m-LOGICALLY-VALUED
LOCAL EXCHANGE TRADING SYSTEMS

TRANCHE 8

Photo by Nguyen Huu Anh Tuan

These days, everywhere one scans the cultural horizon there are to be found myriad traces of underlying thematics related to the prevailing gestalt of collective projective identification. In an advertising blurb (p. 31, New York Review of Books, November 20, 2003) for the soon-to-be-released Captors and Captives: The 1704 French and Indian Raid on Deerfield (Evan Haefeli and Kevin Sweeney, U. Mass. Press), for instance, it is emphasized that the purpose of the book is “ …to demonstrate the fluidity of community and boundary…” which, presumably, having read only the blurb, this particular occasion of warfare in the morning of 18th century rationalism helped wipe out. This fluidity, in so far as it had Native American origins, was based on cosmological metareference; it was analogically modeled on a notion of how the whole of nature functions. By now, the 21st century, all such consciously-mediated cosmogonic reference in political, economic, and social frameworks has been stripped away, leaving utter collapse to regressed projective identification: P2P, for instance, the forward-thrust ledge of the most avant-garde barricade of posthumous New Age thought. Open-source P2P, peer-to-peer, is the prevailing cutting edge visualization of 60s-era participatory democracy. P2P is the analogue for “participatory”; open source, for “transparency”. Not exactly based on cosmological metareference; not exactly based on a notion of how the whole of nature functions. Open-source P2P is no mere example of reductionism; it is an example of the profound collapse in comprehension suffered by the human species beginning as far back as one wants to look. And open-source P2P isn't even a collapse with verisimilitude; it's a flawed metaphor, as is always the case in projective identification. P2P transfers (i.e., psychiatric-couch-type psychological transference on the subject-physical/object level as it applies to group behaviors) in-here(nt) holographic animistic identity transparency to out-there(d) technological artifact; it, open-source P2P, then becomes surrogate for cosmogony upon which social, political, and economic order is to be analogically modeled. Look, however, at the architecture of a peer-to-peer local area network compared to that of a client-server network: P2P is all running in cable-linked circles. Not exactly a cyberia that captures the properties of holographic information space, let alone authentic animistic (Injun) identity transparency. So Wi-Fi (wireless fidelity) must be incorporated into the metaphorical model. Each peer a portal! That'll do it. Except that, with each PC its own RF or microwave transmitter and each peripheral IRed to each PC's binary processor, along with every cell phone, and every RFIDed object, subject, and suspect, we'll be living in a far more invasive microwave oven than we are at present in this day and age of pandemic immune competency disorders. Think of all the newly created degenerative autoimmune diseases that will result from this past-imperfect post-modern metaphor hard-unwired to politics, economics, and sociology! And open source -- the permission of every peer to read the tacit binary-code dimension of every other peer -- is not much of an embodiment of animistic identity transparency, with its wildly non-binary properties transcending information defined in terms of disorder (entropy). A functional “fluidity of community and boundary” is missing from this particular case of projective identification; as well it should, given that, in projective identification, peers are one's own isolated egoic trickster seen in the funhouse of a thousand concave and convex mirrors. Who is captor and who captive? Cosmological metareference cannot usefully be based on extrojection -- through projective identification -- of regressed contents of the collective unconscious. But it doesn't do to challenge fools, idiots, laboratory chimps, and rats on treadmills in their yuppie spas. Best to stand back and watch their antics. Used to be they'd shoot themselves in the foot; nowadays, they have the muzzle tilted to the temple. And in the chamber is the silver bullet, their techno-fix.

So, how did things reach such a strange pass? One stage passed through, and, strangely, presently being passed through again, is Wilsonian democracy, very nicely essayed in the same issue of The New York Review (“The Missionary” by Ronald Steel). Right at the start, however, I'd change a few things said there, by way of contextualizing. Steel observes (p. 26) that: “…the U.S. has been in a state of war in one place or another almost continually since 1941…” Actually, the cited date should be the 1630s when the first village massacre was perpetrated on Lon-Gai-land. Wilson waged war on behalf of what David Singer, the bioethicist, calls “reason and universal ethical values”. Derek Dillon in MOON repeatedly asks: what reason? The two-logically-valued variety, the ten-logically-valued variety, the m-logically-valued variety? And which one of these orders of logical-value is universally ethical? “Reason”, inevitably, is what one regards the properties of one's own thought processes; and “universal”, an application of the coercive “we” to generalization of those idiosyncratic properties. But let's hear from Derek more specifically on Wilson (MOON, Vol. II, p. 129):

We must remember that the days of the FEDERALIST PAPERS were not focused on states' rights, but on denial of local autonomy, on a uniting of states into a superstate. All the discussions at the time of the rights of the subsystem were simply the rationalization of subordination to the supersystem -- that is, the United States…

The League of Nations, after the “war to end all wars”, was, of course, not conceived as a true federalist institution, but only as a first step in that direction. And when it failed, it was only because of the vindictive French and British and a recalcitrant U.S. Congress, not because of anything so nebulous as “reality”. So the idea was embraced all over again a generation later by Roosevelt, with even greater messianic zeal and utter foolishness -- thus preventing the origination and evolution of new concepts, new processes, new approaches…

This chiliastic, down home, Ohio River Valley federalism… was, of course, in no way meant to challenge the validity, indeed sacredness, of the nation-state… but only to strip away the nation-state's evil Old World European bad habits: infernal balance of power adjustments, spheres of influence, buffer systems, et cetera. And federalism was the concept capable of doing all this! One would think that such a profound organizational idea would at least require for its expression a fundamental breakthrough in the absolute differential calculus -- which had, in fact, been one of the products to issue from World War I through the good offices of an Italian named Tullio Levi-Civita -- but, no, once one had the vision, arithmetic was hardly even required: actually, it took no intellectual effort at all; it was self-evident. And, of course, there was no reason to suspect that the nation-state system itself was the culprit; that way of thinking would mean that we, ourselves, might have to change. God forbid!

Wilsonian democracy, in its will to ethically impose the coercive “we”, did not contemplate self-organization any more than self-modification (except by self-propaganda and self-censorship: self-repression). You WILL be free. You WILL engage in self-determination. You WILL have fun to the fourteenth power. And what an inflation: instead of ten commandments, fourteen. A godly economy of command, no matter how deadly the attempt to create a suprasuperstate turned out to be. Soft utopianism, as opposed to hard; Christian linear view of history. Omega-point stuff. And here we are doing it all again for the umpteenth time since the 1630s.

And look what we get as alternative to centralization, pyramiding, command and commandments: open-source P2P. No talk of m-valued logics; m-logically-valued exchange units; currencies defined on Koch-curve-type FLUIDITY OF BOUNDARY; fractal entrapment as opposed to commandments against repatriation in a specified period; no talk of the roles in self-organization of velocity, acceleration, time rate of change of acceleration of monetary through-put; no entertaining decision-free political systems by virtue of the identity transparency, the FLUIDITY OF COMMUNITY, that is, involved in the relative-state of the governing m-logically-valued wave-function: all essential elements of any actual contemporary cosmogonically referenced global unity-through-m-logically-valued-diversity metaculture (as opposed to one-size-fits-all global monoculture). No, it is the techno-fix provided by projective identification we want serviced: cellulared, Wi-Fied and RFIDed microwave oven: that's the sort of planetary monoculture we're after these days. Why? Because we have, for instance, suppressed conscious awareness of the connection between the fear-inducing pre-WWI Axiom of Choice and the post-WWI fourteen-fold Wilsonian You-WILL. A whole lotta twistin' goin' on. The U.S. pushed Europe for decades in the direction of federation, only to discover that a superstate of Europe is a threat to the superstate of North America. Maybe if "You WILL have one single monolithic suprasuperstate" is successfully erectioned, then there will be no more threats, no more conflicts, eh, the real end of history, this time. Whaddaya think, huh?

I am not opposed to open-source P2P as a technology, only as an analogical model for civilization. And I would not be opposed to Wi-Fi as a technology were the frequency-response windows of DNA, RNA, and proteins declassified such that we knew for certain that our communications transmissions are not biologically active. Those molecular frequency-response windows are hairline thin, dependent on waveform and intensity within a vast frequency domain; there is no reason our artificial technologies cannot stay clear of them. These frequency windows have not been open-sourced for military reasons and military reasons ALMOST alone -- the medical imaging industry, as it currently exists, for example, also could not well afford such declassification. Vast numbers of people currently have AIDS, systemic lupus erythematosus, multiple sclerosis, and many other autoimmune diseases because of biologically active probes upon frequency-response windows in one way or another critically related to pathogenesis of these ailments. Just because our communications engineers discovered the valley of minimum sky noise does not mean nature did not know about it first.

Implementation of m-logically-valued monetary units would best be accomplished, and would have greatest effect, in a civilization moving decisively toward overt cosmological metareference of the forms in processes governing its economic, political, and social institutions. The only authentic analogical model we have of unity in diversity is m-logically-valued quantum relative-state. There is no UNIverse that is not simultaneously a MULTIverse. The MULTIverse, under non-probabilistic interpretation, is not a collection of absolutely distinct baby universes, but this one-and-only UNIverse under m-orders of logical-value. Reality (a pan-hylitic/pan-psychitic reality) is not selfsame, the same as itself; it is simultaneously not-itself m-times over under m-orders of logical-value. The short answer to “What does such a universe look like?” is to refer the questioner to an Analytical Cubist portrait: such portraits give some feeling for what objects in such a UNIverse look like, the Cubist object, of course, being the hylitic-psychitic data viewed via simultaneous employment of more than one order of logical-value. This is not actually abstract and cerebral; it is a matter of presence or absence of given percepts and feeling-tones -- synaesthetic feeling-space becoming more and more engaged as the order of value of the logics employed increases in magnitude. Cross-modal correlations of sensory dimensions, or the relative absence thereof, have much to do with order of logical-value employed. A more current visual evocation might be found in Frank Stella's recent book Working Space (Harvard U. Press, 2003). And, yes, I do know that very few people presently on this planet anymore are capable of such direct perception; those capabilities went progressively into abeyance as animistic identity transparency was more and more reduced under elaborations of role stratification toward the federalistic suprasuperstate omega point. This abeyance, this waning, was formation of a neurological deficit, lacuna-on-the-brain, progressive incapacity for m-logically-valued processing by greater and greater blocking of semiconductant to superconductant transitions in nuclear intraneuronal and perineural DNA: Gurdieff's “kundabuffer”. That neurological deficit is the primary reason why it is necessary to create economic, political, and social analogues of the involved processes, e.g., m-logically-valued monetary units, so as, through repeated use, to facilitate functions essential to removal of the deficit.

A planetary METAculture is envisioned as metareferential analogical embodiment of the m-logically-valued relative-state of the MULTIverse which is the UNIverse. Concrete cultures -- Kulturnation as opposed to Staatsnation, e.g., Serbian, Armenian, Palestinian, Albanian as opposed to Serbia, Armenia, Palestine, Albania -- each codify reality as a corpus of learned behaviors transmitted from generation to generation. Tradition! The reality they codify in behavioral analogue is the universe as they experience it, all of that universe. This codification becomes the basis of their worldview, which is embodied in religion, arts, artifacts, music, decision algorithms, institutional formats, and so on. Planetary METAculture is the superposition and relative-state of all such concrete cultures. METAculture cannot exist without the presence of a multiplicity of distinct, unique concrete cultures: this unity demands diversity for its very existence, a notion Socinius would have had no trouble understanding. The more that distinct concrete cultures are validated and vivified, the more vibrant and elaborate the planetary METAculture can be. Unique concrete cultures propound unique worldviews and embody them in various kinds of hard and soft artifacts. METAculture propounds the meta-rules of worldview propoundment itself, and embodies those meta-rules in various kinds of hard and soft artifacts, an example thereof being m-logically-valued monetary units. Such metareferential embodiments protect the involved concrete elements; otherwise, how could those metareferential embodiments themselves exist?

As long as nature is taken to be selfsame, the same as itself, not m-logically-valued, there will be continuous warfare. Each concrete culture codifies all of reality. If nature is understood to be selfsame, then there can be only one true account of it. Each concrete culture claims to have the one true account. This claim is the logical foundation for war. Get rid of the Law of Non-Contradiction and the Law of Distributed Middle under m-valued logics and nature no longer can be understood as selfsame. Selfsameness is undefinable, except under the lowest order of logical-value. Each concrete culture still codifies all of reality, but codification itself is codifiable. Codification of codification is what METAculture is, what it embodies in artifacts, artifacts hard and soft. Five-star global MONOculture is something else again. MONOculture is one concrete culture's worldview construct and artifactual embodiments, based on the notion that nature is selfsame, imposing itself on all other concrete cultures by falsely claiming to be an authentic universal: “reason and universal ethical values”. Which logical-value order of reason is universal? The only such true universal value is a superposition of all of them. You cannot have a superposition of only one thing; an authentic multiplicity is required. The m-logically-valued universal wave-function is an actual superposition of actuals, not a possible superposition of probables -- and each of these actuals is a codification of the actual in its entirety. Under m-valued logics, there is no question of interaction or non-interaction of the actuals, as that only arises under a probabilistic interpretation which separates the actuals as if they were distinct probables. Each of the actuals is a codification of the complete actual, not a separate universe existing in a distinct spacetime continuum, not a simulacra, not a virtual reality. Fusion music is not planetary METAculture; Japanese eclecticism in industrial design and fashion is not planetary METAculture: both are expressions of global MONOculture because they do not embody meta-rules of worldview propoundment, they embody concrete acts of propoundment. METAculture is to the meta-level of concrete cultures, not eclectic fusion on the same concrete level. METAculture cannot disturb concrete cultures; it can only revalidate and revivify them; if METAculture did not do this, it would not itself exist. The assumptions behind global MONOculture are at the root of war; the assumptions behind planetary METAculture are the solution to war. Even were global MONOculture to triumph through warfare, it would lose. Why? Because nature is an actual superposition of actuals, and MONOculture reduces nature to just one thing, a monism embodied in uniformizing technologies. This is a recipe for megadeath, a recipe currently in command of the collective imagination of the human species, a suicidal self-metaprogram. The “layered transparent”, m-valued logics, Gödel-numbered Regge lattices, Musculpt, and all the rest are required if METAcultural artifacts like m-logically-valued monetary units are to be implemented such that this suicidal self-metaprogam is transcended. Look at a current map of the Balkans or of the Caucasus. How else can such jigsaw puzzles become culturally, socially, politically, and economically functional, if not via FLUIDITY OF COMMUNITY AND BOUNDARY achieved by defining m-logically-valued local monetary exchange units on Koch-curve-type boundaries within a METAcultural context developed by people who experience identity transparency? How do people with lacuna-on-the-brain (induced by millennia of ever more elaborated role stratification) re-learn identity transparency? By doing, by use -- use of, for instance, a monetary system embodying identity transparency in its fundamental properties.

Still having trouble with the idea that John Nash, like Yayoi Kusama, has never been mentally ill, eh? I know the thesis that Nash was toying with supra-mental-health in the very “hallucinations” deemed clear indication of illness is hard to swallow; it implies that what is taken as normative is actually itself disease. In order to credit “hallucinatory” Nash healthy, one has to discount oneself as ill: not a likely scenario. I said, if I remember correctly, that Nash was freely moving in complex multivalued function spaces and was being required to bring back a product consonant with the consensus agenda of institutional science. But that was not Nash's real dilemma, only its exoteric aspect. His vivid “clippings hallucination” -- if he actually had this “hallucination” as portrayed in the film -- was a metaphorical map of the real territory. Nash's actual crisis was that he had come face to face with the very elaborate true mental illness sustained by, for instance, John von Neumann, one of the most destructive people of the 20th century. Game theory was an example of the ways in which von Neumann falsified Schrödinger's m-valued wave-function. The “hallucination” is where Nash needed to go if he wanted real comprehension, not into game theory. The creation of game theory by von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern was an expression of full-blown collective hysteria and deeply entrenched psychoneurotic posturing, a form of dissembling to directly complement the dissimulations of quantum logic carried out by von Neumann and Birkhoff: no more-refined schizophrenic word-salad. Here is Derek Dillon (actually written around 1975) reviewing G. Birkhoff and J. von Neumann, “The Logic of Quantum Mechanics”, Annals of Mathematics, 37, 1936 (MOON, Vol. II, p. 751):

One truly must wonder at the extraordinary lengths the mind is willing to go in order to avoid looking the multivalue straight in the face. Here, it is recognized that quantum logic has some relation to projective geometry, but where is the Riemann surface stack? Though some doubt is cast on the utility of Hilbert space, where is the recognition that every point in the referencing phase-space is multivalued, that translation across a single-valued sheet is projected as a static lattice to the multivalued referencing function space? How strange that they should invoke the concept of a logical “lattice” but not view it as a true point-set topology! Similarly, they use involutory relations and the concept of skew-fields, but the multivalue screaming in the background is completely ignored. Dropping distributive (and/or commutative) laws for two-valued propositions, indeed! Can laughter be suppressed? These missing recognitions are not ignorance speaking; they are expressions of psychological dread. And this paper, summarizing a decade, at least, of collective psychoneurotic posturing, was published just three years before the first actions were taken in the inevitable avalanche of consequences!

M-valued logics had been on the scene for 15 years when this paper was written, yet no distinction is made between the n-dimensional and the m-logically-valued (the essential distinction required if Hilbert space is to be transformed into a suitable vehicle for representing quantum-gravity, as, for instance, in how gravitational and electromagnetic waves are transduced into each other by superconductant DNA). The identity transparency underlying quantum nonlocality and infinite correlation length at the critical state is m-logically-valued. The psychological dread relative to this was so great that it induced collective psychosis realized in the mass hysteria which was WWII. This identity transparency was also the object of falsification in creation of game theory. Game theory treated animistic identity transparency as the “interests” of the “players”, and in so doing could analogically model Schrödinger's wave-function (which, otherwise, inevitably would have been generalized into economic theory) as an action-based sociology requiring absolutely-in-so-far-as-distinct actors, thus dissolving animistic identity transparency altogether. This was a brilliant stroke of convolutional psychotic genius, and the very stroke Nash ran headlong into. The distinction between zero-sum and non-zero-sum -- where zero-sum is or is not the case, and non-zero-sum is a matter of how much or how little -- is a dissimulative treatment of 1T2 logic as opposed to m-valued logic. Zero-sum only exists in a 1T2 logic: the “interests” of the “players” are mutually exclusive. The degree of non-zero-sumness increases as the order of logical-value increases, until, in the mth order, animistic identity transparency is absolute (this, obviously, is not a mere matter of consonance of “interests”). Game theory, by an interactionist approach and the breaking of “games” into zero-sum and non-zero-sum components, artificially bifurcates m-valued logics into the 1T2 order vs. all other such orders -- which bifurcation is not actually there in the case. Derek, in MOON, ridicules this bifurcation by popping off about Stillwell's inability to understand how the Chinese could not comprehend the zero-sum nature of the interests of opposing commanders in war. Nash's contrast of non-zero-sum logic with the notion of “fairness” (at the core of “The Bargaining Problem”, Econometrica, 18, 1950) represents a registration that something is amiss, that the idea of “interests” is somehow not sufficient to capture the case. In the actual case, under its various analogical guises, this “something amiss” has driven the human species to fight the Franco-Prussian war (suppression of animistic identity transparency explicit in the diagonal proof of a denumerable transfinite set), WWI (suppression of animistic identity transparency explicit in the Axiom of Choice), WWII (suppression of animistic identity transparency explicit in the m-logically-valued Schrödinger wave-function), WWIII (suppression of animistic identity transparency explicit in the hologram, the q-bit, m-valuedness of the speed of light, and so on). Hopefully, the third time was the charm, and there will not be several billion killed on fourth pass through the same collective psychosis. The odds for this, however, are not very good. And here I am working on this sort of trivial stuff for free, when I could be working a PSD in Baghdad for $1,200 a day. Story of my life! Never made it as a war profiteer.

Yes, I read Robert Wright's NONZERO (Vintage, 2000). It was extremely difficult to get through, a very disgusting book. He extends von Neumann's falsification across a broad range of thought, reiterating all the same old arguments one has already heard a thousand times, only on this occasion connected to game theory at each juncture in the essay. The messages: Selfishness equals altruism; killing equals cooperation; complexity equals the good, not simplicity; every non-zero-sum phase transition to greater social complexity at the Pareto optimum is associated with a more effective means of killing, which yields positive sums to those defined as players in the game, those killed (rabbits and Arabs, for instance) not being regarded players, of course. The essential message: The American Way is the inevitable, uh, “exceedingly likely”, outcome of the Big Bang -- if the notion of “externalites” is tacitly cultivated in just the right way; if metahistorical pattern be limited to linear progression, while waveform, spiral, self-reentrant cycle, linear regression be disallowed; if Marcel Mauss' “general theory of the gift” as identity exchange (not commodity exchange) is resolutely ignored; if noise is properly separated from data; if categories of Vietcong are judiciously defined such that loss is win and win, loss (by appropriately manipulating definitions, one can always bifurcate the zero-sum from the non-zero-sum components of whatever game, such that evolution through “firm self interest” can be demonstrated in every conceivable case). One would have thought Wright would have devoted a whole section to “Everett algorithms”, games cultivated at the Weapons Systems Evaluation Group, the Pentagon. Game theory not only substantiates the Cartesian-Newtonian nation-state system, it demonstrates its exceeding probability amplitude. How very surprising! Shocked I am, given that this was exactly the reason game theory was created: to deny entry into econometrics of Schrödinger's m-logically-valued quantum wave-function. You want to know why I think billions are likely (exceeding probability amplitude) to die at cusp in the currently evolving conundrum? Have you ever read Jacques Derrida when your grade or career did not depend on it? I have. Never, perhaps in the whole history of the human species, has there ever been a person with a worse case of paraphasia. And the generation now coming into control of human affairs had to choose between this and game theory. There is no dimension of human cognition on the planet today that is not profoundly trashed. None, zero, not nonzero. This was not nearly so much the case in run up to WWII. Orders of magnitude in differential between then and now. I'm not talking about lying to others; I'm talking about lying to oneself. Self-lying has become the main activity in every discipline: this is the only way the central falsifications of nature perpetrated over the past 150 years can any longer be sustained: every tiny feeder root has been called upon to give unqualified support to the trunk: Support the command position on the critical issue, even if you have to argue against your own conclusions, or suffer the consequences! The prevailing magnitude of this activity is far, far greater than pre-WWII. And it's virtually one-hundred percent unconscious. People don't even know what the term “identity transparency” means. They've never experienced it. Watching the film Being John Malkovich is about as close as they have ever gotten. How could they be conscious that denial and/or concealment of identity transparency has driven mass behaviors for a century and a half? Mention the animistic “social substance” still directly perceptible in the air at certain Northern Thai geographical locations, for instance, and people think you are crazy. They have never experienced it! Even if they have visited those locations. There is no intergenerational memory of lost states of consciousness. You think people will deal with this sanely as it again becomes the central (unconscious) theme explored by all-out global war? This has nothing whatsoever to do with what people think they think; it has to do with what they think they don't think. As always, they are going to die without understanding the least little bit of why. And the incidence of death is going to be highest where the self-lying has been most rampant.

I must contest, and hopefully rectify, the contention that I am hopelessly lost in uninformed “intellectual gibberish”, and that there is no practical dimension to what I am arguing. I leave alone the clear implication that what I am arguing is just plain crazy, for I take no personal umbrage at such implications, as I well know that cross-orders of logical-value always mutually appear crazy. Below, I offer a contemporary rewrite of a ten-year-old concrete project tender, a practical project idea, the essentials of which I have been arguing, promoting, trying to interest people in since early 1969 when some aspects were worked up in research on the “home resource center” for the then-editor of the journal Technological Forecasting and others emerged in process of fulfilling a laser-beam lighting-scheme design contract to a Las Vegas casino (a lighting scheme never implemented). You will see that in this proposed project there are various practical ideas for how to begin developing the wherewithal to actually do METAculture, the necessary unity-in-diversity contextualization of m-logically-valued monetary units.

ProCynergy Proposal
The Basic Idea

Summary Statement
The contemporary leading edge of the holistic movement is decisively gravitating toward a synthesis mediated by communications, data processing, diagnostic, imaging, and multimedia technologies. ProCynergy proposes creation of a holistic high-tech resort focused precisely on this synthesis, a resort equipped so it would draw leading professionals in the related fields to stage their meetings, workshops, symposia, and health-related tourism activities at its installations.

The centerpiece would be an activities complex comprised of five architecturally integrated facilities interconnected by a computer local area network: (1) a computerized mind gym, biofeedback, and virtual-realitorium; (2) an aqua relaxation/rejuvenation therapy stadium composed of a farm of multi-media flotation tanks, nutrient-uptake hot-spring pools providing underwater sound baths, and detox jaccuzis based on traditional and modern detoxification techniques; (3) a kinesiology/movement therapy gyrotonics hall equipped for holographic dance-theater; (4) a synthesizer-based music and aroma therapy sensorium; and (5) a virtual-reality catwalk for shows of fiber-optic and laser-enhanced biofeedback smart clothing. This complex would simultaneously be therapeutic, recreational, and research-based -- with rotating resident techno-developers, artists, fashion designers, composers, and dance/movement choreographers. The local area network would be designed to evolve via artificial neural network programming in such a manner as to promote a progressive synaesthetic integration of these activity areas. Non-profit support would continually be sought for the ongoing research and development aspects of this activities center.

For-profit marketing and promotion would target the relevant professions, beginning with the letting of contracts to design the resort's facilities to leading figures in these fields. Publication of articles in trade journals and magazines concerning the designs would spur professional interest and lead to bookings of workshops and symposia, the primary means by which a high occupancy rate would be maintained. As the reputation of the resort grew within professional circles, a larger non-professional client base would develop.

Supporting facilities would be comprised of the following: (1) a dedicated colonics center with its own residence block, a meeting space and minimal kitchen; (2) a clinic building and herbal pharmacy; (3) a gourmet raw food restaurant and juice bar; (4) a workshop meeting hall; (5) a holistic-health-technical shop/boutique; and (6) segregated residence areas, each with a meeting space and minimal kitchen. Clinically, the resort would offer clients a standard program with a minimum stay of four days, the shortest period for fasting-colonics therapy. The clinic would offer, in addition, the services of an acupuncturist/Chinese doctor and herbal therapist. A wide variety of holistic treatment specialists would be brought in for clinical terms-of-residence such that the standard program would be supplemented by use of the activities center facilities.

There have been multiple attempts over the past decade to actually and practically get venture capital interest in this idea, with concrete discussions periodically transpiring up until the present day. Anybody, of course, could take this “holistic resort” idea and run with it, but it is unlikely that anything like METAculture would issue from such an effort without thorough familiarity with the full range of related “intellectual gibberish”. And financial success with this idea is not likely if there is no success with the larger METAculture “program”, as that would be the root of the promotional effort. Notes from a recent discussion are provided below:

Best to try the full high-tech idea as initially developed for the ProCynergy Proposal; the exclusively holistic medicine resort idea is too commonplace by now (so many years later) to get major investor interest.

Need to develop an innovative new standard clinical program (possibly involving a theoretical and practical fusion of autogenic therapy, detoxification, homeopathy via the superconductant DNA model's perspectives on holistic and energy medicine and the evolving diagnostic equipment) not overly dependent on J.J.'s personal attention to the client. The new clinical program has to be fragmentable so people can be trained to do relevant tasks. There is no way to expand the client base to the scale of a resort under present circumstances, where the clients come mostly because of J.J., not the program per se. Js.J. has not had contact with M.C. since the early-90s, so no help there over and above my personal contact with M.C. with regard to finding an autogenic therapist to become involved. A decision on creation of such a program would be a major business decision relative to creating this sort of resort chain (and would be more financially justifiable in the case of a chain, as opposed to a single resort). This would minimally involve other people, research, trials, book writing, and a major time commitment on the part of L.P.

Present the idea as an idea for a resort chain: Js.J. feels this is not too important, as it would necessarily start with a first resort and, if successful, expand from there. L.P. feels it may be a significant selling point concerning the issue of potential return on investment and depending upon the scale of investment that comes to be considered.

Singapore is probably the best first location for the following reasons:

The prospective physical location within Singapore was suggested by one who will remain unnamed: somewhere in the woodlands areas which were once British military bases located out near the airport. This person maintains that, with the proper connections, it is possible to purchase a site in such wooded areas.

Other possible good locations: coast of Turkey near the Greek islands; Mendoza, Argentina (the wine-grape-growing area and soon-to-be terminus of the over-the-Andes rail line from Santiago, Chile; Noosa, Australia. At subsequent locations, different target markets from that of Singapore would be identified and built into the plans and designs.

For each such resort there should be a downtown major city location to begin staff training and client recruitment while the resort is being built, and subsequently.

The resort insures that it makes money by booking in symposia, workshops, retreats, professional and corporate meetings in four areas so as to maintain a high occupancy rate and carryover to health-related tourism use of the resort:

  1. Holistic health movement
  2. IT, computer, multimedia, VR, film
  3. Art-music-science fusion
  4. Biofeedback-smart garments.

Promotion begins immediately as the project is brought up by contracting leading professionals in relevant areas of the target clientele market to design the resort and its specialized facilities, and getting articles on these designs into leading professional journals and specialized magazines. It must be emphasized to potential investors that this is one of the major factors that will guarantee financial success of the venture.

There will be unique facilities and professional and clinical terms-in-residence to work with those facilities.

Get the professional groups to make regular use of the resort and a larger clientele will follow as its reputation grows.

The target market for the professional groups would be global; the target market for preventive holistic healthcare delivery would be regional; the target market for remedial holistic medical treatment of chronic disease could be regional to global depending on the clinical terms-in-residence at a given point in time and level of elaboration of the new standard program.

Seek first funds to develop a comprehensive business plan.

First documents needed: (1) executive summary; (2) detailing of involved tasks and cost estimate to produce the first-stage business plan.

If possible, try to bring together an investment consortium, rather than one investor, as the possibility of retaining some control of the INTENT of the project is better. There is no necessary incompatibility between financial success and larger intent; any intimation of such incompatibility is due to a failure of imagination and practical management skills.

Since none of us has money, owns the land, et cetera, the only way we have to maintain a semblance of control over the intent of the project is by gaining and maintaining the knowledge to bring up, run, promote, and maintain high bookings and occupancy rate: new program; knowledge of, and connections in, the involved professional areas and new age and alternative care communities constituting the target market; as well as by bringing forth a continuing stream of innovative ideas.

Consider the possibility of creating a non-profit aspect to complement the for-profit aspect. The non-profit aspect would fund the professional and clinical terms-in-residence, R&D, public music-sculpture, Escher-form dance, and so-on type performances, high-tech and smart-fashion shows, et cetera. Seek foundational and/or governmental support. Investigate the legal aspects of this coupled arrangement to see if and how it would be possible in Singapore, the government of which very handsomely funds high-tech R&D.

Business proposal, stage 1 tasks:

Thanks for telling me about Ready-Made Democracy: A History of Men's Dress in the American Republic, 1760-1860 by Michael Zakim (U. of South Carolina Press, 2003). This is, indeed, one area in which a lot of research needs to be done if the foundations of METAculture are to be laid. But I hardly think that the machined ready-made garment -- though, admittedly, before the advent of designer labels, it stripped away military and status-hierarchy signification from raiment -- can be viewed as fostering anything like authentic democracy. The ready-made was an integral part of the rise of mercantilism; pre-Civil-War slave-labor agricultural economies-of-scale; early industrialization, and fixed-tooling mass-production factory systems; consumerism; and, eventually, was allocated to countries at the bottom tier of economic development in a globalizing economy: none of which one can easily regard as identical to participatory democracy. This observation will not raise too many eyebrows, I imagine. The ready-made was also an integral part of the expansion of the thin blue line into a bold broad band. This notion truly will raise eyebrows. By way of explanation, I would observe that the machined ready-made was the culmination of the millennia-old process by which cosmological metareference was stripped from clothing by taking weaving from the hands of women. Cosmological metareference in raiment was one type of constant reminding factor, a sort of phylactery, re-minding the wearer of animistic identity transparency with the physical surround. The denser a society is with these sorts of constant reminding factors, the less it needs a thin blue line, the less coercion is required to “enforce social harmony” (the oxymoronic foundation of all post-animistic theories of governance). If any form of governance is required, this is only because the system has failed. Spontaneous social harmony arises as a result of continuous collective awareness of harmony in nature. Cosmological metareferences incorporated into the design of the objects of daily life, including clothing, is the primary means by which this continuous collective awareness is maintained. When cosmological metareference was stripped from clothing, military and status-hierarchy signification replaced it. The machined ready-made stripped all metareference whatsoever from raiment. This was one cultural aspect by which state democracy was codified as a means of population control under economic conditions requiring mobility of labor, if capital was to be concentrated in the hands of a few. Marcel Duchamp's choice of the term “ready-made” for a urinal -- later called a “found object” to deflect precision of his profound insight into grammars of the state as analogically reflected in the linguistic structure of aesthetic convention systems -- was by no means incidental, and clearly was a metareferential comment on the role played by prescriptive enculturation in building and maintaining the apparatus of the state. Codification of a single-valued consensus reality -- a world “ready-made” by prescriptive enculturation, i.e., parenting, followed by mandatory public education -- is essential to establishment of role stratification. It is no mere co-incidence that the capitalist commander, the government bureaucrat, the salary man wear nondescript suits (lacking all metareference), be they handcrafted in Saville-Row of cashmere-silk or machine tooled of polyester at Penny's. Anyway, the list of issues involved with this is very long, and it is an area ripe for much new work.

Actually, I would argue that I am not actually a disruptive personality. I do, indeed, appreciate having my attention drawn to Carlos Fuentes' latest effort on behalf of 18th-century ideas about unity-in-diversity (“Continental Drift”, Le Monde Diplomatique, November 2003). I always like to keep abreast of the flow of innovation produced by our reigning illuminati. He regales us with his superlative knowledge of the first half of undergraduate textbooks on “Backgrounds of Western Civilization”, carrying us all the way back to the year 433 (such backgrounds, in his treatment, at least in regards to intellectual history, strangely not extending much beyond 1800), establishes direct connection between 16th century Europe and the anti-globalization street theater of Seattle and Genoa, then re-states his more-than-a-decade-old vision for Latin America relative no longer to the U.S. but this time to the EU, all the while castigating trickle-down as “voodoo economics” -- a treatment I am fully prepared to regard as a masterful example of magical realism, if not full-blown postmodernist deconstructionism (he even paraphrases Jacques Derrida in his concluding summary paragraph, as if Derrida's paraphasia were paraphrasable). While this recapitulation of Fuentes' article probably puts me in some category, its biased nature does not necessarily imply that I am a Reagonomics freak. In today's “intellectual” environment, such explicit disclaimers are necessary if one is not to be grossly misunderstood and unjustly denigrated, which, you must know, would greatly upset me, if not utterly crush my sense of self-assurance and undermine my assertiveness. In Fuentes' current drift toward the continent (creation of such profound verbal devices -- pioneered by Time Magazine -- being the supreme surpassing accomplishment so much in demand and so greatly rewarded today) he tells us that colonialism, as bad as it was, never questioned judicial power and that what we need today is an alliterated “rulebook for a new reality”. This treatment of prevailing circumstances echoes, if it does not alliterate, his long-ago proffered argument that “Both reason and imagination tell us that the name of the solution, the point where you can balance the demands of integration and those of nationalism, is federation” (“Latin America's Alternative: An Ibero-American Federation”, New Perspectives Quarterly, 8:1, Winter 1991). After which, he regales us on the virtues and present-day relevance of The Federalist Papers. Far be it from me to question the notion that this radically innovative idea constitutes a New Perspective! My point is that Fuentes only took the first six credits of “Backgrounds of Western Civilization” which left off at 1800, whereas I was required to take the full twelve-credit four semesters. In the second two semesters, those Fuentes missed, we learned about how much the human species has learned since 1800 concerning how nature balances the demands of integration and diversity. How it is that these post-1800 notions have no relevance to 21st century political economy is difficult for me -- not being one of the reigning illuminati and not being cued in to all the subtleties of magical realism and deconstructionism -- to understand.

But I can understand what it is so many people are so adamant to avoid, how, why and when they have so avoided, and what, how, why and when they will continue so to so avoid. Born in the USA! That's right, this is coming from someone born in the USA. Raised there, too -- well, in a certain sense, being a military brat and all. The psychology of being a SAC pilot who can place a bomb anywhere on the planet; the psychology of being a U2 pilot who can sniff out the presence of anyone on any street corner; the psychology of being a C119 pilot in 1954 flying cargo from Ashiya, AFB, Japan to Dien Bien Phu; the psychology of being a Special Forces soldier who can be HALOed in on a dime to free the oppressed wherever they might be imagined: this was the stuff of my youth, the psychological stuff. Think of it! The power of it. Anywhere. Anytime. To anyone! The swagger, you know, comes with a mindset, a temperament, a set of blinders. I know those blinders, not only being Born in the USA, but having been subjected to the PSYCHOLOGY of those blinders from early childhood. No place for amateurs. No place I'd want my kids to live; therefore, I didn't have any. Nope, not given what's going down, what will go down, on this planet. Does this “attitude” make me an Un-21st century American? I doubt it. But it does make me an Un-18th century American, which is what most Americans are today in the 21st century. Avoid? What is being avoided? Let's go to the heart of the matter. Quoting usnews.com for 15 December 2003 (“The Saudi Connection” by David E. Kaplan, which describes work of the CIA's Illicit Transactions Group to piece together origins and history of al Qaeda, discover its means of money gathering, laundering, and movement, and to identify who the superiors of the lowly field commander Osama bin Laden might be):

Consider the work of the National Intelligence Council, which is tied closely to the CIA and reports directly to its director. In 1999, the NIC brought together experts from across America to identify global trends -- key drivers, they called them -- that would affect the world over the next 15 years. A senior intelligence official, the anonymous author of Through Our Enemies' Eyes, which chronicles the rise of al Qaeda, described to U.S. News how he perused the NIC draft report and was shocked to see that Islamic fundamentalism was not listed among the key drivers. The analyst sent a note to the NIC chief, stressing that there were nearly a dozen Islamic insurgencies around the world, knitted together by Saudi money, al Qaeda, and thousands of Afghan veterans. The response: “I got a Christmas card back with a note hoping my family was well,” the man recalls. The NIC's final report, Global Trends 2015, barely mentioned radicalism in the Islamic world. The NIC's vice chairman, Ellen Laipson, later wrote that their report “shied away” from the issue because it “might be considered insensitive and unintentionally generate ill will”.

The avoidance I am talking about is not the issue of potential (in 1999) Islamic terrorist activity against the ZI, the U.S. Zone of the Interior (as opposed to the U.S. Zone of the Exterior). And not whether or not this potential was avoided because such activity was desired or because it was naively actually unanticipated. Such issues of avoidance are of piddling importance, particularly speaking to 2015. “Key drivers” are elements of multiple scenarios strategic planning. The Pentagon, in developing concepts of operation and concrete operational plans, has been known to develop as many as literally dozens and dozens of scenarios. Now, the NIC, obviously, in dumping a critical key driver by shying away from it, trashed a collection of potential scenarios relevant to global trends to 2015. This happens everyday. This is how strategic planning is done, how it is taught. Often they work a square system, based on binary historical operators: this or that plotted graphically for their PowerPoint presentations on opposite sides of the square; not this and that independent of any sort of regular-polyhedron-type graphic. Until very recently, the military and the government just loved four-color maps. The key drivers are formulated as expressions of single-valued variables, as epiphenomenal of single-valued binary logic (reason, that it; supposedly, the only reason there is, the reason that is an ethical universal: when somebody says to me “reason and universal ethical values” I know I am standing before a killer, one who will kill large numbers of people, generally at as great a distance as possible). Now, even if the Pentagon has 84 scenarios, they are not working all 84 simultaneously. Bet your boots on that! Regardless of how hypered their parallel processors or how soon they get the use of quantum computing. Tell me, given the psychology of SAC pilots, of U2 pilots, of cargo jockeys, of Delta Force operators, how, PSYCHOLOGICALLY now, such people could possibly deal with such kind of simultaneous? It would be fragmenting to their puffed-out chests, the chests they get from being able to do anything to anyone, anywhere, anytime. Such being able to do requires maintenance of ego autonomy, heavy-duty ego autonomy. Can do! Yes, sir! One short, Sergeant! No schizophrenic simultaneity in that persona. So, even if the Pentagon starts out with all the pickets in the general's fence painted white and 84 scenarios, it has to whittle them down to size. This is done by picking the one considered most likely, or the one liked the best -- even if it describes the most negative future. No kidding. That's how it is taught; that's how it is done. By what criteria is the choosing algorithm chosen? In the final analysis, regardless of the terms employed, it all gets down to the ones liked the best. “Shied away” is just one of many terms that can be employed. When the military works with acetate overlays, in the old days or these days, with actual sheets or on the computer monitor, it's not working with multiple scenarios, with simultaneous alternative futures, it's working with superimposed components of a hierarchically-conceived system: two very different things. Simultaneous alternative futures are schizophrenogenic; they are the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. This is precisely what “shied away” from really means. Everett algorithms were a means by which the Pentagon kept contagion of the many worlds out of the Weapons Systems Evaluation Group. But, in reality, psychologically speaking, that is -- an oxymoron to those with puffed-out chests -- it works in reverse: ego autonomy inflates puffed-out chest, which shies away from a deflating many-worlds interpretation and, hence, chooses the scenario most liked, then selects the key drivers that will generate this most-liked scenario and its squared-off complements which the PowerPoint presentation requires for simulating objectivity. A puffed-out chest could not possibly tolerate a theory of history that deflates ego autonomy. This way of thinking is sustainable so long as one has sufficient disposable force to overcome the liabilities of thinking in this way. 18th-century America will not be defeated in the 21st century by Islamic terrorism, global insurgency, war with China and a Germano-Russian bloc -- having mercilessly milked the planetary resource base since the end of WWII, it has enormous reserves of disposable force -- but by its own way of thinking and what that spawns in its own backyard. Samson was a high-mesomorph, you know. Pulling the temple down on one's own head is something only a particular temperamental type would do. I mean, even high-mesomorphs do have a psychology. America will win every battle without even knowing what war it was fighting -- or why it went down.

But there is subsidence to consider, subsidiary consequences of the separate-but-equal segregation of scenarios. Let's again drift toward the continent with Carlos Fuentes. Below, we have the Wall Street Journal discoursing on one consequence of the way European monetary union was undertaken, and what the spin-off has been regarding conflict concerning a European constitution, et cetera (“Humpty Dumpty's European Adventure: France and Germany Shatter the EU” by Melvyn Krauss, 13 December 2003):

It's worth remembering why there was a stability pact in the first place. When monetary union is pursued without a common fiscal policy, there is temptation for individual member states to inflate their fiscal deficits to bolster their own economy. Then the cost of budgetary profligacy is passed on to others in the union because the European Central Bank must raise interest rates to combat inflationary pressures resulting from the increase in deficit spending. This is beggar-my-neighbor policy, pure and simple.

The stability pact was designed to preclude or limit this possibility. The deficit cap prevents individual members from running up budget deficits and “free-riding” on their fellow members. Of course, fixing the budget cap at 3% of GDP was, to a certain extent, arbitrary. That was unavoidable.

“That was unavoidable.” Just like that. No discussion. No explanations. Any informed person would know. And so on. It was not unavoidable, however. The supposed unavoidableness was due only to the fact that European monetary union was undertaken with a monetary unit that is singly-logically-valued. M-logically-valued monetary units were not employed for European monetary union, when the notion of such units had been on the scene for 30 years, six times the period that m-valued logics had been on the scene when Schrödinger's m-valued wave-function was falsified by interpretation relative to probability amplitudes, rather than m-valued logics. This particular unavoidableness was just as unavoidable as was crash capitalism unavoidable in application to the collapsed Soviet Union -- which had in place, at that time, an apparatus ideally suited for implementation of m-logically-valued monetary units, units which could have brought market capitalism up stably and effectively from below. Instead, market capitalism was unsuccessfully imposed from above, creating Russian zaibatsu oligarchs in the process -- and generations will suffer enormous consequences of this brilliant exploitive stroke accomplished by the Harvard whiz-kids we all so greatly revere. Why not unavoidable? What does this have to do with segregating multiple scenarios? You, not me, segregate multiple scenarios because you, not me, want to retain the possibility of drawing a line in the sand. Inside as opposed to outside. Here as opposed to there. ABSOLUTE distinguishability! You are you, damnit! Not me. And I am me and only me. Heh, heh, heh! It is necessary to set a fixed term for repatriation or a fixed percentage of GNP budget deficit cap only because the econometric behavior equations you, not me, work with have single-valued variables. These econometric variables are single-valued because the tacit definition of an exchange unit (and subsidiary reserve unit, and subsidiary credit, and all subsidiary stocks, bonds, fiduciary instruments) mandates that it be singly-logically-valued, not m-logically-valued. Change the logical properties of the definition of the monetary units moving through markets and the nature of variables in all econometric behavior equations change as a consequence. The “time-shapes” (to quote Friedrich Hayek) of the supply of capital, for instance, are not, then, superimposed, they are superposed. There is a difference, you know. Not supposedly superposed instead of superimposed, actually so. The former, superimposition, were it applied to scenarios (a very scary thing to do, as superimposition is oh-so-very-close to superposition, at least in the mind's-eye of the paranoid), would yet, in the Cartesian-Newtonian fashion, allow those scenarios to be absolutely distinguished one from another. The latter, superposition, applied to scenarios, would, being equivalent to the multi-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, not allow absolute distinguishability: there would be identity transparency. A given “time-shape” of the supply of capital, for instance, is a scenario on that supply's utilization pattern, and all the subsiding structural and functional market concomitants. This is a full-blown case of logical, ontological, and temporal subsidence. The factorial value -- the ! after the quantity -- representing all the time-shapes of the total supply of capital is some class of infinity. That is a lot more than 84 scenarios! Superpose all of them -- which, like it or not, is the REAL self-organizing capacity of the market -- and there is no possibility whatsoever of drawing a line in the sand. You are not you! It just isn't the case, no matter how much your 18th-century American mental state writing derogatory editorials for the Wall Street Journal in 21st-century America might think it is so. With a nest of m-logically-valued monetary units constituting the euro, there simply would be no unavoidability relative to a fixed percentage of GNP budget deficit cap. None. But, let me assure you, that, in order to avoid the psychological trauma involved in recognizing the fact that you are not you, there will be no simultaneous handling of 84 scenarios at the Pentagon. Rest assured of that. And, as a consequence, all the subsidence of that Pentagonian psychological behavior -- an expression of the lateral mental cleavage characteristic of the high-mesomorph's temperamental type -- will remain intact and the fiction that you are you and only you will continue to be regarded sacrosanct.

Yes, I have to admit that I have made no effort to conform to Google's copyrighted notion of page rankings. Copyrighted! What a side-splitter. Had I tried to copyright one percent of the ideas I've had over the last 40 years on the order of creativity equivalent to Google's page rankings idea, the Copyright Office would have been swamped. I haven't even put keywords on any page but the homepage, let alone sought links. Why? I don't attribute any importance to Cartesian-Newtonian ideas like “public opinion”. I don't even attribute much importance to my own “conscious” mind, how then to that of others? The only factors worth influencing are gradients in the collective unconscious, and I don't think Google is too well tapped into them. My personal final break with “public opinion” came immediately following my freshman year of high school while living at Gull Lake, Michigan. In eighth-grade history class (eighth grade was no less critical to me than to Joan Didion) we had been intensively introduced to the illustrious careers of the Great Explorers. I had at that time the personal misfortune to run across material in the public library (written by foreigners) that provided more accurate and detailed accounts of what these “explorers” did than that provided in my history class. Lied to! Absolutely lied to! This was a profound shock to a 13-year-old. I was not particularly upset about what happened to people several hundred years earlier, but at being lied to everyday at school. It took me about one-and-a-half years to mull this over and arrive at a course of action. In moving from Gull Lake to Eielson AFB, Alaska in the summer of 1959, I decided I would, for the foreseeable future, get no grade higher than a C. Retrospectively, it is clear that this decision was a final break with the valuing of “public opinion”. And after the age of 14, I never again allowed myself to become fully-employed on behalf of the national interest: underemployment was the career I chose.

Come on! What a joke. Nothing near so mysterious as you suggest. Anyone who has been on this planet for two decades and a half has the opportunity to perceive the very prominent pattern in current events. It's an old pattern. Black currency operations began in earnest during WWII. Nicholas Deak learned the ins and outs of LETS, Local Exchange Trading Systems, in the China-Burma-India theater from Tai Li, and subsequently applied all he learned to the private sector in precious metals and currencies. The Flying Felines were funded with drug money, and help from the tongs (which emerged out of the pao chia system deployed against the Mongols). Occupation of Tibetan temples and attempts to create a guerrilla infrastructure began with those dispatched to Tibet by the Lijiang OSS contingent sent there from Chunking by a Pinkerton predecessor (the Pinkertons being an early example of a PMC, private military company) of Archimedes Patti at a time when the Burma Road had yet to be pushed through and flying over the hump just couldn't deliver enough of anything (this was a long time before the Chinese communist invasion of Tibet). Ten years ago, in Nasi Lijiang, one could still talk with a living survivor of those so dispatched to Tibet (of course, one would have had to have asked the right questions of Patti to know that such a person could still have been in Lijiang at that late date, and one probably would have had to have received Special Forces medical training in 1966 from an in-process-of-retiring cadre who had spent a lot of time in Tibetan temples and the Kashmiri border area of China in the very early 1960s, and, therefore, knew a lot about the early activity history of special service operatives in those temples, to have known what questions to ask retired Major Patti -- who, decades later, found unopened the footlocker of OSS X-2 counterintelligence documents he had shipped back to Washington, D.C. from Kunming in August of 1945; and if the starets, Richard Gere, doesn't like realities like the prominent role played by sheep-dipped Special Forces in Tibet, then he would do well not to play so prominent a role in refocusing national sentiments and “public opinion” by starring in films like “An Officer and a Gentleman”). Similar paths of discovery would have revealed a great deal about what was transpiring in Afghanistan to “Get some back from the Bear” in the five years BEFORE the Soviet invasion, and how the LETS in that region was involved. The most curious thing, however, is how it could have been, that one of the members of the board of directors of the American bank holding company that held much of the stock of BCCI, who had, years earlier, received a briefing based on a bootleg copy of Derek's long analysis of VCI preparations for the 1968 Tet offensive, could have, having thus been so well informed about the importance of political organization in formation of any successful guerrilla infrastructure, allowed the very-intensively-advised Paki intelligence service to so thoroughly neglect this essential dimension of the task at hand, such that, in the much later ensuing chaos, only the most extreme ideology was capable of bringing a semblance of order back into the scene: thus, coupled with what had been done to neighboring Iran soon after WWII, being largely responsible for creation of the international terrorism presently transiting to global insurgency. And when Russian veterans of that phase of the ongoing Afghan war returned home to set up criminal organizations and cartels, they were only carrying forward precedents long since established all around the world. The locus of Deak's end-career moves, not so incidentally, was in Latin America where, in this case, there was no proof of life. One truly does not have to push the imagination very far to visualize the effect of the exponential growth in PMCs on military proselytizing activities in all-volunteer armies (i.e., hybrid transitional forms between Military Public Companies, Ltd. and PMCs). Incendiary criminalization of governance will transpire only as the official military of nation-states reaches the cusp point of subversion. When privately-contracted PSD's (Personal Security Details) in Iraq pay ex-special service operatives USD1,200/day, plus the full benefit package, and the U.S. Army grunt in the field continues to be paid a relative pittance-by-the-month (if he does not receive a bill for the pay he is due, as in Afghanistan), criminalization of governance is not far from its cusp point. Even in the pre-'65 days of “team integrity” and “mission-specific assignment”, per diem from the CIA (not Department of the Army) to sheep-dipped SF knuckle-draggers was nothing like this current sacerdotalism brings -- even figuring in inflation. In 1968, even the contracts between JDL and ex-SF for cross-border reprisals (under cover as training assignments in border kibbutz) did not place this kind of dust in Swiss bank accounts. There have never before been circumstances so ideal for military proselytizing activities. Unless one is career oriented, rather then underemployment oriented, one does not pursue understanding of such matters in order to influence “public opinion”. Have revelations to the public had any real effect on the pattern of events any twenty-five year-old has the opportunity to perceive? No such effects whatsoever can be identified. Had there been such effects, would the planet be in its present pickle? It is not in the realm of “public opinion” that patterns of events are altered; it's in the realm of the collective unconscious.

What all of this is is regression due to suppression. Argentina is a very visible example. Spontaneous response to the recent crisis there was emergence of local currencies, potentially m-logically-valuedLETS. This was suppressed under influence of the IMF, responsible members of the international business community, global private bankers, World Bank officials, and so on. The involved suppression was not only about Argentina, it was about the global economy, of which Argentina is a part. Certain salient aspects of this suppression registered in the three-logically-valued Aymaran portion of Evo Morales' subliminal awareness, not the socialist part, no less than in the Pachakuti part of the subliminal mind of Felipe Quispe. These subliminal registrations are factors of constellation, constellation of archetypal gradients in the collective unconscious. Similar registrations occurred with the unsuccessful attempt to impose from above crash capitalism on the collapsed Soviet Union. In the Baltic, in the Balkans, in the Caucasus, across Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia there have been tidal waves of such registrations, along with widespread abstentions in Eastern Europe from participation in Newtonian vector summation: voting. Without fully knowing why, people in increasing numbers choose to underemploy themselves relative to the prevailing system, and to more fully employ themselves relative to what Hernando de Soto calls the extra-legal sector. This is a not-so-forced form of the forced competitive assimilation which people's war is, and which is so very important to planetary phase transition between international terrorism and global insurgency against the very idea of the Cartesian-Newtonian nation-state system and its supraordinate agglomerations. But, since quantum principles of self-organization relative to LETS are not available to consciousness for myriad reasons, no integrated manifestation emerges, only regressed manifestations: the storm of extralegality gathers itself for a perfect storm with the assistance of ever-more-thorough suppression. Perfect storm is not a Yakusa-like enforcement in lieu of contracts; it is a later stage, a cathartic hysterical mass back-reaction à la al Qaeda and Nepal's CPN-M. Worse yet, even. Because the suppression is transpiring in a context of massively unprecedented planetary market-driven “forced-draft urbanization”, à la Huntington of Harvard, forcing people out of economic free-fire zones and across local and national borders, when the perfect storm comes, like in the Khmer Rouge case, the archetypally-driven compensatory processes in the collective unconscious will insure an equally massively unprecedented planetary forced-draft-de-urbanization: Cambodian holocaust of the Whole Earth. “Brothers and sisters, leave New York City, leave Washington, D.C., leave Los Angeles!” Was not 9/11 an early form of such messaging? Consider the inconstant of proportionality between 1870, 1914, and 1939 as regards increasing numbers of people killed in each major fulmination following upon yet another occasion wherein the human species failed to integrate import of the m-valued functions Abel discovered in the 1820s, and which killed the 19th century dead along with the Cartesian-Newtonian paradigm. I will not again make the same mistake I made in 1968, where I knew that any expansion of the geographical boundaries of the Vietnam war would lead to a huge catastrophe, but was unable to bring myself to imagine anything like the Cambodian holocaust. No one will believe it until it happens; and then they won't understand it when they have to believe it. People can do what they can do; they can't do what they can't do. The best you can do is take what you get and do the most you can do with the little you get.

TimeWave Reflections

Years ago, first reading Terrence McKenna on his TimeWave notion (having just come out of the tank on Maui and having been sat down and told to read), I dismissed it as merely another idea of passIVE-time wherein eternity is considered the “end”, in the limit, of passING-time. But when I now reeeeeed Matthew Watkin's critique of McKenna's TimeWave concept (I've now reaaaaad it five times), and the corrected TimeWave theory, I get a lot of images seemingly related to the notion of operator-time (involving m-logically-valued light), but these have not yet crystallized into a “ picture”. There are many verbal resonances with the notion of operator-time in Matthew's paper. First of all, McKenna did a 180-degree twist on the wave, without having a good reason for it. This is done by shifting from positive to negative value: -1. He was trying to map Chinese cosmological and temporal notions (from his readings of Chinese literature, in translation, I suppose) onto a number sequence derived from the I-Ching, and appears to have had some intuition about a twist he could not give a good reason for. I once read a Ph.D. dissertation, but can't remember the author's name (from Taiwan, I think: Chen, maybe), but the title was something like “The Structure of Logic in Ancient China”. I remember coming away from several passages (translated quotations) with the same sense of virtual certainty I came away from Bill Sullivan's translated quotes from Aymara, given in his book on the Inca's “war against time”, that an “active” notion of time was definitely implied in the quotes. Say one assumes that McKenna's “intuition” related to “active time”, but he just couldn't resolve the notion with clarity. The best book on twists in ancient thought is Ernest McClain's The Myth of Invariance (N.Y.: Nicolas Hays, 1976), about “one-wheeled cars” in Vedic musical thought (tone sequence modulations in ragas, for instance). There is one such raga, (not discussed in MYTH) described in MOON as the generative grammar of Trang Minh's algorithm of multi-identity underlying the tone sequence in the family poem, that eats its own tail and spits out the 64 hexagrams of the I-Ching. The existence of this raga may speak eloquently as to the relation between pre-Brahmanic India and pre-Confucian China. Everything from Pascal's triangle to the binomial theorem to topology's Königsberg Bridge problem can be mapped upon it (or alternatively explained in relation to terminology of the raga). Just because zero or square-root of minus one did not exist in notational discourse as formalized notions does not mean they did not exist in pre-Brahmanic thought. They may well have existed in Vedic inner-Musculpt. Any really high technology is without hardware and leaves no physical traces on nature -- which it works with, not against. This raga, an acoustic-wave signature, was identified to have these properties by Fritz Pearl, the musicologist who specialized in 12-tone music (two hexagrams). The King Wen sequence is a particular ordering of the hexagrams from 1 to 64 (an extended Grundgestalt or “basic shape of the tone row”, in dodecaphonic parlance). I'd like to look up Wen's sequence, but, alas, I've no copy of the I-Ching; I've thrown the coins from memory for over 30 years, and have evolved my own “language” with which to speak with the I-Ching: evolved it in a manner sort of like Jung's “association experiments”. There were many such sequences spoken of historically and many hexagram arrays, some of which are described in Marie-Louise von Franz's Number and Time (Evanston: Northwestern U. Press, 1974). What McKenna calls the First Order Difference (FOD) is the generator of the number sequence. It is the number of lines that change from hexagram to hexagram as the King Wen sequence unfolds. Linking these points together in forward and retrograde, by the two trigrams and the hexagram, generates six waves, which, when flipped 180-degrees and superimposed, generates what McKenna designated TimeWave Zero (TWZ). He called this a “fractal”, which it isn't, which Matthew points out. He, apparently, correlated the nodes of the six-fold wave with historical events, using 2012 as the zero point -- making this choice of zero on the basis of the Mayan calendar, and the apocalyptic predictions associated with that year. Matthew discusses a number of mathematical flaws in the way McKenna and others developed these ideas.

If we assume (1) Matthew is right, McKenna was wrong; (2) McKenna, nonetheless, had a good intuition, here is how I would begin thinking about it. TWZ, if it has anything to do with operator-time, would relate most directly to “first-order temporal curl”. The twist he was looking for was not a half twist, 180-degrees, and -1 is not the significant number. The twist he needed was 90-degrees and the number is square-root of -1. Our scheme is three of space and three of time: the “six long-haired ones” of the Vedas, the six-fold wave of McKenna. Long ago, this was discussed in relation to the hexagrams. As a kind of curiosity. The number sequence generated by the King Wen ordering of hexagrams is 384 number-points. We deal in quadripolar waves, whereas McKenna, via the I-Ching, is dealing in 6-polar waves. The shift here is between a base-4 number system and a base-6 number system. Remember how in MOON where quaternions are discussed in relation to Grassmann algebras (and also the differing viewing-point perspectives on the copy of “Amaterasu's mirror” given to Thuy Tien) it is mentioned that in order to get 6 you really must have 8 (Cayley's 8-tuples): this may be a route for moving between 4-polar and 6-polar waves. I would view the I-Ching as dealing, deep-structure-wise, in an idealized wave that is modulated into surface structures corresponding to concrete surface-structure event correlations (synchronisities). Say the lower trigram corresponds to ponderable 3-space, the upper trigram to 3-fold operator-time. Say the King Wen sequence is deep structure and other sequences are one or another kind of surface-structure modulation. King Wen would likely generate some sort of symmetrical wave, say based on quark symmetries. As once discussed, another way to look at the hexagram is as a Seal of Solomon (black and white hole superimposed). Visualize the rotating solution as generating the wave via 90-degree square-root of -1 twists moving through the whole sequence, hexagram 1 to 64. The march of the functions involved proceeds through a spinor tunnel (tai chi symbol in translation-motion, or a twirling pa qua array cell in spatial translation). As the sequence unfolds, there is a pattern of line changes from one hexagram to the next. We defined first-order operator-time as change of slope. The canonical King Wen wave would be the plot of this change of slope into and out of the imaginary dimensions. Now, consider the three lines of the lower trigram as signifying the vector quantities i, j, and k; the three lines of the upper trigram l, m, n. The lines that change from one hexagram to the next as the sequence unfolds tick-off on these three dimensions and three temporal operators in a particular order, the King Wen order (almost like on the disks in to WWII-era encryption machines). What would these tick-offs signify? The function of the wave is to topologically operate on space. This is something like a spacetime double-helix feeder band under the lowest order of logical-value: yin and yang.

But more likely the King Wen sequence is not the idealized canonical deep structure of the I-Ching. It is probably the modulated surface structure sequence appropriate to the temporal neighborhood of King Wen, through which moving lines (those referring the chronomantic to the “changes to” hexagram) are mapped in that neighborhood. If I remember right, the Richard Wilhelm version of the I-Ching is based on the King Wen sequence. Under this notion, this sequence would likely be inappropriate for our temporal neighborhood. A good reason to stop using the book, start tossing the coins from memory, and to develop a private “language” with which to speak with the I-Ching. What if the canonical deep structure were a superposition (not a superimposition) of all the sequences? 64! And the number-points of the factorialized superposed wave mapped on some distribution across the plane of real numbers? What distribution would that map map? What Gödel-numberable Regge lattice?

There are also the Arrays of Upper Heaven and Lower Heaven (geometrical arrangements of the 64 hexagrams). I have always thought of these arrays as being evocative of the “wormhole mesh” of spacetime foam at the crest of the breaking TimeWave. They form different pa qua tiling patterns, far-from-equilibrium cell structures. Time operates by spinning the array (ninja weaponry), which is a tiling-pattern cellular element of the m-logically-valued reference space (this was the plane-view architectural basis of Gia Long's -- the first Nguyen Emperor -- Citadel in old Saigon, as described in MOON). Another way to approach this would be to try to decompose the King Wen sequence TimeWave out of the m-logically-valued reference space using the notion of three-fold operator-time: non-orientability to change of connectivity to change of slope to TimeWave to King Wen number sequence to King Wen hexagram sequence.

Open-source P2P -- Punk-to-Punk -- is like lo-fi karaoke, house music, rave, chip music composed F2F -- Funk-to-Funk -- and played at high decibels on distorting speakers 24-7 in a sound-proofed room which is planet Earth under a space shield. This “cooperativeness” is not quantum relative-state, non-simple identity, animistic identity transparency; it is a regressed version thereof, regressed under the processes of projective identification. Absolutely-in-so-far-as-distinct entities do not O2O -- One-to-One -- engage in identity transparency; that condition is the psychological state of identification. Generative empathy, empathy, identification: by no means identical. Identification O2O, which, psychologically speaking, is what open-source P2P is -- mind-reading all those about you who claim absolutely-in-so-far-as-distinct identity -- is one definition of Hell. Using a bullhorn to teach the masses Zen meditation at the local Buddhist temple! Try living in a culture for six months where you don't speak the language and see how freed-up your inner space becomes. Cooperative phenomena occurring at the Curie temperature, the critical state, the point of onset of Per Bak's self-organized criticality, do not transpire by O2O identification; they are expressions of quantum relative-state, of non-simple identity, which is O2W2O -- One-to-Whole-to-One: identity transparency is always mediated by transparency with the whole of nature and is never simply O2O between parts mistakenly claiming absolutely-in-so-far-as-distinct identity. The theory and practice of detachment according to Zen before Zen was institutionalized as a church, as a theory of aesthetics, as rock-gestalts functioning as exorcism of the kami in the rocks. Church of the Earth, not church of the patriarchs! It's animistic: kami in the rocks; that's what animism is. The spirits in the rocks (which, according to animistic Shinto, ritualistically weigh nothing) set in the gravel (the plenum of quantum potential) are merely personifications of processes involved in the involved psychological state, processes underlying self-organized criticality. Dark matter and dark energy -- realms of the dust of kami -- are dark because O2O identification is the persistent state of the physicist, the state one is in if one is Wired. Dark matter and dark energy are baryonic matter and energy under two non-linear orders of operator-time; there are two orders of darkness in matter and energy (and three orders of proportionality in matter-energy conversions, i.e., three classes of m-logically-valued light). Orders of dark matter and energy are baryonic matter and energy undergoing topological operations yielding the multiply-connected and the non-orientable: functional prerequisites of the O2W2Oed animistic identity transparency which is the m-logically-valued quantum relative-state of self-organized criticality. Experimental “verification” and mathematical “proof” simply are nothing but consensualized limitations on what is inherently nondelimitable. There is no verification and no proof in the absence of unverifiable assumptions and unprovable axioms, both of which are agreed upon by consensus. Laws, all laws, laws of nature are socialization of cognition. For real? Actually actual? Non-virtual? Not simulacra? Non-self-identical? Indubitably.

Absolutely! Of course I think the “law and capital” movement is a human catastrophe of the first order, a catastrophe on a par with, and the perfect complement to, hysterical Islamic fundamentalism. What else could someone into m-logically-valued monetary units think of “rational choice theory”? At dozens of points, MOON argues very specifically against Robert Nozick's fundamental assumption in Anarchy, State, and Utopia (Oxford: Blackwell, 1974), i.e., that there are only atomistic, billiard-ball individuals, their choices and only their choices, that collective occasions of experience do not exist, that social choice is a fiction. Derek didn't even bother to annotate the bibliographic entry because Nozick's issues had been so thoroughly addressed in the body of the novel. But the more recent “law and capital” generalization is epiphenomenal of fundamentals, fundamentals the academicians have been knowingly lying about for decades. And the consequences of this knowing lying are so sickening relative to issues of “law” that one simply can't sit still for “rational” displays of the academic rationalizations. I know; I tried. In order to maintain politeness, I had to leave their lie-filled classrooms before puking. Why? Ever witnessed a nude thirteen-year-old girl being strung from the ceiling by her wrists bound behind her back such that her shoulders are dislocated? Have any idea how many people in Vietnam were lined up on the bank of the river to receive bullets in the backs of their heads? These instances are the direct consequence of this particular class of academic lying. The distant academics are more responsible than are the proximal perpetrators. Why did I not intervene to stop such things from occurring? Not because the girl had planted a bomb that killed several people and was in the process of revealing the identities of her accomplices who were in process of planting other bombs, and time was of the essence if lives were to be saved. Because Robert Nozick is wrong and because he knows he is wrong. In most such cases, decision to intervene means instantly killing the perpetrators, and likely being killed in the process of killing the perpetrators. “Rational choice theory”, game theory, dilemmas of the prisoner's dilemma (under those circumstances when the prisoner is given a choice or the option of stating a “neck riddle”, as Thuy Tien points out in MOON) simply do not apply to the concrete personal circumstance (as distinct from the theoretical impersonal abstract occasion). There are no “individuals” involved in such events, just as there are “individuals” involved in voting booths or capitalist markets. The “individual”, nicely put, is an idealization; accurately put, a pure fiction. It is more difficult for binary-minds to see this in the case of voting booths and markets than it is to see it in the case of war-related “atrocities” -- “atrocities” in quotes because there are no atrocities in war when war itself is atrocity. Not to kill is abnormal in war. There is no killing in war that is not atrocity. Intervene in what you regard an “atrocity” in war, and just see if you can regard yourself as having confronted “individuals” -- or even if you can regard yourself, the intervener, as an “individual” actor acting in an action-based sociology. You will very rapidly discover just how much of a pure fiction your pure fiction is. This is the pure fiction at the root of the causes of war, a pure fiction cultivated by academics who know they are lying in so cultivating. This lying creates circumstances wherein the atrocity of war is inevitable, wherein some perpetrator absolutely will be entrained by the collective-occasion-of-experience, the event gradient set in motion most fundamentally by lying academics. Why the academics choose to lie to others as well as amongst themselves and to themselves is so well known that discussing the matter as if it needed discussion is itself a form of lying. The atrocity that is war, what you regard “atrocities” in war, will continue so long as you believe in law, laws exacting retribution upon individually responsible perpetrators.

The fundamentals here are usually traced back to Marie Jean Antoine Nicholas de Caritat, AKA Marquis de Condorcet, who gave the first account of the paradox of voting, wherein, given three or more alternatives, no clear non-paradoxical outcome can be demonstrated: aggregate will, social choice is impossible to determine. But, actually, the essence of this goes back even farther, to John Locke, as Derek pointed out in the An Dong Market scene in MOON (p. 498, Vol. II):

The classic example, one among many that could be pointed out, was Locke's justification of majority rule in his SECOND TREATISE. And this was one quotation Derek never had any trouble remembering, nor that it came from Chapter VIII: “For that which acts any community being only the consent of the individuals of it, and it being one body must move one way, it is necessary the body should move that way whither the greater force carries it, [italicized in MOON] which is the consent of the majority; or else it is impossible it should act or continue one body, one community…” Here we have a simple, straightforward borrowing of Newton's laws of motion! An application of vector analysis, if you will: the summation of forces. Checks and balances, countervailing forces: the sublime logic (two-valued) of Newton's billiard table applied to political theory. People as hard clay balls -- simply-located, simply-identified, simply-connected, single-valued: absolutely distinct INDIVIDUALS -- moving according to the laws of motion. No collective properties, no critical behavior, no long-range phase correlations: useful fiction, presently a dead fantasy. So dead by the end of World War II that continued affirmation could be maintained only by one of the most extraordinary black propaganda efforts in the history of the human species. An effort undertaken out of fear, out of psychological incapacity, out of sick compulsion to protect privileged interest no matter what the larger human costs.

So, when in the 1940s Duncan Black developed explications of Condorcet's voting paradox, and in the early 1950s Kenneth Arrow arrived at his impossibility theorem (a rigorous formalization of the voting paradox in terms of aggregation of preference functions), what they demonstrated was one or more of the following: (1) inapplicability of Locke's generalization of Newton's laws of motion into political theory as “majority rule” -- and since, in The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith's notion of the interplay of market supply and demand (God's magic hand, the one exception allowed by deists to the non-interventionist Clockmaker) was similarly explicitly justified by analogy to Newton's laws of motion, the inapplicability of those laws to market capitalism; (2) falsity of Newton's laws of motion; (3) inapplicability and/or falsity of the rules of Aristotelian-Baconian logic governing definability of individuals as distinguished from collectivities, specifically, in the present case, singular preference as distinct from aggregate preference. Once Arrow's impossibility theorem (which -- par for the course in all black propaganda efforts, where one of the primary rules is “call the thing by the name of its opposite” -- was called the “General Possibility Theorem”) was explicated, the academics did not try to discover what its implications were; they tried to find ways around it -- as did Arrow himself. This was largely done in the realms of maximization and optimization theory. Unending growth had to be shored-up, because any disaggregating, any inherent inability to aggregate, any appearance of a multiplicity of fundamentally un-unifiable worlds (individuals or monetary units) meant capital accumulation was inherently fascistic, like Mussolini maintained, inherently tied to the dictatorial will of one individual, not subject to the consent of the majority or the magic hand: one of the formal outcomes of Arrow's theorem. Moreover, absent perception of the possibility of unending growth in aggregation of capital, the organizing capacity of the market wanes: allocation is growth-driven. Hugh Everett, under the influence of Bohr and John Wheeler, did exactly the same thing with his parallel discovery in quantum theory: more than half of the seminal paper on the relative-state formulation of quantum mechanics (the multi-worlds hypothesis) is devoted to finding a way around the glitch, a way found with a little help from John von Neumann's methodology. Whenever academics get a glance over the edge of the paradigmatic abyss, they jump back from the cliff profoundly shaken, trembling in fear, and see to it that enormous numbers of people die as a result of their cowardice.

Arrow's impossibility theorem reveals the same thing Heisenberg's indeterminacy inequalities reveal, the same thing Gödel's undecidability and incompleteness theorems reveal: Aristotelian-Baconian 1T2 logic is only one order of logical-value amongst infinite collections of infinitudes of such orders of logical-value: m-valued logics. The reason of “rational choice theory” is only a very small part of all the reasons there are in this world. INDIVIDUALS are absolutely definable only under the 1T2 order, which leaves a whole lot of other orders under which “individuals” simply are nothing but pure fiction. If one starts looking at these logical facts about “individuals” relative to the atomic theory of matter, particle-wave duality, non-locality, and so on, then indeterminacy takes on new meaning, as does the notion of a virtual particle, and the role in origins of high temperature superconductivity played by the virtuality permitted by indeterminacy. As Derek explicates at the end of MOON, indeterminacy is the tip of the iceberg of non-self-identical geometries, lines of force, equipotential surfaces, and so on; just as numbered Gödel numbers (Number the numbering!) are the tip of the iceberg of non-self-identical numbers. Loosely stated, Schrödinger's wave-function replaced Newton's laws of motion. The variables in the laws of motion are single-valued variables; the variables in Schrödinger's wave-function are multiple-valued-variables, they are m-valued. Adam Smith's market supply and demand dynamic (the magic hand) was a direct generalization of the laws of motion, no less than was Locke's majority rule. Arrow's impossibility theorem demonstrates that under 1T2 logic, with single-valued preference functions, there is no way to achieve an unambiguous aggregate preference function expressive of the collective will without, at the same time, violating one or another of the rules of the logic employed. That which is willed is the will of the dictator -- which is a violation of the logic of the occasion. This is directly analogous to what Schrödinger discovered, what Heisenberg discovered, what Gödel discovered. And this is why what Schrödinger discovered was falsified, why his wave-function was interpreted with probability theory, not m-valued logics: otherwise, it could not have been kept out of the social sciences. So, if one looks the monster straight in the face, doesn't fall back from the edge of the cliff trembling, doesn't try to find a way out, what does one see? One does not see an action-based sociology, individual actors, single-logically-valued monetary units, sets that can be well-ordered; one sees identity transparency between participants, critical behaviors, self-organized criticality resulting from the quantum relative-state of the corpus, wave-functions instead of laws of motion, m-logically-valued monetary units defined on Koch-curve-type boundaries and resultant fractal entrapment. Politics is no longer a decision science: the system involved is a decision-free quantum regime manifesting spontaneous social order. Of course, the theory of transition, now there is something to be concerned about, and the far-from-equilibrium phase transition, that, indeed, seems like it might involve critical, even crisis, behaviors, behaviors like conversion between international terrorism and global insurgency, breakdown of the integrity of national boundaries, and so on and so on.

Ah, yes, theories of transition. There has to be an absolutely-in-so-far-as-distinct self to be self-interested -- rationally, irrationally, or non-rationally. So anyone from an Asian, an African, an AmerIndian tradition who imagines his society can undergo “culturally sensitive” economic development while deploying single-logically-valued monetary units is kidding himself if he thinks establishment of an ultimate preference function for cultural sensitivity will, via judiciously chosen optimality criteria, preserve the essential features of his traditional value framework -- no matter how he might apply Amartya Sen's Resources, Values, and Development to Hernando de Soto's The Mystery of Capital. Once the unit of exchange is re-defined as logically single-valued -- which occurred during the transition from “Stone Age” gift-economy empathic identity exchange to monetized commodity exchange -- “rational self-interest” is a framework determining condition. Order of logical-value of the exchange unit employed sets cardinality of preference that can be optimized or maximized by market mechanisms. Under single-logically-valued monetary units, the cardinality of preference is unary: rational self-interest alone. Any attempt (regulation, legislation, intimidation) to alter operation of this preference will undermine market framework determining conditions such that optimality and/or maximization is unreachable. If you want a greater range of cardinality in preference, the only way to practically accomplish this is by adding orders of logical-value to the very definition of the exchange unit employed. Each additional order of logical-value fundamentally alters market framework determining conditions such that cardinality of permitted preference expands to binary, tertiary, quaternary, and so on. As orders of logical-value are expanded, the notion of self -- the very idea of what identity-itself is -- permitted to the system changes. Tagging orders of value stacked on the monetary unit (the currency base) to indicators (economic, sustainable development, quality of life, et cetera) initializes those orders of value within the framework determining conditions of the market. In an international monetary system employing multiple nestings of m-logically-valued exchange and reserve units, there would be many cardinalities of preference employed -- determined by the array of “ultimate preferences” (values) consensually mandated within a given cellular partition of the framework. Per Kenneth Arrow's impossibility theorem, mandating consensus on the array of preferences to be stacked on the currency base would not be achieved by local plebiscite, referendum, voting, representation, electronic commons, but by a fusion of the computer-gaming of multiple scenarios with quasi-real-time indicator-data feedback and simulation: VirFut Q-Pro. The “non-simple-identity” explicit in quantum systems (quantal “exchange units”, elementary particles, that is, being m-logically-valued, not single-logically-valued) transcends assumptions embedded in Arrow's impossibility theorem such that the relation between “individual” and “aggregate” he employs does not prevail. What prevails is m-logically-valued holographic identity-transparency: the part contains all the information of the whole. Contemporary consensus economic theory -- all of it, including Sen's soft attack on “rational choice theory” via advocacy of “social choice theory” -- is attempt to shore-up inviolability of 1T2 logic in face of 175 years of challenge from m-valued Abelian functions, Cantorian set theory, Axiom of Choice, m-valued logics, quantum nonlocality, fiber-bundle arithmetics, and on and on. Cognition of the claim to simple-self-identity and absolute-individuality of market participants, and similar attributions to commodities, will undergo far-from-equilibrium phase transition to the degree that order of cardinality of preference is expanded in the framework determining conditions of the market by virtue of expansion of the logical-value attributes of the exchange units employed. Such a phase transition would, of course, be chaotic in nature (tracking on an attractor: m-logically-valued and Musculpted VirFut Q-Pro). But, if no such transition is made, the outcome will be not only chaotic, but cataclysmic, because the new technologies increasingly employed embody principles rejected by the people and systems regulating their use. The human species has discovered in nature principles it rejects. In so rejecting, the species has rejected aspects of itself and, thus, has induced pandemic autoimmunity. The only route of recovery is through employment of m-logically-valued monetary units.

Sorry, but I can't help regarding the open-source P2P production model as a form of labor exploitation, as a better widget than out-sourcing for getting the cost curve flattened. As long as it is being used in the product development stages, then nobody is making money. But a time will come when the collaboratively developed product, or a derivative subsidiary product, draws licensing fees, commercial use, subscriptions, a paid version, the low-cost price. Who then makes the money? Who gets the stock options? Certainly not the tens of thousands of volunteer collaborators. Linus Torvalds became a multi-millionaire on the free labor of thousands of volunteers. How many of those volunteers made a fraction of what Linus made? Most other open-source P2P production projects seem to have associated with them some way by which large amounts of money eventually will be made. Sounds like a very effective form of labor exploitation to me -- if not a type of fraud. But then I made my living for two decades with a pick and a shovel, so what do I know?

No, no. Arrow's impossibility theorem, the prisoner's dilemma, opposition between requirements of national monetary and fiscal policy as opposed to dictates imposed by the need for international liquidity, and the like are not fundamental. What needs to be understood is that this does not involve a failure in understanding, but the will not to understand. The individual versus the collective, the personal versus the impersonal, the discrete versus the continuous, the concrete versus the abstract: it has long been widely understood that these dichotomies are derivative of the “laws” associated with single-valued binary logic, and that they do not exist under other orders of logical-value. Understanding was willfully rejected first in higher mathematics in the 19th century, then in physics in the early 20th century, then in economics during the period of WWII and as Keynes' and White's original ideas for a postwar international monetary system were largely scrapped as the Bretton Woods Agreement was negotiated. Keynes died when he did in large measure because of this scrapping. When infantile willfulness becomes the dominant theme in every area of academic insolence enormous social consequences pile up, consequences like war and genocide. Who then is responsible for the mass death: the proximate perpetrators or those who created the situation within which mass death was inevitable? Inevitable circumstance will always be able to find some proximate perpetrator. Psychological induction is an attribute of the inevitability resident in the circumstance created. Who is the real war criminal? Who committed the real crime against humanity? One of the leading abjectly reductionist Nobel laureates in economics, a monetarist, some years ago was sent material on m-logically-valued monetary units -- units which can be regarded as micro as any economist who believes economics is only microeconomics would like to so regard. The response was: I do not understand what this is about; there are a lot of technical words used here, but they are used without regard to their actual meanings. The exact same material had been assigned reading to graduate students in strategic planning, and they had had no trouble whatsoever in understanding it. They may not have agreed with it, but there was no problem with lack of understanding. The Nobel laureate understood very well and responded in knee-jerk fashion: lying and impugning intelligence of the advocate of unwelcome ideas. Ideas that elicited an emotional response; otherwise, the great man would not even have bothered to post a reply. Such people should not be left alone with their illness. Lacuna-on-the-brain: mad human disease. Where do you think mad cow disease came from, anyway? Having masterfully risen to the top of corrupt institutions by knee-jerking through decades, enormous resources are available to such over-achievers, and consequences of the lying are commensurately generalized: those with victorious automatisms have gotten themselves into positions from which they can impose their mental liabilities on the rest of us. And this imposition inevitably involves mass death.

Thanks for the big red square you drew around Robert Samuelson's treatment of the Great Inflation of the 1960s and '70s (“Greenspan's Finest Hour”, Newsweek, December 15, 2003). As you surely noted, he “forgot” to mention the Vietnam war, Johnson's guns and butter, the foreign borrowing (as well as the “liability financing” via printing of dollars for international circulation, which no one ever discusses as getting mixed into the domestic money supply) in lieu of taxes used to pay for the war. None of these, apparently, played significant roles in causing the inflation that led to destruction of the Bretton Woods monetary system. It was all because the Fed flooded the country with too much money. Well, all I can say is, if Samuelson is right, then this is a greater conspiracy theory than I have been able to come up with as to how Bretton Woods was terminated. The Fed did it all by its lonely self. Thus was it made possible for the U.S. to print fully fiat dollars for international circulation without even so much as the restraint of a gold-exchange mechanism. Quite a foreign policy initiative and coup taken by the Fed on its own cognizance! And when Samuelson describes how Greenspan saved the U.S., and thus the world, economy at birth of the new millennium with interest rate cuts in 2001-3, he neglects to mention the global war of the period, with its Afghan and Iraqi theaters of operation -- though he does mention the tax cuts accompanying the required increased expenditures. Global war could not possibly have been involved in saving the global economy. Again, the U.S. is expending billions and billions on warfare not generated by taxes. This time, however, the U.S. is more fully free to print fully fiat dollars at will for insertion into international circulation to cover the foreign liabilities generated by the warfare-related expenditures (on top of those generated by the U.S. trade deficit). What is unclear is how this increased international fiat dollar liquidity will affect U.S. domestic fiat dollar supply over the long-term (borders of nation-states not being what they once were, even as late as the 1960s and '70s), how great the future U.S. martial displays required to maintain fiat dollar confidence will be required to be, and when the self-driven wheel of the exponential cost curve of global counterinsurgency war (saving the world economy) pushing free-printing of international fully fiat dollars undermines fiat dollar confidence pushing need for increased martial displays in the global counterinsurgency war (saving the global economy) pushing free-printing of international fully fiat dollars undermines fiat dollar confidence… begins the excessive wobble of the wheel which takes it off-track and onto its side in the dust. I disagree with George Soros, if one considers trends within megatrends. I don't think the 2004 election is all that critical for continuation of what remains of an open society in America. Illustrating the principle involved, the fully fiat dollar did bounce in response to Saddam's capture. I think it is more likely that the 2012 election will be the critical one. As long as America's stick can keep this self-driven international wheel rolling, the psychological need to make a display of control over what one can control (the domestic population) will not become overwhelming. Considering trends within megatrends, dumping of foreign-held T-bonds shouldn't seriously begin much before the teens of the century, nor should one expect the inevitable Japanese flip-over much earlier. If the Great Inflation of the 1960s and '70s killed Bretton Woods, what will the similar manner of financing the present global war kill -- the free-floating non-system monetary system, or just the fully fiat dollar? The major transitional events should have occurred by 2025. Of course, if Russia regains control of her own oil industry and decides to denominate in euros, or another successful major terrorist strike is carried off in the U.S., or the North Koreans… or the Taiwanese… or… then all bets on trends are off and events take over. The U.S. domestic clampdown likely then will come like seven days in May. The Westphalian nation-state system is deader than a doornail; all we're talking about here are endgame scenarios, survival rates, what, if anything, issues from the transition.

Even under totally globalized anarcho-capitalism the economy would remain something of a controlled space. Any exchange unit employed would be an operator on that space. Properties of this operator would control the space; indeed, how those properties were defined, explicitly and tacitly, would decompose the space and determine what kind of entities could and could not exist in the space operationally demarcated. Historically, this has transpired mostly in tacit dimensions; in large measure, it is still not econometrically explicit (or, having long ago been explicit, it has fallen into unconscious abeyance). Having as a child seen the controlled spaces of Kyoto gardens for the first time during the summer of 1953, and having been introduced soon thereafter by rural Kyushu women to Japanese notions of the sacred, one of my personal Ariadne threads has been the trace of votive flags left in the wake of Ma, evolution and deterioration of the notion of sacred space. The word "Ma" means "sacred space" in Japanese. Pattern of ritual plowing was not imposed on paddy soil; it was etched into the ground-state of Ma. Time itself plowed the soil of Ma. This, one could see sitting on the blood-grass mound under the sacred pine planted with roots penetrating the point of power controlling fertility of that kita-Kyushu valley. Later, much later, I discovered a votive flag in the “moon” of The Moon of Hoa Binh, this bronze drum tympanum having come from the Ma River valley, mothering vale of animistic-tribal Dongsonian Bronze Age culture in what is presently northern Vietnam. Moreover, I once tendered a Ph.D. dissertation prospectus, prepared by a Japanese friend, Ohara Yumiko, to the Linguistics Department of University of Colorado describing a project to explore meanings of old Shinto Japanese words with meanings of the same words as they appear in the AmerIndian Lakota language. This prospectus was rejected because it “stinks of the 'Sapir-Whorf hypothesis'”. Hoa Binh was once an ancient village; it is presently one of the oldest continuous human settlements in Southeast Asia. The Muong people inhabiting this village-become-conurbation, to this very day, use a Sanskrit-related script. This fact makes one wonder at the pseudo-science idea that once there was a pre-Vedic, high, global Neolithic culture in possession of a universal form language of “natural names” -- and that the range of this functional language of natural frequencies was defined on Fourier transform of the frequency domain of Huynh Sanh Thong's root homonym, Ma. How widespread were freshwater sonic-visioning dolphins in those days when bronze drums and stone xylophones were sited under waterfalls? Fractal-boundary songlines as standing waveform drummed and stoned by energy-momentum cascade? Rather than syntactical structures, linguistic form in functions (functional prerequisites; functional invariants). Technology of this culture, pseudo-scientifically speaking, was all in acoustic modification according to nature's form in process, all in “second sound” and its derivatives: room-temperature superfluidity, superconductivity, supersolidity -- and the various forms of levitation and physical transparency involved in these states of self-organized criticality. All in This-being-That becoming this and that: learned behaviors as if discrete bodies. Back before onset of this Kali Yuga. The ideograph for Ma is a gate holding the moon, the moon-tympanum being the superconducting mirror of Amaterasu, the Sun Goddess, that mirror which reflects with verisimilitude anything projected upon it: solar fission-fusion alchemy. Ma in Sanskrit is Mahatmya. Bindu is a point of power on Ma. Nada is animistic identity transparency: This-being-That (the quantum relative-state superposition-entanglement intrinsic to superfluidity, superconductivity, and supersolidity). Quoting Sir John Woodroffe (The Garland of Letters, Madras, Ganesh, 1969 edition of the pre-WWI collected articles, pp. 134-5):

In… some of the old pictorial representations of Omkara the real position of Nada is shown as being over Bindu as an inverted crescent [i.e., moon]. Thus the great Bija [mantra], Hrim [Sanskrit script here with an overarching crescent], is composed of Ha, Ra, I and Ma. Of these Ha --Akasa, Ra -- Agni, I -- Ardhanarisvara, and M -- Nadabindu… The Mantra receives its complete form by the addition of the Mahatmya [i.e., Ma or M] which is Nada-Bindu which are Nirakara (formless) and the Karana (cause) of the other three in which they are implicitly and potentially contained; being in technical phrase Antargata of, or held within, Bindu, which again is Antargata of all the previously evolving Saktis… It [the Hrim mantra] is thus the Sabda statement of the birth of General Form; that is, Form as such of which all particular forms are a derivation.

Woodroffe goes on to speak of “'the utterance time' (Uccaranakala)”, which I take as denoting “the minimum time for spontaneous localization” of an enfolded form, under decomposition of the supersymmetry-space aspect of Ma, through the spacetime gate holding Amaterasu's superconductant mirror. Ignoring the “corruption of words” suggesting real understanding was already being lost as the Vedas began oral transmission, decomposition to supersymmetries is elaborated upon on page 194:

…it has been shown that the Parabindu or Isvara Tattva assumes in creation a threefold aspect as the three Bindus -- Bindu (Karya), Nada, Bija. These three points constitute symbolically a Triangle which is known as the Kamakala [quark symmetries]. Kama is of course [of course!] not here used in the gross sense of desire, sexual or otherwise, but of Iccha, the Divine creative Will towards the life of form…

Economically speaking, fundamental defining properties of the exchange unit employed (a form of Kamakala as temporal operator) control production (and minimum production times) within particular von Hayek “time-shapes of total capital stock” mapped upon abstract economic space as various classes of topological change of that space.

I'm sorry. I not only write as “inner work”, I write as I work in the form I work. I have a cryptanalytic attitude to cosmos -- All-that-Is is in ciphers -- so anyone not willing to hunt around is not going to spend any effort on what I write. The connections are there to be discovered, clues abundant, but things are never put into linear syllogistic march. How could such a march actually assist the reader? It could only lead him astray. Led astray, how could he/she contribute to real solution to the real common problem? All that can be done is to display the way of the work. Inner clues and their exterior resonances twisting into nonorientability. That's just the way it is looking at cosmos from incarnated state. My I wouldn't be here if it hadn't done something wrong! Gödel's greatest contribution was in coming up with the very idea of a “Gödel number”, a way of using prime numbers to numerically represent logical propositions and their logical marches. A given Gödel number is a composite of primes, each prime number representing a given component of a specific logical proposition and “linear syllogistic march” of connections with other propositions -- traditional Aristotelian-Baconian-Boolean 1T2-logically-valued on-or-off binary-logic propositions (two possible logical values to a given proposition, only one being permitted correct under the rules employed). Anything else Gödel did, his proofs included, was incidental. The very notions of “proof” and “constructability” he worked with are incidental, even moot, once the move is made to transfinite orders of m-valued logics, logics on the scene long before Gödel made his proofs (the move referred to is a move which quantum mechanics eventually will force -- if the childish hundred-year-long collective temper tantrum is finally transcended). Why, therefore, spend time grappling with the details of Gödel's work? Just as Why, therefore, spend time grappling with the details of work on m-valued logics interpreted in terms of the notion of truth-value, a notion itself incidental, even moot, under m-orders of logical value? And why, therefore, write in syllogistic logical march, itself incidental, even moot? Look at m-valued logics in relation to the primes! As Alexander Karpenko has done. More specifically, look at m-valued logics in relation to Gödel numbering. Gödel numbers placed in the “position” of primes in Gödel numbers and numbered as Gödel numbered primes in his numbers represent m-logically-valued propositions, transfinite orders thereof being represented by the cardinality of the numbering of the numbered. Such numbered numbering stacked upon stacks of numbered numberings can best be represented in sound and (color)form, in sounded-(color)forms. Musculpt as mathematical notation! This is not a new idea. It is one of the oldest ideas mankind has come into possession of. And it is the basis of any real quantum computing (not, that is, using quantum properties to make faster binary processors -- paralleled, hyper-paralleled, cubed, hyper-cubed, or whatever: no possible paralleling of the binary leads to higher orders of m-valued logics: certainly not in 3-space).

My assumption had long been that eventually I would run across a Sanskrit scholar who could get into the orientation I had come to assume. Likely a yogini type, I thought. Unfortunately, modern feminist agenda has so vectored interpretative orientation, and there being no Emmy Noethers among them, even the Harvard crop, this appears yet another fallow field. So, from perspective of my very limited Sanskrit repertoire, I will quote a long passage wherein Sir John Woodroffe interprets contents of the Yogini-hrdaya-Tantra, the Padukapancaka, the Agamakalpadruma, and Tantrojivana. I will then show how I read -- during the '70s, as I was processing exposure to m-valued logics -- Gödel numbering and Musculpt into these sorts of discourses (such passages can be found in many books by many authors; Woodroffe is just the best I have run across). All the subtle issues -- historical and otherwise -- involved in whether or not what I “read into” this material was actually there to be read into it are issues I entertain near-zero interest in, the material being regarded a superconducting mirror -- just like that carried in Amaterasu's purse -- and that mirror, by very definition, being there for the very purpose of being projected upon. Puzzle it out! From The Garland of Letters, pp. 198-9:

The division of the Mahabindu may be memorized by writing in Sanskrit the “Fire” Bija or “Ram”, that is Ra with Candra-bindu [Sanskrit character here]. Then invert the Nada sign which will thus represent the Moon (Indu), the Bindu, the Sun (Ravi), and the Ra, Fire (Agni). The Triangle may be formed by drawing two sides or a bent line and then completing it with a straight line. At the apex place the Ravi-bindu (Sun) and at the left and right hand corners Vahni-bindu (Fire) and Moon (Candra-bindu). Between Sun and Moon place Vama Vakra-rekha and Brahma; between Fire and Moon, Jyestha and Visnu, and between Moon and Sun, Raudri, Rjurekha and Rudra. Between each of the points are lines formed by all the letters (Matrka-varna) of the alphabet called the A-Ka-Tha triangle. The Padukapanaka, a Hymn attributed to Siva (See The Serpent Power) speaks of the A-Ka-Tha in the second verse on which Kalicarana comments as follows: Here Sakti is Kamakala in form and the three Saktis (Vama, Jyestha, Raudri) emanating from the three Bindus are the three lines. The sixteen vowels beginning with A form the line Vama, the sixteen letters beginning with Ka form the line Jyestha and the sixteen letters beginning with Tha form the line Raudri. The abode of Sakti (Abalalaya) is formed by these three lines. The other three letters Ha, La, Ksa are in the corners of the Triangle. Kaluyradhvamnaya says, “The Tribindu is the Supreme Tattva and embodies in Itself Brahma, Visnu, Siva (Brahma-visnu-sivatmakam). The Triangle composed of the Letters has emanated from the Bindu;” also “The letters A to Visarga make the line Brahma, the letters Ka to Tha the line Visnu, and the letters Tha to Sa the Rudra.” The three lines emanate from the three Bindus. The Gunas, as aspects of Shakti, are also represented by this threefold division. The Tantrojivana says: “The lines Rajas, Sattva, Tamas surround the Yonimandala.” Also “above is the line of Sattva, the line of Rajas is on its left and the line of Tamas on its right.”

I have made no changes in punctuation, quotation marks, and et cetera. It should be noted that prior to this passage Woodroffe observes that order of the cosmogenetic terms employed in “the Texts” cannot be ascertained; these texts being written in verse, word order is controlled by meter. He does, however, offer the following (p. 195):

…as Raghava-Bhatta points out, the order of Saktis varies in Isvara and Jiva. In the former it is Iccha, Jnana, Kriya and in Jiva, Jnana, Iccha, Kriya.

I would say, having devoted a year to study of dodecaphonic music composition techniques, that even this is a bit confused, as the involved reversal surely is in exact retrograde. From point of view of the incarnated ego sphere the order in orders of operator-time is first to second to third; from perspective of ontological decomposition, from third to second to first. The topological operations accomplished by temporal curl at limiting time rates of change of acceleration, limiting accelerations, and limiting velocities (m such limiting values in each such order, corresponding to the m-valuedness of universal physical constants) follow a transformational sequence prescribed by both the geometric and the algebraic properties involved. That understanding of this, an understanding which lay behind the Yogini-hrdaya-Tantra, was essentially mathematical, and mathematically apropos, can be seen when (Woodroffe, p. 196) “It says that when Iccha-Sakti in the form of a goad (Amkusakara, that is, the bent line Vakra-rekha) is about to display the universe which is in seed (Bija) form…” The bending of a line is exactly what first-order temporal curl accomplishes. But the issue of the order of the cosmogenetic terms employed in “the Texts” is far more complex than a mere matter of poetic meter or “direction” of logical and ontological involution and devolution. First of all, in any authentic “mantric poetry” -- as Aurobindo so well explicated -- the verse form employed, including its metric properties, should be in cosmogonic shape (consider, for instance, the extraordinarily complex klong-san verse form in Thai, a Sanskrit derivative, in which Isan folk epics were transmitted: Chinese Tang-style poetry pales by comparison). Cosmological metareference is not only in “natural names”; mantric poetry is Sabda analogue lifted off Musculpt sounded-(color)form. Clearly, “the Texts” give every manner of order for order of the cosmogenetic terms, and most commentators throughout history have tried to smooth over the involved “contradictions”. This “smoothing” is analogous to the contemporary physicist's “renormalization”: it conceals exactly what needs to be understood.

The schemata being explicated by “the Texts” are m-logically valued. The “order in orders” is not in binary logical march, not a simple mathematical involute/devolute: every imaginable diagonality, so to speak, prevails in the ordering of orders. Rectilinear binary mind, having been unduly subjected to glutamaturgic neuronal etching, doesn't like that, of course. It succumbs to dizziness sitting on the Wheel of Karma trying to bring the blur into resolution of spokes countable and simply well-ordered so that some thread can be seen to issue from the spinning wheel. That's why people rioted at the slants of Cubism, of Cubist calligrams and Surrealist poetry: their Umwelt was put on a tilt. Being pushed into a squinch, world war was the only way to un-tilt, they “just knew”. How else get rid of all those Dadaists, anarchists, Impressionists, Bolsheviks, stacked-chord rite-of-spring composers?… God help us, how we do need strong leaders! Moving out of ego sphere into cognition as evermore inclusive aspect of All-that-Is proceeds by tilt into imaginary dimension after tilt into imaginary dimension. Tilt, only by tilt! This real spiritual phenomenology is spurned as if it were the plague. Even the Japanese turned their backs on the Japan Style over this very issue. Walls not meeting the floor at 90 degrees. My Lord Buddha! Woodroffe's explication of “the Texts”, as are all others I know of, is based upon employment of binary logic. As soon as one begins employing m-valued logics, however, the cosmogenetic terms, all of which have number representations, invoke non-self-identical numbers, numbers that do not equal themselves, numbers without idempotency, numbers in number systems without an identity operator. Self-identical numbers are way down at the bottom of the Tree of Life; they exist only under the 2-valued order of m-valued logics. One more axiom wiped off the tabula rasa! This numerical identity transparency means that, just as there are orders of cardinality, there are orders of ordinality -- and these orders are not only nested, they are nested on every degree of tilt, nested like a densely-packed S-matrix grid stacked on a stack of multi-sheeted Riemann surfaces spinning as a black hole into the “butter” of a universal covering surface, modulus… hmmmm, or is that the AUMmmmmmmmmmmmm of M Theory? The non-self-identical number is what, most fundamentally, quantum relative-state/entanglement is all about.

Ha-stack, La-stack, Ksa-stack are Gödel numbers, the nodes, the nodal points of the A-Ka-Tha quark-symmetries Triangle. The letters emanating from Ha, La, and Ksa are stacked on Ha, La, and Ksa as m-logical values. Numbered Gödel numbers are the “lines formed by all the letters” (standing wave, interaction channel resonance). Three-fold complex-imaginary operator-time generates the frequency domain as A-Ka-Tha Triangle and its nested/nesting iterations into densely-packed matrix grid stacked on a stack of multi-sheeted Riemann surfaces spinning as a black hole into the “butter” of a universal covering surface. Logical lattices on frequency domain -- Paramanus, Tanmatras, et cetera -- form cross-sheet bridges (think Dirac “crossover time”; think Platonic regular polyhedra made of Fermi surfaces and Brillouin holes; think p-branes). The “lines”, being m-logically-valued, are bundles of fiber bundles, suprasuperstrung Shinto ropes. All of this is simultaneous in the Fermi sea of an infinite n-dimensional electron gas under m-orders of logical value. Linear-time-bound spoken language simply can't describe it without imposing temporal and spatial partitions? Ditto for written mathematical notation? Then go to Musculpt! Become an adept at cosmic chiromancy.

If I knew this in the late-'70s, what have I been doing all these years? Knocking my head against a brick wall is the short answer. Prob'ly keep right on knockin'.

Details-timing is another matter, but one does not have to speculate as to the general properties of what inevitably will happen: symptoms are to be seen everywhere! In popular -- bestsellers -- American fiction, for instance, any character into Jungian analytical psychology is generally handled as one or another sort of psychopath, the quintessential representative being the highly educated, wealthy, sexually-deranged, drugged-out, wethering female murderess: surrogate Nazi spiderwebist and caponizor. The form of such fiction, its style, is an embodiment of moral-majority perception, cognition, sentiment: normotic realism (Hollywood cinematic realism translated back into the art of writing -- heh-heh-heh!), where flashbacks are risqué and significant italic-one-liners interior monologue is Wendishly Rauchen Werboten, uh, Verboten, what a bummer! even werewolfish, man-anima{[l]ed}, as in the film Altered States, a psychic-wentletrap puppet-on-strings terror inducement. The horror, the horror. She, the she-who-must-be-believed, she-who that-is, that is, is patently a transference-figure signifying a characteristic instance of projective-identification (contrasexual counterpoise to Oriana Fallaci writing A Man describing her own Animus as if he were an actual person out-there, not simply a projection she became identified with: one kind of cancer enhancer more elaborate than the mere mono maker, uh, mononucleosis, that is, if not hepatitis B, given how imposition of monotonic identity upon Lukasiewiczian m-logically-valued psycho-neuro-immunologic processes suppresses competency across so many scale-relativistic biophysical levels). This middle-class stigmatization of C. G. Jung is understandable, given that the clear implication of Jung's portrait of the psychodynamics of Nazification is that culpability lies preponderantly upon middle-class clinging behaviors. Equilibrium and homeostasis are high-value properties to mind-in-normosis, that mind which least appreciates a New Physics demonstration that these classical (and modified-classical, i.e., statistical) notions -- equilibrium, homeostasis -- have only idealized heuristic value. Like Clausewitz's distinction in his chapter “What is War?” between “the pure conception of war” and “war adapted to the real world”. Ah, the scale-dependent -- really scale-relativistic, which is not merely scale-relative -- being handled as scalar! My, how creative has become your chaotic accounting! People's accounting? Deterministic disorder? CPA populism? So very, very complex, Mr. Moto. Max Planck's least read and most profound piece (see his volume of collected scientific papers) is on how the idealized “physical world picture” differs from the “physical world” to which the pure conception is adapted -- or have I got the collective projective-identification reversed by somehow mixing it up with the personal projective-identification? Uh-oh! Which the Animus world, and which the Anima world? Ohmygod! There just has to be a third term, wholly ghostly as it may be. Great Smoky Dragon! The concepts of equilibrium and homeostasis -- directly implied by Newton's “System of the World” -- were part of the physical world picture of pre-quantum-relativity physics, but have never been part of the physical world. People who devote their lives to making payments and balancing their thermodynamic accounts do not condone subversion of equilibria, in whatever field. Such subversion just has to be pathological, if not psychopathic. Bad logic at the very least. Without the fiction of equilibrium being touted as faction, how could asset management companies make credible their projections of the long-term market stability prerequisite to steady growth in capital? The hell with new physics! The hell with C. G. Jung! Mark-to-market-uncertainty must be called mark-to-market, and when mark-to-market threatens long-term capital management, creative accounting is called for so as to further distance uncertainty. The farther away, the further the distancing. Purpose built. The purpose of indicators and behavior equations is forecasting -- and both are very good at that, so long as there are no instabilities, no butterflies in belly of the market. But if the instabilities not forecast become insufferable, then multiple investors' (y'see, multiples are sometimes permissible) resolution of trust by equities incorporation over N/S series programmatic modalities , i.e., ei cross [N/S]m, is required to structuralize -- (f)s DIV, divested-derivative investment value -- the bailout of debt cum bail-in of tax-paid moral hazard JDCed (judgmented, deficiencied, charged-off) and occasioned by the faction of equilibrium having been, yet again, demonstrated fiction. Pseudo-market makers may not have access to perfect information (in the physical world, as they do in the physical world picture), but the economic system, as system qua system, has perfect memory by virtue of the structuralization of functions, (f)s: bail-in resolution of an S&L Crisis prefigures the far-from-equilibrium phase transition sure to follow, necessitating even greater structuralization of the functions, i.e., [(f)s]n, of moral hazard. Though details-timing is beyond my ken, in all likelihood I will not be around to view cuspover -- and I must admit that is pleasing speculation. I remember a day in 1986, beginning of efforts to resolve the gathering S&L Crisis, spent at a bankruptcy lawyers conference, swanky hotel in San Francisco, with my onetime immediate superior at Strategic Research and Analysis, MACV-HQ, Saigon, Harvard Law School trained lawyer, specialized in corporate structure and bankruptcy, way back when took Kissinger's national-security course at Harvard, and I'm saying, y'know how all our analytic experience in Saigon tells us this sort of stuff just structuralizes functions into perfect memory, here immunology of the market, and powerfully contributes to future delinquency, and all he could do was shrug, one more Atlas Shrugged, for there was nothing but shrugging to do, given the corpus of beliefs present in that plenary hall.

The more you get to know the humans, the less you can like them. Psychiatry in the period since the late-19th century when dissociation was deemed disease -- dementia praecox, a kind of premature, uh, uh…aaaaahhh, schizophrenia, hysteria -- in its relation to mathematics in modern aspect -- most notably, conspirational dissembling of the transfinite and m-valued logics -- and post-Newtonian physics -- e.g., dissimulation of quantum relative-state -- played a major catalytic role in anthropogenic climate shift by preventing genuine insight into the multi-valued aspects atmospheric processes and solar-terrestrial interactions. So long as that sort of prejudicial influence continues to prevail, there is little chance humans will intelligently meet the challenges of a shifting climatic regime, whatever other factors may be involved. Right means cannot be discovered on the basis of wrong or severely limited understanding.

“In a rampage, rushing helter-skelter, he scattered blood and orchids all across One Police Plaza.” Now 'tis evident that in the case of… uh, not the plague, surely, uh, well, contemporary popular fiction, one foundation stone: to the normotic, the non-normotic is by definition psychopathic. The perspectives essayed here seemed a lot more implausible forty years ago than they do today. A lot more -- even though people remain immune to them approaching half a century later, despite the fact that over the years most aspects of these ideas have been independently elaborated in theory, supported by experiment and discovery, and have been indirectly identified for vehement attack because of their critical threats to vulnerabilities, i.e., loci of dissembling, of prevailing paradigms. Forty years from now, such perspectives won't be considered as to questions of plausibility or of psychopathy or even of sociopathy, accusations so frequently made forty years ago; instead, there will be general mystification at how so many could have regarded UBL, nuclear weapons proliferation, and the like as threats warranting enormous collective preoccupation and resource expenditures, when matters of vastly greater concern were apparent. By then, it will be understood that the biggest threats, those most culpable, those of greatest lethality have long since been dead and honored as great men, geniuses, those most creative to have appeared among us -- whereas, in actual fact, they…

The paradigm within which the global institutional base remains entombed reached high crisis within two decades of N. H. Abel's “Impossibility Theorem”, and the generalized hysteria involved in that circumstance was most quintessentially signified by the chromaticism intrinsic to, implied by Wagner's “Tristan chords” (Opening of what? Prelude to what? Act One of what? perfect fourths? augmented and half-diminished? fbdg -sharp, -sharp traume upon the Liebestod? unity of opposites in aesthetic realism, allusions vague and categorical? the closing apostrophe? end at the beginning? German-sixth cadentially dominant, not yet Stravinsky's power chords at the rite of spring? Cakewalkin' pollywog 4-note, 7th chord syncopated soft to death, grimacing? ah, well, what else can you expect from projective-identification at man-woman transference?). Tristanakkord! LESELUST: Hans-Ulrich Treichel liest aus Tristan akkord. Ohmygod! “the fog banks of soprano-vagina'd Eternity, effaced and relinquished to the Isolde-vulv'd Tristan chords of Lethe” improvised on stage at the Purple Haze Bar. Finally getting overtly back to it againe, eh what? Once again, now, with understanding this time, not so much feeling: communitas-Gemeinshaft; Wandervogelmystik; Umwelt-semiosphere/Weltbild (Weltbilt in OE-MG); Schicksal of the Kulturnation (Kulturstaat as distinct from CultureStat as detection system and preservative), not the Staatsnation (entelechy of the part through Cantorian part-part/part-whole identity-transparency). Völkerbund, eh what? Rechtstaat or Machstaat or Anstalstaat, 1477-1806? Machstaat und Utopie? Reduce the Machstaat to strip the Bride of her surrounds, even! By the mid-19th century, the pattern of chronic dissimulation and deferral had been well established across the whole of European civilization. This behavioral profile has yet to be significantly altered. Marx reacted to the post-Abelian paradigmatic crisis by producing a parody of Cartesian-Newtonian scientific materialism: dialectical materialism. What better way to hide from essential properties of the paradigmatic transformation? From the non-Abelian atomistic immanence of hieratic institutions (self-appointive, appointive, representational) coercively imposing order by vectorings of force, univalent or countervailing, i.e., 1T2-logical, to the Abelian transcendental multivalent dimensions of spontaneous social order by tribal-pagan-animistic propitiation of m-logically-valued form in process as nature. By 1870, the French Cartesian “cogito” had fired the first shot against the Germanic Erdgeist; followed by what Europeans arrogated to themselves as a world war, indubitably no global Gotterdammerung, the major outcomes of which were instatement of Marx's parody and an overburdening of the Erdgeist (in lyric catafalque bittorrent chaos communication, Lulued and Pandoraed, just one more Goethean Faust lurching toward neofolk besonic Nachrichten) sufficient to insure actual world war of global extent. After that global hot war, which resolved nothing and drove the issues in contention more deeply into civilizational fester, the original and its parody staged a cold war as subterfuge to conceal the collective and cooperative quantum phenomena/behaviors actually at issue in the spontaneous order which tribal-pagan animism socially embodies. Then collapse of the parody -- Born in the USSR! Born in the USSR! Brought down by loss of 13,000 in Afghanistan. And, don't y'know, Russia is so weak, stealing oil the West needs and the USSR once controlled is risk free! -- of the institutionalization of the failed Cartesian-Newtonian paradigm yielded a parody of the parody in Leninist Islamofascist global insurgency in pursuit of instatement as a stateless state: interest-free pan-Islamic caliphate counterpoised to the dollar dominance of states united unto nations united and the pan-Europeanism of a usurious euro. Kuwait, for instance, had been created by exercise of “Rule, Britannia” force for the convenience of Great Britain and efficiency in management of her material gains by force of arms -- as had Iraq been created. When Iraq by force of arms attempted to assimilate, or re-assimilate, annex or re-annex, as the case may be, Kuwait, states united unto nations united colluded to the tune of some thirty-five nation-states' worth of men, money, and munitions, such that Kuwait, again, in the interests of efficiency at management of material gains garnered by force of arms, would be disaggregated from Iraq. And this was touted as an expression of the rule of law over the exercise of force! Rechtstaat or Machstaat? Why this particular form of touting? Had it been touted simply as a successful exercise in force of arms, its capacity to divert the social structure of attention away from truly pressing planetary crises would have been greatly reduced. Why? Because this exercise reaffirmed human capacity to impose a (1T2-valued logic) notion of boundaries alien to nature, but integral to the old, failed paradigm and its institutionalization. All the while, from times of the “Impossibility Theorem”, the era of coal and coke, steel and petroleum emerged and peaked in a population-exploded eco-dyscrasia and climate-shift dynamic, adequate attention to which has been chronically deferred (e.g., main achievement of the cold war) in the above-described manner. Chronic diseases generally run their course. And the course of this disease is most likely to remain chronically run by replay of old grievances over obsessed-upon thematics of subterfuge regarding the unresolved issues of paradigmatic transform and institutionalization. One can expect global war to transit to a first pass on space-based planetary war -- calling forth improvements upon air-war intellectuals of Nintendo and Jedi Knights of the Sand Table, one must suppose -- with those societies most reluctantly beaten onto the Cartesian-Newtonian path standing off against those most readily so beaten. How better to symptomatically express chronic dissimulation and deferral?

If the human species has diminished capacity -- CTC-logically-valued quantum processing capability built into the organic brain, local and non-local, while psychologically registering predominantly only results of the 1T2-valued order of logical processing: very, very dim cap, indeed -- does that exonerate the species for what it has done and is doing to its home planet because of the dim cap it has, by whatever means, sustained? Not guilty by reason of dim cap? The universe must be simple enough for me to understand it, for I have a Ph.D. in physics! Must it now? It seems to me that only under law derived by employment of 1T2-valued logic alone could there be such exoneration, relief of cosmological guilt if not ontological guilt. And everybody -- regardless of race, creed, religion, sex, sexual preference -- should have the right to engage in those forms of murder such law legalizes under the banners of moral war, justice, prophylactic suppression of moral hazard. Every aspect of the deployment of resources by humans is affected by this dim cap precluding actual synergistic interface with nature. Not the least of which is the marshaling and deployment of military force. Consider the implicit polarizing Powell Principle behind The Powell Doctrine, for instance. If, for political, economic, social, cultural, religious, historical reasons, massed force cannot be effectively applied to a situation, then the military should not be employed in the attempt to obtain the political objective. Diplomacy, perhaps coupled to brinksmanship, is the only recourse in such situations. This is a Kierkegaardian “either/or” proposition (not an example of Pirandello's “antilogic” which, per Signora Frola, is pro-Lukasiewiczian logics and associated animistic-quantum non-simple identity-transparency, expressing metaphorically as M. Mauss' “gift exchange in lieu of war”), and a proposition in conformation with the rule of binary logic mandating that the middle must be distributed to the poles. Distributing the middle to the poles in every logical operation employed to evaluate and formulate insures a polarization of experience, institutional function, human response alien to nature and the realities of most political, economic, social, cultural, religious, historical factors involved in situations to which application of military force is contemplated. Of all the lessons one could have taken away from the Viet Nam war, The Powell Doctrine is one of the worst. Though not going during public discourse into the technical aspects of the theory of escalation control options, by implication, Powell's critique of escalation is well taken, but for the wrong basic reason. The very notion of escalation is based upon the mistaken assumption that massed force potentially can -- regardless of the manifest political, economic, social, cultural, religious, historical constraints -- achieve the political objective. Though staged escalation gives the appearance of not distributing the logical middle, this is a false impression because degree of massed force is still massed force -- whereas the spread of intensities, low to high, in warfare is no mere matter of degree of massing in force: it is a matter of political, economic, social, cultural, religious, historical modulations of force, in significant measure by ongoing tactical and strategic improvisation (contrary to The Powell Doctrine's insistence upon well-ordered prescriptive definitions prior to any and every deployment: by implicit analogy to syllogistic march). A hugely complex matter, a very different matter from degree of massing, a matter the U.S. military, among others, is structurally and functionally constituted as to constitutionally ignore and/or inadequately deal with. And why is that? Because any form of governance based on separation as the fundamental metaphysic simply cannot permit any other kind of military. An apolitical military, a military barred from politics -- whatever the merits of this barring -- is not capable of effectively creating an underground political infrastructure (e.g., relative to the Afghan mujahadeen, which was treated by CIA and U.S. sheep-dipped military only as a resistance guerrilla force/army) or efficiently opposing an underground political infrastructure (e.g., AQ&A, which, like the VC, the U.S. military attempts to deal with by massed force and programs of assassination -- Phoenix globalized -- veiled with various forms of window dressing, which only causes the infrastructure to morph into something more problematic. Delta Force operators don't need ta know naathin 'bout no theory of infrastructural organizational dynamics by far-from-equilibrium phase transitions; that's what Rand Corporation and spin-offs from SFI do! Right! Right on both counts. Hah! Moreover, a career military, a technocrat army, which does what it does primarily for pay, persona, and post-privileges will not willingly embrace the complexities or loss of lives required to do it otherwise. What for, eh? A big question. It is not that the U.S. military will necessarily lose in such struggles using such methods; indeed, it may win every battle; it is that the Earth will necessarily lose (no concern defined in the MOS repertoire of the Services). In part whereas, in part in spite of, in part because of these factors, the insistence of The Powell Doctrine, by virtue of the polarizing Powell Principle, is that improvisation is a non-syllogistic no-no and any and every deployment of force should be massed, and massed somewhat over the requirements of the case so as to give adequate margin for error. In regards to the Viet Nam war, one could have questioned, for instance, the political objective, the global assessment giving rise to the political objective, the principles of logic employed in making the assessments and in formulating the policies -- rather than simply questioning appropriateness of the military means employed in the attempt to achieve the political objective (precisely defined as: stop the spread of communism in Southeast Asia). And if such rounded thinking is not the job of the military, then the notion of the separation of powers, of the efficacy of countervailing Newtonian forces in a post-Newtonian world of inordinate complexity, needs to be reevaluated, as does the idea that military men are qualified to become national security advisors, secretaries of state, presidents -- and thus carry their unrounded modes of thought into these positions. The so-called successes of The Powell Doctrine have been successes only insofar as the universe of discourse in any particular case is artificially closed like some thermodynamic domain. “Successful” exercise of The Powell Doctrine in Latin America almost certainly is part and parcel to formation of America's “Achilles' heel”. Memetime will tell. More generally, an excellent case could be made that application of the tacit Powell Principle underlying The Powell Doctrine in American involvements in Afghanistan before, during, and after the Soviet invasion engineered the rise of AQ&A. The same could be said regarding U.S. petrowarfare involvements from Central Asia to the Austrian border, throughout the Middle East and North Africa relative to the probable rise of a Germano-Russian Bloc aligned to a Greater China incorporating Japan (something much more plausible today than in 1968 when I first expressed the idea off-the-record at Strategic Research and Analysis, MACV-J2: more memetime will tell). Of course, the dim cap to 1T2-logic alone, of which the polarizing Powell Principle is but a single example, is only a small portion of the manifold archetypal processes which have been involved in producing the present array of global dilemmas. There has been so much lying to self and other over generations that the intractable issues are myriad to an extent that sends the mind a' reelin'. A dim cap species has little chance of transcending the near universality of “being in denial” (which is not a conscious state). Indeed, on the only occasion I acquiesced to teach some of the methods I personally have arrived at over my years of walking meditation, I was threatened with a lawsuit charging “public endangerment”. Such is the intensity of fear affect-charged to violations of 1T2-logic conventions and associated undermining of selfsameness in identity. Kill, kill, kill -- why, why… it's the only logical response!

Revisionist? You bet! Insofar as one can convince oneself there was some initial vision. Where do you think ideas like m-logically-valued monetary units come from, anyway? The U.S. did not win the Cold War; it prolonged Cold War stichomythy made inevitable by completing development of an unnecessary bomb -- based on dissimulations of mathematics and physics largely responsible for two world wars -- and then using that bomb primarily to intimidate the Soviets. Prolonged. Ask not what the state can do for you; ask what you can do for the state. Sthenic VIGor. Sounds like a peace-corps/domestic-peace-corps Hitler-youth slogan to me. Ramp it up P2P with cellular networking and mobile social software to smart-mob, tourism-based, work-corps voluntarism. Unwelcome weldment inducing Weltschmerz. Shtick become Schicksal, far short of any authentic social Aufbruch modeled on New Physics de-dissimulated. Prolonged, prolonged as a way to defer military, political, economic, social, psychological, cultural consequences of any and every possible post-Cartesian-Newtonian Weltbild-Weltanschauung. Will nature be nurtured or will de nurturers be denatured? Human institutions created the present global crisis; they will not resolve that crisis. Natural processes will do that, and human institutions would do well to anticipate the manner in which it will be accomplished -- in order to adopt the involved forms in process as analogical models conducive to adaptation. American and UK petrowarfare behaviors in the era of post-peak oil clarify Anglo-American behaviors in the Middle East at the ends of both world wars. Nor has anyone ever doubted that access to oil was a major factor in the Nazi invasion of the USSR and Japanese initiation of The Great Pacific War. Though factors in collapse of the USSR -- small factors -- loses to a war in Afghanistan, failure to provide sufficient consumer goods, exhaustion from a long-distance arms race did not bring down the Soviet Union. That event certainly will not be well understood for a long time yet, but study of the history of Soviet scientific thought relative to the failed Cartesian-Newtonian paradigm of which Marxism was one product, one progeny, one parody, also the weakest link, will shed considerable light on one of the major involved factors. Public knowledge of the last several decades in development of post-nuclear weapons will shed light on another major factor.

Photo by Nguyen Huu Anh Tuan

Contact the page editor

Return to:
•Top
•Homepage
1