This contribution will be on faith in general and some Christian faith
in particular. Please skip or delete it now if you are annoyed by such
contributions. It is also a long contribution. Skip it if necessary.
PART ONE -- SCIENCE
One of the key topics which a LO will always have to bear in mind, is
"motivation". Thus, not surprisingly, motivation has also been a topic
in the dialogue on this list a number of times. I will not go so far
as to say that motivation and spontaneity are exactly (sign =) the
same thing, i.e
motivation = spontaneity
But I do believe that there is a strong correspondence (sign ==)
between them, i.e
motivation == spontaneity
I have written a number of times that Law of Entropy Production (LEP)
gives us a clear way how to connect spontaneity to something else in
our experience. The LEP may be formulated as
/_\S(universe) > 0
In this ORDER RELATION (not equation) the /_\ stands for "change". The
S stands for the quantity "entropy", the "(universe)" stands for a
qualification and the 0 stands for "zero". The sign > means "is
greater than". Hence /_\S(universe) means "the change in the entropy
of the universe". The order relation tells us that the change in the
universe's entropy "is greater than zero". It means that the entropy
is increasing as time goes on. In other words, entropy is produced
somewhere in the universe. But where, how and why?
Entropy and energy is not from the same physico-chemical dimension. It
means that energy and entropy cannot be expressed by the same units.
However, there is close relation between them. The only difference
between them is "intensity of diversity in becoming". The technical
name for "intensity of diversity in becoming" is temperature. The
difference between the dimension of energy and the dimension of
entropy is the dimension of temperature ("intensity of becoming
diversity"). Should we measure energy in the unit "joule" and
temperature in the unit "kelvin", then the unit of entropy would be
"joule/kelvin" where the sign / means "divided by".
It is very important to note the technical term "order relation"
above. Mathematically, there is a vital difference between a relation
and a function. Each input "a" to a function "f" has only one
corresponding output "b". This may be symbolised as
a -----f----> b
But for a relation "r" each input "a" has more than one output, say
b1,b2, b3, ..... Thus a relation may be symbolised as
a -----r----> b1, b2, b3, ....
Hopefully it has become clear that the concept "function" in
mathematics corresponds to the concept "convergent thinking" in
creativity whereas "relation" corrresponds to "divergent thinking".
The Law of Entropy Production (LEP) in the dimension of entropy is a
relation and not a function. However, the dimension of energy has its
own law which is a function and not a relation. It is the Law of
Energy Conservation (LEC) which may be symbolised as
/_\E(universe) = 0.
where E is the total energy of the universe.
By introducing the concept of free energy symbolised by F, the genius
Gibbs managed to translate LEP into quantities which belongs to the
dimension of energy. The result is
/_\F(system) < W(sytem|surrounding)
where F(system) is the free energy F of the system and W(sy|su) is the
work W exchanged (sy|su)between the system SY and its surroundings SU.
When W is positive (W>0), work flows into the system so that its
interneal energy E increases. It means that work is done ON the system
by the surroundings. But when W is negative (W<0), work flows out of
the system so that its internal energy E decreases. It means that work
is done BY the system on the surroundings. Work may be considered as
an "organised flow of energy", in contrast to heat Q which may be
considered as a "disorganised flow of energy".
The free energy F of any system (the system, the environment or the
universe) is that part of the system's total energy E which the system
can use to change its future organisation. In other words, free energy
is "deep potential energy". The entropy S of any system is a measure
of the system's present organisation (both order and chaos).
Consequently by way of (another remarkable innovation by Gibbs)
F = E - TxS
we substract the energy TxS needed to maintain the present
organisation of the system from its total (internal) energy E to
obtain its free energy F.
Should we now rearrange the result
/_\F(sy) < W(sy|su)
of Gibbs into
W(sy|su) - /_\F(system) > 0
which has exactly the same meaning, it is possible to compare the
translation with the original expression
/_\S(un) > 0
Something very interesting has happend in the mind of Gibbs.
He exhibited divergent thinking by letting the concept
/_\S(un)
develop in the more complex expression
W(sy|su) - /_\F(sy)
He has showed us than when when we want to analyse the whole
(universe) into its parts (system and surroundings), we have to
consider two things. The one is a "systemic property" which in this
case is /_\F(sy). The other one is an "interaction property" which in
this case is W(sy|su). This "interaction property ensures that the
"systemic property" is linked to the whole -- to think globally and
work regionally.
The creativity of Gibbs did not stop there -- he even went one step
further to give a description of spontaneous changes as
/_\F(sy) < 0
It means that when the free energy F(sy) of the system decreases, the
system changes spontaneously. It means that when the system has
potential energy to change its future organisation AND MAKES THAT
POTENTIAL ENERGY AVAILABLE, the system changes spontaneously.
Furthermore, spontaneity involves three cases:
/_\F(sy)<0 == spontaneous (many cases -- region)
/_\F(sy)=0 == equilibrium (one case -- border line)
/_\F(sy)>0 == non-spontaneous (many cases -- region)
When will the system be able to work? Well, for the system to
do work, energy have to flow in an organised manner OUT of
the system so that its enegy decreases and hence W(sy|su)<0.
In other words, the question boils down to "when will work be
negative, i.e. W<0". The answer is to be found in the order
relation
/_\F < W
This a universal law (LEP) which allows no exception. If the
work W itself has to be outflowing (negative), i.e. W<0, then
/_\F have to be even smaller or less than W. Thus /_\F has
also to be decreasing (negative), i.e /_\F< 0. There is no
exception. But this is exactly the definition for a spontaneous
change of the system. This means that the system will be able
to work when it changes spontaneously.
It is impossible for a system which changes non-spontaneously
to do work. Why? For a nonspontaneous change the system's
free energy has to increase, i.e /_\F>0. But for a system to do
work (rather than the surroundings doing work on the system) we
have W>0. It is logically impossible to have
BOTH /_\F>0 AND W<0 while always
/_\F < W
Here is an example with numbers. Say /_\F = +6 so that /_\F>0
and W = -4 so that W<0. If we substitute these values in
/_\F < W
to get
+6 < -4
it is a logical contradiction. A positive number can never be smaller
than a negative number.
OK, this is what spontaneity is by using the terms "free energy" F,
"work" W , "heat" Q, "energy" E, "entropy" S, "temperature" T,
"change" /_\ , "zero" 0 and "order relation" < and "qualification"
(sy|su). Count them. It means that I needed ten terms to "draw some
rich picture" of spontaneity. Perhaps I could have used a lesser
number of terms. The least which I will need, are those in
/_\F < W
and
0 < /_\F
which are five in number. I could have done it and so saved us a lot
of time, myself in typing and you in reading. I can do it breath
takingly short by merely invoking Modus Ponens:
IF /_\F<0 THEN /_\F<W IMPLY W<0
Yes, I need only one line to formulate spontaneity as a basic logical
activity. Nothing more. How is that for economy of symbols -- the
"minimum rich picture" of spontaneity? Do you visualise in your mind
how the characters in this one single line fly in formation like a
flock of boids?
However, by not using the other five terms and a lot of explaining all
along, the picture will never tell you that spontaneity is directly
linked to LEP -- the universal law which gives time an arrow and links
systemic properties to interaction properties. Furthermore, by using
these extra five terms, I can now take you with me as "boids flying in
formation" (as I have done in many a contribution) over the landscape
of nature and culture to observe how the changes in free energy drives
the evolution of life and the production of our factories, the birth
of an animal and the invention of a tool, the formation of crystals
and the intimidation of complexity. But I will not browse through this
rich picture of reality. I want to fly straight ahaid to faith.
What I have written above and which could be summarised by
IF /_\F<0 THEN /_\F<W IMPLY W<0
which I have written in my faith as a scientist. Yes, it is an article
of my faith that the scientific method (observation, specualtion,
falsification) is one of a number of powerful ways of getting to the
truth. Many scientists claim that the scientific method has nothing to
do with faith, but that it is actually the one "thing" which can be
used to destroy all faith. What "thing" it is, they fail to say.
Furthermore, it can also be used to contribute constructively to
faith. So let us fly into
PART TWO -- FAITH
Last night, during our Bible study meeting, we came to chapter 1 verse
25 of the epistle of St James. I will now quote the Greek text (using
Roman letters) and my interlinear translation of it into English
O de parakuphas eis nomon teleion ton
[But the one beyond_looking into law perfect the]
tes eleuterias kai parameinas, ouk akroates
[of freedom and persisting , not hearer]
epilesmones genomenos, alla poietes ergon
[forgetfulness being, but doer work]
outos makarios en te poiesai autou estai
[this_one blessed in the doing of_self become]
The King James version translates it as:
But whoso looketh into the perfect law if liberty, and
continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but
doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.
By the "perfect law", James refers to the the "effective connection"
of the person with Christ. The apostle John decribes Christ as God
the Logos (Word) through which Creation came about and will eventually
be fulfilled. Jesus Christ describes this "effective connection" with
many metaphors, for example, a scion grafted on a stock and a personal
rebirth together with the Holy Spirit. The "liberty" refers to having
been freed from a life bonded to lesser things such as the
deactivation by sin and the isolation by judgement.
This "perfect law of liberty" is the grand spiritual source of free
energy which we can symbolise by
/_\F < 0
Provided we persist in this condition in free energy (in other words,
so long as we continue making the potential energy available to us
gained by Jesus as the Christ) our Christian spirituality will develop
spontaneously through emergences and digestions. The first emergence
is the spiritual renaissance.
However, this condition in free energy (its change must decrease) also
focus our spontaneity on spontaneous changes. In other words, it
motivates us to develop our Christain spirituality. One of the most
remarkable outcomes of changing spontaneously, is that we will be able
to work rather than acting as consumers of work. John refers to this
as "poietes ergon" (doers of work).
Unfortunately, consumers of work will seldom, if ever, experience
emergences since the external source of work and control cause entropy
production which the person is not ready for. Consequently destructive
immergences rather than constructive emergences happen because the
seven essentialities were too much impaired.
Nevertheless, the Holy Spirit guides the children of God how to get
healed and to grow in the spiritual patterns of liveness, sureness,
wholeness, fruitfulness, spareness, otherness and openness. Hence
producers of work, drawing on their free energy sources, can emerge
much more successfully because they produce their own entropy
according to what they can spiritually handle. Christains prefer to
create their own organisation (chaos and order) although they can, if
it has to, live with organisational measures forced upon them.
Associated with each emergence are the adjoints of emergences such as
happiness, curiosity and expectation. These adjoints are a blessing
("makarios") from God.
James 1:25, like most other verses in the Bible, can have many
interpretations, depending on the context in which the Bible is
placed. The context is influenced generally by the space-time interval
in which the interpreyer lives and specifically by the main articles
of faith which the interpreter has emerged to. The interpretation
which I have given to it, is consistent and coherent with my outlook
as a scientist -- as somebody who tries to understand what entropy,
creatitvity and learning amount to in the context of all reality.
I am fully aware that in each of the subjects entropy, creativity,
learning and believing a multitude of opinions and different
viewpoints exist. This does not worry me the least as a Christian
since I believe that Creation becomes more diverse by the second to
manifest the infinite complexity of the Creator. What is troubling to
me is that some people want to prescibe to other people what they
should believe or to proclaim what beliefs of them are false and
wrong. I believe that this is not how the "perfect law of liberty"
works.
Maybe you will think that once again I have meandered through too
muddy waters. Should that be the case, then forget what I have
written. Think rather about the following question, devoid of any
biblical context.
Is there a "perfect law of liberty" which explains, describes and
predicts each Learning Organisation?
Best wishes
--At de Lange <amdelange@gold.up.ac.za> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South Africa
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>