|
Classical dialectic and its associated languages and logics ideally presume free context. Theorists call any context free grammar and logic "independent of context," and "insensitive to context." Why? Rules of grammar and logic presumably have to be "general:" work everywhere. Rules which have to apply everywhere demand a universal, catholic, context. A OSFA context! Classical statemental dialectic assumes absolute 'truth' may be assessed unambiguously as both consistency (always 'states' truth) and completeness ('states' all truths). Quantonics English Language Remediation presumes that classical dialectical notions of context freeness are bogus! Why? Quantum reality is, in general, sensitive to context. Remediated to uncloak its sensitivity we remediate classical 'context' as quantum~comtæxtings. Quantum phasemental rhetoric assumes absolute flux as comsistænt (always changes) and c¤mplætæ (changes all). MoQ and quantum~enthymemetism use animate, heterogeneous, SOrSo, REIMAR sophist rhetoric. Doug - 2Dec2006. |
|
"The expression of the new quantum concepts is beset with severe difficulties, because much of our customary language and thinking is predicated on the tacit assumption that classical concepts are substantially correct." David Bohm |
|
"The growth of any discipline depends on the ability to communicate and develop ideas, and this in turn relies on a language that is sufficiently detailed and flexible." Simon Singh |
|
"That whereof we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence." Ending of Wittgenstein's |
|
Rather, as William James c¤gæntly suggæsts bæl¤w, "That whereof wæ cann¤t speak, wæ must ihnvænt n¤vel languagæ, hærmænæutihcs, mæmæ¤tihcs amd heuristihcs ahll¤wing us t¤ speak iht." Doug |
| "...one of the most important features of the development and the analysis of modern physics is the experience that the concepts of natural language, vaguely defined as they are, seem to be more stable in the expansion of knowledge than the precise terms of scientific language, derived as an idealization from only limited groups of phenomena. This is in fact not surprising since the concepts of natural language are formed by the immediate connection with reality; they represent reality. It is true that they are not very well defined and may therefore also undergo changes in the course of the centuries, just as reality itself did, but they never lose the immediate connection with reality. On the other hand, the scientific concepts are idealizations; they are derived from experience obtained by refined experimental tools, and are precisely defined through axioms and definitions. Only through these precise definitions is it possible to connect the concepts with a mathematical scheme and to derive mathematically the infinite variety of possible phenomena in this field. But through this process of idealization and precise definition the immediate connection with reality is lost. The concepts still correspond very closely to reality in that part of nature which had been the object of research. But the correspondence may be lost in other parts containing other groups of phenomena." |
William James
in his Principles of Psychology
Chapter VII, The Methods and Snares of Psychology
1891
(Our braces in topic title.)Dear students of Quantonics, William James describes above why, due our English Language
dependencies, humans are innately incapable of unambiguously both describing and understanding quantum reality. Doug - 14Jan2002.
"Since translation, if pursued, allows the participants in a communications breakdown to experience vicariously something of the merits and defects of each other's points of view, it is a potent tool both for persuasion and for conversion..."
p. 202 of 212 total"...For most people translation is a threatening process, and it is entirely foreign to normal [status quo, stuck in the paradigm] science."
p. 203 of 212 totalThomas S. Kuhn,
1969 Postscript to his 1962,
The Structure[s] of Scientific Revolutions,
UChicP 1996 paperback edition.
(Our page number annotations, brackets, ellipses, bold, italics and link.)Note: Reader, please consider Kuhn's description of 'normal' science as a comfortable equilibrium between "paradigm shifts." By comparison he calls 'extraordinary' science that which "paradigm shifts" prefer as their affectors. In other words, 'extraordinary' science Values change and leaving the status quo.
Very quantum, eh?
I.e., quanton(extraordinary_science,ordinary_science),
vis-à-vis more classical,
dichon(extraordinary_science, ordinary_science).
Doug - 15Jul2001.
Menas Kafatos,
and Robert Nadeau
in their The Conscious Universe,
p. 11, Springer-Verlag, 1990.
(Our ellipses, brackets, italics and link.)Reader, please consider how Bohr insisted that his orthodox Copenhagen version of quantum complementarity is 'exclusive.' Ihn Quantonics ¤ur værsi¤n ¤f quantum c¤mplæmæntarihty issi 'inclusive.' This is precisely where Kafatos and Nadeau fail dramatically in their otherwise marvelous Conscious Universe descriptions of quantum reality. See our two kinds of complementarity.
|
Remediation Character Dictionary Wingings and MT Extra fonts required Note: All these fonts and characters will eventually be replaced by a single Quantonics font. |
||
|
Character |
Remediation |
Quantonics Rationale |
| 'e' | 'æ' | Quantum qualihty esthetihc ¤f 'æ' ¤vær 'e.' |
| 'h' | 'h' |
Quantum Planck
prægma/ahcti¤n ¤f
' |
| 'i' | 'ih' | In some cases, like 'minus,'
use 'i |
| 'o' | '¤' | Quantized 'o.' |
| 'o' | 'ø' |
Slash 'o.' Special cases: 'measure' QELRs to
¤mniht¤r
Without use of 'ø' both 'measure' and 'monitor' QELR
to ¤mniht¤r. |
| 'x' | '[' | Quantum umcærtainty ¤f Tao's c¤mplementary 's' (wave) and 'o' (particle) vis-à-vis classical objectivity of 'x.' |
| '=' | ' |
Anihmacy ¤f quantum 'equality' amd 'identity' concepts vis-à-vis classical inanimacy and state-icity of '=.' |
| '-' | '~' | Anihmacy ¤f quantum wavæ tilde vis-à-vis classical inanimacy and state-icity of hyphen. |
|
ihn place ¤f classical
Our 'n' t¤ 'm' ræmædiati¤ns
aræ curræntly væry selectihvæ
, e.g., 'and' to 'amd.' In addition 'con' to
'com,' some 'in,' 'im,' and other objective negational prefixes
to 'com,'
alth¤ugh ¤ur usagæ e[pærimænts
tændings t¤ ænc¤uragæ,
e.g.,'in'
to 'ihn' instead of 'in' to 'com'
ræmædiati¤ns n¤w. As
wæ dæscrihbæ ¤n
¤ur QELR pagæ, ¤ur g¤al issi t¤
d¤ ræmædiati¤ns which aræ sihmple
step changæs ihn
text, amd pærmiht ræhdabilihty
f¤r typihcal Ænglish
ræhdærs while
ahll¤wing thæm
t¤ grashp vahst
¤mnihfferænces am¤ng
w¤rds which
aræ strihctly classihcal ihn
sæmantihc vis-à-vis
m¤re n¤vel quantum hærmænæutihcs f¤r Millænnium III.
Studænts may w¤rry ab¤ut c¤væragæ
¤f ¤ur QELR. Th¤se
sihmple ræmædiati¤ns,
appliæd genærahlly,
t¤ a 250q th¤usamd
w¤rd dihcti¤nary aræ
væry mætastatihc! They ræmædiatæ ~90q%
¤f ahll w¤rds!!
|
|
|
©Quantonics, Inc., 2002-2009 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||