- [in] Interrelationship(s) [with]

"No boundaries between science and other ways of knowing. No a priori dualism between consciousness and science."

We may infer knowledge is ubiquitous throughout and interpenetrating the multiverse - it is the SQ in this Quantonic interrelationship: DQSQ.

This, on a small scale, shows the wrath of SOM.

As Nick Adams, producer at http://www.SiliconSalon.com/ has reminded us often, "The very first word, in the very first book of our [SOM] culture is WRATH."

From the original Iliad in symbol font:

"mhnin aeide thea Peladew Achilos..."

In English font:

"mênin aeide thea Pêlêïadeô Achilêos..."

In English language:

"Sing, oh, Muse of the Wrath of Achilles..."

Why does our society and our culture have so much violence? There is but one answer for which we have ample argument and evidence: because of SOM! We need to change from SOM to a new philosophy and a new way of thinking! MoQ is the candidate we propose to you. SOM is about control, anger, and war. MoQ is about goodness, freedom, and morality.

This is ample evidence that classical mechanics, thus SOM, are manifestly incapable of describing reality.

Quantum physics and its parent MoQ philosophy are required to explain this reality. Superluminal, non-local action and communication are required here, both of which SOM blatantly and arrogantly denies.

Energy efficiency of nearly 100%, again denied by SOM's classical laws of thermodynamics, are required to make this possible.

Clearly, the need and capability to describe this reality, exceeds SOM and classical science.

Also note the implicit denial of SOM's induction in living system processes. Again, MOQ affirmation: Coordination values preconditions...just as Pirsig showed the ludicrity of SOM's causation platypus:

SOMese - "A causes B."

MoQese - "B values precondition A." See our 2003 affectation vis-à-vis cause. See our QQA on cause-effect.

Dramatically and simply, this shows one difference between the old way and a new way of thinking.

Another new way of thinking is to grasp how quantum~waves are stochastic, and as a result probability, plausibility, and likelihood are quantum~likelihood~omnistributionings AKA QLOs, which allow us to answer a key enabling query, "What is Wrong with Probability as Value?" Doug - 8Dec2008.

You need to read chapter two carefully to derive this reviewer-paraphrased crux:

In the DQSQ flux, living systems rectify the flux into an electrical potential difference from which work may then be extracted.

Note that in our perceived reality, (some of) the flux appears as Brownian motion.

If you wish to pursue issues here in greater depth, see Henri Louis Bergson's Time and Free Will.

Doug - 12Mar2005.

'State' as used here is a classical SOMism. In MoQ and quantum science there is only the idea or concept of Quality Event (MoQ) or special event (quantum science). Quantum science shows us that the granularity of a special event is h-bar/2 or Planck's constant divided by 4*pi. Neither in MoQ nor quantum science are countless and ubiquitous QEs and special events synchronized. Any admixture of multiversal special events creates an illusion of a reality continuum — a delusion to which SOM still adheres.

See our MoQ II Reality Loop and our Generation III Reality Loop.

"A more adequate restatement of the second law [of thermodynamics], I suggest, might be as follows:

"Useful work can be done by molecules by a direct transfer of stored energy and thermalized energy cannot be converted into stored energy."

Here she builds the case for coherence as a means for non-local, superluminal (zero latency) coordination of energy transduction and use among (adiabatic) quantum systems.

Coherent systems are said to be coherent when they share a single behavior called a single micro state. Entropy is a function of the natural log of the number of micro states in a system. The natural log of one (one micro state) is zero, thus coherent, one microstate systems are zero entropy systems. Doug - Bold emphasis added 21Mar2005.

Hard to see? View humans as living system composites of nested, coherent quantum systems. Imagine quantum~coherence in and among members of an orchestra and affected energy efficiency therein.

On the Quantonics site, we show ubiquitous cycling in three reality loops I, II., and III. In MoQ and Quantonics we refer to coupling of all loop processes as complementary interrelationships.

In Quantonics we see cycles occurring, too, at submolecular and subatomic levels all the way down to the most primitive quantum wavefunction interrelationshipings.

"Schrödinger uses the term 'negative entropy' in order to describe a somewhat fuzzy mental picture of the living system, which not only seems to avoid the effects of entropy production - as dictated by the second law - but to do just the opposite, to increase organization, which intuitively, seems like the converse of entropy. Szent Györgi, on the other hand has conveniently included the notions both of free energy and of organization in his use of the term. I think that both scientists have the right intuition - energy and organization are inextricably bound up with each other."

…

"Actually, even the relationships among all the thermodynamic entities: entropy, free energy, total energy, heat and temperature, are by no means straightforward."

We begin to recognize a need for an expanded or modified version of the laws of thermodynamics. See Ilya Prigogine and Isabelle Stengers: Order Out of Chaos. They advocate both dissipative and productive entropy terms in potential new laws.

Entropy and negentropy appear as roughly equivalent duals to SQ and DQ in MoQ. In a similar sense that entropy might represent actualization of reality, SQ does similarly. In a similar sense that negentropy might represent emergence, animation, change (both productive and dissipative), DQ does similarly.

MoQ might help us to perceive complex thermodynamic interrelationshipings in alternate light.

These processes are two kinds of change induced by DQ.

Presence or absence of spontaneity in DQ appears as presence or absence of evolutionarily stable strategies. SQ which becomes 'stale' devolves and dissipates back into DQ.

Evolutionary and devolutionary better incremental changes occur at MoQ's Quality Events (~quantum science's special events).

Classical thermodynamics theory appears to mandate a kind of SOM single context concept on energy with an idea of 'total energy.' MoQ very likely disavows a concept of total energy because that would place boundaries on (make finite) DQ. DQ, according to MoQ philosophy is limitless and undefinable - unknowable by finite intellect. Our perception is that a new thermodynamics must somehow live with that requirement.

Here she distinguishes two types of coherence: static and dynamic. Crystalline order (single micro-state, zero entropy (SMZE)) like we see in diamonds is the static type of coherence.

Living system order (SMZE) is the dynamic type of coherence.

Mae-Wan Ho already told us the four other thermodynamic engine types in some process of answering a question, "What kind of 'engine' is an organism?"

1. Carnot
2. Industrial
3. Fuel cell
4. Far from equilibrium machine

Update - 18Apr2007 - Doug:

Mae-wan, here, speaks of QED. Quantum Electro Dynamics. QED is about photon~electron (gamma~beta) interrelationships of atoms' energy shells which surround spatio~arbitrarily and stochastically atoms' nuclei. QED describe most of reality's mutative, emergent behaviors of which humans are sentiently aware (and countless others outside human sensory complementarospective) and experience on a daily routine.

Frequencies, flux rates, involved here are so high as to be classico- 'scientifically' n¤n omnitorable.

A key issue here is that flux rates at some level, as they increase, become adiabatic. Adiabaticity issi "zero entropy."

See quantonics' coinings of cohera and entropa. See quantonics' description of quantum~coherence.

Entropy is a tedious topic: It is easy to confuse entropy-production and -dissipation with actual reality~production and dissipation. Entropy 'production' means increasing entropy: increasing chaotic dissipation of actual reality. Posentropy from an actuality conspective has a 'negative gradient.' Doug is going to work well on explaining this better under our QELR of 'entropy,' and show some graphics which will make understanding easier, hopefully.

QED fluxings are almost wholly adiabatic, and this is what Mae-wan Ho intends in tRatW text by "almost 100% energy efficient."

Too, it is what Doug intends when we say classical science has n¤ means of describing photon~electron mutative process, since classical 'science' can only explain 'state' as stoppable "zero momentum" reference frames and 'state transitions' as events. Classical 'science' has no means to describe quantum processings. Classical properties are 'state-ic.' They hold still. Classical measurement requires what is measured to "hold still." That retarded thingking disables those who use it from grasping essentials of quantum~absolutely~animate~reality. See our QELR of think.

End update - 18Apr2007 - Doug.

Again, we see affirmation of the quantum science duality with MoQ, especially in regard to energy concepts and definables and undefinables. Stored energy, here, is a dual of MoQ's Static Quality, and free energy is a dual of Dynamic Quality. Further, just as she says free energy is undefinable, so does Pirsig tell us unambiguously that DQ is undefinable. A converse holds for stored energy and SQ.

We might extrapolate just a bit and say that changes in stored and free energies are Quantonic interrelationships that are complementary and reveal imperspicuous uncertainty interrelationships. These changes occur in h-bar granularity, ubiquitously in space-time.

All of this conjures a possible vision of all Static Quality Patterns of Value as n-tuples whose coordinates are constantly in flux under an ever changing influence of Dynamic Quality.

29Mar2000 note: Our intuition that mutual coherent excitation and resulting attraction as described here by Mae-wan, elicits further intuition that she is describing partial coherence — and further partial coherence manifesting 'gravity.' Note how this uncloaks gravity as both a partial and superluminal coherent affect.

 

Following text is from our New Map of Reality, "But it is a special kind of gravity metaphor, because all quantum numbers cohere in a BEC. Now ask yourself, "What would happen if only one or some of these atoms' quantum numbers cohered?" We think we may have seen an example elsewhere! In APS' 27Dec1999 PRL, Rongjia Tao of Southern Illinois University at Carbondale describes an experiment where superconducting particles of ~microns diameter were suspended in liquid nitrogen and a strong electric field. What happened when a strong field was applied? All particles 'gravitated' into a tightly-packed, rough spheroid! Experimenters did not predict this! They expected one of two other possible outcomes!" See bottom of New Map of Reality page.

This jibes with MoQ in a most fundamental way: MoQ says that DQSQ and SQDQ are commingling, co-within, interpenetrating interrelationships. MoQ says that objective isolation and separation and individuation are not possible. Mae-Wan tells us that quantum science agrees with this aspect of MoQ's philosophy.

One more cogent point we doubt many chemists would denigrate: chemistry is about (Quantonic) interrelationshipings!

Hmmm... Reality is about Quantonic Interrelationshipings!!

This is profound! Imagine a coherent substrate co-within and commingling all living systems!

This is very likely coherent Quantonic interrelationshipings among DQ and SQ.

When Mae-Wan uses the word 'fluctuationless' she is describing an important characteristic of a quantum coherent field: individual behaviors of quantum system constituents of that field are n¤t statistical, but they are absolutely continuous and synchronous. The constituents act in lock step, non-locally, superluminally, as one.

A crucial observation here is obtainable, now, CeodE 2008: coherent fields are adiabatic...lossless. Compare actual lossless quantum~coherency to DQ, n¤nactual gainful quantum~isocoherency. See parthenofluxis. Doug - 8Dec2008.

Note that there are a large variety of and characteristics of macro- and micro-coherent fields, including: Bose-Einstein Condensates (BECs), superfluids, superconductors, retroreflectors, atom lasers, lasers, masers, etc., under various conditions: at equilibrium, non-equilibrium, near-equilibrium, far from equilibrium, etc.

Just this one value pattern area (MoQese for 'subject') consumes countless thousands of person-years in study and personal endeavor.

Some important issues here. Timing of presence/absence of fields is critical and must be taken into account in experiments. Living systems are affected by electromagnetic fields. This should be true assuming that coherent electrodynamic fields are substrata of all living systems.

An important MoQ-relevant issue is that equivalents of pattern determination (quantum awareness) appear in reactions to magnetic fields.

See David Voss' brief entitled, "Quantum Trick Shots," in Science, Vol. 280, 22May98, p. 1213.

From your reviewer's simplistic perspective, Andreev reflection appears related to zero-entropy adiabatic energy storage capabilities of living coherent quantum systems described in the Rainbow and the Worm by Mae-Wan Ho.

Conjecture by your reviewer: Mae-Wan Ho's phrase,

(pp. 124-5) may be reconciled as to means by momentum-conserving retroreflection, or Andreev reflection, of quantons in coherent condensates described in Voss' article. PDR - 2Jul98.

The reader must be aware that there are many interpretations of quantum science. As do apparently most scientists, Mae-Wan Ho fails to tell us which interpretation(s) she adheres. This happens, in our view, when scientists' latent SOM legacy thinking assumes one large context. Some assume that you need not state context, since there is only one, and it is infinite. (Here is but another reason why we need a new way of thinking.)

If you look at our table of interpretations, Quantum Interpretations, you will see that her description here is closest to what Nick Herbert describes as Copenhagen II, mixed in with a little flavor from Bohm. Elsewhere in the text, she sprinkles jargon from other interpretations freely (e.g., collapse, entanglement, measurement, observation, etc. The last two in this list certainly are anthropocentric.).

In Quantonics, regarding the act of measurement or observation, we attempt to avoid the anthropocentric view held by the above two interpretations of quantum science (i.e., "when we observe it"). Our view is closer to a view currently incompatible with any of Herbert's eight interpretations. It is closest, perhaps to Herbert's fifth interpretation, or Quantum Logic.

We see no special measuring device, but instead see all quantum systems as both observing and observable — even capable of self-observation (yes, this offers the potential fruit of quantum parthenogenesis). Quantum Logic's interpretation is intrinsically desirable to us because of its 'isles of truth,' which admit the multiplicity of contexts (and truths — just like MoQ) which exist in quantum reality. Further we see other logic extensions of the Quantum Logic interpretation, such as Galois groups or gaggles.

Another caveat here, regarding again the phrase, "when we observe it." She gives no formal definition of time. She avers Einsteinian space-time, but talks irreversible flow (arrow) of time, which is the classical continuous formal time a la Feynman's lazy X model of past, now, future.

In Quantonics, we see time as an illusion provided by the h-bar granularity of infinite, ubiquitous quantum reality emerge-change-loops occurring asynchronously.

In Western cultures, SOM's objectivism creeps into everything we say and think. It is solidly ensconced in our language. Once you see this and understand the programming SOM has done to your mind, it becomes an irritant. You want to make it go away.

Mae-Wan Ho, carries the SOM baggage much less than others. Even Pirsig in his three works carries the SOM lingo to his audience too effectively, thus making his SOMite readers language-comfortable, but philosophically uncomfortable.

Here, Mae-Wan intuits MoQ, but only part of the way. She talks about the quantum pure state and mixed states, but there is a subtle concept missing, still.

As we read her words, we see the pure state and the mixed states almost innately using our de facto SOM thinking. We see them both subjectively and objectively, but as separate concepts.

In MoQ, the pure state corresponds to Dynamic Quality or DQ. The mixed states correspond to MoQ's Static Quality or SQ, but in MoQ SQ is not separate from DQ! SQ is in DQ and DQ is in SQ! SQDQ! SQ commingles and interpenetrates DQ, and vice versa like this: DQSQ! We show this more generally like this: DQSQDQ.

We say, "DQ is in interrelationships with SQ in interrelationships with DQ. The interrelationships are Quantonic, they are quantum, complementary, and often show uncertainty and [SOM-apparent] paradice (i.e., paradoxes) via conjugates and quantum logic's islands of truth.

So, from a non-SOM perspective, from a better MoQ and Quantonic perspective, the mixed states commingle and interpenetrate the pure state too. The mixed states are always co-within the pure state, and vice versa.

SOM programs us to not see these important interpenetrating interrelationships. SOM programs us not to see Value.  MoQ and Quantonics free us from this passé, legacy SOM baggage.

In Quantonics, we show this 'deep complementarity' thus: quanton(position,momentum). This notation and the artistic symbology we associate with it like the Tao symbol, and the other Quantonic symbols you see on the site are intentional Gestalts of an amalgam of quantum concepts.

The quanton as a philosophical symbol represents:

• complementarity
• uncertainty interrelationships
• many contexts
• many truths (isles of truth)
• omni-contexture
• paradice (paradoxes)
• etc.

New note: Beware - caveat: Fourier transforms are implicitly SOM, i.e., analytic (naïve) functions. Many behavior transitions Mae-wan describes in her book are not analytic. Many behavior transitions she describes are indeed, nonlinear. If you study recent literature, you will discover, e.g., photonic (esp. recent PhysicsWeb articles) and ocean (Hans Christian von Baeyer article in The Sciences, May/June 1999) solitons are nonlinear manifestations of quantum behaviors. Some of us are beginning to perceive persistence (~¥) of some quantum systems we call elementary constituents as very much like solitons. Added 17May1999 PDR.

New note: In Quantonics, we see this as fundamental to any new ontology for sentient adherence. Any philosophy, metaphysics, and/or ontology must embrace a non-Borgian quanton(global_cohesion,ts_autonomy).

We intentionally use G, A, C, and T in our quanton. We want it to appear as cultural, societal, sociological DNA! Uracil is unified-complementarity, which our quanton notation accomplishes by design. So, in shorthand we may write u(gc,ta), DNA for a new cultural ontology for Millennium III!

To achieve this, we must discard our SOMitic legacy ideas of any kind of dogmatic or rule-based organization for society. Nature's rules, in that regard, appear limited and fairly simple: cooperate (interrelationships change and flow with nature's quantum flux) and defend (resist unilateral control, or any form of exclusive stasis). To a SOMite, quanton(cooperate,defend) is a sophism. Added 17May1999 PDR

She describes an ultimate Internet.

This part is more difficult to follow. It depends mostly upon our ability, or lack thereof, to understand the quantum mathematics behind 'factorizability.'

Several of you ask about the surface or face of DQ as perceived by locally autonomous but globally coherent SQ patterns. We see this issue of surface/face as verisimilar to what Mae-Wan calls fringe contrast.

Pirsig's MoQ reaches philosophically very similar conclusions she reaches here physically and biologically.

A new set of premises for a new way of thinking and a new beginning in sociology lies in Pirsig's MoQ as a new philosophy and in quantum reality as a new science.