The Cryptography of The Cryptic and The Plenum

"Can worldwide communication ever be fully secure? Quantum physicists believe they can provide secret keys using quantum cryptography via satellite. Unlike communication based on classical bits, quantum cryptography employs the quantum states of single light quanta (photons) for the exchange of data. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle limits the precision with which the position and momentum of a quantum particle can be determined simultaneously, but can also be exploited for secure information transfer. Like its classical counterpart, quantum cryptography requires a shared key with which the parties encode and decode messages. However, quantum mechanical phenomena guarantee the security of quantum key distribution. Because quantum states are fragile, interception of the key by an eavesdropper will alter the behavior properties of the particles, and thus becomes detectable."  http://www.sciencedaily.com/

The cryptic and cryptography. One is a phenomenological sort of illegibility and the other is to intentionally make the legibility seem to be chaotic. Yet in the latter case, the legibility remains while being indecipherable.
The concept of keys has been gone over several times here as analogous to the relationship between the observer and the observed. Some have anomalous experiences, some don't. Some have variation A, while some receive variation B, or C, or D, or e, on and on. If there is coherency it appears to be scrambled, and in our purposefully driven existence, sending a message designed to be illegible, seems more than counter-intuitive.

Whether it is biogenetic, software binary language, speech, visual semiotics, on and on, we have many many cases of encoding. None of them are patently, directly observable.
In the case of both the mind and brain, we have a case of self encoding as well as encoding from the five operable channels of the senses. No separation of the seven is possible. Do two individuals either recall or experience an event in a identically precise manner? There is an Uncertainty principle in this fact, that we cannot have patently identical signals nor memories of a singular event. What are you ,versus another, looking for? What do you notice? What was missed?

In terms of self awareness, are there embedded autonomic encoding processes going on without our direct access in order to observe them? What is instinct? It is certainly encoding that has a behavioral effect. What is desire? An effect. What is hatred? An effect. Several encoding processes are at work together simultaneously and to what extent the driver is driven may have an effect on reception.

Whatever a singularity of reality may be, we can never access it directly without the intermediary of encoding. So, if this is true, then what are we missing as witnesses who are experiential in nature? .
I think it's reasonable, despite the claims of materialist science based on repeatability ( which seems myopic)
we are missing a great deal and that what we receive is only a tiny fractional percent of what is beyond what we can directly recognise only through an intermediary. This somewhat reminds me of the basis of religion with it's subset of priest intermediaries who follow their own form of encoding. While there may be some basic shared aspects of religions, no two are exactly alike. You follow A, B, C, or D etc.

Then there is the matter of transpersonal realities and the anomalies that are it's effects. Data that is shared inexplicably over quantifiably large physical distances. The chances of reception are slim and the events that occur are rare. Then there is the return to the matter of keys which is dimly echoed in the ill defined past term, "sympathetic magic" which vaguely uses a principle of resonance. One vibrating tuned fork vibrating another in proximity, only in this case, we are missing what we can define as proximity. outside of physical distance. Yet there is a coherence between the configuration of the key and the lock it opens.

What is a plenum? A chamber intended to contain air, gas, or liquid at positive pressure, or Horror vacui ("nature abhors a vacuum"), A meeting of a deliberative assembly in which all members are present; contrast with quorum... Enclosed spaces (in buildings) used for airflow.... Electrical wire permitted in plenum spaces per building codes... a space completely filled with matter. Matter as encoded information in physicality.

We ask what is behind that wall?  Does information abhor a vacuum?  And in some unimaginable plenum, is all information contained, like a encoding genome?

We travel further beyond space which is filled to overflowing, not with a vacuum but with a hive like library of books archived in this imagined plenum, that are nonsensical in of themselves, as Borges suggested in search of the Librarian. We are the books.  The Librarian despite our hope against hope in a self referential form of transpersonal anthropomorphism, is not a human being, not a superior image of ourselves. 

A primitive tribe refers to the Librarian as That. The Other is another good term. We know it by effect only. 

The effects in of themselves can be self organising in relationship to one another, screening whats behind the wall or up in the attic. If this is so existence or nonexistence as divisors of reality are more than likely absent there in That. Variability may be the mirror of the key, rather than a lock that opens yet another door. What we consider eternity may be a flux in That plenum. At times recognition can be as valuable as an insight but recognition is only a step so tenuous as to potentially lead one off a cliff in a transit of contingencies.