Quantum Nanotechnology/Lessons In Strangeness

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to: navigation, search

Lessons in Strangeness[edit]

Aside from consolidating chronic pain out of existence, what would happen if we were to do the same with thoughts, dreams and ideas? Thought (especially familiar dreams) can be considered or viewed as position-less or imaginary. Perhaps intangible as thoughts are things. Which means that all thought has the tendency to be transmuted into it’s physical equivalent. Yet I am convinced that dreams have a definite connection to alternate dimensions.

Those of you who have had these types of dreams know what I am referring to – because they are familiar. People, places and events that you have seen before. Inexplicably you know that you know that you know it and somehow, in someway, you know that that place actually exists even though you cannot verify it. Sound familiar? But what can I assume about these dreams? Are they actually linked to alternate time-lines? Yet in the real, in our imagination, marked states can be considered as the super-quantum dynamical of all information.

If matter can neither be created nor destroyed then it is in reference only to non-time travitic applications uninvolved in Aloedeology. Yet again, matter has been created and destroyed, in Pair Production and Mutual Annihilation in particle accelerators. A=A. An identity. A thing is itself. A leaf cannot have the same side on both sides. Existence exists therefore non-existence does not exist. Then of course non-A=non-A. It follows then that in order for A to become non-A. There must be an element of subtraction or negation; A – A = ( ). And A – A = 0. If it is true that ( ) = ( ) but if ( ) +A = A, then there is a transition form non-existence to existence with A being existent in reality. Therefore ( )+A = ( )A.

Where non-existence = non-existence, ( ) +A = ( A ). A transfer process of thought into actual could be existent as (A)-(A)=A. Thus “subtraction” of non-existent “(A)” into existence can only bring about non-existent (A) into existence. Or (A) –( ⋅ ) ≠ A. Deleting non-existence itself would not do this but deleting non-existence might occur as ( ) – ( ) = ( ).

Therefore non-existence cannot be deleted because there may not be anything to delete. So to delete something or nothing by subtractive measures would not bring it into the real.

The fundamental method, then, by which A in non-existence to become existent is ( A)+A=A.

Again this sets things at a loss because “A” in non-existence does not become existent by “A” in reality – presupposition. ( A) –A - ( ) = A. Where non-existent A is subtracted from non-existence. This explains the basic transfer of thought into the real but does not explain how it occurs. Perhaps (A) +A – ( )=A. For if (a)_ -A-( )=(A), then (A) is subtracted from nothing as ( ) –( )= ( ). Therefore (A) + A – ( ) = A. representing existence symbolically is measured as a dot.

( • ). (A) + ( ⋅ ) A – ( A ). Is this it? Where non-existent (A) + existent A – non-existent A = A existent.

A subtraction from inexistence while simultaneously becoming an addition to existence. Further we can reduce the length of the equation provided that it’s transmutation is expressed in terms of simultaneity in Aloedeology: (A)+ - • A ( A ) =A There are several inexact(s) to these equations and I do not assume them to be absolute. As with the first case A – A = ( A ). Therefore ( A ) should invert (A) – (A) =A. Again this appears not to be the case since subtraction from or to – it not in existence and the ( - ) part is in existence. Hence one cannot subtract from non-existence when that subtraction is executed in existence.This would also lean toward being the case with addition and other operators. So can these operators be non-existent so as to bring about a non-existent ( A ) into the real and actual?

The reason why A – A = ( A ) was because it first started in existence to make A non-existent as well as subtraction which was existent and this is why it worked. If subtraction and other operators are non-existent is it’s existence in no-existence be existent? The answer might appear contradictory but if it is existent in non-existence it cancels not itself but be thought of as hierarchical dimensions it only cancels it’s surrounding cancelers/inexistors and this cancels it from non-existence into a form of existence hypothetically.


( A ) ( - ) ( A ) = A.


A – A = ( A ) ( - ) ( A ) = A.

The first half of the equation suggests that those who “forget” certain ailments are canceling that ailment out, out of existence. This is a good argument as to why certain cures of the mind work and heal bodily ailments. Remembering or repetitive dwelling on troublesome phenomena associated with repetitive addictions and feeding it (especially in one’s mind) indicates,conjuring from a very real vantage point.

Because after calling it to mind – repeatedly it’s essence is forgotten temporarily and this manifests the phenomena more readily. However this does not always work with all ailments and chronic pain such as a tooth that has gone abscess. For one reason or another when the equations are used for thought transfer into the actual they do and do not work all of the time at least what I have found – perhaps another catalyst is needed.