Your contribution of quantum relationships and the limits of systems could probably inspire interest and discussion.
We in the West are still mired in the results and echos of Aristotelian logic as a basis for reality, (both scientifically and conceptually) and it reflects in our use of language, in my opinion. Modern physics tends to radically disprove our gross understanding and experience of matter and existence and it is possible that Buddhism's investigations demonstrated and intuited this to a degree.
This can become more obvious when you explore language and its structure as per Alfred Korzybski's Science and Sanity, (a hard read) where General Semantics is introduced. There is a newer book that compacts and synthesizes his work.
Your first paragraph is a useful illustration. With a good teacher, or more thorough investigation, an initial obsession with trying not to think can be very useful when followed through. For some, it can be a great way to begin their trek if it leads from an initial curiosity and cautious engagement to jumping right into the arena of the dilemma itself. The energy of frustration can even be the fuel for the fire.
Confusion can be considered an aspect of emptiness in relationship to form. When embraced, it can reveal itself as a potential restructuring and an aspect of learning.
When practice begins, (samantha/vipassana) the relationship of thought and no thought can be known as one taste and that introductory dichotomy can be resolved satisfactorily for one's self.
= new reply since forum marked as read