QUANTA

In physics, a quantum (plural: quanta) is the minimum amount of any physical entity involved in an interaction. 

It takes of course an IQ of approximately minus a thousand to work out that I represent everything the Vatican hates and most promptly did I say it.

And so the quantum world  killed the great head-monkey in the sky?  The great head monkey in the sky died when the first Hindu said, I am Brahma, when Jesus said the Kingdom of Heaven is within, when Al-Hallaj proclaimed I am God!  but still the diseased old monkeys preyed upon people, feasted off the hard-wiring and grew fat, all must bow down and worship the great head monkey in the sky, whose attributes are of course what the apes say they are and thus so remarkably resemble a twitching penis and are in all respects exceedingly antsy.  Oh how dreadfully upset the great monkey in the sky gets if you do not worship him.
BUDDHISM, YOU KNOW, FRIGHTFUL THREAT TO THE CHURCH (see 'More about the new Uncle Joe' below)
I found this years ago (upon the death of the previous Pope) on a Sri Lankan site, the link to which I have regrettably lost. People probably find Buddhism more, er Christian, or something. Herr Ratzinger is actually not out of it. Herr Ratzinger recognizes, which appears to be more than politicians or the Anglican hierarchy do, that the dominant spirituality amongst those who have any is not orthodox anything but heavily influenced
by Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity; the Age of Reptiles is over.

….
Buddhist Channel reported that the full quote, delivered in an interview with L’Expresse in 1997, went like this:
"If Buddhism is attractive, it's only because it suggests that by belonging to it you can touch the infinite, and you can have joy without concrete religious obligations,'' Ratzinger said. ``It's spiritually self-indulgent eroticism.''
…
In 2000, the National Catholic Reporter published a list of Cardinal Ratzinger’s greatest hits,
including a money quote from the same L’Expresse interview:

"In the 1950s someone said that the undoing of the Catholic church in the 20th century wouldn't come from Marxism but from Buddhism. They were right."
Reportedly, at the time Cardinal Ratzinger was incensed that there were allegedly more Frenchmen studying to be Buddhist monks than Benedictine monks.
 
Yay, vive la France!  There is of course beautiful Buddhist meditation music.  There is also Sufi meditation music to soothe the tortured souls of the jihadis.

 The general idea is that the inside comes to equal the outside, that you see what is there, and what is there is not an extension of your self, that which over you have unquestioned rights.  There is no reality more bloody basic than that of the existence of other human beings who are coming from somewhere else, who do not have identical views.  Did someone not say you love your neighbour as yourself. 

Why, nearly 70 years after Honest To God, 40 years after Taking Leave of God, is it insisted we are bothered by apes self-obsessed to the point of insanity, think all must defer to their drivel, walk on tippy-toes around it, find it inconceivable others have an equal right to our own diametrically opposed views, as of course why is society being reduced to the level of the snowflake, convinced of its own perfection, arrantly ridiculous.  Of course we are all helpless without ‘God’, only the divine multi-vitamin or the collective action of the proletariat can save us.  You really don’t like people at all.

Of course people can’t be people, can they, can’t be encouraged to be who they are, develop themselves, morally, emotionally, intellectually, no they can only be what your ape-garbage about ‘revealed truth’ tells them they may be  I mean if they were left to themselves they might say things like you talk out of your fucking arses, bunch of psycho nutters who think they can walk into my bedroom and dictate what may happen there. The content of my wardrobe for that matter (see below).  Women are not supposed to say, hallo, is there anyone at home in there?  I am actually a human being, hallo, hallo…

The rent-a-mob of howling animals you generate is far too important to maintaining power than mere people, nothing more important than to keep them animal, irrational, ignorant, vulnerable, all Good what you say it is, all Truth, what you say it is.  And so of course among the more noticeable features of the current scenario no demand the animal learn to behave, no insistence it be other than sniggering gloating filth, no question it be told to say what it has to say in the open or save its breath.

2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."11
Hope
2090 When God reveals Himself and calls him, man cannot fully respond to the divine love by his own powers. He must hope that God will give him the capacity to love Him in return and to act in conformity with the commandments of charity. Hope is the confident expectation of divine blessing and the beatific vision of God; it is also the fear of offending God's love and of incurring punishment.
2091The first commandment is also concerned with sins against hope, namely, despair and presumption:
By despair, man ceases to hope for his personal salvation from God, for help in attaining it or for the forgiveness of his sins. Despair is contrary to God's goodness, to his justice - for the Lord is faithful to his promises - and to his mercy.
20+92 There are two kinds of presumption. Either man presumes upon his own capacities, (hoping to be able to save himself without help from on high), or he presumes upon God's almighty power or his mercy (hoping to obtain his forgiveness without conversion and glory without merit).
The Catechism of the Catholic Church
 
The limitations of reason within any given frame of reference are equally apparent.  Certainly reason may be utilized to demonsrate the workings of the Trinity or how the withering away of the state follows from the dictatorship of the proletariat, but the bars of the cage cannot be questioned.  It is of course explicit in the concept of revelation that there is that which reason may not touch.
 
There are many, many concepts of God. The one most prominently displayed today is God the Fascist. As even a cursory glance at history tells us, religious people display the same gamut of behaviour from good to evil as the non-religious both upholding and opposing everything from the slave-trade to women's rights.

Again the Catechism:

Wounds to unity
817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

The Church holds we are helpless without God. We cannot do good without God and so without something entering us from outside. There is no mechanism inside people capable of moral choice. What the rest of us would regard as a natural plurality of perspectives is a wound to unity.

The core of it remains that independent mental activity is considered synonymous with self, to assert the existence of a functioning mind as heart, to have one’s own views not those dictated by another, supposedly speaking on behalf of the God person, to be human, is self-will and rebellion

And so we have been landed with yet another bunch of screaming monkey-nuts, with whom of course on essentials the ‘Holy Catholic Church’ is fully in agreement, a fine exemplar of the grotesque that fucked-up monkey Sacranie and his filthy murderous ape-rabble.  Why was it not said to them fine, practise your bloody drivelling religion.  No-one gives a fuck about sexually neurotic monkeys jabbering about the great alpha baboon in the sky.  Just don’t bloody bother anyone else

And it is not a question of an unthinking rationalism.  Undoubtedly extra-normal events occur, if not often, for instance spontaneous remission.  Is the mind not a complex and wonderful thing? Jesus of course may be still alive somewhere, but so may everyone else who ever lived.

Quantum immortality
Proponents of the idea point out that while it is highly speculative, there is nothing in the notion of quantum immortality that violates the known laws of physics
 
An easier to understand example is the one given in quantum suicide where a physicist sits in front of a gun which is triggered, or not triggered, by radioactive decay. With each run of the experiment there is a 50-50 chance that the gun will be triggered and the physicist will die. If the Copenhagen interpretation is correct, then the gun will eventually be triggered and the physicist will die. If the many-worlds interpretation is correct, then at each run of the experiment the physicist will be split into a world in which he lives and one in which he dies. In the worlds where the physicist dies, he will cease to exist. However, from the point of view of the physicist, the experiment will continue running without his ceasing to exist, because at each branch, he will only be able to observe the result in the world in which he survives, and if many- worlds is correct, the physicist will notice that he never seems to die therefore proving himself to be immortal, or at least according to quantum immortality. http://www.biologydaily.com/biology/Quantum_immortality
 
It is a question in fact of the dirty old pervert monkeys in Rome, as the dirty old pervert monkeys in Riyadh thinking us all savages, lo, this is a display of great power before which we must fall on our faces, lo this is a mighty god,  and if we don’t of course they have no hesitation in trying to force us to our knees, oh are we not all evil without God.  Just what is their problem If skin and bodies are so evil, why did this God of theirs create them.  It can scarcely be beyond an omnipotent being to create disembodied life, or for that matter cover us all in a decent fur-coat.  What is the  problem of some mad old animal who thinks I should be a mother or a virgin? 

Why have I been bothered with these bloody monkeys?  But it’s more than merely being bothered of course.  Why was my body thrown to animals to tear at?  Why of course am I regarded as a separate species, one whose body is public property, one with whom no-one need reason  Women only understand violence, do we not.  Oh indeed I understand, apes.  Hey, apes, women can talk, you, Ardeshna, the sick sad little monkey who put its finger to its lips, enjoining me to silence, ever heard women can talk, ape-boy?  All childish prattle, no doubt.  Is it a British subject?  Then naturally it wants me silent concerning its treason.  Women do not write novels.  Women do not worry our pretty little heads about the future of our countries.  Women do not of course go hiking in the Highlands on our own, get dirty and sweaty. That is most unladylike (as though the monkeys knew anything about ladies), unfeminine, a woman’s place is on her back.  Women simply should not do that kind of thing and if they do the spawn of desecration, getting hot and wet between the legs, are more than willing to serve their master’s purpose and prevent it.  And of course nursing is so suitable for women.  For a woman to pretend to be an intellectual is merely grotesque.  The future of England of course is men's business.

And perhaps after all it is not who the pluperfect fucking Christ do jumped-up little pieces of infected shit think they are, but what the pluperfect fucking Christ do they think I am to be accepting of their sickness?  Perhaps the exceptionally disgusting and depraved deformed animal, the sniggering gloating mental defective they call Matron, Saunders, might like to give chapter and verse on that one; precisely, ape, what gives you to believe that I may be treated like a disobedient servant-girl, beaten, crippled, ignored, washed down the drain?  But of course do we not leap agilely from bough to bough: why is it imperative such a
creature retain its position, be protected and upheld?  To whom is it imperative?

Oh really, there is this great alpha baboon in the sky who thinks disobedient women should be beaten and women should keep their fucking marfs shut if we know what's good for us, and you'll go to hell, you will, the big baboon will punish you for eternity.  And course you gotta worship him, the big baboon and most of all you gotta do what he says.  Oh really.  The padded cell is over there.

There have of course occasionally be those with functioning minds in the Catholic Church and even female people
 
HELL, OBJECTIVELY SPEAKING
"The fires of hell are the Light of God as perceived by those who reject it." (St Catherine of Genoa)I haven't been able to trace this on-line. I noted it down somewhere in my complex intellectual past. Please contact me if you know the source, or for that matter if you think it a shoddy translation.

It can be argued (means I'm going to argue it) that the various mythologies of the after-life put in what Susan Howatch in her delicious saga of the Church of England in the twentieth century calls 'old-fashioned picture-language' the proposition that after death you simply continue to be what you have chosen to be in life, only you're no longer able to change your mind, to attempt to make it comprehensible to the multitude.By doing so these mythologies introduce 'doer' and 'done-to' and so corrupt what simply is.God does not damn you.

You damn yourself. Classic Catholic theology holds that right up to the moment of death one may repent and save oneself from hell, no matter how numerous one's sins, how vile one's existence.This is of course arbitrary and one may demand what change of state means that one may no longer choose after death;one of the ground-rules here is that a live soul has free will and a dead soul does not.If we return now to the inscription over the Gates of Hell in the Inferno
Giustizia mosse il mio alto fattore:fecemi la divina podestate,la somma sapienza e 'l primo amore.Justice moved my high maker Divine power made me. The profoundest wisdom and the first love.
Right, so God sat there and thought ah-hah! Justice, wisdom and love demand I create a place of ever-lasting torment. It only makes sense within its own frame of reference, that of continued existence after death, in terms of the supremacy of human choice.Suppose you are a racist and something that others find delightful, tender, good and even holy, a mixed-race couple evidently besotted with each other, for instance, makes your skin crawl. That is your choice and an eternity surrounded by mixed-race couples besotted with each other would constitute eternal torment. No-one is doing anything to you. No-one is paying the slightest attention to you. You experience what is as scourging by demons, gnawing by Cerberus, fiery rain, you name it, all metaphors for your crawling skin and screaming mind.

Of course the little monkey on a self-abasement kick can't stand it, any suggestion the human mind has capacity, let alone is an equal partner in such things.  Reading BDSM sites is enlightening, yes, I think one may say they are enlightening.   Shall we try this one more time?

There is no alpha baboon in the sky, beating his chest and punishing uppity females.  That field of human experience known variously as expansion of consciousness, self-realization, Union with God is a matter of physics.

I don't suppose the louts who have molested me do like my eschatology, my physics, or my philosophy of love, but since I live in a free country what they do and do not like is a matter of the profoundest indifference to me. I do not give a flying fuck, guys. Is some part of that unclear? Certainly the Left is supposed to represent the dull, ignorant, brutish, savage and vile. It's a dirty job, but someone has to do it. The Left is supposed to raise them up, not drag all of us down into the gutter.

There is light, energy, power, perceived by some as 'God'. 
Before this the little primate brain cowers in fear or not as the case may be.
There is no ‘Law’.
Love is Light. Light is energy. Energy is power. Energy is not, however, authority, hierarchy, pushing other people around.
‘The law’ is projection onto that power by the fear-filled unevolved fractured ape-brain of the heterosexual human male of what ‘must be’. What ‘must be’ is not what is.
Transitory states are taken for abiding truths.
Fracture is taken for the Whole.
Agency is introduced where no agency exists.
There are glitches in space and time not sendings and revelations.
Love is what some people label God.
Neither God is Love nor Love is God are susceptible of literal interpretation. 

Supposing you're a writer, wanting to get certain key-points across. God is for everyone, the poor and uneducated and the rich and learned alike. Shepherds, definitely shepherds. Shepherds are good. But God is Everyman not a child of privilege. The rich and learned are not commonplace in stables. Lightbulb moment: let's have some travelling scholars. 
You want to make it clear God is knowable and approachable. 
At the other end of the story you want to make it clear God is not about earthly power. 
If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight for it.
You want to make it clear love is stronger than death.


Every -ism is an an attempt to make aspects of reality, transient realities, temporary realities into absolutes, metaphors for reality into literal truths. 

Every -ism is undermined by and eventually crashes on reality, the reality of the physical universe, the reality of individual humans in all their variety, insistent on being what they are not what they're told to be, the reality of the existence of a multiplicity of other ways of looking at the world. This is what happened to Christianity. This is what happened to Marxism. 

The vehicle is mistaken for the destination. The shape, size, colour or velocity of the vehicle does not matter. What determines the destination is the driver. 

If it is imprinted on your consciousness that Jesus is Lord or there is no God but Allah, you must arrive somewhere where Jesus is Lord or there is no god but Allah, unless of couse somewhere along the road something clicks and you have learned to let go of all your preconceptions. 

If other things are indelibly imprinted on your consciousness, then you must arrive where these others things are so, because you are shaping the road, unless of course etc, in other words if you stop shaping the road. 

The key to totalitarianism is the supposed helplessness of individual human beings. There is nothing inside. Either they are helpless without the assistance of whatever version of the divine multi-vitamin in the sky happens to be current or they are individually helpless and only collectively capable, whether as the proletariat or as the Volk. On no account must any individual think he or she is significant or empowered. 

Rejection of the notion human consciousness shapes the trip lies behind acceptance of 'revelation'. 

There is the question of whether everything that occurs to persons is self-generated or whether it may be a connection with other times, other places, other dimensions and the further question of whether such a connection ever is or can be pure or whether it must be refracted through what the human mind thinks (both consciously and unconsciously) must be.

There is the impossibility of the primate brain believing such a connection, should it exist, being a result of human capacity and consequently its convictions that some higher entity is revealing something to it.

There is the incapacity of the primate brain to deal with its own personal 'big bang', consciousness, and to believe itself capable - that that which sustains, that which reveals, that which is everything, is within, 'the force that through the green fuse drives the flower'. 

Among the very many things they don't like about me, of course: I really don't think they like women who read Dante at all.  Or Petrarch.  Or Boccaccio. Or for that matter Chaucer.  Being educated is really evil, isn't it, as bad as being intelligent.  Oh how desperate all are to make us ignorant and frightened.

Anyone want in particular a little chat about the absolute malevolence, spite, venom, evil that has not only crippled me in the now, but which attempted to ensure that my old age would be blighted, increasingly intolerable.

The nature of my responses to these creatures of course depends on how detached I am feeling at the time.  I seriously let them get under my skin, which I regret, solely for the effect on my own well being. At no time have they shown themselves to be anything other than the spawn of desecration, apes, vicious, malignant wordless, mindless baboons.

Shall we try again, Bobbles my sweet?
How can one possibly take seriously a creature  whose sole claim on one’s 
attention is that he has a large club with  which he does not hesitate to hit 
one, a creature so absolutely  ludicrous and devoid of the slightest grasp on 
sanity that he thinks to  demonstrate his intellectual superiority by hitting one, a creature who  has obviously never been anywhere near a university, never 
met an  educated person. Oh Bobbles that's just so you, isn't it, and you're a 
coward, too! All in all, old boy, you are the scum of the bloody  earth

Of course it wouldn't matter if I weren't surrounded by the diseased  prostrating themselves before you and eager to do thy will. Other sick   animals think I'm supposed to be frightened of or in awe of a sick  animal,  impressed by an ape wielding a club. You leave no mark on me bar the  obvious.

Anyone who thinks loonies are confined to Islam needs to get a  life. Bobbles and I know that. 

For approximately seventeen centuries men  acknowledged that authority comes only from God, and temporal rulers sought the  approval and the blessing of their bishops who, by divine right, ruled in their  dioceses as  successors of the Apostles. Then came the Philosophists. As always,  the  Power of Darkness used pride to achieve his aims, the pride of human   reason. As always he called the Light, Darkness and the Darkness, Light   (Isaiah 5:20). That is why the Medieval times are now referred to as the "Dark  Ages"; (in fact, the Dark Ages were pre-Medieval), and why  philosophism is  referred to as "Enlightenment". ...When the first battle had been won, the Devil  moved from the religious field into the  philosophical field, and conceived  Rationalism, which put human reason  before Revelation.
Satan’s Master Plan from The Catholic Treasure  Chest 

"First, the wearing of men's dress by women  affects the woman herself, by  changing the feminine psychology proper to women; second, it affects the woman as wife of her husband, by tending to vitiate  relationships  between the sexes; and third, it affects the woman as mother of  her  children by harming her dignity in her children's eyes . . . This  changing  of the feminine psychology does fundamental, and, in the long  run, irreparable  damage to the family, to conjugal fidelity, to human  affections and to human  society."
 That Difficult Question of Immodesty and Women Wearing Men's  Clothing  by Marian Therese Horvat, Ph.D.

When a woman is dressed immodestly, she becomes the temptress for men  Many women will say they wear the modern  fashions because they are more comfortable, and the weather is hot (Remember, it  is very hot in Hell). This brings us to the area of sports. Regretably, all too  many sports  are taboo for us Catholics, not that they are in themselves a sin  or a  near occasion of sin, but because of the skimpy attire that such sports   "require". Think of these sports and the clothes people usually wear  when  playing the following sports or activities: swimming, baton  twirling, tennis,  basketball, dancing (disco dancing and little girls  who take dancing lessons)  and gymnastics. Let us take swimming for an  example, since people usually wear  less clothes when swimming than any  other sport. Swimsuits have no sleeves,  have very low necklines, no  coverings for the legs and usually has the whole  back exposed. When we  think of the saying, "in proportion to the amount of  flesh exposed  mortal sin seems to increase", shouldn't we avoid the bathing  suits like the plaque? Do you think this suggestion is crazy? You say yes, then   let us ask another question. Do you prefer to have the mortal sin of  immodesty  on your soul and the untold number of mortal sins of your  being a temptress or tempter and causing others to sin? 

One might say that our little girls can't do  anything. You are wrong,  because, if you modify the costumes and attire that  the girls wear, in  most cases they can still participate if you are Catholic  enough to  stand up for the proper moral dress code. In addition to the   modifications, our girls can go bicycle riding and horse back riding if  they  have a full skirt and the skirt reaches at least to the middle of  the calf; 
and, of course, skating can be done in a skirt. Our girls  should be pursuing 
lady-like activities and hobbies which will prepare  them for marriage and their 
proper role as mother and wife. They should  be learning to sew, embroider, 
knit, crochet, cook, make rosaries, sing  good Catholic songs and other decent, 
patriotic songs, play musical  instruments (we'll need an organ player 
eventually for our chapel),  paint and draw. Above all they should be learning 
to talk, dress, sit,  walk, stand, kneel, stoop and act like a lady at all  times. Our girls  have many options open to them, if they will only pursue them 
in a moral decent manner.
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/morality/modesty/dress.htm

This guy had a real problem with living in the United States, bastion of  Protestantism and infidelity,  where Satan had ensured that the supreme  authority of the Church was rejected. 
  
Throw in a couple of Muslim loonies for good measure Made for each 
other, aren't they.

AI: You have misunderstood the reality. As a Muslim I believe Allah…created whole universe;  he created the UK. It doesn’t belong to you, it doesn’t belong to the Queen, it  doesn’t belong to the Anglo-Saxons…Allah has  put us on the planet earth to live wherever we want and implement the  Sharia rules.
  
Transcript of BBC interview with Abu Izzadeen

"As for those who cannot offer resistance or cannot fight, such as  women, children, monks, old people, the blind,  handicapped and their  likes, they shall not be killed, unless they actually  fight with words  [e.g. by propaganda] and acts [e.g. by spying or otherwise  assisting in  the warefare]. Some [jurists] are of the opinion that all of them  may be killed, on the mere ground that they are unbelievers, but they make an  exception for woman and children sind they constitute property for Muslims."--Sheikh Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah

Guess it's never occurred  to him he'll run into 24 inch-waist SAS

Now, pet, I imagine that in  what passes for your mind England and the  English like everyone else and  everywhere else belong to God. It’s a possibility. There is, however,  something in between England and  God in your model, is there not. You, little  you. You represent God and  rule England on God’s behalf. 

There are a  few problems here, as those nice young men in their clean white coats I’m sure  would be glad to explain to you. 

1) there is not one shred of evidence  for your conviction you carry out God’s will
2) If you do carry out God’s  will, then God is clearly a grossly  mentally disturbed being to whom no sane  and civilized person would give two seconds’ attention 
3) There is not one  shred of evidence for  the existence of this God of yours. You believe he  exists. Others do  not. What is not demonstrable cannot be binding. You must see  that. Some people believe this God exists. Others do not. They can’t both be  right and it is impossible for any individual to be bound by both beliefs.
 
So we have a situation here, Houston Control, where this fucked-up  baboon 
thinks he carries out God’s will. The territory he inhabits may  be summarized 
as the supreme authority of the Church which I must be  made to accept. The 
fruits of the independent exercise of the hearts and minds of humans are the 
work of Satan. This is to what Blair and the  rest of the New Labour rabble 
consider me subject. It's perhaps not so  much a question of why haven't they 
been arrested as of why haven't they been sectioned.
 
Perhaps you'd like a picture of a friend of mine. That should cause the savage such screaming hysteria that it may yet be escorted to a padded cell.  Ever been to the British Museum?  Oh mustn't animals be 'inflamed'?  Can't they help themselves?  Of course they can bloody help themselves.  The insolent evil isn't even that they can't help themselves.  It's that everyone else must function on their level. As Archbishop Tutu pointed out, Jesus said I'll raise you.

Oh, indeed I'll raise you guys, I surely will.  You really can't stand reality, can you.  Welcome to the world of fact.​

Or maybe this is worse: