Thank you. :]

But this doesn't actually work. The humanly-recognizable "chairness" is a concept, which does not occur atemporally, nor is the concept of "chairness" an actual thing. "Chairness" is basically an error of perception--people generalize distinct and unique objects into a class, ignore what doesn't fit or how their concept is incoherent so long as it is useful, and pretend it's real because we generally operate with large margins of error. (For better examples: there is no "fishness" of fish (the definition is incoherent), triangles aren't actually found in reality (but approximate shapes are, so geometry is useful), and slide rules don't give precise answers but for decades they were used because they gave correct-enough approximations.)

Nor is the chair a Static Object; we're pretty sure there are a lot of constantly moving bits that are 'chairing.' (See Nietzsche's "lightning lightnings" example: there isn't a noun that exists separate from the verb, for all western metaphysics assumes there is.)

My temporal thought process can give me the sense of a static atemporal "chairness," the same way a painting is a still image--but that does not demonstrate my thoughts, or a painting, are atemporal. I reject this demonstration.