<Nawt'-kah, Nawts'-kah, No'-kah, Nawn'-kah, Nuhn'-kah, etc.> - A coined Quantonic replacement for classical 'not.' N¤t ihmpliæs a quantum c¤mplæmæntary ihnterrelati¤nship, where a classical 'not' or 'no' is ideally a formal negation.

Pronunciation of suffix 'kah' is for quantum kahmplementarity (c¤mplæmæntarihty).

Wæ treat 'non' ¤mnihquæly hæræ. Why? Non is already a classical, and thus closed 'complementary' term. Our ihntænti¤n issi t¤ treat iht as a n¤vel c¤ihned tærm ihn Quantonics ræplacing iht by 'nom,' or 'n¤n,' which ahll¤ws usærs t¤ ¤mnistinguish ihts usæ as ¤mnihquæly Quantonic~quantum. Quantum c¤mplæmæntarihty issi ¤pæn.

Classical theory assumes that all 'objects' have ideal opposites. Classical theory says that object A's quantitative negative is -A.

Observe how how ideal classical objects and their 'property sets' are closed. Their negations are 'identically' closed too. This is necessary classically, formally, ideally in order for A - A = 0. Classicists call it 'logic.'

In quantum reality A_q's qualitative negation is its real c¤mplæmænt: potentially all other reality, both known and unknown, both actual and n¤nactual! A's c¤mplæmænt issi ¤pæn! A_q -_q A_q omnifferencing(s) issi coquecigrues~ically ambiguous. See phase, rectify, etc. When quantum flux 'cancels' we do not grant a classically ideal notion of 'zero energy,' rather at least double energy immerses as isoflux! Some call it "silence." Some say it is nature "hiding." Key here is that reality is not classically objective, rather reality issi quantum flux and "flux is crux." Flux are intrinsically quantum likelihood omnistributionings, QLOs. See our 3D fuzzon. See quality.

Flux is positive! One may 'not' classically, ideally 'negate' quantum flux! Quantum reality is a n¤n negative, wholly positive reality. Philosophical, scientific, and 'logical' consequences of this are simply enormous! That is why Doug says "A quantum tsunami is imminent, digital is dead, classical logic is dead, etc." See subject, subjectiv, and subjective.

Doug - 3Oct2006.

Quantum the¤ry bæliæs any physihcal nægati¤n ¤f ræhlihty's com ~stihtuænts which wæ cahll "quantons." Quantum the¤ry sh¤ws us that quantons d¤ n¤t have nægatihvæs, rather they have quantum c¤mplæmænts (~c¤mplætæmænts).

From a classical perspective, n¤t is 'subjective.'

Many philosophers, including Henri Louis Bergson, have shown that classical objective negation is subjective.

Excellent physical examples you may choose to imagine are:

• Classical not heart in an animal and human (Can we subtract heart? Where does heart classically begin | end?)
• Another example Doug uses in presentations is a little box of colored wooden blocks (roughly size of cigarette pack) and a similarly-sized and -shaped piece of modeling clay. Perform this operation on both systems: first, remove (subtract) a block from wooden blocks, then remove same 'block' from clay. Wooden blocks are classical — and as Henri Bergson would say, "radically mechanistic," — formal — easily treated by analytic calculus: both differential and integral. Clay is quantum. Clay may not be easily classically differentiated and integrated. Space in wooden blocks' set represents not block. Gouge in clay, plus remaining clay, plus potentially all other reality represents n¤t removed lump of clay. Amd n¤t assumæs quantum c¤mpænetrati¤n amd c¤insidænce.
• Etc.

Index