Concerning Noumenal Subatomic Wavicles and Particles. Although I have described the evolution of metaphysics, and hence of God and Heaven, as proceeding from a context of most God and least Heaven in the Cosmos to one of least God and most Heaven in cyborg universality via more (compared to most) God and less (compared to least) Heaven in nature and less (compared to least) God and more (compared to most) Heaven in mankind, I would not be so foolish as to equate such a progression, unique to the metaphysical aspects of each of the aforementioned contexts, with a shift from most particles and least wavicles to most wavicles and least particles via intermediate ratios of particles to wavicles, and for the simple reason that I know from philosophical experience that elemental particles are not to be equated with God, even if, by contrast, elemental wavicles are most certainly to be equated with Heaven. No, God, being germane to the Truth, and hence to a species of universal knowledge germane to metaphysical ego, can only be equated with molecular wavicles, since metaphysical ego and soul, the contexts of God and Heaven, are always wavicle-equivalents germane to the psyche and, hence, to transcendentalism. For the particle, whether elemental or molecular, of the will or of the spirit, one must turn to soma, and in this instance to the metaphysical soma of bound will, or antiwill, and bound spirit, or antispirit, which have less to do with God the Father and Heaven the Holy Soul in metaphysical transcendentalism than with the Son of God and the Holy Spirit of Heaven in metaphysical idealism, as though state-subordinate corollaries of a church-hegemonic lead. Thus if, in metaphysics, we equate molecular wavicles with God the Father and elemental wavicles with Heaven the Holy Soul, we should be careful to associate elemental particles with the Son of God and molecular particles with the Holy Spirit of Heaven, thereby avoiding the error of making a simple particle/wavicle distinction between God and Heaven. In truth, God the Father and Heaven the Holy Soul prevail, as molecular and elemental wavicles, over the elemental and molecular particles of the Son of God and the Holy Spirit of Heaven, pretty much as Truth and Joy over the truthful approach to Beauty and the joyful approach to Love of that which, being somatically subordinate to a psychic lead, indirectly connects transcendentalism to antimaterialism via its own idealism in the interests of an antifundamentalist completion of the virtuous circle of metaphysics and antimetachemistry, the latter of which manifests as the Beauty and Love of Antidevil the Antimother and Antihell the Unclear Spirit on the plane of antimetachemical antimaterialism and as the beautiful approach to Truth and the loving approach to Joy of the Antidaughter of the Antidevil and the Unclear Soul of Antihell on the plane of antimetachemical antifundamentalism, so that not only is there a connection – indeed, a direct connection - between metaphysical idealism and antimetachemical antimaterialism in primary and secondary state-subordinate terms but, more importantly, such a connection can be inferred to exist between antimetachemical antifundamentalism and metaphysical transcendentalism on secondary and primary church-hegemonic terms. However, that has little to do with the fundamental distinction between molecular wavicles and elemental wavicles in relation to psyche, whether metaphysical (transcendentalist) or antimetachemical (antifundamentalist) and, by state-subordinate contrast, between elemental particles and molecular particles in relation to soma, whether metaphysical (idealist) or antimetachemical (antimaterialist). Such subatomic distinctions, on the other hand, typify the disparity that properly exists between psyche and soma, wavicles and particles, whether in relation to elemental or to molecular subdivisions of each. Now in the case of metaphysics and antimetachemistry at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass, I think we are alluding to a distinction, subatomically, between protons and photinos, conceiving of the former as properly metaphysical and of the latter as their antimetachemical, and therefore anti-photonic, counterparts in what is, after all, a distinction, at this point of the axial compass, between essence and anti-appearance, classless and anti-upperclass criteria germane to the Celestial City and Anti-Vanity Fair. If previously, many years ago, I made a simple distinction between the sensuality of ‘tons and the sensibility of ‘tinos, as in protons vis-à-vis protinos or photons vis-à-vis photinos, I have since come to re-evaluate my position in relation to the rather more complex interaction between the hegemonic and subordinate or, rather, subservient factors at any given point of the said axial compass, which strongly suggests to me that the hegemonic factor will always be a ‘ton, whether photon or proton at the noumenal planes of metachemical sensuality and metaphysical sensibility, and the subservient factor a ‘tino, whether protino or photino at the noumenal planes of antimetaphysical sensuality or, rather, anti-sensibility, and antimetachemical sensibility or, more correctly, anti-sensuality. Thus we would come to the conclusion that the protino of antimetaphysics was an antiproton in its subservience to a metachemical hegemony favouring the photon, an antiproton that was both pseudo-protonic in respect of bound psyche and quasi-photonic in respect of free soma, neither of which would accord with what, in metaphysical sensibility, was properly protonic and therefore free to be true to its essence as a free psychic and bound somatic entity which required a subservient photino in antimetachemistry, an antiphoton that was both pseudo-photonic in respect of bound soma and quasi-protonic in respect of free psyche, neither of which would accord with what, in metachemical sensuality, was properly photonic and therefore free to be ‘true’ to its appearance as a free somatic and bound psychic entity which required, as noted above, a subservient protino in antimetaphysics. Therefore whether at the northwest point of the axial compass in which metachemistry rules antimetaphysics, as upper-classfulness over anti-classlessness, or at the northeast point of the said compass in which metaphysics leads antimetachemistry, as classlessness over anti-upperclassfulness, we should logically conclude that the hegemonic factor is undivided and therefore either a photon or a proton, negatively clear in noumenal sensuality or positively holy in noumenal sensibility, whereas the subservient factor is ever divided and consequently either a protino (divisible, antiprotonically, between pseudo-protonic and quasi-photonic proclivities) or a photino (divisible, antiphotonically, between pseudo-photonic and quasi-protonic proclivities), anti-positively unholy in noumenal anti-sensibility and quasi-negatively unholy in noumenal quasi-sensuality or anti-negatively unclear in noumenal anti-sensuality and quasi-positively unclear in noumenal quasi-sensibility. In the case of metachemistry, the Ugliness and Hatred of metachemical materialism vis-à-vis the ugly approach to Falsity (Illusion) and hateful approach to Woe of metachemical fundamentalism constitute the negative clearness of noumenal sensuality. In the case, however, of antimetaphysics, the Falsity (Illusion) and Woe of antimetaphysical antitranscendentalism vis-à-vis the false approach to Ugliness and woeful approach to Hatred of antimetaphysical anti-idealism constitute the anti-positive unholiness of noumenal anti-sensibility and quasi-negative unholiness of noumenal quasi-sensuality respectively. Turning from the northwest point of the axial compass, wherein we are conscious of the prevalence of a kind of vicious circle, to its northeast point, which is the head of a separate axis altogether, we shall find that in the case of metaphysics, the Truth and Joy of metaphysical transcendentalism vis-à-vis the truthful approach to Beauty and joyful approach to Love of metaphysical idealism constitute the positive holiness of noumenal sensibility. In the case, however, of antimetachemistry, the Beauty and Love of antimetachemical antimaterialism vis-à-vis the beautiful approach to Truth and loving approach to Joy of antimetachemical antifundamentalism constitute the anti-negative unclearness of noumenal anti-sensuality and quasi-positive unclearness of noumenal quasi-sensibility respectively. Photons over protinos vis-à-vis protons over photinos – such is the antithetical reality of the mutually exclusive noumenal heights, the heights, in general terms, of Vanity Fair and the Anti-Celestial City vis-à-vis the Celestial City and Anti-Vanity Fair, neither of which can or ever could have anything to do with the other, since the one is infinitely ruled by photon negativity in noumenal sensuality, whereas the other is eternally led by proton positivity in noumenal sensibility - the alpha and omega of sensual barbarity and sensible culture.