"That the world is continuous
I consider more than ever as unacceptable. But as soon as it
is discontinuous, all our words that we apply to the description
of facts are so many c-numbers. What the words 'wave' or 'corpuscle'
mean we may know not any more." 23November1926. W. Pauli,
1979, see for example, A. I. Miller, Early Quantum ElectroDynamics,
1994, Cambridge University Press. Latter see specific quote on
p. 13 of hardbound first edition. Miller's text is exceptional.
It's too new for Doug to do a full text review, but if you want
to discuss select paragraphs and have Doug do QELR's of Miller's
work, contact Quantonics. Miller provides selected papers from
that time period. Doug can review those for you if you have specific
interest. Most author's are wearing SOM
blinders, and cannot lack qua
to fathom a reality emersced
Herein we see ad
occulos quantum~reality's most fulminating paradox of
what is particle,
what is wave?
It appears, from reading papers from CeodE 1920s, Pauli, et al., didn't omnistinguish
among classes of entropy, what Doug refers today as "entropa."
Had Pauli understood that Fermi statistics were about material,
decoherent, spin one~half reality and Bose statistics were (are)
about coherent, integer~spin reality,
he may n¤t have written (stated) what we read above. (See
Tomonaga's The Story of Spin.) All then, apparent
to most, was J. C. Maxwellian posentropic. All treated
flux and energy and mass as posentropic. (Sheer dialectical
testosterone and hubris.) That, we are knowings nowings, is simply
bogus. Some waves are posentropic~decoherent~fermionic (appear
as material substance). Some waves are zeroentropic~coherent~bosonic
(appear as immaterial flux) AKA cohera.
Some waves are mixings of those and quantum~perturbations (say
BECs) of those. Some waves hide
from all observation and we now refer them as Schrödinger's
Isoflux hides in a very similar way as jet engines hide torque
via designs incorporating partial
isofluxic contrarotation of compressor and fan blades. Another
exemplar of partial isofluxic contrarotation is superconducting
pairs of electrons. If all material reality could isofluxially
contrarotate, it would become immeasurable, undetectable, unobservable,
etc. This is, quantumly, our ultimate cloaking emerscenture
and emerscitecture. Think about it. Isoflux
is what we now intend when we say "absolute zero Kelvin."
Metaphorically like a coldest boy friend for which a girl could
ask. A kind of perfect, "Make the world go away, get it
off of my..." Ever wonder why NDEs come back to actuality
and say they felt cold? (Only similar memeo, but very interesting
in this quantum~comtexting.) LOL. To commence grasping last few
sentences in a life ontology scenario see our Generation
III Quantum~Reality Loop.
28Mar2009 - More...
What is our biggest tell that Pauli is a classicist,
a died in wool dialectician? This: his dichon(discontinuous,
What did he say? He said, "Reality is either continuous
or discontinuous, and even worse, if reality isn't continuous
it has to be discontinuous! ...
Pauli's pure dialectic exposes its own stupidity
as ideal formal opposition.
Opposition, notionally, is one basis of ideal negation, which
is now manifestly bogus, if we adhere memeos of an all positive
quantum~reality. (For a comparison of classical dialectic and
quantum~rhetoric, see our What
are Sophisms? You will see how many folk perceive
rhetoric almost as relativism (this explains how classicists
ineptly referred Kuhn
a "relativist"). It would be, were it ideally objective,
but waves are subjective. Classical relativism succumbs and dies
when it is metastindyanically
in[fj]ected with animate
middle~including everywhere~associative quantum~holographic wavings.)
Doug - 28Mar2009.
... Pure, unadulterated pig whis! We call it "lisr,
immutable, stopped EOOO
OK, though, you are a student of Quantonics. You know what
to do when you see sheer dialectical stupidity of this magnitude.
It's over 83 years since Pauli emitted that bilge! "What
do you do?" "What do you say?"
You say, "quanton(continuous,discontinuous)." That's
incrementally better, but we can make it even better.
"But what does that mean?"
It means, "quantal,
animate, evolving BAWAMings
Over-simply we see classical either-or vav quantum both~and.
Our vav is short for vis-à-vis (Latin for "as compared
Again, over-simply, quantum~reality issi omniscomtinuityings
of comtinuityings. "Doug, how can you say that?" Easy!
Least action and ensemble least action subatomic and atomic con(m)stituents
of quantum~reality are perpetual flux and that means they are
intrinsically adiabatic. They are 100% efficient. They perpetually retain their con(m)tinuity
until they experience some kinds of quantal transmutation, most
of which are described thoroughly by two types of quantum discipline:
and QCD (quantonings(gluonings,quarkings)
and quantonings(nuclei,electrons)). Quantum~simply, then, left
alone these quantum~comstituents are self~comtinuous.
"All of this is crucial. It is
essence, nascence, and ensemble~bases for one of quantum~realityings'
greatest, until now, inexplicables! Change!"
HotMeme "Quantum change, we may now say with quantum~comfidence,
issi quantal~omniscomtinuityings of all quantum~realityings'
quantum~comstituents' quantonic interrelationshipings!"
HotMeme "Quantum~changings quantum~modulate~demodulate
quantum~comstituentings' comtinuityings omniscomtinuously."
Classico-quantumly and with a holographic quantum~awareness
based mindset then we may describe change as: Energy well's
(quantum attractors') emerqancings and continuityings are discontinuously,
complementary energy well's (begs quantum~partiality and
evolutionary absolute change borne tentativenessings of nexi)
via holographic~network adiabatic interrelationshipings' cognitionings,
re cognitionings, and omniscriminationings.
Simply, that means quantum~change is "quantal."
It occurs often with
apparent zero latency and thus itself is adiabatic (quanton(photon,electron)
is a superb example of transmutational adiabaticity...). When
it is apparently n¤n adiabatic, novel quanta of immense
varieties are generated (emitted, radiated) and that energy is
locally 'lost' (transmuted)
via radiation of those quanta (transmuted: n¤t
lost to quantum~reality). Similarly, sometimes some quanta are
locally gained, absorbed.
Latter sounds like a quantum~omniscription
of 'classical conservation.' It isn't! Why? Essentially,
quanton(nonactuality,actuality) is open. All open systems are
n¤n 'classically conservative.' Another indicator is that
quantum~reality is waves, waves are stochastic, all stochastics
are positive. Classical conservation requires an ideal dialectical
notion of negation in order to do 'classical conservation.'
Quantum~reality issi positive!
Quantum~reality issi a n¤n negative stochastic
quantal~wavings reality. See cancel.
(This update awakened Doug at 01:20 CDT, and it's now two
hours later, and I am going to pause and let you read it as is...more
after I get some more sleep. Needs more links, touch-ups, etc.
Doug - 28Mar2009. Thanks to Jade, Dotty and Fiona!!! What a ride...)
: Wavefunction, etc.
Classical quantum theory is mechanical and obeys mathematical
'rules' whose foundations are dialectical. Regular readers in
Quantonics understand that all reasoning
based in dialectic,
in Quantonics, is simply bogus.
So, Classical Mechanical Quantum Theory is bogus. (In
A great example which we can use here is a quote from Dan
Thomas' web site on quantum theory, re Probability,
"In quantum theory, the wavefunction can be complex and negative,
so that it cannot be a probability."
Of course, that 'quantum theory' issi classically mechanical.
See our What is Wrong with
We marked apparent classical problematics in bold violet.
Classicists make a huge error in judgment
when they use the. In quantum reality, there is n¤
the! Definite articles simply cann¤t exist in quantum
reality, since quantum~reality is evolving
and all quantons' middles, to both greater and lesser extents,
Classical mathematics' 'independence
axiom' violates quantum reality. See our thelogos.
Too, classical mathematics assume 'negation' is objective
(classical mathematics assume objectivity is dialectical), but
in quantum reality there are n¤ classical 'negatives.'
Indeed as Henri Louis Bergson has shown us "Negation
Begin Doug aside
Another great example which Prigogine and Stengers belie in
their fabulous Order Out of Chaos, shows mechanical devastation
of classical quantum theory delivered by retarded classical objective
and dialectical mathematics. See p. 227 of 349 total including
Classical mechanics mathematically layers wavefunctions like
- Energy operators,
Classically each of those is expressed as scalar results.
Worse, in classical mechanics eigenvalues are either one or zero.
Essentially any system of energies can be reduced to classical
scalar static and objective results. No account is taken of a
need to monitor dynamics of an energy system. It is assumed,
even presumed, that said system may be stopped for scalar measurement.
However, it worsens more. Energy operators must commute,
and in order for them to commute they must have 'common'
eigenfunctions. 'Common' eigenfunctions cann¤t exist in
quantum~reality in any classical mathematical sense. Common part
of any eigenfunction is always definite and determinate and continuous.
Quantum~reality perpetually evolves based upon ubiquitous up
to Planck rate quantization~scintillation
fractal self~other referent recursionings. So classical definiteness
is overridden by quantum~uncertainty. Radical ubiquitous quantization
destroys classical notions of process determination and continuity.
An implication then, is there can be n¤ classically 'common'
eigenfunctions! Doug - 8Aug2011. See P&S' OOoC text
What we uncloak here is classical mathematics' cheap imitation
using specific and definite classical functions. Autsimilarity
cann¤t be specific n¤r definite since it too is
under a quantum edict of absolute change.
We desnouer Bohm's "We need a non mechanical approach
to quantum~reality." Paraphrased. Doug - 8Aug2011.
Even kinetic analyses are turned into static scalar 'values.'
In all of this classical scalar
mathematical analysis other assumptions are made which viewed
quantumly are simply bogus:
- classical wavefunction amplitude and area as energy vav quantum
wave function flux rate(s) (amplitude is irrelevant) as evolving
- eigen operator commutation vav impossibility of classical
mechanical-formal commutation in quantum~reality,
- classical scalar measurement of amplitude at an instant vav
of flux gradience (a quantum wavefunction in
itself) as flux evolves,
- classical wavefunctions are temporal vav quantum wavefunctions
- classical wavefunction intensity as 'square of the amplitude,'
(i.e., velocity as a scalar magnitude) vav quantum wavefunction
intensity as flux rate relevant (velocity as flux),
- classical superposition of scalars vav quantum~superposition
of evolving wavefunctions,
- classical 'probability' vav quantum stochastics as probabilityings,
plausibilityings, and likelihoodings,
- classical single event prediction vav quantum stochastic
prediction as an evolving wavefunction,
- classical determinism vav quantum~uncertainty born of wave
We see vividly almost ad occulos that classical thingking
(CTMs) is manifestly
bogus, retarded, ersatz, facile, pseudo, and faux.
Doug - 4,8Aug2011.
End Doug aside 4,8Aug2011.
Classical complexity creates 'imaginary' values in actuality.
Quantum complexity is an admission that real quantum~n¤nactuality
complements quantum~actuality, like this: quanton(n¤nactuality,actuality).
Compare classical square
root to Doug's quantum~square~root.
See Doug's 2012 'A
List of Suggested Requirements for N¤væl Quantum
: Wavefunction, etc.
For now, and to keep it quantum~simple,
quantum reality is positive,
n¤n classically-'negative,' and wavefunctions are
Doug has seen too many of you apparently search in vain for
of whether a wave function collapses and whether a notion of
classical 'collapse' as classical stoppability is valid in quantum~reality?
Quick answer to latter part of that phasemental query is "quantum~reality
In quantum~reality, however, there are always more howevers.
Quantum~computing requires what is called "coherence"
) in order for a quantum~computer to "coherently
some portion of
quantum~reality, e.g., another quanton or some evolving
ensemble of quantons.
Apparently, and Doug currently lacks qua to describe this,
but quantum~omnitoring is omnifficultings to both establish and
One issue is that any quantum
qubit which is fermionic, then is made coherent tentatively in
order to dynamically (stindyanically) omnitor its comtext, is
extremely subject to decoherence
based upon both local and nonlocal affectings in said computing
environs. Doug wants to say, emphatically, that is not defined
in any way by a notion of classical stoppable 'collapse' of said
fermion's transmutation from a pretend boson to an actual fermion.
Fermions like to stay fermionic, and they will go from their
to their 'normal' fermionicity at any subatomic drop of a pin.
In general, n¤ quantum~wavefunction classically stops,
ever. Evolve yæs!
Stop n¤! All
quantum flux is quantum durationally perpetual, but it can mix
with other quantum~flux to transmutationally emerse
n¤væl quantum~actualities. Examples of latter are
paired fermionic contrarotation as fermionic torque hiding. It
is worthwhile for serious students of quantonics to compare "torque
hiding" to "partial coherence" in qubits while
they are c¤heræntly
ømnihtøring some portion
of quantum~reality. Ditto advanced memes of partial
gravity and anti gravity. Realise that photons of white light,
when entangled, can phase dependently select darkness: photon
hiding. Realise that isoflux contrarotates and hides DQ as 'dark
energy,' which is essentially unlimited. Memes of quantum~hiding
as temporary (many types of) quantum~coherency. Imagine a bullet
which could contrarotate... An arrow? A pair of electrons?
26Feb2009 - Doug.
End Wavefunction Collapse Aside.
Thank you for reading,
Doug - 24Dec2008.
Page top index.