| Page and Paragraph (Whole paragraphs rounded to pages)
 | Transcription from Danah Zohar's
      Quantum Self | Doug's Commentary and Criticism | 
  
    | Page 44, para. 1 | "We have already seen that
      the act of observing quantum systems
      changes them into ordinary objects. The mere fact of our interference in Nature
      transforms her, and that
      fact alone would require that we change our whole way of looking
      at ourselves and our place in the natural world. But worse still
      for those who like to think that the world 'just is as it is,'
      our interference has an unexpected dimension." | Our bold and color highlights follow a code: 
        black-bold - important to read if you are just scanning
        our review
        orange-bold - text ref'd
        by index pages
        green-bold - we see Zohar
        proffering quantumesque memes
        violet-bold - an apparent
        classical problematic
        blue-bold - we disagree
        with this text segment while disregarding context of Zohar's
        overall text
        gray-bold - quotable
        text
        red-bold - our direct
        commentary
        [] - our intra text commentary
       Danah is making a huge mistake
      of attempting to preserve legacy 'objective science.' To do that
      she must retain a long list of anti-quantum classicisms:
 
        wave function 'collapse,'
        collapsed reality as classically objective,
        fermionic reality as classically objective (it isn't),
        'objective' reality as classically 'stoppable' for purposes
        of 'zero momentum' scalar measurement of fermions which never
        stop,
        particle and wave as either-or objectively lisr,
        quantum theory as mechanical (it isn't),
        reality as objective for convenience of physics,
        etc.
       Danah's "...act of observing
      quantum systems changes them into ordinary objects..."
      We can simplify Danah's misnomer here by using quantonics script
      to say, "Quantons evolve based upon all of their many interrelationshipings
      with their both local and global environmentings." Some
      interrelationshipings have greater quantum~partial affectationings
      than others. To counter Danah's concerns re "pernicious individualism,"
      many interrelationshipings may be viewed as a dynamic Quantum
      Society. In this case, as Doug pointed out in a prior segment,
      Quantum Society isn't just anthropochauvinistic-anthropocentrism.
      Quantum~Society isn't just human anymore. In Quantonics one of our major suppositions is that Nature
      is intrinsically aware at all scales of reality. An implicit
      of that is "Nature measures
      herself, and selects outcomes from her own perpetual everywhere
      holographic EIMA
      self~observation."
     | 
  
    | Page
      45, para. 1 | "Not only does observation
      somehow collapse the wave
      function, thus helping to give us a
      world in the first place, but it turns out that the
      particular way in
      which we choose to observe quantum reality partly determines
      what we shall see. The quantum wave function contains
      many possibilities, and it
      can be up to us which of these will be elicited." | Danah's "...give us a world..."
      does not depend upon a classical notion of wave function 'collapse.' Nature's
      creation of fermions is source and agency of what most of us
      refer "material reality." But fermions are dynamic
      flux which never collapse. We may n¤t classically
      measure them, rather we must quantum~monitor their perpetual
      evolutionings. Perpetual quantum~evolutionings abduct
      quantum~reality as radically instable. This violates (i.e., belies)
      classical canonic stability as a dialectical ruse. Quantum~monitoring
      requires instability
      borne of quantum~scintillation!
      1Jan2012 - Doug. Fermions are n¤t 'particulate.' Fermions evolve as
      quantum~flux and may never be classically 'stopped,' for
      convenience of classical 'measurement.' There are n¤ classical
      'scalars' in quantum~reality. Your blood pressure is a great
      example here. Heart rate too. Always changing, always evolving! Bosons, specifically photons, enable us to see, via QED
      interrelationshipings
      with electrons, fermionic (material) reality. Too beware Danah's
      particularity of photons. They too are perpetual fluxings, always
      changing and changing
      all with which they interrelate. Photons literally transmute atoms'
      energy levelings. If photons have enough energy they can transmute atoms themselves!
      Photons are n¤t objects, and they possess n¤ 'classically
      objective properties.' Photons are ensembles (Banesh Hoffman
      calls them "crowds") of waves (AKA 'wave packets')
      essentially comtaining wave ensemble 'pictures' of their local
      holographic surroundings. A photon intra our Sun has an omniffering
      'picture' than a photon in a Peruvian jungle. Readers should put our comments, so far, in light of a Keynesian
      economic goal of "stabilizing world financial systems."
      Readers should see vividly that is an anti-quantum approach,
      and as a result it will fail just as we monitor what is happening
      now during second decade of our 21st century. Economic systems
      are quantum and as such are perpetually uncontrollable and perpetually
      uncertain...as Keynesians are about to omniscover. Fiat doesn't
      enhance economic stability, rather destabilizes all economic
      systems which embrace it. Doug - 3Oct2010. Fiat, just like 'classical concrete,' is an
      abstraction which is delusional. Au is fermionic: quantum~real.
      Fiat is less than bosonic: quantum~bogus! Fiat
      is empty calories of bloated Keynesian GDPs. Compare flow of
      fiat to flow of Au as [Vv]alue. AuGDPs are Value. FiatGDPs are
      faux value. N¤ value!
     | 
  
    | Page 45, para. 2 | "A photon, for example, has
      both position possibilities (a particlelike nature) and momentum
      possibilities (a wavelike nature). A physicist can set up his
      experiment to measure, and hence fix,
      either of these--though in
      fixing one he loses the other
      (Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle). His interference--his measurement
      or observation--seems in some strange way to influence which
      side of its nature the photon will exhibit. The thought experiment
      about Schrödinger's cat isn't complex enough to illustrate
      this, but another experiment conceived by John Wheeler does so
      graphically." | N¤ photon has classically 'static' position. So to
      claim we can measure it is stupidity of highest grossness. N¤ 'thing' in quantum~reality may be 'fixed.' There
      is n¤ valid concept of classical 'zero momentum'
      in quantum~reality. Please obtain a crucial meme here: Absence of 'zero momentum,'
      is an intrinsic quantum~complementation
      of presence of 'absolutely perpetual flux.' Implications of this
      are so vast as to be almost beyond human imaginationings. To
      test your quantum~stage, ponder a Doug query, "Are quantum~isofluxings
      absolutely perpetual fluxings?" To answer that, do we need
      some n¤væl quantum~thinkqing? What proto~suppositions
      are necessary? Doug - 5Oct2010.
     | 
  
    | Page 45, para. 3 | "If a photon is given the option
      to travel through either
      one or both slits in a screen
      (being quantum mechanical
      it has the option to do both), the physicist's experiment will
      have the following result. If he places two particle
      detectors to the right of the slits, he finds that
      the photon behaves like a single particle--it
      follows a definite path through one slit and strikes one particle
      detector." [She offers a figure here, but Doug
      does not show it.] | There is n¤ such idea as, "...particle
      detectors..." in quantum~reality. Why? There
      are n¤ 'particles' in quantum~reality. Photons are dynamic,
      macroscopic, always fluxing, always evolving wave function ensemble
      'packets' of energyings. Detection of said packets elicits quantum~scintillation.
      Scintillation is quantum~uncertain both in modulation of an electron's
      energy level and in demodulation of electron's energy level.
      Using scintillation to classically 'detect' is implicitly a fool's
      errand. (Using scintillation to omnitor
      quantum~processings is a good meme.) Photons do n¤t have classical trajectories! Photons'
      individual Chautauquas perigrinate stochastically, uncertainly,
      n¤n linearly. There is n¤thing classical about
      photons, period. Danah is showing extreme ignorance in this case.
      Doug - 3Oct2010.
     | 
  
    | Page 45, para. 4 | "If, on the other hand, he
      places a detector screen between the two slits and the particle detectors, the
      photon behaves like a wave--it travels through both
      slits, interferes with itself, and leaves an interference pattern
      on the detector screen." [She offers a figure here, but
      Doug does not show it.] | All photons (bosons) and matter waves (fermions) behave like
      waves. Classical 'physicists' and 'scientists' simply choose
      to misinterpret quantum~reality using their objective biases.
      See Doug's QELR of science. She is right about self interference and we then may infer
      interference borne of quantum~entanglement.
     | 
  
    | Page 45, para. 5 | "Physicist and photon are involved
      in a creative dialogue that somehow transmutes
      one of many quantum possibilities into an everyday, fixed reality. Therefore, the act
      of measurement does play some role in deciding what gets measured.
      'In some strange sense,' says Wheeler ' this is a participatory
      universe.'" | See Doug on quantum~scintillation. N¤ reality is n¤r can be 'fixed.' Period!
     | 
  
    | Page 45, para. 6 | 
        "Beyond particles, beyond fields of force, beyond
        geometry, beyond space and time themselves, is the ultimate constituent
        {of all there is}, the still more ethereal act of observer-participancy?"[This is a quote by Zohar of Wheeler, 1983.]
 | We see John Archibald Wheeler
      here appropriately delegitimizing classical ideas of:
      particles, notions of force, geometry, and Newtonian-Einsteinian
      'space-time.' In Doug's opine, Wheeler was a greatest of greats in quantum
      due diligence and innovation. Richard Feynman thought similarly
      re Wheeler.
     | 
  
    | Page 45, para. 7 | "To capture the flavor of this
      observer-participancy, Wheeler recounts an old Hebrew legend.
      In the legend, Jehovah and Abraham are having a heated dialogue
      about who has the upper hand in accounting for why the world
      is as it is." |  | 
  
    | Page 47, para. 1 | "'You would not even exist
      if it were not for me,' Jehovah reminds Abraham. 'Yes, Lord,
      that I know,' Abraham replies, 'but also you would not be known
      if it were not for me.' In more scientific language, Nobel laureate
      Ilya Prigogine makes the same point when he says, 'Whatever we
      call reality, it is revealed to us only through an active construction
      in which we participate.'" |  | 
  
    | Page 47, para. 2 | "In quantum physics, this interdependency
      between the being of a thing
      and its overall environment is called contextualism, and the
      implications of it are vast, both for our whole conception of
      reality and for our understanding of our selves as partners in
      that reality. It is one central reason for my claim that quantum
      theory must contribute eventually to a new world view, with its
      own distinctive epistemological, moral, and spiritual dimensions.
      The epistemological dimension--what is the nature of our knowledge
      and what do we mean by truth?--was expressed very well in the
      phenomenology of French philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty, in
      what he called 'truth within a situation:'" | Of all paragraphs quoted here by Doug, this one carries perhaps
      hugest ramifications for the 'death of Keynesianism,' the 'death
      of FRB,' and the 'end of Cartel' and political intervention in
      fiscal affairs of capitalism. Doug - 3Oct2010. Our environment is changing rapidly. Our cultures are changing
      rapidly. Peoples' awareness of political and fiscal evils perpetrated
      upon them are growing. Keynesians beware! Politicians beware!
      Bankers beware! Your end times are nigh... Doug - 3Oct2010. Doug has avoided Merleau-Ponty simply due his embrace of 'static
      truth.' In quantum~reality, "Truth is an agent of its own
      change." Truthings are quantum~flux, just like all
      else...
     | 
  
    | Page 47, para. 3 | 
        "So long as I keep before me the ideal of an
        absolute observer, of knowledge in the absence of any viewpoint,
        I can only see my situation as being a source of error. But once
        I have acknowledged that through it I am geared to all actions
        and all knowledge that are meaningful to me, then my contact
        with the social in the finitude of my situation is revealed to
        me to the starting point of all truth, including that of science,
        and, since we have some idea of truth since we are inside truth
        and cannot get outside it, all that I can do is define a truth
        within the situation."[This is a quote by Zohar of Merleau-Ponty, 1960.]
 |  | 
  
    | Page 47, para. 4 | "I shall say more about this,
      and about the moral and spiritual dimensions of observer-participancy,
      in later chapters, but a word of caution about quantum contextualism--'truth
      within a situation'--is necessary here." |  | 
  
    | Page 47, para. 5 | "Misunderstood and pushed in
      the wrong
      directions, the
      fact that the
      human observer in some way helps to evoke the reality
      that he observes could have unfortunate cultural implications.
      It could lend the full weight of physics to the currently
      popular, and in my view very pernicious, notion that the individual
      self is the
      sole author of value--that there
      is no 'truth' in this world but only one's 'perspective.'" |  | 
  
    | Page 48, para. 1 | "To some extent, certain of
      the popular books already written about quantum physics have
      encouraged their readers to draw such conclusions. Consider,
      for example, the epistemological and moral implications of Fritjof
      Capra's claim that, as 'the mind of the observer creates the
      properties possessed by electron,' those properties can in no
      sense be called objective. Concerning atomic physics he says:" |  | 
  
    | Page 48, para. 2 | 
        "In transcending the Cartesian division between
        mind and matter, modern physics has not only invalidated the
        classical ideal of an objective description of nature but has
        also challenged the myth of a value-free science...The scientific
        results {scientists} obtain and the technological application
        they investigate will be conditioned by their frame of mind."[This is a quote by Zohar of Fritjof Capra, 1983.]
 |  | 
  
    | Page 48, para. 3 | "Mainstream
      quantum theory itself carries within it the dangers of such subjectivism
      (to wit, Heisenberg: 'The conception of objective reality
      has thus evaporated...'), but Capra pushes it further by introducing
      the notions of value and frame of mind. Such
      thinking is dangerous, and what is more, it is bad physics." | Let's just override her garbage intellect here. Quantum~reality
      is subjective, period! Doug - 3Oct2010. Classical science is doomed. That is what Danah fears, but
      what she refers danger is actually good quantum change which
      will sweep away much antique and passé classical thingking
      methods.
     | 
  
    | Page 48, para. 4 | "Nothing in quantum theory
      itself suggests that observation or
      the observer 'creates' reality (the properties
      of subatomic particles). At the moment of observation,
      some dialogue between the quantum wave function and the observer
      (be this man or machine)
      evokes, and thus gives concrete
      form to, one of the many possible realities inherent
      within that wave function. But there is already the potential
      for some very definite sort
      of reality there--the wave function of a table can't collapse into a cat or a kangaroo.
      It can become only a table." | Her "very definite" implies
      classical certainty to Doug. More BS. | 
  
    | Page 48, para. 5 | "Furthermore, once the wave
      function has collapsed, its
      reality is as objective as
      anything else science studies. Any two (or more) people looking
      at Schrödinger's cat will agree that he is objectively dead--he
      won't look dead to one and alive to another.
      His mortality is not a matter of anyone's 'point of view,' and
      certainly not of someone's 'value judgment.' He is
      just simply, and finally, dead." |  | 
  
    | Page 48, para. 6 | "The whole large set of questions
      raised by the conundrum of Schrödinger's cat, among them
      the role of the human observer in reality formation and the associated
      problem of objectivity, only
      highlight the fact that at this stage we haven't enough understanding
      of human observers and the physics of
      their consciousness to reach any informed conclusions.
      The problem of the cat obviously obliges us to rethink a great
      many of our preconceptions about ourselves and possibly about
      the purpose of our existence, but to meet the heady challenge,
      we must face head-on the problem of
      consciousness." | Nothing classical will ever explain quantum~con(m)sciousness.
      That is a big reason why AI can't seem to get traction. Classical
      notions disable implementation of quantum~AI. Read Bohm and read Karl Pribram. Consciousness is quantum~holographic.
      If you do not grasp that you are already evolutionarily dead.
      Worse, you have n¤ legacy of any worth to future humanity. Abraham's four millennia old Autiot is closer to quantum~reality
      than current objective 'science' will ever be. Energy isn't classically
      'objective.' Waves are flux are energy, folks. Current economic theory is 'state' folks! Thank you for reading, Doug - 3Oct2010.
     |