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

— The Quantonics Society News for 2006 - April —
TQS News Archive of Prior Years' News

This is our April, 2006 editorial

Go directly to 2006 April News

Due extreme effort required for our critique of FT-E&Y's first part of their four part series on Mastering Uncertainty, we have no editorial opinions to offer for April, 2006 issue of TQS News. Doug.

2006 TQS News
December, 2005 through November, 2006



You are here:

Topics: Failure of
Google in China,
What is Wrong with Democracy,
Why Digital is Dead,
Gnosticism vis-à-vis Pirsig & Bergson
Scott C. Smith,
IBM's High GHz PPCs,
Dennett's BtS,
Doug Critiques Sull's
'Difficult Decisions
for an
Uncertain World'
Doug on novel
Millennium III
Business Thinking
What will happen in
Howard's Movie
The Da Vinci Code...
Doug's view of
'Opus Dei'...
Free energy! High Speed Internet,
DMD's Quantum Simplicity,
Duggeritas™, &
Interim energy,
N-somy tells,
FPGA patents
running out,
MRSA staph,
Classical Sentences, vav
Quantum Sentences
Searching Quantonics,
Quantonics Top 20 Pages,
Why Static Truth is Irrelevant
MacBookPro C2D,
Didactism & autodidactism,
Doug's iPod video

April, 2006 News

On ... Financial Times and Ernst & Young's first part of their four part series on 'Mastering (Learning to Manage) Uncertainty'...

We want to dedicate this issue of The Quantonics Society News to a study of a 17Mar2006 Financial Times insert titled 'Mastering Uncertainty.' This FT insert is sponsored by Ernst & Young. Neither FT nor E&Y are affiliated in any way with Quantonics and vice versa.

This news uses rtf fonts. Our symbol for a quantized 'o' is rtf ¤ which in many European countries looks like a Euro currency symbol. We have not used any Euro symbols in this news, and replaced FT's Euro symbol with 'Euro.' Our quantized 'o' should appear in your browser as similar a sailing vessel's helm wheel with at least four 'spikes' protruding outwardly from its rim, like this: '' We also use wingdings font characters, and MT-Extra font for h-bar, . You will need these fonts and rtf capabilities for our intended semiotics' symbolisms.

Thunderbird's email composer allows you to insert HTML. Try an insert there and type ¤ where you want a quantum 'o.' E.g., say you type prcess. Put your cursor twixt r and c, then select Insert HTML from your Thunderbird [Edit?] menu. Type ¤ in HTML insert dialog box and hit enter or done. Voila! If you see a Euro currency symbol, that is nt what we need here... Ugh! Rather, prcess. Select that character and try different sizes of characters to see if what appears varies... E.g., in PageMill -2,-1, and zero sizes give what we want, but 1, 2, 3, and 4 show Euro dollar sign. Interesting, eh? Upper-lower case?

Our study's intent is to acknowledge that global businesses are recognizing uncertainty big time, now. They have to. It is part of what we have been calling a quantum tsunami of change for everyone on earth.

This insert in 17Mar2006 issue of FT is first of four weekly parts. Part I's outline looks like this:

Part I: Seeking Shelter from the Storm -

Article Part I Article Titles Doug's comments on articles' contents. Doug's A-F Score of each article
1. Introduction - Difficult Decisions for an Uncertain World - By Donald Sull, associate professor of management at London Business School

We like this article so well that we are doing a detail, paragraph-by-paragraph, quantum~critique of it below.

Sull's mind is terrific in our view. As you will see, again in our view, we can offer Sull some language remediation, and we show how and what to do to enhance that process.

Most classical English language is certain, it finds its bases in notions of determinism and certainty founded on ancient Greek dialectic.

2. The Tall Order of Taming Change - By Eamonn Kelly, CEO of Global Business Network This paper is just incredibly good until Kelly offers his six concepts. To us, he reverts, in his six concepts, to old, tried (i.e., tired) and 'certain' classical notions. As an example, Kelly should use meme in place of concept. Meme is process (wave~change). Concept is 'state' (concrete). Quantum~memetic~pr¤cess is uncertainty (probability). Concept is certainty (scalarbation). C
3. Avoiding Unrest in a Volatile Environment - By Ethann B. Kapstein, Paul Debrule professor of sustainable development at Insead

We dislike this title's use of avoidance. We like Michael Polanyi's "plunging reorientationings" better.

To succeed, we must embrace quantum~uncertainty and put it to work for us.

What is it that we, most of us anyway, like about jazz music? Certainty? Uncertainty? Are jazz musicians avoiding or embracing quantum uncertainty? How? Why?

It feels to us that "Avoiding Unrest" begs what we call "running on automatic," and what Dennett calls "decision avoidance." Those classical notions allow inference of "wanting others to make decisions and worse, rules, for us." We detect essence of classical, dialectical object over subject hegemony, and hegemony as means of enforcing certainty. See Dennett on decision avoidance. See his Chapter 5 decision avoidance.

4. Past Experience Points the Way to the Future - By Erik K. Clemons, professor of operations and information management at Wharton, UPenn

Notice this article's title? Determinism AKA certainty is induction of future based upon past.

He claims past's patterns can't treat uncertainty but can help with managing risk.

5. Changing Mental Models in an Uncontrollable World - By Yoram "Jerry" Wind, Lauder professor of marketing at Wharton School of Business, and Colin Cook, senior fellow at Wharton

This article's title is superb! It is provocative. It almost insists that you read this article.

Quantonics simply shows its students how to attenuate their use of Classical Thingk-king Methods (CTMs) and amplify their habituation of Quantonics~Quantum Think~king Modes (QTMs).

This article is mostly compatible with that approach.

Classical thingk-king is a mental anchor, a mental albatross.

6. Can We Really Master Uncertainty? By Jean-Louis Barsoux, senior research fellow at IMD

This paper shows its author as a classicist. His language is almost wholly dialectical and infused with cause-effects, determinisms and certainties.

We view 'master' in a 'master-slave' sense. Classicists view object above subject in a very similar way. We call that classical hegemony. Quantum reality places subject above object, slave above master, individual above society.

Quantum reality is Free Will! And free will is just what emersces omnivalencies and omnivalencies emersce quantum uncertainty at all scales of reality. Classicists both fear and hate any possibilities of that happening. already is...

In our view, managing uncertainty is a cooperative effort among individuals, their quantum~coherent groups (whatever we name them) and nature.

N¤t many of Earth's seniors are ever going to grasp those quantum essentials. Doug - 22Mar2006.


Please, please, please do n¤t make a mistake of viewing our efforts here as arrogance, as condescension. We are trying to help, sincerely. Our mentors are truly titans of thought, quantum~thought, which until Earth's last century has been viewed (since at least Parmenides, Plato, and Aristotle) derogatively and denigratingly as "paradoxical," "sophism," and sophist "absurdity."

To quickly commence qua of Doug's comments, study well our Bases of Judgment. Start at bottom of that page's table and work your way up. Here is a simpler version of that table. Another here.

Why are we interested in this FT-E&Y insert? In our Quantonicsese lingo, "It is an immense quantum tell." "A quantum tell of a now cusping quantum tsunami of cultural change."

These business scholars show us that they beginning to understand what an immense challenge real quantum uncertainty is to global businesses' future critical success factors. We agree! We want to help. Our aside here offers our help, up front, in synopsis:

Aside - What contemporary cultural metameme is above a meme of scaling empirical uncertainty?

  (We ask this question to urge you to ponder whether focus on uncertainty is above focusing on its most important anthropological metameme? Sort of like Kurt Gödel did by pondering provability above truth.) 

Before we start, we want to take this discussion to a metalevel above any simple, culturally as-used, notion of uncertainty. From whence this uncertainty? What cultural change is happening on Earth now which is qualitatively and subjectively affecting what these papers are referring as "uncertainty?" Our answer may not be easy to grasp initially, even so, we need to say it, and as you ponder it for some future times we are confident that you will fathom n¤vel lightings.

(Quantum~) Individuals are ascending above (classical-) societies!

  (A good question, here, is why? If you can answer this, and if you want to, please share your answers with us. With your permission and assuming we like your answers, we will publish them here in Quantonics.)

For several millennia society, via societal hegemony, has been above individuals. That hierarchy is now changing, inverting, massively. (Robert M. Pirsig, writer-philosopher (1928 - ) and Henri Louis Bergson, biologist~philosopher (1859 -1941) anticipated this inversion, quite fabulously!)

There are pessimistic tells some of which, for example terrorism, 'student' behaviours on college campuses, and some 'impatients' in physicians' offices, are currently ad oculos apparent.

There are optimistic tells: mass customization, Google, eBay, Apple, AMD, Toyota, virtual workers, virtual teams, virtual schools, virtual businesses, scroll arrows on our browser pages ("I, as an individual, want to scroll down this page," n¤t "System (disembodied other, possibly society) make the page go up," etc. Mass customization is about individuals. Google is about individuals. Ebay is about individuals. DIY scrolling is about individuals!

  (Ask yourself which businesses are in decline and why? Are they still focused on societal patterns of value? Are they still attempting to invoke product social hegemony ("make the page go up") over individuals? Compare Apple (individuals) vis-à-vis Micro$oft (product social hegemony above individuals, e.g., M$ marketing strategy FUD delays like what just happened with Vista; can you believe they view that as strategic? It is social hegemony, pure and simple! Doug's opinions.), compare AMD (individuals) vis-à-vis Intel (society), Toyota vis-à-vis GM, etc.)

Some of these FT-E&Y authors see those tells, and they are correct in their observations, but they do n¤t yet detect that larger, global phenomenon we just showed you.

Our grades above show which authors come closest, in our opinion, to grasping tells of this enormous global tsunami.

This individual~above~society metameme is much more important to understand! Why? Businesses' futures depend upon their acknowledging its presence and its impetus. Both eBay and Google, for example, "get it." Amazon is very close to "getting it." (A counter example is US Postal 'nonService.') Developing operational processes which 'just treat uncertainty' won't be as potent as developing operational processes which treat individual above society first and uncertainties borne of that historic inversion next.

Our Quantonics web site explains why and how we summarize our views that way. To get a start on understanding our comments read our 2003-2004 Feuilleton Chautauqua. That six-month serialization of news will lead you to all other Quantonics web site and other references necessary to understand a n¤vel quantum meme of individuals above society.

Successful business models will recognize and exploit essences of change riding this enormous wave of inversion.

End aside - Doug - 22Mar2006.

FT editors write, re: Part I, Article two above, "Here, Eamonn Kelly explains the need for a new way of thinking to deal with an uncertain environment." Again, we agree, but worry that these folk have yet to grasp some deeper issues in what is meant by "a new way of thinking."

Doesn't that mean that we need to change our current ways of thinking and evolve novel means of thinking which themselves are quantum real? Yes! But will FT editors and those authors listed above and E&Y sponsors agree? We are uncertain, quantum uncertain, whether they will. Even if they do not, some of our readers will, and they will benefit from our efforts here, studying articles published in Part I's 'Mastering Uncertainty.'

Let's ask a simple question given what has been said above: "How do we think?"

If we need new ways of thinking, shouldn't we understand what those are and find better ones? Quantonics has already done this, in spades. Simply, how we think now is classical, and a novel, better way of thinking is quantum. Allow us to use an example, bluntly: classical says "different," quantum says "omnifferent." 'Di,' vis-à-vis 'omni.' Classical thinking is usually 'di,' two-valued (bimodal), and quantum thinking is heterogeneous (omnimodal). Even more simply, classical thinking is usually singular (monistic), and quantum thinking is usually plural (multiplicate).

What does that show us?

Our authors above hint at this, and it is extremely important. Classical thinking is definite, certain. Quantum thinking is plausibilistic, stochastic, uncertain. Why? Classical reality assumes singularity, predication, independence, and concrete stability. Quantum reality assumes plurality, indeterminacy, everywhere associative codependency, and absolute evolutionary change. Our bold of 'con' is a reminder that, here is a list of — classical-lingual-thought-rational-reasonable concreteness, definiteness, and certainness are classical suppositive and presumptive delusions arecon jobs, if you will.

Those two classes of believings offer entirely omniffering outcomes. Let's just use a few language comparisons as very simple examples.

Classical language uses definite (certain) articles and pronouns, singular nouns, stable nouns and verbs, and mostly two-valued prefixes:

Quantum language uses indefinite (uncertain) articles and pronouns, plural nouns, plural participles, and omnivalent prefixes:

Delightfully, one of our authors above quotes Niels Bohr. Bohr, in our view was one of few folk nearly 100 years ago who was commencing understandings of quantum uncertainty. Others include: Poincaré, Bergson, James, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Bohr, Bohm,... That tiny list offers names of both proto and actual-practicing quantum theoreticians. That is why we started it with a mathematical philosopher, a biological philosopher and a psychological philosopher.

Bohr, Polanyi, Mae-wan Ho (now at Open University, Milton Keynes), et al., claim that language is (a large) part of our problem. Their quotes re: language problematics are just fabulous to read. Using certain language to describe (perhaps to ignore, disable) an uncertain quantum reality is a communications faux pas.

And that is our point here. Our BIG point here!

If you want to communicate a need to learn to manage uncertainty, but you use certain, definite classical language to do so, is that a novel way of thinking? Naught but worseings!

If you want to communicate a need to learn to manage uncertainty, and you use uncertain, indeterminate, animate, everywhere~associative, heterogeneous quantum language to do so, is that a novel way of thinking? Emergent, [r]evolutionary, selective betterings!

Of course today classicists refer latter as "nonsense," "absurd," "idiocy," "charlatanism," "ludicrous," "deconstructionist," etc. Einstein told Bohr it was "subjective." Guess what? Einstein, if he knew this, and to his own horror, is(was) correct! Quantum uncertainty, a novel way of thinking, is "subjective." Classicists claim that reality is objective, determinate, certain. But they are simply wrong! Quantum reality is subjective! Uncertainty emerges from quantum~subjectivity!

When we read our authors above, we see how crippled they are by classical language. We want to help them be less crippled! We want to Quantum English Language Remedy-vaccinate them!

Our approach is to take one or two (Sull's for sure, and possibly Wind's) of those six articles and quote classical problematics and show side-by-side quantum remediationings. Let's just do it!

Part I: 'Seeking Shelter from the Storm'

  1. Introduction - 'Difficult Decisions for an Uncertain World' - By Donald Sull, associate professor of management at London Business School

    (This is Doug's favorite article in Part I. Sull is almost intuitive about quantum reality, akin Geertz, Pirsig, James, Bergson, Ho, Jarrett, d'Espagnat, et al. Some of Sull's remarks are just and simply "dead on" quantum! We are awed at his apparently deep grasp of quantum ways of thinking. Hopefully our efforts here will help with some beneficial language remediations. As an example we might reword his title like this: 'Omnifficult Evolutionary Selectionings for an Quantum~Uncertain World.' And FT's choice of title for Part I needs some help. Say, 'Quantum~Learning to Be Quantum~Playing in Quantum~Stormings.' Cease fighting Nature while learning to respect he-r and cooperate with he-r.)

    Doug Quotes of Author
    (From website)
    Classical vis-à-vis Quantum
    Comments on Author Quote

     QELR of Author's Text (in quotes)
    Extended Critic's Comments
    Para. 1 "At first glance, the phrase 'mastering uncertainty' appears to be something of an oxymoron. One can master a horse, or master a foreign language, but uncertainty? We definitely cannot master uncertainty in the sense that a trainer masters a horse by bending the beast to his will. Uncertainty arises out of the kaleidoscopic shifting of numerous volatile variables, such as regulation, technology, competition, macroeconomics and consumer preferences. Complex interactions among these factors generate fleeting opportunities and threats, but we can neither predict nor dictate their precise form, magnitude or timing. Long-term prediction, let alone control, is out of the question.

    Donald Sull's thelogos is pretty good at about five percent. He used 'the' 120 times out of about 2400 total words in this article. We use bold violet to annotate some apparent classical language which we believe needs quantum remediation.

    Words which need QELR:

    • thing - refers a classical 'object;' classical 'objects' do n¤t exist in quantum reality
    • definite - quantum reality is uncertain
    • not - classical 'not' depends upon classical notions of independence and objective localability, isolability, separability, and reducibility; use n¤t to show that you understand that "negation is subjective"
    • numerous - lots of n¤n trivial issues quantum vis-à-vis classical involved here; let's defer this one until all have come to understand easier memes; essentially quantum reality is perpetual process which may n¤t be 'stopped' as scalar quantitative measurement; "we cannot measure phase, frequency, waves (AKA quantum~probability omnistributions) as a single scalar quantity at a single 'stopped' scalar location
    • consumer - one profile is incapable of fitting many individual preferences; there is n¤ 'the consumer'
    • inter - classically assumes objective independence and separation
    • neither - see 'not' above
    • predict - classical prediction assumes that historical data determines future; this assumption, given modern quantum theory, is wrong; issues, again, are n¤n trivial - see classical cause-effect vis-à-vis quantum affectation
    • nor - see 'not' above
    • form - classical reality is formal, mechanical, objective, etc.; quantum reality is likelihoodistic emergent~evolvings
    • magnitude - see 'numerous' above
    • con - see 'inter' above

    Doug 'remediates' Sull's paragraph 1:

    "At first glance, phrasally 'mastering uncertainty' appears to be an oxymoron. One can uncertainly master a horse, or uncertainly master a foreign language, but master uncertainty? We can understand uncertainty without mastering it in any sense that a trainer understands a horse via a quantum~both~and agreement of mutual wills. Uncertainty arises out of a kaleidoscopic shifting of many perpetually volatile variables, such as regulation, technology, competition, macroeconomics and locus of sale preferences. Complex interrelationshipings among these quantum memeos generate fleeting opportunities and threats, but we can guess their stochastic emerqancies and their likely, most probable, near term timings and possible loci. Long-term classical 'prediction,' let alone classical 'control,' is out of, classically, 'the' question."

    We would add, "Instead of attempting classical either-or hegemonous control, we adopt and adapt both~and quantum processings of respectful cooperation, especially with Nature." Doug - 18Mar2006.

    All of Doug's comments are intended as c¤mplementary, helpful, and beneficial in light of FT's and E&Y's endeavors commenced 17Mar2006 as published in FT's 17Mar2006 home delivery issue.

    We intend n¤ harm, n¤ arrogance, n¤ condescension, only quantum optimism toward better for all Earthlings. Let's all ride this fabulous quantum tsunami and win, win, win. Doug - 18Mar2006.

    Para. 2 "We can, however, aspire to master uncertainty in the way a seasoned sailor masters the sea. Not even the best captain can predict the elements with accuracy, let alone command the wind to blow or the waves to calm. With insight and experience, however, a captain can harness the wind and ride out the storm. Mastery, in this sense, resembles improvisational skill rather than control. This begins with an understanding of uncertainty, how it differs from risk, and general approaches to dealing with an uncertain world.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • differs - 'di' is a classical bivalent prefix; use 'omni' in place of 'di' in quantum co(m)ntexts
    • general - classicists tend to "Ockham's razor" minimalize quantum generality and turn it into specificity; then they induce-bootstrap specificity on all reality and call it "generality;" science and mathematics do this using analytic symbols to represent real quantum 'physical' (rather physial) processes
    "We can, however, aspire to master uncertainty in ways a seasoned sailor masters turbulent and calm seas. Even a great captain is incapable of anticipating Nature's elements with accuracy, let alone command winds to blow or waves to calm. With insight and experience, however, a captain can harness uncertain winds and ride out probabilistic storms. Mastery, in this sense, resembles improvisational, evolving and plausibly~adapting skills rather than planned hegemony. This begins with an understanding [standings~underings!] of uncertainty, how it omniffers risks, and quantum~gænæral approaches to dealing with an uncertain world."
    Para. 3

    "Risk, uncertainty and profit

    "Discussions of uncertainty and risk tend to draw even the most hard-nosed thinkers into a haze of metaphysical rumination ­ recall Donald Rumsfeld's speculations on unknown unknowns, for example. But clarity is possible. The economist Frank Knight made significant headway in his influential 1921 treatise Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, in which he made the distinction between risk as randomness with knowable probabilities ­ think the roll of a dice ­ and uncertainty as randomness where we cannot know the probabilities.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • Discuss - 'di' is a classical bivalent prefix; use 'omni' in place of 'di' in quantum co(m)ntexts
    • think - see our QELR of 'think'
    • clarity - Beware classical clarity as analytic simplification which removes intrinsic process and replaces it with ideal, stoppable classical 'state'
    • distinction - 'di' is a classical bivalent prefix; use 'omni' in place of 'di' in quantum co(m)ntexts
    • between - is a bivalent classicism; use animate EIMA quantum~among(ings)
    • know - classical thinking views 'knowledge' as 'state-ic' 'information;' quantum k~now~ings are absolute quantum processings which are unstoppable and thus have n¤ classical state; quantum stochastics~probabilities~plausibilities~
      likelihoodings are quantum processings

    "Omniscussions of uncertainty and risk tend to draw even hard-nosed thinkers into a haze of metaphysical rumination ­ recall Donald Rumsfeld's speculations on classical 'unknown unknowns,' for example. But monitorable quantum~process representation is possible. Economist Frank Knight made significant headway in his influential 1921 treatise Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, in which he made omnistinctions among risks as randomness with 'knowable' probabilities ­ think rollings of dice ­ and uncertainty as randomness where we can only estimate likelihoods."

    May we direct our readers to our What is Wrong with Probability as Value.

    That paper and other work in Quantonics shows readers that successful people and organizations have to learn to be in animate, recursive, recapitulative quantum~processings of pragmatically monitoring quantum~nowings. We must be learning to have our minds (quantum stages) be doing that and have our organizational processes be doing that. See our QTMs. Doug - 18Mar2006.

    Para. 4 "Critics have dismissed Knight's distinction as trivial. According to this critique, decision-makers who do not know the objective probabilities simply assign subjective probabilities to various outcomes and get on with it. But this criticism attacks a caricature. A careful reading reveals a more nuanced distinction between risk and uncertainty.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    We have to comment on Sull's use of 'decision.' Classically, decision is historical, pastisitic, hearing footsteps thingk-king. But reality doesn't work like that. Reality is nowistic with expectationings of nextings! Reality evolves via nowistic selectionings which most of us refer as "decisions." This may offer a good segue to compare objective (classical), relativistic (post modern), and quantum philosophies. See MoQ, CR, and SOM.

    Too there is a novel percept which our readers must learn to inure, and this is a great place to offer it.

    Classical reality is paradigmatically and dogmatically more objective than subjective.

    Quantum reality is pragmadigmatically and metaphorically more subjective than objective. Our use of pragma here is in its original Greek semantic of action. Quantum reality is an perpetual action reality. Classical reality is a stoppable 'state' reality.

    Distilled: subjective quality is above and more highly evolved, and evolving, than objective quantity. Indeed latter, 'objective quantity,' is classically naïve. We call that classical naïveté "local realism," "social positivism," "naïve realism," and "tragedy of commons sense."

    Sadly, that is what academe is teaching all of us today. It is bogus! It is wrong!

    Those of us who run businesses on foundations of naïve classicism shall be driven to extinction. So if you want to win, you had better start learning about quantum uncertainty, and how to deal with it! Doug.

    "Critics have denigrated Knight's comparison as trivial. According to this critique, selectionings-makers who do not know the objective probabilities simply assign subjective probabilities to various outcomes and get on with it. But this criticism attacks a caricature. A careful reading reveals a more nuanced distinction between risk and uncertainty."

    We need a Bruno de Finetti quote here, from third paragraph of Chapter VI, of his 1935 paper, 'Observation and Thought,' "We are sometimes led to make a judgment which has a purely subjective meaning, and this is perfectly legitimate; but if one seeks to replace it afterward by something objective, one does not make progress, but only an error."

    We believe de Finetti would agree with Knight too that taking something classically objective and making it classically subjective is problematic.

    If you have a task and spend too much time worrying about end game,..., do your best and think as well as you can while focusing on task at hand. End game will take care of itself!

    It is oversimplified, but Quality focuses on nowings and nextings with minor weightings from pastings to be doing evolutionary selectionings.

    Recall what Geertz said, "Absolutism removes judgment from history," and "Relativism disables judgment."

    Quantumism turns 180 degrees, lookings at nowings and anticipatings futurings. See our pastings, nowings, futurings graphic.

    Para. 5 "People encounter risk when they face a simple choice. Examples include a punter deciding to place a bet, a fund manager considering an investment or a homeowner evaluating hurricane insurance. The decision-maker can clearly identify the possible states of nature relevant to the choice they face. The gambler, for instance, knows that there are precisely 38 possible pockets where the roulette ball could land.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    "People encounter risk when they pr¤flect nowings thence futurings. Examples include a punter selecting a bet, a fund manager qualitatively~valuing an investment or a homeowner evaluating hurricane insurance. Any affection-maker can subjectively coobsfect possible interrelationships of nature relevant to any chancings they may select. A gambler, for instance, is k~now~ing that there are only apparently 38 moving pockets where an animate roulette ball could cohere."

    Doug QELRed that 'only apparently' due animate quantum~relativistic affectings.

    Readers should notice that classical theory which tries to mimic certainty through determinism is an attempt at 'risk avoidance.' Determinate, certain 'plans' when 'perfect' avoid all risk. At least that is classical theory... Doug - 19Mar2006

    Para. 6 "In many simple choices, the possible states of nature are bimodal ­ the team will beat the spread or not, a hurricane will damage a house or not. At other times, they extend along a single dimension, such as the range of possible returns to an investment.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • bimodal - all bivalent, two-valued, opposite, contradictory, ideal objective negational classical notions are invalid in quantum reality
    • or - or is bimodal and thus invalid in quantum reality; or is dichonic(either, or)
    • single - classical concepts of singularity in any sense of objective independent, 'unique identity,' stability are invalid in quantum reality
    • dimension - 'di' mension is two-valued on 'mensions' and thus invalid in quantum reality
    "In many quantum~simple bases of judgment, quantum~simple selectings, many possible quantum~phase~encodings of nature are omnimodal, omniQLOistic ­ teams monitoring them will have higher and lower probabilities and likelihoods of winning, hurricanes will have higher and lower likelihoodings of damagings a house. At other timings, they extend along multiple omnimensionings, such as rangings of possible returnings on investmentings."
    Para. 7 "The challenge in simple choices lies not in specifying outcomes, which is relatively straightforward, but in assigning ex ante probabilities to their occurrence. Often, simple choices are similar enough that they can be treated as comparable observations, aggregated and analysed statistically. Investors can, for example, collect and crunch data on historical stock performance across many companies, industries and time periods, and use their analyses to estimate a probability distribution for the investment under consideration.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • specify - see our QELR of generality
    • comparable observations - notice that 'comparable observations' did not prevent NASA's challenger disaster; question here is, "How do we quantum~monitor rubber 'O' rings in a booster rocket?"

      if quantum reality is perpetually changing at up to Planck rates, while coobserving and coaffecting us, what do we really mean when we classically say "observation?"
    • analysis - quantum reality is not an analytical reality; analysis assumes scalarbation; quantum waves may n¤t be scalar sample-and-held and then referred "statically real"
    • statistical - do we mean classical 'state' stuxistics?
      - do we mean quantum wave fluxistics?
    • performance - do we mean against a state-ic forecast based upon historic results?
      - do we mean against current conditionings and anticipated changings in conditionings?
      - are we retroflecting performance?
      - are we pr¤flecting performance?
    • distribution - use omnistribution

    specifying outcomes - is a classically deterministic act;

    assigning ex ante probabilities based upon historical (past) rote tote know ledge data is a classically deterministic act;

    quantum~choosings and comparable observations may be similar, never 'identical;' quantum similarity is a holographic beast with nearly unlimited quantum~fractal local and nonlocal attractors and affectors;

    'state' istical analysis - is a classically deterministic act;

    "Investors can, for example, collect and crunch data on historical stock performance across many companies, industries and time periods, and use their analyses to estimate a probability distribution for the investment under consideration.... "

    Yes, they can do that, but to do so while ignoring nowings and futurings is a classically deterministic act.

    Almost as bad, which data does one 'state' ically 'collect' and 'crunch?'

    All quantum~interrelationshipings are in flux! Even pastings.

    At issue here is dynamic heterogeneous selectionings and adaptationings of quantum~interrelationshipings we must be monitorings to improve critical success factors. See our Sun-Earth weather quanton examples.

    Doug - 19Mar2006.

    Para. 8 "Risk resides in simple choices, but uncertainty arises in messy situations, where the variety of possible actions is nearly infinite. Senior executives at BT, to give a concrete example, face a daunting number of levers they could pull to improve performance, including the use of outsourcing, acquisitions, lobbying and cost-cutting initiatives, to name just a few. When people face a range of possible actions ­ versus a simple yes/no decision ­ the information relevant to guide their actions grows more complex. They must decide which levers to pull when, how hard, and in which combination and sequence.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • uncertainty arises - unexpected outcomes may arise from ensemblings of perpetual uncertaintyings; uncertainty does n¤t 'arise,' uncertainty is
    • action - if it's y=f(t), it's classically deterministic
    • concrete - quantum reality is flux; flux cann¤t be classically concrete
    • simple yes/no decision - classical either-or thingk-king is bogus and delusional; two-valued, bivalent
    • information - usually a know ledge of state-ic pastistic scalar data
    • guide - if it's a classical plan it is deterministic; if it's a classical rule, axiom, formula, process it is deterministic
    • complex - classical complexity and quantum complexity are omniffering species of human thought: classical complexity is quantum flux and flux 'effects;' quantum complexity is classical state and states' paradice and impossibilities; quantum simplicity is flux; classical simplicity is state

    "They must decide which levers to pull when, how hard, and in which combination and sequence."

    Do you see bivalence in:

    • decide?
    • pull?
    • when? (assuming one when)
    • which combination? (assuming one 'right,' and one 'wrong')
    • which sequence?

    Proportional processings, similar quantum reality, require monitoring to adaptively adjust (evolve) interrelationshipings dynamically.

    Ever notice your gas furnace is either on or off: classical!

    Ever notice its set points are plus or minus 3 to 5 degrees.

    That classical system wastes vast amounts of energy.

    Better efficiency may be achieved using a Fibonacci (like a delta mod usart follower) slope adaptive follower on gas feed to furnace and on furnace fan: holds temperature constant and saves much energy lost by classical on-off cycling.

    Para. 9 "In messy situations, managers cannot specify ex ante all the possible states of nature that might influence their action. The optimal combination, sequence and timing of future actions will depend critically on the interaction of many external variables, including shifting regulations, unstable commodity prices, the entry of new rivals, changing consumer preferences, volatile exchange and interest rates, fickle capital markets, geo-political events, natural disasters and continuous technological change ­ not to mention the responses of competitors who will do their best to thwart managers' best-laid plans.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • influence - classical is effective; quantum is affective
    • interaction - if it's classically objective find ways to emersce it as quantum interrelationshipings which you can monitor
    • external - classical dichon(external, internal)
    • regulations - isn't it transparent that regulation is antithetical perpetual adaptation?

      ("Rules is Tules for Fules. I.e., Fules that like 'running on automatic,' and practicing 'decision avoidance.'" N¤ thinking allowed. N¤ thinking required.)
    • new - is classical synthesis from old; n¤vel is quantum emergence of that which has n¤t 'existed' prior
    • event - classically a zero-latency change of 'state;' which has no process description because classical reasoning is inept at adaptive real-world quantum~process descriptions
    • plans - isn't it transparent that planning is antithetical perpetual adaptation?
    Para. 10 "Managers face uncertainty and investors face risk, although the world is equally volatile for both. The distinction hinges on the range of possible actions they can employ to achieve a desired outcome, which is complex for executives and simple for investors. Or to take a sports analogy, the punter chooses whether to bet or not, but the coach must juggle myriad interactions of trades, training, strategy and tactics to win.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • the distinction - every quantum comtext is ensemblings of ensemblings interrelating other quantum ensemblings of ensemblings; all interrelationshipings are in perpetual adaptive processings of omnistinguishing better interrelationshipings; there are n¤ 'no brainer' classically certain and definite "the distinctions" in quantum reality
    Para. 11 "Consider the following thought exercise to clarify the distinction between risk and uncertainty. Imagine Warren Buffett goes to the mountain and God hands him a tablet with the correct probability distribution of possible market capitalisations for a company a decade hence.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    We have covered most of Sull's classical language problematics to this locus in his article. We will pick up others as we encounter them. Let's take larger phrases and clauses and examine them from classical 'state'-ic, certain conspectives vis-à-vis a quantum animate, uncertain perspectives.

    • the correct probability distribution - It should be obvious now, assuming reality is absolutely changing and thus plural present participle animately uncertain, 'the correct' is a classical attempt to stop reality for purposes of analysis. Can you see that this is just and simply wrong? Doug - 23Mar2006.
    • for a company a decade hence - Is it obvious now that this is but a classical statement ('state' ment) of a stux sux ten year strategy which simply cannot be of any value due reality's absolute change and uncertainty? Disideratum (i.e., 'decide two-valued-rationally;' instead "select omnivalent~quantum~uncertainly;" omnisideratum; omnisicoquecigruesum ): value is 'edge of nowings' relentless and recapitulative adaptation. Doug.
    Para. 12 "Assuming Mr Buffett's investment horizon is ten years, this information is most useful in deciding whether or not to invest. For the company's CEO, this information is practically useless. He would need much more granular information about how competition, technology, regulation, macroeconomics and other factors might interact to create specific opportunities or threats. Only this more detailed information would allow him to take precisely the right actions in the right combination at the right time.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • investment horizon - Do you see that this lingo is cartesian? Spatially stuck? It turns time into cartesian spatial extensity. It views time as space (one of Einstein's and classical science's great mistakes; time is about change and space simply from any classical conspective does not animately, flux is crux, change). Henri Louis Bergson has shown us deep dialectical ills of this 'class' of dialectical thought AKA thing-king. Actually, for Buffett too, "this information is practically useless." To illustrate a Quantonics grammatical solution to that classical bogosity, "emerqancings are pragmatically useful." (Greek 'pragma' means flux is crux, h-bar, h, is real 'action.')
    • factors might interact - Are these factors scalar? If so they are classically stopped, inanimate, and thus unreal. Quantum reality refutes classical logical mechanisms like commutation, distribution, objective association, and factorization. Why? At least three major issues: quantum reality is animate and always changing, quantum reality's middles are included (demanding coinsident interrelationshipings and refuting classical notions of formal, mechanical 'interaction'), and quantum reality's quantons are everywhere associative (just like 'portions' of a hologram). Doug - 23Mar2006.

    See Henri Louis Bergson's Time and Free Will topics:

    • 17 - Space and Homogeneity,
    • 18 - Homogeneous Time and Space,
    • 19 - Duration, Succession and Space,
    • 20 - Pure Duration, and
    • 21 - Is Duration Measurable?

    Readers please note: Bergson's duration is essentially quantum flux issi quantum uncertainty! Doug - 26Mar2006.

    Para. 13 "People sometimes attempt to collapse complex uncertainty into simple risk, by framing a messy situation as a big bet. Recall European telecommunication service providers' Euro100bn outlay for third-generation mobile technology licences. Many saw this as a risky bet that would either pay off or not.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • attempt to collapse complex uncertainty into simple risk, - this is Sull's prescient classical description of what Doug means when he says "classicists attempt to zero, turn off, h-bar."
    Para. 14 "But returns to the 3G investment depended critically on interactions with other factors, including regulatory policy influencing returns on capital and competitive intensity, the progress of potential substitute technologies, capital markets' willingness to support subsequent investments, and competitive thrust and parry among others. The telcos faced uncertainty, not risk. Managers should, of course, hive off and manage pockets of risk when possible ­ buying insurance for likely contingencies, for example, or hedging exchange rate exposure. They should not fool themselves, however, into believing they can reduce all uncertainty to risk.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • factors - see our QELR of fact

    We agree that risk and uncertainty are omniffering memes.

    For us, risk is worry! Retarded, focusing on pastistic issues to prevent them: of course this is, due uncertainty, in general impossible.

    Our view is to cease worrying about risk and commence proflectively and nowistically operationally adapting to as many exihgænt uncertainties as you-your-organization can manage. However, first we must learn how to accomplish that. Learning curve for some will be prohibitive. Latter begs countless corporate extinctions as we work our way through our personal transitionings from CTMs to QTMs.

    Let us be transparent about a quantum inevitability: those who do not learn to manage uncertainty are becoming and shall become extinct. There is only one way around that quantum exigent: learn to manage uncertainty, and do it better than your competition.

    Doug - 23Mar2006.

    Para. 15 "Strategic anticipation, organisational agility and uncertainty absorption
    Para. 16 "Business, to paraphrase the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, can only be understood backward, but it must be managed forward. So, how can executives survive and thrive in an uncertain world? Adapt or die, is the short answer. Uncertain markets exert an unforgiving selection pressure on companies by churning out an unrelenting series of opportunities and threats. New companies emerge to pursue novel opportunities, while established companies that cannot adapt fail. The only way to avoid this harsh Darwinian pressure is to adapt to changing circumstances before market pressures select against your company.
    • Sull's "Adapt or die, is the short answer. " should be all businesses' quantum mantra starting ASAP! This is perhaps Sull's most important and memorable quantum~edict.
    • Sull's "selection pressure" is pure quantum~Darwin! Elegant! Eloquent! Superb! Magnificent! Outstanding! Pay attention to Sull! Hire him to consult with your staffs. Excellence! Quality! N¤t (i.e., Nt) TQM, n¤t TQS, rather quantum Quality! TQM and TQS are passé. Why? They rely on classical determinism borne of state-ic, scalar probabilities and cartesian tailor 'points.' TQM and TQS are mechanical! Doug - 23Mar2006.
    • Sull's "The only [a] way to avoid this harsh Darwinian pressure is to adapt to changing circumstances before market pressures select against your company." This is brilliant! Sull is on a good pathway to helping businesses know what to do. But that is easiest part. Toughest part is getting an entire company to move from CTMs to QTMs. Remember OO software? Most people just pooh-poohed it, but few who ran with OO took most cookies to their bank. Similarity here but massively huger scale of omnifficulty and impediments. It is apparent that almost n¤ one intuits quantum reality. If our school systems started teaching quantum today (But where are teachers who understand quantum to do said teaching?) it would be at least two generations before businesses could hire quantum~intuitive employees. Doug, with much personal effort, self taught quantum over more than a decade. Quantonics offers a fast track, but from a business perspective, only a businesses' best and brightest could approach quantum sufficiency in a minimum of four years FULL TIME and accelerated effort. This quantum tsunami challenge needs GLOBAL attention, which is why we are so excited about seeing FT and E&Y broach said topic in a four part FT weekly series. We also suggest getting people like Jeffrey Satinover, Clifford Geertz, Irving Stein, Paul Pietsch, University of Florida folk who developed that "rat brain" 'controlled' F-22 simulator, et al., involved. [Note: can we interim-teach 'rat brains' to monitor a vast array of uncertainties and 'report' to management? Recall that engineer at John Deer who created Earth's first evolved, adaptive assembly line? Doug.] Stein, BTW, was first we read who recognized that Earth has no quantum ontological description. Earth is de facto operating with a largely bogus Newtonian ontology. For us this is one of Stein's most incredible observations. To make a parallel: moving from a Newtonian ontology to a quantum ontology is kin of moving from CTMs to QTMs. We need, Bohr, Bohm, Schrödinger, Heisenberg, Dirac, Bergson, James, et al., but they are n¤ longer with us in any actual sense. Who are their Millennium III compeers? Sull is one clear example. Wind may be another. Paul Kwiat is a quantum probable, however, we are unsure his interests spread this wide. And Zeilinger, Gisin. Bunge at McGill. Dan Thomas at U. Guelph. Jim Baggott. Brian Josephson is a maybe, etc. Maybe Dawkins?
    Note how Søren Kierkegaard is exhibiting a purely classical conspective of business. This conspective cannot deal, at nowings' edgings, with quantum uncertainty. Why? Søren Kierkegaard is prescribing retarded thing-king as a means to understanding. Ugh! Doug.
    Para. 17 "This is an easy concept to understand, but it is hard to translate into practice.
    • Sull, again, bottom lines all this brilliantly!
    Para. 18 "Adaptation can be broken down into two components ­ strategic anticipation and organisational agility. Taken together, these two ideas provide a potent one-two combination. A boxer can anticipate what an opponent might do by studying tapes of his opponent's previous fights. This preparation is useful even if the precise blow-by-blow chronology cannot be known in advance. By improving hand speed and footwork, a pugilist can improve his ability to roll with the punches and adapt to whatever opportunities and threats emerge in a bout.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • broken down - quantum reality is irreducible in any classical sense
    • quantum two - issi n¤t classical 1 + 1!!!
    • ideas - we do not want 'ideas,' we want memes!!!

    We really like memeos of animated practice walkings throughings!

    Boxers have to become Zen-like at nowings' edgings to win. That is a superb business metaphor.

    Para. 19 "Anticipation and agility make for good viewing ­ recall Muhammad Ali floating like a butterfly and stinging like a bee. But they are not the only way to win a fight. Boxers like George Foreman or Rocky Marciano lacked the bob and weave of their more agile opponents, but they could absorb great punishment, outlast opponents and stay in the fight long enough to deliver a decisive blow.
    Para. 20 "Uncertainty absorption represents another distinct approach to dealing with the unknown. In business terms, this refers to general-purpose actions that help the company absorb unexpected contingencies, such as lowering fixed costs or strengthening the balance sheet. Uncertainty absorption techniques lack the bob and weave showmanship of adaptation but often prevail.

    But Dr. Sull, what about uncertainty projection?

    How can a priori be quantumly operational, tactical, and to affectively strategic?

    Let's make Uncertainty Projection™ (UP™) another quantum~tool! UP™ is a wMBU™ tool.

    Doug has mentioned this elsewhere using Michael Jordan to "feign a predicable and perform a novel uncertainty."

    From Doug's complementarospective, this is one of quantum~reality's most powerful means of quantum~wave~winning.

    Consider: quanton(projection,absorption). Quantum~projection and quantum~absorption are complementary. Similar quanton(offense,defense), and quanton(success,failure). And recall our HotMeme"Light is at every comma~nospace."HotMeme™. Now grasp how light allows one to 'see.' Quantum~everywhere~middle~includings~associationings essentially are In Quantum Lightings™. Now in that Light, compare quanton(diffusion,focus), quanton(wave,particle), and quanton(~,¤).

    Fathom how much advantage you have over your competition when they are still classical linear DIQheads and you are learning quantum wave~quantization QIQheadedness. Compare:

    And change your 'corporate vision' to quantum~holographically "seeing everywhere:"

    View a hologram as quantum~ensemblings of energy~wellings. All of that is evolving!

    Where are our imagined cameras and in what ways are we depicting them?

    Each energy~welling (EWing) is made of a huge variety of (a huge ensemble of) quantons. Let's show just one of those several ways:

    EWingquanton(diffusion,focus)EWing, and

    EWingquanton(Sheen,seen)EWing, and


    See complementaroception and complementarospection.

    Notice Doug's middle~inclusion of mirrored capital Cs in his Camera palindrome.
    That represents comma~n¤space of quantum~complements of diffuse,focus, and ~,o.

    Now ask self, "Self, what is omniffering Doug's usage of seen and sææn on right side comma~nospace?"

    Ditto ~,o and ~,¤?

    Ponder quanton(~quanton(¤,o)). Focus vav f¤cus? Thence DQ,SQ?


    Add more cameras, from all omniffering angles.

    What do you omniscover? You cannot add enough cameras to monitor all changings in said environs! See at Rochester University with a photon as quanton(Sheen,Seen). How can you make this:


    Can you see this, also, as a quantum~gn¤stic grail?

    And then evolve its ensemblings?

    How about this complementarospective:

    And this:

    If you view self (aremaCamera issi photon, etc.) as comma~nospace...your imagination and your heuristic intuition commence grasping how (quantum~holographically) it is many, ensemble holographic comma~nospacings!

    Doug - 2-3Jun2010.

    Disinform your competitors. Keep clandestine your evolving product features. Hire people who understand why this is key to their jobs and futures.

    When you practice wMBU™, you become more productive, you sell more products, and you assure quantum~capitalism's survival.

    Doug - 3Jun2010.

    Every blow delivers pain and may deliver learning. Need many adaptive ways of adaptive learning. Pluralism is a major aspect of quantum reality. Monism and monasticism are dead. Every quantum problem is both animate and heterogeneous. Nature uses this to great advantage re: survival. But butterflies (e.g., Sun's radiation) can affect massive, quantum~uncertain [Earth] weather changes. Doug.
    Para. 21

    "Strategic anticipation

    "In uncertain markets, managers cannot peer deep into the future to make accurate long-term predictions. They can, however, gather real-time data from multiple sources, look for patterns from the present and past, and select mental models to represent the situation. They then use the selected model to anticipate how circumstances might unfold.

    Can you see that Sull's prohibitive use of 'the' is problematic in any quantum~animate~heterogeneous comtext? There is n¤ 'the model.' Selection is more like, "which alleles to adjust in various modelings." As a real quantum example, human beings' expressed 'exonic' DNA genes are about 93% n¤n adjustable and about 7% allele~adjustable. This is probably a good ratio for how much of an organization has to be adaptive (read quantum) and how much can be more viscous. It is a huge management issue to decide which constituents and how much viscosity vis-à-vis how much alleleability. Nature changes, adapts as fast as Planck's rate, and as slowly as almost imperceptible change. But ponder how Nature's fastest constituents appear to be 'stable.' By comparison some of Nature's slowest constituents are visibly evolving. More quantum, only apparent, paradox. Doug - 23Mar2006.


    They can also aggregate heterogeneous, perhaps apparently unrelated technologies, and quantum~uncertainly interrelate them and guess at their potential opportunities and threats.

    Use modelings, n¤t a model, n¤r models... Use quantum QLOistic m¤dalings!

    Quantum~co(n)mtext~sensitive m¤daling applications, especially biological varieties like rat brains, are gonna become red hot!!!

    Doug - 23Mar2006.

    Para. 22

    "Effective strategic anticipation hinges on pattern recognition, a daunting task in uncertain markets. Managers must identify early warning signals from the welter of data, see fresh connections among apparently unrelated events and find the needles of decisive variables among the haystacks of insignificant ones. They must do this in real time based on data that are incomplete, ambiguous and often conflicting."

    Compare what Sull is describing here to Kuhn's puzzle meme. Doug - 21Oct2006.

    We like "strategic anticipation!" We do n¤t like 'strategy' in any sense of classical 'long term planning.' Ditto 'tactical.' We disdain classical notions of 'effective,' due their dialectical cause-effect determinacy. Doug.

    Another point on uncertainty. Uncertainty is n¤t a classical monism!

    Be sure to read and attempt to answer all questions listed at left most graphic's link. Right most graphics' QLOs are intended to be omnimensional and animate. Doug - 7Oct2006.

    Animate, included~middle, ensemble heterogeneity omnistinguishes quantum uncertainty from classical uncertainty. Quantum uncertainty issi omnitemporal too:

    You already knew this since you travel globally, but your competitors do not share one global 'time' with you! Doug - 7Oct2006.

    Uncertainty is heterogeneous ensembles of uncertainties each of which is ensembles of uncertainties...

    You can use that to induce doubt (uncertainty) and thence startle your competitors. While they are confidently, certainly, deterministically sleeping... Doug - 7Oct2006.

    Quantum reality is quantum~fractal! Quantum reality is animately quantum~recursive on both~ands of self~other coobsfective~selective referencings.

    That is why...


    • Must be keenly aware that quantum management is entirely omnifferings classical management;
    • Must realize that classical management is (monistic, hierarchical, 'state'-ic, excluded-middle) decoherent as our middle symbol offered above, interpreted as classically stopped, may imply;
    • Must adaptively relearn and re-cognize that quantum managementings are (heterogeneous, animate, included~middle) Tom Petzingeresque, The New Pioneers, quantum~coherent SOON management as our third, bottom, symbol above when quantumly hermeneuted illustrates.)

    ...perpetual recapitulation (of uncertainty ensembles) is imperative. It is essentially quantum strategic management. Doug.

    Sull's use of "incomplete" requires some comments here too. Allow us to omnistinguish classical and quantum absoluteness:

    Classical absoluteness is about quantitative, objective, classical-state-ic-dialectical (two-valued; i.e., either true or false) EEMD truth:

    • Consistency - Always states the truth (notice how assessment of either true or false is dialectical 'truth'), and
    • Completeness - States all truths.

    Specifies and requires classical certainty, doesn't it?

    Quantum absoluteness is about qualitative, subjective, quantum~wave~functionings'~real EIMA omni~Value:

    • Comsistency - Always changes, and
    • C¤mpleteness - Changes all.

    Begs quantum uncertainty, doesn't it? "Indeterminacy is the principal feature of intelligence." Paul Pietsch, Shufflebrain.

    Doug HotMeme aside:

    N¤ndeterministic, periodic waves have quantum~strategic animate, EIMA, ensehmble stochastic uncertainty. Reality is n¤ndeterministic, periodic quantum waves! Reality is NDPQWs!

    A Quantonics HotMeme™: If one wants to cooperatively manage reality with Nature's assistance, one must learn to monitor, fathom, and hermeneut NDPQWs. Doug - 24Mar2006. Quantonics HotMeme.

    End Doug HotMemeaside.

    What you notice here is two incredibly omniffering world views! One is about DIQheaded certainty. Other is about QICheaded uncertainty as essence of quantum~strategy. Quantum~Strategic~Wave~Management~By~Uncertainty™. Quantum~strategic wMBU™. Red text updates and recent quantum~strategy phasement updates - 17Dec2009 - Doug.

    We ask you, readers, to compare these two world views and choose one or invent another which you believe is better for Millennium III:

    • A quantum world view offers a (John Forbes) Nash equilibrium win-win of both cooperation and n¤ncooperation/defense with multiversal respect for individual cultural omniversity.
    • A classical world view offers a hegemonist, status quo, one-size-fits-all, lose-lose oppositive mutual denial:

      "our way or the highway," Neandertalibanic/Ruby Ridge/Waco disrespect for acultural mores (i.e., "you are outside our culture," "you are either for us or against us.").

    Borrowed from legacy text in our Coined Quantonics Terms description of obsfect.

    This is an exhibit of H5W we shall have great omnifficulties moving from CTMs to QTMs.

    A final remark on this paragraph...

    Sull's "needles of decisive variables" is a state ment of classical certainty, isn't it? Classical variables' classical models are determinate, aren't they? Classical modeling is mechanical. It is innately (by human 'design') incapable (lacks quantum qua) of real quantum indeterminacy. Doug.

    Para. 23 "Pattern recognition depends on sensing a situation in all its complexity. It requires managers to scan their environment by gathering data from multiple sources and to make sense of the information through informal discussions and formal scenario planning. While methodical data collection and analysis play a role, countless other less formal sources of data ­ both planned and accidental ­ may provide the critical piece of the puzzle that triggers pattern recognition.

    Students of Quantonics, we have some questions for you.

    What does Sull mean by -

    1. "pattern recognition?"
    2. "scan their environment?"
    3. "gathering data?"
    4. "make sense?"
    5. "informal discussions?"
    6. "formal scenario planning?"
    7. "methodical data collection?"
    8. "analysis?"

    Isn't that list an indictment of how classicists 'state' ically 'study' business environments?

    If we are going to study how our business is operating in an environment of absolutely animate quantum uncertainty, that list shows us what we do n¤t want to do!

    That list presupposes a classical assumption that reality is classical and either already stopped or conveniently stoppable. It assumes we may reify via scalarbation a conveniently-classical reality.

    That is an extreme height of DIQheaded bogosity!

    We disagree: "methodical data collection and analysis [do not] play a role!" I.e., n¤t if one wants to really monitor and adapt affectively to business environmental uncertainty.

    Quantum qualitative, subjective, affective, animate, EIMA, ensemblings of monitorings shall! Doug.

    Para. 24 "Managers who sense their environment and select an appropriate mental model still run a great risk. Even the best model can outlive its utility as circumstances change. Executives must keep their mental model fluid and modify it as the situation evolves. Indeed, they must be open to the possibility of abandoning their model altogether and replacing it with a new one if required.

    Why not evolve skills and modes of quantum~thinking which evolve quantum~modalings which themselves are adaptive?

    Our advice is to gradually wean (and ween) oneself from all CTMs and their formal, mechanical 'methods.'

    Given our advice, Sull's is probably better advice since most managers haven't even begun yet to fathom what Quantonics is saying, what Quantonics is about.

    This is Sull's better, and we agree with it, advice, "Indeed, [executives] must be open to [unlimited possibilities] of abandoning their model altogether and replacing it with [n¤vel quantum~modalings as] required." Doug's brackets to partially QELR Sull's sentence.

    Para. 25 "But how can executives recognise when their mental model has passed its sell-by date? The tendency to fixate on data that confirm expectations and ignore nonconfirming information leads many executives to hold on to their mental model for too long. Part of effective sensing is remaining open to surprises, anomalies and unexpected findings.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • effective - We must learn to cease personal attempts at being 'effective,' and commence learning better ways of becoming 'affective.' Effectation is about hindsight and state-ic quantity. See Quantonics on affectation.
    What we really want to do is learn how to be in relentless processings of affective monitorings! Doug - 24Mar2006.
    Para. 26 "In an uncertain world, managers must recognise that their mental models are provisional ­ useful for now but subject to revision as circumstances change. They must be open to incongruities that signal a gap between their stable mental model and a fluid situation. When managers observe an anomaly, they should investigate it by gathering firsthand data and digging deeper into the source of the discrepancy.

    Here's a list of QELR problematics for this paragraph:

    • stable - Recall Henri Louis Bergson's two delusions borne of classical thing-king?

    Bergson showed us that classicists (dialectical thingkers) suffer two main delusions about reality, that reality is:

    • stable, and
    • objects in reality are independent of one another.

    Here is a quote from our pre-review of Bergson's Creative Evolution:

    "Then with gusto, at chapter IV's beginning, Bergson tells us how classical perspectives of reality suffer two great illusions:

    1. A classical illusion that reality is stable.
    2. A classical illusion that things in reality are independent.

    "We worked for years trying to achieve Bergson's eloquent simplicity! And in just three short pages (topic 39 beginning, pp. 272-274) he takes us to crux."

    There is n¤ such 'thing' as a "stable mental model!" Why? Our minds are essentially quantum holographic! Trouble is, we have been taught to thingk of them as ideal classical mechanical black boxes. Wrong!

    Can anomalies have a single "the source" of "the discrepancy?" To believe that, one must adhere classical cause-effect determinacy, certainty.

    Study John von Neumann's attempts to find 'the cause' of a quantum special event. He couldn't! Why?

    Quantum reality is ensemble affectational. Many affectorings are selectings "whatings happenings nextings."

    Von Neumann never figured that out though. But Quantonics did! Doug - 24Mar2006.

    Para. 27

    "Organisational agility

    "Anticipation is primarily a cognitive process of selecting the appropriate mental model for a situation and revising it when necessary. Agility, by contrast, refers to an organisation's flexibility in undertaking new activities or abandoning old ones in the light of changed circumstances. To succeed consistently with unexpected contingencies, companies need the organisational agility to execute quickly and effectively against novel priorities, rather than doing the same thing over and over again.

    Agree. Just don't "status quo is the way to go" keep using dialectical mechanics and language to attempt to achieve what Sull is teaching!

    Get a new dictionary, a Quantonics dictionary! Doug.

    Para. 28 "Adaptation poses several specific challenges. Companies must, for example, balance defence and offence. Despite all the frothy rhetoric about the need to innovate or die, defending the core business remains critical. A solid core allows companies to stay in the game long enough to seize golden opportunities when they arise and also provides the wherewithal that enables them to invest in new opportunities. Despite many slip-ups, Apple Computer survived long enough to be in the game when the golden opportunity of online music arose.

    Lots of QELR issues here. See if you can adjust them, remediate them, yourself.

    We think Sull is all wet on Apple.

    Apple has been Quality all along. But real quality in a world that worships dialectical quantity doesn't 'sell.'

    Apple's success is a 'tell' of what FT-E&Y's whole four part series is about: a sea change in Earth's cultural transitions from quantitative thingking to qualitative think-king. Doug.

    Apple has been better than Gates' junk since PCs emerged! We've suffered Gates hell and we've enjoyed Apple heaven. Gates' hell was imposed upon us by dialectical 'corporate strategies.' Apple heaven we entered via our own qualitative intuitions. We've mostly junked all of our Politically Correct Win$Tels and replaced them with PowerBooks and G5s which work and last and adapt readily. Total cost of operation of Apple computers is vastly lower than Gates dialectical, mechanical 'software.' Gates' OSes run like 'classical machines.' Apple computers coinside their users offering a near quantum coherence of experience. Apple is quality! Micro$oft is quantity. And as we should expect quality offers a higher ROI.

    Apple is so much better than Micro$oft, there simply is n¤ qualitative comparison! M$ is quantity, that's why? Quality over quantity issi Value over 'truth' issi coquecigrues over 'logic.' That is more than just opinion! Doug.

    Para. 29 "At the other extreme, an exclusive reliance on the core leaves companies susceptible to long-term decline. Defence can keep you in the game, but it cannot win it for you. Had Apple's management team stayed in a defensive crouch protecting its declining core, it would have failed to regain the initiative with the iMac.

    We agree on Sull's defence memeos.

    He clearly doesn't 'get' Apple.

    Apple has been where Sull, belatedly, is counseling all to go.

    Para. 30 "Adaptation also requires executives actively to manage a portfolio of internal initiatives to prepare their company for opportunities or threats that might arise in the future. Small-scale experiments in new products, services or processes, for example, allow companies to probe how the future might unfold. They also provide the foundation for rapidly scaling a business if circumstances warrant.

    Is 'portfolio' a collection of 'states?' Is portfolio a collection of memes?

    Doug worked with a bunch of bone-headed steel cutters for about two and a half years. Sadly, corporations of that ilk just aren't going to make it. They, like Micro$lopt, make software like they pour and cut their steel. Ditto their standard policies and procedures.

    They believe in 'innovation' borne of dialectic and quantity. What they don't get, like Micro$lopt, is that dialectic blinds. Machine-thingking blinds!

    They follow DIQheads like Covey and his ilk which adhere dialectical 'principles.' They follow machine-like methods and procedures until those procedures take them into qualitative reality and then they try to mechanize and objectivize and reify quality. And they fail!

    We tried to help them with innovative memes, but they simply couldn't understand...blinders on and "don't try to get us to take them off!" Ugh! They called me "a fool!"

    Perhaps Doug was a fool for crying for them and caring about them. Who knows?...

    Really sad to watch. Worse to work in such an environment. No more!!! Never, ever, again!!!

    Now, they are Earth's enemy, as we can see in our process of going through this four part series. We shall devolve said enemies, extinct them!


    Para. 31

    "Uncertainty absorption

    "Tactics to absorb uncertainty build resilience against good and bad shocks without trying to anticipate their specific form, magnitude or timing. These include blocking and tackling steps, such as lowering fixed costs or increasing operating efficiency that allow companies to weather unforeseen threats. Although not sexy, such tactics allow companies to outlast less efficient rivals and stay in the game to seize golden opportunities as they arise.

    May we suggest cooperating with uncertainty. Absorption sounds a lot like objective containment. Doug.

    Tactics involve dialectical planning do they not?

    Is good | bad a dichon? A dialectical dichotomy? Two-valued?

    Can any meme be good? Bad? Memes can be better. Memes can be worse. Always quantum~relatively. Never dialectical-ideally. Dialectic teaches that good | bad may be established-assessed absolutely. Quantum absolute change belies any such classical notions. Doug.

    Para. 32 "Although it is currently out of fashion with many investors and academics, diversification within an organisation protects companies against unforeseen threats to core businesses and positions them to seize unanticipated growth outside the core. But diversification comes at a cost. By increasing organisational complexity and diffusing resources, it can leave a company vulnerable to more focused rivals. In addition, many investors prefer executives to leave the diversification to them.

    Change, adapt from diversification to omniversification.

    Omniversify predominately cowithin your organization and mostly avoid omniversification via acquisition. No two cultures will ever mix coherently in a dialectical world. Iraq and Afghanistan are perfect national examples.

    Keep in mind that USA evolved. It was not created. Afghanistan and Iraq have to evolve. We cannot create, recreate them, period.

    Keep in mind: flux (uncertainty) is simple, stux (certainty) is complex. "Indeterminacy is the principal feature of [quantum] intelligence." Pietsch, Shufflebrain. Our brackets. Doug.

    Para. 33 "Despite this, managers can win some of diversification's rewards without paying the full cost. They can follow the "rule of two" by limiting diversification to two markets. Like the human body's doubling up on lungs or kidneys, this provides some diversification against unforeseen loss while keeping the costs of complexity to a minimum.

    Maher's New Rules: Many quantum rules. Many rules!!! Heterogeneous rules. Omniverse rules. Changing rules. There are n¤ 'the' rules!

    Human body is many cells!!! And every one of them carries within it an entire memetically evolvable and evolving genome. That is an example of omniversification. To hell with 'di.' Doug.

    Para. 34 "Managers can also diversify geographically while retaining a tight industry focus, as Mittal Steel has done, or diversify around a set of resources or competencies, as the Royal Bank of Scotland has done by experimenting with multiple channels and brands based on a core operations backbone. In these cases, companies can reap the benefits of diversification while minimising the costs of complexity and diffusion. More 'di.' Dump 'di.'
    Para. 35 "In contrast to specialised resources ­ such as dedicated manufacturing capacity or real estate ­ a war chest of cash or low leverage also allows a company to survive threats and seize opportunities that executives did not anticipate. Cash and borrowing capacity resemble the troops a general holds in reserve waiting to commit to a decisive battle. Do n¤t be conned by 'di.'
    Para. 36 "As the airline industry illustrates, a healthy balance sheet applies equally to downside and upside. With one of the strongest balance sheets in the industry, aircraft manufacturer Embraer survived a sharp fall-off in orders from airlines after the September 11 terrorist attacks, while its highly leveraged competitor Fairchild Dornier went bankrupt. Emirates relied on its healthy balance sheet to order 45 of the double-decker Airbus 380 aircraft on very favourable terms because most of its rivals lacked the wherewithal to acquire the new jets. Do n¤t be logosed and mythosed by 'the.'
    Para. 37 "Whether we like it or not, uncertainty is an unavoidable fact of life. Strategic anticipation, organisational agility and uncertainty absorption offer the promise of helping to seize opportunities and weather threats that we can neither predict nor control. "

    All in all, a great article. Thank you Dr. Sull.

    Doug Renselle
    In Quantonics
    1-317-THOUGHT (USA)

    1950 East Greyhound Pass, Suite 18, #368
    Carmel, INdiana 46033-7730

We also wanted to treat this one as we did Sull's: 'Changing Mental Models in an Uncontrollable World' - By Yoram "Jerry" Wind, Lauder professor of marketing at Wharton School of Business, and Colin Cook, senior fellow at Wharton. However, as you can see it takes significant effort to critique these articles.

This one, we can see, 'Can We Really Master Uncertainty?' By Jean-Louis Barsoux, senior research fellow at IMD, his answer is innate in his title, isn't it?

In summary we can tell our readers that English language in its current evolution is inadequate for authors like these fine people to express well what they want and need to say.

As evidence we offer Quantonics' QELP and QELR.

But it isn't that simple. Allow us to offer a quotation from Doug's current review of Daniel C. Dennett's Breaking the Spell, from Chapter six:

"All of classical science rests upon a 'foundation' of mental pablum: supposition. Supposition based upon social concord. Some call it "positivism," i.e., "socially tragedy of commons sense positivism."

"All 'scientific' facts and truths are made (manufactured) factual and truthful via social concord with a list of suppositives! But, "Vulgi opinio Error," Thomas Digges.

"What if those suppositions are invalid? If those suppositions AKA first principles are invalid can science manufacture facts and truths which are valid?

"Fact: Classical science's suppositions are invalid!

"Allow Doug to repeat a partial list, reality is n¤t suppositionally:

"We offer a longer list of what dialectical 'scientists' have to give up if they want to move closer to understanding a more real quantum reality."

Readers, dialectic is mental pablum. Grasp that from your reading here, if you grasp any novel memes and memeos at all.

In our review of Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions we wrote some similar comments as a Quantonics HotMeme™ titled, 'Classical Static Optimisms.'

To develop 'A New Way of Thinking,' we have to throw those dialectical Classical Static Optimisms away too.

Thank you for reading,

Doug - 25Mar2006.

See you here again in early May, 2006! (With Doug's selective critiques of Parts II, and possibly III and IV of FT-E&Y's series on Novel Ways of Thinking which will help us commence Using Uncertainty to Manage Global Business Enterprises.)



To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

©Quantonics, Inc., 2006-2014 — Rev. 3Jun2010  PDR — Created 18-25Mar2006  PDR
(26Mar2006 rev - Red text additions. Typos. Spelling, etc.)
(2,11-12Apr2006 rev - Princip[le] to principal. Typos in cells 21 & 24. Change p. 22 comments graphic link to 'Ensemble Attractors.')
(2May2006 rev - Minor italicization fix.)
(6,11Sep2006 rev - Superpose 'ad oculos' link. Repair typo 'fau[s]' to 'faux.' Add 'simplification' link under paragraph two of our review of Sull's paper.)
(7Oct2006 rev - Add 'simple' link under para. 5 Classical vav Quantum comments column. Add How Managers Learn to Omnitor Uncertainty review page 22 graphic.)
(21Oct2006 rev - Add para. 22 link to Kuhn's Quantum Puzzle.)
(16Jan2007 rev - Reset legacy red text markups.)
(5Mar2007 rev - Repair spelling of 'heterogeneous.')
(11Feb2008 rev - Reformat slightly. Update latest mailing address.)
(7Jun2008 rev - Add 'Managing Uncertainty Using Adaptation' anchor to paragraph 9 problematics.)
(18Nov2008 rev - Replace wingdings and symbol fonts with gifs. Reset legacy markups.)
(6Dec2008 rev - Add 'omnivalent' links throughout.)
(24Mar2009 rev - Add 'Decision Avoidance' anchor under item three of page top score card. Ditto another Decision Avoidance anchor on main text paragraph nine.)
(17Dec2009 rev - Add 'Strategic' anchor. Adjust colors. Reset legacy markups. Make page current.)
(3Jun2010 rev - Introduce quantum~memeo of 'Uncertainty Projection™'.)