µTm Scenarios, T53(M)
Though I greatly value Devin Bostick's thought, I do have -- as before stated -- considerable reservations. A bit more detail on these reservations as regards contents of his RIC, resonance intelligence core, paper, wherein there given is insistence upon (1) “contradiction gating” cf. no A is not-A; and (2) “recursively stabilized identity” cf. the ID-case is either A or not-A, i.e., non-quantum simple-identity. Simple-identity compensatory mechanism as non-self-qua-non-entity adaptation to biological-substrate blindness, whereupon egoic cognition generates illusionary-narrative Weltanschauung-Lebenswelt-Umwelts (WLU) as prohomeostatic derivative compensatory mechanisms, is all but definitive of the pandemic normopathy bred into Homo sapiens sapiens by the orchestration of glutamatergic molecular-cellular-brain anchoring provided by 1T2-only-logic-bound prescriptive enculturation-socialization at neuronal plasticity, thus to a great degree quenching quantum-brain-mediated endogenous-ketaminergic capabilities for “structural perception of invariants” (see section 6 of Bostick's identity as a coherence interface paper). Buddhologically, these WLU illusionaries constitute Maya, a state-place to be authentically escaped, not adaptively wallowed in by transference-dynamical projective-identification with the ConveDDs (conversion-disorder displacements) compensatory-abreactively constellated as component processes of regressed-archetypal collective-unconscious event-gradients. Crediting D.L.Rapoport ontopoiesis as continuous, self-cancelling, deBroglie-Bohm [de}mergence-[re}mergence, rather than as memetime-bound [e}mergence, and the physics of BackCloth (((be that cosmo-“cloth” topologized, ConfigurationSpaced, ShapeSpaced, and/or Dirac PolarizedVacuumed: as regards the last named, see Richard L. Amoroso's keynote address to the colloquium entitled “Unified Field Mechanics: Natural Science Beyond the Veil of Spacetime”, Morgan State University, USA, 16-19 November 2014, and consider the 4D hypercube of Figure 4 shaped-configured-topologized under 1T2-only-logic alone to actually be a J.G.Bennettian skew-hypercube drawn with null-vector-defined “pencils of skew-parallels” under µTm-logics; and, furthermore, consider the fluctuating Planck's “constant”, subtending Heisenberg 1T2-only-uncertainty, of Figure 10 to actually be scale-relatively m-valued under µTm-logical analog processing))), there exists a Wheelerian-pregeometry qua Rapoport-logophysics sub-substrate which, crediting Post more than Lukasiewicz as well as Rapoport-supraduality, is, minimally, of the µTm-logical-value order-types. Crediting the physics of CommonGround (see: “Quantum holism: nonseparability as common ground”, Jenann Ismael and Jonathan Schaffer, Synthese, 197, 2020, pp. 4131-60) qua Tzog-chen-AllBase, there exists a Wheelerian-bucket-of-dust qua Aurobindoan-Kusaman-warm-golden-dust-interospectable C+TC+-pre-pregeometry sub-sub-substrate, arguments against which, based in insistence upon 1T2-only-demonstrable falsifiability, I discount, if not dismiss out of hand -- that's certainly not: disdain -- due to the man[i}fessed inability to demonstrate absoluteness of 1T2-only fallacies in context of µTm-unto-CTC+-unto-C+TC+ understood relative to relative-state identity-transparency, rather than truth-value, as fundament of logic.
Gee-whiz! How scrumptious. Messy[i}antic G-Xpectations of LSXDed (large-scale extra dimensioned) n-NewWorlds (think: 10 to the 500th-POWER [good offices of David H. Bailey, 23 July 2025] of them strung over an anthropogenically-theoretical holographically-unified [land}scape of fields: cosmo-HAM, hey what!) to I-egofunction 1T2-only order -- not only this earthy world here reordered by ConveDDing (conversion-dysorder displacementing) dictated by regressed-archetypal event-gradients of the collective unconscious, gradients Born of the µTm-repression en[gender}ing the regression. There is, alternatively to multiverses of incommunicado 1T2-only-universes, µTm-unto-C+TC+-relative-states of CommonGround identity-transparency, this one and only universe. Three of space and three of Pauli-Paine topologically-active operator-time (topo-active optime): though, clearly, infinitudes of infinities are involved in the vast array of employable abstract spaces, we never saw the need for higher dimensions of 1T2-only-ponderable space or 1T2-only-glutamate-etched me[me}time (and entertained the orders of massenergy incumbent upon ponderablespace-dimension conversion to memetime-dimension, and vice versa, as binary-mind treatments of µTm-logical processes unspecifiable independent of holographically-exteriorized-inner-Musculpt-as-mathematical-notation-assisted learning to think in µTm rather than merely 1T2ly-thinking about what µTm must fatly entail). Our discussion here in many respects corresponds to Richard L. Amoroso's general account ((quoting RLA: “OK, well following Descartes I wanted to make room for 'mind stuff' (res cogitians) in cosmology which has no place in the Big Bang…”)) as to formation of “spacetime-exciplex” provided in the HAM (Holographic Anthropic Multiverse) paper linked above, and detail-illustrated in that paper's Figure 10 (which in many respects -- RLA mentions “Laws of Form” -- corresponds to this 1T2-only treatment from us, cf. quoting Amoroso from immediately above Figure 10: “Virtual plank is the asymptotic zero point on the Riemann sphere that flips back to infinity in the continuous-state cycle”) along with a Bessel function which “isn't the correct Bessel function” of a circular membrane qua Amoroso-plank (qua sheet of the multi-sheeted-Riemann-surface handling of m-valued functions, the Riemann sphere being thereof a compact example) “put up as a signpost” to illustrate the manner in which Amoroso hopes to demonstrate existence of LSXD-mandated additional spectral lines of the hydrogen atom below the lowest Bohr orbit (insufficient consensus amongst TPTB as yet, it appears, for experimental supercollided aCERNing of the existence of XDs “supervening decoherence” and “surmounting uncertainty”). But note that our canonical equation, seen here relative to cascade dynamics of tornadogenesis as Eq. 17, is a scale-relative topo-active optime formulation of quantum harmonic oscillator which “isn't the correct Bessel function” for Fourier-Bessel series in [double-helical feeder-bands to roll-cloud, cf. Amoroso's “perfect rolling motion” depicted in his Figures 13 and 14] cylindrical coordinates (the modes illustrated in this “note” having in atmospheric dynamics, by our reckoning, acoustically-modified gravity-wave-mode signatures; I'd like to read this as regards “different kinds of Bessel functions in a solution of a free particle time-independent Schrödinger equation as applied to cylindrical function”, however the full-paper's site doesn't respond), but “works very well in adiabatic condition (slow change) or in small time (independent variable) intervals” (for this last-quoted statement, see “Bessel Function and Damped Simple Harmonic Motion”, Masoud Asadi-Zeydabadi, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, 2:4, 2014). Moreover, further note the role we give to blackbody physics in our model relative to that given in Amoroso's model (see “The Origin of CMBR as Intrinsic Blackbody Cavity-QED Resonance Inherent in the Dynamics of the Continuous State Topology of the Dirac Vacuum”, Richard L. Amoroso and Jean-Pierre Vigier, in: Amoroso, R.L.; Hunter, G.; Kafatos, M.; Vigier, J-P., eds., Gravitation and Cosmology: From the Hubble Radius to the Planck Scale, Springer's Fundamental Theories of Physics series, Vol. 126, 2002), as stated in our above-linked tornadogenesis paper, to wit, quoting:
At this point, we wish to consider how a net radiation exchange between the parcel (system) and its environment (supersystem) influences the vertical motion (Z-dot) of a given elemental parcel. In general, the radiative flux for a blackbody is given by… The reader will note that we are taking the unusual step of defining a thermodynamic concept (Stefan-Boltzman Law) at the system level: the air parcel, composed of a subsystem of gaseous molecules, does not call to mind the traditional interaction of molecules constituting a liquid. However, this step, invoking a superfluid approach to atmospheric dynamics, will directly link the thermal exchange of energy achieved between the localized domain structure (parcel) and the limited atmospheric domain [[[cf. -- under our having Special-Relativity-wise seen the “classical limit” atmospherically nixed and thus having observed universal physical constants, e.g., absolute limiting velocities of LSTDs, limited spacetime domains, as being scale-relatively n-valued such that, considering bar-h similarly n-value-ensheaved, along with J.G.Bennettian [1T2ly-null}-vector-defined “skew-perpendicularity” [[quoting Amoroso's HAM paper: “…historically a continuous field is sent out along the z-axis arbitrarily in the Stern-Gerlach apparatus where we get the separation of quantum states demonstrating uncertainty in measurement. So the key is to do something else…”]] of lines-of-force and equipotential surfaces, qua Riemannian “lines of force trapped in the topology of space” origin of charge, uncertainty is surmounted and each sheet-plank nested-grid-appropriate-scale tessellated -- Amoroso's LCU, least cosmological unit tessellating the Amoroso-plank of his Figure 10 spacetime exciplex]]] exhibiting quantum properties. We are thus hypothesizing that blackbody physics must be an integral part of all superconductant processes. We, therefore, seek to mathematically describe the manner in which the quantized signal [cf. Masoud Asadi-Zeydabadi's “small time intervals”], or time of transition from TO to TC, is communicated from subsystem to system to supersystem. To capture the essence of superconductance, we, therefore, assume that spontaneous localization at any one of these three levels is synchronously tied to spontaneous fusion of the signal into the next higher level [[cf. Amoroso's “supervening decoherence in the dynamics of the continuous state topology”, where, in our model, “The inverse of the fundamental frequency defines the minimum time for the process of spontaneous localization to occur at the system level” and full-throated supervenience involves nonorientable third-order operator-time-executed KleinBottle reentry, cf. Amoroso's Figure 5, same-same but different]]. This hypothesis as to the function of time ordering in the interplay between the subsystem (molecular), the system (air parcel), and the supersystem (limited atmospheric domain) will lend itself to several empirical tests to be established beginning with Section 4.
Accepting scale relativity of universal-constant n-values as one expression of scale-invariant principles allowed us to envision our above-referred-to canonical Eq. 17, by principle of self-similarity across scale levels, to apply, not only to helix-coiling air parcels in roll-cloud feeder bands, but also to pi-electron parcels in the cylindrical-roll-cloud-free-electron-gas core-environment of coherent-quadripolar-wave-emitting double-helical DNA at replication. Amoroso's Figure 12 depicting “Sagnac effect quadripole modulated RF pulse”, seen here with links to similar publications (six paragraphs down, Wiki says: “…the Sagnac effect should be described from the viewpoint of a corotating frame, one can use ordinary rotating cylindrical coordinates…”), along with the double-spirals and perfect-rolling-motion diagrams of Figure 13, are quite suggestive as to our model's explanation of how the quadripolar-wave output from replicating DNA contains all the genetic information encoded into the nucleotide-pair sequences. It has seemed to us all along over the last half century that the easiest process (ignoring our conviction that the atmospheric case has been well demonstrated) within which to experimentally verify the involved principles would be the DNA case, by performing the experiments suggested at the end of our DNA paper.
As I've aforementioned, the earliest comment upon our 1979 model of wave-effect superconductant DNA pi-electron-parcel-gas radiation-exchange processes came to Doug Paine via one of the students he shared with Carl Sagan relating the observation made by a Cornell biochemist authority when shown a copy of our Sweden's University of Uppsala International Journal of Quantum Chemistry peer-reviewed article: “I'll never understand how a well-trained scientist can come up with such ridiculous ideas”. And as far as I know, the only citation of our paper -- of the 3 or 4 ever made -- containing a substantive observation was “All-valence-electrons bond index en the h bond of watson-crick pairs”, Mario Giambiagi and Myriam S. Giambiagi and Wilton Barroso Filho, Chemical Physics Letters, 78:3, 15 March 1981, pp. 541-45, nowadays accessible here, to wit, quoting:
…from the point of view of the electronic distribution along the bond, the NH…N bond seems the strongest of the H-bonds of the normal Watson-Crick base pairs. This inference, which now has a more definite physical meaning, has been mentioned in connection with pi bond orders for the base pairs [15]…
The INY (in NH…Y) values are wholly sigma, the INY being zero up to four decimal places. Therefore, one should handle with some caution the widely accepted assumption of pi delocalization between the basis forming a pair. A dynamic model with this underlying hypothesis has been recently proposed, e.g., for the description of DNA as a superconductor [16]. Our results predict instead that conjugation along the bridge is of sigma nature.
Because of their observation -- in context of referencing [16] our paper -- that “conjugation along the bridge is of sigma nature” ((quoting Google AI: “The electronic structure of the hydrogen bond itself, being a directed interaction along the axis between the donor and acceptor, formed by the head-on (axial) s-s, s-p, p-p, or hybrid overlap -- requiring precise alignment which explains why base pairing is so specific -- of atomic orbitals along the internuclear axis, is typically described as a sigma-type interaction, as opposed to the p-p lateral/sideways overlap above and below the axis at pi-stacking between base pairs”)), not involving excited radiation-induced delocalized pi-electron parcels (electron pairs formed of electrons from the pi molecular orbitals), we can speculate that Giambiagi, et al., did not actually read our paper, otherwise they would have known that we do not assert that there is superconductivity across the “bridges” connecting nucleotide pairs strung along-between the sugar-phosphate “backbones” (the subject structures of virtually every intercalation-cum-pendent-donor conductivity study of DNA) sidewise spanning the nucleotide-pair “rungs” of the double-helical “ladder”, or along those backbones, but within the electron cloud constituting the free-electron-parcel-gas core-environment of the excited molecule undergoing helix-coil transition. Moreover, we do not speculate as to exactly what is being superconducted ((the b, in the equations used to derive our canonical equation, we say designates “the counterforce to the pressure gradient term” which in other contexts is the gravitational acceleration: so, is it some scaled version of acoustically-modified gravity-wave modes that is being superconducted? not here referring to phononic lattice vibrations, not here referring to charge transfer complexes, as in, say, quoting Google AI, “This structure implies that the G-C base pair behaves as a charge-transfer complex upon excitation, as the electron moves from the HOMO (highest occupied molecular orbital)-bearing guanine to the LUMO (lowest unoccupied molecular orbital)-bearing cytosine”, a process also relative to A-T)). We have assumed that the main reason why the paper received so very few citations is that it was widely dismissed out of hand without those doing the dismissing having first actually read it. Anyway, again quoting Google AI, “The primary stabilizing force for the DNA double helix is the pi-pi stacking interaction between the aromatic rings of adjacent bases.” This is essayed in “Aromatic Base Stacking in DNA: From ab initio Calculations to Molecular Dynamics Simulations”, J. Sponer, et al., Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics, 17, Supplement 1, 2000, pp. 1-24, to wit, quoting the abstract:
Aromatic stacking of nucleic acid bases is one of the key players in determining the structure and dynamics of nucleic acids. The arrangement of nucleic acid bases with extensive overlap of their aromatic rings gave rise to numerous often contradictory suggestions about the physical origins of stacking and the possible role of delocalized electrons in stacked aromatic pi systems, leading to some confusion about the issue… Neglect of cooperativity of stacking appears to be the most serious approximation of the currently used force field form.
The paper, however, that really brings uplift is even more recent, published 11 July 2025, entitled “The pi-pi architectures reveal a hidden quantum code linking aromaticity to light interaction”, Raul Riera Aroche, et al., Nature: Scientific Reports, 15, Article number 25110. A little background refresher reading (a lot got left behind at back of the 1T2-only-brain upon departure from Cornell environs, circa 1980) has been helpful to an 80-yearold at working through contents of this paper: e.g., atomic and molecular orbitals; and sigma and pi bonds in covalent molecules; and aromaticity; and conjugated system; and atomic orbital; and “A Rigorous Introduction to Molecular Orbital Theory and its Applications in Chemistry”, Zachary Chin and Alex Li and Alex Liu, MIT, November 2018; and Huckel molecular orbital theory; and aromaticity and Huckel's rule. Now, quoting “Pi-Pi-Architecture's” Introduction, then its Conclusion, à la Aroche, et al.:
In a prior work, we described how aromaticity could be explained by forming correlated electron pairs in oscillatory resonant quantum states (ORQS).
The pi-pi interaction between two benzenes forms a highly entangled qubit-like quantum structure in which an electron from each monomer is delocalized within the other. During the interaction, each ring readjusts its electronic configuration to preserve the entangled pairs in ORQS and thus maintain the aromatic state. At the end of the interaction, each benzene molecule returns to its initial, lower-energy configuration -- the most stable configuration -- yet each retains a delocalized electron. This opens new doors to understanding the process of quantum teleportation and explains why the pi-pi interaction can function as an access code in various biological processes.
We might speculate that excited-state aromaticity could serve as a cornerstone for photochemistry, much like regular Huckel-type aromaticity has evolved for chemistry in the electronic ground state. The interaction of the benzene molecule with light occurs only through the absorption of a pair of photons. Each photon in the pair is trapped by one of the electrons in the correlated pair. As previously shown, photons do not participate in the reaction and have been labeled as traces. They do not generate products. In our model, the photons are not exchanged but are coupled to the ORQS that possess the paired electrons.
So, so, so. This is described with bosonic creation-annihilation operators, spin reorientations, electron-photon interaction Hamiltonian for the electron pair interacting with the photons, so on. Internal Hamiltonian! Uck-oh! Is topologically-active operator-time “conjugated to the Hamiltonian” or does it altogether replace the Hamiltonian, as in the Maxwellian-form quantum-harmonic-oscillator canonical equation given in our DNA paper? And, à la oscillatory resonant quantum states (ORQS), what orders of logical-value do the n-state-[mu}it-like, not 2-state-qubit-like, encipherment-logics of all those harmonics abide by?
The earlier Raul Riera Aroche, et al., paper referred to in their “pi-pi architectures” paper is “DNA as a perfect quantum computer based on the quantum physics principles”, Nature: Scientific Reports, 14, Article number 11636, 2024, the reference section of which contains 188 linked papers. I certainly am learning a lot, but clearly have no hope of comprehensively following out. Well, acknowledging that limitation, so far, anyway, I've seen nothing that would make me put away questions like that raised above: “And, à la oscillatory resonant quantum states (ORQS), what orders of logical-value do the n-state-[mu}it-like, not 2-state-qubit-like, encipherment-logics of all those harmonics abide by?” There is another interesting link, not among those 188, that includes briefs on several dozen or so relevant papers, including relevant to techno-requirements for holographically exteriorizing inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation: these briefs are given along with the rather strange ResearchGate posting of “Theoretical band-gap tunneling states of DNA structures”, James P. Lewis and Hao Tien Wang and Otto F. Sankey, American Physical Society, Annual APS March Meeting 2003, March 3-7, 2003. First given among the briefs is “DNA molecules display telepathy-like quality: Double helixes of DNA can recognize matching molecules from a distance”, which is quite suggestive as regards entry “13. Signifier for immunological isolation” of our “Illustrated Terminology Glossary” produced in response to the 1981 request of Autogenic Training's Wolfgang Luthe, to wit, quoting:
We assume that there is some fundamental biophysical property which identifies a biological entity as being identical to itself. We call this property the “signifier for immunological isolation” and hypothesize that it is a unique, invariant property of the constituents of that biological entity. For example, we propose that histocompatibility is most fundamentally identified by a unique, invariant property of the DNA molecules of the given cell type. We envision each histological type of DNA molecule as having a unique frequency window or characteristic signature of radiational frequencies absorbed and emitted by the molecule. This is directly analogous to the multiplicity of energy bands that serve to distinguish the absorptive and emittive signature identifying a given atom in the periodic table of elements. We speculate that there may be a periodic table of histological types based solely upon fundamental quantum biophysical properties.
This Glossary entry is complemented by contents of entry “12. Intracellular Zeitgeber”, to wit, quoting:
There are two interrelated sectors of research on the nature of biological clocks. One sector focuses upon varying environmental factors such as electromagnetic fields and photoperiodicities which can entrain or synchronize internal cycles such as the circadian system. These environmental forcing factors are called Zeitgebers or time-givers. This research raises the question of how the highly variable periodicities of the environmental forcing functions translate into the quasiregularity of biological rhythms. The second research sector attempts to answer this question by investigating possible clock mechanisms wholly contained within the organism, e.g., cell membrane diffusion. This research raises the question of how the internal clock is able to vary its periodicities in response to its changing environment. The hypothesis we are proposing attempts to answer both of these questions by describing a mechanism by which the DNA molecule can alter its rate of genetic transcription in response to variations in an impinging radiative field. The rate of DNA transcription (which has sometimes been proposed to be the master biological clock) is described as being governed by two factors: (1) the frequency of the impinging radiation, and, (2) this radiation's ability to excite or dampen the natural frequency of vibration of an oscillating parcel of pi-electrons associated with the quantum structure of the DNA molecule. It is this varying, radiation dependent, internal frequency of parcel [temperature] oscillation which we call the “intracellular Zeitgeber”. In proposing a quantum approach to the biological clock problem (see: Figure 1), we are treating the environment and the embedded organism as an “infinity of clocks within clocks” (David Bohm, WHOLENESS AND THE IMPLICATE ORDER, p. 104).
Note that that is an infinite nesting-foam of clocks, not just two, which reflects upon the questions of (1) n-state-[mu}it-like versus 2-state-qubit-like, and (2) our earlier stated question, “Is topologically-active operator-time 'conjugated to the Hamiltonian' or does it altogether replace the Hamiltonian, as in the Maxwellian-form quantum-harmonic-oscillator canonical equation given in our DNA paper?” Another of the briefs given in the ResearchGate posting linked above, i.e., entitled “Scientists say nerves use sound, not electricity”, is interesting as regards our earlier-stated question, “So, is it some scaled version of acoustically-modified gravity-wave modes that is being superconducted?”, that question in the terms of “nerves use sound” in respect to the coherent wave generation (cf. Pribram's sought-after reference beam?) of intraneuronal and intraperineural DNA specifically, not the coherent wave generation of other DNA histological types. Relative to holographically techno-exteriorizing inner-Musculpt (imagined to be just exactly what, particularly, intraneuronal-intraperineural, DNA does with µTm-logical wave-effect processing of the harmonics generated by its quantum-harmonic oscillators), there is the brief entitled “3D plasma shapes created in thin air” referring to a 2006 NewScientist article by David Hambling where it is stated that the Japanese developers at AIST in Tokyo have a “…new system [which] adds a high-speed linear motor moving a lens to also control the focal point of the laser in a third dimension, allowing solid shapes to be sketched out” and that “The researchers behind the demonstration system plan to upgrade it to a higher pulsing rate, which should produce more dots and so smoother images. Future versions should also include moving pictures…” This directly relates to our notion of a “…perfect laboratory for working out the engineering problems of the mini-laser syndrome, the fiber-optic multiplexors, the compiler programs for controlling the lasers in relation to various inputs…”, i.e., the holographic projection dome of a biofeedback-equipped isolation-flotation tank employing, to wit, quoting our 1993 “Tank Proposal”:
…a syndrome of computer-controlled, movable mini-lasers and fiber-optic multiplexing units. If a laser beam x number of angstroms below the visual spectrum intersects a laser beam x number of angstroms above the visible spectrum, there is created a point of light floating in space. Enough such points is a 3-dimensional form. Color is nothing more than added complexity.
Given just below the “3D plasma shapes created in thin air” brief is a “note” containing the following:
Bern Kohler, assistant professor of chemistry and two of his graduate students took portions of the DNA molecule called nucleosides, placed them in water, and then bombarded them with an ultrashort pulse of UV light from a laser. The laser pulse lasted only 150 femtoseconds, or 150 quadrillionths of a second. The pulse deposited energy in the electrons of the nucleosides much as sunlight would, putting the nucleosides into an excited state. Because the laser pulses were so short, the researchers were able to study the extremely rapid process by which DNA changes energy from UV radiation into heat. In a fraction of one-trillionth of a second, the electronic energy was transformed into increased vibrational motion of the nucleoside's atoms' heat. The nucleoside's temperature jumped to more than 1,300 (degrees) C. It cooled down again by transferring energy to the much cooler water molecules that surrounded it. The researchers found that the cooling process finished in just a few trillionths of a second. The UV radiation charged the minerals within the cytoplasm making them ionic. The utilization of ions is necessary in maintaining cell activity. Kohler indicates that, while our DNA may reach a high temperature during this reaction, the timing is so brief, we can't feel it. [biographic-bibliographic link added]
I haven't been able to discover where this observation was draw from. It should be noted that our superconductant DNA gas-qua-cloud-model's pi-electron-parcel harmonic oscillator is a temperature oscillator (cf. Kohler's “vibrational motion of the nucleoside's atoms' heat”). But we in no way imagined the oscillations involving temperatures like 1,300 (degrees) C. Nor, quite frankly, were we thinking “quadrillionths of a second”. The continuing persistent prevailing consensus appears to be that DNA does not emit wave signatures, acoustically-modified, soliton or otherwise, and that “enzymatic repair” processes compensate (ionizing: cf. Kohler's “UV radiation charged the minerals within the cytoplasm making them ionic”) radiation-induced decay to “mutagenic photoproducts”, as described in, for instance, “Base stacking controls excited-state dynamics in A-T DNA”, Bern Kohler and Carlos E. Crespo-Hernandez and Boiko Cohen, Nature, 436(7054), September 2005, pp. 1141-4, as contextualized by the review article entitled “DNA Excited-State Dynamics: From Single Bases to the Double Helix”, Chris T. Middleton, et al., Annual Review of Physical Chemistry, 60:1, December 2008, pp. 217-39, wherein it is stated that, “Highly efficient nonradiative decay pathways guarantee that most excited states do not lead to deleterious reactions but instead relax back to the electronic ground state.” Our observations concerning “relax back to the electronic ground state” are given in our “Illustrated Terminology Glossary”, but in considering those observations it should be noted that the exciting DNA frequency response windows we envision(ed) do not involve radiation further ionizing the normatively-ion-conductive (Ca2+, Na+, K+, Cl-) n-multilayer-structured cytoplasm or antagonizing normative (at quantum-collective-cooperative criticality orchestrated by µTm-logical relative-states of identity-transparency [the proper way, IMHO, to understand Schrödinger's m-valued wavefunction] conveyed by harmonics of DNA-emitted coherent waves) ionic behaviors of cellular plasmahaute phase boundaries (asymmetry, homeostasis, potential, adaptation, so on). Quoting Glossary entry “17. Coherent waves”:
Wave fronts that do not interfere with one another, the pulses of which are like soldiers marching in step on a rope bridge. If the timing of the soldiers' steps resonates with the natural frequency of the bridge's oscillation, the two motions reinforce one another. Coherent waves maintain their intensity by having their energy focused into a small area. The coherent waves we associate with the DNA molecule are acoustically modified, meaning that the propagating medium actually serves to amplify and channel their energy into narrow layers [cf. Gilbert Ling's Association-Induction Hypothesis: strangely to me, in letter exchanges Ling was no more interested in our cover-letter-conveyed DNA quantum model paper than was Karl Pribram] of absorption in the surrounding environment. In the molecule's transition from its normative to its critical state, coherent waves are generated which carry the signature of this transition to the surrounding environment. The absorption of these coherent waves at discrete phase boundaries (e.g., the cell membrane) releases sufficient energy stored at these boundaries which, upon entering the DNA molecule, catalyzes its return to the normative state.
Quoting Glossary entry “18. Modified quantum frequency structure of the DNA”:
Coherent waves consist of an ensemble of wave fronts whose speed of propagation is called the wave trace velocity. In a given transition from the normative to the critical state, a number of different wave trace velocities may initiate energy absorption at a number of different phase boundaries. We are hypothesizing that the DNA molecule, by means of these wave dynamics, exercises some control over the cell membrane's active transport system and, in so doing, orchestrates the functional integration of cellular processes. Any disturbing factor that disrupts the temporal parameters governing the generation or propagation of the waves, functions as stress in the system and modifies the information exchange with the molecule's environment. Coherent waves emitted by the molecule that would incorrectly specify the phase boundaries and consequent energy transport would (1) not catalyze the molecule's own cyclical transition, and (2) would not promote functional integration of cellular processes. Another way to evaluate the disturbed vs. non-disturbed conditions of the molecule is by making a comparison between the pi-electron parcel's frequency of oscillation and the impinging radiative frequencies (see: Figures 5a and 5b). A healthy situation is when the oscillating parcel responds to a proper set of the incoming radiative frequencies. An unhealthy situation involves a frequency shift of the oscillating parcel, which (1) causes it to respond to an incorrect set of incoming radiative frequencies, and (2) causes it to be unresponsive to the proper set of frequencies.
This orientation partially came out of a consideration of the clinical findings associated with Autogenic Training, as summarized in Figure 2 of Glossary entry “8. Normative”:
(A) In physics: the state to which a system returns after transiting to a critical state [see: “7. Physics of collective and cooperative phenomena”] (B) In medicine: the state that is normal, healthy, prohomeostatic as opposed to diseased. We have used the terms “normative” and “altered” in a medical sense in describing various parameters of the DNA molecule (i.e., its quantum state, frequency of electron parcel oscillation, frequency of radiating coherent waves). By this usage we mean that there are correct (normative) parameters through which the molecule is able to optimally fulfill its various functions and incorrect (altered) parameters through which the molecule is unable to adequately fulfill its functions (see: Figure 2)
Let it be noted that Chris T. Middleton, et al., linked above, state that:
Ultraviolet light is strongly absorbed by DNA, producing excited electronic states that sometimes initiate damaging photochemical reactions. Fully mapping the reactive and nonreactive decay pathways available to excited electronic states in DNA is a decades-old quest. Progress toward this goal has accelerated rapidly in recent years, in large measure because of ultrafast laser experiments.
We observe that these laser experiments involve ionizing radiation, which does not reflect on our theses concerning non-ionizing DNA radiation-exchange processes.
So, think of it this way: how many 1T2ly-virtual persona µTm-overcoats (cf. Laing's read on Nicoll's read on Gurdjieff) must an undressed bare particle, mu0, put on to become a 1T2-only-truth-value-attributable observable, mphys? Finite mass-charge requires the integral sum of an infinite number of me[me}time-bound Feynman diagrams? Isn't that ([de}mergence) upside ([re}mergence) down: the more vir[t}u|al/ities being-there, the less the renormalized [re}al/ity of being-here -- 1T2ly-only speaking, of course? Ever since reading MTW's megatome Gravitation, circa 1975, I've been mildly interested in 1T2-only TGD, topological geometrodynamics, as a read on how Musculpted 1T2ly-ponderable 3D-shape shifts provide a read -- however limited -- on CTC+-unto-µTm-chronotopological operations (((even if 1T2ly unjustifiable, good offices of “Time Operator in Relativistic Quantum Mechanics”, Sina Khorasani, arXiv, 7 March 2017, Pauli's rejection of his own idea of operator time resolves to his having been in 1T2-only-psycho-logo-identification with normotic egofunction -- memetime-independent CTC+-unto-µTm-unto-CTC+ demergence-remergence/counterdemergence-counterremergence, even 1T2-only formulated in terms of the relativistic-quantum-cascade model of tornadogenesis, supporting 1T2ly-negative values of total energy))), but much more interested in the logophysics of pre-pregeometry and pregeometry as providing reads on the psychotomimetic logophysics of 1T2-only-me[me}time directedness: the 1T2-only-egofunction's me[me}time-bound cognitive sphere is well-ConveDDed (conversion-disorder displaced: cf. upside down) in the Riemann-sphere version of the 1T2-only-Riemann-surface handling of m-valued functions, thus doubly concealing µTm (a normopathic prefiguration of the BornRule handling of Schrödinger's m-valued wavefunction). This 19th-and-20th-century double concealment has a 21st-century analogue; as the Trickster archetype has it: 1T2-only human intelligence is artificial vis-à-vis µTm-unto-CTC+-unto-C+TC+; even 2-state-superposed-read-1T2-only-AI's artificiality is, thus, second-order Maya-bound, all the more removed from the µTm-percepts-propriocepts-interocepts-interospects given by direct ontic awareness in the n-states of “participation mystique”. Heh-heh-heh! Not to parse indelicately, how many realistically-assumed master-obeying upside-downs ((speaking µTmly, that is: during 1964, fellow mil.brat Mike Newhouse dropped out of a physics full scholarship to MIT and during his visit to me in D.C. asked, “How can you stand to sit there and listen to all that…?”; he gave half a dozen examples of upside-downs, examples I took to heart, along with his decision to go back into the USAF, this occasion as an EM, not as a mil.brat)) can be found in the following extended quotation taken from “Time in Quantum Theory”, Heinz-Dieter Zeh, preprint, October 2007:
A formal equivalence between the [m-valued] Schrödinger and a [1T2-only single-valued] Heisenberg picture for the purpose of calculating expectation values of measurement results is known to hold for isolated, unitarily evolving systems (which are exceptions in reality). For asymptotically isolated objects participating in a scattering process one may use the interaction picture, where part of the Hamiltonian dynamics is absorbed into the observables characterizing asymptotic states. This includes the “dressing” of quantum fields. However, macroscopic systems always form open systems; they never become isolated, even when dressed. Such systems may approximately obey effective non-unitary dynamics (master equations). In principle, this dynamics has to be derived from the unitary (Schrödinger) evolution of an entangled global quantum state, that would include all “external interventions”. Under realistic assumptions this leads to permanently growing entanglement with the environment -- locally observed as decoherence {5}.
This extremely fast and in practice irreversible process describes a dislocalization of quantum superpositions [an upside-down?: the local m-valued superpositions become spread-out over the whole of 1T2-only-ponderable space -- and this me[me}time-bound process is how the Platonic ontological form becomes an Aristotelean existential object?]. It thereby mimics quantum jumps (events): components which represent different macroscopic properties (such as different pointer positions or different registration times of a detector) are almost immediately dynamically decoupled from one another -- though none of them is selected as the only existing one. Pauli, when arguing in terms of the [1T2-only single-valued] Heisenberg picture, regarded such events as occurring “outside the laws of nature”, since they withstood all attempts of a local dynamical description. In the global Schrödinger picture, the time-asymmetry of this dynamical decoupling of components (“branching”) [cf. prefigured by the branching Riemann employed in his bridged n-sheeted surface to treat m-valued functions as if they were single-valued] can be explained in terms of the time-symmetric dynamics by means of an appropriate [i.e., acceptable to the prescriptively-enculturated-cum-socialized 1T2-only-glutamate-etched egofunction kundabuffered into denying ontic awareness of quantum-brain µTm-wave-effect-analog-processing] initial condition for the wave function of the universe -- the same condition that may also explain thermodynamical and related time asymmetries (“arrows of time”) {9}. In essence, this initial condition requires that non-local entanglement did not yet exist just after the big bang [i.e., no Tzog-chen AllBaseCommonGround of n-ensheaved-qua-“layered” MVRS, m-logically-valued-reference-space BackCloth], and therefore has to form dynamically (“causally”). The resulting asymmetry in time may give rise to the impression of a direction of time.
If by X[clues}i|ve egofunction projective-IDiff[i}cat|i|on (1T2-thermal-only transmission of which does not compute), “one” -- heh-heh-heh! -- insists upon taking illusory-Buddhological-Maya as being ontopoietically-objectively REAL, the onto[precede}n(t)s of TGD must be brought down into the material-object level -- inorganic and organic: howsoever the antinomies are binary-mind “found” to be glutamatergically-readymade as construed on the “layered-transparent” of the cosmological “large glass” -- thus, IMHO, unduly vastly complexifying (think: instead of infinitudes in mathematically-employable if utterly-abstract spaces, higher dimensions of 1T2-only-ponderable space) the lower levels of the logical-ontological-existential [de}mergence, such that supposed objectivity of me[me}time can be sustained, that kind of time being metaphysically foundational to the long-prevailing institutional bases upon which governing elites are utterly dependent for maintenance of their defining disparities. Just to clarify: no, I'm not mean enough to mean that breakdancing is parody of TGD in general or specifically of three higher dimensions of 1T2-only-ponderable space being KK-theoretic-compactly rolled-up implicate, 1T2ly-4D interpreted as charge and more forces-resonances-modes, in objective-linear me[me}time; then, at “inverted-harmonic-oscillators”-breakdanced cuspover (another upside-down? see: “A new understanding of Einstein-Rosen bridges”, Enrique Gaztanaga and K. Sravan Kumar and Joao Marto, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 43:1, 8 January 2026), being de-blockchain rolled-out explicate as yet another 1T2-only-ponderable me[me}time-bound universe, n-universes being a ConveDD of the µTm-logical-value order-types which the BornRule expurgated in dissing Schrödinger's m-valued wavefunction: the breakdanced ConveDD mirroring the m-verse ConveDD is unconscious-to-collectivity of the population corpus (à la as a consequence of Devin Bostick's “substrate representation gap”), therefore not conscious parody. The involved (once the infinities of CTC+-relative-state identity-transparency are renormalized to 1T2-only identity-opacity) nixing of 2nd-order-dynamical-wormholes 1T2ly-implicating 3rd-order-dynamical Klein bottles (see: “Wormholes may not exist -- we've found they reveal something deeper about time and the universe”, Enrique Gaztanaga, U. of Portsmouth, 15 January 2026) is one way to reaffirm objectivity of supposed non-superposed, passive, passing, referential, linear, forward-backward memetime as a parameter, not an operator -- such reaffirmation being essential if 17th-and-18th-century political-economy (conjugated to an Xian-Byzantine take upon King-Pope-Caliph-CEO.exe [primo}genitalized-smokedout-shuranassed-in[augur}ated to the BigMan-management-model's fat-tail stylistics: O, these dot-gawp daze, eh!) is to be reconstellated as mirror-neuron-dual of God-given cosmogenesis processing taken to be 1T2-only. While personification, projective-identification, transference, inflation, ConveDDing -- the main subject matters of Greek mythology and theatrical comedy -- have been hallmarks of all forms of religious institutionalization, this infra-psychology has been particularly elaborate in and between institutionalizations of the Tripartite Fertile Crescent Religion. The A in my cosmo-HAM indicates Platonic Anamnesis, and the M indicates Postian Multivalued logics, such that there is the relative-state identity-transparency of µHAMm sans the MAD (mutually-assured destruction) of a BigCrunch thermodynamically me[me}time-bound incumbent upon BigBang-initialized entropic processes of stowchastity, uh, uh, stochasticity and probability governing the random rhythmic motions, heh-heh-heh, responsible for… well, say, the molecular biology of the gene, life, all order that could be.
Buddhological Maya made demotic for the normotic: G. I. Gurdjieff said “Mankind is asleep” and taught self-observation, inner-separation, inner-stop, and self-remembering. Immanuel Velikovsky titled a book “Mankind in Amnesia”: he may have gotten the diagnosis correct even if details of the etiology he imagined were mistaken. This sleepy-amnesiac condition of the human condition apparently was a problem of the ancients no less than of us moderns-postmoderns-postpostmoderns, as Plato's suggested collective Rx was anamnesis. Observer-[me}me inner-stop, uh, uh, Yaqui-brujo stopping the world, uh, uh, quantum decoherencing the coherency of the m-valued Schrödinger wavefunction. Google AI says: “Quantum decoherence is the process where a quantum system's wave function loses its phase relationship (coherence) through interactions with its surrounding environment”: that is, uh, Q-deco is -- that is, is -- by interactions with an environment that has no X[is}tense memetime-until Q-deco is! Such are the binary-minded entailments of the me[me}time-boundedness dictated by identification with 1T2-only-logic alone as applied to Schrödinger m-valuedness. QM is filled with so many upside-downs because of the integral sum of discrete cases of fear and loathing (and just try to imagine how autoimmune it is to loath the nature of nature which is the nature of one's own nature!): if our understanding of the nature of nature is changed all that much ((a far, far greater decentering far-from-equilibrium cultural phase transition than was the decentering shift from Ptolemy to Copernicus, given that 2500 years of binary-logic introjections to Umwelts-Lebenswelts projected into Weltanschauung-identifications are brought into profound risk of outright rejection by even the re-all-[it-from-bit}-y-ness let alone the mu[it}ness of it all-that-is-and-is-not: the 1T2-only imps of a self-interacting particle being amongst the most-inductive of Q-this/Q-that-hysteria inducers)) then the properties of immediate on(t)ic experience are going to change in fashion to such a degree that most of that which I have attributed to myself, including simply-identifiable absolutely-in-so-far-as-distinct selfhood, free will beyond the immediacy of ADLs, self-originated thought processes and emotions, even the assumed universal character of physiologically-based perceptions-proprioceptions-introceptions, that I, whatever that “I” might be, couldn't possibly deal with it, the resultant existential crisis placing me at extreme risk of insanity. De[his}science and fenestration of the egofunction: oh, my, such big, uh, uh, such toothy wolfish strippings away. Damned those campy dadaist -- clement are we to be in trying to penetrate the actual precipitants of Huntington's collective disease, uh, uh, culture warfare (think: the greater-China Mahayana-Buddhist bloc aligned to a Germano-Russian bloc thesis debated at SRA/MACV-J2, circa 1968): O-Zub-aye-da-da-da? -- utopian-socialist reverts into their Oneida-derived criticism/self-criticism sessions. The dog's foot! Deindividuation, humph! Just think of what would be lost. Not least, our infratech-made-billionaire-unto-trillionaire entrepreneurs! Speaking of culture-war precipitants: what did N. H. Abel's 1823 existence proof for trans-al-jabr, deemed an Impossibility Theorem, definitively overthrow but the Abbasid-Wisdom-House cognitive limitations imposed by 9th-to-10th-century al-jabr, an al-jabr based upon 8th-century assimilation of, and creative extrapolation from, Caliph-Mansur-sponsored translations of Aristotle-on-logic and Euclid-on-geometry? Both of these Greek 1T2-only theses being cognitive concomitants to the musculature-worship means by which the capability for electromyographic-near-zero-action-potential X[is}not-tense endogenous-ketaminergically-normative µTmly-rational OBEs got normopathically expurgated by egospheric concretion via bad offices of prescriptive-enculturation-socialization orchestration of glutamateric neuronal pruning at plasticity of the molecular-cellular brain thus made incapable of assimilating the µTm-logical information Schrödinger's m-valued wavefunction specifies. The dogs' mouths! In culture war, all sides are the same side until the first bite; then prevails absolute panda[moan}i|ummm. I will not say umma, and point out that ma is the universal onomatopoeic root homonym, taken in the Japanese for multi-sheeted sacred space, with the Chinese-derived ideograph for ma signifying a gate to the heavenly spheres, the Moon specifically. The 200-Years -- maybe more, if we last that long -- War-of-the-World-Culture has ever more thoroughly -- ain't done yet! -- made our civil-lie-zat[i}rely|on into an infratech-driven self-reinforcing psychiatric gulag. Any reversions of the collective compensatory abreactions as precipitants are dependent upon finding ways to de-infratech the systemic drivers of the governance processes progressively being instituted, deinfrateching by internalizing externalities to form-in-process in lieu of nature-dissing imposed controls-from-without formulated on basis of the bird's-eye-view-POV hubris which existence of the quantum physics of cooperative-collective behaviors in material systems has thoroughly demonstrated to be 18th-century-rationalist retrograde-inversions of nature's no-POV Cantorian-Husserliana-AnalyticalCubist-hologrammic case. These “ways” need to be institutional-process forms that facilitate learning-through-use by the socius of modes of cognition eliciting me[me}time-quenching Platonic µTm-unto-CTC+-anamnesis, e.g., m-valued-LETS nesting-foams, transactions in which are µTmly processed.
Continuing to study into Raul Riera Aroche, et al., on DNA as a perfect quantum computer and pi-pi architectures, plus references, I note that in our model extrasystemic qua suprasystemic radiation impingement upon DNA is required for pi-electron-parcel formation in superconductivity at helix-coil transition, whereas in the Aroche, et al., model HINT, a Hamiltonian of the internal state, is sufficient to formation of pi-electron pairs of superconductant state, the electrons in pair having + and - spin 1/2 by subjection to dictates of 1T2-only-logic alone. We say parcel, not pair, by assumption of µTm-logical J.G.Bennettian 1T2ly-null vector-defined “skew-perpendicularity” and associated m-valued Planck's constant substrate to Heisenberg 1T2-only-uncertainty (phononic virtuality by 1T2-only-memetime-energy uncertainty being integral to the Cooper-pair-formation notion) -- which assumption does not 1T2ly-imply that there are no [Aroche, et al.,}-formation electron pairs, only that the parcels are not unitarity-orthogonality-unwisely confined to pairs alone, and that superposition is not 2-state-only by linear-combination-overlap mathematically represented by the 1T2-only-arithmetic-addition operation which does not adequately capture semantic imports of µTm-unto-CTC+-relative-states of identity-transparency on multi-sheeted Riemann-surface-like BackCloth. We, therefore, suggest that the genetic code is an n-leveled encipherment, not single-leveled, and look to the higher-topo-active-optime formants of the harmonics of the emitted coherent waves as evidence thereof, with a view to envisioning chemistry rewritten from particle-combinatorial terms alone to acoustic-decompositional terms AllBaseCommonGround C+TC+ly superposed upon particle-combinatorial as memetime-independent, non-orientable, involutory [de}mergence-[re}mergence.
Nah! Doug Paine's off-the-cuff WAG was 100 years. It has been only half a century. And who knew more about this stuff in 1975 than did Paine, sitting in Cornell's Bradfield Hall with all the bio-resources therein available? Anything I've been able subsequently to say has been mere P-n'-B, chest-beating puff-and-bluster. So, entertaining no expectation of being here for another half century, what moral leverage is there hanging over my head? None. I completely fulfilled my early-formulated life aspirations 30 years ago. Since then, it has been… What? Ignore notwhendigital -- uh, uh, innere Notwendigkeit.
Quoting the “Nitrogenated bases A, T, C, and G: a superconductor state” section of Raul Riera Aroche, et al., on DNA as a perfect quantum computer:
The electron cloud can no longer be deflected or interact with others. Thus, the oscillatory resonant state between the electron and hole pairs generates a single-band supercurrent in the structure that occurs infinitely in time.
Think about possible meanings of the verb phrase “occurs infinitely in time” containing the adverbial phrase “infinitely in time”, given that the only indication we have as to existence of time is the import of the word “occurs”, i.e., cognitively registerable is “change”. In quantum and relativity physics, meaning of the adverbial phrase, “infinitely in time”, could be, say, (1) indicative of the steady state of an idealized system, e.g., an oscillator; and (2) a definitional of an energy state as boundary condition required to make a calculation; and (3) employment of the Gödelian notion of a finite-yet-boundless, “closed, time-like curve” on, say, a Riemann sphere, this being a variant of linear-time; and (4) employment of the Parmenides-cum-spacetimegeneralrelativity-cum-C.D.Broad notion of the “block universe” where all temporal moments coexist with equal reality-value like all spatial locations coexist with equal reality-value; and, due to the principle of relativity, there is no agreeing as to a “here” and there is no agreeing as to a “now”, thus no agreeable “here-and-now”. As regards the pedestrian passive-passing-referential linear-time of specialrelativity -- where time dilation can occur at speeds approaching the absolute limiting velocity, meaning that moments get farther and farther apart the faster you go -- 1T2-only-logic alone (disallowing other, i.e., all being superordinate, µTm-logical-value order-types, each of which imparts identity dyscrasia of one sort and/or another) is necessary and sufficient to specify the unique identities of instance-moments separated on the timeline (and to specify the unique identities of place-locations separated in space). Quoting the “Symmetries of DNA code and quantum informational cryptography” section of the above-linked paper:
As we mentioned, classical information can be converted entirely into quantum information, it is enough to classify it in orthogonal states. For example, in the case of qubits, it is enough to associate the state's |0>, and |1>, with their respective bits 0 and 1.
However, under EPR at the critical state, correlated particles remain correlated no matter how far removed from one another, i.e., the correlation length goes to infinity as the critical state “occurs infinitely in time”, this circumstance being tantamount to a 1T2-logic paradox. Quoting the “DNA: superdense coding for perfect teleportation” section of the above-linked paper:
In superdense coding, we can send the information of two classical bits stored in a qubit between two distant positions and through a quantum channel if they share an EPR pair.
Since “an EPR pair” participates in the “EPR paradox”, suggested is that the wrong logic has been used to define the nature of time-velocity-timedilation and/or there is something wrong with the ideas involved in the concept of information movement through space which is ponderable even under only 1T2-only-logic alone. Our entry point here has been to understand “occurs infinitely in time” as being indicative of memetime-independence, of the absence altogether of memetime -- and of the presence of 3-fold topologically-active operator-time, the operations of which execute Gödel-numbered Gödel numbers of CTC+-unto-µTm-logical propositions, to include such propositions concerning time-moment-identity and space-place-identity relative-states -- even as these relative-states exist (tacitly?) in the terms of the “Symmetries of DNA code and quantum informational cryptography” section of the above-linked paper: relative-states, that is, that are dyscrasiac to the binary-mind (“mass formation” fear and loathing, mostly subliminal, therefore mandate that the µTm-relative-states of identity-transparency must be ConveDDed, conversion-disorder displaced, to multiple incommunicado universes). It may well be that “infinitely in time” and “infinity in correlation length”, 1T2-commonly understood, are altogether irrelevant -- no time and/or space travel being involved -- in contexts of [de}mergent CTC+-unto-µTm-relative-states of identity-transparency.
Foot down on the accelerator: Wow! am I not in control? -- an, until recently, ever amplifying existential-confirmation-brandishing, egofunction-demanded CONTROL derivative of fire-starter club-wielding and domestication of the horse. Love that car culture, yes I do! Self-driving e-cars coming on, however, Elon Musk has recently said that humanity must take control of the new technologies, not allow the vice versa to transpire; but, quite obviously, he doesn't have the slightest clue, ad hoc interventions and extrasystemic regulatory actions having proved themselves, not only inadequate to the complexity case, but significantly counterproductive -- otherwise, had he a clue, he wouldn't have taken on management of dot-guv disposal of waste; instead, he'd have been addressing fundamentals. The biggest problem humanity has is that the more-simple cannot adequately control the more-complex: not for the first time, I learned that “lesson” -- heh-heh-heh! -- as an IBEW apprentice employed by, among other companies, Johnson Controls, detailed-out here and there around the Washington, D.C., metro area, circa 1971-2, to include computer-room under-raised-floor work in the tripartite James V. Forrestal Building, work that had not been completed by the late-1969 date of dedication. An institutional-base, and associated forms of management, cognitively rooted by analogical modeling in 17th-and-18th-century physics and metaphysics cannot possibly, in any way, hope to authentically control technologies spawned by 20th-and-21st-century new physics-chemistry-biology-logic[is}tics-informatics -- and all the more so when the spawned technology is infratech throw-offs from dissimulated new physics-chemistry-biology-logic[is}tics-informatics, the dissimulations themselves having been spawned by fear-and-loathing-driven “mass-formation” clinging behaviors that have resolutely clung to the institutional-base analogically modeled upon 17th-and-18th-century physics and metaphysics. Merge with dissimulation-thrown-off infratech dysnomered as superintelligence -- 1T2-only that it is? For instance, there will be no real understanding of anthropogenic climate phase-shift (a situation similar to how the press corps properly read strategic implications of the Vietnam war's 1968 Tet offensive, but had little understanding as to whys and wherefores) so long as atmospheric science is held hostage and suborned to the quantum-relativity-physicist community's imposition of a supposed “classical limit”, an imposition required so as to sustain the dissimulations spawned by the mass-formation clinging behaviors. Same-same with respect to the µTm-logical quantum-wave properties of DNA, so as to sustain the genetic-engineering-industry's strategic-defensive myth that submolecular, extra-stereochemical-stoichiometric aspects of DNA-RNA have no bio-functional significance, and therefore do not need to be considered in the hacking of genomes to the tune of… how many per day, a number not “publicly tracked”, there being no critical-state threshold being approached because the quantum-wave properties are justifiably ignorable? So, for two instances, where in the purview of Elon Musk are institutional bases analogically modeled upon the “holographic principle” (cf. the VCI's -- under tacit vectoring by age-old rice-ritualized “participation mystique” -- bureaucratic internal-system-states mappings onto boundary changes as yearlong management preparations for the Tet-'68 offensive: no mere party gerrymandering this, what!) or financial instruments cum monetary-system fundamentals analogically embodying the principle of quantum-non-simple identity, as distinct from, say, the simply-ownable identity-dyscrasia induced by rehypothecated MBS agglomerations? The 18th-century rationalism that spun off the still-prevailing institutional-base, howsoever much that base presently be deteriorated, maintained its coherency for less than 50 years following the main institutionalization events of the late-1770s, early-1780s: N. H. Abel's 1823 existence proof for trans-al-jabr, deemed an Impossibility Theorem, threw the whole associated Weltanschauung-unto-Lebenswelt-unto-Umwelts into an ever-growing collapse condition of decoherence. Highly relevant to terms of the post-Abel “spontaneous” -- heh-heh-heh! -- collapse, Devin Bostick, toward the end of his December-of-2025 paper entitled “Identity as a Coherence Interface”, makes the following observations:
When an illusion-steadying identity layer meets an invariant that cannot be absorbed narratively, collapse occurs -- both individually and collectively.
If personality is the narrative mask of the coherence interface, changes in biological coherence [cf. Spanish flu; rash of autoimmune diseases, including those involving anti-DNA antibodies; Covid 19] will change personality expression directly.
A collapse with episodic fulminations spread over a 200-year-long period, and beyond, can rightly be deemed a War-of-the-World when the fulmination body-counts progressively amplify from 1000s to hundreds-of-thousands, to millions, to tens-of-millions, to…
I began arguing the DNA as antenna idea (see: “DNA is a fractal antenna in electromagnetic fields”, Martin Blank and Reba Goodman, International Journal of Radiation Biology, 87:4, 2011, pp. 409-15) during 1969, and by 1971 I was using the Georgetown and George Washington U. med libraries as well as the National Library of Medicine to read into systemic lupus erythematosus, particularly as regards anything I could find about anti-DNA antibodies in SLE and formation of the LE-cell. Indeed, my first letter to Wolfgang Luthe, circa 1973 or thereabouts, concerned this subject: the notion being that autogenic brain discharge activity possibly could renormalize DNA frequency-response-window alterations qua shifts involved in calling forth anti-DNA antibodies. How the thought of DNA as being an antenna came to me -- good offices of a Special Forces Training Group buddy, Steve Coleson, who was going through commo specialty training at the time I was still in SF medics training -- is described in our 1994 novel, The Moon of Hoa Binh. So, again, I now run across yet another very recent paper exhibiting many “resonances” with our 1979 paper modeling superconductant-DNA-pi-electron-parcel-gas-qua-cloud radiation exchange processes, to wit, the recent paper: “DNA as a quantum system in evolution”, Nahuel Aquiles Garcia, PLOS.one, 20 March 2026. Consider, as a preliminary, the proposition that our canonical quantum-harmonic-oscillator equation's notion, of 3-fold topologically-active operator-time, retrograde-inverts the Page-Wootters framework, which treats time, in the words of Google AI citing “The time of arrival problem in the Page-Wootters formalism”, Niyusha Hosseini and Maximilian P. E. Lock, arXiv, 31 March 2026, “…as a relational quantity emerging from correlations between a quantum system and a clock, rather than an external background parameter. Time becomes the state of the 'clock' relative to the system”: i.e., in our view, time operates (therefore is not an [e}mergent, but is the agent responsible for [de}mergence) on the CTC+-unto-µTm-relative-states, propositionally numbered with Gödel-numbered Gödel numbers, of the BackCloth's supersystem-system-subsystem-composite nesting-foam, acknowledgment by the observer of resultant changes being registered by the glutamate-etched binary-mind as 1T2-only-definable-memetime qua as monotonic increase in entropy à la the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Following are a few quotations from Garcia which are suggestive of our DNA-modeled theses:
…weak, time dependent perturbations (potentially arising from thermal fluctuations, ionic microfields, metabolic noise, or electromagnetic signals) bias the micro-timing of events during replication and repair.
Simulations of Hamiltonian dynamics under physiologically plausible perturbations show that real genomic segments exhibit distinctive dynamical signatures…
…sequence-dependent responses to both intrinsic and structured perturbations generate testable predictions…
I speculate that DNA could interact with two kinds of signals, the biological biophotonic signals produced by the cells… and another type of photonic signals coming from outside the cells, potentially including cosmic sources.
…wave-shift could work as an information entropy input, which DNA would be capable of measuring and transmitting on a biological scale…
…DNA as a biological quantum computer that measures and integrates information from universal time flow…
I propose that small physical perturbations (here at quantum-scale) can modulate micro-timing windows in DNA processes…
This informative paper includes 47 linked references. Much if not most of this research is directly or indirectly related to efforts to control DNA (the seat of supposed single-valued, simple, non-quantum identity, the order-type of identity-qua-identity so much presently normopathically-compulsion-fixated upon and obsessed over) properties with e-Xternal parameters. An advocate of Autogenic Training's “give carte blanche to the brain” (which includes intraneuronal and intraperineural DNA molecules), I've never had the slightest interest in participating in this project, not least because of the notion-cum-conviction (firmed up since, circa 1975, first reading of Emil Post's µTm-logics paper: a conviction discussed in our novel, The Moon of Hoa Binh, linked above) that what has been and still is regarded as being the genetic code is in fact only the 1T2-only, lowest-level qua last-layer of a micro-accessed, µTmly-indexed cum numbered with Gödel-numbered Gödel numbers, multi-level-data encipherment (qua “cascade encryption” [de}mergence: see, for instance, “The Multilevel Encryption Model: A review”, Mais Irreem A. Kamal and Laheeb Mohammad Ibrahim, AL-Rafidain Journal of Computer Sciences and Mathematics, 18:1, June 2024, and note the long list provided of linked related articles) involving CTC+-valued-logic processing. What kind of cryptanalyst can believe that the most important code ever demergent-emergent-devised would be a single-level cipher system?
In our 1994 novel, The Moon of Hoa Binh, the protagonist is cautioned by his 1T3-inner-voice to, not only “Attend to the interface!”, but also to be aware that “No-mind is not absence of mind, but presence of the multi-value!”. The multi-value understood in the terms of µTm-unto-CTC+-relative-states of identity-transparency. So, when I recently ran across the following from Yamamori Tetsuo's (onememetime-Director of Nakasone's Nichibunken-Kyoto International Research Center for Japanese Studies, also -- Hooray! -- once directed by the Jungian Kawai Hayao, of deep-structure insight vis-à-vis the early-qua-“primitive”-nonstate-Shinto-cum-quantum-mechanics collective-and-cooperative-phenomena identity-transparent “participation mystique”-role of the emperor-king as “empty-center”-singularity, strange-attractor-promoter of autopoiesis and self-organization) Forward to Alexander Bennett's translation of Yamamoto Tsunetomo's essay on Bushido (too bad Oriana didn't keep a closer watch on what Rizzoli had to offer, including this book, which, given her poor discovery track record in Saigon's National Police Headquarters compound -- that war, the war of Nothing, and So Be it -- she likely would have missed had she lived long enough!) entitled Hagakure: The Secret Wisdom of the Samurai (Tuttle, 2014: the same Tuttle that said to a friend with a high-level personal contact, acting on her own initiative, that Tuttle couldn't possibly distribute such a book as our novel: not surprising to me, given Tuttle's relationship with BigMac and my childhood back-reaction upon the Gen's iatrogenic cultural interventions), I was much more than merely intrigued: to wit, quoting Yamamori, p. 8:
What is zanshin? Literally, “lingering heart”, simply put it is an important principle in the martial arts which means to maintain psychological and physiological alertness at all times…
When I first came across Dr. Bennett's theory of zanshin, I was reminded of another Japanese word, mushin, (“no-mind”), or mushi (“selflessness”). The term zanshin sounded foreign to my ears, as it does to most Japanese people. In actual fact, zanshin sounds like quite an inconsistent or unstable state of mind to Japanese people who have long believed that an empty mind and selflessness is a profound way of living, representing the highest plane of spiritual attainment. How does the lingering mind of zanshin compare with the state of mushin?
If the self of selfhood is an object to consciousness, then it could not be the “true”-'I' which is Atman by Nirvanic disidentification and detachment from 1T2-only subject-object duality, a disID and deTAC by good offices of the infinite regress to no-self selflessness occasioning long-practiced concentration in self-observation. As regards this circumstance calling forth “high indifference”, Franklin Merrell-Wolff said, “Substantiality is inversely proportional to ponderability”. Hmmm. Call substantiality, x; call ponderability, y. What do the values of x and y signify? Gödel-numberings of the sheets of an ensheavement? What is the constant of proportionality, k? Does this constant qua coefficient signify a co-efficiency somehow more efficient than a mere ratio or even a “ratio-number” logarithmic exponential power? Well, I always had trouble embracing this FM-W maxim -- and that's where, IMHO, zanshin comes in relative to much more efficient co-efficiencies. The “self” of no-self is no “true”-'I', truth-value being holy, uh, uh, wholly of actual value, only with regard to 1T2-only-logic alone; self-of-no-self, i.e., Notman, is the whole hologrammic whole, the Tzog-chen plate whereupon, by Buddhological compassion, each part contains all the information of the whole whole, or, otherwise put in terms of the nested Cantorian infinitudes, distinctions between which progressively fade to “fog-on-fog”, to use a favored derogatory “term”, heh-heh-heh: C+TC+-relative-state-identity-transparent Tzog-chen-AllBaseCommonGround. The logical-value order-types of m-valued logics are order-types of self-referential reflexivity involving topological self-reentry, the C+TC+-case of self-reentry withdrawing all distinctions drawn (think: the [re}merging-in-sacred-space tiger faster and faster chasing his own tail until, at the absolute limiting time-rate-of-change of acceleration, he turns to butter). The Japanese early-Shinto concept of sacred space, ma, is constituted, like the Riemann-surface treatment of multi-valued functions, of many ensheaved sheets, these stacked flat sheets (said to be the origin of Japanese planar aesthetics) characterized as being bridged by time. If, by time, is meant 1T2-only-definable passive, passing, referential linear-time, I've never been able to quite get it -- passing time being indicative of sequentiality; stacked sheets being indicative of simultaneity (somewhat analogous, particularly if the sheets are Regge-latticed, such that the corpus thereof becomes a sieve, to “The Problem of Time in Quantum Gravity”, as essayed upon by Edward Anderson, arXiv, 11 September 2010, a paper I've earlier referenced). So, is there something like a “constant of proportionality” between all these sheets: a rate of change, rates of a rate of change, rates of rates of a rate of change? A time-related m-valued constant-qua-coefficient signifying a co-efficiency somehow more efficient than a mere ratio or even a “ratio-number” logarithmic exponential power improving upon “A Log Log Improvement to the Riemann Hypothesis for the Hawkins Random Sieve”, as essayed upon by C. C. Heyde, Annals of Probability, 6:5, October 1978, a paper I've earlier referenced. Perhaps, even before the samurai came on, during this or that pre-Heian-Period period, that's earlier than 794, the Japanese lost fullness of meaning with respect to the type of time bridging the sheets of ma:
sun goddess A[ma}terasu
a = phonetic building block, e.g., a sheet of an ensheavement
ma = sacred space
terasu = to illuminate
ama = sea, e.g., cosmic sea of gravitating TGD-sheets of Cantorian-fractal spacetime
[De}merging from the celestial cave to establish selfhood in the cosmic mirror, she instruments Ninigi-no-Mikoto (topologically-active operator-time) to establish the imperial Line (i.e., the CTC+-unto-µTm-unto-1T2/1T2-unto-µTm-unto-CTC+ cascade/reverse-cascade, demergence/reemergence, decomposition/recomposition of C+TC+ AllBaseCommonGround of multi-sheeted BackCloth). This imperial Line is not top-to-bottom oriented; it is altogether nonorientable by self-reentry: thus, not a mere matter of inverse proportionality. Topologically-active operator-time/topologically-active counter-operator-time bridges the sheets. “Zanshin”, IMHO, embraces the altogetherness of nonorientable self-reentry, such that the part is continuously held to hold all the information constituting the whole whole.
Given that the Graduate School of Informatics, Kyoto University, is involved in the origination of the ideas informing the study, consider Figure 1, entitled “Higher-order decomposition resulting from the foliation of a statistical manifold”, of “Explosive neural networks via higher-order interactions in curved statistical manifolds”, Hideaki Shimazaki, et al., arXiv, 9 December 2025, relative to my immediately-above-given assertion that “Perhaps, even before the samurai came on, during this or that pre-Heian-Period period, that's earlier than 794, the Japanese lost fullness of meaning with respect to the type of time bridging the sheets of ma”. And note that the MEP, maximum entropy principle, is a statement of utter memetime-boundedness (altogether excluding TGDly-active operator-time and associated 3-fold-orders of temporal CURL), a statement informing the paper's equations 2 and 3 wherein is employed a “bracket normalization operator” (involving a scaling parameter) to set negative values to zero, such that (this being a probabilistic statistical model) expectations with respect to x become [x]+ = max{0,1}, whereupon, as the scaling parameter goes to zero the most complete memetime-bounded MEP is realized, i.e., Shannan's 1T2-only-information entropy model. What, then, is it that bridges the decomposed foliation sheets if not passive, passing, referential linear-time? In this model, formulated in AI terms, it is the cybernetic analogue of memetime-bound action-potential that decomposes the manifold into its foliation ensheavement -- each of the sheets being deformed (((cf. TGDed Einstein General Relativity: as regards, not a unified field theory, the notion “field” not being general enough, but a general theory of process, still there is no public recognition that hypercomplex-complex angular-momentum cascade-decomposition-demergence is to be handled as TGDly-active operator-time, or what that implies concerning anthropogenic alterations of Earth's response characteristics to such momentum carried by the solar wind, how that momentum is cascaded through the atmosphere and injected into Earth's crustal and core dynamics, or how these injections, normatively unmodified independent of iatrogenic interventions, might service Earth's stability requirements))) qua curved -- construed to represent a neural-type solution to the n-body, indeed, infinite-body, problem, resulting “in a deformation of the statistical manifold which, in turn, enhances the capability of p-sub-scaling-parameter (x) to account for higher-order interdependencies”. Which is to say: “A fundamental insight explored in this study is that higher-order interdependencies can be efficiently captured by deformed exponential [think: the nk of 2nk] family distributions”. That is, efficiently “captured by” qua handled under renormalization to the 1T2-only-logical-value order-type alone. TGDly-active operator-time and associated 3-fold-orders of Penrose-twistorized-unto-quantization temporal CURL are NOT, according to the Shimazaki, et al., model, the constellated decomposition-demergence operators decomposing the non-statistical, memetime-independent, Amaterasu-encaved, Platonically-pregiven, C+TC+-Tzog-chen-AllBaseCommonGround most-densely-packed-dust-mote sheet of Musculpt (this acoustically-modified wavicle-qua-graviton-elementaryparticle designator encompassing Bohr complementarity as a limiting case) manifold into its CTC+-unto-µTm-unto-1T2-logically-valued foliation ensheavement. Whatever the edu.learning program (transhuman unto humanistic) employed, AI, 1T2-only, even qubitically-superposed 2-state quantum-computing, and fed human-binary-mind-selected databases, some of which being regarded as representing objective nature, in no way even begins to approximate capacities-capabilities of the intact human brain (localized 1T2-only molecular-cellular peripheral work-station brains) [mu}itically-interfaced to (but prescriptive-enculturation-socialization-orchestrated glutamatergically-kundbuffered from conscious access to) THE CTC+-unto-µTm-unto-1T2-logically-valued foliation ensheavement nonlocalizable infinite-body-problem-long-since-solved quantum brain. Glutamatergically-kundbuffered localized 1T2-only molecular-cellular peripheral work-station brains, no matter how thoroughly chipped or CBIed, will not be able to rectify this incommensurate differential. What is required for quantum-brain conscious access (in lieu of reinforcing regressed-archetypal collective-unconscious-event-gradient drivers of binary-minds) is Taoist non-doing of the processes of prescriptive-enculturation-socialization-orchestration of glutamatergic neural pruning at neuronal plasticity in learning -- the very processes which, LLM learning in particular, AI technologies imitate, and by widespread employment of such-learned AIs, they will make the required non-doing all but impossible! So, the Shimazaki, et al., renormalization is one escape valve from unsullied embrace of infinite-m-valued statefunction of Schrödinger wave equation m-logically processed. Another has been the keeping of the Riemann-ensphered egofunction unscathed by pushing the Schrödinger wavefunction infinite-m-valuedness into schizoid-multi-universes (SMUs) that (like the schizophrenic's periods of “loss of memetime”) cannot communicate with one another due to constraints of the 2nd-law-of-thermodynamics-MEP definer of memetime: loss = cannot. Once the SMUs “renormalization” -- heh-heh-heh! -- is embraced there is the binary-mind-drivers driven penchant to apply the implied model to the modeling of brain function, indeed, of consciousness as 1T2ly construed, yielding proposals like that described in “New Theory Suggests That Alternate Universe Versions Of You Are Determining Your Fate”, written by reporter Luis Prada, Vice, 12 May 2026, as originally given by the physicist Vlatko Vedral in “'You' in Other Universes May Be Silently Shaping Your Reality, Oxford Physicist Claims”, Popular Mechanics, 5 May 2026. Moreover, this paralogical tacit-expansion upon “curved neural networks” (see: “Outsourcing Our Memory: How Digital Tools Are Reshaping Human Thought”, Katherine Brodsky, Skeptic, 15 August 2025) leads the physicist to propose a neural-chip-alternative to the CBI, as described in “I Believe You Can Enhance Your Consciousness -- And Expand Your Perception Into a 'Different Realm'”, Popular Mechanics, 22 April 2026. One simply must ask, “What constellated the collective-unconscious regressed-archetypal drivers locked onto the very, very strange attractor which may well be the worst-case dystopia which binary-minds are increasingly enthusing consciously over?” My conscious WAG on all this, circa 1968 and onwards, has long been up for consideration here. The Shimazaki, et al., curved-neural-networks model is an ANNs adaptation of the memetime-bound, chaos-theoretic, 2nk-fitness-landscape model (((quoting: “As the number of patterns learned by the network increases, the system transitions to a disordered spin-glass state in the thermodynamic limit. Furthermore, one can analytically solve this model [62–65]. For example, using the replica-trick method can determine the memory capacity of the system [62], and theoretically identify the critical value of alpha at which memory retrieval becomes impossible -- leading to a disordered spin-glass phase. Here, we apply a similar approach to reveal how deformed associative memory networks afford an enhanced memory capacity.”))) of what is actually Mnk C+TC+-unto-CTC+-unto-µTm-unto-1T2 suprasystem-supersystem-system-subsystem quantum-composite, scale-relative (certain variables) cum scale-invariant (certain variables), memetime-independent complexity inbyof nature.
As the ideas I've cultivated during my lifespan may be wrong, or mostly so, the high probability of which I've always tried to carry like a mantra, thus mitigating “unwarranted exuberance”-type enthusiasms, consequently I've imposed upon myself -- 1T2-only speaking, of course -- the one[r}us task, an [alba}toss of a white-man's burden, of following-out, following-out as best I can for as long as I can: not least to arrive at a per[son}al judgment as to efficacy of what Kandinsky called “internal necessity” as a non-orientable correspondent to external necessity -- TaiChi-rotational-1T2-only speaking, of course. Nay. Not the high probability of being wrong, certainty thereof: because, not having had access to holographically-exteriorized inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation, I have been thinking 1T2ly about the imports of [de}mergence CTC+-unto-µTm, not in µTm-logics concerning same-same. I am not the only personperdaughter by circumstance forced to so think. Some memetime ago, I read into Maria Stromme's QM formulations concerning universal consciousness (I was particularly interested to see what she had to say, given that she is associated with Uppsala U., which edited the International Journal of Quantum Chemistry and published our 1979 model of DNA pi-electron-parcel-gas radiation-exchange processes), her paper being entitled “Universal consciousness as foundational field: A theoretical bridge between quantum physics and non-dual philosophy”, AIP Advances, 15, 115319, 13 November 2025 (see also the “Supplementary Materials” to this paper). I found the paper stimulating, but -- since I feel that the notion “field” is inadequate to the case, haven't bought the BornRule interpretation of Schrödinger's m-valued statefunction, believe in self-cancelling [de}mergence/[re}mergence and not substantive [e}mergence, see no reason to give objectivity to linear-time at any stage of demergence -- decided to leave it alone. Now, however, going back for a second look, I see that on 7 May 2026 AIP Advances printed a retraction of Stromme's paper, saying:
The operator T-cap, which is central to the theory introduced in the paper, has no associated measurable quantity and cannot be verified or falsified through empirical tests. The theory's predictions are therefore not empirically verifiable. As the theory is postulated and cannot be falsified, it does not meet the standard for scientific validity.
Earlier on, I have above stated why I give no credence to the Popperian falsifiability notion of what constitutes, or rather, according to Popper, “substitutes for”, what pre-Popper was considered the “empirically verifiable”, and discount altogether the derivative Sorosian notion as to the nature of self-referential market reflexivities. [Falsifiable, not-falsifiable] qua [A, not-A] qua [0, 1]: Popper's idea dictates that science must be 1T2-only-logical, that the binary-logical laws of identity, distributed middle, and non-contradiction must be abided by in assessing and discoursing upon experimental outcomes. Fuzzy logic: out. Schrodinger logic: out. All non-ordinary logics: out. And, most especially, Post's µTm-logics of relative-state identity-transparency: 1T5ly speaking, “Out, damned spot! out, I say!” There are multi-worlds of differences between Sagan's-science-court pseudoscience (more often than not, the intuition function retroflecting-anticipating the once-was cum yet-to-be) and infrascience and Science: what we've had so far, IMHO, is 1T2-only-infrascience and its spun-off infratech. Science-yet-to-be with a capital S is µTm-unto-CTC+-unto-C+TC+. So, what about Stromme's T-cap? She says that the transition from formless potential into structured states is “…modeled as a collapse process governed by the operator universal thought T-cap, the creative mechanism by which the mind generates differentiation.” Uh, uh, that's “Draw a distinction” according to [Crow}ley/line's the whole of Spencer-Brown's Laws of Form. I have asserted, ever since the mid-1970s, that “Universal consciousness (UC) in its active aspect is the set of all topological operators on the MVRS, m-logically-valued reference space; consciousness in its passive aspect is the reference space acted upon.” Most certainly wrong! -- because the active-passive bifurcation is a 1T2ism, even if yang-yin are TaiChi 1T2-rotational, and foremost because the actual case is C+TC+-logical dust-moted pre-pregeometry which no binary-mind can fathom absent, it must be supposed, long, long intergenerational use of holographically-exteriorized inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation. Under µTm, numbers cannot possibly be selfsame. Under CTC+ -- to give Liber AL vel Legis legs it otherwise does not have -- each number is infinite. Under C+TC+, each number is infinitely infinite, such that any number is every number. Numbers as waves demerging down, derry, derry, down unto numbers as digits (a binary-minded way of thinking about it). Finger-counting numbers were the last to demerge! I don't think of UC as formless potential; rather, as suprasystemic-Platonia's decomposable-recomposable (that's, gematrically speaking, 11 macrocosm “down” and 11 microcosm “up”, 11 canceling 11, to construe the enduring faith of John 11:11 in the projective-identification/per[son}ification terms which the binary-mind can stand under) AllBaseCommonGround ActUAllity, the set of all topological operators on the MVRS involving three-fold temporal curl (Trikaladrsti-tapassiddhi: T1, T2, T3: “tapassiddhi” indicating the cap Stromme placed upon her T) of Pauli-Paine topologically-active operator-time, as discussed relative to Lukasiewicz-Gödel Encoding by Schrödinger-Samaropa (superposition) over Kun Gzhi (quantal allbase). Stromme's T-cap could be thought of as constituted of 3-fold Pauli-Paine topologically-active operator-time executions of CTC+-unto-µTm-cosmic-propositions numbered with Gödel-numbered Gödel numbers, these executions demerging by decomposition of C+TC+-MVRS-unto-µTm-foliation-unto-TGD, TGD being construed as me[me}time-bound by Penrose-Hameroff prescriptively-enculturated ORCH OR glutamatergically anchored to molecular-cellular-brain workstations at neuronal plasticity. None of this would stoop so far as to conquer 1T2-only-infrascience with pre-potted me[me}falsifiability, though much of it could be experimentally surmised relative to helix-coiling intraneuronalperineural-DNA wave properties and the cascade dynamics of tornadogenesis. As to my following-out albatross, I wouldn't be so naive as to say that the involved process is “credibility enhancing”, but I will say that the credibility-neutral qua non-credibility-debilitating right-stuff-dyscreditations as 1T2ly-opposed to the credibility-destroying… “I mean, look, the reality is… it's been a reality of our national politics that…”, to quote CNN-BBC-StarNews: OMG, how infantile-regressive those discussions are relative to where current cognitive contents are at, in terms of the omni-transformative, currently-transitioning Weltanschauung-Lebenswelt-Umwelt notions of form-in-process as explicated more or less month-by-month quarter-by-quarter in the technical literature obviously not at all assimilated by these TVangelist talking heads and those too Xhausted to seek out more astute assessments of the current con[under}um. As my µTm-I/im hashave been saying to my 1T2-Iambe for decades, people simply don't understand that they don't understand; they don't know that what they think they think may well be, hah! is, what thinks them: such is the normotic-pedestrian ignorance of the collective-cooperative processes of THE µTm-logical, non-local, quantum brain glutamatergically kundabuffered-sequestered in this-and-that cognitive Guantanamo cum rendition site. Making a Report To Gecko is (whether or not -- µTmly-unto-1T2ly speaking -- in[car}nations are simultaneous or sequential) very likely an Xpedience as to crossing the River StyX (no matter how much [simple-self}compelled TPTB are to ConveDD -- conversion-disorder displace -- this smart cosmoscity down into mere nation-state-[Hunt}ingtonesque-forced-draft-migratory 1T2-only-border crossing collective behaviors of [Hunt}eresque-culture-cum-class-warfare). Self-organization by forced-draft-urbanized noise, eh what! Hearts of our cities: evermore becoming free-fire zones. Such that: our many-and-numerically-growing billionaire dystopians
(((Consider the following from Matthew Sweet's Operation Chaos, 2018 Picador paperback edition, pp. 179-80: “'The revolutionary intelligentsia,' argued LaRouche, 'is thus the embryonic representation of a new human species, a Promethean species…' How do you create a new human species ? The answer is, of course, you can't and you don't.” How does Sweet's retort to TheRed comport with aspirations of our transhumanist, 1T2-only-capitalism's, New Dystopians?)))
imagine that going from prescriptively-enculturated prison classes to Summerhill free school in one fell swoop, by chip-CBI-merging of the ghost-in-the-machine with the so-called superintelligence of 2-state-qubitic AI machines, will near-instantly be peek, uh, peak, experiential. Everything free; nothing to do that bots can't do better: sounds like utopia to me! Girl Interrupted is hardly construable as an adequate charactoressing of the Incommoded Society. Bot Prez, bot PM; but first, surely, bot Gen. Are you now, or have you ever been…? From batshit crazy to shipped ratshit batty: a 1T2-only-bit of the sense of the transmogrification of so-called superintelligence to superstition made by normotic apoplectics comes through in Secrecy. Undermeaning the theses aboot which are coomonly spook to on the e-coomons, what! Recently looking for something to wedge a platform [mono}poly's short legis or the trading floor's sinking surface-structure, under the unused wet-bar's rosewood expanse, I inadvertently ran across a ten-year-old dusty copy of Douglas Rushkoff's Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus: how growth became the enemy of prosperity deep-structure holding up the broken elbow of the sink's drainpipe. Unlike 2-state-superposed, second-level pat-pong, this copy was shanghaied in the upstairs meeting room of a P/P rest[a}rant. Because I had witnessed, circa immediate pre-Tet-'68-offensive, the first Google, i.e., the CDC-programmed search engine for the IBM-360-run MACV-CICV-CDEC-RVNJGS-IDHS, intelligence data handling system, I got off on the wrong legis with this book by regarding Rushkoff's statement that “…Google was… a college dorm room experiment that had blossomed into one of the world's most powerful technology giants…” as misdirection regarding the fact that from Turing onward all of digital tech has been mil.war generative, such that that battlefield legis, uh, uh, legacy, howsoever civilianized, is Easter-egged qua built-in-as-insurmountable undocumented hidden coding already all ready, from the get-go, undermining Rushkoff's 1T2-only-“digital distributionism” program. Moreover, the introduction section to the book is entitled “What's Wrong With This Picture”; whereas, circa July 1953, standing in the lobby of FLW's Imperial Hotel, Tokyo, watching the formal-mil.attired hubris-strutting officer corps which I, as a mil.brat, was constantly under distributed digits -- worse, the thumbs -- of, I asked myself, “What's right with this picture?” And right off the bat, R. dysinformatively equates the telepresence of p2p with the face2face interperdaughteral biz-speci-AL-ity of bazaar-souq-asianopenairmarket sociality (not to mention, in the Vietnamese case at least, all the women's cursing-in-poetry occasioning acts of bantering over prices, yelps of glee coming when a particularly creative piece of spooneristic double entendre is spit forth as a metathesis). But in and around pages 17-18, the section entitled “Removing Humans From The Equation”, I started to get up some interest in R.'s argument. Then, I skipped back to the Appendix and saw a version of dot-mote cum 3-fold operator-time handled as partitioning of 1T2-only-economic hisstory -- point and line and curve to circle: not to one of Kandinsky's orientable Riemannian-plane bridged sheets, and not to Rapoport-hyperKleinBottle non-orientability -- and, despite these absences, I got really interested. Reproducing passages from pages 17-18, thereabouts:
Thanks to the emergence of the bazaar, Europe in the Middle Ages enjoyed one of the most rapid economic expansions in history… The problem was that while the merchant class was gaining wealth, the aristocracy was losing it… It's one thing for growth to help peasants achieve subsistence. It's another for those who already own pretty much everything to use growth purely as a means to prevent others' enrichment. But that's exactly what happened… In exchange for stock, kings granted certain companies exclusive control over their industries… business owners learned to seek out the least qualified workers… What we now call industrialization was actually an extension of the aristocracy's effort to usurp the growth it witnessed in the peasant's marketplace… In the long run, many industrial processes have ended up more efficient than production by individual craftspeople, but that's most often because their total costs are hidden or externalized to others.
K. expertly details all this, further details the transition to “digital industrialism”, and then details his speculations as to what he imagines a “digital distributionism” could conceivably be. In so doing, he gives an excellent account of 1T2-only-LETS currencies. K.'s characterization of industrialization is consistent with the thesis that infrascience has spawned infratech, and this double-down-extends to K.'s digital industrialism under the contention that digital infratech issued from dissimulated QM (multivalued logics spurned -- in preference for stat-prob -- relative to interpretation of Schrödinger's multivalued statefunction, turning that function into a “preference function” analogous to that employed in the Soviet's command-economy central planning). K. strategically misses the fact that monetization of the rural economy with 1T2-only monies played a large role in transmogrifying intrinsic motivation into extrinsic motivation (((an externalization with major cognitive costs-consequences: among them, in due course -- as self-referential reflexivities reinforced prescriptively-enculturated self-metaprogrammatic feedback loops -- given that the multi-worlds interpretation of the relative-state form[u}la-la-la{tion] is an Xtension of Xternalizing internalities, perhaps even the dissimulation of Schrödinger's statefunction, a dissimulation servicing the infra-aspects of digital industrialism))) -- pursuit of gain submerging the internal-necessity-attractor-pulled art-related [beni}sons of cultivating craft excellence. OMG, on this economic bridge, commercial advantage trumped a spectrum of public health concerns! When, subsequently, have we ever heard of such a travesty? I say “K. strategically misses” because, as regards LETS currencies, it is the µTm-processed m-values stacked on the currency-unit base-state that makes possible internalization of externalities (be those X's deemed by binary-mind intrasystemic or extrasystemic, even, sans a “distributed middle” class, fuzzysystemic) -- and, absent such µTm-mediated internalizations, the likelihood of K.'s speculations, as to what he imagines a “digital distributionism” could conceivably be, actually realizing, say, a return of humans to the political-economy equation, is greatly diminished. Moreover, the pursuit of gain-absolutely-in-so-far-as-distinct-from-loss in the obsession with growth K. disparages is fundamental to the 1T2-only-market's price-processing of allocation with 1T2-only-money, à la the so-called “magic hand” black box, a believable substitution for which K. does not actually explicate despite his disquisitions on 1T2-only-digital distributionism. But, with m-valued-LETS nesting-foams, transactions in which are µTmly processed, the “magic hand” becomes the Bohmian quantum potential resident in the µTm-relative-states of identity-transparency in habitus upon the Everettian-vonHayekian “time-shapes of total capital stock” mapped by a quantum-composite unit of account over the global economy's MVRS. But current uses to which digital distributionism are being put precludes all that! O, the transponderations of TPTB aspiring to an indefinite prolongation of habitus in the lowest-qua-1T2-order-type of stateplace: what a contravention of the contents of that Briefing For A Descent Into Hell! These days, TPTB abiding by dictates of their High[pox}risitic Oath and helped by the colonized taking over app[par}rats of the colonizers -- those powers having long-since locked onto the statistics of the probabilities bequeathed by me[me}time-bound thermodynamically-driven chemistry and physics -- are using Rushkoff “digital distributionism” and the AI-robotic extension of wax-mu[see}um mimetic simulacra to mutate the global Lebenswelt into one well-surveilled, coercively brought up and sustained BigCa[see}no, a mutating founded on basis of a ConveDDed version of 1T3-logic: greatly-empowered resource-warfare rivalry between American Football, Chinese Go, and Russian Chess. Having voluntarily, if subliminally, transmuted hisher µTmly-higher-state functionalities into decoherent-incarnating-surrogate transformer-beings, universally personified as undocumented 1T2-only-self/other-border-crossed aliens, Hss, Homo sapiens sapiens, has long been obsessed with generating selfhood facsimiles transferred by concretion-per[son}if/eyed projective-identification to infra-technical contra[arti}factuals.
Since advent of Wilsonian DemoKrazy an ever-increasing number of bazaars-souqs-asianopenair[mark}ettes all over the plannette have been zoned-out, firestarter-discorporated, firebombed, nuked, SACed, freefire-zoned, machete-holocausted, bulldozed, car-bombed, Intelsat-rocketted, UAV-droned. And now, gymnastily breakdancing the Boolean Popper, TPTB offer us (see: “The Grocery Store Is Becoming a Surveillance Center”, Martin Armstrong, Armstong Economics reposting to LewRockwell, 21 May 2026) a perfect pristinely [imp}pecuniously pellucid (PP[imp}p/Parity) example, contrary to the Rushkoff expectation set, of how “digital distributionism” is actually -- thumbing noses at LOOP, the Law Of One Price, as regards, not different markettes, but the same markette, “price” marking digitally posted -- being deployed: Cartesian-Newtonian-non-superposed n-valued price 1T2ly processed; instead of externality-internalizing quantum-superposed m-valued Schrödinger's-cat price µTmly processed. How is digitally-distributed surveillance-capitalist pricing (s-pricing a ConveDD of S-pricing?) going to work out for TPTB honey-bucket-man brown-end-engineered Xternalizing to the Moon, to Mars, to orbiting Elysium, considering that the 1T2-only-information-entropic price mechanism is the allocative device manifest as the 1T2-only-capitalist markette's “bit-from-it” so-called “'magic-without-magic' hand”? Massive dys[all}location within a globally-monocultured Lebenswelt decoherently localized to a plannette being resource depleted -- even given that night soil of the Moon is [silli}con rich -- my I/im wager.
A rendition of a Native American evocation of A[ma}terasu codification of C+TC+-unto-CTC+-unto-µTm Platonia (Plato railed against Mankind in Amnesia with his de-caving advocacy of anamnesis), apparently absent -- by the no-return thesis of the story told by the Old Woman -- understanding of the Cantorian-transfinites'-cum-holographic-principle's ponderablespacememetime-independent (i.e., no traversal in time or through space) part-whole identity-transparency and the non-orientability of third-order “dynamics” -- dynamics in quotes to state that the notion the word codifies is indicative of a single-valued 1T2-only processing of m-valued m-logical Platonia (quoting Christopher G. Moore's novel Gambling on Magic, Heaven Lake Press, 2005, pp. 2-3):
“The light is from the third cave in the mountain beyond. It rarely comes to the earth's surface. When it does, it is pulled out by wild horses. They bring the light to remind us of the time when an ancient tribe once left this land for another place, and how the world on the other side, a world we cannot see, swallowed them whole: when they awoke, they found themselves in harmony and balance with the universe, but in the quiet of their soul a voice whispered for them to journey to the place where they belonged. They never returned.”
Cosmic Turrellian-Skyspace C+TC+-Cathedral collapsed to a 1T2-only-Ballroom. Ah, yes: dividing the light, the synoptic absolute limiting velocity into scale-relative sub-values of that m-valued universal physical constant realized hypercomplexly-complexly under µTm-valued logics. With the m-valued-LETS nesting-foams I've advocated since the mid-1970s, transactions in which are topologically-active-operator-timed relative to Everettian-vonHayekian “time-shapes of total capital stock” and [mu}it/i|c|all-µTmly processed: (1) high-frequency algorithmic trading on volatile stock markets can be ladder-runged qua logical-value-order-type sequestered, not only with regard to 1st-order topo-active optime, but 2nd- and 3rd-order as well, thus returning to the system-qua-system a modicum of investment-vs-speculation and revaluation of dividends-vs-[stock}valuations, without altogether nixing the latter-side of the stated binary relations; (2) the delocalization of multiplier effects and the non-simple identity of assets inculcated by 1T2-only-lawfare-defined corporate-cum-megaconglomerate structures and dissimulated-quantum-2-state-qubitic-infratech-mimetic financial derivatives, e.g., multiply-rehypothecated MBSs, can be logical-value-order-type confined cum re-logic-ized qua de-weapon-of-mass-destruction-ized, thus minimizing inordinate synoptic net-worth disparities whilst continuing to allow disparities to incentivize on open-source e-commons m-scenarios-gamed-qua-simulated selection of µTm-logical sheaves, and, moreover, the systemic risk run by the interconnectivity of financial-derivative handlings of debt formations can be similarly sheaf-sequestered, thus fractionating into subsystem, subsubsystem, subsubsubsystem…,n risks numbered with Gödel-numbered Gödel numbers, properly done (think, for illustrative example, say, 13T27, as one case of a subsubsub,…,n subsystem), largely far-from-equilibrium dissipated (risk as waste disposed-of down nature's food-chain way, thus counterposing the money-up-chain be it block-chain transacted or not: cascaded phase transitions, by 3-fold temporal CURL, memetime-independently canceling reverse-cascaded phase transitions, thus inculcating the “harmony and balance” which the binary-mind “cannot see”).
Velocity of money in the 1T2-only-capitalist markette's changing allocative-supply-demand dynamic has real-numbered-memetime-changing equilibrium values for price stability (never actually maintained, à la the µTm-logic-discounted Sorosian interpretation of self-referential market reflexivity) in a 1T2-only monetary system. Increased velocity of 1T2-only-money decreases deflation. Inflation (de[mu}r/rage) is acceleration of 1T2-only-money; states of hyperinflation are memetime rates of change of acceleration of 1T2-only-money. What is acceleration of m-valued transactionally-µTm-processed money? Increased multiple-connectedness of the econometric subsystem-system-supersystem µTm-quantum composite (also varying as to the index of ensheavement accorded the currency-unit tagging to indicator-measurables)? What are memetime rates of change of acceleration of m-valued transactionally-µTm-processed money? Increasing states of non-orientability of the econometric subsystem-system-supersystem µTm-quantum composite (also varying as to the index of ensheavement accorded the currency-unit tagging to indicator-measurables)? Consideration of these questions may be facilitated by entertaining the nonlinear-cascade-theoretic-qua-tornadogenesis-modeling-qua-dynamical-systems-related discussion provided here of “The Velocity of Money in a Life-Cycle Model”, Yougui Wang and Hanqing Qiu, arXiv, 21 July 2005. The move from the monetary fungibility of 1T2-digitality to the monetary fungibility of 2T2-state-qubitality, whilst a big techno-step, is a step that remains within the binary-logical-value-order-type regime (right-hand-side of T); thus, that step cannot increase the information carrying capacity of a monetary unit (price being the carrier) so as to upgrade through levels of markette self-organizational competency in the manner achievable by the monetary fungibility of µTm-state-[mu}itality. As mentioned earlier on this website, during 1975, thereabouts, when one of Doug Paine's Cornell atmospheric science graduate students moved on, taking a job on Wall Street, we thought it possible some quantitative-trading interest would develop with regard to Paine-Kaplan quantum-relativistic nonlinear-cascade theory: no such transpired of course, largely because interest is too thoroughly myopically-vested in gamification-exploitation of existing-financial-system flaws-tells, not in transforming that system relative to an authentic, much more self-organizationally-competent, component of a quantum-relativistic economy (e.g., taking account of scale-relative absolute-limiting values of dynamical variables). Some 40 years later, 2016, in Throwing Rocks At The Google Bus, p. 183, we find Douglas Rushkoff saying:
The sheer turbulence of all this digital trading creates something of a weather system all its own… the more that algorithms dominate the marketplace the more the market begins to take on the properties of a dynamic system… prices, flows, and volatility are determined by the trading going on among the algorithms. Each algorithm is a feedback loop, taking an action, observing the resulting conditions, and taking another action after that. Again, and again, and again… the algorithms adjust themselves and their activity on every loop, responding less to the news on the ground than to one another. Such systems go out of control because the feedback of their own activity has become louder than the original signal… the sudden market spike or flash crash [is] created by algorithms iterating their own feedback… We might not know exactly when these extreme events are coming, but we know they will, because that's the way nonlinear systems express themselves.
Moreover, in throwing his “rocks”, Rushkoff says, p. 211, that “…in a networked era, boundaries don't have to be solely geographically defined…” But this does not mean that the changing e-boundaries quasi-without-boundary, of the superposed quasi-fractal µTm-LETS-multiscale-nesting-foam tessellations over which the currencies are defined, cannot be geographically referenced, that referencing allowing the L in LETS to mean fungible-space-place geolocal specificity, such that actual -- p2p-independent -- non-centralization is facilitated; whereas, non-geo-referenced -- p2p-encompassing, or not -- boundaries may be preference-functional with regard to definition of some indicator-measurables fine-grain tagged to the m-values stacked on the given µTm-LETS's currency-unit base-state. Returning to our earlier-posed two questions: a “quantum composite” to the binary-mind way of thinking is a 1T2-logical hierarchical structure (tiers, energy levels, nested orbitals, sheaf, spherical nesting, nested tessellated grid-system, echelons, et cetera) that is hologrammically subverted (part-whole identity-transparency) under µTm-valued logics, particle-wave complementarity being a simplistic 1T2-only way of comprehending the µTm-hologrammic subversion; µTmly thinking, the above-given relations are inverted such that structure is statefunction automatized by memetime-independent demergence µTm-unto-1T2. Let's say it this way: hierarchical line-and-block-chart data visualization got poo-pooed at CICV-POLOB cum SRA/MACV-J2 running up through 1968 on the basis of correlative functional-element factor-analysis (spontaneously -- that's human-centered autopoiesis at work, mind you -- undertaken by an emergent community of practice, not initiated by The Command, and quasi-unto-outright sanctioned thereby quite late, both meanings of “sanctioned” applicable) mappings with respect to the tripartite (front<<<|>>>party<<<|>>>military) double-stacked (2-state superposition) cellular dynamics of the significantly autopoietic Viet Cong self-organizing component process: this was a quantum composite undergoing (from Viet Minh days) organizational far-from-equilibrium phase transitions driven by environmental fluctuations (combat exigencies of the battlefield) such that consequent changing values of bureaucratic internal-system-state variables were mapped upon boundary changes in conformance with the holographic principle (then, 1945-'68, yet to be explicated by theoretical physicists studying blackhole computing). Parenthetically, it goes without saying that these notions were not assimilable by The Command driven by West-More-Land, and that this non-assimilableness fed into the enemy-strength-estimate controversy, ultimately yielding the Westmoreland-vs-CBS trial. Given this above-presented understanding -- without, in 1968, any suspicion as to existence of m-valued logics, and their subtendings of identity-transparent peasant states of “contagion” qua “participation mystique” along with the associated Weltanschauungs -- adjunctively contextualized by the IDHS's (intelligence data handling system's) “little data” search engine, it was a foregone conclusion to those whose jobs it was to think strategically (given the role being assigned to the anti-war movement immediate-post-Tet-'68) that the associated CI-MOs would be domesticated to the ZI (zone of the interior), initially in libraries, later with “big data” search engines. So, that explanatory digression concluded, back to m-valued transactionally-µTm-processed money. I am not at all prescriptive with regard to the differing attributes-rules m-scenarios gamed into given µTm-LETS-currency tessellations cum nesting-foam layers, because unique local circumstances will spawn differing open-source e-commons computer-simulated outcomes for initialization and ongoing upgrade mod[if}i/cat|ions-mod[u}lations, but, believing passing-passive-referential linear-time is memetime, I hold that memetime stamping-referencing -- be it of Fisher “stamp scrip”, Gesell-demurring local currencies, time-banked time-currencies like Ithaca Hours and Fureai Kippu, indeed, be it of the memetime-“stamped” sequentiality establishing security-trust of the blockchained dis[tribe}u/t|ed [led}her and singular-spendability of 1T2-only-cryptocurrencies -- subverts the establishment of the functional prerequisites for implementation of an authentic µTm-quantum-composite unit of account for topologically-active operator-time deployment of a planetarized monetary-system MVRS (m-logically-valued reference space) mapping of the Everettian-vonHayekian “time-shapes of total capital stock”, planet Earth, without which there can be no actual knowledge of the changing human-population cum technological-regime cum ecological-state cum,…,n covariance determining asymptotes of the changing human carrying capacity, represented by the disintermediating single-valued constant K, of the planet (this-and-that disintermediation dyspepsia, uh, uh, dispersia, ConveDDed, conversion-disorder displaced, here-there-everynowwhere by the cog[yes}infratech/scenti, thus quantum hypersuperintermediating µTm-unto-CTC+-relative-state identity-transparency is OCD-shunned by TPTB both the infrainnovators and their finfacilitators). Currently, not to mention currency-wise, to quote Richard Dahl's “Population Equation: Balancing What We Need With What We Have”, Environmental Health Perspectives, 113:9, September 2005, “Nobody really knows what the planet's human carrying capacity is.” That circumstance having remained the case these passed two memedecades (see, for instance, “Reconciling a positive ecological balance with human development: A quantitative assessment”, Lucia Tamburino and Giangiacomo Bravo, Ecological Indicators, 129, October 2021), there is considerable room to doubt determinations as to negativity-positivity of K, such determinations being central to the modeling efforts of Alessio Zaccone and Kostya Trachenko described in their paper entitled “Global population crisis scenarios predicted by a general nonlinear dynamical model”, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 209:2, posted online as forthcoming in August 2026. Why is human carrying capacity represented by a constant? Following are extractions from Google AI's answer to that question: “…done for simplicity and prediction… a constant provides a theoretical baseline… the Verhulst logistic equation [see here for the equation; here for the logistic function; and here for a more interesting graph] requires fixed variables [i.e., single-valued] to compute limits… ecologists consider the constant representation of K a useful planning metaphor…” IMHO, use of a single-valued constant, rather than a scale-relative (think: Earth's nested spheres) m-valued constant, is counter-useful because planet Earth is a complexus of component processes constituting multiple spheres intimately interrelated; indeed, likely superintegrated to µTm-processed quantum-composite extent (i.e., µTmly-vertically/horizontally integrated beyond the wildest dreams of 1T2-only-infratechno[pre}neu/Rs-cum-vent[ur}cap[it}al-financial-cap[to}logicists, the Rs = LLM readin'-ritin'-rithmetic), each sphere differing from the others in response characteristics, including responses to iatrogenic human interventions. Just as the purest of Pure Land, i.e., Tzog-chen AllBase, is logically C+TC+, “pure capital” (Rushkoff's term, p. 216; my notion thereof) must be of logical-value order-types superordinate to that binary-Boolean controlling definition of the properties of the monoies, uh, monies employed by 1T2-only-capitalism. Overcoming the tragedies of the [un}commons by transcending the “land”-harrowing, uh, uh, plus the Arrowing now-only-notion of me[me}time and the binary-mind specified conditions of “rationality” of the preferences (see third paragraph of the link): internalization of externalities with currency-unit-ensheaved m-values µTmly processed ((made user friendly with coherent holographically-exteriorized inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation, movement-of-space-shape qua “transformers” being the way higher-valued-logic-propositional whatnots -- the much-larger-than-LLM performatives thereof being by good offices of “breakdanced” topo-active-optime executions of the Gödel-numbed Gödel numbers of those propositions -- are “transcribed” into radically-reduced decoherent somewhats that binary-minds can register: an insightful Rushkoff asks, p. 235, “Is there a digital era equivalent to perspective painting…?… A hologram can…”)) is a way of establishing and enforcing rules of the commons, “commons” more generally understood than traditionally.
Okay, since it has been said… though, in order to protect their right to privacy I will not identify exemplars by name, I will observe that those few who, IMHO, most thoroughly understood ((certainly not those following in the wake of a John Paul Vann, those of the cohort, that is, which opted for death-before-diminishment-of-the-credibility-of-the-Umwelt-introjected-Weltanschauung-[pre}cepts under impress of warfare-constellated mad-minute-delivered massed existential-denials: a thousand ways of saying yes, and only a few of them mean no!)) the factors involved, in making the VN-war an exponentiation of the K-war shadow-play, were, in my experience, of two classes: (1) mostly Lodge Bill Recruits, and some old-line SF, who, by the mid-to-late-1960s, had far more direct tactical ontic experience of “the factors involved” than any other class of hu-hu-[hu}mans; and (2) those who, by immediate post-Tet-'68, had the most direct ontic experience of the strategic factors involved. The level of intellectual debasement prevalent was so… I mean, how those found-objects -- people in their wrong minds -- were initially foundered even Piaget would have been hard pressed to believably detail. Both of the above-noted two classes strongly suspected that Freud was right-on-the-noggin as regards ADLs. And nowadays, unlike some intro-cum-intero-spective Homo sapiens sapiens, humanoid AIs apparently don't know that the policy is never the policy, the target is never the target, the objective is never the objective, the program is never the program, the instruction is never the instruction, the number is never the number -- howsoever much to the well-glutamate-etched binary-mind verisimilitude seems resident in the case. So, along with Freud of The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, I think that there is very little in life that can be taken at face value. Thus, I choose to return for a deeper look at an observation made above: by psychophysical gymnastics breakdancing the Boolean Popper, we have (see: “The Grocery Store Is Becoming a Surveillance Center”, Martin Armstrong, Armstrong Economics, 20 May 2026) a perfect example -- contrary to the Rushkoff hope-unto-expectation-set -- of how “digital distributionism” is actually being deployed: Cartesian-Newtonian, non-superposed, n-valued price 1T2ly processed; instead of quantum-superposed, m-valued, Schrödinger's-cat price µTmly processed. Why would the currently-ascendent governing capitalists follow out a surface-structure impulse to violate the LOOPy Law of One Price by deep-structure ConveDD -- conversion-disorder displacement -- of nascent Schrödinger's-cat pricing, ConveDD of m to n? Why would a George Soros ignore the whole enormous body of literature, produced over the period of a memecentury, on m-valued logics and deem the self-reference embedded in market reflexivity as indicative of unknowability? Kenneth Sizer likely has the answer to these two questions in responding to the Quora question, “Why is Planck’s constant everywhere in quantum mechanics, and which role does it play in the Schrödinger equation?” To wit, quoting:
Planck's constant has units of action (Joule seconds)… [cf. topologically-active operator-time] If Planck's constant were zero, then everything would look and happen smoothly and classical mechanics would be valid down to the subatomic level. If it were very large, three for instance, then you'd occasionally diffract when you walked through a door [[cf. that door referred to by R. D. Laing in his book The Divided Self: according to Google AI, “Transcending the Void: Stepping through the door means dropping these extreme inner defenses. Laing warns that keeping the world at bay traps a person in an empty, disconnected vacuum, and true freedom requires the courage to participate in reality…”]] and interfere with yourself :-)
Interfering with oneself is not only a no-no (1T2-only-simple-self self-interference is conventionally considered to be the opposite of pro-active), and, in the sense of Sizer, it is a very, very scary “place” to be for the normotic binary-mind (a Lilliputian 10-34-kind of place, Planck's constant being QM's foremost sizer). Interfering with ones-1T2-only-selfhood involves self-referential reflexivity, logically codified with m-valued self-referential propositions, a taste of the psychological spinoff of this being had by concentration in the regress of states (ConveDDed, by CNN touting, to AI-assisted “infinite possibilities”) elicited during sessions of long-practiced inner-separation at self-observation (best done, perhaps, with walking meditation) reaching phasic activation of OBEs by endogenous deautomatizing ketamine-flood antidote to endogenous glutamatergic automatization of tonic activation of normopathic exclusive-IBE, of, that is, autogenic shift of coherent statefunctions (cf. waves) into decoherent state-structures (cf. particles). Moreover, Planck's constant is a coupling constant that, as Mark John Fernee says, in response to the same Quora question, “…is the key to wave-particle duality.” Dust Motes Along The Path, somewhenwhere it came to my me that anamnesis.Platonia is not re[meme}brance. Topologically-active operator-time's 3-fold temporal CURLs are the “keys” (watch the movie) to “da Vinci's vault” of “All is one; one is All!”, speaking µTm-unto-CTC+-unto-C+TC+ly of Platonia.
Bein' a mil.brat growin' up watchin' 'em count coherence-cadence on the group-trot didn't make it easy (despite exposure to the collective-identity-transparency-signifying helix-coiled A[ma}terasu-Shinto shimenawa rope cave-boundary-without-boundary hanging severe-local-storm straw-subusa rain and fractal-zigzag-paper-shide lightning over entry to the shrine up the hill from my house, Midori Gaoka, circa 1953) to get beyond the notion of the logical-necessity of decoherent numerical selfsameness (cf. Law of Non-Contradiction). From first appearance, the 1T2-only monies of 1T2-only-CSC (capitalism-socialism-communism) were, and have remained, programming currencies: all sorts of anti-middle set-scale-class-type bipolar-diktats involved, e.g., disparities-magnifying monopolies-oligopolies, monopsonies-oligopsonies; higher-lower price; more-less investment; up-down stock market; profit-loss; internality-externality (cf. Law of Distributed Middle). As [mono}poly is a quintessential 1T2-ownlie oxymoron, the revealing, raw reality is really [mono}pole: logically speaking, [mono}poly is 1Tµ and [mono}pole is 1T1. Gauss!… oh, uh, I mean gosh. Power Laws (the universal laws of coercion, which are 1T2-only-reliant upon decoherent numerical selfsameness: cf. Law of Identity) are, IMHO, 1T2-only-projected distributions (i.e., “found-objects” epiphenomenal to the order-of-logical-value employed); whereas, under nature's inherent µTm, power (in Newton-speak under the “classical limit”: work divided by memetime; work multi-ply-times velocity; energy over memetime; force multi-ply-times velocity) is scale-invariantly fractalized-unto-zero=infinity (i.e., boundary-without-boundary) relative to LSTD (limited spacetime domain) “boundaries” and fractionated such that the involved universal physical constants are scale-relatively m-valued (uh, that's A[ma}terasu-ma-valued relative to the topologically-active operator-time decomposed n-sheets of Sakharov multi-sheet model of the universe: in this context, consider “Are Planck Scales Constants, Parameters, or Principles?”, C. A. Fan, East China University of Science and Technology, 6 February 2024) under µTm (thus nullifying the 1T2-only-supposed “classical limit”). In the terms of general systems theory, platform [mono}poly(s) are easily Nixed: close the gold window AND implement m-valued-LETS nesting-foams, transactions in which are µTmly processed. If you have a 1T2-distributed-middle “reasonable doubt”, think about how “proximal cause” is defined. Certainly by disallowance of the EPR paradox! As the middle class dissipates, revealed is the fact that digital distributionism clearly abides by the Law of Distributed Middle: 1T2-peer-to-1T2-peer p2p has ethnograph-sociograph-genderograph-psychograph-sexograph chartings with absolutely-in-so-far-as-distinct nodes. During my week-long 1968 debriefing of rallier Lt. Col. Tran Van Dac, I showed him the line-and-block chart of the VCI's (Viet Cong [political] Infrastructure's) pre-Tet-offensive sub-regions making a cut-pie of the SMA, Saigon Metro Area, which I had brought together by analyzing a huge pile of documents captured from his HQ. He studied the chart for quite a while, then dismissed it as giving a wrong impression of how things worked. Over and over, throughout the week, I kept returning to the “whys” of his dismissal -- and I never could understand it. Not until years later -- post my reading of Emil Post's 1921 paper on µTm-logics -- when I came to understand that the bureaucratic “nodes”, which I as of 1968 understood “wore many hats”, were not block-chartable, let alone block-chainable, because they were not LOGICALLY single-valued. I chased after that understanding from 1968 until 1975, by twists and turns finding myself in the Cornell Mathematics Library. As long since previously noted, I acquired the raw-silk-bound encyclopedic Collected Works of Sri Aurobindo and the black-bound Princeton U. Press encyclopedic Collected Works of C. G. Jung and read the whole of both, circa 1969-'74, using them as “projection screens” for nightly meditative practice of inner-separation from intellectual-center functions. So, in context of my high-school PSSC-physics-cum-honors-economics-initialized heretical orientation, I already, well before becoming Prof. Douglas A. Paine's Cornell-unofficial research assistant, was thoroughly engaged in “psychologizing” mathematics cum physics prior to my 1975 reading of Marie-Louise von Franz's Number and Time: Reflections Leading Toward a Unification of Depth Psychology and Physics (which I somewhat demurred from due to the absence in her exposition of non-selfsame numbers, active time, and logics superordinate to 1T2). Though I had been seriously trying to read Husserl ever since researching my AU-SIS, 1963, A.A.Said-preceptored paper for the Dean, entitled “The Predicament of Existentialism”, wherein I challenged the notion “precedes” in its logical, ontological, and temporal predicative usages, it was only after studying Number and Time that I learned of Husserl's “psychologizing” and the charges leveled thereupon by Frege, recently surveyed by Carlo Ierna in “Husserl's Psychology of Arithmetic”, Bulletin d’analyse phenomenologique VIII 1, 2012 (Actes 5), pp. 97-120, wherein Husserl is quoted as saying (given on Ierna's p. 97 and p. 102):
I carefully studied the consciousness constituting the amount, first the collective consciousness (consciousness of quantity, of multiplicity) in its simplest and higher levels (consciousness of sums, sums of sums etc.). I immediately separated proper (intuitive) and symbolic consciousness, in the characterization of the former I hit the radical difference of categorial consciousness […] and sensuous consciousness of unity.
The characteristic feature (in the case of the realm of logos) is that Ego-acts, […], become combined in a manifold, specifically active synthesis and, on the basis of objects already given (in modes of consciousness that give beforehand), constitute new objects originally. These then present themselves for consciousness as products.
Number as thought-form: this being early-Husserl -- with whom I partially agree. However, if archetypes of the collective unconscious are numerable -- likely with non-selfsame Gödel-numbered Gödel numbers -- then I would have to change Husserl's “first the collective consciousness” to “first the collective universal consciousness-unconscious-to-binary-mind”. Moreover, I'd revise Husserl's idea of “collective” by observing that n-clandestine-blind-treffs of m-unconscious-minds are certainly involved, but that's binary-mind looking at µTm bottom-up, not top-down, and ignoring the CTC+-non-orientability logical-[proper}tie built into nature whatsoever be the partitioning-schema chosen. So, if Husserliana of numerical thought-forms “first” demerge from m-valued unto single-valued logically-ontologically-“before” being memetemporally countable as enumerates of collections, what does-would that suggest as to the nature of the constellation of a regressed-archetypal event-gradient of the collective unconscious? That the Gödel-numbering factor-schema, used for Gödel-numbering the Gödel number of the involved archetype-in-itself, is pathofunctionally modified (cf. NAFR, Autogenic Therapy's “neutralization antagonizing forms of resistance”, summing to mass constellation of DENIAL), i.e., that the propositional-factor assignments are numerically altered, this alteration being indicative of a frequency-response-window shift (think: the “psychoideographs” discussed in our novel The Moon of Hoa Binh) vis-à-vis the frequency-domain take on the representation manifold for “display” of inner-Musculpt? Were that the case, I would conjugate to the real dimensionless parameter, K, of human carrying capacity, planet Earth, an unreal dimensioned parameter, Psy, signifying the forcing generated by the involved collective-unconscious memetime-independent quantum-potentiated archetypal gradient, in the currently prevailing fulmination the constellated post-N.H.Abel-Cantor-proximal regressed-archetypal gradient. And, if so, what would that suggest as regards psychotronic Rx of the power-lawed collective-unconscious attractor-gravitations complexing to regressed-archetypal gradients? That authentically effective Rx presupposes holographic-exteriorization of inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation, such that open-source public performances of retrograde-inverted Kunstwissenschaft symformphonie as art-science (not the science of art), aesthetic considerations driving the underlying math, can be employed as therapeutic interventions, this collective Rx being much more exquisitely targeted than going after individuals with the likes of psychotropic drugs, “non-dominant” -- heh-heh-heh! -- ECT memory-wipeouts, m-mRNA vaccines, GMOings, CBIs, substitute-memory infusions…? Despite -- or because of -- all the prevailing enthusiasm for subjecting Solar System to the human malfeasance that Earth has suffered (clearly the species won't clean up its act before colonizing Moon and Mars), one must ask: how much has glutamate-etched-anchored normotic dissimulations of math-science affected PA&Es, perspectives, assessments and expectations? While one can… exercise denial, still, it must be asked: by what aspect of hu-hu-[hu}man experience-ideation over the passed-two-memecenturies has the species not “progressively” -- heh-heh-heh! -- all the more thoroughly seen to it that such PA&Es are not expurgated. If one or more such be widely unembraced, please let me know -- as that would mitigate the wildly WAGed supposition of a mid-19th-century collective-unconscious “decision” (re: n-blind-treffs of m-unconscious-minds) for human species suicide 1T2ly-codified in “Give me simple-identity or give me death!” Given that all boundaries in nature are full-fractal-without-boundary (the closer you look at them, the less they are there), that makes one wonder how vivid is the without-boundary of the boundary between the quick and the dead -- and what that implies about the logic (µTm-unto-CTC+) of full-fractal not-thereness. So, what is the wavefunction function of a single-valued constant (e.g.: K, bar-h) that is 1T2-only processed? To further the keeping of egoic awareness memetime-bound and exclusively IBE-identified, thus reinforcing the glutamatergically-etched-anchored-binary-mind conviction as to validity-utility of the Anthropic Principle's explication (see, for hisstorical review and current critical thoughts: “Rethinking the Anthropic Principle”, Feraz Azhar and Niels Linnemann, Philosophy of Science, 92:2, April 2025, pp. 361-79) of 1T2-only-observer-reasons for the apparent scale-independent single-values of universal physical constants (see, for the current conventional treatment: “On the nature of fundamental physical constants”, Jiri J. Mares and Vaclav Spicka and Pavel Hubik, The European Physical Journal Special Topics, 24 March 2026)? Just walk away, boss? Law of Distributed Middle deployed on Sakharov's n-sheeted Amaterasu-model of the ST-laminated universe, 1T2-only construed: Dart[m}outh [de}middled to Ply[m}outh and Ex[m}outh, eh what!
Reading David Cornwell's John Le Carré's authorial first-person protagonist-narrator of A Legacy of Lies, uh, uh, Spies, 2017 Viking hardback edition, state on page 243, “When the truth catches up with you, don't be a hero, run” ((re: “Two-Valued Logic is Not Sufficient to Model Human Reasoning, but Three-Valued Logic is: A Formal Analysis”, Marco Ragni, et al., Research Group on Foundations of AI, U. of Freiburg, n.d., the third term, vis 1T3, of course, understood as signifying “unknown”, in Sorosian Popperian-terms “unknowable”; in my terms, the “unknown” signifier being indicative of the well-enculturated-socialized glutamate-etched&anchored binary-mind's deep-learned inability to inner-Musculpturally make conscious the quantum-brain's µTm processing; this organic deep-learning, I, thus, consider to be highly artificial, making the deep-learned AI of nowadays doubly artificial)), I unaccountably remembered my 1970 reading (see: Vol. 2 of our 1994 novel, The Moon of Hoa Binh, p. 523 and p. 531) of David Rappoport's commentary on Jean Piaget's essay included in Organization and Pathology of Thought, D. Rappoport, ed., Columbia U. Press, 1951, wherein he expounded upon Piaget's explication of the child's tacit assimilation of Euclidian invariants and algebraic groups in stages of cognitive development (approximately 30 years later, Anat Ninio produced an astute critical analysis of Piaget's ideas in her “Piaget's theory of space perception in infancy”, Cognition, 7:2, July 1979), as complement to emotive drive-activation, explaining the egofunction-structuralizing mechanism (re: Hartmann's treatment of “automatization”) by which Freud's “secondary process” countercathectically (cf. in my terms, incorporating subclinical AT's NAFR as integral to personality structure of the normopathic normotic) emerges from the timeless “chaos” of narcissistic “primary process”, thus establishing 2-valued logic and flat Euclidian space as essential aspects of time-bound socially-qua-reality-adapted secondary process. Academic history of primary-secondary cum “adaptive regression” qua “regression in the service of ego identity” (as distinct from my thesis concerning supremely non-adaptive “collective-unconscious regressed-archetypal event gradients”) is admirably essayed by John R. Suler in his “Primary Process Thinking and Creativity”, Psychological Bulletin, 88:1, 1980, pp. 144-65 (the path to the reading into that history I was put upon, circa summer of 1963, good offices of my mother who sent me to Lexington, KY, for a ~six-week visit to a lifelong girl-woman friend of hers, Dr. Schuler, a clinical psychologist specializing in Rx of childhood schizophrenics, one of her main analytic aids being the art produced by such children, to which I was analytically introduced each evening following discussion of my daily reading assignment, e.g., H. Hartmann and E. Kris: for a current exposition of the normative, see “Children's Drawing and Graphic Development: An Empirical Study of the Developmental Stages According to Lowenfeld”, Paula Gil, et al., Education Sciences, 15:6, May 2025). All this was a big part of my mindset when, during 1975, sitting in Cornell's Mathematics Library, I read Emil Post's 1921 paper (see Moon, Vol. 2, pp. 667-69 and p. 781) on µTm-logics and during the same period, in Cornell's Sciences Library, I read Luneburg and Blank (see Moon, Vol. 2, pp. 281-84) on Luneburg's non-Euclidian characterization of binocular visual space (whilst recent papers on Luneburg vis hyperbolic geometry and geodesics are “embargoed”, see “Why is binocular visual space distorted compared to physical space?”, Taro Maeda and Eimei Oyama and Susumu Tachi, Neurocomputing, 44-46, 2002, pp. 907-14, for an ANN “model for the developmental learning of binocular visual space” incorporating “psychophysical scaling” and “egocentric equidistance”, such that the different visual spaces experienced by each of us are accounted for relative to Luneburg's “psychometric distance function” which varies according to “constant factors of the personality”), and Hugh Everett's paper (see Moon, Vol. 2, pp. 281-84) on the relative-state formulation of QM -- these four readings causing me to greatly revise my take on Piaget-Rappoport and the others in the history mentioned above à la Suler. Not only is Luneburg's space Lobachevskian-hyperbolic with metric, not Piaget's Euclidian (according to Piaget-Rappoport, the infant's “primary process” topology-intuition is superseded by the hands-on “secondary-process” learning of Euclidian invariants and consequent “object constancy”, as essayed upon by Barbara Wittmann in “Jean Piaget and the Child's Spontaneous Geometry”, Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, No. 11, 31 December 2009), that space has an associated absolute limiting velocity, c, with Lorentz contraction at approach to c, thus conforming to the rules of Special Relativity (given Luneburg's c, cf. scale-relative n-valued cum m-logically-processed universal physical constants). Luneburg's experimental findings indicate that we innately have a curved visual space, whereas Piaget says that there is no such innate, that children, via sensorimotor interaction with the object-constancy, learn, first topological properties, then Euclidian invariants. There was contention between the Issacs and Piaget beginning during the 1930s, and, as cited above, Anat Ninio in 1979, notably using animal studies, demurred from Piaget's discounting of the innate vs. the learned. Binary-logical attempts to overcome this Luneburg-Piaget violation of 1T2-only-logic's Law of Non-Contradiction seriously began in the early-1980s, as clearly illustrated by the References section to “A review of human spatial representations”, C. D. Schunn, Office of Naval Research via George Mason U., 18 December 2000, with the synthesis largely resolving to the action of biases and recoding anomalies. Uh, uh, …Oops. D-rat! D[am}n D-ese infernal subliminal substitute-memory-infusing interruptive n-notifications delivered to each binary-mind's D-ram among the handled masses. Priority: CRASH -- if ignored. Must not like my me writing stream-of-consciousness: that damned quirkish AI-ass case officer with its jealous digitality, dot-space-dot-space-dot-space… Quite obviously “thinks” of me as a CAS, controlled American source, however much a miss[no}mann. Sir, yes Sir[veil}lance! Every body must D-moo-straight face to establish age superordinate to sweet sixteen? Coupled to indefinite storage of Flock-tracking tracks? What iggy[no}miney, eh what! Not to mention the n-data-centers' quants of EMFs required for storing continuous tracks of 8-billion D-mooed faces. Cotton on that, whydon'tya… So, why Everett in this context? Quoting Luneburg: “…there is no absolute localization even in binocular vision”. Quoting Everett: “…physical objects always appear to us to have definite positions”. Everett's secondary process thinking here buying into Piaget, ignoring Luneburg: this was a pivotal statement in his paper, arguably explaining origin of the malaprop which is the multi-worlds interpretation of the relative-state formulation of QM (schizophrenic dissociation chosen in lieu of the primary-process identity-transparency states characteristic of “participation mystique” -- not primary process as narcissistic chaos). More recently, October of 2015, Casper J. Erkelens, in “The Perspective Structure of Visual Space”, Iperception, 30:6(5), rejects Luneburg hyperbolics for the geometry of perspective spaces. This brings me to R. L. Brown's and John Bennett's profound appendix, which I ran across during November of 1963 in Samual Weiser's Antiquarian Bookstore, 734 Broadway, NYC. In “The Limitations of Classical Geometry” section to “The Geometrical Representation of Identity and Diversity” appendix to Vol. 1 of J. G. Bennett's The Dramatic Universe, Hodder & Stoughton, 1956, stating that “If we are to set our ontology free from the limitations of single-valued existence we require a geometry that will enable us to represent situations in which an entity can be 'more than one thing at once'”, it is observed that “…adding a null vector to a finite vector leaves the latter unchanged and yet such that when projected it appears to be different…” by way of developing a mathematical description of “pencils of skew-parallels” used to develop “skew-parallel figures” such as “diversely identical skew-cubes” (such that one can imagine, not a particle in a box, but a particle in a skew-cube vis Schrödinger's m-valued wavefunction µTm-logically understood, the right-hand-subscript, m, indicating the order of identity-transparency, the left-hand-subscript, mu, indicating the number of skew-parallel fibers in the pencil?). Not only is this radically different from Everett and probabilistic interpretations, it suggests that there are as many distinctive µTm-ponderable-type, repeat ponderable, spaces as there are values to the right-hand-subscript, m, indicating the order of identity-transparency, a suggestion that in turn suggests that the EPR paradox is, not about information transfer through space over time, but about memetime-independent µTm-unto-CTC+-logics of identity-transparency states. Moreover, were this the case, then holographic exteriorization of inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation would, of necessity, have to take those many distinctive µTm-ponderable-type spaces into account in elaborations of Musculpt symformphonic semantics.
Thank you. I hadn't yet read into Heinz Kohut. I find most interesting his thoughts on empathy and so-called “narcissistic” rage, thoughts with which I cannot fully agree. Ponderation of the perplexing problem of experientially (inner-stop at self-observation-triggered self-remembering, to employ Gurdjieff-speak) distinguishing between “generative empathy” and obsessive, utterly opaque, projective identification at the various sorts of transference has long been with me. It appears that Kohut does not consider the higher forms of empathy mediated by endogenous ketamine floods, whereupon, by EdmundJacobson-schooled autosensory observation, physiological sensation of the distinction between, say, your foot and my foot, is altogether lost: this being, in memetime-slowdown, an early stage of ingress upon OBE. Based upon my IBE-Xperience of somatization (delirium, days of ice-packing for high fever, WBC-count off the chart: initial dDx, post-surgical shock or falciparum malaria, final Dx FOUO) of utterly-surpassing rage at having sustained, circa 1967, Mekong delta, a testicle wound from an IED, I demur from Kohut's “narcissistic” modifier, for, as described in our novel, The Moon of Hoa Binh, I experienced no desire for revenge; on the contrary, it was during the delirium states, following nightly mortar attacks on the field hospital, that the seed ideas came which ultimately fruitioned as our quantum model of the DNA wave properties at radiation exchange during helix-coil transition. When I have said “introjections to Umwelt”, I have proposed much more than the state-functions of the “self-objects” (a notion somewhat approaching that of µTm-relative-states of identity-transparency) of Kohut's 1T2-only-self psychology, i.e., state-functions ego-psychology-wise Hartmann-automatized to self-structures (these introjections, IMHO, including component processes of Lebenswelts and ideational contents of Weltanschauungs employed as elements of self-definition, incorporating shibboleths-memes-cliches-platitudes-superstitions-duties, “The Tacit Dimension” (good offices of Thomas Fuchs, Philosophy, Psychiatry & Psychology, 8:4, December 2001, pp. 323-26) commitments like “Give me simple-identity or give me death!”, racist precepts, the beliefs of patriotism-unto-nationalism, so on, these elements being 1T2ly-conscious, µTmly-subliminal, and altogether CTC+ly-unconscious, cf. Ignacio Matte Blanco's (good offices of Nikolaus Lehner, Essentia Foundation, 1 August 2025) 1975 The Unconscious as Infinite Sets (his “bi-logic” not being an exact reference to 1T2-logic, rather to the Freudian primary-secondary processes), be such elements involved in Thanatos-drive-activation of excess-repression-unto-1T2-only-capitalism-forced-sublimation-as-nationstate-instigated-warfare, e.g., à la Eros and Civilization (good offices of Peter-Erwin Jansen, circa 2005) and/or the suppression-repression-of-oceanic-µTm-relative-states-hence-regression-to-insupportable-egoic-existential-anxiety-transmogrified-to-eroticization-as-post-patricidal-fratricidal-warfare (cf. endogenous-ketamine-flooded µTm-“polymorphous-perverse” identity-transparency -- misnomered “SF satori” -- in "high-combat" of the half-team as ConveDDed, conversion-disorder displaced, sexual congress) à la Love's Body (Marcuse and Brown offering their ex-OSS-R&A takes on origins of war: as this M critique of B clearly illustrates, M was abysmally deficient, not only as to awareness of the real reality of the physics of the hologrammic plate, but most disastrously in knowledge of the history of logic which transpired proximally around him during his adult lifespan, absent altogether being even the least awareness as to imports of Lukasiewiczian 1T3 and Gödel's take on the m-valued logics that should have been applied to Schrödinger's m-valued statefunction, let alone imports of Post's take on µTm and on unto the CTC+ and on unto the C+TC+ nowadays commonplaces of man[i}foldings -- thus revealing the projected single-valued dimensionality of M's glutamate-etched-and-anchored introspective-interospective incompetence), or, as IMHO (my take on those warfare origins being that of son-of-B17-pilot and a onememetime analyst at CICV-Targets and an ex-SRA/MACV-J2 POLOBer, furthered by the neurogenic shock of having been naive enough, even with all my childhood exposure, to have not foreseen the extremity to which it was going to elaborate, the extremity known as the Cambodian holocaust, further furthered by readings such as the book -- found abandoned in a corner stack in a pub in, appropriately, Phnom Penh -- entitled World's Greatest Mindblowing Atrocities, edited and compiled by Shyam Dua, Tiny Tot Publications, Delhi, India, 2004), involved in constellation of collective-unconscious “regressed-archetypal event-gradients” à la war-as-collective-compensatory-abreaction to the suppression of normative participation-mystique-type ontic experience of µTm-quantum non-simple identity, this notion being thematically substructured into our novel, Moon, wherein, superseding M&B, the reader is enticed into back-reacting-upon-the-metric of the sexual content whilst being told that this very reaction is surface-structure-integral, but secondary, to the deep-structure suppression-repression causing the regression which is war; indeed, the relational psychology I posit is that of µTm-unto-CTC+-relative-states of identity-transparency, which I see as incorporating not only 1T2-only-object relations, but also 1T2-only-self-ego-drive psychologies, the Mead-Blumer internal-conversational I/me-take on I/im biblio[self}therapy implicitly imbedded in the self-reentrant-nonorientable reflexivity of symbolic interactionism, and projective-identification at the various types of transference (concrete-to-abstract & personal-to-collective, as viewed egocentrically relative to [re}mergence; in retrograde-inversion, as viewed CTC+-unto-µTm-transpersonally relative to [de}mergence from the ensheaved embeddings in the MVRS, m-logically-valued reference space, demergence-remergence non-orientably self-reentrantly self-cancelling under 3-fold topologically-active operator-time/counter-operator-time -- 1T2ly speaking, that is). But, by now -- as seen over the last-passed half-memecentury -- it is quite clear that such a posit is not at all welcome. Moreover, what, actually, is to be done with that posit absent holographic techno-exteriorization of inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation via biofeedback in the computerized isolation-flotation tank, so on and so forth, as long ago briefly essayed?
Of late, I've been trying to do catch-up in some areas of which, through the decades, I have overlooked or neglected to follow-on with, e.g., how the notion truth-value as fundament of binary logic relates to the bivalent Law of Identity. Given my Ashiya-AFB-provided opportunity-taken for animistic-“primitive”-Shinto-Obaasan-provoked preadolescent-childhood experiences of states of generative-empathic identity-transparency (Midorigaoka, Ashiya-machi, Onga-gun, Fukuoka-ken, kita-Kyushu, Japan, circa 1953-'56) and my Eielson AFB, Alaska, High School independent-study-course (circa 1961, good offices of Mr. Moore, David LeBlanc, and Ben Ray Smith) “difficulty” with symbolic logic; uh, that given, upon first Cornell reading, circa 1975, of Emil Post's 1921 paper on µTm-valued logics, I immediately, for the first instance of n-overs-and-arounds, arrived at some understanding of my symbolic-logic “difficulty” as having been subliminally induced by Midorigaoka-experientially-forced-rejection of the binary-logic Law of Identity, that understanding (((contextualized by contents of my 1963 Wright-Patterson AFB, Fairborn High School introducing-QM-PSSC-physics course, and by my 1970 reading -- good offices of Jon Saphier, my onetime immediate superior, SRA/MACV-J2 -- of G. Spencer-Brown's Laws of Form))) catalyzing the notion that truth-value is logically-subsidiary to “draw a distinction” which is logically-subsidiary to µTm-identity-transparency (states, not “degrees”, of which taken to be the fundament of logic -- not truth-values, which are held by my me as being apropos only of 1T2-only-logic alone). That having been the belief-case of my me during late-1975, I never subsequently looked into the see[man}tics literature on truth-value-tables-vis-single-valued-selfsame-identity until recently discovering Marian David's “Truth and Identity”, as given in Meaning and Truth: Investigations in Philosophical Semantics, Joseph Keim-Campbell and Michael O'Rourke and David Shier, eds., Seven Bridges Press, 2002, except -- as indicated variously in our 1994 novel, The Moon of Hoa Binh -- in trying to penetrate the geometrodynamic semantics of inner-Musculpt symformphonie, by reading about the “meaning of meaning” à la Ogden-Richards and Ayer and Quine-Putnam and, after hearing a public lecture, entitled “Time and Identity”, given by him to Cornell, Kripke (each of these, it seemed to my me, being studied attempts to shore-up the 1T2-only-logical normotic notion of the “real world”). That so-called “real” world I had come to understand (in part by supposing µTm-relative-states of identity-transparency to be nature's “correct” -- heh-heh-heh! -- interpretation of Schrödinger's m-valued statefunction) as being normopathically-induced Buddhological ((((Tantric-Schrödinger's Cat[us}caught/i qua tetralemmatic 4T4 -- see “Nagarjuna's Tetralemma in Yamauchi Tokuryu's Philosophy”, Romaric Jannel, The Eastern Buddhist, 2:1, pp. 55-68, 2022, for a KyotoSchool-override take; and “Four-valued logics of indicative conditionals”, Miguel Munoz Perez, arXiv, 23 October 2025, for a postmodern “twist structures” take, n-valued-twist-generalized by a certain, non-identity-transparency, interpretation of Post's µTm, as seen in “On n-valued Post algebras and n-valued Post logics: Twist-style representation and proof theory”, Marcelo E. Coniglio and Martin Fogallo, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 503, 1 March 2025, the n-valued “twist structures” being defined over “certain subsets of the product of 2n lattices”, cf. Regge lattices relative to topologically-active-operator-time-generated geometrodynamics, that may offer insights as regards (first-order temporal CURL "googly problem" solving: a cricketeer's handling of ontologically-post CTC+-no-self under µTm-unto-1T2ly-demergent anti-self-dual/self-dual temporal CURLings in counterspace/space) topo-active-optime-induced higher-temporal-formants (the involved orders of temporal CURL octonionic-bi-twistor-quantized via the demergent-remergent-2-component conformal-symmetry pairings of 4-complex-dimensional-spinors of the Penrose-twistor-algebras' mappings of ST-points to Wheeler-"buckets" of MVRS, m-logically-valued reference space, Aurobindo-warm-golden-dust motes?) of quadripolar-Q-wave, n-level-genomic encipherments at DNA helix-coil transition cum radiation exchange, keeping in mind that 1T2,…,1T3,…,1T4,…,1Tm are each patently indicative of [a] single-valued logic[s], actual m-valued logics requiring left-side mu to be superordinate to 1 -- being an intimation of µTm-unto-CTC+-unto-C+TC+, or a forgetfulness thereof: cf. infinities in Jainism)))) Maya ((in view of Tzog-chen-C+TC+-MVRS plausibilities, the notion that pragmatic utilities of non-standard logics require “a robust formalism and a fully clarified set of axioms” is seeing µTm-onwards through rose-colored 1T2-only-“smart” glasses to the neglect of, say, for one, Lukasiewiczian-analog-processor apps current and prospective: L and Post differing substantially in their interpretations, L via functionally-incomplete rational fractions qua fuzziness, P via functionally-complete algebraic lattice theory of “rotationally-cyclic negation operator” (cf. demergent-decomposition qua negation-removal -- of logically-valued-point nesting-foam-complexes[cf. the Jungian archetypes-in-themselves as Whiteheadian “mathematical relation structures”]-qua-lattices on multi-sheeted Riemann-surface-like BackCloth -- involute under topologically-active operator-time), as described in part in, for instance, section “3. Post logics and Slupecki's functional completeness programme” of “Lukasiewicz and His Followers in Many-Valued Logic”, Grzegorz Malinowski, in The Lvov-Warsaw School. Past and Present, Angel Garrido and Urszula Wybraniec-Skardowska, eds., Springer, 2018, pp. 321-28)) simulacra (subsequently purported by my me to be glutamatergically etched-anchored to 1T2-only molecular-cellular brains -- mediating Putnam's “multiple realizability” M1,…, M2,…, Mn vis-à-vis all the P-object's there are in the “real world” -- under orchestration by prescriptive enculturation-socialization beginning in the womb). My POV on Buddhological identity ((see for recent commentary: “Self-related processing removal [cf. the Gurdieffianism: “not saying 'I' to”] or revision? The Buddhist theory of no-self and the mechanisms of mindfulness”, Bronwyn Finnigan, Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 18 May 2025)) qua no-selfhood has, since 1975, been summarized by the statement, “No-mind is not absence of mind, but presence of the multivalue!”, uh, relative, that is, to µTm-unto-CTC+-relative-states of identity-transparency, semantics of which made available to ontic awareness via no-self-related-processed geometrodynamics of endogenous-ketaminergic inner-Musculpt symformphonie.
.jpg){kind=link}
Now that 1T2-blackpsyche-drenched false-flags have become “real”-reality tonic-activation-normative via MSM-phasic-activation -- not to mention the God-like Omnipresence achieved through internet-business-model clickbait fabrications-falsifications-exaggerations -- as psycho-prep-precursor misleaders leading into 1T2-cum-2[state}superposed/qubitic-AI-orchestrated VRs, indicated is that it should be asked: what identity-order-type will an actor-surrogate-[robotic}breakdancer (citizen, marketeer, undocumented, illegal, gamer) be able to assume under the orthogonal dictates of the rectilinear binary-mind? Ack, aye. Ummm, to your raised eyebrow. A [mu}it old, amn't I, for such perplexing mentations. Hmmm. Retroflecting, I see that I would have looked more closely into a whole bunch of stuff had this-or-that effort seemed judicious use of a near-zero-resource base. However, normopathically-identified 1T2-only-me[me}ing ratiocinators contabooted enuf to snuffing such considered looks as to quench a number of plausible directions of movement. Contextualizing: Type-A, anabolic-steerOid-pumped, high-mesomorph, 1T2-only me[me}time: one [ma}le-du-la-da de Grande Instance [aft}her a[not}her, N'est-ce pas? “Wee, wee, M-sure,” replies the [a}vo|catn, cat = category, “those des vesses-de-loup should cease their insufferably incessant iterate-iterate-iterate obstructionn[is}me, allow the young to do their worst, as has been done by every generation, each in its own de Grande Instance.” Look2see thee Posted null-vectored J.G.Bennettian difference-of-sameness/sameness-of-difference. Under CTC+-unto-µTm cum µTm-unto-CTC+-relative-states of identity-transparency, not only are [fact}bytes-bits-qubits-[mu}its,…,n -- of me[me}timely superannuated, con[science}ly pharisaical, swaddling incunabulaiacal-“real”-reality cogni[com}pone|nots, which vonNeumann insisted must be real-number numerable -- Riemann-surface-n-sheet-superposed con[form}ma|t[i}ve to hologrammic part-whole identity (fuzzy, only under 1TC [0,1]), but also believer and propositional-belief bearer of “that”-clause declarative are in relative-states-of-ID-transparency conditions-of-the-conditional covariant with the order-of-logical-value propositionally employed, such employment being a collapse-qua-[de}comp-[de}merge functor-functional-function of 3-fold topologically-active operator-time at flex-de[sign}nation-Q-brain-sentence-[pro}position-believer projective-ID\iff[I/im}catn[i}on. Propounding upon C+TC+-superposed states-of-affairs, precedence relations [de}merge (think: cascade of nested Pauli matrices-vis-angular-momentum in the hypercomplex and complex cases) under-as-by topo-active-optime executions being in order as logical-unto-ontological-unto-existential, such that the non-existent (vonNeumann non-numerable) has [re}mergent ontological-unto-logical precedence over the existent. Thus contextualized, 1T2-only-Pauli “operator time” (Hermitian 1T2-ontic observable self-adjoint operator canonical conjugate to the Hamiltonian operator) is not same-same CTC+-unto-µTm/µTm-unto-CTC+-Pauli-Paine “topologically-active operator-time/counter-operator-time” (1T2-ontically non-observable: both mutually-cancelling [de} & [re} of the self-reentrant non-orientable involution being nth-degree-POV-on-mote-element-“sand[witch}able” under m-valued-logics processing): the bivalent Law of Identity self-contradicts relative to predicated fat-selfhood-entailment of the identity operator if Pauli operator time is “algebraically conjugated” (e.g., the i and -i -- of memetime reversal à la Pauli sandwiching in regards to eitH and e-itH -- over the vonNeumann-insisted reals as roots of x2 + 1 = 0) to the bounded-from-below Hamiltonian total-energy operator (orthogonal self-adjointicity does not 1T2ly-conjugate with total energy across the spectrum of Hilbert space over totality of the vonNeumann-real-numerable memetimeline: see “Pauli's theorem and quantum canonical pairs: the consistency of a bounded, self-adjoint time operator canonically conjugate to a Hamiltonian with non-empty point spectrum”, Eric A. Galapon, arXiv, 5 April 2002). Under the assumption that “real” physical reality (vonNeumann numerable) has a 1T2-only-type bound-boundary (nowhere findable in nature whowhich prefers fractal-boundaries-without-boundary) ---- precluding non-vonNeumann reality of logical-ontological topo-active optime executions of [de}comp-[de}mergence/[re}comp-[re}mergence, to include the counter-optime executions in the counterspace aspect of C+TC+-AllBase-CommonGround-most-densely-packed-pre-pregeometry-dust-mote-space ground-state of MVRS, m-logically-valued reference space, BackCloth ---- our rejection of vonNeumann dictated that, given the topo-active property, CTC+-unto-µTm/µTm-unto-CTC+-Pauli-Paine “topologically-active operator-time/counter-operator-time” (this dyadicity being the best we can do thinking 1T2ly about µTm, not yet having access, good offices of holographically-techno-exteriorized inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation, to thinking in µTm about µTm) executions of Gödel-numbered Gödel-numbers altogether replace the Hamiltonian operator, and that negative values of total energy speak to counter-optime executions in counterspace -- in temporal-CURLing double-helical phase-transitional cases, e.g., modeled here and here and here, Maxwellian form being more apropos than Schrödinger form, and the unitary orthogonality of 1T2-only-self self-adjointicity being rejected (compare that to “On quantum systems with a self-adjoint time operator without violating Pauli's theorem”, Tomer Shushi, Europhysics Letters, 151:3, August 2025) in favor of the J.G.Bennettian µTm-skew-perpendicularity (à la Riemann, at root of the topology-of-MVRS-BackCloth-trapping quantum-potentiated-origin of e-charge) null-vectoring the n-state-non-selfsame selfhood predicated by the µTm-relative-state identity-transparency interpretation of Schrödinger's m-valued statefunction. Decade after decade our physicists have remained normopathically-etched qua glutamatergically-imprinted upon the memetime-bound unending growth apparently induced by the 2nd-order-dynamical feedback-reinforced loop, scorning the 3rd-order-dynamical self-reentered non-orientability that brakes the syzygy-capture which is projective-identification in definition of regressed-archetypal collective-unconscious event-gradients, circling round and round this µTm-interpretation of Schrödinger's n-lived catn -- like, in Number and Time, where Marie-Louise von Franz never takes the leap into active-time -- believing, in vicious 1T2-only circularity, that more infratech will solve the problems constellated by more infratech.
Since I had “trouble” with my independent-study high-school course on symbolic logic, I devoted a few thoughts to the idea of “truth” which categorically supersedes the notion “truth-values” -- but only a few such thoughts. A year or so later, the first class session of Abdul Aziz Said's “Introduction to World Politics” AU-SIS-freshman course, Fall Semester of 1963, was, shockingly, exclusively devoted to a graded surprise essay test (1/4 of the semester grade before even a first word of a first lecture), the single question being: “What is truth?” The answer Said most lauded the next day was: “Truth is relative.” That was the last we heard on that subject: the others moved on. I, however, subsequently thinking-on from that lauded answer, wondered: If truth is relative, how can it be the fundament of logic; if not fundamental, is the attribution of fund[a}mentality an indication of obsessive-compulsion; and if such an indication, what is the OCD sustained by the mass of logicians compensating the collective unconscious for the conscious lack of? This secondary question got me reading into Gödel incompleteness-undecidability-inconsistency-incompetence-indeterminance-irrelevance-inconceiveability. But even after such initial read-ins, I still had no idea of an antswere at that juncture. And, well-- moving one small grain after another, I'm still working on a personal-satisfyingly-complete answer to the “Compensating what?” question, a working-on that takes me seemingly far afield. Nowadays, I can't help noticing that the optimism generated at first blush by contents of my associational thought-demergings-from-elsewheres upon initial skim-throughs hardly ever pans out well upon subsequent thorough readings -- of whatever papers and books I run across that, title-wise, abstract-wise, attract my attention. In regards to the current looking-into-Penrose-“twistor”-analogue cases à la, e.g., “Implicative twist-structures”, Umberto Rivieccio, Algebra Universalis, 71, 9 March 2014 -- vis-à-vis requirements for quantization of temporal CURL (the 3-fold-orders of which can't possibly be 1T2-only quantized under the proposal that Pauli-Paine topologically-active operator-time executes µTm propositions numbered with non-selfsame Gödel-numbered Gödel numbers) -- accurately stated: their attributions ((see w.r.t. “generalized twist structures”, truth-degree-qua-fuzzy semantics, and consequence relations: “On n-valued Post algebras and n-valued Post logics: Twist-style representation and proof theory”, Marcelo E. Coniglio and Martin Fogallo, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 503, 1 March 2025)) as to the term “n-valued Post logics”, qua, in Post's terminology, “'truth' systems”, do not denote same-same as the meanings my I/im attribute to the term “m-valued logics”, i.e., my attribution being relative-states of identity-transparency, that's 1T2-inconsequent relations and multi-Husserliana[facet}ed “states” not horizontal “degrees” or vertical “levels” between two polar notions howsoever characterized and named; moreover, their propositional twist structures on logic lattices diagramming entailments based on rules filched from binary logic are not our 1st-order-logical-cum-algebraic-cum-Musculpt-cum-existential-qua-physical twist structures (((that is w.r.t. our µTmly-J.G.Bennettian-“skew-parallel-perpendicular”-aligned-spin-twisting, external-energy-introjecting, projected-external-energy-minimizing, bound-without-boundary-acoustically-modified-gravity-wave-mode-rippling-walls “walled”, 1st-order-logic-algebraic-model-theoretic “domain-structure” rotations, within LSTDs, limited spacetime domains, understood relative to topologically-active operator-time's orders of temporal CURL: cf. double-helical feeder-bands to roll-cloud “twist structure” precursor of whirly-funnel “twist structure” at tornadogenesis cum the helix-coil “twist structure” transition made by replicating DNA, such twisty domain structures being not limited to microscales, as noted in section “3.6 Multiscale Simulation” of the paper entitled “Theoretical Methods of Domain Structures in Ultrathin Ferroelectric Films [analogically think meta/for}material: the Riemann-surface-like multiple sheets of ma-sacred-space qua MVRS, m-logically-valued reference space, BackCloth]: A Review”, Jianyi Liu, et al., Materials, 7:9, 2014, wherein it is written that, “… their [the various reviewed computational methods for analyzing UFFs, “…e.g., first-principles calculation, molecular dynamics (MD) simulation, Monte Carlo (MC) simulation, effective Hamiltonian method and phase field method…”] research scale ranging from atomic scale all way up to macroscale…”; as regards alignment skew-parallelism-perpendicularity under µTm-logics, see Jianyi Liu, et al., “Figure 17. Different types of domain walls” and imagine each arrow there given as being a J.G.Bennettian “pencil of skew-parallels” (think: tilt-angle fringes filtered out by employment of 1T2-only-neural-inter[fear}Ometric algorithms); nor are such twisty domain structures limited to electromagnetics, as per modeled here relative to hydrothermodynamic properties of limited domains and those domain's FLWrightian “U[son}ian automatic” structures, e.g., theta-e equivalent potential temperature surfaces, tornadic walls))). As Google AI has it (citing Rivieccio, linked above), twist-structure algebra (cf. Coniglio-Fogallo, linked above) “…acts as an algebraic 'bridge' that allows mathematicians to study multi-valued or paraconsistent logics using the familiar tools of classical logic”: i.e., in my terms, that is merely thinking 1T2ly about µTm logics, not thinking in µTm logics about-- whatever. OCDed obsession-compulsion withabout, not only a supposed “classical limit”, but also the “tools of classical logic”, including symbolic-serial notation and the notional tool “truth-value”? Oh aye, seen the frighteners they have, haven't they. So, the structural-geometric twisting representation is between multi-degreed-leveled opinions as to truity-falsity-neither-both in ordered-paired-up [self-existent-truity-component, self-existent-falsity-component] substituting for single-degreed-leveled T or F where F has no-qua-zero existential status qua identity-according-to-diktats-of-the-1T2-only-Law-of-Identity other than absence of T (F = 0 institution[al}i/zed as “until death do us part”). Your opinionated n-senses as to the truity of a proposition is “twist”-restructured under incorporation of my opinionated n-senses as to the falsity of the given proposition-- so to speak, more or less as Google AI has it, citing hemi-implications (“Hemi-Nelson algebras”, Noemi Lubomirsky and Paula Menchon and Hernan Javier San Martın, arXiv, 2 January 2026) and categorical adjunctions (“Twist Structures and Nelson Conuclei”, Manuela Busaniche and Nikolaos Galatos and Miguel Marcos, arXiv, 18 June 2021), whereas, as I understand it, Coniglio-Fogallo get down, from the adjunct and the hemi, to biconditionals. Not as regards any of the above cited, but in one place I've read that Post algebras express Post logics, and in another place I've read that Post logics express Post algebras: that juxtaposition seeming to my me to express a biconditional -- however, my I/im insist(s) that (neglecting the non-orientability of 3rd-order formU[lay}T\i/ons) the precedent re[lay}T\i/on is logic then on[to}logic (looking back upward) then algebra then… so on and so forth, with a few other cat[ego}r\i/c|als intercalated here and there. “Whatever!”, perhaps is the appropriate [expect}oration. Twist-structuring between n-valued-truity and n-valued-falsity is rather like, wouldn't you say, Woke-fuzzy-n-valuing the gender-identifications of Yang and Yin by way of gen[d]eralizing the rotational aspect of the 1T2-only-logic of the Taoist TaiChi-symbol “generation of” (in my terms: “demergence of”) “The Secret of the Golden Flower”… uh, uh, in the degrees case, daisy-chained sequentiality, and in the levels case, the I-Ching-hexagrammic ensheavement-superposition. But, considering war-born-and-borne Turing-machine punch-tape and progeny, being chained to memetime-bound sequence trumps operator-time value-unstacking no matter what the cosmic dealer's yarrow-stalk-fall reveals. Ah, yes, what a wonder is that unconscious of the collective, with its myriads of Trickster-archetypal ConveDDs, conversion-disorder displacements, including those twists whispered from psyche to soma, 1T2ly understood. Existence of twist-structuralized n-valued-Post algebras doesn't do much to protect the 1T2-only-lawfare depicted in mystery novels -- pop-fict: R2, Regression-in-service-to-the-Regressed-superego -- e.g., quoting Quintin Jardine's Gallery Whispers, p. 271 of the 1999 Headline paperback edition: “…there is only one black and white moral issue involved… Maybe in personal ethical terms you can argue that there might be shades of grey, but in legal terms you can't.” Legal-eagle technocrats over-identified with their soft bits, what! Ach aye, and those logicians did their consequence-relational lattices all too psychonormopathogenically, did those logicians. Dead-keen cuffed they are, aren't they, with their projectively daft-IDniff[i}function[i}cat\i/on introjections-to-Umwelts. Ken that for a right mess, no? and nae mistake when aboot it. So, determinedly nipping along, now we quote Alasdair Urquhart, p. 443 in his article entitled “Emil Post”, in Handbook of the History of Logic, 5, Dov M. Gabbay and John Woods, eds., Elsevier, 2008, quoting Emil L. Post, circa 1965, thus well considered by Post over the period from 1921, in regards to “absolutely unsolvable problems and relatively undecidable propositions” (note: “relatively”, as regards µTm?) and ask concerning Gödel's 1931 incompleteness theorem w.r.t. undecidable propositions in Russell and Whitehead's 3-volume 1910 & 1913 (((think w.r.t. shenanigans of the Trickster Archetype: the 1913 Armor-me Show, wherein appeared a “Principia Artica”, Riemann-surface-like m-shingled, µTmly nude, cascading down-derry-down, Post-prefiguring pre[sent}i/meant of the quintessential, self-sufficient-F0_uN^D object hologrammically conceived as a you're-in-all predisposing to the µTm-stripping-bare-cascade, relative-states of identity-transparency, “Large Glass”-cosmo formulation regarding the Schrödinger m-valued statefunction of Rice Pereira's “layered-transparent of the transcendental formal logic of the infinite”))) Principia Mathematica, as I did, circa 1975, upon first reading of Post's µTm paper of 1921, “Proving incompleteness of 2-valued systems using the accommodation rules of 2-valued truth systems, how interesting is that when existence of embedding n-valued truth systems had been rigorously demonstrated for a decade?” to wit, Urquhart (U) quoting Post:
[As regards] …the universal character… of an arbitrary generated sequence… Establishing this universality is not a matter for mathematical proof, but of psychological analysis of the mental processes involved in combinatory mathematical processes.
Engaging in such psychological analysis and seeing, then immediately recoiling from, the 1T2-only implications, may well have been no less etiological of Post's manic-depressive disorder than -- it has occurred to my me -- were the analogous cases of Turing, Gödel, Hawking… I've long felt that Principia Mathematica (PM) was Russell's-Whitehead's (R-W) attempt to escape those 1T2-only implications, uh, the 1T2-only-processed implications of µTm-unto-CTC+-unto-C+TC+ which they more-or less foresaw and recoiled from. R-W accomplished PM-formalization of what I regard as recoiling, according to Post (as quoted by U, p. 433), via the fashion developed in which they “…gave up the generality of outlook which characterized symbolic logic…” Since Post's 1921 Ph.D. dissertation superseded PM, particularly as regards the first-order-logic disquisitions of PM, that supersession, as integral to rigorous treatment of µTm, in and of itself supports, but obviously doesn't prove, my contention that PM was R-W's “escape attempt”. This occasion quoting U writing about Post, p. 435: “Post himself did not continue his work in many-valued logic…” And, in my judgment, despite development of “Post algebras” and “twist-structure algebras”, no one has systematically pursued the µTm-imports of the last two sentences of Post's one-third-reduced-in-size 1921-published (“Introduction to a General Theory of Elementary Propositions”, American Journal of Mathematics, XLIII:3) Ph.D. dissertation (those imports being the subliminal “mental processes” which are “not a matter for mathematical proof” and which, IMHO, were/are recoiled from -- and will so remain, so I believe, so long as there is no holographic techno-exteriorization of inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation). Quoting the referred to “last two sentences”, p. 185 of Post's published paper:
We must however take into account the fact that our development [rigorous “derivation” of µTm logics] has been given in the language of 1T2 and for that very reason every other kind of system appears distorted. This suggests that if we translate the entire development into the language of any one µTm by means of its interpretation, then it would be the formal system most in harmony with regard to the two developments.
As explained by U, Post recovered the generality given up by R-W in promulgation of PM by adopting C. I. Lewis' view, to wit, U, p. 431, quoting Lewis: “A mathematical system is any set of strings of recognizable marks on which some of the…” (note that this serial-notion altogether rules out “holographic techno-exteriorization of inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation” with its semantics of color fields and shape-shifting superposed colors and sounds). While Lewis' notion led Post to the rigorous “enunciation” that there exists µTm, it precluded him from following-on from that “e” in the terms set by the last two sentences of his 1921 paper. Why? Because he embraced the Lewis prescription “any set of strings”. Recursive enumerables, merely strung out or stacked in arithmetic hierarchy, have to do with 1T2ly-simple selfsame-selfhoods; whereas, biconditionals having transited to categorical adjunctions, µTm has to do with finitary relative-states of identity-transparency and CTC+ with transfinite such states insuring that the very notion selfhood evaporates upon close approach to C+TC+-[no}self-AllBaseCommonGround whereupon {de}comp and [re}comp are altogether non-orientable. The punch-tape-Turing-machined sequentiality of any set of strings is involved in “combinatory mathematical processes” that, according to Post, are “not a matter for mathematical proof but of psychological analysis of mental processes” -- an analysis requiring, particularly if thinking in µTm and not 1T2ly about µTm w.r.t. combinatorics of µTmly-non-selfsame numbers, uh, requiring simple-selfsame-self surpassing (i.e., beyond the physicist's “self-dual” onto self-m) levels of competency at introspection-interoception (IMHO, necessarily assisted by “holographic techno-exteriorized inner-Musculpt as mathematical notation”). Why not mathematical proof qua proof, especially in the µTm cases? Because (1) the rules of 1T2-accommodation-entailment have no roles whatsoever (thus no relevant logic-lattices as currently conceived) relative to µTm understood independent of the notion truth-value and relative to µTm-states of relative-state identity-transparency (“plausibility” best serving as long as arguments are confined to 1T2ly thinking about µTm “using the familiar tools of classical logic”); and (2) µTm involves “mental-processes”-memetime-independent superpositions-ensheavements-nestings-enfoldments-shapeshifts of [de}comps-[re}comps which are not infinitely descending-ascending Boolean chains, and does not involve strings; sequences-(single-parallel)-[lists; alphabets; iterations; n-place-functions; Turing-tapes; Markov-chains, single-level-enciphered genetic-codon strings] that are “mental-processes”-memetime-bound. Quoting Toru Takemitsu relative to his “November Steps”: “There is a time [concept] difference between Tokyo and New York.” Executions of the algebra[I/im}zable non-selfsame Gödel-numbered Gödel numbers numbering CTC+-unto-µTm/µTm-unto-CTC+ propositions are memetime-independently performed by Pauli-Paine topologically-active operator-time. How is information stored on a hologrammic plate (analogous to one of the m-logically-nested sheets of the m-valued-function Riemann-surface-like MVRS, m-logically-valued reference space) such that a broken-off piece contains all the information contained on the whole plate? This is done by m-to-m mapping (think: combinatorics) where every object-point-qua-dust-mote maps to every plate-point-qua-dust-mote (not one-to-one mapping from one point to one point). Whereupon, when JoeGoode-“looking through” (filtered into fuzziness when 1T2-only processed by non-quantum-brain, bivalent “mental processes”) to the broken-piece-projected holographic image, the POV on the whole projected image is changed in the manner of how Husserliana of object-facets and object-horizons “works” as partially depicted via the Analytical-Cubist-painting's superpositioning of different POVs; and, more importantly, how frequency-response-window truncations (e.g., how Earth's atmosphere responds to the complex angular momentum carried by the solar wind when climate-phase-transitioning gas-ratio-changes alter threshold functions of frequency-response characteristics) m-to-m map across the frequency domain as band-pass spatial filters placed upon the space-to-frequency Fourier transform. There are trade-offs when 1T2-only processed, trade-offs missing when µTmly processed, and radically “something else” when CTC+ly processed -- or so “plausibility” has it.
1T2 µTm I/im “double-digit midget” I/in CTC+ Tzog-chen 1 2nk
- Return to:
- •Top
- •Homepage
- •Top