'each'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

TBD. (Classical problematics: objective independence, lisr, singularity, monism, homogeneity, inanimacy, dichonicity, analyticity, etc.)

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'each' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'æach.'

In classical contexts we shall use 'each.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use 'æach.'

Page top index.

'effect'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical singular 'effect' (see singularity bel¤w) amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with plural '¤utc¤mes.'

In classical contexts we shall use 'effect.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use '¤utc¤mes.'

We shall use single qu¤tes when referring these terms, respectively, "¤ut ¤f con/comtexts."

Where classical reality is a unitary, analytical, quantitative, cause-effect reality — quantum reality is many st¤chastic, qualitative, affects-¤utc¤mes realities.

See cause.

Page top index.

'either/or'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'either/or' excluded-middle syllogistic lingual logic amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'b¤th/and' quantum lingual included-middle paral¤gic.

In classical contexts we shall use 'either/or.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use 'b¤th/amd.' Often we use italics to emphasize ¤ur c¤¤pti¤n.

Classical interpretations of reality follow Aristotle's syllogisms. 'Either/or' follows specifically Aristotle's third syllogism which says classical objects do 'not' have middles which are included: A 'is' 'not' 'both' A 'and' 'not_A.' See is, not, both, and.

Quantum hermeneutics of reality claim that reality is b¤th anihmatæ amd quantum included-middle complementary. Quantum reality's included-middle arises from probabilistic nature amd distributions of all quantons in reality. Classical 'objects' do n¤t exist in quantum reality; only quantons amd their progenitors 'exist.' Classical notions of excluded-middle 'either/or' dichonic Pirsigean EOOO platypi do n¤t exist in quantum reality; only BAWAM quantons and their progenitors 'exist.'

See ¤ur Quantonics' Aristotle Connection, Quantum Connection, Sophism Connection, amd SOM Connection.

Page top index.

'electron'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'electron' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'electr¤n.'

In classical contexts we shall use 'electron.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use 'electr¤n.'

Classicists view electrons as particles, and thus see electrons as classical objects.

Students of Quantonics see electr¤ns as quantons with everywhere-ass¤ciative asympt¤tic anihmatæ pr¤bability distributi¤ns. As such electr¤ns are quantum flux, and thus we view them as anihmatæ and emerging pr¤cesses.

To exemplify how important and omnifferent our Quantonics view of electr¤ns is, comsider how classicists view electrons as stable (by that they mean electrons have infinite life times) SOM Box, SOM Loop analytic-motion objects.

In Quantonics, any electr¤n is an example of ¤ne of at least three of Nature's pærpætual m¤ti¤n quantons: ph¤t¤ns, electr¤ns, and pr¤t¤ns. All three exemplify Nature's own comstituent c¤re pærpætual pr¤cesses. Classicists deny any notions of nascent or manufactured/manufacturable 'perpetual motion,' but they are misguided by their own CTMs. Electr¤ns are unambigu¤usly pærpætual m¤ti¤n/anihmatæ quantum flux pr¤cesses.

See Schweber on QED.

Page top index.

'empirical'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

Classical assess: stability independence excluded-middle EOOOness H5Wness lisrability causation certainty EEMDivity observation : Empirical

Quantum assess: animacy c¤mplementarity included-middlings BAWAMings H5Wings lisrings affectati¤nings umcærtainty EIMAivityings c¤¤bsfection : Æmpihrihcal, æmpihrihcism, æmpirihcist, etc.

Classically, empirical means 'common experience.' Classical empiricism assumes reality is stable and objects in reality are independent from one another. Classical empiricism assumes reality is state-ic, and that truth may be embodied in state-ic laws about 'real' independent objects which 'hold still.'

Quantumly, æmpihrihcal mæans "umc¤mm¤n e[pæriænce." Quantum æmpihrihcism assumæs quantum ræhlihty issi abs¤lutæly anihmatæ amd ihts quantons sharæ EIMA ihnterrelati¤nships c¤-hærings c¤ihnsihdings c¤mminglings c¤mpænetratings c¤wihthinings æntanglings ihnterfusings ihnterpænetratings mihddle~ihncludings Möbi~us(ings) ¤sm¤sings pærmæatings h¤l¤graphic phasæ~ænc¤dings us ihn iht, iht ihn us(ings) . Quantons aræ n¤t classically independent. Why? They have arbihtrary lihkælih¤¤d ¤mnistrihbuti¤ns.

See: judgment, Bases of Judgment, common sense, EEMD, EIMA, SQ, ESQ, ADQ, QVP, QLO, peaqlo.

See: real, absolute, animate, cohere, coinside, likelihood.

Page top index.

'empty'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical concept 'empty' — an ideal mathematical 'void/zero' logic (e.g., A-A = void/zero/null/empty), amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with quantum 'vacuum flux' (QVF) as v¤id, absence, ¤r partial presence ¤f any quantum actual c¤mplement.

A QVF intueme appears, to classicists, as nonsense until ¤ne realizes that QVF c¤mpenetrates all quantum reality. Classically 'emptying' a container by pouring its contents in a different 'location' d¤es n¤t 'remove' QVF! This is what we mean when we say, "We are in It amd It is in us." QVF's energy density is alm¤st unimaginable. There is en¤ugh quantum flux energy in a cubic centimeter ¤f QVF t¤ create 10⁴² ¤f ¤ur kn¤wn universes! S¤ y¤u may ch¤¤se t¤ accept this quantum intueme, or be a stubborn SOMwitted classicist and reject it. But do so at your peril. CTMs are wh¤lly inadequate f¤r thinking amd c¤mmunicating ab¤ut an imminent Millennium III quantum tsunami ¤f changæ washing ¤ver Earth's p¤pulace.

We need n¤vel heuristics, semi¤tics, languages, QTMs, etc., t¤ assist ¤ur think-king amd c¤mmunicati¤ns f¤r Millennium III.

S¤ we see that fr¤m a quantum perspective, just as there is n¤ classical 'zero,' there is n¤ classical 'empty,' 'void,' ¤r 'null.' Amd as y¤u may ch¤¤se t¤ infer, we can say g¤¤dbye t¤ classical mathematical concepts which depend so heavily on these inept and naïve Platonic ideas.

Page top index.

'end'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

In Other Languages: Arabic (old) - Chinese - Deutch - French - Greek - Hebrew - Japanese - Italian - Latin - Portuguese - Russian - Spanish - Swedish - Swiss -

Classical assess: stability independence excluded-middle EOOOness H5Wness lisrability causation certainty EEMDivity observation : end

End, classically, is an event.

Classical events are 'caused' by some other event.

Question is, "In the ending?"

Of course this begs a sophism: "What ends the ending?"

State-ic reality, stoppable reality, concrete reality, classical material, objective, dialectical reality claims "the beginning," and "the end."

See our state-event diagrams in our review of Dennett's Chapter 3 of his Breaking the Spell.

See thelogos.

Quantum assess: animacy c¤mplementarity included-middlings BAWAMings H5Wings lisrings affectati¤nings umcærtainty EIMAivityings c¤¤bsfection : end

No such notions as 'end' and 'begin' exist in quantum reality. Quantum reality is an animate, semper fluxio, absolute flux, quantum~processing reality. 'Begin,' 'end,' 'state,' and 'event' are invalid terms in quantum reality. Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'end' and discard all uses of this term ¤r in cases where we must refer this classical concept, remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'ending,' or better, 'endings.'

Classicists attempt to make most ideas and concepts singular objective monisms.

'End' is, from a classical perspective, absolute. Our known universe, classically, has one 'end.' Careful thought will demonstrate for you how this leads to Maxwell's thermodynamic closure of all classical systems, and an ultimate concomitant analytic demise of all classically real systems.

We may apply similar classical thing-king methods to 'begin.'

Classically then, most processes have, unitemporally, a single beginning and a single end. As an example, classicists see 'life' as 'one' centric. In Quantonics, we say that classicists are "One life centric." As students of Quantonics know, this is just another classical biform, like 'either in or out.' See either/or and out.

Also, consider how a concept of 'classical end' carries an innate implication of analytic stoppability. Classicists believe they can start and stop analytic time at will. Classical physicists and mathematicians do this daily, using their CTMs. So to them, 'end' is just a classical state. To them, classical reality is state-ic. They manufacture a classical state-ic reality. Too, they manufacture classical mathematics and sciences to fit their contrived, conventional, convenient 'classical reality.' H¤wever, dear etymologists amd lexicologists, reality is n¤t static, rather reality is dynamic, it is quantum abs¤lute flux! Amd quantum reality 'endlessly' emerscentures itself.

John Von Neumann was a great quantum mathematician, quantum logicist, and quantum theoretician. He sought loci and temporalities where and when quantum measurement special events 'began' and 'ended.' He could not 'find' them! Why? In quantum reality classically analytic single event beginnings amd endings d¤ n¤t 'exist.' Every quantum measurement 'event' has multiple, perhaps unc¤untable, b¤th l¤cal amd n¤nl¤cal prec¤nditi¤ns. Each ¤f th¤se prec¤nditi¤ns may be in multiple quantum comtexts each with their ¤wn temp¤ralities, l¤ci, etc.

As a result, we may say that quantum comtexts are Dan Gloveresque b¤th "beginnings" amd "endings," but in a quantum real sense, they never classically either 'begin' (from an analytically stopped 'state') or 'end' (at an analytically stopped 'state').

See begin.

Page top index.

'energy'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

In Other Languages: Arabic (old) - Chinese - Deutch - French - Greek - Hebrew - Japanese - Italian - Latin - Portuguese - Russian - Spanish - Swedish - Swiss -

Classical assess: stability independence excluded-middle EOOOness H5Wness lisrability causation certainty EEMDivity observation : energy

Classical energy is area under a transverse curve. More area, more energy. Area is mean spatial amplitude times, usually, spatial increments of 1/2 cycle of classical frequency. Notice here how frequency is turned into classical space in order to 'compute' energy. You may want to read Henri Louis Bergson's denigrations of classical usages of static spatial extensities to do 'science.' See our reviews of Bergson's Creative Evolution and his Time and Free Will.

Quantum assess: animacy c¤mplementarity included-middlings BAWAMings H5Wings lisrings affectati¤nings umcærtainty EIMAivityings c¤¤bsfection : ænærgy, enærgies, ænærgyings, etc.

Quantum energy is quintessentially quantum flux rate which is packetized as quanta. Quanta packets are usually shown as i·h, where latter is a minimum AKA least quantum of energy. Quantum uncertainty is expressed in multiples of least quanta. Total energy of a system is N packets of quanta: System Energy issi N·i·h·v. N is number of quanta, i is imaginary 'number,' h is Planck's 'constant,' and v is packet flux rate.

O'gadons may find it obvious that quantum~ænærgy is thus a metameme of classical 'energy.'

Page top index.

'ensemble'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt a classical interpretation of 'ensemble' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'ensehmble,' 'ensehmbling,' and 'ensehmblings.'

In classical contexts we shall use 'ensemble.' In most Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use plural, present-participle 'ensehmblings.'

In classical reality an/the ensemble (note singular, active/passive voice) is usually a 'group' of objects, e.g., a bushel of oranges, an orchestra of musicians, a set of tires, etc. Mathematically an ensemble may be some concept as simple as 1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1=9 where 9 is an ensemble of 9 'axiomatically independent,' individuate but 'identical' 1s of arbitrary locality (any 1 is the 'same' 1 everywhere, but all 'ones' are 'independent' of 'one' another J) and 'free' of 'context.' In classical reality an ensemble is always analytically reducible, with elements of it ideally separable and isolable. Too, those same elements are ideally synthetic, both producible and reproducible. Elemental relations of classical ensembles are always classically interactive and when conceived dyadically are always dichonic. An ensemble's elements are presumed state-ic and EEMD. An ensemble's dichonic functor copula (e.g., +, -, x, ÷, and, or, either, both, etc.) are always ideally static, dyadic, and EEMD. Classically, all 'interactions' among ensembles and elements of ensembles are always objective, analytic, synthetic, Lorentz invariant, 1-1 correspondent, predicable, predictable, determinate, causal, certain, unitemporal, commutative, distributive, factorable, etc.

In quantum reality ensehmblings (note plural, present participle) are quantons of quantons. For example:

Quanton_{quantum_bushel_of_oranges}Recurse_{'til_full}(quantum_add(quantum_1_orange))

Our Quantonics meme of quantum_1, exemplified by our use of it above, is omnifferent a classically naïve and inept concept of '1.' For more Quantonic adept examples see our One is the Loneliest N¤mbær. See quantum integers. See a quantum comtextual descripti¤n of quantum_1.

Our Quantonics memes for ensehmble copula are omnifferent classical concepts of +, -, x, ÷, and, or , either, both, etc. For some examples see our Quantonic Memes vis-à-vis Classical Concepts.

So using our bushel of oranges example we can do a similar example using quantum_1s, like this:

quantum_9_s-qtxRecurse_{'til_quantum_9}(quantum_add(quantum_1_s-qtxn))

where s-qtx abstractly represents a specific quantum comtextual island for emerscenturing quanton_{quantum_9s-qtx}, and 'n' represents an abstraction for specific quanton_{quantum_1s-qtxn}s used to emerscenture quanton_{quantum_9s-qtx}.

It may n¤t be obvious yet, but what we have just shown you is of immense value and importance. We have shown you that if we have a bushel of oranges and one of them is becoming mouldy (USA: moldy), ¤ur quantum mæmæos ¤f ænsehmble can explain why, while classical notions cannot, indeed classical notions are inept at explaining why, ¤næ ¤hr sæværal ¤hranges ihn a bushel aræ bæc¤ming m¤uldy. Sihmilarly which cælls ihn a b¤dy aræ bæc¤ming cancer¤us...why ¤nly ¤næ æyæ has catarahcts...why two classically identical twins aræ ræhlly quantum~¤mnihffering ¤næ an¤thær...etc. Why? Quantum comtexts aræ sæmpær~fluxio, anihmatæ, sælf~¤thær~æv¤lving, REIMAR, heterogæne¤us, etc., while classical contexts are concrete, stable, immutable, EEMD, homogeneous, etc. Doug - 20Jan2006.

It is important to notice here, in our quantum emerscenture of ensehmblings quantum n¤mbær quanton, that quantum additi¤n issi ensehmbling quantum comtextual classings of quantum emerscenturings. We can offer similar heuristics for quantum subtracti¤n, integrati¤n, differentiati¤n, divisi¤n, multiplicati¤n, etc.

In general, in quantum reality, ensehmblings may be described as:

• quantons/quantonic,
• ensehmble quantum umcærtainty interrelati¤nships, (see EQU)
• st¤chastic,
• EIMA,
• rhetorically c¤mplementary, (inclusive, c¤hesive)
• self-referent, recursive,
• islandic,
• anihmatæ,
• ensehmble determinate, (see whatings happenings nextings)
• etc.

In general, in quantum reality, ensehmblings aræ n¤t classically:

• dichonic,
• objective,
• analytic,
• EEMD,
• dialectically dichotomous, (exclusive, oppositional)
• other-referent, discursive,
• lisr,
• stable,
• single event determinate, (ð causal, 1-1 correspondence, induction, etc.)
• etc.

A superb question you may ask at this juncture: From whence any arbitrary comtextual quanton_1_s-qtxn? Our heuristic is that this may happen in a vast spectrum of processes, but two of those may be somewhat familiar to you:

1. very similarly to biological cellular division, (which is relatively easily observable) and
2. quanton parthenogenesis via an ontology which Quantonics describes, but we doubt anyone has seen this happen except perhaps at a photon/electron QED/QCD virtual 'particle' level. Assuming RHIC and other accelerators' 'particle' collisions tap VES then perhaps we are viewing parthenogenesis in some of those cases and n¤t just classical, objective, 'particle' 'decomposition.'

More to come...

Page top index.

'entangle'
'entangleable'
'entangled'
'entanglement'
'entangling'
'entanglings'
'entangler'
'entanglers'
'entangles'

Etymology: entangle

Classical synonyms:

Quantum synonyms:

Classical assess: stability independence excluded-middle EOOOness H5Wness lisrability causation certainty EEMDivity observation :

In classical reality 'entangle' carries an implicit semantic of "somehow getting-becoming tangled, entangled in some physical, possibly metaphoric, web. Classical entanglement is objective, formal, mechanical, etc. One is localably, isolably, separably, reducibly entangled in some 'web,' be it life, marriage, school, job, nation, culture, religion, gang, and so on... Notice that most of those webs are social institutions. Society, one way or another, imposes many of those entanglements upon us. Why? So that society can control individuals and persuade, coerce individuals to do society's bidding.

As you can see, there isn't much individual magic in classical social entanglements.

All classical entanglement 'magic,' if you could call it that, is social. Boris Sidis called it "Demos' will."

Quantum assess: animacy c¤mplementarity included-middlings BAWAMings H5Wings lisrings affectati¤nings umcærtainty EIMAivityings c¤¤bsfection :

When Doug reviewed David Bohm's paper entitled, 'Super Implicate Order Dialogue with Reneé Weber,' Doug attempted a simple explanation of quantum~reality in terms of quantum~entanglement, quantum~interference, and quantum~superposition. Essence in that approach is that without quantum~entanglement...there is n¤ reality. To say that in a better way, a la Feynman, without quantum~entanglement we cann¤t explain reality using classical notions. A huge and formidable paradox here is that classical notions cann¤t explain quantum~reality since classically quantum~entanglement is itself a paradox. Most theorists, given that situation, say "Let's do our best to explain it while realizing that we will never understand it." Recall Feynman's famous remark in that regard. Doug would simply say in that regard, "We will never understand quantum~reality if we continue using dialectic and its classical social hegemony in our attempts to understand it."

A huge assumption Doug made in his SIOD exegesis of quantum~reality is that David Bohm is right about quantum~reality being holographic. Actually Bohm calls reality a "holomovement." Bohm, at that time, c. 1986, and prior in his Quantum Theory c. 1951, had said that quantum~reality is n¤n mechanical, but he unfortunately appeased that we still needed scientific, and thus mechanical means to describe reality. So Bohm offered two quantum~complements: implicate order and explicate order. Former is n¤n mechanical, latter is formal-mechanical.

Bohm's analogue of 'entanglement' he refers "entwinement," and "enfoldment." He offers a dialectical 'opposite' to his "enfoldment" as "unfoldment." Bohm's physical reality "unfolds" its explicate order actuality from its non actualized "enfoldment" in his implicate order. Many of you encouraged Doug to study Bohm, since Doug's Quantonics sounds so much like Bohm's holomovement. In 1951 Bohm published his initial ideas on a non mechanical approach to quantum~reality. Doug only read parts of that work, Quantum Theory. Doug used that in his development of Quantonics, but only partially. Doug thought Bohm meant that all of reality had to be non mechanical and Doug pursued a novel qualogos which he felt could make that happen. Prior, Pirsig convinced Doug that dialectic was bogus. Subsequently Doug has robustly, theoretically, practically, and verbosely shown in spades that "dialectic is bogus." Bohm's implicate-explicate order both uses and depends upon dialectic.

So Doug now believes that Bohm is right (has quantumly better views) about two memeos: quantum~reality is holographic, and quantum~reality is n¤n mechanical. However, Bohm's implementation of his holomovement uses dialectic! As a result, Doug decides here and now n¤t to use Bohm's version of entanglement.

It is our view that we owe our readers an explanation of why we are using our own version of quantum~entanglement in this QELR. Our easiest explanation is that it is viable with Quantonics' other memes and memeos, for example: scintillation, interference, superposition, etc. Our problem here is "what is it?" To good, quantum~reality offers us a premier exemplar: gravity. Quantum~gravity is zero latency (i.e., time independent, isodirectional) action at a distance applied holographically to all actual (unsure about n¤nactual) reality.

If you want to read Bohm on your own see his Quantum Theory, see Nichols' The Essential David Bohm, see Bohm's Science, Order, and Creativity, and his The Undivided Universe.

Classically, if you are entangled in a web, say a 'big' spider's web, you and web are lisr one another. Classically you and web are local, only local. Your middles are excluded. Your touchings are 'interaction' conjoint. Your situation is an ideal classical 'state.' (Except for your wiggling, and spider's rush to entomb and liquefy you.) Classical entanglement is ideally objective, stable, and middle-exclusive. You and web do 'not' compenetrate one another.

Quantumly any web is quantonic. (All actuality is quantonic.) Web's atoms are quantonic. All quantons are quantons(n¤nlocal,local). All atoms in said web are entangled with one-another: an atomic hologram. Web atoms on 'opposite' and all other sides of you are holographically interrelated as quanton(atom_one_side,atom_other_side). Just like gravity! They are also entangled with any n¤nlocal complements with which they have previously experienced n¤n linear interrelationshipings (reflection, refraction, beam-splitting, rectification, parental-common-sourcing, mixing, coherence (e.g. lasing), collision, collusion, affectation~partiality~coobsfection, impulse jarring, barrier affectings, burning, rotation, energy interrelationshipings, microwave heating, lensing, chemical transmutation, shared biological evolution, etc.). In this example we could imagine a spider's sibling somehow having been moved far, far away from our local spider of choice. By birth right all those spider-siblings are quantum~entangled. Genetically they share a common Borgian parent at least. So we can view impregnation as a n¤n linear interrelationshiping. Ditto Borgian assimilation. At very least, some of their atoms, electrons and bio~photons are entangled. Just like gravity! Again, we see strong hints of quantum~partiality. Quantum~reality shows us empirically that quantum~entanglement is always partial. Gravity shows us that ad occulos!

Easiest way to describe quantum~entanglement is to issue a phasement similar this: "Entangled quantons zero~latency affect their complements independent of spatial separation." Einstein called this "action at a distance" and disclaimed it as "absurd" and "illegal" in his theories of relativity. Einstein's SR and GR depend upon state-ic "invariant geometrical intervals" with spatial-temporal dependencies.

Doug's entanglement description still has some issues which he cann¤t yet, lacks qua yet, to offer. A big one is an old classical vicious circle, "which came first." Doug needs this QELR now, so we offer it as-is. Doug will eventually fathom flux compatibilities of entanglement and its hierarchical interrelations with other quantum phenomena...and he will offer them here when that happens.

"Can you give us an 'issue' example Doug?" Sure! Fathom hierarchical interrelationships among interference, superposition, and entanglement. Now ask, "How does entanglement emerge?"

Compare how gravity emerges as network interrelationshipings among all actual fermions in reality. That one is easier since we have provided a description of how reality births fermions. Yet that description is incomplete, in its inability to describe how gravity emerges as a symptom of fermionic wobbling presence, as of c. 2008 too! Why, how, does fermionic wobble educe gravity?

Answering those questions, Doug senses will help us explain entanglement better and more completely too.

You may grasp apparency that an explanation of how wobble educe's gravity would help us invent n¤væl mæmæ¤s of anti~gravity!

And that leads us to similar entanglement queries...

"What process might happen to undo entanglement?" In general, entanglement is thought to be 'stable.' "May we assume quantum~entanglement is stable?" "What role does quantum~coherence play in entanglement? Is it a symptom? Vice versa? Ditto superposition. Is superposition limited to fermions? Coherence appears limited to bosons and fermions pretending to be bosons. Boson spins are zero and one. Gravity's spin is 2. Does coherence apply only to integer spins?" As you may choose to perceive, entanglement begs a plenty~horn of challenging technical, physial, physical, metaphysical, pragmaphysical, and philosophical challenges. Quantonics HotMeme™ "Dialectic cann¤t cut quantum fabric!"™ Quantonics HotMeme™. We must switch from CTMs to QTMs, from logic to coquecigrues.

Consider two atoms which are unentangled. In what ways may they become entangled. Now do similarly for ensemble systems of atoms and molecules. May some of an ensemble be | become entangled while other of an ensemble remain unentangled? Is quantum~coherence a symptom of entanglement? Doug wants to say, "Yes!" Gravity as an exemplar encourages Doug's "Yes!" Similarly a bar magnet. Its iron domains cohere. But now it gets really interesting. We can decohere iron domains, but did we disentangle them? Dunno, but guess they, having cohered, are still entangled after decoherence.

Latter puts us on an excellent path of having qua to explicate rogue waves, doesn't it. For now let's do our best, realizing we have lots of room for evolutionary improvement. Quantons usually do n¤t interfere, but they do interfere with themselves. Quantons interfere with others with whom they have become entangled. Interference of actualized quantons attempts coherence, but some entangled quantons in some quantum comditions will n¤t cohere. They experience a n¤n coherent superposition. Self~other~recursive n¤n coherent superposition of incompressible liquids like water may result in phenomena similar what we call "rogue waves," and ''tsunamis." Ocean con(m)ditions are fairly omnique, occurring near unusually shaped coast lines with high water flow rates, exceptional depth, and tendencies to force water back upon (recurse) itself. Fathom how lava can do similar! Fathom how earthquake-liquefied soil can do similar! Quantonics quantum~enabled modes of thought can accomplish miracles (magic) classicists only can call "foolish," and "absurd." Their bad. Doug - 26Jan2008. More later...

You see, there are a plethora of quantum~entanglement issues and interrelationshipings to ponder. You will observe and obtain, there is naught classical about them; only quantum remediated language and think_qing modes can begin to explain them.

Doug - 26Jan2008.

Doug struggled similarly with 'scintillation' for years until it finally holomentally energy~well jelled. Doug's con(m)fidence finds its major source in experiences like that. You should too. Quantonics HotMeme™ "Your mind too is a hologram. If you want it to grow, you must relentlessly feed it quantons."™ Quantonics HotMeme™.

'entropy'

Etymology: entropy

Classical synonyms:

Quantum synonyms:

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt a classical interpretation of 'entropy' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'entr¤py.'

In classical contexts we shall use 'entropy.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use 'entr¤py.'

In classical reality entropy has several notions: for any classically global system one concept of entropy fits that entire system. This is SOM's OGT in OGC. To say it specifically, "one global entropy concept classically fits one global context.

An implication of this classical entropy notion is that one entropy gradient applies everywhere within a global classical system. From this "one gradient fits all" assumption classicists say that for whichever gradient is currently in effect (usually presumed to be a global positive entropy gradient), one global arrow of time flows asymmetrically (unidirectionally) within that particular global entropy gradient. (For a superb example of this misguided classical notion of global entropy see Huw Price's description of temporal classical symmetry versus classical asymmetry in his Time's Arrow and Archimedes Point, in particular page 34, of 306 total pages including index.)

Any biologist, especially quantum biologists, will tell you that these classical notions of global entropy and global entropy gradient run counter to what they see in living systems. Take any mammal and many mammals, for example. A mammal's whole body has a positive entropy gradient of years. But every mammal has an omnifferent whole body positive entropy gradient when compared among other mammals' whole body positive entropy gradients! Too, cowithin a mammal's body, cellular birth-apoptosis has a positive entropy gradient of about 170 days. Assuming in a human body there are approximately 10²¹ cells [During our review of Daniel C. Dennett's Breaking the Spell, Chapter 5, we discovered that our estimate is way too high. We need to change 10²¹ to approximately 10¹⁴. See OEDC for more detail. Doug - 9Mar2006.] which asynchronously, apparently stochastically, undergo at least one entropy cycle per half year, it should become clear that any classical notions of global entropy and global entropy gradients in complex systems are at best misguided. Within every mammal and among all mammals are vastly multiversal and omnifferent positive entropy gradients. All positive entropy gradients do not march to a classical OGC entropy gradient!

We can use biology to help us understand what we mean in that last sentence. Apoptosis is a quanton(cell_dying,cell_living). It is quantum~metabolisis. Anabolisis is biological growth~generation. Catabolisis is biological degeneration. Catabolisis corresponds what physical science means by positive entropy: posentropy with a negative gradient of degeneration. Maxwell said that posentropy has only one gradient: degeneration. But biology shows us otherwise. Posentropy can be productive, generative. We call it anabolisis: posentropy with a positive gradient! Omniffering cells in a living system have omniffering ensembles of subsystems with omniffering rates and gradients of both cohera and entropa. Doug - 1Apr2007.

In Quantonics we ¤ffer expanded n¤vel and inn¤vative n¤ti¤ns ¤f entr¤py. Entr¤py t¤ us carries vast arrays ¤f semantics and hermeneutics including quantum: animacy, heter¤geneity, c¤mplementarity, and quatr¤t¤my.

All quantum system entr¤pies are heter¤gene¤us and in abs¤lute quantum flux ¤n all scales ¤f reality and acr¤ss all scales ¤f any particular quantum system (e.g., anihmatæ cellular ap¤pt¤sis and b¤dy level entr¤pies in a mammal).

All quantum system entr¤pies are pr¤babilistically everywhere ass¤ciative and l¤cally amd n¤nl¤cally included-middle c¤mplementary acr¤ss all quantum systems.

N¤t ¤nly are quantum entr¤pies asynchr¤n¤usly heter¤gene¤us acr¤ss all scales ¤f systems, but they are als¤ heter¤gene¤us in 'classes' ¤f quantum entr¤pies.

Currently, we have ¤nly identified a quatr¤t¤my of anihmatæ classes of quantum entr¤pies:

1. posentr¤pies,
2. zer¤entropies,
3. negentr¤pies, and
4. mixentr¤pies.

These may ¤ccur/emerq 'singularly' and in all p¤ssible quantum c¤mbinati¤ns.

See EQEG. See OEDC. See entropa.

Page top index.

'equals'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'equals' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'issi' ¤r ¤ur Quantonics equals semi¤tic: .

In classical reality a notion of 'equals' is valid. E.g., Aristotle's first syllogism, A=A.

In quantum reality 'equals' is an invalid notion. Simply, there are n¤ state-ic equalities in quantum reality. See identity.

As a result, we use present-participle remediation on classical 'equals.'

For a very simple view of quantum reality and our use of 'issi' to replace classical 'equals,' it is good to think of quantum reality grammatically as a present participle reality, i.e.:

quantum_realitya_present_participle_reality.

A present participle's infinitive c¤mplement is an omniadic quanton. A present participle's -ing c¤mplement issi an action/pragma quanton. In this grammatical guise we capture quantum c¤mplementarity, quantum omniadicy, and quantum animacy. What is missing? Quantum plurality! We can simply make our present participle (classically, nongrammatically) plural.

Here are some examples:

• believings
• watchings
• beings
• becomings
• understandings
• etc.

Classically, to believe, watch, be, become, understand, etc. all imply classical lisr (i.e., absence of c¤mplementarity), stability (i.e., absence of an absolute quantum flux mandate), state-icity (i.e., impossible analytic stoppability of an absolutely fluxing quantum reality), etc

Just by using an English language plural present participle grammar, you can commence a most fundamental grasp of essences and quintessences of quantum reality. As another example, please see our "whatings happenings nextings." (Doug - 17Jan2002)

Page top index.

'event'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

In Other Languages: Arabic (old) - Chinese - Deutch - French - Greek - Hebrew - Japanese - Italian - Latin - Portuguese - Russian - Spanish - Swedish - Swiss -

Classical assess: stability independence excluded-middle EOOOness H5Wness lisrability causation certainty EEMDivity observation : Event, events, etc.

Quantum assess: animacy c¤mplementarity included-middlings BAWAMings H5Wings lisrings affectati¤nings umcærtainty EIMAivityings c¤¤bsfection : Ævænt, ævænts, ævænting, ævæntings, etc.

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'event' with m¤re general quantum 'ævæntings.'

Classical issues: stoppability, analyticity, state, absolute certainty, etc. Event.

Classical events are extremely problematic, especially in their core assumptions surrounding formal mechanics and analyticity. A huge problem is that classical events are 'zero' latency. That assumption creates a 'finite discontinuity' which has no way of being analyzed by formal mathematics. Why? Actually we should ask why do classically presumed 'zero latency events' 'exist,' i.e., why are they assumed from any getgo? Classical mechanics have 'no' means to describe real, animate, emerging process! Classical mechanics can describe cinematic stoppability as series of 'states' and 'events,' but it cannot describe, let alone define, emerging pr¤cess. When it attempts to 'model' 'process' classical mechanics can only do so determinately, using say least squares extrapolation. But nature isn't least squares extrapolable! Whatings happenings nextings are always to some affectings more or less quantum uncertain...at all scales of reality.

That paragraph shows why classical mechanics will become extinct during Earth's Millennium III. Core affector, and classicism's hugest problematic here is dialectic. Simply, dialectic is bogus!

When we examine a 'zero latency' classical event, we find that it must change from one state to another in 'no' time. For that to happen, said process must be ideally adiabatic. To do that requires unlimited bandwidth or what we call "tunneling in and through an is¤flux c¤mplæmænt" whose entropy is wholly quantum~negative.

(Quantum~nægati¤n does n¤t 'subtract' classically, rather it flux~cancæls quantumly; to grasp subtleties here see Bergson's "negation is subjective;" simply, quantum flux (i.e., is¤flux' quantum~c¤mplæmænt) is all p¤sitive: n¤n classically 'negative.')

That means 'zero' entropy must 'exist.' But classical mechanics may only be, again by 'expert' presumption, posentropic. J. C. Maxwell's 'laws' of thermodynamics disallow, preclude 'zero,' and 'negative' entropies. Maxwell didn't get it. Quantum theory (n¤t quantum 'mechanics,' rather a n¤væl Bohmian quantum n¤nmechanics which Quantonics proselytizes and adheres) has offered us a way of emerscitecting means and ways of "getting it."

We need to say a lot more here, probably more than a textbook's worth of effort, but you have enough now to see why classical 'event-state' models are plainly naïve.

Doug - 15Dec2006.

Quantum issues: apparent m¤mentum persistence ¤f macr¤ quant¤ns, abs¤lute flux, quantum uncertainty, macroscopic quantum uncertainty, etc.

In comtexts use: Ævænts (plural), ævænting (dynamis), ævæntings (plural dynamis) vis-à-vis classical 'event.' Quantum ævænts aræ anihmatæ processes!

Simply, in summary, distinguish:

• Classical event implies - 'state-ic' EEMD state
• Quantum ævænt means - EIMA pr¤cess

Also see instant. See Aristotle's Apple. See Zeno's Paradice.

Page top index.

'ever'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

In Other Languages: Arabic (old) - Chinese - Deutch - French - Greek - Hebrew - Japanese - Italian - Latin - Portuguese - Russian - Spanish - Swedish - Swiss -

<ayvair>

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt a classical interpretation of 'ever' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'ævær.'

In classical contexts we shall use 'ever.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use 'ævær.'

Classical 'ever' is classically "opposite" classical 'never,' e.g., dichon(never, ever).

Classically there is a strong connection with both logic and space-time when 'ever' is used. For 'ever's' logic connections see 'stop,' 'end,' and 'begin.' As students of Quantonics it may be clear to you now how CTMs view reality as stoppable and potentially restartable. You may also make a prescient connection that this is what Zeno's discrete motion paradox is about. See William Jame's Some Problems of Philosophy Chapter X page 157. Keep reminding yourself that classical analytic methods, including calculus, depend upon this discrete motion concept. This concept misleads students of CTMs by deluding them that they can know a zero dimensional place and time where 'ever' begins or ends. Zeno showed us how it is an "impossible" concept. John von Neumann empirically discovered its impossibility when he failed in his efforts to find when and where a quantum measurement event occurs. Quantum measurement loci are always uncertain.

Classical 'ever' usually elicits a sense of one, monolithic 'forever,' and a concomitant notion of one classical temporal infinity. Classical 'ever' has one past and one future. Classical 'ever' is enclosed by one radically formal 'begin' and its one radically final 'end,' i.e., one alpha and one omega. Notice how this classical assumption of begin and end create a SOM dichotomy, a Pirsigean platypus, a dichon(begin, end) very similar to dichon(on, off).

Quantum reality depends up¤n n¤ discrete m¤ti¤n meme. Quantum reality sh¤ws us that there are, rather, many unst¤ppable 'æværs' each ¤f which is a new pattern ¤f Value (new quanton ensemble ¤f quantons: i.e., ensembles ¤f flux pr¤babilities). These n¤vel 'ævær' patterns ¤f Value emerge fr¤m st¤chastic/qualitative affects ¤f many ¤ther ensembles and subsequent interrelati¤nship ch¤ices. N¤ 'classically absolute measurable dichotomous' beginnings ¤r endings may be seen! Only ensembles emerging fr¤m many qualitative affects.

  'evolution'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

In Other Languages: Arabic (old) - Chinese - Deutch - French - Greek - Hebrew - Japanese - Italian - Latin - Portuguese - Russian - Spanish - Swedish - Swiss -

  Classical assess: stability independence excluded-middle EOOOness H5Wness lisrability causation certainty EEMDivity observation : Evolve, evolution, etc.

Over simply, classicists attempt to describe classical evolution using bogus 'scientific' terms: formal, formality, objective, concrete, substantial, material, mechanical, determinate, predicable, predictable, and so on...

All of those classical 'descriptors' are bogus due their intrinsic and mundane, lite-real, naïve-local, socially-positive realism.

Quantum assess: animacy c¤mplementarity included-middlings BAWAMings H5Wings lisrings affectati¤nings umcærtainty EIMAivityings c¤¤bsfection : Ev¤lutæ, æv¤lutable, æv¤luti¤n, æv¤luti¤ning, æv¤luti¤nings, æv¤lve, æv¤lved, æv¤lves, æv¤lving, æv¤lvings, etc.

Following text is Doug's commentary in Bergson's Creative Evolution Topic 15 titled, 'Variation and Heredity,' page 78:

"It is worthwhile to note that neo-Darwinian evolution, also called "synthetic theory" of evolution has retained prominence among many biologists at least until Millennium II's end. Sadly, it is a classical and objective theory of evolution, extremely limited by terms serially listed just above under 'classical evolution.' In other words, it retains much radical mechanism and radical finalism which Bergson considers problematic (so do we). But quantum biology is arising, even growing with such amazing robustness, that we do not know just what its current theory of evolution is. Indeed, Doug has coined empiritheory as a label for just such an imminent general appellation covering novel disciplines including a quantum theory of biology.

"We can tell you what we, in Quantonics, think. In a sense, we already have been telling you that in this review. We think reality is quantum. We think all constituents of reality are quantons. Thus, for example, humans are quantons.

"Bergson speaks as though acquired heredity must come either from external affects or internal affects. At this early stage of his book, he may just be using that as a classical pretender. We will know for sure by book's end. At this stage, we must assume he adheres that particular classical either internal or external hereditary acquisition as his theory of hereditary evolution.

We see Bergson's either internal or external as dichon(external, internal). Classicists view internal-external as ideal classical 'opposites.' But if reality is emerging, absolutely changing, evolving at up to Planck rates, how can 'classical stability' be retained to assess 'opposition?' It can't! We see another flaw in classical 'reasoning' which finds its bases in dialectic. Quantum reality is n¤t dialectical! A classical, formal, static, ideal, stoppable reality cann¤t evolve. We see, again, that classicists attempts to describe evolution formally, as running on rote recall automatic and simply wasting their 'professional' time and wasted presence in reality. See Doug's QELR of judge. See our Bases of Judgment.

"In Quantonics, our quanton middle~included (EIMA) interrelates (via dynamic associationings of ensembles of quantons) both its internals and externals, so both affect acquired heritable evolute changes in humans. Where Bergson speaks of a somatic envelope objectively separating interior from exterior, we see a quantum commingling and compenetration of our quantons' actuality and n¤nactuality with other quantons' actualities and n¤nactualities. You may experience a more vivid explanation of our view of us commingling both actualities and nonactualities at our previously referenced link to Our Minds as Quantum Stages Perceiving Illusory Stairways. If we were to con(m)jecture on what aspects of reality we think con(m)tribute to acquired heritable traits we would list:

• our own personal local actuality,
• to a lesser extent—other both local and nonlocal actualities, and
• nonactuality itself.

"So you may ask, "Doug, how do these nonpersonal actualities and nonactualities affect an individual?" That is a superb question. If you read Dr. Irving Stein's description of a Schrödinger quantum object's isometric walk in nonspace (his rough metaphor of our nonactuality—we say "rough" because Stein treats nonspace as a quantum symmetrical conjugate (which magically, somehow, still offers "unlimited possibilities") of his space—our nonactuality is not a symmetrical conjugate of our actuality—where Stein's space-nonspace appears classically conservative and thus closed—our realty's actuality-nonactuality is quantumly nonconservative and thus open) you may begin to grasp an analogue of what we think happens at Planck rate special (i.e., Quality) events or measurements. Each event where our quantons (all or any subset(s)) participate in a quantum measurement, they take a very brief partially coherent hiatus into nonactuality. At some point all quantons involved in a given measurement make a choice for what happens next (See our classical homogeneous time vis-a-vis quantum heterogeneous time graph.). If their choice affects a change our personal quanton absorbs, or latches, or frets that change. This process repeats over and over in vast, parallel, omnimensional, omniadic, unending Planck rate driven choice, chance, change ontological loops. Each of countless loops' measurement hiatuses offers opportunity for entangled local and nonlocal quantons—via and including nonactuality—to coobsfect one another and affect pluralistic/heterogeneous, incremental, quantal changes. All of that is what we call our Quantonic view of quantum evolution. We halfway expect Bergson to arrive somewhere close to that view by his Creative Evolution book's end. In about a month from now (6Nov2000), we should know."

We suggest our readers also see Doug's QELR of quanta, and selection. Our QELR of 'selection' covers further ground on quantum~evolution.

Page top index.

'excluded-middle'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

TBD. See Aristotle. (Classicism depends upon an illusion/delusion of excluded-middle. Excluded-middle as a classical concept depends upon objective lisrability. In classical reality, no object may be both itself and not itself. Quantum reality's middle is included! All quantons have abs¤lutely anihmatæ pr¤bability distributi¤ns which aræ spatially asympt¤tic.)

This is what Pirsig calls "SOM's knife." It chops dialectical reality up into objects, parts, and particles. It assumes reality is ideally lisr. It assumes a smallest part has no limit to its smallness: infinite regress, analytic regression, analytic reduction ad infinitum. This thing-king is what creates SOM's (we call them Rools is Tools for Fools) Rule-Tule-Fule-Box containing mechanical and formal analytics and synthetics. All this depends upon Parmenidean, Platonic, Aristotelian notions in this order of precedence: stability (most basic assumption) independence objective negation formal contradiction falsifiability proof truth (crown jewel of classical 'science' and 'philosophy') It began with Parmenides. Plato bought into it and extended it. Aristotle made it 'physical.' Classicists today call it "logical," and "scientific." It's wr¤ng!!! It's bogus! In spades, it's bogus... Why? Reality's middle is included!!! Reality is heterogeneous. Reality is absolutely animate (instable). Negation is subjective. See our comparison table at Jammer's Quantum Logic. See Quantonics' coquecigrues. See our SOM's Bases of Judgment. Doug - 17Sep2005.

Page top index.

'exist'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

To remediate classical 'exist,' we need a novel Quantonic symbol for classical 'x.' We want to use a character which looks like our quantum uncertainty symbol, but none is available from existing font sets. In our own pending Quantonics font set we will use our quantum uncertainty symbol, however for our work here, we choose wingdings font [ ( '[' on your keyboard ) to remediate classical 'x.' It is a simple Tao quanton. Our first use occurs here in our novel remediation of classical 'exist' on 28Apr2001 - Doug.

Quantonics ch¤¤ses t¤ c¤¤pt classical 'exist' amd remerq all quantum comtextual ¤ccurrences with 'æ[ist.'

Where classical 'x' evokes an absolutely certain objective stasis, quantum '[' elicits an absolutely uncertain fecund wayve dynamis.

In classical contexts we shall use 'exist.' In Quantonics/quantum comtexts we shall use 'æ[isting.'

Page top index.

'exodus'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

TBD.

Page top index.

'explain'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms:

• affinity
• apologize
• clarify
• demonstrate
• elaborate
• elucidate
• excuse
• exegesis
• exemplify
• explicate
• interpret
• justify
• reason
• reveal
• theorize
• think
• typify

Synonyms - Quantum

In Other Languages: Arabic (old) - Chinese - Deutsch - Erklärung French - expliquer Greek - exhgw (need symbol font) Hebrew - dahrahsh (phon.) Japanese - Italian - Latin - exponere Portugese - Russian - Spanish - Swedish - Swiss -

TBD. (need symbol font to see Greek: exhgw)

Classical assess: stability independence excluded-middle EOOOness H5Wness lisrability causation certainty EEMDivity observation : Explain, explained, explains, explaining, explanation, etc.

Criterion	Dialectical Assessment	Ideal Classical Reality
stability	Classical objective explanations exist	Classical explanations are stable.
independence	Classical objective explanations exist	Objects in classical reality may be explained independently in terms of scalar metrics.
excluded-middle	Classical objective explanations exist	No object | explanation in classical reality can be both itself and not itself.
EOOOness	Classical objective explanations exist	Classical predicate logical explanations are absolutely dialectical.
H5Wness	Classical objective explanations exist	H5W explanations are all always lisr, stoppable, stable, analytic, etc.
lisrability	Classical objective explanations exist	Explanations are ideally, Classical lisr. Explanations are analytic.
causation	Classical objective explanations exist	Classical explanations are 1:1 correspondently unitemporally event-state... causal-effective.
certainty	Classical objective explanations exist	All classical explanations are determinately and determinably absolute.
EEMDivity	Classical objective explanations exist	Due independence & excluded-middle explanations are everywhere-dissociative.
observation	Classical objective explanations exist	Classical explanations may be verified and validated via classical unilateral observation.

Quantum assess: animacy c¤mplementarity included-middlings BAWAMings H5Wings lisrings affectati¤nings umcærtainty EIMAivityings c¤¤bsfection : Explain, explained, explains, explainings, explanati¤nings, etc.

Criterion	Vis-à-vis Assessment
anihmacy	Quantum explanati¤nings aræ abs¤lutæly anihmatæ pr¤cæss.
c¤mplæmæntarihty	Explanati¤nings c¤mplæmænt ahll ahctualihty. Ræhlihty issi a quanton(explanati¤nings,ahctualihty).
ihncludæd~mihddlings	Quantum explanati¤nings mædiatæs ahll ahctualihty as ræhlihty's ihncludæd~mihddle.
BAWAMings	Explanati¤nings quantum c¤here~c¤mpænetratæ ahll ahctualihty.
H5Wings	Explanati¤nings ¤ffer m¤dalings f¤r ahll ahctual h¤wings, whyings, whænings, whereings, whatings, wh¤ings
lisrings	Quantum explanati¤nings aræ ahlways quantons(n¤n_lisr,apparæntly_lisr).
affæctati¤nings	Explanati¤nings aræ is¤~qualihtatihvæ, ~affæctihve, ~subqjæctihvæ, ~sælf~referænt, ~frahctal, ~s¤phist, etc.
umcærtainty	Explanati¤ns aræ umcærtain ihnterrelati¤nshippings quantons(explanati¤nings(quantons(n¤nahctualihty,ahctualihty)).
EIMAivityings	Explanati¤nings aræ is¤h¤l¤graphic amd thus æværywhere~ihncludæd~mihddle~ass¤ciatihve.
c¤¤bsfæcti¤n	Explanati¤nings c¤¤bsfæct p¤tæntiahlly ahll ræhlihty.

See understand.

Page top index.

'extend'
'extensible'
'extensibility'
'extension'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Synonyms - Classical

Synonyms - Quantum

TBD. (Classical Problematics: Classicism depends upon a concept of what Bergson calls "spatial extensibility." CTMs require us to think in space-time. Classicism manufactures state-ic space-time as a formal concept based upon an excluded-middle objective reality which is quantitatively lisrable, countable, numerable, measurable, and thus mechanically extensible in space. Classical space may be represented using Descartesian n-tuples, e.g., <x,y,z,...>, and classical time may be represented using Peanoean modularly inductive and static subscripts, e.g., t₁, t₂, t₃, ... t_n. Both conventions assume, as Bergson has so eloquently exposed for us, that classical reality is both stable (i.e., zero momentum 'exists;' objects will conveniently hold still for us) and that objects in classical reality are independent of one another (any classical object may be arbitrarily isolated/separated from any other classical object). All this classical twaddle denies quantum reality!)

Page top index.

'external'

Etymology - Classical

Etymology - Quantum

Classical synonyms:

• outside,
• consceptively and conspectively 'not' internal
• objectively separate and removed from inside,
• middle-exclusion of external from internal,
• etc.

Quantum synonyms:

• See Quantonics' coined term,
  complementarospective,
• etc.

Classical assess: stability independence excluded-middle EOOOness H5Wness lisrability causation certainty EEMDivity observation : External, etc.

Classical usage of 'external' exemplifies what Quantonics means when it says "classical reality is: objectively-inanimate, dissociative, excluded-middle, and lisr."

Classicists view either 'external' or 'internal' as ideally, dialectically EOOO and as dichon(external, internal). Classicists see and conceive an ideal SOM's wall separation of external and internal. To any classicist, one is either inside or outside some box or container or center of detention. For example, classical white people, those who are bigots, see blacks as 'external' to white culture while some whites are 'internal' white culture. That is only one of countless examples of dialectics' evils.

To any classicist 'external' is objectively opposite 'internal.' Classically 'external' negates 'internal.' How can that happen? Classicists view 'externality' and 'internality' as 'objective, measurable, quantitative properties.' I.e., properties of ideal classical 'objects.'

Quantum assess: animacy c¤mplementarity included-middlings BAWAMings H5Wings lisrings affectati¤nings umcærtainty EIMAivityings c¤¤bsfection : We ask you to learn to think_q quanton(externality,internality), etc.

Quantonics' QELR of classical 'external' and 'internal,' is n¤t as a dialectical either-or, rather as as a quantum~c¤mplæmæntary both~all~while~and~many, BAWAM. We show that as quanton(external,internal). What does that mean? It means quantum~memes similar 'external' and 'internal' complement one another: memes of 'externality' are in memes of 'internality.' Using our race example again, we say "white issi ihn black and black issi ihn white." In quantum~reality that quoted phrase is real, a real quantum~truthing.

To any quantumist memes of c¤mplæmæntarihty, like quanton(externality,internality), can miscibly phase~encode one another and quite miraculously can also superpositionally ignore one another. A classically 'general' term for this quantum phenomena is interference, both its presence, its absence and its partial presence and partial absence. It is impossible for quantum flux (AKA the logos, Light) to classically 'oppose' quantum flux as ideal classical negation. Quantum flux never classically 'negates;' it always superpositionally phase~encodes self-other quantum~fluxings as: SO^rONs.

Page top index.