unlatched ison, isot, and isob c¤mplements in n¤nactuality. See our July, 2002 Quantonic Ensehmble Quantum Interrelationships. Quantons' unlatched c¤mplements are n¤nactually n¤napparent. We show this in limited 2D graphics as contrarotating, blue dotted, opposing-arrowed circles. Quantons' latched c¤mplements are actually apparent. At QEs known arises (emerses) from unknown. See our recent, 2004, Fuzzons to Fermion Ontology. Assume QEs are quantum processes. See event. Known remains both interpenetrated by and cowithin unknown via all quantons' unknown c¤mplements. Known is latched part of a real quanton. Known quantons are c¤mplements of both unlatched and latched flux. |
|
2. |
At QE |
|
|
|
Ubiquitous, superluminal Planck
rate reality loops (flux): Assume: Becoming: Latching and unlatching (creation-discreation measurement via quantonic co- or self-observation) remain undefined, but appear to be a metaphor of n¤nlinear rectification (latch) to actual persistence from ~isotropic flux, or a metaphor of n¤nlinear diffraction (unlatch) back to ~isotropic flux. All actual physica and physi phenomena are manifestations of reality's flux both latching and unlatching. Now, at beginning of 2006, USA and nearly all Earth's countries are in crisis: our largest problem as we in Quantonics see it is energy. Oil has had it! Our last paragraph above on "Latching and unlatching..." carries a powerful clue as how to provide unlimited energy at, compared to oil at $70 a barrel, low cost. What we want to do, using Quantonics' quantum metaphors, is latch isoflux into quantum actuality! It's that simple!!! Really! "So, Doug, how do we do that?" We are already doing it, however, we do not perceive these examples that way:
"Explain how those are examples." Each of those examples (language is omnifficult here) spherically, multimensionally omnirectify isoflux! When we use a diode to rectify transverse frequency in a power supply, we are rectifying actual flux unimensionally. We view frequencies in actuality as transverse, e.g., a sine wave. But quantum isoflux is non transverse and omnimensional. Sonoluminescence and nuclear implosions offer classical metaphors of multimensional non transverse isoflux rectification. Both approaches rectify quantum isoflux into quantum actuality! We, prior, just haven't viewed it that way, but Quantonics is saying we should. We like sonoluminescence as a table top approach for obvious reasons when compared to nuclear implosions. Here is a very rudimentary quantum meme: Using water initially, deuterated acetone later, put a buckyball (BB) in said fluid. How many BB facets? Have to try various. Facet count increases need for lasers, one per facet. Inject said BB with argon. We are assuming that BB and surface tension will somewhat facetize argon bubble, enhancing ignition energy implosion of BB. Aim lasers normal to facets. Pulse lasers synchronously. May need audio flux for context similar to earlier non BB approaches. Average diameter of BB should, from prior experience, be about 1 micron. Need to vary this parameter. Note that an BB free argon bubble has, comparatively, unlimited facets. So using BB facets may actually be a worse approach. But we can learn a lot from it, we believe. Question: How would we laser implode a BB free argon bubble? Also, "What parameter variations affect control of power attenuation and amplification? Imagine replacing a 200 kg gas engine with a 20kg SL box and 20kg electric motors at each wheel?!! (We are assuming a 'big' car, say, 1600kg gross weight.) And we refill our argon bottle and water supplies once, say, a year. Wow! For each BB vary laser intensity (any laser is uniphotonic, so intensity implies iterative presence~absence (beam on, beam off) of and perhaps multiple beams), energy (i.e., frequency of uniphoton), and pulse rate. Experiment: See what happens. Compare to standard SL approaches. Improve. Ponder alternate approaches. Develop means to (e.g., gatlin, register, array, holographic, multiprocessor, etc. BB) stack pulses for durational performance with an SL pedal; and do we need 'coasting' to store energy (with such abundance, storage may no longer be such a big issue; cold starting is an issue however which mitigates that comment; perhaps like our PCs we never turn it 'off,' now how's that for a quantum positive and elimination of dialectical notions of 'off')? A weakness, which we perceive, with sonoluminescence is bubble staging and bubble energy injection management. In cuneiform, sort of a: given |, how big is, and what orientation of V problem? BBs give us some hegemony over those parameters which previously were absent (in our view). We should be able to queue BBs similar to current fuel injectors. Dyanamic laser alignment will be a challenge; alternately a way of staging which implicitly offers alignment (probably not as large an issue in prior versions of SL). Perhaps BBs aren't best approach. OK! Try others which give us these requirements:
There's a lot more to this, but we have offered quantum essence to you. Our memes derive from Claudia Eberlein's original notions. We haven't resources, or we would do this ourselves. Doug - 30Jan2006. |
3. |
After QE |
|
Possibly
changed AQO exists, with its past eliminated. New initial conditions with past eliminated for ensuing random walk of measured NQOs in nonspace. |
Changed quantons exist in the new reality |
Quantons exist as unlatched n¤nactualities, and as both latched and unlatched c¤mplementary actualities. N¤nactual - quanton(fluxu,fluxu) Actual - quanton(fluxu,fluxl) |
4. |
Quanton Attributes | No quantonic attributes, just ordinary object attributes | Attributes seen depend upon conscious choice of attributes to observe | Both known and unknown quanton interrelationship attributes evolve based on both n¤nactual (unknown) and actual (known) qualitative/affective anihmatæ ensehmble quantum processings' preconditonings prior to each QE | |
5. |
Measurements | By coincident
co-restriction and/or restriction and resulting evolution of
quantons in both nonspace and space. Interactions may occur or not. Interactions prefer both space energy/mass and their nonspace proxy transfers |
By conscious observation |
By QE (our QE in Quantonics is a quantum~process, n¤t a classical 'state,' so we should use QÆ as our quantum remediation of more classical QE, here - Doug - 4Apr2009) Planck rate sampling of all quantons in both unknown and known reality. By using quantum~computing pr¤cæssings to ¤mniht¤r (Why? Classical 'measurement' requires reality to hold still so that scalar measurements can be made; quantum~reality is unstoppable! Doug - 4Apr2009.) stindyanic processings in quantum~reality Our site uses spatial, not temporal, flux rates throughout. There are 10 orders of magnitude twixt spatial (1043) and temporal (1033) flux rates due to speed of light and metric unit factors. |
|
6. |
Measurement Device |
Depending upon which assumptions we make about Stein's new
ontology. Combinations: |
Intrinsic quanton awareness. Nature measures he-rself. Humans will use quantum~computers and quantum~sensors (initially most of these will be biological (biocoquecigruecal) to use nature's built in, intrinsic, quantum~ ¤mniht¤ring qua) to do pragmatic quantum ¤mniht¤rings Doug - 4Apr2009. |
||
7. |
Deficiencies | Causality
of TI Adequacy of classical formal logic as a tool for interpretation of quantum mechanics Paradice avoidance: assumes paradice is real, classically Assumes external, unilateral anthropocentric observation (thus denies universe is a quantum system, a quanton) |
Despite this long list of deficiencies, your reviewer finds Stein's ontology most palatable both from intuitive and intellectual perspectives. Adaptation and evolution of Stein's ontology offer much potential for both understanding and explanation capability. |
N¤ntrivial ontology. | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthropocentric observation |
Classical legacy assumption: humans observe reality experiments. Fails in quantum science, e.g., which human observes a universe or multiverse? (Question: After physicists finally asked this key philosophical question, why didn't they dump anthropocentrism? An answer: Blinders from a legacy SOM mindset!) However, modern quantum science retains anthropocentrism. Here is an example: John von Neumann's description (Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics) of evolutionary changes and measurment changes, paraphrased, "1) a quanton's state changes smoothly and continuously with time as the system evolves; and 2) a quanton's state changes abruptly and discontinuously with time in accordance with the laws of probability when (and only when) a measurement is made on a quanton." An assumption here is a human must measure a quanton for it to change state. (Subsequently, we have concluded, applying Pirsig's MoQ memes, and after reading Henri Louis Bergson's Introduction to Metaphysics and his Creative Evolution, plus William James' Some Problems of Philosophy, that there is no classical 'state.' Von Neumann's wave function collapse never happens! Quantum measurement is heterogeneous in interpretations, loci, and temporalities! See both Problematic Pirsigean Memes and Recommended Reading. Also consider how Pirsig's MoQ demands "...no classical 'state,' and that von Neumann's wave function collapse never happens!" MoQ tells us that DQ is absolute flux. Quantum reality never stops fluxing; it always fluxes. Von Neumannesque wave function collapse is impossible. Classical 'state' has no way to 'exist.' See Bergson's discussion of 'state' in his Creative Evolution Topic 40. Doug 2Jan2001.) Also see our more recent Q&A on causality and two kinds of quantum complementarity: Bohr's 'exclusive' (Aristotelian excluded-middle) complementarity and Quantonics' inclusive (included-middle) quantum c¤mplementarity. Doug - 28Apr2003. This exposes a major difference in some interpretations of quantum science and ours (Renselle's Quantum Heuristic). We see measurement as Planck rate quantal processes occurring ubiquitously. We assume quantons are aware, so any multiverse measures itself quantumly at (up to) Planck rates. Aggregation of quantal processes only appears continuous. We think von Neumann's wave function collapse is malperceived. Whether a human participates is incidental. Human or other sentient (or any other quanton or aggregate) participation may alter any local (all affected constituents, including any humans or sentients) experimental system irretrievably. |
Co-observation | A quantum principle: all quantons can 'observe' other quantons (we call it, "quantum awareness." See 'obsfect.'). Return |
Self observation | A quantum heuristic: aggregate quantons do 'observe' themselves (we call it, "quantum self awareness"). Return |
Unilateral observation | Classical legacy assumption: humans observe experiments, but experiments do not observe humans. Fails in quantum science, i.e., any observer - as a quantum system - is part of, indeed cowithin, their experiment. Return |