Arches

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

Doug Renselle's 2011-20XX Economics Feuilleton Chautauqua

Chapter Three

"PBings of Innovated Talking Points Assessing FEP: a move from CTMs to QTMs."
PDR

Chapter One

Chapter Two

Chapter Three is fairly whole and comprehensive. It lays a good wMBU™ foundation of PBings for many FEP Talking Points.

Looking ahead to Chapter Four, Doug is planning a Chapter title of 'Evolution of FEPolitics: a move from CTMs to QTMs.'
As you can see Doug will be doing his most comprehensive study of an evolution of QuPo using relevant bases established in Chapters 1-3.

Doug - 21Feb2011.


Chapter Three Index to Doug's Commencing 11Sep2010 Feuilleton Chautauqua on Economic [Vv]alue
Seg 1 - PBing One: Quantum Pluralisms of Monisms vis-à-vis Classical Monism Seg 10 - PBing Ten: Quantum~Complementation vis-à-vis Classical Formal Opposition
Seg 2 - PBing Two: Planck's Clock vis-à-vis Immutability Seg 11 - PBing Eleven: Coherent Islandicity of Individual Choice vis-à-vis Social Dogma
Seg 3 - PBing Three: Absolute Change vis-à-vis Absolute State Seg 12 - PBing Twelve: Equal Individual Opportunity vis-à-vis Equal Socially Planned Results
Seg 4 - PBing Four: Quantum~Consciousness vis-à-vis Mechanical Mind Seg 13 - PBing Thirteen: Quantum~Evolutionary Projection of Potentia vis-à-vis Classical Social Status Quo as Intentional Repetition of History
Seg 5 - PBing Five: Quantum~Uncertainty AKA "Indetermination" vis-à-vis Determination Seg 14 - PBing Fourteen: Quantum~Evolutionary Individual Competition vis-à-vis Classical Planning for Social Status Quo
Seg 6 - PBing Six: Quantum~Awareness vis-à-vis Classical Mechanical Thought Seg 15 - PBing Fifteen: Quantum~Competitive GDP as real Value vis-à-vis Classical Socially-Planned GDP as Reductive 'fiat value'
Seg 7 - PBing Seven: A Priori vis-à-vis A Posteriori Seg 16 - PBing Sixteen: Value hyper value vis-à-vis value hyper Value
Seg 8 - PBing Eight: Peircean Abduction vis-à-vis Deduction-Induction Rev - 7Dec2011 - All are Partially Right and Wrong Seg 17 - PBing Seventeen: Real Money Value Preservation vis-à-vis Fiat Money 'value' Debasement
Seg 9 - PBing Nine: Quantum~Affectation vis-à-vis Classical-Effect[u]ation Seg 18 - Chapter Three Epilogue - Value as A New Way of Thinkqing's Hierarchy of Quantum~Thought See strategic heuristic. Revise QVH Table.

Compare this chapter's Plateau II Epilogue to Doug's Bases of Judgment Plateau I from his 2003-2004 Feuilleton Chautauqua.


18Feb2011 & 1Mar2011

Chapter 3, Segment 17 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Seventeen: Real Value Preservation vis-à-vis Fiat 'value' Debasement.

A few updates to PBing 17 through 25Aug2012 - Doug.

Implicit in this segment's subtitle is a memeo that QTMs favor Real Value Preservation (equilibria) and CTMs inure Fiat 'value' Debasement (chaos).

Doug, "What SEP do you have of latter?" That's easy! History.
All politically controlled fiat money systems have not only debased their currencies, but those money systems have failed.
Countless examples abound, and among them: Rome and Germany. Rome apparently has forgotten. Germany still remembers.
In Doug's opinion, USA currently is destroying itself and its monetary system (and thus its global reserve currency responsibilities).

Political systems wax and wane, rise and fall based upon some [Vv]alue essentials:

  1. What they believe
  2. What they think
  3. What they do

Doug, so far in his first three chapters of his www text book on Financial Economic and Political [Vv]alues,
has been comparing what CTM-based fiat-value (classical chaos generating) systems
"believe, think, and do" to QTM real~Value (absolutely~evolving quantum~equilibrium attracting) alternatives.

Our enemies here, which countless people acknowledge, are Marxist Social Keynesians and their Banking Cartel.
Their beliefs, ones most dangerous to any nation's fiscal system, include:

  1. Private Cartel-Run Fractional Reserve Banking
  2. Private Cartel Volitional Printing of (unlimited) Fiat Paper Money (result: 98% deflation of $ 'value' since 1913; US public doesn't realize how $ price of Au omnitors this in real time -- see measure)
  3. Fiscal and Economic Stability for Cartel Enrichment to Sate Political Power and Greed While Debt-Enslaving Humanity (political and banking power and greed)
  4. Credit and Debt as Means of Implementation of Political Banking and Control
  5. Private Cartel Unlimited Use of Public Money
    1. to trade 'free' markets to interfere in and 'control' those markets to achieve 'Keynesian stability,' errr...umm... chaos, in those markets,
    2. etc. (long list...)
  6. etc.

Those beliefs, among others, always destroy any economic system in which they are embedded.

A powerful analogy, which Doug, et al., spend their entire lives expressing, is how
dialectic destroys all reasoning systems in which it is embedded.

Doug's inference then is simple:
Marxist Social Keynesians believe in and think dialectically.

Their thingking leads ultimately to a OSFA totalitarian, stably utopian hive of...

"...drones without choice."™

Hive drones running on 'state' socially-controlled automatic.

That is what they, Marxist Social Keynesians believe, thingk, and do: they call it 'social value.'
Their 'value' distills to central planning, elimination of competition born of opportunity, and
destruction of individual freedoms via state elimination of choice-based free enterprise.

Doug wishes to make a succinct observation. Keynesians want other monist social management of individuals based upon social principles.

A quantum~approach shows us endless benefits of individual self~management by all individuals. Quantonics teaches that.

Bottom line here is that a quantum~approach is about individual freedom.

A Keynesian approach is about hive drone enslavement of all individuals.

Doug, "Can we summarize quantumists' beliefs regarding individual fiscal responsibility and self~management?"

  1. Individual (Self~Responsible) Management of Self~Local Real Money and Transactions
  2. Individual Savings of Real Money (Being Your Own Bank: "We don't need no GD~Stinking Cartels!")
  3. Individual Investment of Savings in Certified~Free Markets
  4. Individual Avoidance of Debt and Credit At All Costs
  5. etc.

So, Doug, "In summary, what do quantumists think and do?" Quantumists thinkq in QTMs and act freely with respect for all other quantumists.

 

PBing Seventeen: Real Value Preservation vis-à-vis Fiat 'value' Debasement

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Real Value Preservation
vis-à-vis
Fiat 'value' Debasement
Fiat 'value' Debasement
vis-à-vis
Real Value Preservation
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Real individual freedom (as quantum~equilibrium) is above
    fiat social enslavement (as classical-chaos).
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical Marxist society knows what is best for individuals. Just look at NEA and teachers' unions beliefs, thoughts and actions today CeodE 2011. Society is hyper individual freedom: that's obvious!
  • etc.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Quantumists want to destroy socialism.
  • etc.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • All classical societies based fiscally in Keynesian Fiat Stability are failing (chaotically) as we watch.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

That finishes Chapter Three.

Thank you for reading.

To be continued...

18Feb2011 & 1Mar2011, red text updates and some new links, 25Aug2012

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


12-13Feb2011

Chapter 3, Segment 16 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Sixteen: Value hyper value vis-à-vis value hyper Value.

Quantum~reality, in Doug's opinion, Values Mae-wan Ho's coherence of autonomies.

Classical-reality, Doug's strawman of it (SOM), values dialectic's decoherence of subjects and objects.

Former Doug scripts as quanton(autonomex,autonomey). A grail, and more often perhaps, an ensemble of grail interrelationshipings.

Latter Doug scripts as dichon(subjects, objects). A wall.

To Doug it is ostensibly apparent any grail is hyper any wall.
Walls say "stop."
Grails say, "Let's have an adventure. Which pill? Pink? Blue? Select. Make a choice, take a chance, and take a change."

Stop maintains classical 'state.' Stop retains status quo.
Stop says, "Wors(e)hip dogmatic rules and monism."

Adventure evokes evolution. Adventure demands change.
Adventure says, "Bettership your individual embracings of indetermination and uncertainty."

Paraphrasing Henri Louis Bergson's simplicity, "inertia (state) is complex, and spontaneity (change) is simple."

Doug infers value as classical-state and Value as quantum~changings.

This is a very big and strategic deal since our entire world currently wors(e)ships status quo as 'state.'
We need to change, and to do so we must dump dialectic and embrace quantum.

. . .

Doug enjoys benchmarking his own innovations. You might refer it, "Work product testing and validation via SEP~recapitulation."

Doug has spent muchas bueno effort describing Value in his Chapter Three opus while building up to Chapter Three in Chapters One and Two.

In that effort Doug produced lists of 14 hypers, and seven comparatives.
All of those use quantumese. Can we benchmark them against some ancient Values?
Doug believes we can and we may find more Value in doing so.
This segment of Chapter Three offers us a superb opportunity to do so.

Quantum~Value is about quantum~flux.

Ancient~Value is about cosmic~energy.

Quantum~flux issi autsimilar cosmic~energy: so autsimilar that they are synonyms.
Let's list cosmic~energy's nine archetypes as representative of cosmic~energy's Value.

"But Doug, why do we want to do that?"

To compare them to our 14 hypers and our seven vavs, and do so as a quality benchmark of our efforts so far.
We shall be comparing nine ancient archetypes to seven quantum~vavs and 14 quantum~hypers.

Here's Doug's hermeneutic list of cosmic~energy's nine ancient archetypes:

Archetype
Cosmic Energy Archetypes Doug's Concision
Arch 1

Cosmic energy its~self as a recursive self~other flux~active parthenofluxic complement of its said and its unsaid. Cosmic energy recurses its flux~quanta of:

  • unsaid self partially~becoming many saids' selves,
  • unsaid self's qua to limit how much 'becomes' said, and
  • unsaid self's uses of unsaid as unevolved energyings.
Cosmic Energy
Arch 2

Cosmic energy recursively "exhales" all of its self~other perpetually emerging saids as individual and ensemble 'islands' of:

  • said being self,
  • said being self as an existing said~antinomial of its unsaid fount: Arch 1, and
  • self's said being as a resistance to its unsaid fount: Arch 1.
Being1
Arch 3

Cosmic energy perpetually "evolves" all of its self~other emerging and being saids as perpetual movement and rest of all saids and islands of saids:

  • said evolving as self,
  • said evolving as self regenerative free will of vicissitudinal choice~selectionings evoking both placid and explosive affectationings,
  • said evolving as self with qua to limit both its placid and explosive affectationings.
Becoming2
Arch 4

Cosmic energy mortally lives as being of saids and ensembles of saids while tentatively resisting its inevitable return to Arch 1 as perpetual recursions of:

  • said both living and dying as self,
  • said both living and dying as self while limiting self and being limited by ephemeral other, and
  • said both living and dying as self while only tentatively resisting its inevitable return to Arch 1 as fount of life itself.
Life Quanton(unsaid,said)
Arch 5 Cosmic energy's immortal ubiquity of omniversal conscious living as "Arch 5 is in Arch 4 and Arch 4 is in Arch 5." Omniversal ubiquity of life.
Arch 6 Cosmic energy's immortal and perpetual creative pragma imbued by Arch 5's middle~including fertilization of Arch 4; two becoming one. Impregnation.
Arch 7

Cosmic energy's unlimited potentia via:

  • said self's self~other evolution, of
  • said self~others' unlimited potentia for actualization, and
  • said self~others' cyclic evolution change agency complementing Arch 5's role as life's seed of conception.
Unlimited potentia.
Arch 8

Cosmic energy as undifferentiated:

  • unsaid self as notionally nonconceptual, then
  • unsaid self conceived actually by saids' selves, and
  • unsaid self tentatively trapped in said selves' dialectical burden of notional resistance to and spiritual ignorance of evolutionary change.

N¤nactuality is undifferentiated: unsaid. Cosmic breath of cosmic spirit: pneuma. See topos. Woven bread was ancients' symbol of pneuma.

See William James on spirit as energy (ancient cosmic energy). Pneuma (spirit) is undifferentiated. So one, as a quantum~individual, may n¤t logically reify 'spirit.' One may n¤t reify quantum isoflux.

Arch 9

Cosmic energy's expression of saids as primeval female energy, wisdom, and gnosis:

  • said's self as female energy: wisdom itself,
  • said self's female energy actualization, and
  • said self's female energy encapsulated tentatively in dialectic's resistance to female energy as immortal imperative for perpetual evolutionary change.
Cosmic wisdom is feminine.

Doug's biggest question here is, "How could an ancient (>four millennia old) system of describing cosmic energy come so close to describing a holographic~quantum~reality?"

These nine Archetypes describe Value as ancients perceived Value in terms of "cosmic energy" patterns of absolute change and evolution.

Note how real competition is ubiquitously evident. There is no planning, period. There is only uncertainty borne of absolute perpetuity of change. Value itself!

There is no state, period, except as dialectic's inept attempts to impose it.

Quantum~holographicity abounds: a tell of real Value!

In summary then we may choose to hermeneut Cosmic Value exemplified by Doug's nine concisions:

  1. Cosmic Energy
  2. Being
  3. Becoming
  4. Life, living
  5. Ubiquity of immortal life
  6. Impregnation
  7. Unlimited potentia
  8. Unsaid as undifferentiated
  9. Wisdom is feminine

Why does Doug denigrate classical social 'value?' Social value's dialectic and perpetual
'inertial state as Keynesian stability,' deny all of those cosmic energy Values.

All of those cosmic energy Values demand perpetual and unstoppable absolute change: Bergson's spontaneity itself.

Quote Doug on this, "When anyone recommends status quo as value, i.e., stability as value, beware." Those of us who change and adapt, shall survive.

And, "Classical status quo is 'state,' i.e., classical self-deluding bogosity." So, "When anyone recommends change via evolution, listen!"

Now Doug must compare his derived nine Cosmic Energy Archetype Value concisions with his Segment 14 seven Quantum Thinkqing Values.
Let's first show them side-by-side:

©Quantonics, Inc., 2011-2030
  1. Cosmic Energy
  2. Being
  3. Becoming
  4. Life, living
  5. Ubiquity of immortal life
  6. Impregnation
  7. Unlimited potentia
  8. Unsaid as undifferentiated
  9. Wisdom is feminine
  1. Evolution
  2. Choice~Chance~Change
  3. Quantum~Grail
  4. Quantum~Uncertainty
  5. Packet~Energy~Wellings
  6. Coherent Autonomy
  7. Planck Rate Quantization

©Quantonics, Inc., 2011-2030

Neither of those two lists has a twit of classical social 'certainty,' 'state,' n¤r 'stability.'

All are imbued with quantum~uncertainty, absolute change, and perpetual evolution.

Each of our nine Archetypes has some of each of our seven Quantum Thinkqing Values in them.

Each of our seven Quantum~Values has some of each of our nine Cosmic Energy Archetype Values in them.

Autsimilar Pirsig's descriptionings of mind and body, paraphrased,
"Each holographically co~contains other without contradiction."

How many of those two lists of Values are 'in' modern cultural 'values?' Arguably, none.

Is that an indictment of modern and post modern Earth societies? Doug exclaims, "Yæs!"

Keynesianism and its social Marxism is one of our best exemplars.

Please revisit Segment 14 of Chapter Three.

As a simple effort of your own compare our nine cosmic energy Values to Doug's 14 Quantum~Value hypers:

Ancient Cosmic Energy Value Hierarchy

Quantonics' Quantum~Thought Value Hierarchy
  1. Cosmic Energy
  2. Being
  3. Becoming
  4. Life, living
  5. Ubiquity of immortal life
  6. Impregnation
  7. Unlimited potentia
  8. Unsaid as undifferentiated
  9. Wisdom is feminine
  1. Quantum~Evolutionings
  2. A~Posteriorai~Uncertainty~Chancings
  3. Scintillation~Change
  4. A~Iamai~Uncertainty~Chancings
  5. Selection~Choice
  6. A~Priorai~Uncertainty~Chancings
  7. Packet~Interrelationshipings Quantum~Grail
  8. Quantonics' Macroscopic Quantum~Uncertaintyings
  9. Packet~Energy~Wellings
  10. Packet~Energyings
  11. Pluralism
  12. Islandicity as Quantum~Proxy of Monism
  13. Quantizationings
  14. Planck's Clockings

©Quantonics, Inc., 2011-2030

How do you think we should arrange these to make them more compatible?
Does one describe flux interrelationshipings culturally?
Other, more technically?
Which?

Are they relatively inverted? Yæs? N¤? Why?

In QCD on each list, where are TBCSUD quarks? Where is Doug's Fuzzons to Fermion Ontology?

Doug will spend rest of this Valentine's Day 2011 weekend completing this PBing Sixteen:

 

PBing Sixteen: Value hyper value vis-à-vis value hyper Value

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum~Value hyper value
vis-à-vis
Classical Social-value hyper Value
Classical Social-value hyper Value
vis-à-vis
Quantum~Value hyper value
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantum~Value omniscribes reality as a quantum~system of absolute change.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical Social-value describes reality as a dialectical system of status quo.
  • etc.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Quantum reality has 'no' static value.
  • etc.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Classical social reality denies change.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

"Flux is simple."

"State is complex."

Bergson.

Value issi hyper 'value.'

Renselle, 6Dec2010.

To be continued...

12-13Feb2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


Segment 16 Notes

Note 1: Being, here, is Cosmic Energy' creation of 'being.' In Doug's Quantum Essence web page we describe this as n¤nactuality's undifferentiated~n¤nactualized unsaid~unlatched flux becoming said~latched flux actualized. Doug probably should write, "Becoming Being."

Note 2: Becoming, here, is Cosmic Energy' evolution of 'being.'

Segment 16 Notes


9-10Feb2011

Chapter 3, Segment 15 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Fifteen: Quantum~Competitive GDP vis-à-vis Classical Socially-Planned GDP.

"Doug, make it simple for us to grasp why Classical Socially-Planned GDP is inferior your Quantum~Competitive GDP approach."

Simply, Keynesians use fiat money AKA fiat managed-stability status quo 'value' to push their planned results!

Doug's quantum approach uses real competitive~evolutionary~production of real products to pull demand.

In script we can show those two approaches like this:

Classical GDP Social-Reduction: dichon(said, said).
(Exemplars here include GM, and M$oft.)

From Chapter Two, "Bottom line:
Classicists kill Value by turning it into 'value.'
Reduction is only one of their means."

Quantum GDP Competitive~Evolution: quanton(said,unsaid).
(Exemplars here include Apple and Stanford's Self Management courses.)

From Chapter Two, "Bottom line:
Quantumists evolve saidValuings into
their unsaidValuings potentia.

Allow Doug to map those onto "real GDP," and 'fiat GDP.'

Classical: Classicists kill GDP by making it fiat.

Quantum: Quantumists evolve and grow GDP by making it real.

Doug - 9Feb2011.

Now, allow Doug to spend a little time on GDP memeos familiar to most real entrepreneurs.
Allow Doug to hover his th~oughts and quantum~hermeneutics~semasiologies
around notions (classical) and memeos (quantum) of push and pull.
How about another list comparison:

Quantum~Pull Terms Classical Push Terms
  • stability
  • results
  • plan
  • etc.

Doug can list 100s of comparisons in that table. But his brief list accomplishes his goal:
radical quantum indictment of classical thing-king as a fraud of global proportions.
Its name? Dialectic, "...a genetic defect in human reason." Paraphrased.
Pirsig. See Pirsig's Lila, p. 277, 1st ed., Bantam, 1991.
See also Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, p. 102, four-five pages
into Chapter 10, Bantam, 1982, "The cause of our current social crises is..."

Doug - 9Feb2011.

What manufacturing 'method' has revolutionized classical JIT, minimalist (down sized) production? It's called, "kanban."

Kanban is, by design, a — "pull" based on demand — scheduling system.
However, it is more than a scheduling system since it modularizes
all production lines into minimalist rational 'production' cells.

Doug views that kanban modularization is an imperfect classical-metaphor of quantization.
But that imperfect metaphor transformed social aspects of classical manufacturing.
Kanban is something we all need to learn about, since it is a move, however tiny,
toward a New Millennium III Philosophy, a quantum philosophy.

Wikipedia writes that Toyota's kanban rules include:

* Do not send defective products to the subsequent process
* The subsequent process comes to withdraw only what is needed
* Produce only the exact quantity withdrawn by the subsequent process
* Level the production
* Kanban is a means to fine tuning
* Stabilize and rationalize the process

Doug would take strong quantum~exception with much of those six 'rules.'
Mostly because they suffer that common genetic defect in human reason.

Notice some anti-quantum dialectical terms: Stabilize, rationalize, fine-tuning as classical TQC, "level the production," "exact quantity," etc.

So classical kanban isn't quantum; however, Doug believes it is a candidate for becoming quantum!

Toyota's kanban does further indict social planning if we restate rule 1 as, "Do not send fiat products to the subsequent process"

Doug simplifies that on a global economic scale as, "Do not use fiat paper money flow as a proxy for GDP."

Many of us are retardedly coveting (pushing) fiat paper money as a serfdom of debt as 'value.'
We should, in Doug's opine, be attracting (pulling) real and improving product quality as Value.

Observe a natural human trait: we do not spend real money on fiat products.
We refuse to exchange real money for fiat paper. (Fekete's backwardation in PMs.)
We refuse to offer Value for value.

Socially-planned results garner 'value.' Socialists assess status quo. Polemic dialectical quantity dogma: Utopian 'state' forever.

Competitive production garners Value. Quantumists assess better. Evolution's Quality mantra: Quantum better change in perpetuity.

Doug - 10Feb2011.

Doug has much more to offer here, but when this book is published, those extensions will add Value to its hard copy reproduction.
(Students please study Doug's now decade~plus old comments on reproduction and production.)

That added Value may pull you to it as a necessary addition to your FEP library.

Most of what Doug has written above applies directly to Politics, all hard sciences, and all hard dialectical religions.

 

PBing Fifteen: Quantum~Competitive GDP vis-à-vis Classical Socially-Planned GDP

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum~Competitive GDP
vis-à-vis
Classical Socially-Planned GDP
Classical Socially-Planned GDP
vis-à-vis
Quantum~Competitive GDP
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantum~competitive GDP looks for opportunities in unsaids as unlimited potentia.
  • Quantum~competitive GDP omnitors success in quantum~pull terms.
  • Quantum~competitive GDP emersces unsaids as increasing Value
  • Quantum~competitive GDP quantumly evolves novel actualities via quantized emerscitecture and emerscenture.
  • Quantum~competitive GDP is strategic since it has a high likelihood of sustaining and gradually increasing Value.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical socially-planned GDP uses dialectic to predetermine results.
  • Classical socially-planned GDP measures success in classical-push terms.
  • Classical socially-planned GDP counts flow of fiat as production.
  • Classical socially-planned GDP dialectically rationalizes formal architecture and manufacture.
  • etc.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Quantum~competitive GDP deludes itself that evolution, competition, and unsaids 'exist.'
  • Opportunity (unsaid) doesn't 'exist,' nor does it 'pull.'
  • etc.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Classical socially-planned GDP rearranges (swaps) saids as decreasing 'value.'
  • Results cann¤t be predicted, let alone determinately planned.
  • Socially-planned GDP always (historically) degenerates into fiat as relentlessly declining 'value.'
  • Socially-planned classical push manufacturing is becoming extinct, is dying.
  • Classical socially-planned GDP encourages 'planners' to publish bogus GDP statistics and incestuous counts of fiat paper in place of actual product quantities. "If it isn't what we want, we'll make it what we want," as socially 'planning.' Creative disinformation propaganda via MSM social-planning subsidiaries.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

Our biggest exegesis of what this GDP issue is all about is Value.
See Doug's Epilogue for a table of Quantum~Values, Plateau II.
Also see Doug's last segment table of quantum vav classical [Vv]alue comparisons.
Finally, see Doug's table of From-Tos on quantum~politics as Finding One's Inner.

Our PBing opus of Chapter Three is rapidly coming to a close.

It, in my opinion, has been worth Doug's efforts.

To be continued...

9-10Feb2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


7,9Feb2011

Chapter 3, Segment 14 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Fourteen: Quantum~Evolutionary Individual Competition vis-à-vis Classical Planning for Social Status Quo .

Doug took a 3-4 day hiatus from writing PBings to do his Chapter Three Epilogue. See Segment 18 above.
His purpose for doing that is to give readers a way to compare classical dialectical thought 'value' with Doug's innovative quantum~th~ought Values.
Here is a side-by-side table showing both classical thing-king values along side quantum~thinkqing Values (highest to lowest):

Left column is from this Chapter's Epilogue.

Right column is from SOM's Bases of Judgment.

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030

 Quantum~Thinkqing Values

 Classical-Thing-king 'values'
  1. Evolution
  2. Choice~Chance~Change
  3. Quantum~Grailo
  4. Quantum~Uncertainty
  5. Packet~Energy~Wellings
  6. Coherent Autonomy
  7. Planck Rate Quantization
  1. Truth
  2. Proof
  3. Falsifiability
  4. Contradiction
  5. Negation
  6. Lisrability
  7. Stability

Planck rate absolute change emerscing evolution as Value is a valid reality. Students please observe how quantum~grail is quintessence of quantum~awarenessings, quantum~con(m)sciousnessings, and a key enabler of quantum~selection required for quantum~evolution.

See QuPo From-To Table of classical to quantum political [Vv]alues. Doug - 23Feb2011.

o - In Doug's QVH Table he shows this as quantum~scintillation. To oversimplify, evolution issi quanton(scintillation,quantization). Most surprising essence here is a Doug HotMeme™ which he shows in detail here. To phasement that HotMeme™ simply, "Scintillation energy omnitors gradience from~to equilibrium."™ We can then infer that quantum~grail is a key enabler of quantum~relative~gradience assessment as quantum~pr¤cæss. Doug - 10Jun2011.

Stability, classicism's lowest 'value' is dogmatic, orthodox, axiomatic, state-ic, an invalid fraud.

 ©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030

by Doug Renselle
7,9,23Feb2011, 10Jun2011 add 'Quantum~Grail' footnote.

This is a fairly simple from~to table which is part of Finding One's Inner.
We want to leave classical and become quantum~beings.

To read that table from a classical conspective, say, "Right column is hyper left column."

To understand that table from a quantum complementarospective, believe, "Left column is hyper right column."

From Doug's quantum~perspective we can say for example, "Classical truth has no means to quantum~evolve."
We can emit similar sentences for other six pairs of terms.
Classical 'values' all adhere classical dialectical objectivity, negation, independence, and absolute state (i.e., absolute stability).
Quantum Values all adhere quantum~subjectivity, flux as only positive, middle~inclusion, and absolute change.

Then...Bergson's "flux is simple, state is complex,"..., see, it's easy! Doug.

One very obvious aspect of our table's simple comparisons is how classical thing-king, as described by Hume, et al., cannot "bridge fact and value."
It's own dogmatic 'state stability' prevents any bridging of fact and value.

Quantum~Thinkqing's quantum~grail "bridges fact and value." How? In biblical terminology, it "...mixes all things in all."
In quantumese, "...holograms everywhere~associatively middle~include all energy~wellings in all energy~wellings, at least partially."

Quantum middle~inclusion and everywhere~associativity violate all of those classical thing-king 'values.'

That is why Doug claims "classical thing-king is bogus."

Quantumists "embrace uncertainty." (uncertainty, AKA opportunity)

Classicists "embrace certainty." (certainty, AKA 'planning')

Bergson's Creative Evolution, Carlo Suares' Qabala, James' plural~flux Philosophy, Pirsig's MoQ, and
Renselle's Quantonics have shown classical certainty is bogus, period.
Now think about that. Doesn't classical 'truth' imply certainty? If so, then it is bogus!

James: "Truth is made." (Pragmatism)

Renselle: "Truth is an agent of its own change."

Classical thing-king is bogus.

Therefore when one builds any system like Keynesianism, on classical foundations then one gets in a great deal of trouble.

Doug - 7,9Feb2011.

 

PBing Fourteen: Quantum~Evolutionary Individual Competition vis-à-vis Classical Social Planning for Status Quo

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum~Evolutionary Individual Competition
vis-à-vis
Classical Social Planning for Status Quo
Classical Social Planning for Status Quo
vis-à-vis
Quantum~Evolutionary Individual Competition
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantumists agree with Nature that survivability is only achievable via adaptation to absolute change.
  • Quantumists believe that quantum~reality is self~other~referent~aware and ubiquitously, cosmically con(m)scious. Refer Carlo Suares' "Faith as direct experience of immortal con(m)sciousness." See PBing Six. For additional omniscriptions of intrinsic and immortally con(m)scious grail~awareness see PBing Ten.
  • Quantum~thought competes memes and memeos and selects better.
  • Quantum~pragma competes processings and actionings and selects better.
  • Quantum~recapitulation (up to Planck rates) perpetually evolves all thought and all pragma.
  • Quantum~grail holographically interrelates all actionings and all th~oughtings. This is quintessentially what Doug intends when he says, Quantonics HotMeme™ "Grail competes, quantum~coherently and quantum~autonomously, all actionings and th~oughtings." Quantonics HotMeme™.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical Social Planning uses state to establish Status Quo.
  • Classical Social Planning eliminates any need for competition, since planning is a classically valid method of determining future results.
  • etc.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Change is a classical abomination.
  • etc.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Classical Social Planning always fails, since it doesn't "embrace uncertainty."
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

 

Doug.

To be continued...

7,9Feb2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


2-3Feb2011

Chapter 3, Segment 13 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Thirteen: Quantum~Evolutionary Projection of Potentia vis-à-vis Classical Social Status Quo as Intentional Repetition of History.

"Doug, what is simplest way you have of describing your memeo of, "Quantum~Evolutionary Projection of Potentia?"

One way of answering is, "That is what quantumists do."

"OK, then, Doug what is it that quantumists do?"

Quantum~Evolutionary Projection of Potentia is quintessentially turning unsaids into saids.
Perpetual change is a quantum~reality.
Quantumists turn (evolve) unsaids into saids.
Quantonics' emersos offers quantumists languagings of 'absolute change.'
For example: wisdom, change, selection, choice, chance, uncertainty, autsimilarity, potentia, flux, isoflux, cancellation, waves, complementation, etc.
See QELR, Coined Terms, and Acronyms.

"Doug, can you rinse and repeat your answer approach for, "Classical Social Status Quo as Intentional Repetition of History?"

One way of answering is, "That is what classicists do."

"OK, then, Doug what is it that classicists do?"

Classical Social Status Quo as Intentional Repetition of History is dialectical 'maintenance of state.'
Immortality of 'state' is a classical Platonic and utopian ideal.
Classicists practice absolute stux via dialectically planning for maintenance of status quo.
Dialectic's mythos provides classicists with languages of 'absolute state.'
Exemplars are numerous: dialectic, object, independence, certainty, identity, state, statement, event, stop, negation, opposition, and so on...
See QELP.

 

PBing Twelve: Quantum~Evolutionary Projection of Potentia vis-à-vis Classical Social Status Quo as Intentional Repetition of History

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum~Evolutionary Projection of Potentia
vis-à-vis
Classical Social Status Quo as Intentional Repetition of History
Classical Social Status Quo as Intentional Repetition of History
vis-à-vis
Quantum~Evolutionary Projection of Potentia
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantumists believe that change is absolute.
  • Quantum~change explains classical 'state' as "absence of change." Implication here is that classical dialectical notions of 'state' are simply bogus.
  • Quantum~evolution depends upon up to Planck rate change impetus. To achieve classical state, one must turn off Planck's clock which disables evolution and disables quantum~reality's absolute change.
  • Quantum~evolution is parent of quantum~potentia. Without quantum~evolution, there is no potentia. Without quantum~evolution reality itself would simply not exist.
  • Quantum~evolution naturally creates saids (fluxing actualityings) from unsaids (isofluxing n¤nactualityings). Qua to make saids out of unsaids describes well what we intend by "quantum~potentia."
  • Quantumists believe that quantum~reality is unstoppable.
  • Quantumists believe that any unstoppable reality may n¤t be dialectically analyzed. "Frequency (waves) cannot be measured at a 'point.'" "Even phase cann¤t be measured at a point." See Doug's QELR of 'phase.'
  • Quantumists believe that classical analytic scalars do not exist. See Doug's QELRs of measure, and monitor.
  • Quantum~potentia is always quantum~abductive, never classically-dialectically inductive-deductive.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • All classicists know that state does not change.
  • All classicists know that state cannot describe change, therefore 'change' (a classical description of change) does not 'exist,' so change itself does not exist.
  • Classical state is immutable except via motion borne of some event.
  • All classicists understand that determinism of planning is only valid in a reality which doesn't change (a reality which remains undisturbed).
  • Future planning depends upon repetition of past states and events which, by canonic law, are verifiably repeatable.
  • All classical experimentation whose purpose is to establish provisional truth must depend upon past reliably repeating itself in order to assess what is 'true.'
  • Dialectic encourages classicists to apply absolutely 'true' scientific results to finance, economics, and politics. Keynesiansism is their best example of status quo as spawn of dialectical determinism always 'working.'
  • All classicists understand that state can be in linear motion. Immutability, though, remains pure during motion (except in Einstein's theories of relativity).
  • All classicists understand that classical motion can be stopped for purposes of static scalar analyses of object's 'state' in (while it is paradoxically in) motion.
  • etc.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical dialectic state denies any validity of non motional, non y=f(t), non continuous quantum~absolute~change. Students please note that 'continuous' quantum~change is an oxymoron. All quantum~change is quantized at up to Planck's rate.
  • etc.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantum~potentia denies any validity of classical dialectical-analytic notions of ideal, formal repetition, state, and indescribable 'event.' See Doug's QELRs of event and occur.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

Allow Doug to compare classical paint and quantum paint:

Classical paint always goes bad. Its inventors assume classical state is true and can be maintained in paint, objectively, by dialectical canon.

Quantum paint always stays good. Its creators assume quantum~change is absolute and quantum~paint must evolve itself perpetually to retain its quantum~goodness.

Now let me see...which is better? Hmmm...boy that's a tough question...

A Quantonics HotMeme™ "All Quantum~Potentia is Radically and Strategically More Important than Any Classical Social Status Quo." A Quantonics HotMeme

Why?

Change can explain state. State cannot explain change.

It's simple.

Doug.

To be continued...

2-3Feb2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


1Feb2011

Chapter 3, Segment 12 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Twelve: Equal Individual Opportunity vis-à-vis Equal Socially Planned Results.

This PBing is an essential summary of The Great Con Job. The great CONservative CON and the great LIEberal LIE.

A terrific Quantoncs political breakthrough is Doug's disclosure of this quantum~memeo of The Great Con Job.
Doug has been writing about this since start of Millennium III.
In PBing Eleven, he linked to his 2005 TQS News omniscription of why Lieberals lie and Conservatives Con:
It distills to humanities great genetic defect of reasoning which Pirsig, et al., refer 'dialectic.'
Simply, dialectic 'makes' lieberals lie and conservatives con.

If you grasp Doug's essence here, this is why our politics are predominately corrupt and our (mostly Keynesian) economics systems are fraudulent.

Dialectic's innate bivalency distills all 'decisionings' to 'either-or.'
If you thingk like that, you are an agent of corruption and fraud.
It's that simple, folks. See Doug's holographic simplicity and his What is Simple and What is Complex?

That narrative explains Doug's quantonic mantra of, "Change your thinking from CTMs to QTMs."

CTMs represent dialectical 'reasoning' of classical socialist lieberals and conservatives.

QTMs represent quantum thinkqing of quantum~social quantum~beings.

This PBing Twelve may be summarized using memes of change, quantum~change, in that narrative.

QTMs can explain Equal Individual Opportunity.

CTMs cannot explain Equal Individual Opportunity, and instead deny it.

CTMs use dialectic's naïve bivalent decisioning to mandate dialectical determinism
(ideal Platonic absence of individual free will)
in their Equal Socially Planned Results.

Both Lieberal and Conservative Classical Socialists use CTMs to practice corrupt politics and fraudulent Keynesian economics.

If you want to place blame on badness we see everywherings and everywhenings today, Doug thinkqs that is where you should place it.

Quantonics HotMeme™ "Quantum~beings see dialectic AKA SOM's mythos as reality's 'bad guy.'" Quantonics HotMeme

 

PBing Twelve: Equal Individual Opportunity vis-à-vis Equal Socially Planned Results

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Equal Individual Opportunity
vis-à-vis
Equal Socially Planned Results
Equal Socially Planned Results
vis-à-vis
Equal Individual Opportunity
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantum~individuals hyper classical society; see Doug's Evolution of Pirsig's SPoVs
  • Quantum~individuals peers to quantum~society
  • Planning is invalid since reality is quantum~uncertain
  • Quantum competition is a key enabler of all quantum~beings and their individual freedoms
  • Quantum individual freedom leads to real (non fiat) economic Value growth
  • Quantum individual freedom disables corrupt central financial-economic-political controls and hegemony-of-the-few in societies embracing quantum~individual freedoms; see Doug on few over many
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical society hyper all individuals
  • Classical planning according dialectic validates determinism
  • Classical planning eliminates competition
  • Classical planning demands that all individuals have equal potential canonically and legally controlled by classical society. Superior and extraordinary individual potential to compete and win is disallowed.
  • etc.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Quantum~uncertainty denies classical dialectically determinate planning
  • Quantum~individual freedom encourages classical conceptions of social chaos and anarchy (classical planners are blind to Mae-wan Ho's memeos of quantum~coherence and quantum~islandic~autonomies as improvements to quantum~social order as compared to classically managed social order)
  • etc.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Unintended consequences of all classical planning renders it invalid
  • Classical planning disables social productivity thus invoking a death sentence on any society subject to classical planning.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

Central 'planning' of a few over many is a failed classical, dialectal error of 'judgment' and 'reason.'

Kondratieff's fourth turning can and will end this cancer of fraudulent finance, economics, and politics for all Earth societies who fathom this classical error.

To be continued...

1Feb2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


28,30-31Jan2011 and 1Feb2011 (Add 'Lying and Conning' link to 2005 TQS News.) and 21Feb2011 Update PBings.

Chapter 3, Segment 11 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Eleven: Quantum~Coherent Islandicity of Individual Choice vis-à-vis Classical Social Dogma.

Our Quantonics mantra contigues in a granular, quantized manner...n¤t y=f(t) continuously as classicists dogmatically mandate.
We are well out of SOM's box, SOM's classical mythos, now.
We are intentionally, volitionally, vicissitudinally immersing our quantum~beings in a novel quantum~emersos nowings.

But "where are we Doug?" See our original Talking Points, about half way down.
We are leaving issues of quantum~foundational detail and entering a
very high Value land of "quantum~individuals hyper classical-societies."
This land is MoQland AKA quantum~reality. It is a land where QuPo's rubber hits the road.

Doug considers it somewhat fateful that he is writing about this just now.
Look at what is happening all across Earth. Classical socialism is dying, literally.
Both Kondratieff and "End of a Seculum" are showing their fourth turnings.
Symptoms are evident everywherings and everywhenings.
Fiscal paper is measured directly by Gold's price ($20 in 1913 and about $1400 peak in 2011).
That ratio is 70:1 which means a 1913 dollar is now worth 1.4 cents.
There is no better evidence of absolute Keynesian failure.
And look at Keynesians' fears as expressed in DOW, Nasdaq, and S&P.
Managed no-volume, no retail trading, meltups, apparently relentless, yet evidence of almost immediate death.
Metals exchanges are experiencing real supply backwardation: nobody is selling hard metal assets.
Keynesians attempt to control (classically and socially manage) metals prices and markets.
Oil too. Some other commodities too.
Read their panic. Smell their panic.
Keynesian death is imminent and just as relentlessly approaching as their terminal,
only apparently relentless, 'market controls' are noticeably and notably failing.
NO'bama is turning right and praising Ronald Reagan. Shades of classically social endtimes!
More fear! Palpable fear. A complicit social and Keynesian fuxup is about to be shown a door into the abyss of absolute failure.
A Harvard Marxist. A garbage intellect of dark magnitude. A dead star. A death star. A dialectician par unexcellence.
NO'bama wants to be a Republicunt. But he, like all men, is a hermaphrodite and he cann¤t change that.
Women are sexually pure: XX! Men are sexually impure: XY. Men are haploidally both male and female.
Classically political social men are stupid. Quantum~Political individual women are wise.

Yes, a Fourth Turning borne of classical patriarchal social ineptitude and incompetence.

Even nature is in this act, a Fourth Turning.

Aneuploidal evolution is going pandemic. XX and XY are becoming XXY and XYY through XXYYY and XYYYYY.
Nature, in Doug's opine, too is in a Fourth Turning.
He~r homo Sapiens experiment is ending, and He~r neo Sapiens revolution is imminent.
It appears to Doug S~he is fed up with classical masculine, patriarchal XY!
Rampant evolution of aneuploidy is a quantum~tell.

While those social inepts claim climate change and global warming are anthropogenic.
No, they fuxed that up too. Nature's rhythms are wholly outside their tiny focused purview.
They cann¤t imagine what's in quantum~reality's bookcase: They, instead are Seen~focused on their credit card.

But that is what classical, patriarchal socialists do: focus on detrite intellectual garbage which for Doug is actual social psychochrome.

They think debt and credit are wealth. More hypointellectual psychochromic detritus.

What evidence do we have? It's simple. They try to control everything.
They always fail! Why? They are too retarded to understand humans intrinsically lack qua to socially control everything.

Classical social control is antithetic beau coup quantum~social and ~political memes:

 Quantum~Social and ~Political Memes

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030

  • quantum~individualism as a tell of quantum~being
  • individual free will of all quantum~beings
  • autonomous quantum~evolution of individual quantum~beings
  • individual quantum~being's belief in quantized absolute change
  • social freedom of all quantum~beings
  • social respect of all quantum~beings by both quantum~society and other quantum~beings
  • evolutionary development of quantum~ego of all quantum~beings
  • pluralism of all quantum~beings
  • cultural diversity of all quantum~beings
  • ethical diversity of all quantum~beings
  • moral diversity of all quantum~beings
  • quantum~social coherence as EIMA quantum~holographic complementationings of all quantum~beings
  • etc.
 ©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030

But these classical socialists persist. They insist One Size Fits All! Evidence? They mandate One World Order:
ideal, Platonic, Aristotelian, Parmenidean dialectical, mechanical, formal bee hive order.

They want a social hive of their fascist 'state designed' drones. "Humans are only 'machines,' didn't you know?" Sounds like David Deutsch.

More retarded intellectual garbage. Psychochrome in ceramic socially fascist molded concretization. Mussolini and Hitler all over again.

But TS is about to HTF! We've had it. They've had it.

Watch metals and strategic commodities! They are tells of this seculum's end to classical socialism.

I am going to publish this, as is, now and work on following crucial PBing Eleven over this weekend. It's gonna take muchas bueno quantum~thought.

Mean time enjoy and recapitulate above PBing Eleven narrative.

I love you Beth! I miss you Beth! I will always love you Beth!

Doug - 28Jan2011.

 

PBing Eleven: Quantum~Islandicity of Individual Choice vis-à-vis Classical Social Dogma

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum~Islandicity of Individual Choice
vis-à-vis
Classical Social Dogma
Classical Social Dogma
vis-à-vis
Quantum~Islandicity of Individual Choice
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantum~islandicity of individual choice evokes dynamic coherence of evolutionary quantum~beings.
  • Quantum~beings have individual free willings.
    • Only quantum~beings can make selves individually free
  • Quantum~beings adapt to quantum~reality's absolute change impetus.
  • Quantum~beings practice quantum~social respect and evoke evolution of their own individual quantum~egos.
  • Quantum~beings inure multiversities and omniversities of:
    • quantum~cultures
    • quantum~societies
      • individual quantum~beings are hyper classical society
      • absolute quantum~flux is hyper classical social 'state'
    • quantum~beliefs
      • pluralism of local quantum~islandic ethics
      • pluralism of local quantum~islandic cultures
      • pluralism of local quantum~islandic moralities
      • please ponder both quantum~locality and ~n¤nlocality
      • please ponder quantum~partiality
      • please ponder quantum~enthymemeticity
    • quantum~thought
    • quantum~pragma
    • quantum~languages
    • quantum~politics
    • quantum~epistemologies
    • etc.
  • Quantum~beings adhere perpetually evolving quantum~holographic~coherence of all quantum~beings which we can refer quantum~society.
    • Quantum~society is massive islandic ensembles of both locally~ and globally~quantum~coherent quantum~beings.
    • Quantum~politics adheres and inures quantum~societal acculturationings.
  • Quantum absolute evolutionary change is what each quantum~being individually betterships.
  • All quantum~beings recursively query selves, "What shall I do?" Quantum~beings ask others, "What will you do?" Quantum~beings never ask, "What will we do?"
  • Quantum~beings seek unsaids as quantum~potentia for whatings happenings nextings.
  • Quantum~beings, due perpetual Planck rate evolutionings, EIMA, quantization, and quantum~uncertainty, "No Size Fits All," NSFA. A potentially better way to say that is, "Every Quanton Issi Omnique, EQIO." Quantum~autsimilarity 'exists,' but n¤t classical 'identity.' (All perpetual quantum~flux issi autsimilarly quantizing, evolving and varying mostly by wave number, iso[bnptvVx]icity, fermionicity (quarkicity), and bosonicity (gluonicity).)
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical social 'state' is what we, as hive drones, worship.
  • Our classical society always asks, "What will we do?"
  • Social 'state' loves said as perpetual status quo.
  • Static reality adheres y=f(t) determinism.
  • Everybody understands classical reality.
  • Everybody understands continuous linear and circular closed functions.
  • Everybody understands classical 'state.'
  • Everybody understands classical cause-effect determinism.
  • Everybody understands middle-exclusion.
  • Everybody understands thermodynamics is uniquely posentropic.
  • Everybody knows reality is classically and formally and mechanically-objectively analytic.
  • etc.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Nobody understands quantum reality.
  • Nobody understands quantization.
  • Nobody understands absolute change.
  • Nobody understands quantum~uncertainty.
  • Nobody understands middle~inclusion.
  • Nobody understands quantum~coherence.
  • Nobody understands quantum~holographicity.
  • etc.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Classical social dogma finds its rational bases in dialectic.
  • Pirsig, "Dialectic is bogus," so classical social dogma based in dialectic implies dialectical social rationality is bogus.
  • Bergson, "State and lisr objectivity are bogus," so classical analytic method is deceit.
  • Gnosis, "Monism is deceit, coherent individualism is hyper decoherent society, and principle rules something not itself."
  • Quantum empiritheory, "Quantum~reality is valid, classical-reality is invalid."
  • Qabala, "Reality is cosmic energy expressed dynamically and recursively in Autiot, n¤t Aristotelian 'material substance' expressed statically and independently in mathematical symbols."
  • In USA classical state-social dogma takes two essentially monist political forms, both dialectical:
    • Lieberal social dogma:
      • State, nation, culture, etc. as a plurality of political monisms each of which self refers, 'the people.'
      • 'Di-versity' as a 'Democratic' Einsteinian-relativistic but decoherent and chaotic pluralism which is mostly treated by lieberals as relative bivalent dualisms (dialectic itself).
      • Truth is relative, but state-ic.
      • etc.
    • Conservative social dogma:
      • State, nation, culture, etc. as a monism (federation) of political pluralisms (republics) each of which self refers, 'the people.'
      • One Parmenidian-Platonic-Aristotelian-Thomist-Newtonian ideal dialectical thought system monistically, decoherently and chaotically fits all. "Our way or the highway." Relativism is blasphemy. Plurality of belief is blasphemy.
      • Truth is absolute, and state-ic.
      • etc.
    • Lieberals literally 'lie,' and Conservatives 'con' due their dialectical CTMs. Dialectic makes them 'lie,' and 'con.'
    • etc.
  • Classical conservatives assume, due axiomatic monism, "One Size Fits All."
  • Classical lieberals assume, due axiomatic objective relativism, "Many Sizes Fit All."
  • Classical 'society' cann¤t assess quantum~beings.
  • Classical 'state' cann¤t assess quantum~flux.
  • Classical social 'law' is bogus since its dogma assumes and presumes classical 'state.'
  • Classicists assume that 'static' OSFA and MSFA society makes individuals in that society 'free.'
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

Doug's PBing Eleven 'Worse' cells above are consistent and quasi complete indictments of ineptness, incompetence, and
failings of contemporary public education, academe, and 'social' 'government.'
Doug's opine - 31Jan2011.

If you want background Quantonics web site reading, Doug offers this list partial:

Managing Uncertainty

Where is Liberal Passion?

Extinction of Classical Politics and Law

Try those...

In a way, Doug's PBing Eleven above represents proemial nascence of quantum~reality and Quantonics.

This is excellent foundation for PBings 12-17, which will likely be last of Doug's PBing work in this text book. (Don't place any bets though.)

What a blessing!

Can you stand a tad o humor? Do you recognize, "suck, squeeze, pop, and phooey?"
Yeah, I know, sounds slightly erotic, but actually, it's four phases of an 4-cycle internal combustion engine.
What is humorous about this, to Doug, is that 'pop' might be visualized as a mechanical model of quantization of combustion.

Compare how jet engines do not have distributive-timed and -alternating 'pops' except at engine start ignition.

Only two years was too long for Doug at ima "Cummins"...land of plethoric milk and honey
cast block-brained spark-compression-injection pluggers...IC is already extinct...they do not grasp that...YET!

Our "oil shortage" is about to become an overabundance...do not say Doug didn't give you a "heads up."

"Doug, drop the eros please!"

You got it.

LOL.

To be continued...

28,30-31Jan2011 and 1Feb2011 (Add 'Lying and Conning' link to 2005 TQS News.) and 21Feb2011 Update PBings.

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


27-28Jan2011 and 9Feb2011

Chapter 3, Segment 10 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Ten: Quantum~Complementation vis-à-vis Classical Formal Opposition.

"Doug, this word complementation, especially when you prefix it with quantum, intimidates my intellect. What can I do about that?"

Many, many years ago when Doug was just starting his career, he had similar issues with complement.
A more mature and experienced systems engineer said to me, "Think of it as 'complete-ment.'"
That helped me immensely. But his remark is classical and reeks of stoppability and 'state.'

Simple Gestalts reek like that too. They lack quantum omnimensionality of a general quantum~hologram and
its countless energy~wellings evolving and fully motional (unstoppable) interrelationshipings AKA quantons.

What can we do about that?

We do what Quantonics teaches.
We remediate our thinking: we move from CTMs to QTMs,
and we move from thing-king to thinkqing.
We move from the classical mythos' perpetual classical 'state'
to quantum emersos' immortal, and ubiquitously aware,
ubiquitously con(m)scious, quantum~change.

Linguistically we make those moves by using participle 'ing' to enunciate
change and plural 's' to manifest quantum~ensemble~heterogeneity.

Simply take classical 'complement' and make it quantum~complementings. Ditto from
perpetually 'state-ic' complementation to immortally~changing complementationings.

Linguistically, then, 'ings' is quantum~reality's ubiquitous and unstoppable Planck rate
clockings' tickings relentlessly, everywherings and everywhenings, forever.

Doug's 'ings' QELR here linguistically invokes verbal, absolute change. That, at least, is Doug's intent.

If you agree, then, we have complementationings signifying [] quantum~complementation as self~other~referent
awarenessings~consciousnessings processings which have potential for quantum~absolute evolutionary change.

Believe it or not, this is one of Earth's most powerful linguistic innovations, ever!

We have a Quantonics' breakthrough in our innate abilities as humans to
describe quantum~reality better than it has ever been described prior.

That is a huge reason why Doug refers Quantonics as "strategic." It is! Indeed, it is!
It changes Earth and its people forever, a Second Coming, if you will.

With that linguistic remediation of complementationings, we have only partial progress, however.
What about raw semantic of complement itself?
Classically it is 'state-ic,' stoppable, zero-momentable, sample and holdable, etc.
Quantumly c¤mplæmæntings have n¤ classical state since they perpetually evolve. Always changing, changing all!

"But how, Doug?"

Change as 'ings' (plural participle~ings) is only one part of
improving our linguistic qua for describing quantum~reality.

We must find means and ways to describe quantum~evolution as always and perpetually in processings
of th~oughtful and CH3ings selective incremental creation (and discreation) of quantum~reality.
"Why?"
By direct experience and observation, that is what quantum~reality does.
We change perpetually, living and dying, living and dying, ..., . Our body's cells do too:
apoptosis, ribosomic resurrection, apoptosis, ribosomic resurrection...a million times each second.
Ditto planets, suns, solar systems, galaxies, and any~verses.

Doug's multi-generational 'reality loops' attempt to describe this.
Physics' Quantum Chromo Dynamics (QCD) and Quantum Electro Dynamics (QED) do too.
Quantonics does. Autiot does. Qabala does. And so on...

"What are those means and ways, Doug?"

Key enablers of quantum~real immortal cosmically~con(m)scious absolute selective~change and relentless incremental evolution include:

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
Key Quantum~Enabler Quantonics' Linguistic Remedy Detail
1 Planck's Clock 'ings' Plural participle as absolute quantum~changings. This absolute quantum~flux is a metaphor of Bergson's 'vital impetus,' and Pirsig's DQ. Both are pure quantum~agents of selective awarenessings and ubiquitous cosmic~con(m)sciousness.
2 Quantization as Flux Packetization 'quanton,' '¤,' and '~'

Quanton as ¤mniht (least energy packet) and ensemble (Nih) energy assemblies in quantum~reality.

'¤' as explicit marking of 'o' words as quantization and quanta. 'o' represents classical cyclical closure AKA classical 'circles.' '¤' represents packet energy quantization as quantum openness AKA quantized cycloids. A closed reality cann¤t, due its canonic 'conservation,' evolve and thus believes in its own 'state.' An open reality can, due its omniffering Nash~esque kinds of always~adaptive equilibria, evolve and thus believes in its own perpetual changings, mutabilityings, and transmutabilityings. CTMs vav QTMs.

'~' as quantum~wave empiritheoretical reality. Each '~' may be thought of as a packet, possibly a packet of packets...

Quanton(~,¤) then can be a packet and an entire assembly of quantons of quantized quantum~wave energies, whose total energy isn't self-relativity-theory-violatingNote 1 E=MC2, rather issi E Nih.

3 Middle~Inclusion 'comma~nospace'

Classical 'state' requires a notion of 'middle-exclusion' to sustain itself. Classical 'middle-exclusion' is an wholly exegetic oxymoron in quantum~reality. See Aristotle.

Quantum evolution requires a memeo of quantum~holographically~open self~other~aware~coobsfective and self~other~referent middle~inclusion to enable absolute and perpetual selective mutability of all of quantum reality, always. Quantum open middle~inclusion is an inexplicably 'absurd' oxymoron in classical-reality.

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030

Quantum~complementationings cann¤t happen without those three key enablers.
They and quantum~complementationings are essential to individuals having qua to describe, understand and use quantum reality.

"Doug, is there one sentence you can write which tells me what complementation is and what it does?"

Over simply, "quantum~complementation is everywherings~everywhenings~included~middlings~associativityings."
That is autsimilar this phasement, "Quantum~complementation issi quantum~holographicity."

Using naïve classical symbols we can narrate it as "A is in B and B is in A."
That is, quantum~complementation via EIMA PBing[A,B].
An actual exemplar might be Pirsig's quantum~genius phasementing, "...mind (quantum~awareness)
is in body and body is in mind (quantum~awareness)...without classical contradiction..."

More generally, "We are ihn Iht and Iht issi ihn us."
(Doug's use of h-bar MT Extra font here suggests quantized packetization
of quantum~holographic Iht and Iht's 'ihn' PBing cowithinitness~complementationings.)
Biblically, "Mixes all things in all." Latter is a biblical Qabala~Autiot~Gn¤stic~grail.
(See Elaine Pagels' Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis.)

Here is another sentence which gives us a pretty good meme of what quantum~complementation is:
"Quantum~complementationings are quantum~reality's grail."

Imagine our >---< grail symbols as Quantonic~Interrelationshipings replacing ellipses in this graphic.

Quantum~grail here does holographic "mixings of all in all" by providing quantonic nexi among all energy~wellings in any hologramings.
Instead of literal and biblical 'mixing' we call those nexi Quantonic~Interrelationshipings which perpetually self~other~awarefully and selectively evolve and coobsfect~coaffect one another.

Doug - 28Jan2011 and 9Feb2011.

Another sentence offers exegeses of quantum~grail: "Grail are ubiquitous quantons in agency of evolutionary creationings and discreationings."

Perhaps more easily, Quantonics HotMeme™ "All quantons have grail." Quantonics HotMeme™.

Any quanton's comma~nospace is a quantum~grail which offers quantum~self~other~aware~selective~complementationings intrinsically.

Use some symbols as significates to illustrate:

grail issi >-----< comma~nospace

That script says that grail, >-----<, and comma~nospace are autsimilar one another.

quanton(n¤nactuality,actuality) issi autsimilar
quanton(n¤nactuality>----<actuality) issi autsimilar
quanton(n¤nactuality~grail~actuality) and so on...
(imagine ~grail~ here as complementationings' tunnelings of quantum~omnivalence twixt islandic energy~wellings in a hologram)

Too, grail, >-----<, and comma~nospace all are doing quantum~complementationings of both n¤nactuality and actuality,
so we refer n¤nactuality as a complement and actuality as a complement.

Now fathom how those complementings are quantum~hologramings of vast numbers of energy~welling of wave~fluxings.

Potentially all energy~wellings may interrelate all energy~wellings.

Each interrelationshiping is a (may be described a) quanton, a grail!

Doug's original symbol for quantum~interrelationshipings looks like this: (that's a wingdings font lower case 'v.')

You may now be capable of understanding why Doug calls Quantonics "A New Philosophy of Interrelationshipings, A New Way of Thinkqing."
(If we look at Quantonics as a benchmark of Qabala and Qabala's Autiot, we probably should say,
A New Way of Thinkqing about An Old Way of Thinkqing,
what Heraclitus called, "the logos, the account.")

"Is this really useful Doug?"

Try this:

Use quantonics script to show how to tap into reserve energy: quanton(n¤nactuality,actuality).
and
Use quantonics script to show how to access unlimited free energy: quanton(n¤nactuality,actuality).

Both scripts show what. We now only have to figure out how.

How involves understanding how to invent a grail which does what that script shows.

"Has that already been done, Doug?"

Yes! Einstein's atom bomb does script two as an impulse. Nuclear power generation does it 'quantized~continuously.'
All of our quantum~stages do script number one when we are thinking, pondering, and imagining.

Supernovæa do script two routinely as a mix of impulses and continuity.

"Doug, are you saying, literally, 'quantum~grail is everywhere and everywhen?'"

Yes, and more. Indeed quantum~grail is everyhow, everywhy, everywhat, everywho. Grail is quantonic. Grail is holographic.
As Carlo Suares wrote, grail is "[holographic] Aleph in the blood." Doug might extend that as "Grail is Aleph in quantum~holographic reality."
Script might be quanton(Aleph,Tav). Similar for Pirsig's MoQ as quanton(DQ,SQ).
(If Doug recalls well, Carlo Suares' 'hologram' [which Doug takes as inferential] remarks
appear in his Second Coming of Reb YhShWh. If not, in his Trilogy.)

All interrelationshipings among all energy~wellings in all hologramings are quantons and thus complementary grail interrelationshipings.

Yes! Doug is saying reality issi quantonic interrelationshipings AKA Grail.
All Grail interrelationshipings are quantum~complementary, up to Planck rate middle~includings' fluxings,

You may deeply fathom this at Doug's recent CeodE 2011 What is Grail?

Doug - 27Jan2011.

 

PBing Ten: Quantum~Complementation vis-à-vis Classical Formal Opposition

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum~Complementation
vis-à-vis
Classical Formal Opposition
Classical Formal Opposition
vis-à-vis
Quantum~Complementation
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantum~complementation offers students of quantum~reality a nearly pure description and understanding of quantum~reality.
  • Energy is a flux is crux semaphore of quantum~reality's wholly positive nature. Waves are all positive energy.
  • Positive energy complements. Doug - 9Jun2011.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical formal-opposition wins this argument hands down since quantum complementation, is as Einstein claimed, subjective. Formal opposition requires ideal and canonic objective reification of reality in order to be viable.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Quantum complementationings deny two of classical reality's dialectical core axioms: objective stability and objective independence.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Classical 'opposition' requires ideal and objective classical negation in order to establish 'opposition.'
  • Negative energy opposes. Doug - 9Jun2011.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

Again, it depends upon our core assumptions.

If you are an objectivist, you will deny quantum~complementationings hands down.

If you are a quantumist, you say simply, "Dialectic is bogus. Objectivity is bogus. State is bogus. Quantum is real."

Doug - 27-28Jan2011 and 9Feb2011


Segment 10 Notes

Note 1: Violation here is GR's canon that no object can exceed speed of light velocity vis-à-vis said classical law's C2. Readers must accept a quantum caveat that classical relativity theory uses time as a symptom of space rate (Delta-space/space as an objective 'change' motional proxy), not as it claims "a geometrical and 'invariant' space identity." Talk about oxymora! Either assumption, though leads to failed classical thought since it is in a most rudimentary sense dialectical. Einstein was a dialectician! Doug - 27Jan2011.

Segment 10 Notes


To be continued...

27Jan2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


26Jan2011 and 10Feb2011

Chapter 3, Segment 9 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Nine: Quantum~Affectation vis-à-vis Classical-Effect[u]ation.

This PBing Nine summarizes PBing Eight in a very Quantum~Political manner:

Affectation as quantum~individual free will is hyper effectation as classical-social control.

Politically this is very interesting since Doug can use our "What is simple?" wMBU™ tool to say rather eloquently,

"Individual free will can explain social control, but social control cann¤t explain individual free will."

From which we may choose to infer, "Classical socialists are genuinely retarded," and "Quantum individuals are exceptional and extraordinary."

This is incredible political power in quantum~pragma of self~other fractal~recursive and stindyanic hypernetwork expression!

Doug's use of 'quantum~pragma' here has two semasiologies (i.e., symbol (semiotic) recursive fractal hermeneutics):

  1. individual free will as quanta, and
  2. individual free will as quantization.

Regarding those two memeos, it is crucial for you to understand them and what they mean Quantum~Politically.

 

PBing Nine: Quantum~Affectation vis-à-vis Classical-Effect[u]ation

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum~Affectation
vis-à-vis
Classical-Effect[u]ation
Classical-Effect[u]ation
vis-à-vis
Quantum~Affectation
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantum~affectation offers a flux simple implicit pluralism of naturally evolving open and stindyanic quantal~interrelationshipings, e.g., scintillation, entanglement, cancellation, interference, mutation, radiation, etc.
  • Quantum~affectation offers incredible potentia across all human epistemology especially in terms of rapid growth of understanding reality and its "flux is crux cosmic energy" quantum~holographic self expression.
  • Quantum~affectation is Jamesian, Pirsigean and Peircean pragmatic: It stands at nowings and quantum~uncertainly (abductively) chooses (selects) better nextings as Pirsigean "Bings prefer~Value preconditionings Aings."
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical [cause-]effect offers a 'state simple' objective 1:1 interaction monism.
  • Classical effect assumes observer doesn't disturb its observable.
  • Classical effect assumes observable doesn't disturb its observer. See Doug's How SOMites View Reality.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Quantum affectation disturbs both observer and observed. See Doug's How MoQites View Reality.
  • Quantum affectation is many to many radically plural and stindyanic ensemble flux ('not state') ephemeral.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Classical effectation's axioms disable natural evolution.
  • Classical effectation's assumptions and presumptions (implicit and explicit; tacit and expressed) prevent humanity's innovation of quantum~artificial~intelligence.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

See Doug's comparisons of quantum~affectation and classical cause-effect.

Bergson spends huge efforts on these issues in both his Time and Free Will and his Creative Evolution.
Full text is available with Doug's extensive commentary at both links.

PBing these core classical notions and quantum memeos is at heart of assessing which is better.

Notice what we are doing here isn't a classical 'objective' analytic method.

What we are doing is accumulating quantum SEP: Subjective Evidentiary Pr¤¤fings.
We are doing simple quantum~accumulation. We are n¤t doing classical Ockhamistic minimalism.

How can Doug be sure that this Quantonics SEP approach is better?

Quantum~hologramings accumulate quantons. Quantons are SEP as stindyanic, open, grail~quantized, evolving interrelationshipings.
All nexi in any holograming are quantons. Hologramings perpetually fledge themselves with accumulating SEPings.
From any quantum~stage's complementarospectivings that is HOW it quantum~holographically learns.

So, you may now grasp, that is what Chapter Three of this internet textbook is pragmatically doing! SEP~learning.

Classical methods of dialectical 'objective' 'proof' are uni-formally bogus. See Doug's Bases of Judgment.

To be continued...

26Jan2011 and 10Feb2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


25-26Jan2011 and 20Feb2011 (Add 'proemially nascent' link.)

Chapter 3, Segment 8 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Eight: Peircean Abduction vis-à-vis Deduction-Induction.

Just a reminder: PBings is an acronym for Doug's quantum version of Poisson~Bracketings.

As always, and whatever topics we wish to omniscuss, we have issues. Here, we have issues that
classical logic forged on a dialectical substrate is bogus whenever we move it into a quantum~comtext.

With Peirce's abductivism we find that much of his 'logic' is dialectical, but when he
innovated abductivism Peirce commenced his own move into memes quantum.
Peirce suffers ill effects of using classical logic to explain his brand of abductivism.
Doug's biggest complaint is that Peirce's abductivism uses classical 'state' to explain itself.
Of course, regular readers and students now intuit, in quantum~reality, there is n¤ classical state.
However, when Doug moves Peirce's abductivism into Doug's innovated quantum~philosophy, Peirce's abductivism
becomes viable since its core feature is, "embrace uncertainty," and gn¤stically, "embrace indetermination."

Given that brief precis our issues of omniscussion may be more simply fathomed as:
quantum~Peircean, classical-Peircean, and classical-deduction-induction.

Doug uses that approach in PBing Eight: Peircean Abduction vis-à-vis Deduction-Induction.

Allow Doug to quote Peirce on his own abductivism.

"But there is no kind of inference which can lend the slightest probability to any such absolute denial of an unusual phenomenon."
That quote is taken from Justus Buchler's Philosophical Writings of Peirce, p. 56, Dover, 1955, original published 1940.

This is an important philosophical phasement (interpreted Quantonically) since it vivifies a few proemially nascent quantum~memes, including:

  • Bergson's "negation is subjective,"
  • Classical logic's (Popperian) falsifiability as a means to proof as quantumly inviable,
  • Renselle's heuristic of macroscopic uncertainty as an Quantonics essential of A New Way of Thinkqing,
  • Peirce's admission of a reality of "unusual phenomena" as suggesting holographic thus stochastic wave quantum~memes of both cognition and recognition, Pribram~Bohm style, begs quantum~holographicity of reality and quantum~mind AKA Doug's quantum~stage, and
  • Significant agreement with Pirsig that "probability is Value," and to some extent Pirsig's, paraphrased, "...to some extent all are partially right..." Ref. ZMM and Lila.
    • Here we can begin to see extreme philosophical Value of our quantum~view of Peircean Abduction (Add quantum~view link. 27Apr2014 - Doug):
      • We mix it with Pirsig's "...all are partially right..." and we have a memeo of quantum~right.
      • What about it's quantum~c¤mplæmænt: "...all are partially wrong..." in terms of Probability as Value as a memeo of quantum~wr¤ng?
      • Quantum~reality shows its simplicity in its intrinsic complementarity as quanton(right,wr¤ng) as positive energyings' interrelationshipings. Pirsig nailed it!
        • Essence here is grasping how quantum~reality is all positive energy, all positive flux, etc.
        • We may choose to fathom how:
          • partially~right issi positive quantum energy which is more probable, and (What Doug means~intends by "hyper." Assessment of >better as Value. Quantum~better.)
          • partially~wr¤ng issi positive quantum~energy which is less probable, and (What Doug means~intends by "hypo." Assessment of <better as 'value.' Quantum~worse.)
          • Now quantum~complementation imposes its intrinsic sophism: sometimes 'better' is worse and 'worse' is better, like "down is in up and up is in down. Exemplar? Often hyperinflation is relatively worse, and hypoinflation is relatively better, but it is always a complementary interrelationshiping which depends upon one's view and comtextings. So quanton(right,wr¤ng) shows us via quantum~inference right nissin wr¤ng, and wr¤ng nissin right, and
          • Quantum~complementary~partiality shows us that quantum~reality is intrinsically relative and how there issi n¤ quantum~nææd for classical-relativity by "intelligent design," any more than there is any quantum~nææd for classical-socialism and socialized religion by "intelligent design:" relativity is built into quantum~reality's proemially~nascent massively ensemble holographic~hologramic 'substrata.'

Quantonics HotMeme™ "quanton(right,wr¤ng) issi both right issi ihn wr¤ng and wr¤ng issi ihn right"™ Quantonics HotMeme

Too, we may now write and say: quanton(Value,'value') issi Value issi ihn 'value' and 'value' issi ihn Value.
Value nissin 'value.'
DQ nissin SQ.

Doug's fav exemplar is, "When quantum~learning to play a violin (and, say, run a business successfully) g¤¤d(bættær) n¤tes nissin bahd(w¤rsæ) n¤tes."
(Just for you Stephen, "...just sayin'." )

We should write and say these quantum~proemial~nascences ("Leefney Ha Sheerey Havayeh Yeleed"),
we should study and learn to gnostically bæliheve, thinkq, and (as due~pragma) them.

As readers may choose to surmise, this affirms our first bullet above (Bergson's Negation is Subjective), and
entirely destroys and decimates dialectic's SOM Wall canonic Either-Or!

Quantum~energy and flux interrelationshipings are always positive, complementary, and EIMA~BAWAM.

Ideal classical negation and nearly all its extreme classical strawman penchants (say "pawn~shaw") are
stoppably, Keynesian-stably, state-ically, status-quoically, and canonically 'value' dead.

Classicists believe, thingk, write, say, and do "'value is all there is..'value' is reality.' We call that, using our straw man, "ESQ."

Quantumists bæliheve, thinkq, write, say, and d¤ quantons(Value,'value').
We follow Pirsig by writing and saying, "Always keep DQ (Value) with your SQ ('value')."
We bæliheve, think, and d¤ that.

MoQ nissin Doug's New Quantum~Philosophy.

Doug - 7Dec2011.

Stochastics (all positive 'energy') imply quantum~waves. Quantum~waves (all positive 'energy') imply stochastics.

Classical state, as explained, by David Hume using objective negation, denies plausibility of stochastics.

Here is another quote of Peirce:

"...in pure abduction, it can never be justifiable to accept the hypothesis otherwise than as an interrogation." Ibid., p. 154.

Hypotheses as interrogatives, at least to Doug, imply macroscopic uncertainty when we assume that no set of
classical interrogatives, when answered enthymemetically, can answer any hypothesis classically-completely and -finally.

Doug's previous phasmenting, assuming quantum~reality as absolute change (evolutionarily always changes, changes all), philosophicallyq begs a HotMeme™:

Quantonics' Philosophicalq HotMeme™ "All hypotheses beg radically~quantum~enthymemetic~interrogatives (rqei)"™ Quantonics' Philosophicalq HotMeme

And its double:

Quantonics' Philosophicalq HotMeme™ "All interrogatives beg radically~quantum~enthymemetic~hypotheses (rqeh)"™ Quantonics' Philosophicalq HotMeme

Evolutionaryq quantum~absolute changeq says that all quantons are always partialq (enthymemeticq) ihn their quantized and scintillating Vayt(livingq)~Bayt(dyingq) beingq~ontologicalq 'trajectories.'

As a student of Quantonics what is self~evident about those two HotMemes™? This:
hypothesis  quanton(interrogation,hypothesis) interrogation
I.e., interrogation issi ihn hypothesis and hypothesis issi ihn interrogation.

Hypothesis and interrogation antinomially quantum~complement one another.

Just like chaos and equilibria. Just like position and momentum. Just like energy and timings. Just like inflation and deflation. Etc.

Doug - 1Apr2014.

 

PBing Eight: Peircean Abduction vis-à-vis Deduction-Induction

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Peircean Abductivism
vis-à-vis
Deduction-Induction
Deduction-Induction
vis-à-vis
Peircean Abductivism
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Abductivism admits pragmatically that quantum macroscopic~uncertainty means we are, at nowing, limited to stochastic "guessing." Instead of deductivelyc-inductivelyc looking at our six (past), we must abductively look at our 12 (futurings) and naturallyq selectq via quantadulation (Jung's Libidoq) whatings happenings nextings. It takes individual responsibility for potential outcomes and requires individualq sentienceq (awarenessq, consciousnessq, and wisdomq) to doq so: i.e., guess. Doug - 30Mar2014.
  • Abductivism admits that quantadulative "guessing" is a quintessene~tial of quantum~holographic~evolution itself based in natural~selection's 'classical heresy' of real quantum~choosings, chancings, and changings.
  • Less obvious, but lending incredible power to Peircean abduction as a representative pragmatic of quantum~uncertainty and indetermination, we see how Peirce's (Purse's) abductivism becomes quite literally a radical quantum~agent of individual free will in Bergson's sense of free will.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Deduction from past's objective historical facts is the pathway to classical truth, determinism, and certainty.
  • Induction on past's objective historical facts is the pathway to classical truth, determinism, and certainty.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Quantum~reality has no classical state, so use of classical dialectic is impossible in quantum~reality.
  • Without 'state' deduction is impossible.
  • Without 'state' induction is impossible.
  • Without 'state' scalar measurement is impossible.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Classical deduction is a bogus component of classical formal-mechanical dialectical logic.
  • Classical induction is a bogus component of classical formal-mechanical dialectical logic.
  • Classical deduction-induction depend upon classical notions of state, static zero momentum frames of reference, objective independence, verifiable A=A first axiom geometric identity, lisr, Aristotelian sillygisms, Maxwellian thermodynamics, and so on...
  • Classical dialectical deduction-induction applied socially in a classical "running on 'rule of law' automatic" and determinate (with classical 'certainty' fully expressed) bivalent decisioning social sense becomes a radical agent of social control over individuals. Please recall quantum~gn¤sis' "[classical social] principle rules something not itself."
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

I thinkq this one is self-evident.

Again, simply, flux can explain state, yet state cann¤t explain flux.

"Flux is simple. State is complex."

Quantum is better. Classical, again, is worse.

Following QuPo, then, quantum~better edifies itself as quantum~individual free will in a coherent quantum~society,
and that memeo is hyper classical social destruction of individual free will as a classical social control mechanism.

See Doug's emerging~evolving QuPo Primer.

Doug - 26Jan2011, and 20Feb2011 (Add 'proemially nascent' link.).

To be continued...

25-26Jan2011 and 20Feb2011 (Add 'proemially nascent' link.)

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


23Jan2011

Chapter 3, Segment 7 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Seven: A Priori vis-à-vis A Posteriori.

Just a reminder: PBings is an acronym for Doug's quantum version of Poisson~Bracketings.

Doug wants to review some problems of philosophy here which help adjust our comtexts to
his approach on quantum memeos of A Priori vis-à-vis classical notions of A Posteriori.

Here are some classical pattern-repetitious philosophical problem areas Doug wants to
address as a kind of quantum~introductory preparation for PBing Seven:

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030

Problem Index

Philosophical Problematics

Classical View as Problematic vav
Quantum View as Exegetic

Doug's Detail Omniscriptions
1 Classical Law of Posentropy A type 1 to 3 problematic: Classical posentropy as 'the [one, monistic] entropy' maps onto three quantum classes of entropy and their mixtures. See entropa.
2 Classical Law of Decoherence A type 1 to 3 problematic: Classical decoherence as 'the physical decoherence' of material reality maps onto three quantum classes of coherence and their mixtures. See cohera.
3 Aristotle's Three Syllogisms A type 3 to 1 problematic: Aristotle's three syllogisms as the logical laws of substantial reality map onto a single quantum phasement of quantum~coquecigrues. See Aristotle. See Doug's bold green text at CTM.
4 Maxwell's Three Laws of Thermodynamics A type 3 to 3+ problematic: Maxwell's three laws of thermodynamics of substantial reality map onto a multiplicity of quantum phasementings of quantum~thermodynamics. See C. P. Snow.
5 Classical Law of Probability A type 1 to 3 problematic: Classical probability as 'the statistical' statement of all classical stochastics maps onto three quantum~stochastic phasementings of quantum~stochastics. From classical static and immutable past to quantum stindyanic and evolving pastings, nowings, and futurings. See PNFings and PPLings. See Doug's QELR of probability.
6 Classical Law of Unitemporality A type 1 monism to 3 pluralisms problematic: Classical unitime as a master 'light cone' flow through physical actuality (which classicists refer 'reality') maps onto three quantum~stochastic phasementings of massively multiplicate~plural~heterogeneous quantum~temporal stochastics. See Doug's QELR of time.
7 Classical Law of a 3D1T Monism A type 1 monism to many pluralisms problematic: Classical state-ic space-time monism maps onto many quantum phasementings of many stindyanic spacings~timings' quantum~evolutionings. See Doug's QELR of law, and monism.
8 Classical Law of Dialectical Bivalence A type 2 dualism to many pluralisms problematic: Classical state-ic either-or dialectical immutable bivalence maps onto stindyanic quantum~both~all~while~and~many everywhere EIMA evolving omnivalencings. See Doug's coining of omnivalence.

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030

That list is partial. There are many more problematics to list there. Doug's intent is to show you that these problematics exist and they show some valuable and expository similarities.

Another of Doug's intentions appears in that list. It shows Problem Index 5 as relevant this Poisson~Bracketing Seven's problematic as it appears classically.

To oversimplify in an introductory manner. Classical a posteriori 'probability' theory is monistic, a monism.
"Doug, how many ways does classical probability theory manifest its monism?"

Its basis is past as a monistic unit history: to say it in a hylic-vulgate manner, "There is only one history."
Too, its assessment is a stoppable scalar: scalarbation as a classical monism.
It assumes probability isn't recursive on constituent probabilities. Here is a graphic to show Doug's semantic:

Here is another to show more quantumesque omnistributionings:

So classical probability is essentially about one past history over some stretch of classically monistic and continuous unitime.
If we assume that, then probability is classical stochastics on a unitemporal past.

Quantum reality isn't classical. Doug's brand of quantum~reality treats pastings. as massively heterogeneous
quantized (n¤n continuous) temporalities and their massively heterogeneous stochastics.

Now, rinse and repeat that phasementing for nowings and futurings. Graphically, given Doug's artistic license, it looks something like this:

That graphic illustrates well many heterogeneities of quantum PNFings and PPLings.

 

PBing Seven: A Priori vis-à-vis A Posteriori

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  A Priori
vis-à-vis
A Posteriori
A Posteriori
vis-à-vis
A Priori
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantum a priori admits quantum~reality is an affective reality while embracing macroscopic quantum~uncertainty.
  • Quantum a priori stands at nowings and looks to futurings with optimistic expectationings.
  • Quantum a priori is Peircean abductive.
  • Quantum a priori is Peircean-Jamesian pragmatic.
  • Quantum a priori is heterogeneous in all omnitorables.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical a posteriori assesses possibility of a determinate future as a ideal scalar metric of classical probability.
  • Reality is ideally stoppable, and to assume it is quantumly unstoppable is to commit a grave quantum error of thought. This demonstrates logically 'the' pure absurdity of quantum~thinking.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Quantum a priori is classically uncertain.
  • Quantum a priori cannot stop reality to collect scalar data in order to calculate classical probability.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Classical a posteriori claims classical reality is an effective reality, and mandates canonically cause-effect determinism.
  • Classical a posteriori stands at one monistic and stopped 'now' and claims one determinate scalar 'past' determines future's one determinate scalar future.
  • Classical a posteriori is mechanically, formally deductive and inductive on past scalar metrics.
  • Classical a posteriori is Newtonian determinate.
  • Classical a posteriori is homogeneous and monistic in all historic scalar data.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

Doug leaves it to you to draw your own bottom line on this one.
(No, Doug is n¤t writing about skid marks.)

While doing so, keep repeating to self, self "I haf' fun."

To be continued...

23Jan2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


20-23Jan2011

Chapter 3, Segment 6 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Six: Quantum~Awareness vis-à-vis Classical Mechanical Thought.

Just a reminder: PBings is an acronym for Doug's quantum version of Poisson~Bracketings.

Doug quantumly views quantum~awarenessings as quantized interrelationshipings among energy~wellings (ensembles of quantons) in quantum~hologramings.

Genericity of that phasementing begs subtler memes and memeos of proemial nascenceNote 1 of quantum~awarenessings at all scales of reality,
both cowithin quantum~actuality (flux) and quantum~nonactuality (isoflux) at all scales of quantum~flux' quantons(isoflux,flux) spectra.

Quantum~reality's music of flux awarenessings being born.

"Leefney ha sheerey havayeh yeleed."

Doug - 21Jan2011.

We have to keep on our quantum~stagings that flux as shown in quantons(isoflux,flux) has a spectrum vastly exceeding
a classical range from nearly 'zero' flux up to Planck's rate of about 1043 alternations per unit reference.
When Doug writes "flux spectra" that is said classical interpretation he is referring.
Real quantum~flux actualizes as an unlimited variety of classical notions which need quantum~remediation.
Some examples include: spherical~flux, cycloidal flux, spiral flux (AKA vortices), etc.
All of these may be viewed as classically~closed, and much better, quantumly~open.
Quantization opens and pluralizes all classical notions of flux. As an example:


Doug - 21,23Jan2011.

Now what is totally mind-boggling is that isoflux is incredibly more vast than flux! And it hides! Bohm and Weber call it "silence."
This is why Hilbert 'space' is unlimited both omnimensionally and energetically.
We, currently, have 'no' classically 'limited' way to describe isoflux AKA quantum~vacuum~flux (QVF).
A major problem in attempting an omniscription of isoflux is absolute flux' antithesis of every notion 'dialectical.'
Quintessentially, there are 'no' dialectical words to 'describe' Iht. Compare Autiot.
Any attempts to invent those words, based in dialectic, creates invalid 'state mental' and 'funda mental' words.
See Doug's Quantum English Language Problematics.
Distilled, dichons cann¤t explain flux, let alone explain quantons.

You may, then, choose to view quantum~awarenessings as a kind of nascent pre~consciousness which resides in high rate fluxings (e.g., Aleph), and
which emerges as consciousness in much lower rate fluxings (e.g., Tav) where sentience, as we know it, appears to reside. Avoid potential confusion: compare Tayt.
See Aleph~Tav reality loop. See Aleph~Tav as a way of tapping into reserve energy.

Again, distilled, Doug's proemially nascent hiding of pre~consciousness, stated colloquially, "Hides in flux' book case:"

Yet said book case affects every aspect of quantum~reality's inherent awareness and pre~consciousness sentience of all quantum~beings.
Doug - 21Jan2011.

After reading those last five or so paragraphs...Does Doug need to ask this?
"Is it apparent to you when we compare quantum~awareness to classical mechanical thought,
that quantum is closer what we mean by empiricism and mechanical thought is — by human design — dialectically rational?"
Awareness mediated by flux tends toward uncertainty, qualitative perception, subjective assessment, etc. Quantum empiritheory.
Mechanical thought mediated by dialectical state designs determinism, quantitative conception, objective measurement, etc. Formal rationality.

 

PBing Six: Quantum Awareness vis-à-vis Classical Mechanical Thought

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum~Awareness
vis-à-vis
Classical Mechanical Thought
Classical Mechanical Thought
vis-à-vis
Quantum~Awareness
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantum~awareness is a thematic complement of many memes:
    • quantum~uncertainty educing choosings, chancings, and changings as "thought selection,"
    • quantum~open cyclicity of ...creation, discreation, creation, discreation... as "thought evolution,"
    • EIMA coobsfection, i.e., "thinkqing as energy~wellings holographically interrelating energy~wellings as pattern comparison adaptation," and
    • quantum~flux per intera:
      • full spectra trichotomies and quantum~holographic thought mixturings of:
        • entropa
          • posentropa
          • integerentropa
          • negentropa
        • cohera (issues of quantum~adiabaticity emerge here; major ramifications for quantum~awarenessings; essence of Pirsig's mind~body coinsidence without classical contradiction; essence of quantum~holographicity of EIMA fermions and bosons; quantum~scintillation, QED and QCD are key here)
          • decohera (ensembles are posentropic; atomic constitua are adiabatic)
          • cohera (adiabatic; no energy loss; awareness as quantum~efficiency)
          • isocohera (isoadiabatic; energy gain; unlimited mediation of awarenessings)
        • stochasta
          • pastings as a posteriorai
          • nowings as a iamai
          • futurings as a futuriorai
      • quantum~thought qua enablers:
        • quantization
        • scintilla
        • evolution
        • transmutation
        • entanglement
        • interference
        • affectation - with and due radical holographic~hologramic~holograilic quantum~comtext sensitivity - Doug - 23Jan2012
        • selection
      • diffraction
      • complementation
      • phasic~cancellation
      • fractal network recursion
      • holocognition (See Doug on What is Wrong with Probability as Value?)
      • holorecognition
      • holographic full spectrum per intera coherence and correlation
      • omniscrimination via fact (inertia) vav Value (spontaneity) quantal assessmentings
      • supers (luminality, conductivity, cooling, position,
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical mechanical thought has almost unlimited power to disable quantum~awareness and ~thought.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Quantum~awareness and ~thought simply does not work in classical reality's SOM Box mythos.
  • Quantum~awareness and ~thought disables many classically objective 'crown jewels:' identity, negation, contradiction, proof, analyticity, dialectic, state, stoppability, lisr, GUTs, ToEs, distributivity, factorability, commutation, scalar measurement, scalar perpetuity AKA constants, classical-phase as scalar vav quantum~phase as a wave~function, etc.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • All classical dialectical mechanical thing-king is bogus in quantum~reality's emersos.
  • Classical mechanical thought offers only continuous, linear, and closed cyclic thing-king. Dichons(o, o) vav quantons(~,¤).
  • Classical mechanical thought objectively captures stopped data on mechanical and state-ic know ledges.
  • Classical mechanical thought is only J. C. Maxwellian posentropic and that entropy only has a single gradient.
  • Classical mechanical thought disables quantum~flux, ~quantization, ~pluralism, adaptive selection, choice, etc.
  • Classical mechanical thought adheres objective: stability, independence, negation, etc.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
(16Nov2011 rev - Add 'scintilla' link to quantization~scintilla~evolution tricodon in PBing 6 table.)
 

This one is autsimilar PBing Four.

It really comes down to your individual view point and what you believe.

If you are a dialectician, you will like thing-king.

If you are a quantumist, you will like thinkqing.

However, quantum is hyper dialectic!

Why?

Quantonics HotMeme™ "As Keynesianism leads to fiat 'money,' so dialectism leads to fiat 'intellect.'" Quantonics HotMeme

However, when we compete these systems of thought on our world's quantum~stage, dialecticians are borne to lose.


Segment 6 Notes

Note 1: Literally Doug's proemial nascence means "before the song being born." Here Doug views quantum~awareness as evolutionary flux which is easy to hermeneut as music and song of quantum~nature's perpetual emerscence. In Hebrew Autiot it is (for English readers, left to right reversed) Lammed~Phay~Noun~Yod (before pronounced 'leefney') Ha (the pronounced 'ha') Sheen~Yod~Raysh (quantum~diffuse song pronounced poetically 'sheerey') Hay~Vav~Vav~Yod~Hay (being pronounced 'havayeh') Yod~Lammed~Yod~Dallet (born pronounced 'yeleed'). Again, left to right reversed, "Leefney ha sheerey havayeh yeleed." One Autiot hermeneutic for Doug's proemial nascence. For me that is beautiful, incredible, awesome. And if we know Autiot's energies it becomes extraordinarily quantum~real. I think Heraclitus might offer, "A genuine cosmic~energy accounting." Doug - 21Jan2011.

Segment 6 Notes


To be continued...

20-23Jan2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


19,20Jan2011

Chapter 3, Segment 5 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Five: Quantum~Uncertainty AKA "Indetermination" vis-à-vis Determination.

As waveMBU™ critical quantum success enablers Bergson's memes of simplicity help us immensely here.

If Bergson said (he did write), "Spontaneity is simple, and inertia is complex," paraphrased, then Doug can immediately issue a quantum meliorative here:

Quantum~uncertainty is simple and classical-determination is complex.

"Why? and How? Doug?"

Dirac offers us a view of "Why?" He wrote, paraphrased, "There is no classical determinism (causation) without a presumption of classically ideal and absolute 'state.' (ideal absence of disturbances)"

Here is his actual statement from his fourth edition, 1958, Principles of Quantum Mechanics, p. 4,
"...we must revise our ideas of causality [determination]. Causality [determination] applies only to a system which is left undisturbed."
Doug's brackets.

In Doug's brief review of Dirac's text in Doug's Recommended Reading web page, Doug wrote,
"Doug's interpretation of what Dirac just said is that there is n¤ classical causality in quantum reality.
Why? Quantum absolute semper flux changes all and always changes. Thus n¤ actual system is ever left "undisturbed."
And, indeed, that is just what we observe in our own Millennium III notions of reality. Reality offers us n¤ notions of classical 'zer¤ momentum.'
N¤ classical 'reference frame' has 'zer¤ momentum,' n¤r may it have/acquire by any means 'zer¤ momentum.'"

As we can see classical causality and classical determination are almost synonyms of one another: causality begs determinism and determinism begs causality.
Henri Louis Bergson, in his life opus, has demonstrated unambiguously (at least for Doug) that both causality and determinism are simply classical illusions and self delusions.

 

PBing Five: Quantum Uncertainty AKA "Indetermination" vis-à-vis Determination

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum Uncertainty AKA Quantum Indetermination
vis-à-vis
Classical Determination
Classical Determination
vis-à-vis
Quantum Uncertainty AKA Quantum Indetermination
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Quantization of reality pluralizes it into ensembles of packet energy whose perpetually evolving holographic interrelationshipings are intrinsically stochastic (fluxic, wavic, etc.) and thus implicitly uncertain.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical determinism permits classical thought to predict future events ideally. For example, "Due global warming, Earth's temperature, in exactly 100 years, will be exactly six degrees Centigrade higher than it is now."
  • Ideal classical determination is necessary for classicists to be able to control nature and reality.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • An uncertain reality is indeterminate.
  • An uncertain reality is not predicable.
  • An uncertain reality is not predictable, except ensemble stochastically.
  • Quantum~uncertainty invalidates classical reality's dialectical assumptions and presumptions AKA canon 'law.'
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Classical thought based in dialectic and ideal mathematical and objective predication is simply retarded.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

Doug's way of interpreting PBing Five is, again, simple. While classicists seek determination in all issues of reality,
quantumists fathom real quantum~uncertainty ubiquitously and macroscopically in all reality.

"So Doug, what contributes to quantum~uncertainty in quantum~reality?
What are some Hows of quantum~uncertainty, quantum~indetermination?"

  • Absolute flux' absolute change is quantum~reality's big How,
    • Up to Planck rate clock and its subharmonics,
    • This is source and agency of Quantum~Reality itself and QR's real quantum~indetermination,
    • Observe please that while QR change is absolute QR uncertainty is stochastic, since quantum~flux is intrinsically stochastic,
    • So all QR flux is probable (pastings), plausible (nowings), and likely (futurings) quantum~stochastically which is why you see Doug writing "Change is absolute, but quantum~uncertainty isn't absolute since it is quantum~flux~stochastic," (This bullet is crucial to one's understanding of quantum~reality. Doug - 20Jan2011.)
    • This absolute change is what Doug means by "Value," and we represent it, for want of a better and n¤n mechanical way, using stochastics. Only one four millennium old language, other than Doug's Quantonics, represents this cosmic quantum~flux energy of change as Value: Qabala's Autiot as described by Carlo Suares.
  • QR Quantization borne of Planck clocks' perpetual tickings,
  • QR Pluralism of quanta borne of quantization,
  • QR Evolution borne of pluralism's ensemble quantum~holographic per intera absolute changings,
  • Quantum flux' everywhere~included~middlings~associativityings (EIMA) quantum~complementarity of all quantonic fluxings' interrelationshipings,
  • Quantum~correlative (and superluminal) quantum~nonlocality
    • Borne of quantum~fluxings' partial~presence and partial~absence of enthymemetic quantum~entanglement,
  • Everywhere quantum~partiality of enthymemetic quantum~coquecigrues,
  • etc.

Those bullet list items go a long way toward assisting one to understand "some Hows" of quantum~indetermination.

For Doug, this is potent déjà vu! Doug last felt this way when he summarized
his 2003-2004 Feuilleton Chautauqua with his tabular Bases of Judgment.
Doug senses a similar evolutionary unfolding happening here in Chapter Three of FEP Economic [Vv]alue.

Doug - 20Jan2011.

Is power of PBings as an instrument of waveMBU™ becoming more apparent to you now?

Consider that Doug's waveMBU™ box of quantum~instruments burgeons with more... and they all kick classical ass!

Keynesians and their economic maths depend explicitly on 'determinism' in order to be able to maintain Hyman P. Minskyan 'stability.'

As you can fathom now, given PBing Five, Keynesians are extinct, they are among "The Walking Dead."
(From any classical 'religious' conspective, Keynesians are "Doing Satan's work.")

To be continued...

19,20Jan2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


16Jan2011

Chapter 3, Segment 4 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Four: Quantum Consciousness vis-à-vis Classical Mind.

Just so we can keep our bearings, please review our Chautauqua plateaux' original list of Talking Point Comparatives.

In this PBing Doug is comparing his memeo of A Holographic Quantum Stage (better) to a mechanical computer (David Deutschean) model of classical mind.

 

PBing Four: Quantum Consciousness vis-à-vis Classical Mind

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum Consciousness
vis-à-vis
Classical Mind
Classical Mind
vis-à-vis
Quantum Consciousness
Better
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classical Mind is rational. It retains memories in ideal, concrete state. Each memory has its own determinate locus.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Quantum Mind and Consciousness are irrational, equivocal and perverse. All memories change and evolve uncertainly, therefore they are 'not' 'true' and have 'no' means of representing classically stable 'absolute immutable and durational truth.'
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Mind as a David Deutsch "classical computer" is a SOM Box full of dialectical walls.
  • Classical mind mechanically brutalizes its thought objects by viciously banging them into unlimited dialectical walls. We see here Mae-wan Ho's classical Cuisinart-centrifuge analytic violence, laid bare for all to inspect.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

We shall pursue issues, especially quantum~empiricism hyper classical rationalism, emerging here
further under our PBing 6 titled Quantum Awareness vis-à-vis Mechanical Thought.
As a tease, living quantum~empiricism is much more energetic and Jamesian~Peircean pragmatic
than Deutsch, et al., classical rationalism's dead and deadly concrete stability and immutable state.
Again, "What is Simple? What is Complex? Why? Explain."

To be continued...

16Jan2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


15Jan2011

Chapter 3, Segment 3 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Three: Absolute Change vis-à-vis Absolute State.

[Note that Doug innovatively broaches AI implementation strategy here and borrows from Qabala's Autiot
by commencing quantum~memeos of attaching quantum~energies to QELRed words.
This is a Quantonics Breakthrough! Doug - 15Jan2011.]

Here, we have an opportunity to see what Doug means, what Doug intends, by quantum~autsimilarity.
PBing Three is autsimilar PBing Two! Doug could use bullet items from PBing Two here.

"So Doug, what is omniffering twixt PBing Three and PBing Two?"

Recall our need to use hyper and hypo to express comtextual hierarchy? We need do that here.

Absolute change is a symptom of Planck clockings' perpetuity(ings).
So absolute change is hypo (under, below) Planck clockings, and vice versa.
That is, Planck clockings are hyper (above, higher energy than) absolute change.
If you need an analogy, a good one is "gravity is hyper acceleration, since acceleration is a symptom of gravity."

Even more linguistic energy expresses itself when we recognize absolute change is hyper absolute state! Why?
Absolute change implies potentia for evolution. Absolute state denies evolution canonically. So too, then, evolution is hyper state.

"So Doug, why are we doing this PBing?" We don't really need to, other than to show you how linguistically,
when we do our due diligence on it separately, PBing Three will never be 'classically identical' to its autsimilar PBing Two.

A very good way to omniscribe this involves comparison of QELRed words with Autiot words.
We need to thinkq of QELRed words as quantum~wave~functions.
When we do that, omniffering words have omniffering energies in omniffering quantum~comtexts.
That should be obvious since Doug said (wrote), "Planck clockings," as a memeo, "is hyper absolute change."
That is one huge quantum nexus, folks! Doug is also saying Planck~clockings' linguistic
wave function has greater energy than 'absolute change's' linguistic quantum~wave~function.

"Doug, that seems like too much technical detail!" Agree, and that is why Doug used hyper and hypo to simplify for you.
However, that technical detail is crucial to a much larger issue of enormous benefit to humankind: Artificial Intelligence.
Simply, attaching wave~functions and energies to QELRed words offers a fact to Value bridge into potential solutions for 'The AI Problem!.'
That is an enormous breakthrough in AI quantology, folks!
And you have seen it emerge, right here, in a seemingly innocuous internet text book on FEP [Vv]alue.

So, even if it is a nearly (apparently) redundant act, let's go ahead and do our due on Absolute Change vav Absolute State.

 

PBing Three: Absolute Change vis-à-vis Absolute State

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Absolute Change
vis-à-vis
Absolute State
Absolute State
vis-à-vis
Absolute Change
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Change is fluxic, i.e., absolute change is flux and flux is spawn of Planck clockings.
  • Evolution is spawn of absolute change's intrinsic parthenofluxis. (Compare parthenogenesis.)
  • Parthenofluxis enables creatio ex nihilo aperio, i.e., quantum~evolutionary~creation from nothing laid bare. Quantum~evolutionary~creation of actuality from nonactuality laid bare. In Quantonics script, reality issi quanton(nonactuality,actuality) issi quanton(isoflux,flux) borne of absolute change as spawn of perpetual Planck clockings.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Change is 'state' ic.
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Absolute change cannot (ideal Platonic-formal classical negation here) be analyzed since analysis requires stoppability to accomplish scalar (stopped) measurement. See measure.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • There is, classically, 'no change' except formal, mechanical, analytic, objective 'state-event' motion and inertial~motional Newtonian state.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

See, if we hadn't done our due, (mal)assuming classically that autsimilarity might be similar classical 'identity,' we would have missed Doug's AI~enabling breakthrough!

Do your quantum~recapitulative due diligence trudge, now, and review Doug's very recent What is Simple? What is Complex? opus.

To be continued...

15Jan2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


14-15,19Jan2011

Chapter 3, Segment 2 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing Two: Planck's Clock vis-à-vis Immutability.

Our previous PBing (Poisson~Bracketing) allowed us, as quantum~omnicision makers to assess amelioratively
quantum~pluralisms' abundant and ubiquitous Value as hyper classical monism's quasi absent 'value.'
Gn¤stics said it more concisely, "Monism is deceit."

This PBing should offer omnicision makers autsimilar resultings.

 

PBing Two: Planck's Clock vis-à-vis Immutability

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Planck's Clock
vis-à-vis
Immutability
Immutability
vis-à-vis
Planck's Clock
Better
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Planck's clock represents a quantum~memeo of absolute heterotemporal change:
    • Consistently: always changes, and
    • Completely: changes all. (Note intrinsic quantum~pluralisms of ~monisms.)
  • Planck's clock imposes a quantum~meme of unstoppability.
  • Planck's clock manifests its quantum~pluralism as ubiquitous multiversal clockings and subharmonics of all quantum~fluxing quantons.
  • Planck's clock pluralistically quantizes all quantum~reality, always.
    • Intrinsic spontaneity of quanta and self~other fractal~recursive awareness of quantal flux ensembles enables packets of flux to scintillate choice, chance, and change: essence of quantum~comsciousness; essence of quantum~ontology. (Doug - 19Jan2011)
    • Quantization thus elicits coobsfective and transmutative self~other~volitional and vicissitudinal evolution of all quantum~reality.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Classicism's immutability is an imperative for ideal and formal Platonic-Aristotelian 'state' which mandates absence of any change, except linear and continuous monotemporal motion, let alone absolute quantum~change.
  • Immutability enables classical scalarbation of physical 'measurables.' Without immutability classical measurables are no longer scalar 'quantities.'
Worse
  • (From a classical conspective:)
  • Planck's clock crucifies all classical thought, reason, and judgment based in dialectic and dialectic's axiom of immutability. (Bergson refers classical "motional state immutability," paraphrased, "motion (movement) of immobilities.")
  • Students of Quantonics must remind selves that 'science's' 'physical measurables,' mass, length and time, to this CeodE 2011, remain classically, immutably 'undefined.' Doug - 14Jan2011.
  • (From a quantum complementarospective:)
  • Immutability represents a classical notion of absolute monotemporal state:
    • Consistently always states the truth, and
    • Completely: states all truths.
  • Classical immutability axiomatizes notions of "zero momentum," "reference frames," "stoppability," "sample and hold," "ideal mechanical analyticity of material objective form," "event as 'change' of 'state,'" etc.
  • Classical immutability mandates one clock y=f(t) determining all change as monotemporal linear motion.
  • Classical immutability permits only motion, state, and event as atemporal 'state change,' as tools of dialectical reason.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
(19Jan2011 rev - Doug adds 'scintillate' and 'essence' links. Doug adds 'quantum~ontology' better.)
 

Omnicision makers (not 'classical decision' makers) can use our PBings to actually do waveMBU™.

If you need to review Doug's original list of Talking Points at this juncture, see his original plateaux' Quantum vav Classical Talking Points.

To be continued...

14-15,19Jan2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


13Jan2011

Chapter 3, Segment 1 - Value vis-à-vis value, A Quantonics Chautauqua in Quantum~Economics

PBing One: Quantum Pluralisms of Monisms vis-à-vis Classical Monism.

This entire Chapter Three of Doug's Internet Text Book on Economic [Vv]alue is dedicated to doing Poisson~Bracketings' assessments of his Talking Points (TPings) from Chapter Two.

Doug is going to do PBings until you can due~diligently~do them in your sleep.

So, prior our extensive efforts here, please take timings to carefully review Doug's TPings' Classical vav Quantum~Comparisons assumptions.

Doug's first comparative Talking Point is: quantum pluralisms of monisms vis-à-vis classical monism.
We need a two by two 'table' to do our most rudimentary PB on this TPings' vis-à-vis(s):

 

PBing One: Quantum Pluralisms of Monisms vis-à-vis Classical Monism

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 
  Quantum Pluralisms of Monisms
vis-à-vis
Classical Monism
Classical Monism
vis-à-vis
Quantum Pluralisms of Monisms
Better
  • Quantum~reality admits, empirically~pragmatizes and ~desnouers its own quantum~islandicity.
  • Quantumists agree with quantum~reality.
  • Quantumism admits:
    • middle~inclusion,
    • flux and its spontaneity,
      • as only positive with cancellation as its classical 'negation' proxy
    • quantization and packetization of hologramings' energy~wellings,
  • Quantum~reality is unambiguously alive.
  • Quantum~reality quantizes itself as packets of flux. This is intrinsic quantum~pluralisms of monisms with all monisms as fractally pluralisms of monisms. That is, packets of flux are themselves pluralisms of many (ensemble) fluxings.
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
  • As long as classicists adhere their beliefs in monism and canonic dogma of that monism, their mythos appears viable and appears valid.
Worse
  • Belief in quantum~thinkqing requires classicists to reject both their own belief system, and their own monistic mythos.
  • Classical monism self-declares its own global monism and universality.
  • Classical monism axiomatizes state (inertia, static reference frames, zero momentum, stoppability, analytic thought, etc.).
  • Classical monism axiomatizes objective independence.
  • Classical monism is unambiguously (according its own mythos) dead. Simply, "state is dead."
  • etc. (can be extended almost limitlessly)
 

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2030
 

Students please observe Doug's uses of both pink and blue as his PBing's matte with black corners.
Fathom quanton(pink,blue) as hermaphroditic quanton(female,male). Now stretch your quantum~stage!
Weigh, holographically, quanton(uncertainty,certainty), quanton(wave,particle), quanton(flux,state),
quanton(spontaneity,inertia), and more symbolically quanton(~,o) and thence quanton(~,¤)!

Neat, eh?

Those quantons exemplify quantum~islandic~coherent~complementation AKA PBings!!
That should be enough epiphany for one day. Doug - 13Jan2011.

Ah, but, there is more, much-much more...

Some Chautauqua, eh?

To be continued...

13Jan2011

Doug.

Chapter Three Index


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

Doug Renselle
Quantonics, Inc.
Suite 18 #368 1950 East Greyhound Pass
Carmel, INdiana 46033-7730
USA
1-317-THOUGHT

©Quantonics, Inc., 2011-2030 — Rev. 10Feb2016 PDR — Created 21Feb2011  PDR
(12-16,19-20Jan2011 rev - Set up to start Chapter Three. Do PBing One. Do PBing Two. Add links to PBing Two. Do PBing Three. Do PBing 4. Update PBing 2. Update PBing 5. Add PBing 6.)
(21-23,25-28,30-31Jan2011 rev - Update PBing 6. Add PBing 7. Add PBing 8. Update PBing 8. Add PBing 9. Add PBing 10. Add PBing 11. Update PBing 11. Interim finish to publish PBing 11.)
(1-6,8-10Feb2011 rev - Add PBings 12 and 13. Add 'abductive' link to PBing 13. Prematurely add Seg 18 as Chapter Three Epilogue. Add Quantum Values anchor. Seg 15. PBing 15.)
(10,12-13,15Feb2011 rev - Add 'Radiation Tells Proemial Nascence' radiation link to PBing 9. Seg 16. PBing 16. Update PBing 16 by adding a Renselle reference link to Value hyper value in Ch2.)
(18,20-21Feb2011 rev - Seg 17, and finish Ch3. Add 'Note 1' Proemially Nascent link under Seg 8 of Ch3. Update PBing 11.)
(22Feb2011 rev - Publish Ch3.)
(23Feb2011 rev - Repair missing double quote and single quote marks under PBings 2 and 7, classical worse.)
(1,4Mar2011 rev - Add PBing 17 trademark to codon "Drones Without Choice."™ Add 'Arch 7' anchor. Add 'Nine Ancient Archetypes' anchor to PBing 16 of Value vav 'value.')
(9-10,20-21May2011 rev - Add 'Strategic Heuristic' to Chapter 3 Epilogue. Revise Chapter 3 Epilogue's QVH Table.)
(3,9Jun2011 rev - Repair a typo. Reset all legacy markups. Make page current. Repair typos. Fix many bad links. Add new links.)
(10,22,27Jun2011 rev - Update Seg 14 Thinkqing Values vav Thingking 'values' Table, new footnote. Add Proemial Nascence anchor to Segment 6. Add Ch. 1 & 2 links near page top.)
(23-24Oct2011 rev - Repair PBing 11 typo. Attempt to repair 'autonome' subscripts in PBing 16.)
(16Nov2011 rev - Update PBing 6 table.)
(7Dec2011 rev - Update Segment 8 with 'All Are Partially Right and Wrong.')
(23Jan2012 rev - Update Peircean Abductivism PB. Reset legacy markups.)
(24Feb2012 rev - Repair misspelling of Fekete's name.)
(25Aug2012 rev - Update PBing 17 to reflect recent Quantonics advances in quantum~evolution's memeos of chaos and equilibria re [Vv]alue.)
(3,11Oct2012 rev - Add 'Jacobs Ladder Modal' graphic link to Stairways of Evidence web page anchor 'Jacob's Möbius.' Add 'QTM Real~Value' QELR of Value link under Seg 17.)
(22Feb2013 rev - Reset legacy markups. Make page current.)
(13Sep2013 rev - Add 'consciousness' links to What Is Consciousness?')
(30Mar2014 rev - Add anchor to PBing 8 better and worse antinomial comparatives. Update PBing 8 comparison table.)
(1,27Apr2014 rev - Add rqei and rqeh under PBing 8. Add 'quantum~view' link to 3D Fuzzon April, 2014 updates.)
(18Oct2014 rev - Move 'Nine Ancient Archetypes' anchor several lines higher in text. Make page current.)
(3Dec2014 rev - Reset legacy markups.)
(11Mar2015 rev - Add 'Ancient Archetypes' anchor closer to 'Ancient Archetypes' table.)
(23Sep2015 rev - Add 'Peirce Hypothesis Interrogative' anchor under segment eight.)
(10Feb2016 rev - Add link to 'Genetic Defect in Human Reason' under Segment 15.)


Arches