Quantonics' Poisson Bracketings

Macroscopically Using Quantum Uncertainty

Macroscopically Applying Quantum Uncertainty

"Doug, give us a real, quantum~genuine example of how to use and apply macroscopic quantum~uncertainty!"

To do what you ask we must use a quantum~meme of something classicists call 'hierarchy.'
Let's exemplify that meme first so we can use it to do what you ask.

Is truth above true? Is true above fact?
Most of us intuitively may conclude philosophical truth is above what is scientifically true.
Doug wants that to be so, but many would omnisagree.

But how do philosophers and scientists choose truths and their trueness?
They claim valid tools of thought which help them come to some concord.
That is classical essence of agreement based in opinion.

We have a problem now, a big problem.
All philosophy, science, indeed all 'law' depends, bottom line, on social opinion.

Thus Doug's end result, our answer to your query, has to be a
HotMeme™ "Common social opinion is never a metameme of quantum~uncertainty." HotMeme™.

To make that very simple, anyone who tells you that they know truth and what is true, in terms of 'common sense,' is retarded at best.

For countless affectors, quantum~uncertainty at all scales of reality is sovereign all social opinion including: philosophic, scientific, and legal.

Doug - 20Dec2008.

An Example of PB[PB[Pessimism,Optimism],PB[Worse,Better]]

Interrelationshipings in Reality are Quantum Uncertain

In Quantonics We Use PBs to Assess Interrelationshipings' Uncertainties

Poisson Brackets are commutation interrelationships.

Classically if A x B = B x A, we can say "A commutes B, and B commutes A." In other words, order of multiplication is irrelevant.

But reality isn't like that! Reality is n¤t classical. Rather reality is quantum~uncertain. Order of interrelationshipings is relevant!

In quantum reality, generally, A does n¤t commute B and vice versa.

Example? Your view of self and someone else's view of you uncertainly omniffer. Your view of other and other's view of self uncertainly omniffer.

This is a clear manifestation that quantum~reality, a holographic reality, is radically comtext~sensitive
and that sensitivity for any PBing evolves everywherings and everywhenings.

We can use PBs to show that:


Here's an example of a way to assess and manage PB[PB[pessimism,optimism],PB[worse,better]]:

  • One may pessimistically believe that a task is 'impossible' to accomplish when it may actually be 'possible.'
  • One may be pessimistic about another person's capabilities without realizing that person may actually be whom you actually need for a task. Observe how some people dredge pessimism based upon color, creed, culture, etc.
  • One may believe that humans are 'causing' global warming and climate change when, indeed, nature is affecting change in ways beyond human qua.
  • Pessimism rests unassured.
  • One may easily be optimistic about accomplishing a task which is 'impossible.' However, claiming a reality that said task is 'impossible' will be viewed as 'pessimistic.'
  • One may be optimistic about a person's abilities to perform a task based upon their success doing another unrelated class of effort. Upon placing that person in a novel problem space, said individual falters from lack of specific problem~handling skills.
  • One may believe that climate has been apparently stable for a 100 years that it will continue to be stable for another 100 years, and perhaps even longer, when reality's norm is that actually climate changes naturally and unpredictably.
  • Optimism rests unassured.
  • Caution may save one from disaster.
  • Uncertainty at all scales of reality begs one to think using probability, plausibility, and likelihood.
  • Understanding Paul Pietsch's phasement, "Indeterminacy is the principal feature of intelligence."
  • Dread staunches over exuberance.
  • Why do you monitor your children while they are waiting for their school bus?
  • An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
  • If I swing without a net I may die.
  • If I kill my neighbor, I may start a clan war which will last for centuries.
  • A war that destroys one's own people and treasure is a lost cause.
  • Confidence may permit one to succeed.
  • Just as in poker, stochastics should guide any optimist's choosings, chancings, and changings.
  • In formal models of reality determinism often works.
  • Hope raises expectations.
  • It's good for your kids to go out and meet the world and experience all: both good and evil.
  • I could worry about everything and never get anything done. 98% of what I worry about never happens, and the 2% which does happen I am incapable of anticipating which those are. (Doug ran a very successful business based upon this, but same business now, 20+ years later would fail, for countless reasons due absolute change of business ephemera. In early Millennium III what works changes almost daily, with even higher surety monthly. State of art c. 2007 is wMBU™ Doug's acronym for wave~Management By Uncertainty.)
  • Don't worry. Be happy.
  • If I love my neighbor s~he will love me.

This table is borrowed from our April, 2007 TQS News.

Our natural, dialectical tendency is to treat pessimism, optimism, better, and worse as ideal either-or classical absolutes. When we do that, we commit immense Errors in judgment.

Quantum~reality says we must avoid ideal dialectical Errors in judgment using Quantum~Likelihood~Omnistribution~stochastics (QLOs: each of which may be viewed as an 'evolving PB'):

In that graphic Doug is showing a more genericq Poisson~Bracketing as PB(Absolute_Uncertainty,Absolute_Truth).
It shows readers that those absolutes can only exist in an ideal dialectical mind.
In quantum~reality truth is stochastic and uncertainty is stochastic so we may represent them using QLOs.

QLOs (Quantum~Likelihood~Omnistributionings) are quantonic
complementaryq~antinomialq pairwise qwf~interrelationshipings of
PB(Ephemer[[a][um]]a,Ephemer[[a][um]]b) of

Specific antinomials in our graphic are bogus dialectical ideals of
absolutec truthc and absolutec uncertaintyc.
'c' subscripts for 'classical.'

Big red inchworm is a evolvingq PBing QLO of ensemble stochastics of Pastings,Nowings,Futurings.

Astutes please re cognize epigenomic quantum~subjunctive aspects of quantons(Futurings,quantons(Nowings,Pastings)).
You may wish to revisit Doug's very popular What is Wrong with Probability as Value?
Name of that web page is a takeoff on title of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen's EPR paper from about 1934-1935.

Too, weigh your pondering of QLOs as cuneiformicq Value.

Doug - 25Feb2015, 2,19Mar2015.

Shakespeare offered us perhaps dialectics' most supreme exemplar in his:

"To be or not to be, that is the question."

We see his enormous Error in judgment via his implicit:

dichon(not_to_be, to_be).

Either to be or not to be.

A Pirsigean platypus!

Rather Shakespeare might have asked, while allowing animate EIMA quantum~subjective~negation:



Fathom this approach compared to Valentinus' gnostic "threefold exegeses."

Thence to Doug's (mimicking, following Chaldeans) "fourfold exegeses."

Poisson~Bracketings show us, generally, that quantum~complementarity is ubiquitous: all things (fluxings) are
holographically mixed in all things (fluxings) greater and lesser extents...essence of quantum~partiality.

Our two PB exemplars, so far, show us that optimism quantum~complements pessimism, and 'to be' complements 'not to be.'

...quanton(optimism,pessimism) and quanton(to_be,not_to_be): general quantum~complementation...

As movement issi ihn rest, so too pessimism issi ihn optimism and 'to be' issi ihn 'not to be.'

This is perhaps our most powerful quantum~tell of how we must use PBings to do quantum~assessments of quantum~realityings.

For another 'worse~better' example see our 'religion-science' PB here.

For Doug's original intuitive use of PBs to describe anthropological interrelationshipings as quantum~uncertainties see here.

You may use this technique as part of your quantum~indagation and ~gravidation quantiques on any pair of noun and adjective (and other plausible linguistic) comparatives like this:


For those of you in business, this is a great way to do what Doug coined as wMBU™.

A great example of business application of wMBU™ is whether to move from your current home or virtual digs to an office building or separate facility.

PBing for Doug is a kind of quantum~due~diligence of any problem space.

If you were about to sell your business, perhaps buy an existing business, PBings are essential tools of quantum~due~diligence.

Doug has a small business exemplar on moving which he will offer here, soon...

Bottom line is that dialectic no longer works for general business decision-making. Classical MBO is clearly dead. Time to move on, folks!

Nearly all (occurring, actual) problems today are multiparametric.

What does that tell us?

Many parameters (ephemera) imply ensembles of holograilic interrelating evolvables.
See Henri Louis Bergson's omniscription of our Quantum Stage's processings actually
doing a kind of quantum~evolving due diligence, which we use as a wMBU™ tool.

Ensembles imply statistics. Statistics imply probabilityngs, plausibilityings, and likelihoodings.
PPLings imply quantum~waves (wavefunctions) of uncertain~change.

Behold: wMBU™!

If your current counsel offers classical, dialectical either-or decision-making, it's time to move Millennium III wMBU™.

Beth just recently managed a due diligence effort on sale of a small business (<$50 million) to a larger firm (>$1 billion).

Unfortunately larger firm had already decided to make said purchase, and they used classical dialectic to decide.

Doug's view is that dialectic may be problematic in that specific case, since PBings of market parameters and buy-sell parametrics were apparently n¤t done.

If you are assessing buy-sell, use PBings to do your own buy-sell due diligence assessment.

Doug also recommends that if you are anticipating selling your own business during next five years you should start having full annual accounting audits done. That simplifies actual due diligence at sale time, and more than pays for itself. Also consider showing your accountants how they can do PBings on select business problems in your business. You will be able to see, vividly, on a single page, a better view of what your decision options are given a large parameter space.

Doug will use this web page as a work space to refine memes and memeos regarding better ways we can assess and manage uncertainty in our lives and businesses.

For example, please note natural quantum~recursion in our approach. Too, note how PB issi a quanton. Compare dichon.

As a test of your personal abilities to emersce a similar table, do this exercise:

dialectical_reality vis-à-vis quantum reality,
better vis-à-vis worse.

Quantonics' approach to implementing PBs is to view each bullet item as a QLO (perhaps of QLOs) which interrelates other bullets somewhat like this:

We took our table of text bullets and scrunched it so that our QLO Value Ensemble could roughly superpose it.

Suddenly our Quantum Uncertainty Value Semiotic

grabs some additional semantic, does it not?

You want MOOOORRE...?

Try tying those green Xs into quantum waves!

Doug has found a way of assessing two authors' approaches to solving dissimilar problems by Poisson~Bracket placing their words in each others' mouths.

See Bailey on natural homosexuality vis-à-vis Monastersky on climate change.

For a Bergsonian analogue of using and applying quantum uncertainty, see our c. 2000 quanton graphic of his Bergsonian Durational Uncertainty.

Try to imagine a Quantonics approach to a classico-Quantum m¤dal using QLOs to represent cell and bullet level interrelationshipings.

Like this:

Each color above shows interrelationshipings of ensemble QLO pairs from four peaqlo triple ensembles.

We can interrelate any ensemble with any ensemble.

If we interrelate an ensemble with itself we might see a cylinder of self~reference, self~recursion.

We can enthymemetically interrelate any partial~element of any ensemble with any partial~element of any ensemble and with any ensemble.

Any interrelationship may be modaled as a wave~function and as an ensemble of wave~functions. Our cylinder exemplar may make that more apparent.

Now, H5W does one extract QLOs (QSOs - Doug - 3Apr2009) from reality?
(Here is our major challenge. It is the key quantum~success~enabler which requires huge effort to evolve. Doug perceives non~mechanical, ~formal, ~dialectical, etc., multidisciplinary business schools playing key roles in development of this qua.)

We offer a 'Doug rendition' of first cut graphic and second cut descriptive approaches on that parenthetic:

Doug's tentative, here, is still too dialectical. Better (as quantum~meliorism) should have a "CEP," a "CPE" around stochastic 'attractors' which appear almost as 'ad occulos' eyes.

Clearly this needs a lot more work, but we offer it as a kind of 'heads up' for those who may have chosen to pursue this venue.

Doug -16Nov2008.

A second cut descriptive effort on last few words in our development parenthetic, "...key roles in development of this qua."

Our second cut effort gives us bases of ontological (ontocoquecigruecal) emerscenture of quantons as holographic nexi. We show how holographic nexi emerq themselves on our quantum~stagings. Given those bases, we find that it is physially extensible and full spectrum flux~scalable in actuality among other actual quantons.

Our approach finds its bases in nascent quantum H5W Chautauquas among three quantum~awareness memes: cognition (occurrence), re cognition (recurrence), and omniscrimination (evolutionary holographic adaptation).

Incipience of our quanton(unsaid,said), as wave~proemial energy~wellings' PBings, sort of its 'first' holographic nexus exhibits its infancy in quantons(occur,recur) emersing energy~wellings on some quantum~stagings.

Subsequent growth and fledging of those nexi are as quantons(recur,recur) and quantons(adapt,recur).

Can you see much of H¤wq and Whatq developing qua here?

Isn't it beautiful?

Doug sees this as quantum~beauty — Almost As Good as It Gets.

We're far from finishing though!

Whatings issi nextings? For a heads up, see quantum~selection, and check our nearly decade old selection~ontology.

Doug - 15Dec2008

If we are worrying about wMBU™ we must have means to represent all aspects of a business this way. Marketing must worry about all customer QLOs which drive sales and satisfaction:

  • Beauty
  • Comfort
  • Cost
  • Desire
  • Durability and all ilities...
  • Efficiency
  • Ego
  • Emotion
  • Environment
  • Quality
  • Recycling
  • Status
  • Utility
  • Values
  • etc.

Each of those can be an ensemble of ensembles of QLOs.

Each of those is dynamic, changing, adapting, evolving with dynamic customer-by-customer memes and memeos of what is currently bettering and what expectational betterings may be and become.

All business disciplines have similar QLOs: management, quality, accounting, legal, sales, emerscenturing, G&A, security, facilities, purchasing, communications, IS, publications, HR, payroll, PR, logistics (coquecigruesistics!), etc.

Doug left out planning. It is historically a dialectical cause-effect mechanical induction exercise which has no place in a business run on wMBU™ memeos.

And all of those 'roll up' into a business QLO ensemble of ensembles of ensembles...

wMBUed™ products evolve and adapt with individual and societal expectationings for betterings.

Status quo and One Size Fits All predicting ideal dialectical certainty via MBO is a failed business notion. MBO is classically dead!

Doug - 15Aug2007.

Then, if we can emerse a classically state-ic model, how could we move it closer to quantum?

Doug - 6May2007.


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

©Quantonics, Inc., 2007-2028 — Rev. 13Apr2015  PDR — Created 6May2007  PDR
(25May2007 rev - Add QLO Value overlay on top of our Pessimism~Optimism, Better~Worse matrix. Mooorre...?)
(17Jul2007 rev - Add web page 'subtitles.' Add link to quantum~using and~applying Bergsonian Durational Uncertainty.)
(15Aug2007 rev - Add 'An Approach Example.')
(19Sep2007 rev - Add 'Four Peaqlos on Their Way to a Fermion' link to QLO (peaqlo) GIF.)
(22Dec2007 rev - Add Shakespeare PB exemplar. Reset legacy red text markups.)
(27Feb2008 rev - Add 'Ensemble Interrelationshipings' anchor to QVI graphic. Repair spelling of mimic[]ing to mimicking.)
(10Aug2008 rev - Add Nathan Bailey vav Richard Monastersky PB on homosexuality vav climate change.)
(16-17Nov2008 rev - Add quanton(unsaid,said) graphic exhibiting quantum~melioristic quantum~modaling.)
(15,20Dec2008 rev - Add second cut 'Second Cut Emerq Holographic Nexi' on emerqancy of holographic nexi as PBings. Add 'Quantum~Awareness' anchor. Add page top 'Uncertainty Sovereign.')
(15Jan2009 rev - Add 'omniscrimination' and 'wave~function' links to our recent c. 2009
QELRs of 'discrimination' and 'wavefunction.')
(12Mar2009 rev - Add 'enthymemetically' link to Doug's treatise on 'Commutativity and Enthymemetics.')
(3Apr2009 rev - Updates for Doug's latest QSO modaling breakthrough. Update text at 'Quanton Unsaid Said' anchor location.)
(23Jan2012 - Add sprinkled commentary adjustments and several links to more recent pages with relevant instruction.)
(11May2012 rev - Add a 'A Reservoir of Wave Functions' graphic link to 'perhaps QLO of QLOs' exemplar graphic.)
(23,25Feb2015 rev - Add 'Quantum Assessment' anchor near page top. Make page current. Reset legacy markups. Add 25Feb2015 Update near page top.)
(2,19Mar2015 rev - Update Quantum~Assessment re complementary~antinomialism of ephemera. Repair Int to In typo.)
(13Apr2015 rev - Make page current. Reset legacy markups.)