Doug's Hodgepodge CeodE 2010
Ad Hoc Financial-Economic-Political Comments

These remarks are Doug's opinions only.
Doug is n¤t a certified broker.
Doug is n¤t a licensed counselor.
Ponder at your own risk.



Archive of prior and current years' HodgePodge

Doug's HodgePodge CeodE 2009
Doug's HodgePodge CeodE 2011

Chapter One Segments 1-19 of Doug's Commencing 11Sep2010 Feuilleton Chautauqua on Economic [Vv]alue

Chapter Two Segments 1-12 of Doug's Commencing 11Sep2010 Feuilleton Chautauqua on Economic [Vv]alue



Has-Be[e]n Banana Bernank

Is it obvious that Has-Ben's Marxist-Keynesianism is failing, collapsing?

Fiat is doomed, but it will take awhile...probably...

Fright-filled skid marks at said Faid.

I am so glad they didn't call it "Qualitative Easing."
And their socialist Total Quality is out of Control!

Thanks to Drudge and Zerohedge™!

Doug - 4Dec2010.


This past week Zero Hedge published portions of Bill Buckler's Privateer Report no. 661. It is titled,
'Why the fourth branch of US government should be abolished and why authority should never be trusted.'

Doug considers this required reading.

Recently, I have been attempting to make comparisons which will enable readers to grasp why that article is so important.

Buckler is agreeing with a notion that authority is sociopathy. Especially a classical notion of social authority.

Socially and financially a Keynesian economic system declares its own authority.
That concept should be familiar as it 'exists' in many other 'forms.'

Buckler is correct, in Doug's opinion, that we cannot afford that classical brand of social authority any longer.

That social authority exists only due our stupidity, and complete absence of due diligence, of allowing it to continue.

Doug wants to do another comparison. First, though, let's review some simple notions. Hyper means 'above.' Hypo' means 'below/under.'
Doug has been using hyper and hypo as a way for us to assess better. For example, "Is society hyper individual." Socialists say "Yes!" Doug says "No."
Buckler is asking whether Keynesian 'classical monistic social authority' is hyper pluralistic and
evolving individual and local authority? Doug hears Buckler answering, "No." Doug agrees.

Let's do another comparison. First I want to introduce you to a book which Doug is reading now.
It is Lawrence Gardner's Magdalene Legacy, 2005, Barnes & Noble.

A comparison Doug wants to make here is how 'social authority' establishes itself.
How does 'social authority' self authorize society as hyper individual? That is Doug's question.
Further, why is our query important regarding Keynesian 'state economics.'

Allow Doug to quote p. 15, last paragraph, of Gardner's 1st ed. text:

"It is against this background that we need to ask why the monastic scholars were at odds with the ecclesiastical clerics in their enthusiasm over Mary Magdalene. The answer is straightforward: the monks were academics and, although dealing with an ostensibly religious subject, their concerns were about documented record. The bishops, on the other hand, were concerned only with religious doctrine and, since they determined the doctrine, historical record was not a matter of importance for them. In fact, they endeavoured to force their doctrine on people by way of compulsory dogma when the Congregatio Propaganda Fide (Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith) was introduced by Pope Gregory XV in 1662."

(Notice that unlike Gardner's "academic cleric monks" today's academe has bought into Keynesianism lock, stock and barrel.
Those monks were individualists. Today's academe is predominately socialist.)

Doug claims Gardner's comparison answers our query, "How does 'social authority' self authorize society as hyper individual?"

Authority sociopathically establishes itself at least two ways: 1) by ignoring, destroying, and reengineering
history, and 2) by establishing both dogma and doctrine as 'rules for individual behavior.'

Doug must emphasize here an overriding control mechanism implicit in educing 1) and 2):
said candidate authority must establish some 'systemic fear' in those whom it would control.
(That is precisely why Jesus said in his Farewell Discourse, "Do n¤t be afraid.")

That is what Keynesians have done to establish their economic system and impose it on USA and our world.

Buckler is writing to us, saying to us, that we must ignore and subvert that authority.
It, essentially, like said 'c a t h o l i c church' has no authority other than what it has illegitimately self-declared.

We do not have to play 'church's' game anymore than we have to play a Keynesian 'economic' game.

Now we have to ask our hyper questions: "Is any kind of classical social
doctrine and dogma above quantum~individuals' rights to choose?"

Doug claims there is an easy way to decide that hyper query.

What are dogma and doctrine? They represent means to establish classical social 'state.'
Both church and Keynes attempt to establish a 'one size fits all' determinate social state.

Did you notice in Doug's last segment how he abused Hawking, Einstein, et al.?
What was their classical 'science' attempting to do?
In Doug's opinion they were attempting to, "...establish a 'one size fits all' scientifically 'certain' social state."
Why and how? To achieve a conventional determinism.

If you believe what Quantonics teaches, you grasp that reality isn't state-ic.
Reality is absolutely evolutionary up to Planck rate change.
Always changing and changing all.

To Doug, and this is his belief, an ineffable Quantum~G¤d's methodology is quantum~evolution.

Classical state resists and denies and calls 'evolution' "heresy."

Classicists cannot deal with absolute change. Why? They cannot control it.
Change ignores authority based in dogma and doctrine.

All static 'things' die! Church is dead. Keynesians are dead. They just do not realize it, yet.

Classicism is dead! Classical authority is dead! Classical formality, objectivity, and mechanism are all dead!

Alive is hyper dead, yet they, quanton(alive,dead), quantum~complement one another in perpetual cycles of evolutionary change.

Believe it.

Thank you for reading,





Religion in USA and many other places in our world, e.g., Islamic countries, is political. In USA it amounts to
two social patterns of 'value:' dialectically split 'christians' versus 'agnostics,' for lack and hope of a better term.

'Science,' dialectical science, has been telling and showing us for some time that it is committing suicide.
First we had that 'anthropogenic global warming' AlGorebasmic fiasco. It called itself, "A Kyoto Accord." Wholly bogus!
Now we have an essentially incompetent and classically objective Steven Hawking saying, "God did not create universe..." (from Drudge, thank you).

Can you see why I call Hawking incompetent?
How can he know, "God did not create universe..."? Compared to our cosmos, Hawking's mind is but a grain of sand.
To say what he said, doesn't he have to take on a self-aggrandized Godlike stature?
Is Steven Hawking God? Is he qualified to assess what God does?

To Doug, only G¤d knows if G¤d created our multiverses.
(To Doug, anyone who says they know anything for sure about G¤d is a LIAR!
That is why Gn¤stics and Cabalists say, "...adhere indetermination and embrace uncertainty.")

Hawking's arrogance is another tell of classical science's demise. Doug's opine.

Doug hasn't spent time on Hawking in Quantonics for a simple reason: Hawking is a dialectical objectivist. That means he is a hylic SOMite.

Hylics are quintessentially retarded, but they believe they are intellectually gifted. Why? Society 'values'
them highly. Why? Society is consensus: commons sense. Of course, that is bogus!
"Vulgi opinio Error!" Thomas Digges, 1600.
Heraclitus, "Dialectic is Error."
Jesus (n¤t 'the christ'), "Dialectic is Error."
The Nine Gates, "Dialectic is Error." (Read The Dumas Club by Arturo Pérez Reverte.)

Why does society 'value' retards like Al Gabore and Steven Hawking? And Albert Einstein? Society believes "Dialectic is concrete truth." Error!

But lucidly now, before our eyes, we are watching "blue pill" classical society stagnately concretize itself in its own abysmal toilet. Death by ESQ.
Goodbye, and thank quantum~G¤d.

Amazing, eh?


Doug's assumption here is that n¤ 'scientist' can be a material objectivist and be competent.
Quantum~reality is immaterially subjective, period. It is absolute quantum~flux.

Doug's opine.




I know, I know, it's been 11 days...

I skipped bargaining. I am in that anger stage...I think...

My lack of production is embarrassing. I am almost always productive, er uhm, in terms of writing.

Yammering too...

. . .

I am reading, though, instead of writing, and I found this great explanation of what is going on...see... this article by Matthias Chang at Market Oracle.

I am unsure Matthias has hit any nail on its head, but his description of what has happened and why is valuable reading IMO.


Perhaps a novel liaison with a nice woman may light my fire. We'll see.

Best...and maybe this small effort is an indicator of more to come...soon.





"Hey Doug, What is sociopathy?"

Let's try an example. Hitler was a sociopath. He tried to eliminate all Semites from Earth. He failed of course, but he did kill and torture millions of Jews.

Our online dictionary says that a sociopath is a person who does harm to society.

Doug has a problem with that definition since he intuitively grasps that organizations can practice sociopathy.

"But Doug, What does that word, sociopathy, really say?"

It means 'pathy' AKA 'disease' of society.

All previous societies which used fiat and fractional reserve systems have died from their 'disease' of paper money, "money without Value."

Read what Minsky says about this, here:

 "Money enters into neoclassical theory because of the need to transform real wages and the relative prices of commodities into the wages and prices we observe, that is, wages and prices denominated in money. In neoclassical theory, money does not have any significant relation to finance and the financing of activity. Even though money becomes the fixed point, and other prices, as well as index numbers of prices, move relative to the value of the money unit, money in the neoclassical theory is, by definition, sterile. Money yields no income, and in the neoclassical view it only yields benefits in terms of facilitating transactions involving goods and services. Inasmuch as there is no uncertainty in the neoclassical world, the possession of money does not yield a subjective benefit in the form of protection against uncertainty."

See p. 124, Stabilizing an Unstable Economy, Minsky, McGraw Hill, 2008.

Now think about this, do n¤t thingk about it. Neoclassical theory has no place for money! That is what Minsky is quintessentially saying.
Also realize, Gold protects against uncertainty, even admitting quantumly, "Uncertainty exists, therefore embrace it."

Wikipedia says this about neoclassical Keynesianism, "The attempt to combine neo-classical microeconomics and
Keynesian macroeconomics would lead to the neoclassical synthesis[16] which has been the dominant paradigm of
economic reasoning in English-speaking countries since the 1950s.
Hicks and Samuelson were for example instrumental in mainstreaming Keynesian economics."

Now we see how US money (dollar) became valueless! Keynesianism demands it!

Keynesianism's demand for fiat paper is a social pattern of economic 'value' which
destroys, sociopathetically, all societies in which 'value' is embedded and practiced.

What is this evil which lurks in hearts of humankind which literally attempts to destroy intrinsic Value?

What one word describes this evil? Convenience.
(I.e., it is convenient and conventional to be classically objective, state-ic, and causally determinate.)

Why are logic systems and their maths in our world failing? Convenience. Convention. A presumption of "no uncertainty" AKA classical determinism.

Why is minimalism failing? Convenience. Convention. A presumption of "no uncertainty" AKA classical determinism.

Why has Occam's Razor failed as a formal way of looking at reality? Convenience. Convention. A presumption of "no uncertainty" AKA classical determinism.

Why have Einstein's Theories (both SR and GR) failed? Convenience. Convention. And perhaps largest of all, "absence of uncertainty."

Why is Keynesian economic theory failing as all Earth watches? Convenience. Convention. And perhaps largest of all, "absence of uncertainty."

What does Doug's Quantonics teach us? Dump convention. Dump convenience. Dump classicism, neoclassicism and Keynesian economics. Embrace quantum~uncertainty.

There is n¤ 'classical certainty,' neo and otherwise, in quantum~reality.

Just as in quantum~reality, every Planck quantum unit has Value, in quantum~economics all units of money have intrinsic Value.

Break that fundamental meme and get in trouble.

We see now, that is what Keynesians have done: "They got in big, big, big trouble."

Let's, with Nature's assistance, off all of them.

Oh, but they're doing it to themselves...





Do we agree? Keynesianism is sociopathy, right?


Zerohedge has a great article today on M2. Tyler says, paraphrased, "M2 is up, trouble is 'Where's velocity?'" Read dialog, there, below Tyler's offering.

One (I surmise) young fella there who refers self as 'eternal student' offers us some links to youtube, wikipedia, and debtdeflation.

His youtube link offers five video segments which explain rather simply what is wrong with Keynesian notions of "debt as money."

What Doug really likes about that video is that it makes very clear that "debt as money" is essentially Keynesian sociopathy.

With what should we replace said "debt as money" notion? This is where Doug gets really excited:

"Value as money!"

Recommended video segments offer some ways to do it.

Here are 'eternal student's' recommended links:


"Debt as money" is how Keynesianism turns all of its constituents into debt slaves. See videos.

"Value as money" offers countless advantages: individual freedom, social sustainability, cancellation of Keynesianism, etc.

Bottom line: Federal Reserve Bank has to go, and our new government has to be
wholly responsible, independently, for its own "Value as money" system.

Enjoy! More importantly, learn!





I am still struggling as a widower: manifestly without my dearest Bethahavah. Do you need to know this?
Probably not. Do I need to do it? Yes! It is therapeutic, my sharing with you.
Beth, I love you. Doug.

. . .

A little street talk...

Let's be "perfect storm" blunt. Current world economics are sociopathy. Keynesianism is destroying our societies!

"Doug, how in hell did you come to that conclusion?"

Heraclitus said, "Dialectic is war." Quantum~Gn¤stic Jesus said, "Dialectic is Error."

Nexus? Keynesianism is pure dialectic. It is classical either-or, bivalent, objective, concrete "garbage intellect."
Robert M. Pirsig called it, paraphrased, a "...genetic defect in our current reasoning."

We have a few, culturally and genetically retarded, Keynesian economists destroying our world fiscally. That is what Doug means by sociopathy.

It is what Doug means by dumbass: dialectical uber mob bosses assuaging sociopathetic sepsis.

Who are they? Bernanke, Geithner, Federal 'fractional reserve' Banks, US Congress,
US Supreme Court, US 'executive' branch, Cartel Banks, IMF, etc.
Bad people doing very bad things. Dialectical, Keynesian fuxups.

What does Nature do with garbage like this? Nature offs them. Of course She'll need our help. And we shall.

What did we do to 'Kings' of old? We offed them, with Nature's help.

What will we do with our current sociopathetic Keynesian Kings? Off them.
This time however, they are doing it to themselves,..., very gradually. We add exigent urgency...

Part of offing these garbage intellectuals is educing a novel and omniffering political system: Doug calls it "Quantum Politics."
QuPo is in its infancy now, but it is growing rapidly. A strategic growth to off all Keynesians and their garbage intellects.

We'll keep you apprised.

Any quantum politics described

" a domain of coherent activities, opens the way to envisaging individuals which are aggregates of individuals, as, for example, a population or a society engaging in coherent activities. As coherence maximizes both local freedom and global cohesion, it defines [inter]relationship[s] between the individual and the collective which has previously been deemed contradictory or impossible. The 'inevitable' conflict between the individual and the collective, between private and public interests, has been the starting point for all social as well as biological theories of western society. Coherence tells us it is n¤t so 'inevitable' after all. Eminent sociologists have been deploring the lack of progress in sociology, and saying that it is time to frame new questions. Perhaps sociology needs a new set of premises altogether. In a coherent society, such conflicts do n¤t exist. The problem is how to arrive at such an ideal state of organization that in a real sense, nurtures diversity (and individuality) with universal love." See p. 153 of Mae-wan Ho's the Rainbow and the Worm, 1st ed., and p. 215 of her 2nd ed.

(Our brackets, bold, quantization of 'not,' and italicization of thelogos. We left out footnotes 22 and 23 from Mae-wan's 2nd edition. We corrected US spelling to 'premises.' All other punctuation and marks are hers.)

Readers, please beware any classical notions of 'global unification' as analogous quantum~coherence. Quantum~coherence is n¤t classical, dialectical 'unification.'





Perhaps Doug's most fervent belief is in fiscal responsibility. When one believes that one tries to be fiscally responsible.
Sounds redundant doesn't it? It is self~re~affirmation of individual duty to both self and society.

Given that belief, what should one do? Believe in sound fiscal policy. Support sound fiscal policy.

Is our world's current fiscal policy sound? In Doug's opinion, NO!

Why? Keynesians have had control in USA since about 1913.
Keynesianism is profoundly irresponsible. Why? It focuses on liberal welfare and a bigger notion of 'welfare state.'
What does that mean? To Doug it means that society takes control of welfare of individuals. This is the big liberal mind fux.

Why? Any society which thinks it is responsible for all its individual citizens, using welfare, enslaves those individuals.

Keynesianism is even worse since it makes 'debt slaves' of all its citizens who play said Keynesian game.
But that house of cards is in avalanche decay now: cards are tumbling, too big to fail are failing now.

Doug never adhered to Keynesianism. Doug always saved. Doug paid off three houses and one lake property.
Doug paid cash for his last three automobiles. Doug invested in real property and real money: metals, especially precious metals.
Which precious metals? Ones Richard Russell recommended when Doug first started reading him in about 1972.
Doug bought his first Krugerrands in 1974 and tripled his money prior Au's biggest slapdown in 1980.

So, to Doug, Au is real money. That is what Richard Russell taught Doug. Doug learned that lesson well.

Again, we see Au in a massive bull market. In Doug's opinion, Au will ramp even more.

"But Doug, there is an end game. What is your end game for this current Au bull market?"

I'll say it again. Watch S&P and Dow to Au ratios. When Dow:Gold ratio falls to
about two and S&P to Gold drops below about 0.25, it's time to cash in at least half of
one's metals. It's time to move to Values which are low due fear, perhaps stocks.

Recently Doug mentioned 10 and 5 year slopes for Au.

Let's recapitulate:

Au's 10 year slope is about $100 per year using trend lines. Au's 5 year slope is about $150. Doug just looked at Kitco's 1 year slope and it is about $250.

I do not know how to make it any clearer than that. Compare stocks. They are wilting miserably. There is no longer any near future value in stocks!

For next two to 10 years, metals are, in Doug's opinion, the way.

I was just reading Merv Burak's article on Market Oracle. He noticed something I had missed:
Kitco's one year Au chart shows near completion of a mini inverse head and shoulders in Au!

Remember our last big inverse head and shoulders in Au? There was a huge upside breakout after that!
(Notice Doug's wag soft fuzzy pink projection of Au in Feb, 2010? Doug only missed that by about $20. Not bad.)

Based upon Doug's meme of quantum~autsimilarity, Doug expects (as do others) a imminent breakout above $1300 Au 'price.'

Spot Au is about 1221 right now as Doug writes this. If we have another $250+
added to Au twixt now and this time next year Au will be at about $1471+ then.

We'll see.

Best always,





Doug finds it more than interesting that Au spiked about $15 yesterday...

...and Zerohedge's Tyler Durden more than mentions 'The Hindenberg Omen.'

Is that coincidence? Synchronicity? (both are classical notions)

Could it be a quantum~tell?

Depends upon how we look at these things.

Classically Au's 'price' is a scalar. It's increase of about $15 yesterday is a scalar. "Classicists scalarbate."

Classically parameters used to calculate 'The Hindenberg Omen' are scalars, and its fundamental
assessment is scalar, either-or (dialectical), and bivalent (yes or no dialectical).

Quantumists say, "Au's 'price' is a wave function." Surmise: "Its classical (price)
metric is bogus, since it does not reflect Au's emerging quantum~stochastic Value."
We must relentlessly recapitulate Au's stochastics and ømnihtør (quantum~monitor) them
real time (do n¤t scalar 'stop,' perhaps 'collapse' said wave function). Think of Au as metal~weather.

Quantumists say, "Hindenberg Omen composes a wave function." Ditto commentary above re Au.

These two indicators, taken together (superposition of their wavefunctions) are telling us
something very important. Interventionalists' manipulation of Au 'price' is nearing an end.
Ted Butler is saying that in fewer than 180 days CFTC will have firm position limits on Au
and Ag, etc. Other changes are imminent which will change commodity rules for futures
and perhaps even 'naked shorting.' JP Morgan, et al., may be in a world of immense hurt.
At this juncture Doug thinks it's too late for CFTC.
Nature is about to have Her way with ne'erdowells.


If you look at Kitco's Au charts, 5 year and 10 year, you will see gold's long term quantum~momentum
has increased about 50%. i.e., slope of 10 year is about $100 and slope of 5 year is about $150.
In other words, Au is appreciating now at a 12.5% annual rate. Stock markets are losing ground relatively.
However, that annual rate for Au doesn't show its Value.
Its Value is two or three times that, were it not suppressed by Interventionalists.
Even better, when Au returns as a basis for a new 'real money' system in what we now call USA,
its Value will be revealed as somewhere twixt $5k and $50k, depending.

If Izzy is right about silver, its Value will be somewhere twixt $100 and $1000.

If Doug lives another 5-10 he'll get to see that happen.

Be short stocks, stay away from US paper, and be long physical Au and Ag.

Doug's opine.

Best to all of you,


(I miss Beth, but I am adapting to being a widower.)




Hard to believe. It is already two weeks passed since Beth transitioned.
I didn't think I could do this, but I did...somehow...thanks to all of you...who offered and helped.

Very recently John Williams was interviewed by The Energy Report.

I urge you to read this review at Market Oracle.

We are much closer to a full fledged depression, a deep depression, than one may imagine.

John offers some ideas about what we need to do.

I offer melioration, too: we need 34 states to vote for secession, that's all folks.

Our federal government is worse than worthless.
It's incompetence is like a boat anchor stuck in a concrete of fiscal Keynesian ineptitude.

Let's get rid of it and keep a plural republic of independent states.
Some of those will succeed empirically, and that is what we need now.

Sincerely, I offer my best hopes for all of you,





"Doug why do you rant so often about Keynesianism?"

Simply, it is my view, a view shared by many, that Keynesians are economically insane.
Their insanity is driving our world into a massive spiral of economic death.

"But Doug, what is dying?"

Last two segments of Hodgepodge™ Doug has written about a classical conspective of determinate causation.

Classically, then, our current direct experience of a massive Keynesian spiral of economic death
is 'caused' by fiat paper, dilution of fiat paper, a politically-inspired fractional reserve basis of money, and
a classical notion that it is possible to spend one's way out of a Keynesian economic death cycle.

Determinism and its sibling causation adhere notions that "what worked before will keep on working."

Doug says this vulgately as "status quo is 'the' way to go."

That is what Keynesians are attempting now as Doug writes this: Maintenance of Keynesian Status Quo!

Doug wrote this philosophically in his 2006 review of Daniel C. Dennett's Breaking the Spell, Chapter 8:

"Successful qua tends to blind its stake holders (here we see success as inuring maintenance of status quo inertia vis-à-vis educing evolutionary pragma and relentless adaptation) to imminent and emerscent qua and its emersos of qualogos. Contemporary mythos examples include unilateral application of social pattern of value 'war' not working against terrorists in a global Earth community of communities, and businesses like GM, Ford, Micro$oft, countless steel companies, and so on: status quo is n¤t qua for longevity. To use Dawkins' own terminology, status quo is not an evolutionarily stable strategy, ESS. Why? Quantum reality is flux, and that demands that qua immerse itself in dynamic and emerscent memes. But dialectic is about state-ic notions..." 

What is worse about Keynesians is that they have almost 'religious faith' that their theories are durable causationally and determinately.

They are not!

Keynesianism and Keynesians are dying, in many ways they are dead yet do not know it. Some are suspecting...




Please permit Doug to segue from yesterday to nowings...

"Why is classical causation bogus?"

To get this underway, try a list of fairly simple memes: plurality, change, and middle~inclusion.
To omnistinguish classical exclusion and quantum~complementary~inclusion, Doug uses some hand gestures.
Doug pulled this text from work he did in 1999 on his Quanto email list:

I use some simple hand gestures to show newbies fundamental differences twixt SOM and MoQ. Try this:

SOM Aristotelian dialectic -

1. Hold both your hands in front of you.
2. Make fists with thumbs pointing up.
3. Rotate both hands so thumbs point down.
4. Bang your fists together.

MoQ and Quantum~Quantonics complementarity -

1. Hold both your hands in front of you.
2. Open your hands with all fingers extended.
3. Bring your hands together with fingers meshing like gears, thumbs up.

Our SOM gesture shows its versus, head-banging, oppositional, pugilistic, wrath-filled nature. Thumbs down shows its negative nature. Closed fists shows its closed, parochial, provincial, prison-of-reason nature.

Our MoQ gesture shows its omnifying, commingling, interpenetrating, co-permeating, absolutely animate and changing interrelationships. Thumbs up shows its moral, ethical, excellent nature. Open hands shows its openness, its unlimitedness, its both/and actual/nonactual, its both/and known/unknown, etc. reality.

Classical causation is objective, monistic, dialectical, excluding, etc.

Quantum affectation is subjective, plural, complementary, including, etc.

But Doug, "Why is classical causation bogus?" Mainly, SOM logic is bogus!

There are many reasons. Perhaps a table would help us here:

Why Classical Causation is Bogus
Reasons: Descriptions: Commentary:
Change Causation assumes reality is a static, perpetually immutable, closed, objective analytic monism. See Henri Louis Bergson's Creative Evolution on change.

See Doug's extensive QELR of change.

Classical change assumes "one cause, one effect." Classical change further assumes that change is "excluded-middle state-ic," that reality is objectively separable, stable and holds still. Classical dogma forbids "an effect without an identifiable cause." For example, classicists cannot explain "action at a distance," and "quantum~scintillation." Why? They believe in OSFA bivalent cause-effect.

Quantum change assumes (due dynamic wave based reality) ensemble affectation borne of ensemble comtextual changes. Many changes (plurality of absolute change) affect many outcomes. This quantum~reality offers partial exegesis of what classicists mean by "unintended consequences," and "Murphy." Indeed, in quantum~reality, outcomes may occur absent any identifiable preconditions. This accounts for much of what quantumists refer as "novelty and surprise."

Doug - 4Aug2010.

Plurality Causation assumes that objective cloning is possible and that identities are real notions. Classically, plural immutable identities are real (coins, ice cream cones, most manufacturables). Identity is Aristotle's first syllogism and a principle basis (axiom) for maths' 'geometry.'

Due evolution's absolute ensemble changings, no two things in quantum reality can be classically identical longer than one, possibly a few, Planck moments.

In quantum reality autsimilarity is ubiquitous, but identity is essentially absent.

When we talk about quantum~reality, we are implicitly talking about quantum~wavings, and that implies we must always be talking about vast pluralities of ensemblings. In short we call those ensemblings, "quantum~stochastics of probabilityings (pastings), plausibilityings (nowings), and likelihoodings (futurings)." Dynamic, middle~included pluralityings reign in quantum~reality. That explains Doug's QELR coinage of quantum "omnivalence," above (hyper) classical bivalence.

I grasp rather clearly how some of you cannot view pastings as having affectation on our livings' nowings. Do a web search on "epigenome," for a real exemplar of which Doug writes in that regard. Pastings are affectings nowings, quantumly and massively-ubiquitously. I think it acceptable, as Pirsig does, that we may regard pastings as "preconditionings."

Recall Pirsig's simply brilliant, paraphrased, "Instead of A causes B, we might choose to say 'Bings prefer preconditionings Aings'."

Doug - 4Aug2010.

Exclusion Causation assumes that real objects are ideally (certainly) separable from which one may assume that objects are ideally certainly-analytically separable.

No single cause 'exists' in quantum reality. Jon von Neumann looked for and couldn't find it. "You ask, Why?"

Quantum reality is essentially holographic, so all is evolving middle~including ensemble (plural) affectation and coobsfection.


Causation depends upon logical equations being scientifically, i.e., certainly, 'true.'

Classical 'truth' depends upon a certain denial of evolution, so that truth can remain immutable. See Henri Louis Bergson's Creative Evolution on stability.

Due absolute change, quantum reality is intrinsically uncertain which exposes classical notions of 'certainty' as bogus.

Quantum 'truth' is an agent of its own change. All evolves, so truth evolves. Ergo quantum~uncertainty hyper classical certainty. Doug - 4Aug2010.

Doug will add to this table and omniscussion during balance of 2010.

Walk around your car. How many perspectives of your car can you have? Only one? Many? Which is more real?

Caveat: Today's financial systems use causation based in SOM Logic!!!





I encourage you to read Gary North's latest article at Market Oracle.

He shows us how deeply ill and economically insane Keynesianism is.

Keynesianism is a Millennium II Victorian socially liberal economic system. It's an antique! It's bogus! It's phony!

"Doug, how is Keynesianism bogus and phony?"

I don't want to write redundantly Gary, so let's say it as simply as possible: Keynesians believe in strict determinism and thus causation.
Causation is a term used by Gary North in his latest article, to describe how Keynesians suffer extreme "reasoning defects."

We no longer live in MII. We do live in MIII. Millennium III, in Doug's opinion, is a commencement of quantum~thinkqing.
We are leaving a long period of classical thing-king behind and entering a novel epoch of quantum~thinkqing.
With that, determinism dies! Determinism is dead! Causation is dead. Linear thing-king is dead! Objectivism is dead.

On Fofoa recently Doug was reading their latest (as I recall 30Jul2010) segment.
Its author writes somewhere, " must be objective and keep an open mind..." I stopped reading at that point.

In Doug's opinion, that author is an idiot. Why? To Doug, objectivity is closed, and in no way can it be 'open.'
To Doug, that author is speaking in oxymora.

Let me see if I can show you why I thinkq that. Let's quote Philip R. Wallace from his Paradox
, paraphrased, "...interpretation involves according primacy to subjectivity over objectivity..."

For an objectivist, there is only one interpretation: his. This is what Doug means by "objectivity as closed." This, simply is OSFA thing-king.

Bottom line: To Doug, objective thing-king is closed and quantum subjective thinkqing is open.

If objectivism is dead then classical notions of strict determinism are dead too.

Quantum~evolution replaces them, handily. Quantum~evolution is uncertain, borne on a directly
observable reality that evolution's impetus is absolute change borne of absolute quantum~flux.

Quantum~uncertainty is macroscopically uncertain. Doug's latest SEP of that is wholly unexpected
passing of his beloved Beth at age 62. Macroscopic quantum~uncertainty is real folks!




On Friday or Saturday before she left us...

Beth asked me point blank, "Is Quantonics abstract?"

Beth's query simply took my qua and respect for her to cloud nine.

Few people could even begin to ask that question!

I believe what stimulated her to ask it is that Doug had been paraphrasing Suares' remarks about Autiot.

Suares writes in Sepher Yetsira (possibly, too, his Cipher of Genesis) that Autiot isn't abstract.

Most of us, due academic propaganda, dialectically juxtapose 'concrete' and 'abstract' classically.
That means 'two value simply' that concrete is 'opposite' abstract and vice versa. See Doug's QELR of concrete as comcrete.
Dichon(concrete, abstract).
For most people whither 'A is A' in English, Latin, Greek, German, French, Cyrillic, etc.,
'A' is an classical formal abstraction of whatever you want it to be an abstraction.


"As it signifies, so it is."

However, apparently even Plato said 'dog' as a word doesn't bite!
(I need to check that. I have been unable to affirm that as a quote of Plato - Doug.)

Problem with classical abstractions is that once they are assigned their local significance, they become 'concrete:' essentially ESQ.
Few of you will disavow 'horse' as a concretion of said animal.

Why did Suares claim Autiot isn't abstract?
It isn't easy for dialectical minds to grasp, but I will try to emulate him as simply as I know how.

From an 'English' perspective, A in Autiot is Aleph, B is Bayt, and C is Ghimel. Similarly for remaining 27 'letters' of Autiot.

Unlike English, I put Hebrew 'letters' in single quotes since they aren't...rather they are words (again, unlike English, etc.).
Each Autiot word (each Aut) isn't abstract since it 'contains' its own DNA, sort of like nature's critters and shrubbery.

Allow me to show you, and if you read Suares' opus he will show you even better than Doug does here.

Autiot recurses (self-refers, quantumly) Aleph as Aleph~lammed~phay. Bayt as Bayt~yod~tayt Bayt~Yod~Tav.
And Ghimel as Ghimel~hay~mem~lammed. All Autiot's letters are like that. Why?
They, in Doug's Millennium III quantum~linguistics, represent "packets of quantum~energy."
We call them "quantons." They holographically self~other refer middle~inclusive recursively everywhere in our cosmos.
(24Aug2015 rev - Repair spelling of Bayt.)

Abstractions in all languages but Autiot and Quantonics are static semantics, scalars, numbers, fixed 'static' measurements.

Autiot and quantons are stochastic wave functions of a 'real' quantum~reality.

This is crucial in Hodgepodge™ since stochastics are strategic, and that implies to Doug that Autiot is strategic as a Millennium III language.


I am miserable without Beth. She is my logos, my light, my Sophia. Without her I am empty.

Beth in Autiot is Bayt. Energy's only even prime.

May your quantum~energies' middle~include and entangle all quantum~reality.




Been a bad week, folks!

Doug's beloved, Beth (lovingly I call her Bethahavah) transitioned to n¤nactuality.
I am working some just to keep emotional pain somewhat at bay.

I don't want this work to appear that I am not missing her, rather I am celebrating her freedom from tribulations of actuality.

I love you Beth, I will always love you Beth. Doug.

. . .

Fofoa is one of my fav websites. They tell Au's story almost better than anyone.
Recently, they are highlighting Fekete's ongoing detail studies of Au.

I am looking at this page now which is a publication of Fekete quoted apparently in its entirety.

Fekete is saying "backwardation in Au is a predictor of 'end of fiat money systems' for this seculum," this Kondratieff cycle. He doesn't use those words, though.

If you are like me, you do not intuit backwardation. I'll write it my way given Fekete's teaching: backwardation is opposite contango.

Now we have another issue, "What is contango?" In my words: in futures markets contango exists when supply is adequate to meet demand.

So, one way backwardation can happen is when people who own gold will not sell it. This shuts down futures markets, and ultimately all fiat money systems.

You didn't think Au was that important, did you?

Fekete is a dialectician. He trusts maths. He trusts objective thingking.

Regulars in Quantonics grasp how Doug claims all of that objective stuff and almost all of its accoutrements are just bogus.
How about an example? Let's quote a paragraph from that Fofoa - Fekete link above:

"Why is it that the same theoretical argument is foolproof
in the case of full contango, but it is fallacious in the case of backwardation?
The reason is that full contango in gold (maximum reading on the gold basis)
implies full public confidence in fiat money; backwardation (minimum reading
on the gold basis) implies the collapse of public confidence in fiat money"

First, Doug does not disagree with Fekete's classically objective answer to his own query here.

Classically he is 'correct.' Quantumly, he doesn't "get it."

If equilibrium of contango and backwardation are processes, our first quantum edict is that processes may n¤t be analyzed
classically: processes have n¤ state! Processes do n¤t hold still, rather they perpetually and absolutely evolve.

We can say similar about non equilibrium evolutionings of contango~backwardation interrelationshipings.

A really big deal here is that, quantumly, all processings are positive flux.

They are stochastic.

Basic probability (stochastics) theory is axiomatically n¤n negative. Very quantum!

Now what, then, is troublesome about backwardation as described by Fekete (from a more quantum perspective)?

His maths make backwardation negative (bivalently 'opposite contango:' classically negative).

So, his query paraphrased, "Why is theory fallacious in the case of backwardation?" Answer, "It's negative."

As Henri Louis Bergson said so well, "Negation is subjective." If you know stochastic theory, you see why. See Bruno de Finetti.

Doug's view is that we do not want to view dynamic and evolving processes as sources of negation.
We cann¤t (may n¤t) treat them classically.

Rather we must treat them as positive energy (quantum flux). Key then, is to fathom how quantum flux interrelates other quantum flux.

When we do that, we find that contango as quantum flux entangles backwardation as quantum flux, a new flux emerges which isn't state-ically classically bivalent.
We have to learn how to hermeneut that new dynamic pattern, and thus eliminate classical fallacies.

. . .

Please share some positive thoughts in a brief "farewell to Beth."





Watching Bernanke...

Chris Dodd needs a huge cork. Like, duh, in his mouth.

Banner shows, "Fed R Bank has new authority to control markets."

Will you agree that FRB is wholly Keynesian?

Will you agree that it is simply moronic and oxymoronic for Keynesians to have control of markets?

Stability at cost of freedom is 'The No Deal."

Control "Free Whatever" is an oxymoron!!!

Keynesians are fiscally and economically insane and notably incompetent: they have given us this fiscally and economically perturbed world we live in now!

Three plus months to go to mid terms. Mantra: Vote out all incumbents! Reputationally destroy all Keynesians!





Monday evening, 19Jul2010 begins 25 hours of 9 Av!!!

Historically, this is a date of many 'Jewish 911s.' For example, Romans destroyed their Temple in 70 ce on 9 Av.

As Angel would say, "Dark times, my friend." In Hebrew Autiot, 9 is Tayt. Autiot spells 'satan' sheen~tayt~noun.



Heads up 19-20Jul2010!!!



Did you see Steve Betts' article on Market Oracle yesterday? Steve is a Richard Russell fan. Doug too, except Doug doesn't lean as heavily on technical analysis as they do.


Technical analysis is almost pure dialectic. It is objective. It is quantitative.

Reality is subjective, qualitative. Markets, except when they are controlled, are too!

Steve's article had two bravos in it for Doug. At its end, he claims "The Fed is over," it just doesn't realize it yet. Doug agrees.

His other bravo he doesn't even mention, but it is a tell of control via hylic minded "powers that be."

Take a look at his MACD on DJ industrials.

See anything telling?

y = sin(x)/x

It's called a "damped sinusoid." It illustrates gradual death of momentum, ultimately a "dead parent."

This is a classical tell of TPTB achieving Minsky's goal of 'stability.' Ideally when classical stability, perfect constancy, is achieved...all markets are dead.

Be careful of that for which you wish.

That math 'equation' is perfectly mechanical, perfectly formal. Nature never does hylic maths! Rulers do! We see an imminent tell of their self demise.

Thank you, Steve! Martus aritos!




I hope you don't mind, this segment, if I write about a genuine hodgepodge of stuff. Why? I need to.
Why? I believe many folk are suffering due GWBu()sh()'s and NOBama's administrations.
Perhaps I have too much hubris in a meme that my approach to financial and economic life has worked well.

If my own ideas (memes) have anything to do with that, then you may benefit from my sharing them.

First 50 years of my life, by default, I was pretty much a dialectical conservative. But I had moments of social-liberal backsliding.

Conservatism comes naturally to attempting to act on one's own poverty.

My dad left Mom and me when I was 2.5 years old and Mom was going on 46 (too old to be a Mom; and dad wanted her to abort me).

She got a job at a GM plant just after WWII. I got a paper route when I was 10.

She bought a bungalow for $5k in 1950 and her mortgage payment was about $50 per month.
Can't recall interest rate, but it seems it was about 4%. GM paid her about $1 per hour at that time.

I got my paper route in about 1952 (Doug netted $12.50 a week.).
A really good thing, since I could buy my lunches (10 sliders for a $1), clothes, and snacks.
That helped Mom, indirectly.

Mom did something crucial for me: she taught me, very fundamentally, how we could make it on very slim pickings.

Her approach was very simple: One cannot spend more than one makes. "Live just below one's means."

My Mother was one of the smartest people I have ever known.
I have looked at her high school work, and to me it exceeds what most colleges only try to do today.

But she was a black Irish bitch. Hell on wheels. She would fight, fist fight, at any drop of a pin.
She used to beat me with 6 ft long branches from bush trimmings.
That ended when a neighbor lady saw my naked back when I was playing in her yard with her son.
Word got around and it scared my Mom. She had other forms of abuse as alternatives...

So Mom was both good and bad. Financially and economically she was wise. Socially she was incompetent.

Rapidly nearing 70, I carry both of those congenital influences with me even today.

I never knew my dad, but I think he was part Jew, not Israeli, but a diasporic pale French Jew
descended from Judæah. I haven't verified it, but my blood may be about 1/8 Judæan.
It shows in Doug's Essene gnostic intuitions and his natural attractions to Hebrew and its Qabalic Autiot.
If my comjecture is true, then I am proud of my Jewishness. Jews are smart.
They are survivors. They adapt. They change. They manage well.

When Beth graduated from Purdue she worked for some retail (very big stores) business Jews in Indianapolis.
She (a recovering çatholiç) claims she learned more during those years than any others.
Beth loved working with male Jews. They are gutsy. They make things happen.
They (ones she worked with) are fiscally responsible. They evolve with absolute change and manage accordingly.

So, my Jewish blood, if it is really there, makes me very proud.

Have I done well? I can't share proprietary information about myself, but most would say, "Doug has done well."
Beth is the best thing that has happened in my life. She feels that way about me, too.
We are happy, except for what is happening CeodE 2010 to our "used to be great USA."

Cognitive Dissonance on Zerohedge often writes much like Doug feels.
He believes individuals have much greater power than society to make change. Doug agrees.

So, is what Doug learned valuable? Did his Mom teach him well to be fiscally responsible?

Doug answers, without hubris, "yes!"

Doug's first company taught him a key fiscal metric: Quick Ratio.

If you run your life recapitulating your individual quick ratio, you will be much more like Doug.

My Mom would say, just as Beth's Dad Cecil said, "Stay out of debt."
If you use a credit card, pay it off each billing period, in full.
Cecil paid off their house in less than five years and did that two times.

Doug has paid off at least three houses. First one in six years.
Second one in about seven years. Third one (current) in less than five years.

To do that, you have to do what most, apparently, can't: defer gratification.

To do that you have to save: again defer gratification.

But when your stash evolves into hefty, you can negotiate from a position of strength.
You will learn to enjoy that, and you will never want to lose it. Society (today's) hates people who do that.
Guess what? We hate societies who hate us! Now...who's your daddy? Who's really in trouble?

Doug's way was long and slow.
If you are very, very have to learn how to make money fast.
Used to be, trading was a good way to do that...not any more...

Some have reverted to stealing. For Doug, that is simply immoral...
...but many don't even consider morality a modern human issue.

Socialists are thieves in Doug's view.
They love to use sovereign power to redistribute money of
those who have worked hard and deferred much to get it.
Doug says to socialists, "Go to hell."
Socialists are people in a nonredemptive process of becoming extinct.
Doug loves that, and enjoys it happening massively ubiquitously nowings.

That's enough for now,


We do not need "Robbing U Hood," we need Individual Responsibility. Quantum~Gnosis!!!




I just want to clarify, using Doug's quantum~perspectives, something Tyler Durden wrote (perhaps submitted) today on Zerohedge.

TD implied using "(we believe)" that Au defends itself in both inflation and deflation. Doug agrees with that.

However, it appeared to Doug that TD implied that Au defends itself in paper price too. Doug takes issue with that.

Why? US Treasury, Federal Reserve Bank, Cartel, and all relevant Interventionalists (USTFRBCI) use Au's paper price to make it appear that it is only a commodity.

Recent price down action in Au...we sense is what TD is referring. That action is affected directly by USTFRBCI. Why?

They have at least two reasons:

1) They hate gold conceptually as "real money," so they want it to look like a commodity.
To control Au, they use massive naked shorts, MSM, and other influences to force its "fiat paper price" down.
Please be aware...regardless of inflation, regardless of deflation, this illicit and illegal naked shorting of gold
by government agencies and government sponsored agencies has no affect on Au's Value (relative value).
2) USTFRBCI want those of us who view Au as Exter's "goto" asset to be frightened
by fiat paper price declines in Au to run to USTFRBCI's desired goto asset: treasuries.

Doug's point is that Au's fiat paper price doesn't go up, necessarily, during both inflation and deflation. That is his issue with TD's commentary.

Key to understanding here is that USTFRBCI's naked shorting of Au to push its fiat paper price down does not commoditize Au! If it did Au's
Value would decline, tentatively and permanently. Rather, Au millennially holds its Value and gradually increases its Value: attributes of "real money."

Historically Au retains Value, not 'price.' That is why those "who are adept" hold on to it and use it as their own individual bank.

USTFRBCI want all to use their fiat paper money. People who do that end up, like we see now, as debt slaves to USTFRBCI.

To own Au, and keep it one must stay out of debt, and purchase and hold Au.

Guy who built our house once told Doug, "Your view is un American!"

Sorry! It's adept!

World fiat paper is in its death throes as we speak. US fiat dollar and fiat Treasuries are worthless.
Why? All TBTF banks are bankrupt, UST is bankrupt, USA is bankrupt...period!

It is well worth your while to read Zerohedge, Market Oracle, et al., every business day.
Fofoa too, which publishes much less often than daily. Value there is exceptional...

Doug's latest Au complementarospectives.


MSM - Zerohedge's acronym for "main stream media."
TBTF - Zerohedge's acronym for "Too Big To Fail."




ZH just called NOBama a lunatic!

Well, Doug has to take some credit too. I admit my own lunacy for voting for NOBama! But McCain't was even (still is) worse!
Republican'ts, just like LIEberalls, never did anything except coddle cartels and interventionalists.

Blago, suddenly, appears to have some better ideas: Oprah-Madonna over NOBama-Bitem. (cynicism)

Hope you're still short... and isn't Au fab? Au gets slapped-down, picks itself up dusts self off and starts all over again. Bravo! Cartel is less than six months from losing control, IMO.

ZH reading is just sparkling today! (Actually, it usually is.)





27Jun2010 08:34 EDT

Doug has another WAG to offer:

Recall how Doug used fermionic paddling (wobble) to show how wind makes water waves?

Well, oil isn't water! And oil, even though it is fermionic, doesn't evaporate like water.

Doug's WAG: There won't be any hurricanes this year in Gulf of Mexico! If there are any, they will be low category numbers.

Alex is our first exemplar.

Simply, Doug is saying he thinks oil mixed in water will mitigate hurricanes, n¤t intensify them.
Yes water and oil will be hotter, but oil won't paddle as efficiently as water,
and it will lower ability of water and air to mutually fermionically 'paddle.' We'll see.

Quantum~thinkqing in a real test of likelihoodings.


27Jun2010 08:34 CDT



Recently Doug wrote that Hayek was a 'conservative.'

Amazingly when you read Chapter 15, Hayek self refers 'liberal.'

"Doug, you were wrong about Hayek being a 'conservative.'"

Yes and no.

Prior fin de siecle 19, 'liberal' meant more of what we intend by 'conservative' today.

'Liberal' has been gradually linguistically re engineered to mean social liberal.

Hayek's semantic for his version of 'liberal' is 'individual liberalism.'
(Individual freedom from oppression by dialectical objective societies.)

So we have to compare Hayek's individual liberalism with more recent social liberalism.

Have you ever noticed how society always wants to take credit for what individuals do?
How does society do that? Pirsig answered perhaps best for us.
Pirsig's hermeneutic is that society believes that it makes individuals.
To Pirsig, that is upside down. Worse, it is fascism, Mussolini style, "Nation makes the people..." Italian fascism.
Pirsig's Metaphysics of Quality inverts that as individuals (via pneumatic thought) are above society in terms of Value.

Can we use Pirsig's results to quantumly thinkq better? Doug believes we can.

individual liberalism is above [hyper] social liberalism

See how that works? Too,

individual liberalism is above social conservatism.

"Damn Doug, this is incredible!"
Recall how Doug has been telling you to read Pirsig!
(Pirsig claims he has been doing Quality all along. Doug senses Pirsig was unaware he was also doing Essene Autiot Gnosis all along too.)

When we distill this using MoQ we see an evolution from classical thing-king to quantum~thinkqing,
like this (table's evolution is right to left - Aristotle then Classical Pirsig then Quantum Pirsig):

Quantum vis-à-vis Classical
Static Patterns
Value Evolution

See our MoQ Emerscitecture Graphic.

For more on Doug's quantum~evolution of Pirsig's MoQ see Doug's Feuilleton Chautauqua which began in October, 2003.

Evolutionary Description - Right to Left

Quantum SP¤Vs - Quantonic - Pirsigean
Value Hierarchy
Classical SPoVs-Pirsigean S-O Inversion
Value Hierarchy

Classical SPoVs-Aristotelian S-O Uninverted
Value Hierarchy
A-I, Social, ihndihvihdual SPoVs' Evolution IqQ -SP¤Vs ihndihvihdual



ScP-SPoVs Social S AcA-SPoVs Atomic-Inorganic O



B, I, S¤cial SPoVs' Evolution SqQ -SP¤Vs S¤cial IcP-SPoVs Intellectual BcA-SPoVs Biological
Social, Biological, Bi¤n¤n SPoVs' Evolution BqQ -SP¤Vs Bi¤n¤n-l¤gihcal
See bionon.
BcP-SPoVs Biological O ScA-SPoVs Social S
I, A-I, At¤mihc-ihn¤rganihc SPoVs' Evolution AqQ -SP¤Vs At¤mihc-ihn¤rganihc AcP-SPoVs Atomic-Inorganic IcA-SPoVs Intellectual
©Quantonics, Inc., 2003-2028 — Rev. 21Oct2003 PDR — Created 17Oct2003 PDR

As you can (may) readily see Aristotle saw Objects (atomic-inorganic hyper organic-biological) hyper Subjects (then social hyper intellectual).
To show what Pirsig accomplished, Doug created a classical inversion of Aristotle as Subjects hyper Objects while inverting inorganic-organic to organic-inorganic.
Pirsig's ultimate Value layers in MoQ now are: individual hyper social hyper biological hyper inorganic. What Doug attempts to show is that Pirsig inverted Aristotle.

Pirsig handed us a gift, a gift of global proportions. Yet almost no one on Earth today realizes this.
Essentially (in a sense of Essene Gnosis), and quintessentially, Pirsig said we must change our thinking from quantity to Quality. (This describes what Doug thought Obama meant by 'Change.')
Doug believes Pirsig got it right (quantumly better).

"How can we use this, Doug, to solve huge problems of our world today?"

SOM and CR view our reality objectively. Unintended consequence? Society views individuals as objects, and when they view individuals as subjects individuals become slaves of society.

Hayek showed us that he believed in individual 'equality of opportunity' liberalism (explicitly not social 'equal results' liberalism).

However Hayek, as far as Doug knows, did not omnistinguish subjective individual liberalism and objective individual liberalism. He should have. That is Pirsig's whole point. Subjective individualism is hyper objective individualism. Why? Hayek's "subjective individual liberalism" as described by Henri Louis Bergson is "individual liberty and freedom." Pirsig agrees. Doug agrees.

What do we have today? Social objective individualism with most earth individuals as debt slaves to Keynesian fiat fractional reserve banking.

Can you see how Keynesians continue to make mistakes: trying to spend their way out of an imminent depression. If Keynesians understood Pirsig as Doug has shown via his MoQ evolution above, they wouldn't be Keynesians. They would not believe spending, socially-objectively, is the way out of their self made abyss.

Let's summarize with a table of quantum~MoQesque hypers:

subjective conservatism
individual conservatism
subjective liberal individualism
individual equity freedom
free subjective individuals

objective conservatism
social conservatism
objective liberal individualism
individual (socially FRB and Cartel fiat imposed) debt slavery
enslaving objective societies





That dumbass of dumbasses, Harvard socialist nutcase NObama is back to his old tricks.

He has catapulted Keynes to Climate Change.

NObama wants to be capable of controlling climate...Keynesian style!

Just what we need, Socialized Weather: "Equality of Results." OSFA. One weather fits all. OWFA.

What an OWFA idea. :)

He can't even control broken oil wells. How in hell does he thingk he can control weather?
Angela Merkel and Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R WA) have pegged you well NObama! See ZH today.

Go Sophia!

NObama, "Go to hell."





Doug always loves this date. It is our Northern Hemisphere's longest day. Sinusoid peaks.
A durational turning point of chaotic change: quantum~change, quantum~uncertainty. Uncertainty? Yes!
When can you recall having tropical weather in US' midwest for about 10 weeks straight?
Tornadoes in our great North West? Yep! Indiana is raining like Oregon's rain forest!
See! Weather is macroscopically uncertain.
It is a direct experience that classical determinism is bogus,
that classical notions of truth are simply dialectical Error!


If you are reading Hayek's Road to Serfdom, Doug claims you should read Ch. 15 and his Conclusion first.

We hear much about a New World Order.

Hayek's last chapter (15) tells and shows you why that is a genuinely bad idea.

Order to 'rulers' is 'stability.' They hate uncertainty!

If one hates uncertainty, what is one's ultimate fate? Extinction.

Reality is uncertain. Those who do not grasp that, by not grasping it, guarantee their self extinction.

Rulers' incapabilities to deal with and manage macroscopic uncertainty desnouer their self process of extinction.

But that is what Rulers' (believe they) want (order and self delusions of certainty).

Hayek says that those of us individuals shouldn't allow any 'rulers' to begin with.
When rulers speak of 'order,' especially New World Order...beware.

Personally, Doug plans to just ignore them.
In doing that, they will put up with it until it irritates them exceptionally.
Then they will come after Doug. But Doug will resist them in ways they haven't begun to imagine.
Their greed for stolen wealth and self-declared power will put them down, unless individuals do it first.
Individuals won't act until they are forced, and then rulers can commence suffering, instead of individuals.

If you are a socialist, you will hate what Doug just wrote.
If you hate and understand what Doug just wrote, you will also realize how your extinction is nigh.
That probably is your biggest reason for hating what Doug writes.

You are going to kill many of us, and individuals will kill many of you...

...ultimately individuals win: they are quantum~real and you are n¤t.

Obama's administration is already calling US 'terrorists.'

Why do they hate individuals?

It is clear!



Gold has been showing its merit. (Watch out, though, for cartel intervention...)

Doug has written, based on his own and others' (i.e., e.g., Deepcaster, ZH, etc.) beliefs one of two near term outcomes are imminent:

1) Au is ready to charge ahead now reaching about $2000 paper 'price' by year end 2010, or

2) Au will be radically slapped down again as it was from Jan2008-Aug2009. See Kitco Au Technical 8yr.

1) probably means Au has begun its long, powerful run towards a Dow:Gold ratio of two or below.

2) probably means Cartel and Interventionalists still have means to knock Au down, mightily.

1) says those of you who haven't established a solid gold foundation are losing opportunity, fast.

2) says, everyone will get another opportunity to buy Au (likely) below $900.

Regardless, those adepts among us, as we grasp essentials of Maslow's needs hierarchy, we too grasp essentials of John Exter's Pyramid.

Observe and obtain how both are about individuals (not about society) and how individuals can self~actualize, quantumly, gnostically.




19Jun2010, 27Jun2010 Change 'Adam Smith' to 'John Stuart Mill' and add link.

Somewhere recently, and Doug cannot recall where, ZH, Market Oracle, fofoa, Minsky, and possibly Hayek,
an author wrote about what Doug philosophically would call "economic ontology."
Doug can simplify that more vulgately by writing, "Metaphysical reality of economic being."
However, then, most readers have issues with "What in hell is 'metaphysical?'"
Physical reality is what we can see, understand, sense, conceive and think about actually.
Metaphysical reality includes physical reality (actuality), yet also includes intuitions about what quantonics refers "nonactuality."

Here is a spectral picture of what Doug intends:

In other words, metaphysics if it had qua, would attempt to describe that entire spectrum of sensible and insensible,
plus it would include quantum~reality's isoflux (i.e., quantum~nonactuality) which is even vastly larger than what our picture shows.

An implication of what Doug has just written is that all human descriptions of reality are always incomplete.

That raises a vast taxonomy of conundra, since classical science claims that all incomplete theories and hypotheses are 'false.'

Too, classical 'science' is even more arrogant. It claims that if we cannot 'see' it, it does not 'exist.'

Doug's point then is, "What can we say classically about all economic theories, hypotheses, and ontologies?" That depends.

Classicists claim that what we see exists and what we cannot see doesn't exist, therefore they claim what we see is classically-complete.

Do you agree?

Doug claims classicists are full of BS and buried in BS at least up to their eyebrows.

However, if you agree with them, then you can claim (based upon classical presumption of 'completeness'), that classical theories and hypotheses can be complete.

Doug claims no one can ever declare any theory, any hypothesis "classically complete."

An easy way to answer 'why?' is that reality, by observation, evolves, therefore all of reality is always only partial.

So if we follow Doug, we can say, "Economic ontologies are always quantum~partial (classically incomplete)."

Now we have bases for further facultative forays into "economic being."

Let's answer another question. "Is Keynesian economic being better than Hayekian economic being?"

Doug likes Richard Dawkins' memeo of Evolutionarily Stable Strategy (ESS).
Doug hates Dawkins' dialectisms.
See...Doug's views are balanced via quantum~complementarity. :)

Doug begs you to permit him to use ESS as a way of assessing Keynes vav Hayek re economic being.

OK, let's attempt a abridged description of presumptions of Keynes' economic being:

  • use a debt based state-managed socialist fractional reserve fiat-money economic ontology (anti US Constitution)
  • equality of results is key
  • ideal absence of competition is key
  • social state-ic one-size-fits-all control is key
  • all social planning is anti-competitive, anti-capitalist
  • society is above individuals (anti US Constitution)
  • controlled markets and trading are key
  • stability is key (political "running on automatic" is socialist utopia)
  • etc.

Then, let's attempt a abridged description of presumptions of Hayek's economic being:

  • use an equity based individuals-managed capitalist real money economic ontology (pro US Constitution)
  • equality of opportunity is key; diversity of results is essential, "many~sizes~fit~all"
  • mutually beneficial individual and capital competition is key
  • individual freedom is key (pro US Constitution)
  • individuals are above society (pro US Constitution; per John Stuart Mill)
  • free (non socially controlled) markets are key
  • uncertainty management is key (embrace uncertainty, assess uncertainty, pragma...)
  • etc.

(expect both of those lists to expand indefinitely as Doug learns more...)

Keynes' approach to economic being reaps rewards global societies are experiencing nowings.
Essentially fiat monetary instability and asymptotic degeneration of nations. Entire nations' economies (unmanageably) fail.

Hayek's approach to economic being reaps rewards of incremental growth of individual wealth which provides ongoing
national fiscal stability: individuals and corporations cyclically (manageably) fail on smaller, usually more local scales.

Which is better? You decide.

Is something better ahead?

Doug calls it, "Quantum~economic~being." We have to invent it!
Are you ready? What will you do? What are your presumptions?





All other news seems to pale in light of BP's catastrophe in GoM.

This is worse than WWII, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, GW Bu()sh(), 911, and NObama all wrapped in one.

When Gulf Stream takes that oil to Kennebunkport, Maine and beyond...we'll have a real sense of 'global impact.'

Bush's property there will be below BBB. Junk! No mo Maine lobster! (Fish based cat food is getting tough to find.
Our feral friend is spoiled on it...guess she'll have to change like all rest of us.) Oil has a way of eventually getting all over those who exploit it.

Doug wrote this years ago, "Oil has had it." Becoming more obvious now, isn't it?

Doug can't add much...that hasn't already been written elsewhere...


USA is already independent in fossil fuels!

Big north western states have enough coal to keep US running on liquefied coal for at least 100 years at current rates of consumption.

Any pollution, then, and unlike GoM, will be localized. But those processes have been improved
much in recent years, so Doug senses it is a better alternative to deep sea drilling.

If you haven't seen Abyss, at all or lately, time to break it out and re view.

Beth and Doug are doing that this week.


Doug is reading so many texts in parallel now, his progress per text is slow.
There is a huge advantage to it, however. Doug omniscovers how related all author's topics and narratives are.
Many authors are so much more naturally quantum, gnostic, and evolving than Doug had intuited.
But they have problems too: Just as Doug does.
Minsky believed in absolute macroscopic uncertainty...maybe, perhaps, that uncertainty's conflict with Minsky's goal isn't
as obviously quantum to you as it is to Doug...Minsky wanted to make our economic systems 'more stable.'

Instability is a quantum~tell of absolute uncertainty.

Correction: "Instability is a quantum~tell of macroscopic absolute change."

All of us may directly observe occurrences of wave patterns of absolute change. Some natural, some educed by human activity.

Quantum~uncertainty is always stochastic, we can always describe it via autsimilar ensembles of probability, plausibility, and likelihood.
uncertainty is never 'classically' absolute, rather it is always enthymemetic and changing-evolving.

But Doug, "What do we mean by quantum~absolute change?"

Always changes (quantum~consistent), and changes all (quantum~complete).

It's that simple.

Compare it to classical absolute dialectical-'state:'

Always states the truth (classical, dialectically consistent), and states all truths (classical, dialectically complete).

Summary: classically 'state' is absolute (no uncertainty); quantumly 'change' is absolute (embrace uncertainty).

As you can see, we have to be much more careful when we use that term: absolute.

You may find it valuable to recall that Irving Stein said, paraphrased, "Classicists have no coherent concept of change." So they rely on 'state.'

See Stein's, The Concept of Object as the Foundation of Physics.

Doug - 18Jun2010.

Stability is a classical tell of social 'state.'

His book title is Stabilizing an Unstable Economy. Chapter 1, page 1, he writes, " focus is on stabilizing the economy."

For Doug that is a massive classical contradiction.

I'm unsure my time is well spent reading more of Minsky. I intuit we need some new memes vastly outside of what his mind was capable.

Everyone who is an Austrian economist raves about F. Hayek.
I have owned a copy of his Road to Serfdom for a few decades.
I tried reading it 20 years ago, and ultimately I was turned off then (mainly by Hayek's classical dialectic).
It is now on Amazon's best seller list, so I thought I would dig it out and try reading it again. I mean 'dig' it out literally.
Tops of my book stacks are loaded down with 9mm 15 round clips. :)

Where Minsky actually showed solutions (all liberal, socialist, essentially totalitarian),
Hayek described what is wrong. Hayek's enemy, rightly in Doug's view, is socialism.


Minsky used classical analysis to model economic systems and compare them.
Comparison allowed Minsky to assess his version of better. Minsky assumed social systems are good.

Hayek realized our issues go much deeper. They antecede an assumption of classical-socialism as OK.

Hayek, like USA's founding 'fathers,' saw individual rights as above social rights.
What he grasped is an essential that "(real) individuals cannot be socially herded."
To say that another way, "social hive drones may be socially herded."
Thomas Digges wrote it like this, "vulgi opinio Error."
Doug would say that "classical dialectical social consensus is Error."
Mae-wan Ho implied that a quantum~coherent ensemble of autonomous individuals is better.
Regular readers understand and fathom how Doug agrees with Mae-wan.

Simply, social cloning and herding leads to socialism, leads to totalitarianism.

So our first order of business is to protect individual rights. Kill any society which violates individual rights, period.

All classical social constructs are evil. Why? Consensus! Consensus is "everyone thingks alike."
That enables OSFA herding. Politicians love to herd people (their flock of running on automatic unthinking slaves).

How did we get the Federal Reserve? politicians.

How did our SS trusts get spent? politicians.

So our really BIG problem is politicians. Biden says he's proud to be one. What arrogance! Like Obama, he's just another political incompetent dumbass.

What we need is to get rid of politicians. How? Make it impossible to herd people. How? Gnosis!

It's as simple as that.

Quantum~gnosis is our answer, folks!

When they try to herd you onto trains to USA's analog of Auschwitz, shoot them. Don't ask questions and don't answer their queries! Shoot them.

By 'the' way, if you want an example of social totalitarianism, it's Obama's power to 'switch-kill' Internet.
FU Obama mo fo. 'Nother problem! We need jamproof private wireless nets, now! Ham radio all over again.

Obama you are a real piece of political scum...

"Hey Dugger, 'Reap what you sow.'" Yeah, I deserve this!





What was Hayek's bottom line? In his Road to Serfdom?

Doug's copy of Road to Serfdom is a paperback, UChic Press, 1972, 248 pages including index.

Hayek states his bottom line on page 42, last paragraph:

"It is of the utmost importance to the argument of this book for the reader to keep in mind that the planning
against which all our criticism is directed is soley the planning against competition--the planning which is to be
substituted for competition. This is the more important, as we cannot, within the scope of this book, enter into a
discussion of the very necessary planning which is required to make competition as effective and beneficial as
possible. But as in current usage 'planning' has become almost synonymous with the former kind of planning,
it will sometimes be inevitable for the sake of brevity to refer to it simply as planning,
even though this means leaving to our opponents a very good word meriting a better fate."

So Hayek offers us a classical dialectism as his solution: either planning for competition
is good or planning against competition is bad. He chooses planning for competition.

Quantumly, what is wrong with this? Hayek's dialectic! But it gets worse.
Planning is classical. It presumes a classical notion of inductive predicability.

What was Minsky's bottom line? In his Stabilizing an Unstable Economy?

Minsky believed capitalism is flawed. Like all 'scientists' who worship classical
objectivism, he appears to be saying as Feynman did, "Nature is absurd."

Since to Minsky capitalism is flawed, he claims we must invent a very narrowly defined capitalism with fewer flaws.
Since any model of capitalism will be unstable, we must find ways to stabilize it.

Of course stabilization is a goal of all socialists, and stabilization, like 'equality of result,'
requires planning against capitalism (as naturally competitive).


Capitalism, like nature is both open and cyclic (not closed and linear or cyclic as classicists adhere).
What we need to learn to understand is that capitalism's open cyclicity is its natural control 'mechanism.'

When we try to control capitalism, we end up in a global situation like we have today: socialism run amok.
A debt based global Keynesian socialist putrified society run amok by elite oligarchists who want global control.

Doug's bottom line: we cann¤t use classical social ideas to manage our business
interrelationshipings within a everywhere~quantum~uncertain natural reality.

We must learn to monitor, assess, and manage by quantum~uncertainty.

Doug wants to offer you an anecdote regarding Hayek and Doug's prior experiences with socialism creeping metastatically into Indiana politics.

In Doug's company, during early 1990s, he hired a female marketing director. All males had proven
themselves literally incompetent at selling complex technical services as consulting.

Dawn gave me a copy of Indiana Policy Review, Vol 3, No 2, March-April 1992. Its title is A Future that Works.
A third bullet item under that title is 'Recognize that equality of opportunity is sacrificed in pursuit of equality of results.'
On reading this, Doug went ballistic. It is pure socialist tripe! In Doug's own (then) conservative Indiana.
I couldn't believe it. Anyone who knows F. A. Hayek's work sees that bullshit exactly for what it is.
Hayek was conservative, so Doug wrote back to Dawn, "Conservatives NEVER sacrifice equality of
opportunity. And especially NEVER to produce equality of results!!" Date on that memo was 15Mar1992.

Wall Street Journal issue dated January13, 1992 had just published, on its editorial page,
an article titled, 'Post-Communism's Do-It-Yourself Needs,' a Global View by George Melloan.

Melloan writes, "Hayek's adversaries described him as an enemy of the people--merely because he argued that
equality of opportunity is just, but attempts by government to create equality of result would lead to tyranny."

Melloan went on to anticipate just what we see happening in our world today, "Millions of eastern Europeans are
trying to emulate 'the American Dream,' even as the interventionalist US Congress is doing what it can to kill it."

Socialists' "perpetual sameness as 'equality of results' everywhere" is wholly antithetical quantum~reality,
its natural evolution, its absolute change, and its ubiquitous Bell Inequalities! Period!

Obama lied. He didn't want social change, he wanted perpetual sameness of result.
What a perpetually-lying and politically-economically incompetent dumbass!

Thank you for reading,





I hate to directly borrow others' work, but Jim Willie's Interpol announcement (Browser Search
on 'Interpol'), yesterday, in his page on Market Oracle, in my view deserves wider distribution. So here it is:

Thank you so much Jim Willie and Market Oracle for disclosing this crucial information.

It desnouers HUGE imminent CHANGE!





Well, let's hope BP's Oil enGulfed Coast Disaster isn't another Obama diversion from US's and Globe's financial meltdown.

Isn't Obama simply an abomination?

Doug thinks he is actually worse than GW Bu()sh()! Didn't think that was possible.
But look at what is happening...More war in Afghanistan. Potential war with N Korea. And the beat goes on.

I am evolving into a mode of total disrespect for all politicians and all government. Classical dialectical society is abundantly incompetent and inept.

I think Obama should be impeached and-or recalled. (Now, where is his birth certificate? Hiding it is a clear tell that he is illegal: grounds for impeachment.)

I think every citizen of USA should stop going to any British Petroleum fuel stations. Boycott BP.

Obama agrees with Catholics that Pope and his incompetent pedophiles should be legally immune. Lynch the lot!
Obama, you dumbass, roast in hell. Mayhaps a priest will molest your children...? What would you do then? Dumbass!

. . .

Continuing on with Doug's reading of 2008 reprint of Minsky's Stabilizing an Unstable Economy...

Keynes was a classicist. Minsky was a classicist.

But reality isn't classical! Reality is quantum.

Keynes claimed that capitalism suffers two major issues. Unemployment and inequality.

That is pure socialism. Dolt-headed classical Marxist dialectical socialism.

Quantum~reality shows us that everything in reality isn't just cyclic (n¤t classically linear), but cycles are quantumly~open (n¤t classically, dialectically closed).
Physicists, quantum~physicists, refer affects of this massively ephemeral quantum~stochastic~chaos, "Bell inequalities."

"Doug, what are Bell inequalities?"

Simply if A is changing, evolving absolutely, A - A may never be zero! (Assumes classical subtraction takes time...Doug. Begs query: "When is A = A?" Never!)

Bell inequalities are very easy to understand if you can accept a quantum~proem that "quantum~reality is absolute change." Socialists want-desire-dream absolute 'state.'
Implication of absolute change is that there are n¤ constants in quantum~reality (Minsky admits this): all is absolutely evolving, and naught is even equal to itself longer than one or a few Planck moments.

Classical implications of that are just unimaginable. For example, A - A does not equal ideal classical zero!

But it's even worse than that! Classical negation doesn't exist in quantum reality. You may n¤t classically subtract in quantum~reality; you may only phase~cancel in quantum~reality.

Bell inequalities are a quantum~tell that all is changing always. We call it "evolution." Quantum flux~wave evolution.

But Keynes, Minsky, et al., use classical theories and maths which presume their models are stable: hold still, do 'no't change. They are wrong!

Now think about Minsky's book title word, "unstable."

Socialists do not like instability. They want reality to hold still. They call evolutionary change "absurd."

Global financial systems are crashing. Why? They try to hold still, but reality imposes evolution in spite of their classical dialectical admonitions.

Unemployment evolves. Inequalities are quantum~real and quantized~evolving. Instability is implicit.

All Millennium III theories of economics which do n¤t take those quantum~realisms as axiomatic are simply doomed.

We must learn to "embrace uncertainty," and "manage by uncertainty."

Thank you for reading,





Our shorts are doing nicely this morning. See Deepcaster's recommendations.

. . .

In Papadimitriou and Wray's prologue, 'Two Decades Later,' to Minsky's re published Stabilzing an Unstable Economy
on p. xvi, they write, "Thus, while Minsky did not incorporate the now well-known Kalecki relation in JMK..."

JMK is John Milton Keynes' works. See superb bibliography at end of their prologue.

Why didn't Minsky use Kalecki?

What did Kalecki do?

He adhered what he called "ceteris paribus," which means "all other things being equal and constant."
He adhered this in his economic models. Though he claimed his models were not mechanical, he
built an ideal wall around his economic models to "isolate them" from others' behaviours.

Whether we like it or no...economies are quantum, period.

Kalecki's economic models (and thus Doug suspects Keynes' too) are anti~quantum!

Shades of David X. Li. Shades of modern economic maths and stochastics!

Bayes theorem, for example, uses Abelian groups. Abelian groups have as an essential mathematical 'feature,' commutation.

But in quantum~reality commutation (e.g., equality of Poisson Bracketings: [A,B] = [B,A]) is forbidden.

Actually all mathematical, formal, mechanical "equivalence relations" are forbidden!

Doug suspects that much of Keynes' total economic failure which is unfolding before our eyes now, is due Keynes stupid and ignorant use
of bogus classical maths' axioms like independence, equality, negative as opposite positive, equivalence relations, identity, and so on...

Minsky probably (some say he) was more subjective (read quantum) in his views of markets and their economic model interrelationshipings.
We'll see...

Doug just wanted to give you a taste of what is ahead. Hope this is valuable and useful to you.





Clearly, autsimilarity has its limitations. Viewed classically it may be 'conceived' as classical induction. Doug has belied classical induction over and over.

Quantum~autsimilarity isn't classical induction. Even so, it is quantum~uncertain. Doug's view is that if you want to predict (try to), use autsimilarity. So you see Doug doing just that.

You also see Doug being vigilant via quantum~omnitoring (always recapitulatively watching) of market and other indicators (ephemera).

Doug's vigilance has uncloaked something potentially important!

See Kitco's Technical Gold Chart. Try to scroll 1-year and 2-year charts on a single screen, together.

Look at one year pattern apparently ending in May, 2010. Compare right shoulder of inverse head and shoulders in two-year chart whose pattern ended near May, 2009.

Compare end pattern of May, 2010's left shoulder with right shoulder which ended in May-June, 2009! Notice comparative (autsimilar) width of right shoulder's right spike up. Both are wider.

And, we already wrote about this 19May2010, right spike is higher than left spike now...those two omnifferencings plus temporal stretching may beg, in Doug's view, after a small dip -- continued momentum up for now.

What this tells Doug is that we may n¤t be autsimilarly repeating 2008-2009's whole inverse head and shoulders pattern...we may, with temporal stretching, just be repeating its right shoulder...and if that is so...
we will likely n¤t see rest of whole head and shoulders pattern. Rather we may be seeing a surge in Au paper prices twixt now and 2011. Pundits are saying that is what is happening!

It's possible! Anyway, we now have at least two ways of thinking about (classically,) what is happening (quantumly, whatings are happenings) in Au. Doug is leaning toward that new view, and you may concur...

If so, you should be adding to your Au positions now...we may n¤t see this low of pricing for some time. If Doug's 19May2010 graphs
offer better analysis, in your view, wait for lower prices in Au. But you have to decide. Doug cann¤t do that for you.

Try averaging down. King's World pundits, including Ron Paul, are pushing that as a more professional approach.

Fiatists are about to, as a financial species, become extinct.

Fiat is classically determinate, but reality isn't!

. . .

Doug has commenced his own serious studies of both Minsky and Keynes. Purpose is to develop a quantum~theory of economics.
Doug has studied philosophy, mathematics, logic, religion, quantum, classical, etc. Contemporaneity is urging economics now.

Doug just acquired a hardbound 2008 reprint first edition of Minsky's 1986 Stabilizing an Unstable Economy. Reason's become apparent in said title.

I am not even through preface and 'two decades later' prologue and I am simply amazed. Minsky is saying, as both gn¤sis and Autiot do, "Embrace quantum~uncertainty." Amen!

Want some sugar? Try this, "Since financing investment is the most important source of [any] instability found
in [an] economy, it must also be the main topic of analysis if one wants to stabilize [said] unstable economy."

Doug's sic's.

Doug is astonished at Minsky's clarity and anticipative and cogent assessment of Earth's financial troubles as witnessed now.

Does recently passed Financial Reform bill focus~diffuse on "financing investment?" If n¤t, it is a 'bad' bill! Essence!

If you want to follow along with Doug's progress...get a copy, library or personal, and watch as Quantonics puts quantum~spin on a novel quantum~theory of economics.

Thank you for reading,





I want to write about a few topics which seem appropriate just now.

In our 6Mar2010 HodgePodge™ using quantum~autsimilarity Doug extended from January, 2010 nearly
two years using an inverse head and shoulders pattern which appeared, as finished, in August, 2009.

Doug desnoured his smooth outline of that fabulous pattern thus:

Some of you may recall that Deepcaster has talked (written) about TPTB (ZH's 'The Powers That Be') doing temporal-stretching of markets.

That moved Doug to ponder quantum~autsimilarity 'stretched.' Using Kitco gold's data from January, 2010 till now to invent a 'stretching factor,' Doug came up with ~1.37.

Doug took top 'real' pattern which covers Mar, 2008 to Jul, 2009, and stretched it approximately by a factor of 1.37. (All done graphically using visual estimation.)

Time stretched, but amplitude held as our autsimilar games of quantum~plausibility. Lower chart shows Doug's results.
You may choose to accept Doug's claims of autsimilarity from March to July, 2008 with January to May, 2010.
That pattern's ending is where we are now, and Doug chooses to expect stochastically
something like what we see from June, 2010 to August, 2011.

This is valuable to Doug for a very simple reason: Gold is our goto asset for next 2-5 years at least.
Doug needs to guess where and how much he should further accumulate when.

For Doug, this chart gives us about as good an answer as anyone else might offer.

What amazes Doug is how closely our two patterns align when one considers Deepcaster's temporal stretching.
Thank you Deepcaster!
And I kept DZZ despite your earlier recommendations to get out...we'll see.

. . .

Been reading much about that 'pool' of OTC (over the counter) derivatives (about $600T by some estimates;
actually lower due special considerations of unwinding them...writers in Market Oracle explain...).

Keep in mind now that Doug is n¤t a financial expert. So what follows is just (relatively~ignorant) opinion.

If you have spent 90 tedious minutes to get through 'Alice's Darkside' (on our top page), you get a notion of how important it is for TPTB to hide a growing litany of losses.

Doug believes those mysterious OTC derivatives represent 'the pool' of many of those losses all nice and neatly wrapped in packages called "derivatives."
Hiding losses like this offers an apparition to non experts like me that all is well, when indeed, nearly all of these 'gamers' are bankrupt.

Now you know where our taxes went into that TARP of nearly $1T late last year.
Bernanke bailed out FRB and cartel banks with our taxpayer dollars folks!
(I am almost insane with anger about this, and if I could make it happen there
would be a huge Fried Green Tomatoes barbecue in DC before year end.)

All major players: FRB, Treasury, cartel banks, interventionalists, Europe, PIIGS, and even China are near bankruptcy in real terms!
FRB and US cartel banks are responsible for nearly all of our globe's bankruptcy problems! It isn't that simple, though. Ultimately we have to be vigilant of our courts, Congress and our presidency.
They are all corrupt, and we put them there. We nurtured them with our beliefs in dialectic, latter promulgated by academe which needs even more individual due diligent vigilance.

It's a crisis of unbelievable proportions...and Doug agrees others who claim it will end badly.

For us that is why Au is so important.

ZH troops mostly claim hyperinflation is imminent. But to Doug, that just doesn't set well.

On Market Oracle, one of their writers, I think Steve Betts, explained to Doug why we will have deflation!

It's kind of easy for Doug, but he could be overlooking a crucial nonapparent ephemeral.

ZH and folk are looking at money (M1, M2, M3, etc.) and growth of fiat by FRB printing as a proxy for inflation.

But Steve Betts (as I recall) says money isn't important to inflation...velocity of money is important as an inflation proxy.

Velocity of money is crashing, for several quite esoteric banking 'reasons.'

Therefore, if Steve and Doug are correct...expect deflation, not inflation.

Steve is superb in my opinion.






Interesting date, eh?

How is it a palindrome? Any memes emerging in that mush of yours? Oh? You have a quantum~stage? You should get it right away, then!

Is it musical? Rhythmic? Can we make it so? Can rhythm be palindromic?

What if we write it 5112010? "Five, eleven, ..., twenty, ten? Repeat it. Get it? What is it? A rhythmic palindrome. How?

mono-syllable, bi-syllable, bi-syllable, mono-syllable. one-two-two-one.

We got rhythm!

OK, enuf that.

"I haf fun."

. . .

1, 2, 3.

(Filter, "If one is the only number in the world..." Filter, Ayer, and Gray quantum~superposed.)

"I haf fun."

. . .

Have you noticed that word paradigm being resurrected again?

Financial pundits are calling this radical change our world is experiencing "a new paradigm."

There's a problem! Real change cannot paradigm shift!

Kuhn's paradigm shift describes "shift of state," Aristotelean like. Kuhn even calls it an "event."

Real change cannot be classically analyzed using classical event-state ontologies. Who said that? Henri Louis Bergson!

Bergson was right! Quantum~change isn't analytic.

And guess what? That explains why classical financial analysis all of a sudden is essentially meaningless. It no longer works.
We are in a huge process of change! However, we may no longer refer it naîvely "a paradigm shift."

To prepare you, as simply as possible, compare para and pragma. Former is state-ic and objective. Latter is process~action quantized. Now imagine "pragmadigm."
Thence metadigm! Perhaps metanadigm!?

There you have it.

Doug anticipated most of this during 2001 when he wrote a review of Kuhn's 1962 first ed., 1996 subsequent ed., Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

You may be interested to observe that much of what Doug wrote then about Avatars 10 years ago was used in a movie of similar name (with no credits to Doug's work).

Do you mind if we take this opportunity to peruse what Doug wrote about change being antithetical SOM notions of paradigm way back then? Let's do it.


During next few weeks and months, Doug will make comments here regarding his nearly 10 year old review comments of Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

Those paragraphs are verbatim, except Doug removed a (#Hubris) anchor and added bold green to final clause of quoted text. Please plan to come back to this text, if you are interested, over next few months. Doug will be adding comments here and hermeneutics which enfold much of what is happening in our world now, CeodE 2010-2014.

As you look at this, try to imagine our world's problems economically, politically, and civically. In place of 'science' and 'scientist,' imagine other disciplines and pundits attempting to deal with a huge change, A Millennium III quantum~change if you will, happening in and on planet Earth now.

Doug - 11May2010.

In order to comment on each paragraph, Doug added labels. In order to comment on selected sentences in a paragraph, Doug added sentence count superscripts in bold. To reference commented text, Doug will use PjSk, i.e., Paragraph j and Sentence k. Let's try it.

Quoted Paragraph I "1To Kuhn, a paradigm is like a lens through which one views reality. 2Using differing lenses one views reality in differing ways. 3And each different view evokes, whether normal scientists like it or not, paraphenomena and paradoxes (paradice). 4A paradigm shift commences state-ic use of a new lens. 5Use of a particular lens is 'normal science' working in its latest selected 'state.' 6Changing lenses (paradigm shifted state) is a role for 'extraordinary science.' 7Newer 'normal science' depends on 'extraordinary science' for its survival and successes.

Commentary on PIS1: Doug's use of "lens" is perfect in its attendance to Kuhn's notion of paradigm. It implies focus. Focusing is a classical dialectical act. To explain we have to describe English semantic for focus, "To give one's full attention to a narrow concept." What is a narrow concept? Any classical dialectical Ockhammized object. It's what we mean by seeing a tree while consensually being blind to its forest. To see a tree's 'state' without fathoming its processings. Classical 'focus' is always incomplete, always formally, canonically, objectively, analytically partial.

(Here, please obtain, Doug describes social consensus as hive drone blindness. This dis ease is rampant among many 'citizens' of USA today. Academia have carefully taught them to be dialectically, analytically blind. Symptom? Our government and FRB are criminals, and most 'citizens' cann¤t 'see' that. Obama is a complicit criminal and GWBu()sh() was even worse; Congress and Subspleen Court are wholly inept and crooked.)

When we ponder 'focus' quantumly, it becomes f¤cus. F¤cus is quantized. Why? Quantum~reality is quantized. In addition to that we offer quantum~f¤cus' actual~n¤nactual quantum~complement: dynamic~diffusion. Regulars will recognize this as quanton(~,o) issi quanton(dynamic~diffusion,apparently~static~f¤cus). In quantum theory it looks like quanton(wave,particle). Quantum~linguistically it (QELRed) looks like quanton(subjæct,¤bjæct). To show its genericity we use quanton(diffuse,focus). In Autiot it looks like quanton(Sheen,Seen), then quantized as quanton(Shææn,Sææn). In quantum~physics quanton(momentum,position). Momentum is diffuse, position is focused.

To put this in a religious heuristic: quanton(spirit,demiurge), and quanton(pneuma,hyle).

To provide a simple metaphor, a classical 'paradigm' is like formally analyzing a single bead in a necklace. A quantum~pragmadigm diffuses all beads via holographic~quantization and sees whole necklace instead of just one bead. A next step as part of this HodgePodge™ effort is to see how a quantum~metanadigm admits and cultivates memeos of many evolving pragmadigmatic~necklaces quantumly. See Doug's What Are Sophisms?

Summary: classical is 'normal,' however, quantum issi extraordinary! (Being quantum~individually extraordinary and excellent is what ancient Greeks meant by martus aritos. I.e., individual witnessing (gnosis) without social complicity.) Para is 'state-ic.' Socially complicit institutional 'state.' Pragma is dynamic and diffuse. Diffusion of views and senses is a tell of ubiquitous evolving, Bergsonian quantization of individual free will quantum~hologrphicityings:

Bottom line: classical paradigms classically focus on 'state;' quantum pragmadigms use quantization to both f¤cus and diffuse all quanton(Value,value) heuristics holographically.

Doug - 12,14May2010.

Quoted Paragraph II 1"Consider paradigm shifts as classically evoked paradice — classically conjured sophisms. 2Science's classical predilections unintentionally but ultimately elicit paradoxes and more paradoxes which further elicits one paradigm shift after another. 3Paradoxes are classical 'effects' unanticipated and unpredicted by a current paradigm. 4Classical, 'normal' scientists fail to recognize these classical 'effects' for their quantum nature. 5'Normal' scientists are paradigmatically blinded to nature's quantum tells. 6Usually, 'normal' scientists will use a toe to raise a carpet's edge and sweep these unexpected paraphenomena away. 7A perfect recent example is Donald McDonald's historical description of John Bardeen's attempts to sweep Brian Josephson's quantum tunneling paraphenomena under a carpet's edge. 8Under any current paradigm phenomena arise which are quintessentially science-quakes. 9They literally shake a current paradigm's foundations. 10Kuhn cites countless examples.

I want to do sentence 5, but sentences 8 and 9 have more contemporaneous Value here, so let's do them first.

Now that Doug has covered sentences 8 and 9, let's go back and pick up sentence 5.

Kuhn distinguishes 'normal' science and "extraordinary" science. For Kuhn, normal is status quo. Extraordinary, to him, is that which evokes and educes paradigm shifts. Since about 1855, according to Doug, our earth has been in a novel quantum 'science' pragmadigm shift as part of a larger SOMCRMoQ metanadigm evolution mediated by quantum~change itself.

Take a look at Doug's now very old, CeodE 2000, SOM's Box:

See solid red box? See Doug's dotted-blue hyperbox? Imagine lots of dotted-blue hyperboxes. Red box is classical 'determinate' y=f(t) dialectical reality. Lots of dotted-blue hyperboxes partially represent quantum~reality.

Normal scientists are stuck in red box. Quantum~scihæntists, extraordinary scihæntists have left red box and moved into one or more dotted-blue boxes. Quantum~leap(s) if you will.

Ponder similarly that USA's current government, FRB, and cartel banks are in red box. That's how they classically deterministically control (apparently) stocks, bonds, housing, etc. Their red box is classical. Consequence? They are doomed. Anyone who stays in that red doomed. Pay attention to ZH, Jim Willie, etc. Now you grasp why and how they surmise we should all completely disconnect from stock markets, corrupt government, main-stream-media, and FRB-cartel. Their end is nigh. Lase 'em baby.

Commentary on PIIS8-9: First, let's duplicate them, "8Under any current paradigm phenomena arise which are quintessentially global-economic-quakes. 9They literally shake a current [economic] paradigm's foundations."

What is our current economic paradigm? A mostly Keynesian-Marxist social-welfare paradigm as cover for global takeover by fiat-paper-strategic haute monde cartels and oligarchists. In past Doug has written some about few 'ruling' many. Our last two sentences describe that same topic. Keep in mind that to an oligarchy social-welfare is civic-welfare. Few view us as OSFA humans, not quantum~individuals. This is their first great Error. Their second great Error is to attempt to 'politically-economically' replace real money with fiat paper. In any tentative ending of Fews' rule individuals revoke both of those Errors, naturally. Our portable lasers will annihilate them.

Timings are now for a revolution from social totalitarian fiat top down elitism and oligarchy to quantum~individualism. To get some flavor of what is in Doug's quantum~stage right now, think of French Revolution, 1789-1799. Quantum guillotines are high powered lasers: microseconds to "heads off." It is just now starting...

Doug's view is that Marxian-Keynesian "class interest" socialism isn't worth a good god damn. Especially dialectical Marxian either-or-ism (similar, either "christians' infidels" (Aquinas), or "Muslims' infidels" (Mohammed)). Christians are Muslims' infidels and Muslims are Christians' infidels, at least some believe that and behave accordingly.

Better is quantum~gn¤stic~individualism. USA's founding fathers tried to achieve this using classical semantics, syntax, and logic. But those are all dialectical. So we, in 1913, fell back into oligarchists' satanic lair. That great economic-political 'catholic' Error has run its course. Marx was a fool. Keynes was a fool. Most of us now, finally, recognize that. Let me say it simply. Nature hates ESQ. Classical Marxist-Keynesians are proving that now in spades. Harvard's reputation is being sullied. Leftists are looking like retardation distilled. Ditto extreme right nut cases.

Allow Doug a spiritual metaphor. A Doug HotMeme"Light is at every comma~nospace." HotMeme™.

But Doug, "What does that mean?"

Reality issi quanton(DQ,SQ)! Reality issi quanton(diffuse,focus). Reality issi quanton(quality,quantity). Reality issi quanton(Value,value). Reality issi quanton(better,good). Reality evolves 'good' while diffusely~middle~including better: amelioration.

ESQ = dichon(SQ, SQ). Hylicity. Darkness. Demiurge. Error. Satan. "Dead father." "Rest without movement." Dialectic! Classically, "Darkness is at every comma-space." Marx and Keynes politically and economically only knew and used comma-spaces! Ditto our classical financial 'systems' today, CeodE 2010.

Our quantum~revolution for Millennium III is to change all comma-spaces (ruler darkness) into comma~nospaces (individual laser brilliance). They will call us "terrorists," but we know better than they...that they are earth's real terrorists. Why did we leave Britain? Why did we write our constitution to protect individual rights? To protect us from these incompetent, greedy oligarchical haute monde (one global ruler) terrorists. Kings of kings if you will.

Their fiat is worthless now. They lose in any fiat sense. And we shall neutralize them anyway. As many as we can. Earth is small. They cann¤t get away.

Masses are learning quickly a simple notion of real individual~freedom: breaking pseudo-rulers' rules. Fiat rulers are our New Infidels. NeoInfidels.

Read Zerohedge. Read Market Oracle. Read Jim Willie. Read FoFoA.

Doug - 13-15May2010.

Quoted Paragraph III "1To Kuhn, a paradigm is a box in which normal science places all its beliefs, commitments, and staunch — even hubristic and arrogant — adherences, until a better paradigm emerges. 2A paradigm shift is when a new breed of extraordinary scientists choose to jump into that newer, better box. 3In that better box, extraordinary scientists invent new puzzles for solving much of what a preceding paradigm swept under its carpet's edge. 4From a quantum perspective, a classical paradigm shift is a relatively minor formal change in a much larger natural evolutionarily "genetic" animation. 5A formal decision to change paradigms, to choose one paradigm over another, involves issues which are insoluble by science per se, especially "normal science." 6Solubility of those issues requires a metadigmatic look at nature, in physial deed a quantum metaphysical/philosophical examination of nature using memes outside of science's competing paradigms. 7Such is what quantonics suggests, n¤t just in crises, but as incessant, phasic, animate, modalities — pragmadigmatic overviews and active support of:

    • applied paradigms,
    • choices of replacement paradigms, and thence quantum egress toward
    • ascension from normal science's paradigms to more highly evolved metadigms of pragmadigms, of which this suggested approach is prototypical.

Doug - 19May2010...

If you will, allow Doug to start with sentence 7 first...

Commentary on PIIIS7: Read sentence 7 carefully. What is its major tone, its crucial tenor?

Doug's hermeneutic of his own 10 year old words in sentence 7 is 'vigilance.'

Politically and economically we are, as a world, in crisis! Why? Individuals (many) haven't been vigilant in monitoring leaders of nations (few). They (few) are now putting all of our (many) cookies in their jars. Had we been vigilant, this could have been mitigated.

How do they (few) do it? They turn us (many) into social cogs in a social (dialectical) machine. They turn us, as Boris Sidis warned, into social hive drone clockwork zombies: political slaves.

How do we stop that? Simply by ceasing all cooperation with our corrupt leadership. We see that happening to some extent now via a process of incumbent attrition. However we need to do more, as individuals! Again, I ask you to reread Cognitive Dissonance at Zerohedge™. Do a browser search on 21:28 to see his incredible gnostic narrative.

"But Doug, What do we mean when we say, 'vigilance?'" Doug's answer is simple: "Always watching." To be vigilant is to always be alert and have qua to detect corruption, especially political and economic corruption. "But Doug, what is corruption?" Let's make a list of some exemplars (in stream of consciousness order):

  • TARP,
  • Loss of Social Security Trusts (politicians used our SS savings as a general fund),
  • Permitting banks to trade in free markets,
  • Permitting banks to use (while disallowing individuals to use) "naked shorts," "order que preemption," "High Frequency Trading (HFT)," "Sub-penny trading (SPT)," "derivatives as means to hide bank trading and other losses from investors," "financial contrivances to assist nations into bankruptcy," etc.
  • 1913 instantiation of FRB as a nongovernmental corporation to 'protect USA's wealth,'
  • Fiat money,
  • Retention of a trading system which can be and is gamed routinely,
  • Retention of 'rules' which permit US 'government' and FRB (and friends) to manipulate markets,
  • Corrupt agencies of government, including SEC, CFTC, Treasury, IRS (constitutionally illegal), House, Senate, Presidency, Subspleen Court, etc.
  • Politicians' behaviors to move away from a gold standard,
  • Political choices to encourage a fractional reserve monetary system which is known to be a most efficient way to destroy any monetary system ('fractional reserves' notionally represents our biggest buggaboo here...Doug - 19May2010),
  • Politicians' use of citizen wealth to pursue goals unwanted by citizenry,
  • Politicians' as benefactors of bank and lobby corruption (to Doug, simply, this is treason),
  • Government 'servants' making more money than peer levels in society,
  • Government of the government, for the government, by the government,
  • Government as sovereign individuals (Watch Merrick's torture of Kumar in episode 3 of Jewel in the Crown.),
  • Rating agencies (e.g., Moody's) and accountants (e.g., Coopers) which can be bribed,
  • Politicians who are scientific fools: Gore, McCain't, etc. (and then politically spread lies, like metastatic cancers...),
  • Use of credit and debt as means to enslave individuals,
  • Education systems which intentionally dumb down and politically socialize individuals, turning them into hive drones,
  • Education systems (esp. Harvard) which intentionally teach socialist Marxian-Keynesian economic philosophical crap, and companies which practice it (e.g., Cummins, etc.),
  • etc.

"And the beat goes on..."

"Doug, what is our most essential tool of vigilance?" Quantum~light as unstoppable middle~inclusion.

We use it to shine light on all corruption and expose corruption prior its own metastasis.

"Doug, how can we use light as an essential tool enabling our individual qua?"

Our first step is to dump dialectic. Dump determinism. Dialectical determinism (SOM's wall) blinds us. Then learn how to embrace light's many hermeneutics.

"Doug, what do you mean by hermeneutics?"

Literally, "many interpretations." (Many interpretationings. One interpretation does not state-ically fit all observables. See Doug's What are Sophisms?)

Classically, dialectically, interpretation is either-or (dialectical). "You are either for us or against us (Doug quoting a corrupt politician.)." Black or white. Up or down. East or West. Right or wrong. In or out. Good or bad: all dialectic!

Hermeneutics is quantum~intærprætation. All hermeneutics are quintessentially enthymemetic.

Our best exemplar is a hologram. Each energy well in a hologram views and is viewed by (via, e.g., light) up to all other energy wellings in said hologram. Those many coobsfective views are referred quantumly as "hermeneutics." Every view is a quanton!

Philip R. Wallace in his Paradox Lost said it much like this, "(Quantum~)Interpretation accords primacy to subjectivity (quantum~quality) over objectivity (dialectical quantity)."

To summarize, a key enabler of individual vigilance is light. But we must interpret (hermeneut) what we see quantumly, n¤t dialectically.

Politically and economically our world's politicians have turned from service to corruption. We must metaphorically kill those corrupt ones and find legitimate 'servants' to take their places. If you are being vigilant you are k~now~ings this is already happening on a grand scale in good old golden (golden as a contraction of 'good old') USA.

In Doug's view our biggest crooks in Doug's lifetime are Nixon, Clinton, Bu()sh(), and Obama. Doug is still fond of Truman, Ike, and Reagan, although evidence is emerging which could (likely will) change that.

Doug - 19May2010.

Quoted Paragraph IV "Quantum Post Modern philosophers, in our opinion, are better qualified for this role and should undertake it. Where scientists look at trees (and only want to look at trees), philosophers look at nature and forests and want to compete various modes of interrelating nature, forests, and trees. At Millennium III's start scientific grundlagen are crumbling, especially mathematics and mechanics plus all sciences which depend upon them. It is time to ascend:

    • from - classically schizophrenic sequences of crisis-driven paradigm shifts
    • to - relentless pragmadigmatic evolution of metadigms.

This whole paragraph is relevant today's 'science' of economics.

Classical economic theory is a total failure. We have SEP of that now and we are directly experiencing total collapse of fiat money systems and economists' nitwitted classical methods and models. Modern economic theory is indeed schizophrenic. No classical economic paradigm is viable!

We must move from schizophrenic economics of 'state' and 'state socialism,' to a healthy gnostic economics of change and quantum~individualism.

Which is more problematic? A too big to fail corrupt 'state?' Some corporations of individuals being corrupt?

Which is better? Allow corporations to fail. Wait ("kick the can") for too big to fail states to fail?

Why is it simply wrong for 'state' to save a dying corporation? What are unintended consequences of saving dying corporations?

Is it better for state to destroy production and then become employer of last resort paying 'union members' too much to be non productive?

Doug's view is that quanton(success,failure) is quantum~reality's overriding dictum...: Failure is in success and success is in failure. Do you see a quantum~implicit of instability? But social 'state' wants ideal stability! Do you see ad occulos how stupid 'social state' really is? Quantum gn¤sis, AKA wisdom, tells us to "embrace uncertainty." Indeed, that is Quantonics' strategy, folks!

That is why Doug claims Quantonics is becoming more and more globally strategic with each passing quantum~moment... What is so interesting to Doug is that our web community, albeit very small, isn't USA! It is almost everyone else! (Excepting North Korea, but Doug doesn't want those midget social-hylic creeps on Quantonics' site. The Kim Whim Republic! :)

Doug - 2Jun2010.

Quoted Paragraph V "When we use a word like hubris we always feel a tinge of guilt. How can we say that a respected discipline like classical science is hubristic, arrogant? Kuhn provides plenty of examples. One is a theme we propound often: classical scientists [read 'Keynesian economists'] believe so strongly in their current [dialectical] paradigm that when they encounter an anomaly twixt nature and their paradigm, they wonder, "…how can nature so rudely violate our paradigm?" In other words, scientists [read 'Keynesian economists'] tend to create paradigms [read fiat paper fractional reserve money systems] and then declare nature "wrong" when she inevitably violates them. To us, reader, that is arrogance! So should we feel guilty when we declare scientists ['Keynesian economists'] hubristic? Perhaps better that you decide, else we uncloak a tad of our own hubris. We offer a superb example here: Resnikoff.

Why is fiat paper doomed? Why is fractional reserve banking doomed?

Following our comments in para. IV, both violate nature!


Fiat paper is (classically) negative energy! How is it negative energy? It absolutely destroys all monetary systems in which it (fiat paper) resides.

Fractional reserve banking is negative energy! How is it negative energy? By monetary base dilution. Fractional reserve means fiat dilution, folks! Dilution means, reduce unit value of money in said monetary system. Evidence? US$ since Fractional Reserve Notes were introduced in 1913 have declined in value by about 99%. And those FRNs are about to be valueless and useless. It will take a global monetary crash to do it...and that event is imminent!

Read recent blogs at fofoa.

As fofoa suggests, let's evolve from a debt (usury) based society into an equity based society. Debt is social enslavement of individuals. Equity is individual freedom! US' Federal Reserve Banking system is ALL ABOUT DEBT! FRB is about social enslavement of individuals. Let's kick these Ruler dialectical-honkeys off our backs.

7Jun2010 - Doug.

See Doug's QELRs of energy, negative, positive, and opposite.

Quoted Paragraph VI "Kuhn apparently misses (in our review, here, we try to show this) a point that his Western cultural view of paradigm shifts falls under a dominant larger classical paradigm which we call SOM which lasted from approximately Aristotle to Einstein (~2.3 millennia). He does n¤t discuss a cultural-philosophical metadigm shift from SOM to CR, which we think is almost over now; however he mentions several tells and features of that shift. Some of his critics accuse him of cultural relativism, calling his sequential paradigms and their shifts "relative." Kuhn ineffectively responds that CR is many parallel views, and his paradigms are analytically sequential. Kuhn's discipline is primarily science history, and most of his focus is on paradigm shifts within science itself. That narrower focus might explain Kuhn's absent discussion of a less apparent SOM-CR metadigm shift. Also, no good classicist could ever announce his recognition of such a shift without experiencing massive counsel for herm (her-him) to, "Put that CR toothpaste (Pandora) back in its (her) tube (box), and deny that you ever even mentioned it (her)."
Quoted Paragraph VII "We want to show that Kuhn's SoSR is a child of SOM. That said, it has lower utility as a paradigm evaluator for impending massive Millennium III changes."

Digest that. We'll keep working on it next few days 'til we reach a plateau.





If we do a real quantum~assessment of what happened on USGCP's much heralded 6May2010 market manipulation...

One meme which emerges almost immediately is: Classical Society is inept.

Markets are like weather, and weather is complex like a galaxy is complex.

Quantum~chaos reigns.

But all of our financial systems, government systems, laws, political behaviors, and so on,..., are classical!

That explains why "classical society is inept."

Yesterday's market collapse wasn't an accident. It was intentional.
Any individual who isn't a gambler, will now see US markets for what they are.
As emphasized elsewhere, market liquidity provided by non gambling individuals is gone!
One step by hegemons, a classical collapse for mankind.

A chaotic system, at least as far as we know, may exhibit long term autsimilar patterns (e.g., heart sinus rhythm), but
it seldom 'coordination-corrects' across a broad spectrum of a classically determinate manner.

If Doug is correct about that, we can KNOW that yesterday was intentional.

Classicists thingk they can have formal control. But recall David X. Li. So did he!

Next time, "coordinated corrections," probably, won't work!

Reread James Gleick's Chaos. Study Feigenbaum's weather-chaos enigma. Classical social ineptness abounds...
Classical society simply does not grasp essentials of quantum~sophisms and
their implicit quantum~fractal selfings~otherings recursion.
(A large feature of classical social ineptness is its normative implicit that reality holds still, and
objects in reality are independent. Their grammar is mostly singular and present-past tense.
Quantum~adeptness intuits how reality is absolute change and plural holographic middle~inclusive.
Quantum grammar requires absolute plural process interrelationshipings.
Quantum~grammar uses plural present participle! 7May2010 - Doug.)

. . .

FRB simply does not want to be audited, and biggest reason is that audits will lend
credence to Doug's declaration, "Classical society is inept," lies, corrupt, and criminal.

Totalitarian systems, centrally planned systems, top-down classically controlled systems always fail.
Fiat systems always fail. See ZeroHedge and Market Oracle for plethoric commentary on this.

Obama's incompetence here is manifest. (I hate to admit that.)

And we can almost be assured Congress will seal its own destiny by giving more power to FRB.
If our complaints are valid, and Congress gives more power to FRB, we can kiss USA (as we have known it) goodbye.

It, actually, does not matter. Yesterday is pure SEP of USA's labored death throes.

I would not want to be an elected politician or banker (not much omnifferencings) during 2011-2014.

Except for short positions, Doug has been completely out of markets for about a year.
As long as FRB, our corrupt Congress and President remain in inept Marxist 'control,' Doug is unlikely to return.

What are they going to do when everyone leaves?

Yeah, I know, "Count their fiat FRNs."



USGCP's: US' Great Casino Ponzi scheme.



Does today show you how criminal FRB and 'the' Squid are?

They are 'trying' to scare us with a market (DOW) dropping from -410 to over -900 points in less than 15 minutes!


Scare Congress into NOT auditing FRB. To scare people out of equities into treasuries.

Hope you didn't buy into their lies, folks!


At 10 minutes to closing Dow is now only down ~338.

Hope you are short... and Au is up $34 in its US fiat paper "assessment."

Read ZeroHedge and Market Oracle...Doug does.




Doug isn't a philosopher of economics, but he does know a lot about philosophy in general, and in a more local way...significantly more about a new quantum~philosophy.

So a big question is: "How, and in what ways, does a newer quantum~philosophy compare and apply to current economic philosophy?"

On a comparative basis, our answers are consummately easier. Newer quantum~philosophy is head and shoulders above current classical economic philosophy!

"But how does it apply?"

Doug has been showing you some exemplars over last year or so here in Hodgepodge.
That list is a long one, but most applied comparatives distill to classical dialectic vav quantum rhetoric:

quantity vav quality, 'certain' state vav uncertain~absolute change, and objective vav subjective.

Doug understands that this audience simply does not grasp formidable and plethoric issues of classical vav quantum.
So, given that understanding Doug tries his best to use examples which omnistinguish red and green bold comparatives above.
Let's do that, again, here.

One of our assumptions in our exemplifications is that classical red bold is classically inferior what Doug juxtaposed as
quantum philosophy's vastly superior green bold, and Doug has qua to narrate and illustrate that.

Another assumption is how we wisely grasp classical thingking is copiously inferior quantum~thinkqing, and again Doug can show that
to you...but since most of you are classicists...n¤t necessarily in a manner transparently apparent to you. (To start, compare classical and quantum think.)
Yet we grasp a truthing, "Failure cann¤t cope with persistence." We offer another of our assumptions.
Essence: when we adhere quantum~thinkqing, quanton(success,failure) issi genuine_value. Indeed, it issi "quantum~harmony."

Our example...

Doug's philosophically plebeian example may even be quite pleasurable to some of you:

Bethahavah and Doug are watching some old movies, some of which Doug refers (at least partially) "quantum."

Two evenings ago we watched IQ. Walter Matthau (as Einstein), Meg Ryan (his niece), Tim Robbins (auto mechanic), Gene Saks plays Boris Podolsky, Lou Jacobi plays Kurt Gödel (see his speel on "Time doesn't exist" at about 9 minutes and 20 seconds into movie (pure quantum~excellence), Joseph Maher plays Nathan Liebknecht (a pseudonym physicist), etc. (Doug made a recall error on Tim Robbins. Doug often does mental-dyslexia on Tim Hutton and Tim Robbins. 1May2010.)

It's a great flick for classicists. It pretty much reinforces classical thingking. Like EPR though, therein lies its own danger to self and self's classical bogus dialectical thingking.

As Doug and Bethahavah watched, some phrases kept recurring, reoccurring. Doug noticed that without grasping why he was noticing. Now, two days later, it dawns on Doug why!

Which phrase did Doug notice and have it stick in his quantum~holographic~stagings: a kind of subliminal cognition absent its needed re cognition?
Doug watched this movie several times prior and never experienced this lightning bolt prior!

"OK, Doug, damn it, which phrase?"

This one: "Time does not exist."

(Starts about 9:20 into movie.
Gödel goes off on a tirade about time.
It is excellent!
If you can take time to do it, watch this recapitulatively.
He shows why quantitative econ is just absurd theoretically,
since no economic ephemera hold still or can be "stopped.")

Beau coup of you are visiting our site nowings to view our Einstein-Minkowsky Space Time Diagram and commentary.
Perhaps that has cohered Doug's attention and permitted him to grasp classical bogosity and its underpinnings in that phrase,

"Time does not exist."

Why would any classical scientist ever make that 'statement?'

Here is Doug's answer and it has enormous importance re economic philosophy and its current classical ills:

Classicists believe in 'state,' and quantum~time cann¤t be classical 'state.'
(Gödel's, Zeno's, Bergson's, and Pirsig's whole point!)
Quantum~time is change itself. Classically, perpetual change and thus "time, cannot exist."

Quantum~philosophy turns all of that upside down. It says, "state does not exist," and "time, as perpetual and absolute changings, is real."

If you do not grasp enormity of what Doug just uncovered so simply for you, ..., your bad!

Impact of this on current financial, fiduciary, and economic philosophy, science and practice are explosive to say a least.
(All classical economic theory based upon classical objective, formal, mechanical, dialectical, quantitative 'state,' is simply bogus!)

To show you explicitly, Einstein said, "Time and space are identical." Via which he implied, "space and time are both state-ic." But that is bogus!
Time is absolute (quantum) change~process, Bergsonian durational process.
(Gödel explains duration when he says, "there is no when." No one can find when. Why? Time isn't stoppable!)
Space (classically) is dialectical Cartesian 'state.' Einstein forced time to be space and thus stoppable state.

Current economic theory is quantitative, dialectical, objective, and 'state-ic.' Bogus!

Now, Doug has to qualify his "bogus" somewhat: all economic stochastics viewed as absolute change are real, but few grasp that Pirsigean epiphany.

Essentials here are quantity is static. Mathematics as applied to economics is(are) static.
Decisioning applied to economics is bivalent (dialectical). All economic data are objective

Quantumly, all of that is bogus.

Thank you for reading,





Doug senses that some of you, likely only a few of you, think at least partially and similarly as Doug. Of course that may be a general phasement in any sense of our humanity itself.

To any extant Doug's surmise is so, did you correlate two recent close-proximity news announcements?

1. X37-B launch by US Pentagon, and
2. PGS project progress and development.

. . .

PGS: Precision Global Strike - Think of it as "Unlimited Space Snipers." Gives n¤væl semantic head to USSA, doesn't it?
Possibly think of GSux in space, and "United Space Squids of America." High Frequency Snipers' Many-Tentacled Squids of America. ROGLMGO.

"If we can't buy them and derivatively marginalize them, shoot them." Keynesian socialist steroids. Democratic "backbone." JFK in NAM.

. . .

Did those two news items superpose on your quantum~stagings?

X37-B is top secret (some above system high) USA accoutrements. PGS philosophically is political-military strategic quantum~stochastic~modalityings.

But what does PGS smell like? Recall Ronald Reagan's "Ballistic Missile Shield," and how socialists berated it?

When Doug Gestaltly puts X37-B and PGS together, his imagination offers a genesis of a kind of n¤væl (due its additional and essentially free offensive nature) BMS. But as-imagined it can do so much more!

What is a key enabler of PGS? X37-B! How?

What do we know so far about X37-B? It is a very big military space drone. It can stay in low orbit (Doug is guessing about 170km altitude) and loiter anywhere around our globe for up to 170 days.

Even though it is a top secret project, Doug likes to imagine X37-B's qua. Allow Doug to offer his guesses:

  • Rapid rate military offensive n¤n nuclear space-sourced surgical terrorism of US' enemies.
  • Rapid rate altitude change.
  • Rapid rate relocation.
  • Rapid rate replacement. (Probably drone for drone...)
  • Rapid master substitution among master drones -- literal master adaptation one and many and multiples in ensembles -- stochastic behaviors, etc.
  • Drone weapon delivery optimization per target.
  • Multiple target management, scheduling and delivery optimization.
  • Minimum weapon delivery time just under a minute (assuming about Mach 5 and an 85km apex to target distance).
  • Minimum (single and multiple) prepare to fire time under 20 seconds (enables multiple nearly simultaneous firing after target[s] acquisition).
  • Maximum weapon delivery time one hour (assuming 20,000km target range; and a Mach 17 sub-orbital ramjet capability -- note that NASA has already (nearly) achieved latter in test flights during last decade or so...).
  • Repetitive delivery capability assuming 250kg hyper-conventional warheads and roughly 1/2 scale shuttle, maximum of 50 repeats per X37-B prior reload. Reload is robotic from supply drones. Multiples of these on same target emulate ground penetration MOABs.
  • Fathom each X37-B as an space Aegis. Master-slave monitoring of all "mother ship" local weapons systems. Probably can assume that these may aggregate to make a super Aegis space system (a la Reagan's "shield").
  • Example used in recent news is that X37-B will get Osama bin Laden now, where old cruise missiles couldn't (cruise missile delivery time is 890kmph limited).
  • 250kg weapons are like small drones, and they have smaller airplane-like drones embedded (this is a very sophisticated way to holographically express Aegis hegemony).
  • Example of minimum delivery is imagine one X37-B loitering in, e.g., a 16km2 area above Iran and Middle East.
  • This scenario offers most effective boost phase defense of any Iranian (and other) ICBM.
  • Aegis of multiple X37-B can monitor at least 10s of simultaneous launches and stop all of them within a minute of ignition.
  • Other uses of PGS and X37-B are simply profound. Use your imagination. (Consider trajectory alteration of an inbound 35km diameter asteroid.)
  • Consider space terrorism aspects against an enemy who is guilty of terrorizing US.
  • Think of X37-B's weapons as like space snipers with perfect accuracy but not 50 calibre, but 250kg deadliness.
  • This list goes on...

PGS heuristics by Doug Renselle; Doug has no affiliation with US Military IN ANY WAY; Doug has been classified 4Y since late 1960s early 1970s (myopia); prior that Doug aced their entry exams (wanted a nuclear sub nav position in early 1960s, couldn't get into Navy via Louisville exam station). Doug worked for military sub contractors doing navigation software and communications systems from about 1968 through about 1987. In 1968 one bit of RAM (magnetic core) cost five cents! Prior that one vacuum tube (part of a bit) was $s! LSI solid state was a glimmer... - 25Apr2010.

Assume speed of sound is about 343 meters per second. Assume Mach 5 is about 5 x 1225kmph i.e., 6,125kmph. Mach 25 is 5 times that.

To orbit earth in one hour requires about Mach 33. Thus, to travel in one hour to a target 1/2 an earth circumference away would require Mach 16+.

So how fast is light? Roughly (check me) Mach 882,000! That's about 27k faster than Mach 33. So at speed of light our weapons could circle earth about 27,000 times in an hour.
Doug did that like this: 186280x3600x1.61 = 1,079,678,880kmph. Divide that by 1225 to get above Mach number.

So PGS must offer an option to carry one or more high energy, i.e., >106 watt lasers or high energy laser plasma boosters!

How do we do plasma boosting with X37-Bs? Imagine X37-Bs, a pair of them, acting like mirrored ends of a ruby rod. Use another million watt laser to pump that pair.
How do we make them look like mirrors? Use large corner "channel plate" reflectors at each X37-B.
Keep in mind that (i.e., contrarotating~fermionic~BCS) bosons ideally (quantumly) retroreflect. Pumping is almost --quantumly-- built in.

See! This can go on and on and on...

Doug is showing this here and now, since many of you have been looking for a "game changer," culturally and financially across our globe.
(Some have cogently suggested how military power is implicitly a game changer. Ummm...yayaæs!)

Claim is, "PGS is coming." Doug believes, "It's here." Fiduciary political responsibility be damned!

US already has PGS!

Best, as usual, to all of you,


(who is peaceful until attacked)


(As has been said prior, but never quite like this, "It's time to bring out the big guns!" As General Patton might have said, "Don't classically fux with quantum US.")



Beth and I are just disgusted at our own USA!

We have been thinking how criminal our nation's 'leadership' really is.

When 911 happened, Doug thought that we were being wronged. But when you find out how our gov't did its best to rip off Arab nations by paying them (as required in Au bars) in phony tungsten bars coated with a layer of gold... Simultaneously, our 'government' is ripping off other nations by cheating via paying our bills in valueless fiat paper money. No wonder we are going down. No wonder so many Arabs hate US.

After 911, Doug does research on 'christianity' only to find out, literally, it is a total lie. Do your own due diligence on this, folks. What 'catholics' invented as a 'christ' is actually Satan. It is so!

Christianity is a lie!

And, I believe, at last count we have five 'catholics' on our supreme (not) court.

Our treasury is run by thieves. Federal (fractional) 'reserve' bank is run by thieves. FRB's hatchet-people are in at least three big (fractional reserve) 'banks.' Some call them 'cartel.'

Said cartel rips us off every day, every way.

They can do HFT! They can do sub-penny (SPT). They can leap to head of trading queues at will. We are disallowed as individuals from HFT, SPT, queue rearranging.

FRB and its 'cartel,' manipulate commodities prices. CFTC and Comex permit unlimited naked shorting of commodities.

All of them together control stock markets (it should be evident to you, if you even pay slightest attention).

We as a nation are living, just as Osama Bin Laden has said, a lie. We are not honest! We are corrupt! We lie! Religiously. Fiscally. Morally. We lie.

Our 'government' lies about statistics, crucial statistics. Unemployment, inflation, GDP, debt, unfunded liabilities, etc. They can ignore accounting rules. (Don't you think we should too?)
These political scum believe they are sovereign what they call 'the people.' They are not! If there were any 'rule of law,' they would adhere it...but they ignore it! Do you realize that?

So Arabs call us "Satan." But doesn't it make some sense? Aren't these politicians closer to Satan than to moral good?

Are we guilty of those charges? Many are.

But payment is (just desserts are) coming due. Have you noticed how many politicians are 'retiring' early?
Bankruptcies are rising rapidly now, up massively both MoM and YoY. Gradient is accelerating (exponential).

Doug is so fed up...

But I am acting on what I have learned, folks.

I am no longer a phony Satanic 'christian.' I am no longer a phony Republican't, no longer a Marxist scum Lieberal.

I am an Essene~Chaldean Jesuit~Autiot quantum~Gn¤stic and I am working on a novel quantum~political schema called QuPo.

Except for stock banners on CNBC, Beth and I no longer watch TV. Beth uses it to play DVDs.
Doug watches CNBC with volume muted and a white paper board Velcro'd over center of picture.
Doug and Beth work on a Quantonics network of Apple computers with a total of three 30" and one 24" cinemas.
We buy our fav series (lots of BBC) and watch them together on two of those 30" cinemas.
Beth and Doug do all other news gathering via WWW. We hate push TV. We love WWW's pull! Whenever WWW sites push, we boycott them, actively.
We stopped our RR premium channels and saved over $700 a year. We'll dump RR completely when we find a good incremental delivery alternative.
We hate paying for channel space we do not use. TV ads are just atrocious and built around a notion of credit and debt.
"Neither a borrower nor a lender be."

There are many things we can do to reduce US' credit monster. Turning off TV is a big one. Paying cash is another. Cutting up credit cards is another. Voting out incumbents another.
"And the beat goes on..."

Let's turn this thing around. Do not let them (our corrupt political 'leaders' and their wholly fraudulent FRB and cartel hatchetmen) continue intellectual and moral rape of our minds and our wealth.
Start by intentionally lowering your standard of living to a point where you can put away 25% per annum.
Don't put it or keep it in paper. Buy coins from a reputable dealer and store them in a safe place. Search on WWW for what 'safe place' means.

I'll say it again, "We can live without them, but they cannot live without us."

Remember that old 1970s WSJ Micky-D full page ad: "...Failure cannot cope with persistence..."

A problem for Hodgepodge readers from all of this "not watching TV" is that Doug's fire burns slower and in a more healthy way.
However, that fire (like Paula Cole's This Fire) sourced much of what Doug has written prior.
Doug has to learn a better way to generate new material for Hodgepodge...bear with me...

Next segment will probably be about a way to quickly and accurately assay gold nondestructively for select 'bad' ingredience.

Mean time see Web Elements and GSU's Hyperphysics sites linked on right side near top of our index page.

Correlate Clinton, Au, Tungsten, and Slick's way of "ripping off Arabs." Now we're doing it to Chinese, et al. I HATE this!!!

Is it any wonder they hate US? I am beginning to...

Yes, I know...I have that option...and I am considering it.


Primaries in Indiana are May 4. Goal: dump incumbents.
One of biggest and worst Republican'ts in Indiana history is going down, down, down...




Ty Andros' Part V of his recent series is must reading for our Quantonics community.

Doug's remarks here, today, find much of their bases in what Ty writes.

Most of our friends have read this and are starting to see 'The Light.'

It's about time.

Also, it is important to recognize that Ty refers Reggie Middleton's Boom Bust Blog.
One of Reggie's graphs shows how 31Mar2010 is a crucial date for US Treasuries.
$1.9T of bonds and bills roll, and many worry that subscriptions will fall far short of that amount of lending.

It is given that our stock markets and bond markets are essentially in Federal Reserve control!
It is mandatory for that issuance to be fully subscribed.

How can FRBanks and Central banks guarantee full subscription? Fear! They must induce fear. When? This week.

If many pundits whom Doug concurs are close to being better in their prognoses,
this week will have a managed crash in equities and commodities including gold and silver.

31Mar2010 should be close to start date of next bear leg down.

As all of you are aware, Doug has been way too early on many of his 'guesses.'
It almost seems impossible to Doug that this isn't a big week in global history.

What do pundits say? Do not buy treasuries! Their bases are fiat. They are worthless!

Purchase and take possession of metals, especially precious metals.

Ty says we will have hyper inflation. Doug understands why Ty says that,
and Doug understands Ty is more qualified than Doug to make that assessment.

However, there is something about this time around...Doug senses it is omniffering prior bear moves.

Doug's view is that we will have deflation...natural deflation...not FRB-Cartel managed inflation.


Our whole globe is affected.

Doug's bias is that it is time to destroy socialism, Marxism, and unionism. Timings are nigh!

Capitalism is evolution, folks! Socialism is pure dialectical crap! Marx was a dialectician par excellence!

Dialectic is dying and all that Marx and unionists believe in is becoming extinct.
Death of fiat is a strong tell. End of all classical societies as we know them is a tell!

Survival is key at this juncture and all those whom Doug reads agree.

Stocks are a bad deal, when you price them in Au.
See Ty Andros' Part V link above.
Recent bull markets are just facades, really. See Ty.

Now, that said, Doug wants to say to you, and this is only his opinion,
nobody knows what is about to happen...except we know huge change is imminent.

Questions? When, what, who, where, why, and how: H5W. We have answered "Why?"
Socialism can be blamed directly for fiat paper and welfare 'state.'
You wanna place blame: there is where to place it.

We fairly well understand what. See Ty's Part V.

Where, this time, is global.

Who, this time, is nearly everyone except what Deepcaster calls "the Interventionalists." FRB, Cartel banks, Central banks, IMF, etc.

Social management of capitalism to educe collapse and thence dictatorial hegemony is their game.

And Doug believes When can happen rapidly, moderately slowly, and very slowly, but Kondratieff says within approximately next 20 years for sure.

Question there is, have Interventionalists altered Kondratieff? Dunno! We have to omnitor this quantum~process to find out if they have.
If they have, it is only tentative and only temporary, at some juncture nature steps in and nature is quantum: Interventionalists are dialectical DIQheads.
One thing we know for sure is that K~Winter is late and slow...a quantum~novel kind of Global Cooling of a financial sort.

It's imminent though, but when is very very quantum~uncertain.

Doug's bottom line here is when Au and Ag (Pt and Pd too) drop in paper price, buy them not US Treasuries!
Beware: some pundits take an opposite view, they are telling you to sell your metals now. Doug disagrees!

But Doug, like all humans, is fallible. So be gnostic, be quantum~gnostic and
do your own personal~responsibility due diligence! Socialists are out to get you, and gnosis is your protection!

Best to you this week...

And in November, maybe our last chance, vote all incumbents out! Why?

Keep in mind:

Both Houses of Congress are criminals!
(Social Security Trusts, TARP, use of reconciliation to force passage of an otherwise unpassible bill, etc.)

Supreme Court are criminals!
(They claim, e.g., corporations are individuals! They elected a Republican't Neocan't traitor, GWBu()sh(), to office.)

Obama is a criminal!
(He and his disadministration are committing social 'welfare' fiduciary and treasury fiat fraud against us and against our world's other nations.
He's killing our kids in Afghanistan and Iraq without 'congressional order,' on 'executive order.' A murderer!)

Ever wonder why Obama was smiling when he went to meet Bush near Obama's
inauguration, and came out looking like death had masked his soul and being?

What did Bu()sh() (an Interventionalist) say to Obama?

Doug's best guess, "Do as we say or we will kill you! Just like we killed John Kennedy!"

Recall that Kennedy had attempted to replace federal reserve 'notes' with real
constitutional money prior his assassination. And Kennedy was killed in Dallas!





Folks, something politically huge is happening! By huge I mean "long term durational affectation."

See Zero Hedge's 13Mar2010 Ratigan And Spitzer Discuss Repo 105, Conclude "Civil Cases Will Be Brought".

One of greatest quotes ever appears in that genuinely-WOW commentary and its intriguing omnilogs.

Scroll down to Cognitive Dissonance's 21:28 response to financial illiterate's 21:11 query. It's about 20% down said page...

Read subsequent remarks too! Awesome! Forum omnilogging at its best.

Most of you know Doug has, since about 2005, officially become a quantum~gn¤stic. This sequence of comments, for Doug, is evidence of global metastasis of quantum~gn¤sis!

I had to share Zero Hedge's commentary with you, since it is one of many rapidly evolving SEPs of gn¤sis' global metastasis.
It is, finally, the beginning of the end of classical political and economic treachery. That treachery is what gn¤sis intends by Error. Heraclitus paraphrased: dialectic is Error. Dialectic is classical treachery.

Thank you Zero Hedge! You, most of you, are precious (e.g., Cognitive Dissonance) to those of us who grasp your semantics, your economic-political Autiot (i.e., language of quantum~gn¤sis).
Thank you for teaching us, for helping us leave dialectic's hive of consensual socially enslaved drones.





A lot is going on...some we need to defer to later segments of Hodgepodge.

A quantum tell of quantum~computing's chronological cusp.

...and all pundits are already talking about it...mostly dialectical gunk... Doug decided to talk about a novel subject this segment of Hodgepodge™:

We need to narrate Darpa's latest dream machine:

Many of you are aware of Doug's great interest in quantum~computing and what it will do for our world...but it isn't here yet...near but n¤t here.
(Near is about one to two decades. Doug's opine.)

Too, you are aware of Doug's great interest in computing 'architectures,' which Doug wants to rename "emerscitectures."
Big AI qua relevance here!

Well, Darpa wants a ten petaflop machine whose power efficiency requires one watt per 50 gigaflops!
A standard install plenum 78x24x40 inches can only consume 57kw!!!

Darpa is looking for innovators to make this happen. Standard suppliers apparently do not dream
powerfully enough, so Darpa has decided to leap out of a classical box into an yet unnamed NSpace.

Clearly this isn't classical stuff anymore!


That's ridiculously easy: one watt per 50 gigaflops is roughly 10-12 watts per flop.
Also we have to worry about how many clock ticks per flop.
If it's 10 then Doug's calculation becomes 10-13 watts per tick.

How do we go about doing something like that?

Doug has already answered this, partially elsewhere.

Classical theory no longer works, people!
Just like in economics, politics, mathematics, and science...classical theory is no longer valid, no longer viable.


One word: adiabaticity.

It isn't familiar to you, is it?

What does it mean? Simply it means 100% energy heat loss.

J. C. Maxwell is supposed to be Earth's greatest entropy specialist, but poor JCM believed
there was only one type of entropy and that entropy only had one gradient.

Very, very do what Darpa asks...we have to throw Maxwell out with most other classical theory.


Adiabaticity implies "zero entropy." Maxwell declared zero entropy "impossible." So classical theory would say we cannot do it.

But our brains do it every day. Our brain's neurons are zeroentropic plus. We have empirical evidence that Maxwell was just another dialectical dumbass.

Let's keep it short: we need a new view of entropies (see cohera and entropa), thus
we need adiabatic memories, and we need adiabatic clocking.

Consider bandwidths and center-clock frequencies. Consider issues of onset~adiabaticity!

If you want to know how, hire some really good quantum physicists and quantum mathematicians and quantum biologists.
Might start with University of Florida who did that YF-22 simulator using rat brain neurons.





Recall how, earlier this year, Doug did a two year quantum~autsimilar projection of Au?

Well, he's doing it again, now with five year Kitco chart whose 'now' reference is 4-7Mar2010:

If you wonder about strange abscissa labeling, Kitco alternates 8mo then 9mo then 8mo, etc. spacing.

You can easily see that our quantum~autsimilarity worked quite well in January. Let's see what happens with our five year version.





Yesterday, without saying so, Doug portrayed Fed et al. as believing in financial reality as 'causal.'

Doug portrayed their adherence to causality as their assumption that they can determinately control markets' behaviors.

Quantonics and others have shown that causality depends upon a classical notion of 'strict determinism.'

What other notions do these classical bankers and econometricians (CBaE) adhere?

Revised 27Feb2010 ©Quantonics, Inc. Created by Doug Renselle 27Feb2010

 Classical B & E Notion

 Doug Commentary

There is a lot to be said here, so allow Doug to distill it. Classical causality as strict determinism is bogus. Use it axiomatically and get in major trouble right here in river city.

See Doug's QELR of cause. See Doug's QELP of cause. See Doug's QQA on cause. See Doug's comparison of classical causation and quantum~affectation.

One to One Correspondence CBaE's objective axioms use 1:1 correspondence to meet their requirement for determinate classical causality. But all that they measure are ephemera. N¤ price is static: thus ephemeral. N¤ price stands alone: thus ephemeral. All ephemera are quantum~wavic and thus are ensembles of ensembles n¤ne of whose constitua are classically synchronous n¤r unitemporal.
Strict Determinism

CBaE assume classically 'What happens next' is a direct consequence of an probabilistic ensemble of past events.

Implicit CBaE assumption is: This is a totally factual proposition and 'no' subjective Value is involved in 'what happens next.'

Philosophical underpinnings of this assumption is Hume's Law applies as "There is 'no' bridge over fact and Value." (Doug's single quotes of 'no.')

Hume's Law is similar Aristotle's Law of Excluded-Middle which says A 'cannot' be both A and 'not' A. Hume's Law is more specific in saying An object 'cannot' be both an object and a subject.

Control as Effective Assumption of CBaE here is, "If we can control future events we deny natural parametric evolution." As some of us grasp, that is a denial of nature which of late appears to be what CBaE are attempting. Of course most classical scientists, and thus 'political economists' view nature as 'absurd.' Doug imagines how CBaE must view that 26Feb2010 8.8 quake in Chile absurd? Without CBaE realizing a 8.8 quake in fiat Fed US$ paper may be imminent?
Parametric Stability CBaE assume analytic stability. So do they assume analytic stoppability of financial reality? What if reality isn't stoppable and what if stopping it to analyze it has deleterious affects on outcomes of those assumptions? For an analogy see Doug's A Quantum Pendulum. We have already seen what happens when an analyst like David X Li, et al., use scalar (stopped) metrics in quantitative algorithms.
Parametric Independence Excepting analytic effects of time CBaE assume all quantitative parameters are independent of changes in other independent parameters. See mathematics' Independence Axiom, for example, in Weisstein's CRC Encyclopedia of Mathematics (try
Time as Analytic CBaE assume classically 'One Time Fits All.' We call that classical notion uni-time, uni-temporal, and uni-temporality. It is classical time as a monism.
Quantity as Measure CBaE assume fiscal and economic reality is wholly quantitative. No subjective-value is allowed to and into all quantitative analysis. Essentially quantitative value is price and cost (and to some extent, a great extent credit).

Revised 27Feb2010 ©Quantonics, Inc. Created by Doug Renselle 27Feb2010

Doug put that table together to help readers see what is wrong with global financial analysis using western dialectical objective thought.

N¤ne of those classical notions is valid in quantum~reality.

Quantum~reality is qualitative, and unambiguously n¤t wholly quantitative.

Classical reality as dialectical denies Value and subjective reality AKA qualitative reality. Our table partially shows why.

So CBaE work in a classical reality which is quantitative and objective and which denies economic reality as qualitative and subjective.

So just like in philosophy and culture and religion we have a economic war twixt classicists and quantumists.

Classicists say all is quantitative and many of them believe in paper money and paper pricing and costing of all material commodities, goods and assets.
They believe in fractional reserve banking based upon fiat paper. They believe in infinite credit based upon fiat paper.

Those beliefs (classical dialectical beliefs) are destroying global monetary systems.


Through a process of substituting purely symbolic dialectical price-cost notions for Value memetics and memeos.

Simply, via a process of substituting quantity for quality.

Fiat paper is worthless. How do we know? In USA US$ doesn't pay any interest.
Fiat can no longer afford to pay interest since it isn't worth anything.
Fiat is only a symbol with no intrinsic Value.
How do we know for sure it has no Value?
Sovereign USA is completely bankrupt at least 3 to 10 times over!!!
Someone Doug just read, methinks on FoFoA, said that US$ is just a symbol: and symbols have no intrinsic Value! Agree!

Now, compare gold to US$. If you hold it in your individual personal physical possession, it has an intrinsic Value.
In recorded history it always has, and it will for a long time to come.

Gold's fiat paper price is manipulated, and it is too low.
It sounds absurd, Doug realizes that, but when fiat paper dies...and it will, and sooner than later...we will find out what gold's value really is.
(Ditto silver and palladium, though Doug does not view them as having intrinsic value since they are neither durable noble metals.)

If Doug told you what he thinks gold will be value-wise per Troy ounce, you would laugh.
But Doug and countless others will have their~our last laugh.

Our globe's Cartel and Interventionalists believe they have total control of market prices.
Not only do they believe that, they believe their control is durable.
What is basis of their reason? Exemplary classical notions like we show above.

Roughly in 1930s, even into early 1940s, one could buy a Ford for about $495.
That's approximately 20 Troy ounces of gold depending upon whether you use $20 vav $35 per ounce then paper gold pricing.

As it turns out, 20 Troy ounces at today's paper gold price is about $22000, which will buy a modern Ford equivalent easily.

Notice quantity change for fiat: 22000/495 = 44.

Notice quantity change for gold: 20/20 = 1.
(Notice implicitness of NO INFLATION!)
No infinite credit bubble. No retarded 'political economics.'
Doug picked up that phrase ('political economics') reading a 1980s Larry Summers' paper on Gibson's Paradox in an article at FoFoA which is very relevant comments here.
It is also relevant a paper on gold evaluation and physical locus existence at this Thunder Road article.)

Which is higher value?
Now we move to qualitative assessment based upon which unit of price exchange held its unit value
and which devalued its unit value, followed by a qualitative query, "Which is better?"
Try doing a Poisson Bracket (PB) on that: gold vav fiat and better vav worse.
How much did $ 'value' (actually price) lose? 1-495/22000 = 98%.

Turns out that is just what most pundits claim as dollar's loss of value in last 80-100 years.

Gold saves our USA. Fiat paper destroys it, period.

Here's a piece of analytic evidence for you which is unreproachable empirically: All paper money systems fail by an inflationary process of self destruction of unit value.
All 'experts' understand that. General public doesn't yet understand that, but when they out.

Our public school systems have taught our kids to be fiscally incompetent. It is repugnant. NEA go to hell. Local teachers' associations go to hell. School boards too!!!

Today's Zero Hedge has an article that says German Weimar Republic's ultimate inflation reduced Mark's value not 50 times but nearly 166,000 times! Ponder that awhile.





Did you notice interventionalist's trial run on 25Feb2010?

We saw a big U-y in both Dow and Nasdaq. Did you notice that early spike down and back up in gold? And then gold kept moving up while markets did their U-y.


Fed and Cartel want evidence that they can make markets go up and down at will, and that they can make gold act either harmoniously or dissonantly.


What happens, Fed hopes, can be totally manipulated...

But it's too late!


See FoFoA.

Euro has features to save it from $'s demise!!!

Gold is KING!!!

Notice Fofoa's economic Krebs cycle charts.

Re: Apple and its reelection of envirnomentalist Al Gore to its board...

Al Gore, in Doug's opinion, is political slime. For a man of that calibre to be on Apple's board is a tarnish. To reelect him is to tarnish Apple.

And Steve said about Apple's fiat cash hoard:

"Cash gives us tremendous security and flexibility. When you take risks, it's like jumping up in the air, and it's nice to know the ground will be there when you land."
Quote of Apple's CEO Steve Jobs.

Looks like Steve may be technically savvy and politically-economically inastute.

Sorry Steve, as you will soon learn, fiat has no 'ground.'

See our FoFoA link above, Steve.





Doug has been watching with interest rhetoric coming out of 'executive' and 'legislative' branches of USFFA (US Failing Federation of America).

I have been hearing blatant stupidity on both sides.

Bush thinks we want his neocan't imperialist fascism back. (While Cheney is in his death throes...)

Obama thinks we want a (he says) 1$Trillion health 'care' system (which will become a 5$trillion abomination), while most of US want naught to do with it.

All of this in a backdrop of a Dow which is entering a major bear phase which will drop to mid 4000s yet this year (pure Doug speculation based on other pundits' thoughts).

More of that backdrop which is a tell of some goodness in our speculation is a huge divergence (see Zerohedge) twixt US spending and revenues.
This will only get worse, and nut case Obama wants to increase spending when he should be doing opposite.

Doug is watching Dow and Nasdaq now 10:11 USCDT) and it looks like this big bear move is starting with a flourish...Dow off 62 and Nasdaq off 22...

Individual citizens of USA have much more power than our government gives us credulity.

It's time to show them...that...

If you have lots of cash...hold it physically...see here.

Doug has been more of a deflationist than an inflationist for over a year now. That article shows why. The Long Wave Group explains it a good way, in Doug's opinion.

Individuals may see how a quantum~real 'seculum' is closer to 60-70 years than Romans' intuition of about 100 years.

LWG expects our bear 'bottom' (no pun) in 2012, but it will take our globe roughly 15-25 years to dig out of our snow~drifted public and private debts.

If they are correct, and Doug is about 2-sigma sure they are, Au will explode and Au stocks will too. Read 'here' above carefully.

We likely will see a Dow:Au ratio of less than two during next 2-10 years.

Other major changes, seemingly catastrophic contemporaneously, are imminent: complete replacement of our current US politics, complete replacement of entire congress,
total detention if n¤t destruction of FRB and all its fascist cronies, near total recant of public and private debt, irrecoverable political embarrassment of Conservative
and Lieberal 'parties,' total destruction of fiat as foe of every citizen and citizenry on Earth, Geertzian disassembly (do a browser search on that pattern) of
nearly all unions (monisms) on Earth, and decommissioning of nearly all classical epistemological 'tools' of state-ic and status quo 'know-ledges.'

Thank you for reading,





Reader Questions About Classical vis-à-vis Quantum Dæm¤cracy
Created - February 20, 2010 - By Doug

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2014


Query Etymology
Topic Doug's Commentary
"To 'Blindly see,' what does it mean?" 19Feb2010 - Poway California Classical [Dd]emocracy can only 'see' blindly,' while
quantum~[Dd]æm¤cracy sees without classical blinders.

On 31Jan2010 Doug wrote, "Classical politicians (blindly) see only dichon(o, o)."

Our reader's query is exceptionally complementaroceptive!

'Blindly see,' classically is an oxymoron.

Recall how Doug has taken great pain to show how dialectic thing-king generates paradice. That is why Doug put 'blindly' in parentheses in his original reader-quoted text.

What Doug intends is that classicists can only partially see due their religious adherence to dialectic. Dialectic is a huge disabler of human thought.

Quantumly both blindly and see are enthymemes. All of us are limited to how much we can see (hear, feel, sense, etc.). Our list of exegetica here are nearly unbounded. For example optical frequencies are less than one octave of nature's >143 octave quantum~flux spectrum.

So we may look at real quantum~partial sight as a kind of bandwidth limited blindness. (This is a large aspect of quantonics' semantic of "macroscopic quantum~uncertainty." Understanding it is kin of what we and Paul Pietsch mean by, "Indeterminacy is a principal feature of intelligence." Now ponder how classical democracy adheres dialectical notions of ideal 'truth,' based in ideal classical 'certainty.' When one realizes, wisely, how nature has put blinders on all of us, we intelligently regard uncertainty as a higher Value than classical ideal truth.)

Too, we grasp from numerous psychological-clinical studies how, we tend to see what we expect to see. That is closer to what Doug intended by "(blindly) see."

In gnosis we use topos to show this quite simply: hylic (most blindered), psychic (struggling to see more), pneumatic (least blindered).

Doug - 20Feb2010.

©Quantonics, Inc., 2010-2014

Doug's view of markets tend to well~align many pundits.

Our globe is about to experience major financial failures. Much of it borne of GWBu()sh()'s disadministration. Social conservatives are intrinsic failures. That is why Doug refers them as Republican'ts.

Why are they failures?

Quantum~reality isn't conservative. It isn't a "zero sum game." It isn't classically closed (conservative).

Quantum reality is open, and thus entropically productive. Quantum~reality creates actuality from isoflux! Conservative thought cannot even begin to grasp that reality, folks!

Doug can write volume libraries about this, but it won't do much good until humanity begins to grasp what quantum~reality is and what it means for all of us as individual, gnostic human beings.

If you care about that, study quantonics, all those titans whose works we cover generously in y~our website we call "Quantonics."

Doug is moving cash to short positions in small caps, materials, and select Chinese~relevant financial vehicles.

Keep in mind that $ are fiat. Regardless how much FRB and Treasury try to save US' $...we think they cann¤'s now too late.
Long term, a world without fiat currency will be a better world, just like a world without 'Classical Democracy' will be a better world (in Doug's opinion).





Our USA House of Representatives don't!

Consider: USA's GDP is over stated! Our actual GDP is probably about 0.5 to 0.7 that stated!

What does that mean for our real debt ceiling? What does that mean for velocity of money? Etc.

Assume what Doug just wrote is more reasonable than what GAO, Treasury and FRB report.

Then our debt ceiling above $14T is more than double real GDP. Are you stunned? Should be.

Some are saying its closer to $21T due off books issues whose future values are indeterminate.

If actual GDP is $7T, then our reported debt and our new debt ceiling are double GDP; including our
unreported debt, total may be at least three times actual GDP! If so, USA is way beyond bankrupt!

Among 435 who voted to allow an increase, regardless of paygo, are inept and incompetent.

You know, they think they are what USA is all about... Arrogance! USA is about individuals being productive (i.e., antisocialist). Capitalism is what allows individuals to be productive!

USA now has over 2 million government employees, none of whom produces a god-damned thing. Wastrels! Incompetents! Inepts!

Congress, cut spending now!

Reduce size of gov't now!

If your paycheck is in $US, regardless that manipulated DXY, you're getting fuxed! How long will it take you to see what is happening?

If you want to grasp why Doug is ranting, read Zero Hedge! Read Jim Willie at Market Oracle. Read! Time is over for you to be fiscally inept. Learn!

Doug -




OK! Senate votes for Bernanke!

So now what do we do in November?

Simply, vote only for non incumbents. These creeps won't sunset themselves. Let's do it for them.

Doug 29-31Jan2010

. . .

Recall Doug's recent rant on classical democracy vav quantum~dæm¤cracy?

How can Doug put quantum~dæm¤cracy in alternative quantum~lightings?

One way is to offer a pathway of quantum~change. Another which assists that approach is...

David Bohm, in his 1992 Thought as a System shows us a way. See page 161 in Bohm's 250 page Routledge paperback.Permit Doug to use Quantonics script for an immediate and eidetic comparison:
Essentials of Quantonics' Comparisons
Classical Democracy vav Quantum~Dæm¤cracy


Quantonics Script

Quantum Hermeneutics




dichon(I, me)

Classically 'I' is subjective and me is objective. Too, classically, subjects and objects are middle-excluded due Aristotle's third syllogistic 'law.' Our dichon's comma-space twixt 'I' and 'me' signifies 'concretely' Aristotle's third 'law.'

dichon(~, o)

Classical Society
Classical Individual

Classical politicians view individuals only as quantitative objects: they see 'o,' but they are blindered to 'me' as qualitative 'wavings.'

Classical politicians (blindly) see only

dichon(o, o).

Quantumists must use quantization and Poisson~Bracketing to marginalize classical quantitative notions of society and emphasize qualitative quantum~memeos of quantum~society.



Quantumly "I" and "me" are both quantons and as such are quantum~holographic "patterns of quantum~flux Value." In Quantonics, all quantons are quantum~holographically middle~including and middle~includings. Our quanton's comma~no~space quantumly illustrates quantum~middle~inclusion.

Classical society must evolve away from its self-proclaimed sovereignty over individuals to acceptance of quantum~individuals sovereign to classical society.



Quantum politicians view individual as qualitative complementation of quantum~flux.

Quantum politicians see


Doug's table above is intended to show a profound need for social disposal of [Dd]emocratic and [Rr]epublican politics and nurturing of a n¤væl quantum~politics.

This is just a start, borne of prior omniscussions (n¤t 'di'scussions) of this topic in Hodgepodge and elsewhere in Quantonics web site.

In subsequent segments of Doug's Hodgepodge 2010, he will do Poisson~Bracketings of classical democracy vav quantum~dæm¤cracy.

Doug's ultimate goal is a Quantum~Political~Primer™ on H5W to do that.

29-31Jan2010 -Doug.




"Hey Doug, What are you hearing from TG's testimony today?"

It all comes down to this: Fed doesn't want transparency, even though Geithner claims it is a good idea..

Fed only is viable as long as we play their game.

Transparency shows us that we shouldn't be playing their game.

See Gary North's End the Fed article recommended Doom Loop reference.

If you do not know (understand) what Doug intends by "Fed's game," see Gary North's End the Fed article
and his referenced Doom Loop which was presented very recently to Chicago FRB.

You need to read Gary prior Doom Loop, please.

Doug will do a summary of Doom Loop ASAP..

Thank you for reading,





Boy, has Obama fuxed up or what?

Recall how BO said, "Jesse Jackson is one of my best pals?"

Yep, and he likes Bernanke and Geithner too.

So BO has amongst his favs those three major dumbasses.

Are you paying attention to 26Jan2010 news?

See Zerohedge on Bernanke, Geithner, FRBNY, and GSux.

Bernanke and Geithner both need to be replaced, BO!
Their ineptness and incapacity to perform are just profound!




Doug wants to talk about political philosophy from a narrow quantum~complementarospective.

About classical-democracy vav quantum~dæm¤cracy.

What is wrong with classical democracy, a democracy hylics (classicists) promote today?
Simply, it is dialectical. And In Quantonics "dialectic is bogus."

"OK, Doug! What is quantum~dæm¤cracy?" That's easy!

HotMeme™ "Quantum~dæm¤cracy issi hologramic!"™ HotMeme™.

Doug derives that from a more general quantum metameme, a
MetanaHotMeme:™ "Quantum~reality issi hologramic."™ Source? David Bohm! MetanaHotMeme™.

Classical democracy is bivalent. Quantum~dæm¤cracy issi h¤l¤graphically omnivalent.

Classical democracy is static, an Abyss of Stayssyss.
Quantum~dæm¤cracy issi absolute flux, absolute evolutionary perpetual selection via quantized choosings, chancings, and changings.

Classical democracy worships exclusion, cause-effect, and perpetual state. Quantum~dæm¤cracy
betterships inclusion, coobsfectationings (see affectation, too), and Bergsonian flux~duration.

Classical objects' properties are democratically perpetual state. Quantum quantons'
holographic~interrelationshipings are quantum~dæm¤cratic perpetual~evolutionary change.

Holographic quantum~dæm¤cracy implores all of any quantum~hologramings' energy~wellings to
coobsfectively beings doings their free~will quantized ensemblings' QMVings EIMAings at up to Planck rates.

HotMeme™ "Quantum~Free~Will~Quantization (quantum~dæm¤cracy) in our quantum~stagings EIMA scintillates biophotonically!"™ HotMeme™.

See Doug's quantum~description of scintillation. See Doug's coining of quantum~stage.

Is it clear to you n¤w~ings why Doug declares a Essene~Jesuit~Gn¤stic normative,
"Classical-democracy, just like its dialectical-çatholiç dead-father-demiurge, is dead!"

There is more to be said ( re quanton(unsaid,said) ) about this, but Doug, just for n¤w~ings,
wants to get your hologramic quantum~th¤ughts running in background on this topic.

If you need a hint, imagine John Forbes Nash's Equilibrium Theory immersed in its own quantum~hologram.





Doug just wants to make a comment about Supreme Court (that's a laugh) decision re corporations' rights to contribute to a political campaign.

If you agree with Quantonics, you believe in gnosis. You believe in quantum~gnosis. Gnosis is about individuals.

Corporations are small models of society: they are n¤t individuals. They are groups of people; definitely n¤t individuals! (Yes, forgive Doug, he is using SOMiticism.)

Social voting and campaign support as a social group is lobbying, IMO. Society represents groups ("the people," and their 'civil rights'), n¤t individuals.
Actually, that is what is wrong with nearly all classical social organizations (essentially "tragedy of commons sense" 'unions').
Their social mentality is OSFA. But reality is MSFA. Latter is what we mean by "academic freedom," "religious freedom," and "cultural di(omni)versity."

Society is individiopathic, deadly to individuals and thus indirectly to self.

Individual disrespect of a failing society is healthy. Any societal disrespect for individuals is self-destruction in process.

Doug says, "Our Supreme Court has n¤thing supreme about it."
Indeed, it is less than ordinary! Our supreme court is naught more than a "tragedy of OSFA commons sense."
It is çatholiç. Intellectual, psychic-hylic, dialectical garbage."

"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."

JS Mill, On Liberty, 1859.

Now is mankind society? Doug thinks society is lessor mankind. Epistemology of mankind is about knowing. Society has n¤ means to be knowing other than Rules. Individuals can think. Society cann¤t think.

Here we see a 'Supreme' Court which cares more about society than individuals. This is a huge mistake. Like GW Bu()sh()'s mistake, Error, "Society is above individuals." Bullshit!

Individuals are more highly evolved and evolving than society, period. Doug.

Clearly, society and its courts, supreme and otherwise, are failing. But individuals cann¤t fail. They evolve. They change. They adapt.
Corporations die because they are less capable of adapting than individuals! States and societies die simply because they are less capable of adapting and surviving than individuals.

Doug disagrees with Supreme Court. Neither corporations nor societies have 'individual' voting rights. To enable their voting rights is a çatholiç abomination.

Individuals, quantum~individuals...and agreeing with JS Mill and Pirsig...are sovereign any society. Individual right to vote trumps any unthinkqing and mindless social group and corporation.

Next we'll be giving churches and lobbyists voting rights...thinkq about that!

Doug has lost faith in every branch of US government.

Keep in mind this same corrupt and çatholiç supreme court put that ultimate political scum
GWBu()sh() in office second term: an abomination against individual humanity and our Earth.

That dumbass tipped d' Rary. And look at what is happening. And Republican'ts are feeling another of their self arrogant "ascensions."
Hey Newtron, how about a "Contract Against America?" Oh, I'm sorry, that was GWBu()sh()'s Supreme Court election.

My bet is Scott Brown is just another Bu()sh()ter. But I hope he helps vote down Democrappeds social welfare incompetence.

Young folk...when your teachers berate capitalism tell them to shut their stupid Karl Marxian dialectical pie holes. Tell them you aren't paying for political proselytization as education.

Socialism doesn't pay for anything. Socialism is, as folk at Zero Hedge explain, wholly n¤n productive. Absolutely incapable. Absolutely incompetent.

Doug -




If you missed Caprica's premier on SyFy, be sure to catch its next segment next Friday night at nine pm. Check your local listings.

Caprica is a science fiction rendition of Quantonics. If you like Quantonics, you'll like (Doug thinkqs) Caprica.

Doug -




In only nine and one-half months (November 2, 2010) USA may be having its final (forever) mid-term elections.

If that statement is normative, then all of us should start pondering H5W we plan to vote. (Possibly 'not.')

How do we, should we, vote when our current social leadership is manifestly inept?
So too, what should we do about local political machines which perpetuate said ineptness?

Follow d' $Money!

(If you doubt their ineptness, consider their failings. Their failings are evident when you consider what has happened to USA since
1913 when our 'government' enabled a "privately owned" Federal Reserve Bank as 'protector and guarantor' of our money system.
Actually this is Congress' responsibility, but they outsourced it to a private company called
"The Federal Reserve Bank." Nearly all 'assets' in USA today are valued in Federal Reserve 'Notes' and 'Dollars.')
All 535 members of Congress have willingly nurtured its Federal Reserve System. That is why we declare them inept!


US Dollar has lost about 98% of its value since 1913!

How else are these 535 complicits inept?
(You may actually want to see it as adeptness, as measured by who has much of US individuals' as constituents money now.)

Their statistics are all manipulated, contrived and bogus. E.g., inflation, unemployment, etc.

They hide actuality from their conned-stituents.
They deny taxpayers' transparent access to their and FRB's theft of our assets and taxes.

Unfortunately we are a bivalent party system, excluding invalid notions of 'independents,' et al.

Republican'ts and Lieberalls.

In Doug's view both parties need replacement. But it cannot happen peacefully. So it appears we are stuck.

It gets really simple when you think about it, however.

What keeps their ineptnesses nurtured? Our participation in their processes.

When you are being robbed blind, what do you do? Escape robbers!
Doug leaves it to your individual imaginationings how to escape.

Simply, if we refuse to play their game, their way...
...they lose.

We lose too, however, only temporarily.
We can survive without them ...
... although a huge, only ostensibly hermetic, secret is ...
... they cannot survive without us!

That bold green text is probably the most important political statement on Earth today, CeodE 2010. Doug - 16Jan2010.

According to other pundits whom we respect, readers should expect at least two major events from US' 535 incompetents during 2010-2011:

Treasury confiscation of intangibles like 401k 'plans' and savings via mandatory conversion into 'Treasury' annuities.
(Ponder how our dollars and 'notes' are actually 'FRB annuities.'
535 and FRB've already spent nearly 100 years fuxing US individual 'citizens' over.)...

...And, Obama's declaration of war against all of, possibly part of, Middle East as "terrorist infidels."

But Doug, "How do we create a new $Money which cann¤t be so easily manipulated by political incompetents?"

Doug admits to potential fiscal and economic naiveté here, but to keep it simple:

Calculate current global 'development product.'

Say it's currently $100T.

Take total above ground gold, silver, platinum, copper, titanium, rhodium, palladium, etc.,
weights in Troy ounces. Determine their relative values percentage-wise.

Monetise GDP of $100T in terms of those metals.

Credit all assets globally, immediately, with corresponding shares of said "New Real Money."
Let's call it "GNRM!" Global New Real Money.

Do not say it cannot be done. Rather "Just do it." Yes, it requires multinational cooperation,
but alternatives are much worse and outcomes will last decades if not longer.

Then, politically, never allow a return to fiat money.
Never allow a non constitutional private company, like FRB, to decide how any nation's money shall be managed!

Every nation is in trouble now, even Australia, though they mostly believe they are OK...they aren't!

This puts us all back on a real money basis, and it puts our globe back on an even keel. Discomforts will heal rapidly. We can say goodbye to perpetual fiat bubbles.

Thank you for reading,





Today, Zero Hedge has a superb article 'Global Tactical Asset Allocation - Equities.' Said article is by Damien Cleusix.

Cleusix refers a paper (a notion previously referred by A. Greenspan) titled 'Paradox of Credibility.' Said paper is by Hanjoon Michael Jung.

Most of our regular readers grasp how Doug has spent much time on issues of paradice, and how classical thingk-king is actually a de facto generator of oxymora and paradice (pl. of paradox).

Said 'Paradox of Credibility' paper is dialectical. As such, we can declare its actual bogosity immediately.
Doug's allegation of bogosity emerges due paper's author's (Hanjoon Michael Jung) use of classical logic to support his hypotheses.
Dialectical logic, alethic logic, and predicate logic are n¤ longer valid in any scientific opus.
Why? Reality is quantum. Reality is n¤t generally dialectical!

Dialectic creates paradice while declaring them 'false.'

There are n¤ classical paradice in quantum~reality.

"How can that be Doug?"

Over simply, dialectic is a monism, depends upon monist 'principles.' Quantum~reality is heterogeneous, plural, and multiplicate.

Dialectic assumes stable OGC and stoppable and analytic OGT. (This set of assumptions is what annihilated David X. Li's classical economic formalisms.).

Coquecigrues ('quantum logic') assumes many truthings in many comtextings all of which are evolving, and thus intrinsically enthymemetic, at up to Planck rates.

When we apply quantum~thinkqing to any classical paradox said paradox becomes quantumly~explicable, n¤ longer a paradox.
See Doug's Zeno's Paradice. See Doug's What Are Sophisms?, and his Sophism Connection. Also see Doug's Problematic and Pesky Classical English Oxymora.

A major problem with classical reasoning based in dialethic 'logic,' is its core assumptions.
It suffers its own Paradox of Credibility. Why? Mostly due its assumptions regarding dyadic relationships among logical objects:

  • symmetry
  • transitivity
  • reflexivity
  • commutativity
  • distributivity
  • factorizability
  • lisr
    • localability
    • isolability
    • separability
    • reducibility
  • etc.

N¤næ of those classical relations is valid in quantum~reality!

"OK, Doug...assume you are correct in your allegation of Cleusix' reference to Paradox of Credibility bogosity. How do we deal with this quantumly?"

Doug's core assumptions about quantum~reality include:

  • quantum~reality's comstituents are quantons
  • quantons are waves and thus always changing and changing all
  • quantum~waves everywhere~included~middle~associate (EIMA)
  • waves are stochastic thus positive (see de Finetti, 'Foresight, Its Logical Laws, Its Subjective Sources')
  • ensemble quantum~waves evolve perpetually
  • all real quantum~wave~ensembles are always partially evolved at any nowings
  • a way of describing quantum~partiality issi quanton(unsaid,said)
  • etc.

If you grasp Doug's quantum~semantics in his list of quantum~assumptions, we may surmise how all quantum~nomina are always partial, always enthymemetic.

So, credibility is always partial. Credibility is always enthymemetic. Credibility may n¤t be ideally, classically 'assessed.'

"How do we show that in Quantonicsese?"

Credibilityq quanton(credibility_unsaid,credibility_said).

Cleusix' reference to A. Greenspan's classical notion of Paradox of Credibility, similar David X. Li's opus,
treats credibility as a stoppable scalar metric which is classically assessable.
But credibility is quantum! It evolves! One may n¤t classically scalarbate credibility!

Thanks to Tyler Durden at ZH for indirectly finding this paper for us.

If you can find time read all of Cleusix' article. Very, very, very important!





A principal reason Doug started HodgePodge over a year ago was to comment on his views and interpretations of various aspects of USA's and our world's financial, economic, and political issues.
However, for Doug, a big part of all that is surviving what globe's politicians have done to individuals out of their own need for power, money and to them 'prestige.'

Well, to Doug, precious metals are a key aspect to survival. Lot's of pundits agree. There isn't any need for Doug to rewrite all that is written elsewhere.
There is a need to help individuals of our world survive by showing them how current ways of thing-king are not only antique, but also anachronistic and detrite.

So Doug is using FEP (finance, economics, and politics) as means to illustrate how we can stop using CTMs and start using QTMs to help all of us survive.
For Doug, that is one of our most strategic needs both as individuals and as novel quantum~societies will emerge from rubble of current civilization.

Just one example is gold.

Thinkqing gold is thinkqing quantum. There are lots of reasons which will become more apparent as time passes.

Biggest and easiest to grasp is that gold (and other precious metals) are real, quantum~real.

FRB's paper is fiat. Faux, pseudo, garbage, junk, etc. And fiat is means of bankers to steal nations' wealth. (See Quiet Coup by Simon Johnson.)

What Doug wants to offer re: gold is a Kitco 2-year chart he just altered FYE.

Doug took that beautiful head and shoulders bottom and cloned it, then attached clone to 6Jan2010's 2 year Au chart. Here it is:

Doug's technique here is to use quantum~autsimilarity to extend Kitco's 2 year gold chart approximately 21 months.

That isn't what will happen, since we cann¤t do deterministic projections in quantum~reality.

However it is a decent stochastic expectation, since it is real autsimilarity.

This effort is just for fun, and FYE. Let's see what happens.

Are you amazed at how well those charts aligned-registered?

Doug is!

Thanks to Illustrator for making it easy.

Most pundits aren't going to like our chart, since it has gold going essentially sideways for another year.

As you can see, buying opportunities may be quite further in future than what we might wish.

If you have resources to do so, ride it down.

Key to healthy outlook in our chart is its green 200 day moving average. Trends hold! Good!

It just feels and seems reasonable to Doug. It's very quantum!

Doug - 7Jan2010.


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

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

©Quantonics, Inc., 2008-2028 — Rev. 27Jan2015  PDR — Created 7Jan2010  PDR
(4Feb2010 rev - Repair FYE Au chart cloning date from 6Dec2009 to 6Jan2010.)
(20,23,26-27Feb2010 rev - Answer reader query about Doug's usage of "(blindly) see.")
(6,14,28Mar2010 rev - Add five year Au chart with approximately a one year quantum~autsimilar projection. Subsequent vignettes.)
(12,25,29Apr2010 rev - Latest segment. Add IQ movie commentary.)
(1,6-7,11-16,19May2010 rev - Fix Tim Robbins name. Change 'ordinate' to 'abscissa.' Add red text and 'BCS,' 'retroreflection' links to 25Apr2010 PGS description. Paragraph III text.)
(20,22May2010 rev - Add commentary on Au autsimilarity with temporal stretching. Guesses on $600T OTC Derivative 'pool.' Potentially new Au pattern developing and Minsky-Keynes commentary.)
(25-26,28May2010 rev - Commence and continue Minsky vav Keynes omniscussion. Add Interpol List text from Jim Willie's 27May2010 article on Market Oracle.)
(2-3,7,17-19,21,23-24Jun2010 rev - Add Para. IV commentary. Repair some typos under PGS. Add para. V commentary. BP commentary and 'absolute change' issues. Keynes vav Hayek. Another OWFA AlGorebasm.)
(25,27Jun2010 rev - Reformat tables in latest 24Jun2010 update. In 19Jun2010 segment change 'Adam Smith' to 'John Stuart Mill' and add link. Hurricane likelihoodings.)
(29Jun2010 rev - Cynicism.)
(2,13,17,21Jul2010 rev - Add segment on USTFRBCI's attempts to commoditize Au. Steve Betts' MACD as a "damped sinusoid." Remind 9 Av. Keynesianism: The No Deal!)
(24,28,31Jul2010 rev - Add 'Keynesian' link to 21Jul2010 segment. Fekete on backwardation. Next segment.)
(1-5,9,13Aug2010 rev - Update latest segment. Typo. Omniscussion on classical causation. Refine causation table content. Why Keynesians are dying and dead. Hindenberg omen, et al.)
(19-21Aug2010 rev - Economics (Keynesian style) is sociopathy. Value as money. Neoclassical Keynesianism.)
(1,3,6,11-12,22,27Sep2010 rev - Matthias Chang's article. Comments on Hawking's AlGorebasms. Quote Gardner's Magdalene Legacy.)
(14,16Nov2010 rev - Move Chapter One of Doug's 11Sep2010 Economic Value Feuilleton Chautauqua
to its own separate page. Typo under 'causation and its exclusion.')
(18-20Nov2010 rev - Commence narrative of Chapter Two, Segment 1 on 'quantum~complementarity.' Chapter Two, Segment 2. Repair 'quanton' coined comment in Segment 1.)
(22,24,27-29Nov2010 rev - Segment 3. Segment 4. Segment 5. Typos. Segment 6.)
(3-4,6,12,14-18,20-26,28-29Dec2010 rev - Segment 7 of Chapter 2. Add Has-Been-Banana-Bernanke jpg. Segment 9. Segment 10. Minor updates to Seg 10. Progress on Seg 11.)
(1,9,12Jan2011 rev - Add 'How to Find One's Inner' links to Chapter 2, Segment 11. Add 'Peircean Abductivism' anchor. Add Chapter Two link near page top.)
(1Feb2011 rev - Add 'Evolution of Pirsig's SPoVs' anchor to 24-25Jul2010 Hodgepodge segment.)
(24Feb2012 rev - Repair misspelling of Fekete's name.)
(24Jul2012 rev - Add 'adiabaticity' anchor in 10March2010 segment.)
(19Jan2013 rev - Add 'Time Does Not Exist' anchor under 29Apr2010 segment.)
(15Jun2013 rev - Add 'A Primer on Quantum~Politics' link under 12Apr News segment.)
(27Jan2015 rev - Add 'Why Peace is Uncertainty,' under 25Apr2010 segment, I am 'peaceful until attacked.')