A Dialogue Twixt Henry and Doug

A Passionate Struggle by a Young Chinese Grad Student
Understand Pirsig's MoQ,
Plus Our
Quantonics' Quantum MoQ Extensions

A series of eleven emails, six from Henry to Doug, and Doug's five responses to Henry.

Minor edits to text for spelling, grammar, added comments (in red), minimal deleted personal items, etc.
(Henry's article(modifier-object) consonant/vowel mapping is more stringent/formal/correct than ours.
We often treat modifier-object as a compound object and apply article(compound-object)
consonant/vowel mappings according that grammatical syntax. It is only Doug's habit.)

Minimal uses of special fonts including MT Extra (for h-bar), rtf (for quantized 'o'),
symbol (delta, lambda, etc.), and wingdings (smileys, tao, arrows, etc).

1 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: Hello From China
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 12:05:07 +0000


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Dear Doug,

So nice (and so hard) have been reading and studying your Quantonics
site, thank you for your contribution!

I have translate A Course in Consciousness (ACIC) into Chinese, and would you
please say something about ACIC?

ACIC's site as below:

Thanks and Regards,


2 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: Re: Hello From China
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 19:30:08 -0500


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Hello Henry,

We have noticed 'hits' from your web site and went there to visit today and
when we noticed it first a couple of weeks ago.

Our first visit you had some superb artwork which appeared to us very quantum!

We also find your site's 'title' intriguing! Quantum Chan (Zen) School 2002,
and something similar to that like Quantum Chan Students/Study Club. We like
both titles and we are gratified that you chose to link to our site, and we are
mentioning you in our November, 2002 News which will appear on our site early
in December.

Please apprise what your parenthetical (and so hard) implies. We want to help
to make it easier for you and for your students.

We are looking at your "A Course in Consciousness" now. It will take us some
time to digest 142 pages, but we shall try.

Mean time, please provide more information about your QCS2002 site so we can
tell our community more about it.

If there is any way we can help, please let us know.

Also, are you aware of Quantum Mind symposium in Tucson, AZ mid March, 2003.
See our top page under Sidis. Satinover, Nadeau/Kafatos, Mae-wan Ho, Penrose,
et al., will be there.

We look forward with anticipation hearing more from you.

Kind regards,


3 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: Re: Hello From China
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 05:41:13 +0000


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Hi Doug,

What a surprising pleasure hearing from you! Actually, I have sent emails to
you several times before via another two local email servers, but all
returned with failure messages...eventually, I had to change to this hotmail
account, thanks God, it works.

Another surprise you have noticed my Q-Chan School site, and so many thanks
and pleasure for your appreciation and encouragement! To be honest, I should
tell this QCS2002 site is directly inspired by your wonderful Quantonics
works and site! Thanks again. So, it is natural to include studying your
Quantonics as one of majors of QCS2002...And sorry for linking to your site
without asking for your approval until now.

When I first encountered your Qauntonics site few weeks ago (via some links
concerning ZMM, I'm still a new comer for ZMM and have not yet read ZMM
thoroughly), I made a firm decision immediately to study it in depth as
possible as I can...Maybe, it is my previous extensive and intensive reading
experience and everlasting pursue for philosophical and mystic understanding
of life have directed me your site...seems it is so natural, and it is an
emerging progress for my pursue.

As for myself, maybe not much to say yet...I am a man of just over 30, born
and grown up in South China, live in Guangzhou City. When I was a college
student ten years ago, my major was Applied Physics (little shame my present
knowledge about quantum physics is not enough to catch up)...from my
teenage, I have been very interested in philosophical and mystic
reading...especially when internet available, more and more materials
exposing to me...all these experience lead me to present study—Quantum and

Right, I do feel some hard [difficulties] studying your site. I do mean I had to
digest it bite by bite, no pain no gain, the hardship is worthwhile! Besides,
English is not my first language, anyway, I think I can make it!

Our major intent to establish QCS2002 is to gather more and more local
Chinese people who have similar interest and pursue to create a interactive
study and communication environment to help progress in understanding of
life. At this starting stage, one of our major concerns is to introduce some
wonderful English works to Chinese people, including gathering materials in
electronic or paper format, at the same time, picking some to translate into
Chinese...I absolutely believe your Quantonics site is one of our first
choices! And I think we would need your help as things going. Thanks in

As for the "Quantum Mind" symposium in Tucson, I ever heard of it via some
relevant sites and your site. Right, it's a gathering of "Quantum elite"! What
a excite! By the way, I am glad you often mention Mae-wan Ho, a Chinese elite
scientist, I feel proud of her.

So many thanks and pleasure interacting with you!

Nice Regards and Respect for you all,


A Further message appended on same day:

Hi, Dear Doug,

I am not sure whether you received my last mail (21Nov) as I am waiting for
our further interaction. Today, I just finished my first reading of
ZMM (electronic format)...naturally, Lila is the next...but, I've not got Lila
yet, could you please (if convenient) send me a copy of Lila in electronic or
paper format (for I can not pay internationally yet).

How is it going with Prof.Stanley Sobottka's A Course In
(ACIC)? I have ever paid 4 months to translate the course into
Chinese...hope I could hear some comments on it from you.


Best Regards to you and Beth.


4 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: Re: Hello From China
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 09:26:12 -0500


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Hello Henry!

Just received your notes addressed to both mail boxes.

We are commencing a three month break from Quantonics and all our work here. We
are headed for Oregon's coast. Our efforts will be much reduced while we are on
break. However, we intend to spend some times with ACIC so that we can offer
some reactions to it. Since you wrote your most recent emails, we are packing and
preparing for our trip. Lots to do for a three month hiatus.

We are delighted with this PRC contact and your ambassadorial interrelationships
with USA and especially University of Virginia. We want to keep this
correspondence active. Just a slight warning that our reaction times will be
just a little slower than usual. J

We need to tell you that Doug is n¤t a Ph.D., at least n¤t formally. Beyond
baccalaureate, Doug is self-taught. His reasons are related to Pirsig's
teachings: Academia is mostly Static Quality. Too, it is paradigmatic, and it
suffers what Thomas Kuhn called "Disciplinary Matrices." Also, we want total
freedom as to which materials we study and pursue. As such our memes in
Quantonics are not formally, academically "approved." We infrequently receive
some rather nasty comments from some classical 'scientists' who see us as
"deconstructionists," etc.

Regarding Lila, it is not available in electronic format. Also, ZMM, in that
electronic format, may be missing some important pages around Pirsig's
discussion of "Mu."

We can snail mail you copies of both. We pick up used copies in used book
stores here rather often. If you want us to do that, send us a PO Box near you
and we will send them there.

When we examine ACIC, we will do so using similar memes we use to live by.
Let's look at some examples:

  1. Pirsig teaches us that reality is more qualitative than quantitative, and an
    emphasis on quantitative/objective comes from ancient Greek, et al.,
    influences. As a result of Greek influences, Western Culture currently places an
    emphasis on objective over subjective (O over S) rather than S over O. A side
    point which is interesting to observe here is that superposition of S over O is a Tao
    symbol. (See our animations.) Quantum reality is a subjective (and as Mikhail N.
    Epstein at Emory says "subjunctive") reality. Our big culture wars now are about
    global societies evolving through a series of cultural changes. From SOM
    (imperative/static/objective/closed/homogeneous/EEMD) to CR AKA Cultural
    Relativism (deconstructionist/static/objective/closed/heterogeneous; see our
    Philosophical Battle Winner) to MoQ/Quantum/Quantonics
    (subjunctive/animate/subjective/open/EIMA). Most universities in our USA teach
    either SOM or CR. Simply, our current cultural revolution is from O over S to S
    over O. We need to review ACIC from latter perspective because we, as Gandhi
    said, "...must become the change we seek." (We infer Gandhi's as quantum changæ.)
  2. Bergson teaches us that SOM and CR both share two major delusions:

       a. that reality is stable, and
       b. that objects in reality are independent.

    If ACIC presumes these major delusions, you can see that we will have great
    trouble with it.
  3. Linguistically, SOM and CR worship under a banner of dialectic. Again,
    simply, dialectic presumes O over S, and it presumes Bergson's two grand
    delusions. From this, it becomes rather apparent that English language in
    particular is a O over S language. We have found through great effort that,
    without remediation, standard English is incapable of describing quantum
    . That is why you see our enormous efforts to remediate English
    language on our site. English offers subtleties like your home language where
    'wu' has potentially 100s of flavors and hues. Similarly for 'yu.' For ACIC to be
    quantum real it needs to be a quanton(wu,yu) which is a fabulous metaphor of
    quantum reality. That is a very good way to think about how ACIC can be
    Quantonic. That may give you some feeling for how we will proceed.

We can go on and on and on here, but we are just re-writing what is on our
Quantonics web site.

To allow an ongoing dialog regarding ACIC, and to break this job up into smaller
chunks, is it OK if we start with book's conclusions first? Another approach is
for us to just put book's whole text in Quantonics' review format and do it page
by page as we have done other books, but that is a huge task and will take many

Let us know what you think, Henry,


5 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: Please send me copies
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 16:18:03 +0000


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Hi, Doug,

Thanks for your prompt reply, sorry for giving you a extra work on
ACIC. Actually,I do think there's something different between Quantonics and
ACIC, but, I can't figure out where the differences lies yet...this is not
trivial for me, maybe I should leave it alone for myself to search...
I have realized any real big question must be left to oneself! Maybe this is
Pirsig's STUCKNESS in ZMM or Koan in Zen...

Before my first reading on ZMM, I have spent about 10 days to browse your
site's most pages. Surely, 10 days' reading for such a site as Quantonics is
very superficial, but, did give me a flavor! I really feel fortunate having met
your site! Your site brings out some big questions for me, I think I am going
with your site from now on and on. Maybe, if not your site, I will miss
ZMM, really a heart-moving book for me!

Thanks for your explanation on Quantonics in 1) 2) 3), as you said you were
re-writing what is on your Quantonics web site. But that does not mean I have
understood what you have written. Much work for me to catch up, of course, with
much exciting pleasure.

I understand your warning about Academia, this's why I have never thought
about further academic education...often, I really feel lonely about my own
philosophical and mystic inner search (but,no way to out)...that is why I
love ZMM so much!

Seems your site and ZMM have given me some clue to further my private
search...I don't know what to say yet...

As for your review on ACIC, I'd like it as you like.

I do need your help, please send copies of ZMM and Lila to my postal address as


Thank you for your help, if there is anything I could help, let me know. It's
really my pleasure if I can help.

Best wishes and enjoy your break!


6 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: Preliminary comments on ACIC conclusions.
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 12:18:11 -0500


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Hello Henry!

Thank you for your kind remarks!

We will help you as much as we can. Our help will be more limited due our quarter long
sabbatical, but we will still continue to help. Count on this: we want to help and we shall help!

If you have questions about our site, start making a list of them. Prioritize them and then please
send them one at a time which allows us quick help responses to you. We tend toward much
verbosity (for clarification, as you will see below), so one bite at a time helps to manage our work

We will send you those two books ASAP, but remember this is our holiday season and
everything moves more slowly.

We have a first cut on Conclusion 1. of ACIC:

Text from Ch. 26:

1. The premise: Consciousness is all there is. Another word for Consciousness is the impersonal,
yet intimate, I.

In Quantonics we adhere a quantum meme that reality issi quanton(n¤nactuality,actuality).

From a 'spiritual' perspective then, n¤nactuality represents a n¤nconceptual 'wu' part of reality
which holds unlimited potential and mediates our conceptual 'yu' part of reality. In our previous
email to you we showed it as quanton(wu,yu). (Readers should/may view a quantum analogy:


In quantum physics, we extend its classically conceptual, conjugate reality to include 'wu.' Physics'
conjugate reality looks like this in Dirac notation: < y* | y >. That Sheffer stroke [SOM's wall]
objectively cuts conjugate reality into two independent conjugates. We call it dichon(y*, y). Our
comma-space we also call "SOM's wall," which is analogous a Sheffer stroke.

We fix that classical dichon like this, using Quantonic script: quanton(y*,y), and our
comma-nospace represents quantum reality's everywhere-included-middle-associative (EIMA)
animate c¤mplementarity. But that is just a quanton of actual conjugates. To extend actuality to
include n¤nactuality we offer a novel meme of "comjugation." Our use of an 'm' remediates a
classical 'con.' J Again, using Quantonic script we can now show both n¤nactuality and actuality
together like this: quanton(Y*,quanton(y*,y)). Now capital Y represents quantum reality's
quantum n¤nactuality comjugate which quantum c¤mplements all quantum conjugate actuality
which we show using lower case y* and y. (Readers must be aware that Quantonics sees at least
these variations of c¤mjugation:

To us, quantum reality is "~thogonal.")

Now our question is: "Is consciousness just a classical actuality or is consciousness a
quanton(n¤nactuality,actuality) and quanton(wu,yu)?" Also, is it quanton(DQ,SQ)?

We think Stanley Sobottka, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Virginia may be
describing classical consciousness and n¤t describing quantum comsciousness. A classical view
ignores quantum n¤nactuality. A quantum view includes it.

See how you like this approach.

If you do, we will treat his other conclusions below similarly.

Kind regards,


"2. The conclusions:

  1. I do not exist. I am not an object or entity. There is no "I".
  2. Nothing exists. There are no objects or entities.
  3. Whatever is supposed to happen will happen. Whatever is not supposed to happen cannot
    happen. There is no doer, and there is no choice.
  4. The entire manifestation is an expression of Love." Sobottka, from Ch. 26, ACIC
    (Our use of numbered list.)

Note that in Conclusion 1, Sobottka claims that his version of consciousness is 'I.' Here, in Conclusion 2,
he tells us 'I' does not exist, therefore we must conclude that consciousness does not exist! Indeed, now he
tells us "Nothing exists." Perhaps we will learn in ACIC's text that Sobottka uses a novel, nonclassical
'definition' of 'exist.' Ignoring linguistic issues, Sobottkan personal — unique to him — contextual issues, and
already acknowledged English language problematics, allow us to say that, in Quantonics, we would
re-write Dr.Sobottka's ACIC conclusions like this:

  1. All reality exists as quantons and quantons(quantons(quantons...))... Quantons are n¤t classical
    objects and classical material entities. We presume all 'I' are quantons.
  2. Reality 'exists' as quanton(n¤nactuality,actuality). There are only quantons and their n¤nactual
    quantum absolute flux c¤mplements.
  3. "Anythings can happenings." There are n¤ quantum limitations on what may happen ultimately
    or whatings may happenings nextings. There are quantonic doers in quantum reality, whose
    'doings' issi quantum pr¤cesses of unending choosings. Quantum reality's quantons are always
    locally ensemble choosings what appears locally 'better,' based upon both local and nonlocal
    coobsfectings. (Readers note that quantum reality, in Quantonics, is a present-participle reality.)
  4. The entire manifestation is an expression of unending quantum change toward 'better' under
    absolute quantum flux impetus. Quantum reality is ensemble recursively EIMA both self- and
    co-aware. Massively parallel quantum ensembles' both ensemble and individuate quantons
    make asynchronous, individuate choices at up to Planck rates. "Whatings happenings nextings"
    then are always ensemble (in)determinate, acausal, non 1-1 correspondent, unpredictable,
    stochastic, and probabilistic. Quantum reality is n¤t a classical cause-effect reality, rather it is an
    ensemble self- and co-aware choosings-outcomings reality. This is what we refer as
    "consciousness." Quantum "consciousness" is only possible in a reality whose ensemble middles
    are included.
See Jeffrey Satinover's The Quantum Brain.
See Kafatos and Nadeau's The Conscious Universe; see both 1990 and 2000 editions.
We can re-write this in purely Pirsigean terms for anyone who wants to see it.
We added this red text on 11Dec2002 - Doug. We did it as a part of putting this dialog together as a single web page.


7 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: Re: Preliminary comments on ACIC conclusions.
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 04:56:49 +0000


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Hi, Doug,

Thanks for your help!Your willing to help really means much.

Your site does conjure questions inside me (I think these questions are
mostly on my own side), I must face them seriously. But first, I should pay
more time and further effort to study your site and your recommended books (I
want and I shall) rather than just push my questions out simply (sometimes, I
have no idea how to put them out yet). I mean I should distill my own real
big questions first to encounter an real stuckness. In this process, I'll make
list of them.

When I go through your comments on Conclusion 1 of ACIC, I do think you've
got the crux! As you said:

"Now our question is: 'Is consciousness just a classical actuality or is
consciousness a quanton(nonactuality,actuality) and quanton(wu,yu)?'"

This question is one of my major questions also. Confusions such as whether
monism or pluralism, dialectic or quantonic...coming up. Actually, ACIC does
bring me some obsession, maybe like this: obsession(me,ACIC). Now I involve my
energy in Quantonics step by step.

You suggest a presumption as:

"We think Stanley Sobottka, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of
Virginia may be describing classical consciousness and not describing
quantum consciousness. A classical view ignores quantum nonactuality. A
quantum view includes it."

Is it possible for another presumption?

Conclusion is a good start, and, do you think to investigate how ACIC reach
its conclusion is a good next too? Do you think sometimes process is more
meaningful than only a dry conclusion? Maybe, it's not bad to comment on
ACIC's contents.

I do think your ongoing reviews on ACIC will be of tremendous help for me
and many others. But, I do not want this extra work spoils your holiday.

Thanks again for two books.

Nice holiday!


8 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: Dry conclusions.
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 13:48:56 -0500


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Hello Henry!

Your books are in USnail. You should have them within 2-4 weeks we guess.

Our interpretations of ACIC's conclusions probably will not change having read its entire text, but
we want to see how close we come assessing ACIC (in terms of Quantonics world views) just
based upon looking at ACIC's conclusions.

Of course we must use language as our only means to interpret ACIC's author's intent. Certainly
we do not nor may we immediately share his context. His mind and experiences are entirely
different from ours. So, we are limited to our own interpretation/hermeneutics of ACIC's text.

Just like what happens when you visit/read our site, you have no way to share Doug's
mental_entropy/experience/know-ledge. That is why our dialogue is so important. To help you
"get inside Doug's head."

We oversimplify and break reality into three philosophical categories: SOM, CR, and

We use those as referents for our writing and dialogues. If you do that, then you will better be
able to understand where we are contextually. Roughly, SOM corresponds inanimate
excluded-middle monism/homogeneity; CR corresponds inanimate excluded-middle
pluralism/heterogeneity; and MoQ corresponds animate included-middle pluralism/heterogeneity.

SOM believes "one global truth fits one global context." CR believes "many relative truths fit one
global context." MoQ with Quantonics extensions believes "many quantum ensemble
uncertainties fit many Mae-wan Ho (both islandic/autonomous) percepts
among/interrelating/associating many Mae-wan Ho (cohesive) quantum co(m)texts. See our
Philosophical Battle Winner page linked from our top page, near top.

For us, obsession(Henry,ACIC) is normally thought of by classicists as all there is. To interpret
your script in our Quantonics version of expanded quantum reality we would write something like
this: quanton(nonactuality,obsession(Henry,ACIC)). It's that simple! Pirsig's version, interpreted
in Quantonicsese is reality issi quanton(DQ,SQ). To expand your obsession using Pirsigean script
we do this: quanton(DQ,obsession(Henry,ACIC)). All we are doing is three novel memes:

  1. Adding DQ/nonactuality to your own view to expand it to quantum reality,
  2. Included-middle associate (ensemble quantum probability-distribution-superpose)
    everything with everything to eliminate classical notions of objective independence,
  3. Animate all of that via EIMA immersion in quantum (up to Planck rate) flux.

We think Professor Sobottka left all of that out of his new view of consciousness, and we think
that based upon our limited capability linguistic assessment of his conclusions. (As an example
here, Sobottka appears unaware of Pribram and Bohm's views of universe and consciousness
as "holographic." Their views are compatible subsets of our quantum ensemble superposed
consciousness as EIMA all reality.)

You asked, "Is it possible for another presumption?" Of course! There are an unlimited number
of potential presumptions. We thought you wanted us to offer our hermeneutics in light of
MoQ/Quantum/Quantonics perspectives.

Our next effort will be to finish other conclusion items (four more), and then go on to Ch. 1 and
proceed from there.

We should be able to do a short piece each 2-3 days.

Our next emails will be sent to you from Oregon. We won't arrive there until 1Dec2002, so you
will not hear from us again until about 2Dec2002.



9 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: Re: Dry conclusions.
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 04:01:49 +0000


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Hi, Doug,

Right, "get inside Doug's head", no matter how I try, I just can not have a
taste of Pirsig's "Value" yet!! Worse, I even don't know where to
start. Seems, only I can do is to read, to think, to wait...come on please. What the
hell is "Quality"?!

As for three oversimplified categories, surely,I belong to SOM and CR. CR is
really chaotic and confusing. Your Philosophical Battle Winner page, I have
read twice before. As many other your pages, I had to read again and again.

What a ugly struggle and confusion inside me.

To my surprise, I never thought I would receive such a help as yours. So many

Best, and enjoy Oregon.


10 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: What is Quality?
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:31:02 -0500


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Hello Henry!

We have arrived and are comfortably moved-in. Here is a good overview of ...

Yes... Quality...

One of our favorite descriptions of Quality is Richard Powers' following text where he is
describing Bach's Thirty Goldberg Variations, plus two arias — one alpha and one omega —
notice that 32 is a base-2 power of five which relates to human chromosomal DNA encoding of
nucleic acids as mRNA whose triplet codons select individual amino acids used for
emerscenturing human proteins — Quality! — or as a Wall Street Journal review called it, "music
and(to) molecules:"

"Ultimately the Goldbergs are about the paradox of variation, preserved divergence,
the transition effect inherent in terraced unfolding, the change in nature attendant
upon a change in degree. How necessity might arise out of chance. How difference
might arise out of more of the same. By the time the delinquent parent aria returns to
close out the set, the music is about how variation might ultimately free itself from
the instruction that underwrites it, sets it in motion, but nowhere anticipates what
might come from experience's trial run."
From Powers' 1991 'The Goldbug Variations.'

We wrote this following comment regarding that quotation: "Few classicists will ever grasp
Powers' intueme of emergence as quantum c¤mplementarity, i.e., sophism. It takes minds like
Bergson, James, Pirsig, Sidis, and Powers to understand what a pluralist-paralogosist means
when s-he says, "classical negation is classically subjective." See Bergson's discussion of negation
in his Topic 39 of his Creative Evolution. Consider what enormous philosophical and scientific
impact that recognition has for classical thinkers and their CTMs."

Quality is emergent (emerscenturable, emerscenturing). Classical objects are incapable of n¤vel
animate quantum emergence! Classical objects (as ideally perceived by classicists) have no
intrinsic (i.e., Natural) means of "[ing] [themselves] from the instruction[s] which underwrites
[them]." Quantons (, Nature's quantum building 'blocks,') are intrinsically, physially capable of
n¤vel emergence. They are capable of freeing themselves from whence they came — and
quantum both-all emersing n¤vel while-and immersing old. Pirsig, in ZMM, refers this Dynamic
Quality as "Romantic Quality," and says, "It's the leading edge of the engine, a two-dimensional
surface of no real significance unless you understand that the train isn't a static entity at all."
See near end of ch. 24, pp. 254-5/373 of ZMM Bantam paperback.

Compare our quantum emerscenture to classical manufacture. Classicists, SOMites, see
(non-Quality) reality as static lisr building blocks (like tinker toys and children's ideally
separable/separate objective A=B+C toy blocks). Students of Quantonics, MoQites, see Quality
reality as dynamically emerscenturable and emerscenturing. We were/are n¤t manufactured
block-by-block in our Mothers' wombs — we were/are emerscenturing — quantum (up to)
Planck rate, "music to molecules!" View "music" as Quantonic isoflux, quantum vacuum flux,
Pirsig's DQ, vacuum energy space, Northrop's undifferentiated continuum, etc. View "molecules"
as quantum mixtures (quantons) of negentropy (isons), zeroentropy (bosons), and posentropy

Each of our bodies' molecules/cells/quantons has a 'life-time' of only ~170 days. Cell 'death'
(apoptosis) OEDC transitions cells back to isobeing while simultaneously replacing 'dying' cells
with n¤vel 'living' cells. Notice how classicists view either 'living' or 'dying' as a dichon. But it is
n¤t a dichon! It issi quanton(isobeing,being), quanton(nonactuality,actuality),
quanton(immerging,emerging). As a human, right now, during these (hopefully J) very moments of
epiphany, you are an amalgam of both life and death, both living and dying, yet classically we
refer that amalgam as either 'life' and 'living,' or 'death' and 'dying.' Our classical anti-Quality,
"Church of Reason," EOOO blinders (from family, friends, training, education, acculturation, etc.)
prevent us from viewing our own lives and all Nature as Quantonic.

Where classicists do non-Quality architecture, students of Quantonics do Quality emerscitecture.

Henry, face it. If it were easy...Pirsig would not have written two books to try to help us

William James (1842-1910) would not have changed his entire view of reality during his last half
of life and spent his last year and days writing about it. James changed from a Parmenidean,
Aristotelian, Kantian, Hegelian, Newtonian either/or SOMitic monism to a quasi-quantum
both/and animate (pragma-tic/action-itic; Greek for 'pragma' is 'action') pluralism a la Charles

Jules Henri Poincaré (1854-1912) would not have told us over and over that Value is not in
'properties' of objects, rather Value is in interrelationships among non-objective, non-mechanical
real 'entities.' (See end of movie 'Pi' where Max tells a Rabi that value is n¤t in numbers, rather
value is in interrelationships between (among ensembles of) numbers. For example, love is an
interrelationship which is Quality. Love is quantum qualitative, not classically quantitative. Love is
in interrelationships among people, not classically objective properties OF people. Imagine,
similarly, how you feel when you go to buy an new car, a new home, a new set of golf clubs. Do
you see how you REALLY act/pragma on Quality, not as classicists presume on quantity?)

Henri Louis Bergson (1859-1941) would not have labored so extensively to try to help his peers
~100 years ago grasp his intentions for "duration." Consider how Bergson's duration is a very
close analogue of Quantonics' quanton. Bergson's duration is also analogous quantum uncertainty,
as good an analogue of quantum uncertainty as we can offer. His duration explains Poisson's bracket
of position and momentum and of time and energy and of all other quantum uncertainty interrelationships
of which all reality composes itself. Problematically, Poisson's bracket is usually conceived classically
as a dichon. That's why we show it as a quanton, instead. See our quanton ensemble quantum interrelationships.
Bergson's duration is what Zeno of Elea was talking about in his four paradice. Bergsonian duration
AKA quantum uncertainty AKA quantons AKA ensemble quantum interrelationships AKA Quality
AKA quantons AKA metaphors AKA memes AKA etc., etc., etc. Bergson's duration is what happens
when Pirsig's DQ and SQ quantum included-middle animately superpose one another and qualitatively
coaffect and coobsfect one another. Red text added 10May2003 - Doug.

Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) underwent a similar (to James) late-in-life SOM to ~MoQ
conversion from logic, mathematics, and science to philosophy which he documents in his 1929
Process and Reality. Whitehead co-wrote Principia Mathematica (1910-1913; three volumes)
with Bertrand Russell and subsequently denied it as abject failure. He perceived their Principia
as a failure due its non-Quality Bergsonian "radical mechanism." Hilbert never was capable of
grasping omnifferences among Quality and non-Quality. (Search our site for "radical formalism.")

John Forbes Nash became schizophrenic in his efforts to leave SOMland and enter a more
quantum MoQland. Why? We venture that he was trained as an ideal SOMitic classicist, and
thus he had no means of managing quantum reality's vast pluralities which appear to classicists as
paradice AKA sophisms. But quantum reality is, to any classical mind, paradoxical, sophist,
equivocal, prevaricative, even "nonsense" AKA "Wu!"

We need a larger Quantonic multiversal omni-view to be able to grasp quantum Quality.
Spiritually we need a n¤vel faith which early 3rd millennium humankind appear 'not' to easily intuit.

Quality: is liking and appreciating that which moves and emerges/immerges, while simultaneously
realizing that motion is n¤t analytic, n¤t classical. We cann¤t analyze an ocean wave. We cann¤t,
as Mae-wan Ho explained (in her the Rainbow and the Worm), analyze coherent, massively
parallel 'orchestrated' cellular motion of a human's flexing arm. Even though classicists believe it is
possible, we cann¤t analyze a baby being conceived, wombed, born, and experiencing ontic
development, aging and subsequent immersion. Why? Reality is quantum. Quantum reality is
absolute flux. Quantum reality is n¤t analytically stoppable.

Quality is, from a MoQ/Quantum/Quantonic perspective, absolute change:

changes all - complete from a quantum perspective
always changes - consistent from a quantum perspective


SOM's absolute material, objective, predicate-logical, state-ic/inanimate truth:

states all truths - complete from a classical conspective
always state THE truth - consistent from a classical perspective

Quality says that quantity is a subspecies of quality! All classical concepts are subspecies of
Quality! Ponder how this is a radical inversion of what Parmenides and Aristotle taught and
believed. They believed that quality and good are subspecies of absolute, logical, material,
objective truth. THE truth. But if there is only ONE TRUTH, then reality may have only ONE
CONTEXT in which that ONE TRUTH always holds. And that, Henry, is classicism's great
deign of feign sheigm/shame (playing with words here)! We know that quantum reality is not a
monism of one truth in one context! Rather, quantum reality is a plurality of many truths in many
contexts. We call this, "con(m)trafactual, incommensurable, quantum locality/localities." From
our every-day experiences here in Earth, we observe how Chinese islands of culture are vastly
omnifferent (our coined term) Arabian, East Indian, Japanese, Javanese, Tibetan, and Western
cultures. Reality shows us she is quantum plural, n¤t classically monistic. Reality shows us her
heterogeneity every day in every way.

If you understand and begin practicing life in a more quantum way (you already do, naturally, in
some ways, e.g., you found us J), then you are beginning a Chautauqua away from SOM, away
from quantitative TRUTH toward MoQ qualitative/Quality interrelationships. Those
interrelationships are Poincaréan. We call them "quantons." Quantons are quantum Qualitative
interrelationships. Value lies in those interrelationships (not inside objects as classical properties).
When (, actively/pragma-tively,) we improve those interrelationships reality evolves toward 'better.'
Acting (act-ing AKA pragma-ting; also, view actin (actin-g), in original Greek, as rays) as an agent
of Nature and trying to help her evolve toward 'better' is what Pirsig calls "Good." His first Good is
DQ which is our animate impetus to act (pragma). His second Good is SQ which is capable of
making choices (quantum measurement events or Quality Events) which improve all SQ
interrelationships. Note how 'improve' is a relative meme among many quantum islands of culture
or whatever. (In quantum reality, 'improve' is how we describe (n¤t 'define') quantum interrelationships
which are getting better in terms of

One culture may not see what another culture does as an improvement. For example, classicism
views our quantum improvements above as 'paradoxes.' So which is really 'better?' Nature solves
this easily! She says whatever survives is 'better.' If Quantonics is 'better' it will survive. If ideas
in ACIC are 'better' they will survive. If Quantum Chan Study Group is 'better' it will survive.

Quality says that classical mechanics are naïve. For example, a constant, unchanging zero is
naïve. Ditto one. Those are mechanical, ideal objective concepts. They are incapable of
quantum memetic evolution. As you have seen on our web site a quantum_1 is animate, and
capable of quantum quality evolution toward 'better.' We can show how classical mechanical
notions of inanimate mass, length, and time too are radically mechanical classical naïveties. We
do that in our Quantonics web site. Similarly, any concept of classical identity or cloning.
Neither are possible, in general, in quantum reality.

Value: that DQ (in interrelationships with SQ; view Henry, Doug, et al., as SQ in animate
interrelationships with DQ) which brings fresh pleasure, that which surprises (due its novelty, e.g.,
having one's first child, listening to music a first time, riding a roller coaster first time, falling in love
a first time, seeing a new car which one has not seen before which makes one feel awe in its
beauty), raw change (an accident which makes one assess one's own mortality), going too fast by
any means, receiving an unexpected gift or help, experiencing an epiphany (about one's own
beliefs, experiencing "The Old Ones," receiving help from Sidis' "reserve energy," feeling
Feynman share your I-cubed, and so on...)...

Henry, Doug used to be a died in wool SOMite. He believed we could make classical either/or
assessments about almost every thing and every decision in life. Doug was "classically
enlightened." Actually, that kind of thing-king is not a "French enlightenment" of past's ~18th
century, rather it is a Western cultural "endarkenment" which shuts out Value and Quality!
Classical predicate-logical thing-king turns Quality off! Disables Quality.

How does it turn Quality off? It claims Quality does not exist (because Quality is subjective). It
tells us that reality is stable (Quality is change, and classical reality is stable, therefore classical
reality has no Quality.). It tells us that objects in classical reality are "excluded-middle-"
independent; they can only have propertyesque "interactions." (Quality requires compenetrating
"included-middle" interrelationships among Quality-real 'entities.')

When you get married, buy a car, buy a home, decide what to have for dinner, decide how to
vote, decide which book to read next, decide when to take a holiday, choose to make love, look
at a work of all those cases which rises to fore of your thinking? Logic? Emotion?

SOMites like to think that their choices are classically logical. But think about that. Is that
assessment accurate? Almost never, in our daily lives, do we make those decisions/choices
based upon either TRUE or FALSE! Rather, we make those decisions/choices based upon what
we LIKE!

THAT is Quality in action!

We are not logical beings. We are quantum beings.

But most of our, especially Western, cultures tell/train/teach/proselytize us to "be logical."

"The Enlightenment's" classical science treats reality as if she were "logical," as if she had no
Quality. But reality is ALL Quality! She recursively commingles herself and emerses/immerses
her works. She always changes (is not classically stable). And all her works compenetrate,
interpenetrate, co-inside/co-here one another. Classical objects are incapable of compenetration
due their axiomatic "independence."

When you get to a point where you believe what Doug just wrote, then you will be in a n¤vel
duration of learning what Quality is. That is a PROCESS. It is quantum pr¤cess. It is unending.

We call it quantum reality, because what we have learned about quantum science shows us that
quantum science best aligns what we have just written.

Our S V O transitioning animation shows this Classical to Quantum/MoQ transition: S and O
classically separate from one another to S and O as a Tao ([) 'S' superposing () a
Tao 'O.' That (black-white static Tao) 'S' is backward. Look at it in a mirror to see it as an 'S.'
In Quantonics we see S as quantum wave and O as quantum 'particle.' Thus Tao can show us
quantum wave-particle duality. This is a 'Chan' metaphor of quantum reality's animate

Doug is Tao. Henry is Tao. All is Tao. All is quantum. All is Quality. Tao is in Quality and
Quality is in Tao. Quantum reality is in Quality and Quality is in Quantum Reality. When you
read 'Lila,' you will see Pirsig tell Richard Rigel (subtly; "Lila has Quality." and "Quality has Lila."
See our Li-la Semantics. Lila is Quality's animate "divine dance.") that Lila is in Quality and
Quality is in Lila. "We are in It and It is in us" (paraphrased/interpreted from Eugen Herrigel's,
Chan/Zen in the Art of Archery).

Quality is Tao. Quality is both/and. Quality is both in us and we are in Quality. Quality
compenetrates all reality. Quality is both DQ (animacy impetus for change of SQ but unseeable
by SQ) and SQ (latched bosonic/fermionic what we see as actual). Quality is both DQ and SQ
as a quanton(DQ,SQ). Value is Static Patterns of Quality which have tentatively latched in
actuality. SQ is Static Patterns of Value (actuality). DQ is source and change agency/impetus for
all emersions and immersions of SQ.

Classical thing-king denies DQ's existence as "subjective."

Classical thing-king only "sees" a fermionic (J.C. Maxwellian posentropy) subset of SQ. It only
"sees" what is "known" and denies "existence" of that which is "unknown."

To us, now as students of Pirsig's MoQ, teaching classical SOMitic thing-king is a crime! It is, in
our view, responsible for most of Earth's "evils." Pirsig tells us that MoQ's only "evil" is "Exclusive
Static Quality." Why is ESQ evil? It (classically) denies DQ's impetus for change. How? It
denies DQ's "existence."

Henry, does that appear helpful as clarification of what Quality is?

Kind regards,


11 of 11 — Acronyms used in these emails. Unique Quantonic terms used in these emails, see: Coined Terms, English Remediation, English Problematics.

Subject: Re: What is Quality?
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 05:30:10 +0000


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

Hi, Doug,

So nice hearing from Oregon...

Thanks for such a unexpected explanation. To be a student of MoQ, Quantonics, I
am Doug's student receiving your considerate teaching as a student of
primary step. What a unexpected luck of mine!

To be honest, I am lost in your website (right now, I am reading your review on
Bergson's Time and Free Will) and your teaching. I know I must go on with
this hard work, for I feel there is something can lead me out of my present
paradoxical life...excited, anxiety, frustration, hope, you said
Henry must "face it".

I see, I am not a logical being in everyday activities. That's why I am
searching on and on...

I am looking forward to getting into Doug's mind really...seems it's long
way to go...

Though I am brought up in China, I always think I (maybe most Chinese also) am
having been living in western education environment actually. I am having
been a died in wool SOMite! Maybe, I am on this adventure leading to...hope I
could make any progress step by step...Fortunately, your help shows up.

As a student, so much homework to catch up...hard work with patience.

Thanks and Best Wishes,


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

©Quantonics, Inc., 2002-2009 — Rev. 16Dec2007  PDR — Created 10Dec2002  PDR
(12Dec2002 rev - Add Quantum Mind symposium link.)
(14Dec2002 rev - Repair email totals numbering.)
(26Dec2002 rev - Add 'Dialectic Reason' link to item 3 of letter 4. Repair minor Doug-typos.
(10May2003 rev - Repair more typos. Insert some red text comments in email 8. Ditto email 10.)
(29Nov2003 rev - Correct 'emperic' to 'empiric.')
(15Dec2003 rev - Typos.)
(4Jan2004 rev - Repair legacy email addresses for nospam and noflame.)
(18Jul2004 rev - Add link to 'empiricism,' and reset legacy red text update marks.)
(6Aug2004 rev - Correct Doug's misspelling of Pribram's name.)
(31Dec2004 rev - Reset red text. Repair some links. Adjust colors.)
(17Jan2005 rev - Typo.)
(21Aug2006 rev - Minor reformating. Massive respell.)
(16Dec2007 rev - Reformat slightly.)