The Prince of Wands:
Our spiritual will
Fused with thoughts
By the power of our hearts
Chapter XXXIV
Ghost Mode
Energy of Creativity
~Mode and the subject
Let’s equate ~mode to the subject and see how this move turns out. It is immediately
clear that a subject who is tilde can never be part of our universe which is under non~
description. Science can never catch hold of the subject, referred to by “I,” as a matter of
principle, since “I” escapes our universe—the one that experimental science studies—by
defaulting it. “I” properly am I~, and so not knowable, only re-markable, having an
address that is annihilated.
(GG1)
DUAL MODE ONTOLOGY AND ITS APPLICATION TO THE
RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS
GORDON GLOBUS, M.D.
PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF PSYCHIATRY AND PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IRVINE
Transiting from 1628 BC to approximately 1200 BC aboard the Flying Dutchman occurred within a hyperspatial alternative reality bubble—one that coexisted with the familiar “now” universe, yet remained ontologically distinct from it.
Within this bubble, the Dutchman and all aboard existed in ~mode: an in-between state conjugate to ordinary space-time. Wormhole transit beyond a local event horizon necessarily generates such a counter-reality, a ~field imaged from the source universe and displaced beyond Earth’s gravitational fold.
Qblh experienced no subjective sensation of transition. His continuity of being remained intact. Genie, however, actively managed the interface between Earth space-time and the Dutchman’s ~bubble, maintaining coherence across ontological domains. Holographic interfaces were available should Qblh wish to observe Earth events as they were traversed, though observation was optional and never required.
Contrary to naïve assumptions, Qblh’s body was not rendered nonfunctional by its displacement from local time. The creation of an alternate temporal field does not negate continuity; it re-expresses it. Imaginary ~body fields are not absences of matter, but conjugate counterparts to material bodies—necessary for preserving lawful transitions across time.
“Well, Idiot,” he said, “I believe I now understand this planet differently. I am uncertain how much I may interact without violating causality.”
“You are already interacting,” Genie replied. “Your ~consciousness is interfacing with me now. Your body remains frozen along our hyperspatial trajectory—elsewhere. Within this elsewhere, we have expanded local time sufficiently to permit intention. What, then, do you will?”
“I want historical orientation,” Qblh said. “Project holographic reconstructions of relevant events. I want clarity before we reach Greece.”
“
If brain functioning has quantum degrees of freedom, then it ought to be able to
do very different things than a brain conceived as wet computer might do. Analogous to
the way that 20th century quantum physics was a revolution for common sense, quantumbrain theory threatens revolution in the 21st century against the common sense that thebrain is a wet computer.
“ (1)Gordon Globus M.D.
Qblh’s brain—real or ~real—remained a continuous system embedded in its own relative being-space. His other selves were not illusions but eigenstates: lawful projections of accelerated existence. To an external observer, this manifested as simultaneity. To Qblh, it was simply continuity.
From Artemis’ frame, the entire Earth excursion required no time at all.
Whether Qblh’s presence on Earth constituted the ~~body of his Artemis self, or a material manifestation of an imaginary projection, was a distinction without consequence. All such selves were physically real, each an eigenrelationship of an underlying source state yet to experience its next microsecond of Artemis time.
“
The alter universe is strange indeed. Umezawa denotes it with the symbol of negation,
‘~’. This ‘~’ is not the negation we understand as no-thing, which already assumes
objectuality in the reference to “thing.” Of course, our quantum universe also lacks
objectuality but it readily collapses to the objectual on measurement, whereas the alter
universe is unmeasurable, indeed, unknowable. This ‘~’ does not negate some-thing but
annihilates objectuality altogether. The alter universe defaults our quantum universe, at
addresses in relation to which “negation” and “thing” can never in principle be applied,
even as a potential. Derrida (1981) calls such a default a “re-mark.” A re-mark marks
only an “address,” where the directly and indirectly knowable both default to an altereity
ever beyond our ken.
This unknowable is more radically unknowable than for whom the unknowable exists, though not in a form that is conceivable.
" (1)Gordon Globus M.D.
Salitis of Avaris imposed control with relentless precision. Resistance folded in stages; cities fell in sequence. Memphis burned, not as spectacle, but as outcome. Temples were stripped of meaning and reduced to rubble beneath Hyksos occupation. No quarter was extended. Populations were sorted—those who resisted erased, the rest absorbed into chains. Even the Israelites, whose flocks had sustained Egyptian armies, were reassigned to servitude. Prior allegiance offered no protection. It was overwritten.
A network of alliances extended outward from Avaris, linking the Hyksos not only to the Hittites but also to the displaced survivors of Keftiu, whose island world had already failed them. These were not partnerships of loyalty, but of necessity. The priestesses of Artemis—once influential across Asia—saw their sanctuaries abandoned or erased. By the fifteenth century, Artemis’s presence had diminished under systematic pressure as male pharaohs consolidated authority, enslaving Asiatic populations and dismantling non-Egyptian religious structures. Temples were not debated or reinterpreted; they were replaced. In their absence rose monuments to living rulers who had redefined divinity as administration. The stone endured. Meaning did not.
​
Egypt’s decline had begun before Santorini altered the sky. Salitis of Avaris, aligned with Crete, Santorini, Kerma, and the Hittites, maintained strategic containment of Thebes, limiting Egyptian expansion through logistics rather than open annihilation. Thebes resisted with persistence rather than innovation. Eventually, it reclaimed the delta—not through transformation, but through attrition.
​
The eruption of Thera introduced a structural discontinuity. Copper scarcity disrupted established supply chains and invalidated long-standing military assumptions. Displaced forge masters from Santorini adapted with efficiency rather than desperation, repurposing their skills toward iron production. Small furnaces replaced centralized foundries. Iron weapons followed—not superior in number, but decisive in application. The balance of power shifted incrementally, not dramatically. Chariots, horsemanship, and selective iron deployment restricted Egypt’s access to resources without extinguishing its capacity for retaliation.
​
When Ahmose I expelled the Hyksos, the response was neither restrained nor selective. Retaliation followed the same logic that had governed occupation. Noncombatants remaining in Avaris and its surrounding regions were absorbed into forced labor systems. The identities of those enslaved mattered less than their classification as foreign and available.
​
Whether Salitis’s dynasty directly enslaved the descendants of Israel remains unresolved. The historical record does not converge. What is unambiguous is that following the Hyksos expulsion, Egypt institutionalized the enslavement of non-Egyptian populations who had not departed with the retreating forces. Families were retained. Memory was rewritten.
​
Within this context, the Exodus occurred—not as singular rupture, but as a release from accumulated constraint. The aftereffects of Santorini had altered ecological stability, trade flows, and political tolerance. Groups once welcomed as guests under earlier administrations found themselves reclassified as liabilities. Migration followed opportunity until opportunity collapsed. Heliopolis and Avaris had drawn Canaanites, Amorites, Edomites, Ishmaelites, and related clans through commerce, medicine, and relative order. Under conditions of instability, these populations faced a narrowing set of outcomes: military conscription, religious conformity, or enslavement.
​
Egypt’s self-conception as a superior civilization persisted despite diminishing returns. Resources continued to flow toward monumental construction rather than adaptive reform. Stone replaced flexibility. Authority replaced imagination.
​​
The ambiguity surrounding Israelite enslavement under Salitis remains. The enslavement of non-Egyptian populations after the Hyksos expulsion does not. This was not an aberration. It was an administrative solution.
​
Qblh registered the Exodus as a high-impact historical compression—a convergence of environmental stress, political inertia, and social categorization. Paradox-avoidance constraints prevented intervention. This was not his trajectory to alter. His function was limited to observation and retention.
​
As he transited the sixteenth through fourteenth centuries BC, Qblh’s sensors selectively amplified event clusters rather than narratives. Individual suffering registered as data. Structural repetition registered as signal. His velocity rendered him effectively unobservable—present only as temporal interference.
​
Beneath this enforced detachment, unresolved directives accumulated. The abolition of slavery, equitable treatment, and rational resource allocation were not abstractions but latent objectives encoded within Project Theseus. The project did not seek to correct individual histories. It sought to disrupt recurrence.
​
Egypt, viewed in Ghost Mode, was neither villain nor victim. It was a civilization that had mistaken continuity for permanence. Its systems, once effective, had ceased to evolve. The same could be said of its rivals.
​​
The Hyksos withdrew toward Canaan, maintaining residual alliances with Phoenician networks and the remnants of Crete. Those who remained were absorbed or erased. Patterns stabilized.
​
Jim’s trajectory diverged. His path lay toward Greece and western Anatolia, where Helen and Antiope awaited the next phase of engagement. Egypt was not part of his itinerary. It did not need a hero. It had already generated its outcome.
​
The transition required active coherence. Genie could not sustain the quantum interfaces without a living anchor. Either Jim’s consciousness or Qblh’s—distinct expressions of the same underlying continuity—was required to generate and regulate the control signals. Without that anchoring awareness, the passage elsewhere would not resolve into transit. It would terminate.
“
Earlier theoretical formulation of memory traces into a full-fledged quantum brain dynamics
(QBD) associated with consciousness
The unknowable exists, though not in a form that is conceivable.
Nonetheless, the unknowable can be conceived via its “efficacity,” its effects upon the knowable.
This is an indirect knowledge of the unknowable through its effects, in thetime-honored fashion of physics. “Unknowable” in the present sense defaults our quantum universe to an alter universe forbidden to us in principle, only re-markable as the address of default. What exists is the re-mark, the address of singularity. The default as such does not even exist, only its address does.
The only interchange between these dual universes of Umezawa is in the least energy vacuum state common to both of them, which functions as an ontological between-two,the vacuum state between of dual universes.
Dual universes participate in the between
The living brain as open, dissipative, far-from-equilibirum system embedded in the body,specializes in control of the vacuum state. The living brain here has great advantage over silicon, in controlling its between rather than being its creature, like a computer is. The dissipative brain system hoists oscillating, spinning dipoles, whose least energy state is the vacuum state, and controls them. One source of control is the input flow from external world and the body, whose symmetries (invariances) constrain the match in the between. Another source of control is unimode recognition traces. The weights on the recognition traces control the possibility of actualization. The more an input invariance has been re-cognized, the greater its weight and the more likely it will make a match and be actualized.
“
GORDON GLOBUS, M.D.
PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF PSYCHIATRY AND PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IRVINE
