Äèïëîìíàÿ ðàáîòà: The manager as a teacher: selected aspects of stimulation of scientsfsc thinking
Äèïëîìíàÿ ðàáîòà: The manager as a teacher: selected aspects of stimulation of scientsfsc thinking
RUSSIAN
ACADEMY OF GOVERNMENT
SERVICE
AT THE PRESIDENT OF RUSSIAN
FEDERATION
INSTITUTE
OF INCREASE OF QUALIFICATION
OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
ATTESTATION
WORK
THE
MANAGER AS A TEACHER:
SELECTED
ASPECTS
OF
STIMULATION OF SCIENTIFIC THINKING
Author:
Vladislav I. Kaganovskiy,
student
of the Group # 02.313
of
professional re-training
in
sphere «HR management»
MOSCOW
2006
“Wars
are won by school teacher”
Otto
von Bismark
Selected
aspects of stimulation of
scientific thinking
As is generally known,
science and education are one of strategic
resources of the state, one of fundamental forms of culture of civilization, as
well as competitive advantage of every individual. Global discoveries of modern
life occur both deep in and at the junction of various sciences, and at that,
often and often the more unusual the combination of sciences is, the wider
range of scientific prospects is promised by non-standard conspectus of their
combination, for example, biology and electronics, philology and mathematics,
etc. Discoveries in one area stimulate development in other spheres of science
as well. Scientific development of a society is
a programmable and predictable phenomenon, and this issue is specifically dealt
by the futurology science. Modern techniques of pedagogy, psychology, medicine and
other sciences do not only enable orientation and informational “pumping” of human
brain, but also the formation of an individual’s character optimally suitable for
the role of scientist. Unlike a computer, any human being has intuition - the
element of thinking so far in no way replaceable (although some developments in
this sphere are coming into being). Narrow specialization of scientists tapers the
scope of their activity and is explained by an immense volume of information required
for modern scientist. This problem is being solved (partially though) through a
variety of actions – intellectualization of computers, “simplification” of
information (its reduction to short, but data intensive/high-capacity formulas
and formulations), application of psycho-technologies. Psycho-technologies (mnemonics,
educational games, hypnopaedia, (auto-) hypnosis, propaganda and advertising
methods and techniques, including technotronic and pharmacological /nootropic
preparations/, etc.) make it possible to solve the following problem. A “black
box” concept applied in computer science designates a system into which the
chaotic information is entered, and in a little while a version, hypothesis or theory
is produced. A human being represents (with some reservations though) such a
system. Information processing occurs consciously and subconsciously based on
certain rules (program). The more information processing rules we enter, the fewer
number of degrees of freedom remains in the system. Hence, it is desirable to
enter the very basic axioms. Differences in programs (even mere default - but
without lack of key information) form differences in opinions and argumentation.
The longer the period of program operation is (including based on internal biological
clock), the greater the effect one can expect. The provability of success is
directly proportional to the quantity of samples/tests, hence it is desirable
to build in basic mechanisms of scientific thinking at the earliest age possible
in a maximum wide audience and to stimulate their active work, and in certain
time intervals make evaluation and update of “programs” of thinking. “Comprehension
by an individual of new skills occurs only step-wise. Transition between two following
mental conditions takes place: “I’ll never understand how this can be done and
I’ll never be able to do it” and “it is so obvious that I can’t understand what
needs to be explained here”. Except for early childhood, the leaps of this kind
occur when mastering reading
and mastering writing, mastering all standard extensions of set of numbers
(fractional, negative, rational numbers, but not complex numbers), when mastering
the concept of infinitesimal value and
its consequences (the limits), differentiation,
when mastering integration, complex of specific
abilities forming the phenomenon of information generating (in other words, in
the course of transition from studying science or art to purposeful/conscious
professional creative work). We hereby note that at any of these stages, for
the reasons not quite clear to us, the leap may not occur. It means that certain
ability has not turned into a stage of subconscious professional application
and cannot be used randomly by an individual for the solution of problems he/she
faces. At that, the required algorithm may be well known. In other words, an
individual knows letters. He/she knows how to write them. He/she can form words
from them. He/she can write a sentence. But! This work would require all his/her
intellectual and mainly physical effort. For the reason that all resources of the
brain are spent for the process of writing, errors are inevitable. It is
obvious that despite formal literacy (the presence of knowledge of algorithm) an
individual cannot be engaged in any activity for which the ability to write is one
of the basic or at least essential skills. Similar state of an individual is widely
known in modern pedagogy and is called functional illiteracy. Similarly, one
can speak of functional inability to integrate (quite a frequent reason for the
exclusion of the 1st and 2nd grade students from physical and mathematical departments).
Curiously enough, at higher levels the leap does not occur so often, to the
extent that it is even considered normal. The formula: “An excellent student,
but failed to make proper choice of vocation. Well, he’s not a physicist by
virtue of thinking – well, that’s the way” (the leap allowing to mechanically employ
specific style of thinking / physical in this case / did not occur). As to
automatic creativity, these concepts in general are considered disconnected,
and individuals for whom the process of creation of new essentialities in science
and culture is the ordinary professional work not demanding special strain of
effort are named geniuses. However, a child sick with functional illiteracy would
perceive his peer who has mastered writing to the extent of being able of doing
it without looking into a writing-book, a genius, too! Thus, we arrive at the
conclusion that creativity at the level of simple genius is
basically accessible to everyone. Modern education translates
to pupils’ knowledge (of which, according to research, 90 % is being well and almost
immediately forgotten) and very limited number of skills which would in a
step-wise manner move the individual to the following stage of intellectual or
physical development. One should know right well that endless school classes
and home work, exhausting sports trainings are no more than eternal “throwing of
cube” in the hope that lucky number will come out – in the hope of a “click”.
And the “click” may occur at the first dash. It may never occur as well.
Accordingly, the philosophy “repetition is the mother of learning” in effect adds
up to a “trial-and-error method” which has been for a long time and fairly branded
as such by TRIZists (the followers of Inventive Problems Solution Theory). As a
matter of fact, the uneven nature of transition between “in”-and “out”- states
at the moment of “click” suggests that it is a question of structural
transformation of mentality. That is, “click” requires destruction of a structure
(a pattern of thought, a picture of the world) and creation of another one in
which a new skill is included “hardwarily” to be used automatically.
Restrictions stimulate internal activity. It is proven that creative task “Draw
something” without setting pre-determined conditions with restrictions is carried
out less productively and less originally than the task: “Draw an unusual
animal with a pencil during 30 minutes” (Sergey Pereslegin). Required personal qualities
– traits of character /temperamental attributes/ may be divided into four conventional
groups: necessary, desirable, undesirable and inadmissible. Knowledge can be
divided into two groups: means and ways of information processing (including
philosophy, logic, mathematics, etc.), the so-called meta-skills or meta-knowledge/
which are universal and applicable in any field of activity), and the subject
(subjects) matter per se. From the view point of methodology all methods of
scientific knowledge can be divided into
five basic groups: 1. Philosophical methods. These include dialectics and
metaphysics. 2. General scientific (general logical) approaches and research
methods - analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction,
abstraction, generalization, idealization, analogy, modeling, stochastic-statistical
methods, systemic approach,
etc. 3. Special-scientific methods: totality of techniques, research methods used
in one or another field
of knowledge. 4. Disciplinary methods, i.e. a set of methods applied in one or
another discipline.
5. Methods of interdisciplinary research – a set of several synthetic, integrative
methods generated mainly at the cross-disciplinary junction of branches of
science. Scientific cognition is characterized by two levels - empirical and
theoretical. Characteristic feature of empirical knowledge is the fact fixing activity.
Theoretical cognition is substantial cognition /knowledge
per se/ which occurs at the level of high order abstraction. There two ways to
attempt to solve a problem: search for the necessary information or investigate
it independently by means of observation,
experiments and theoretical thinking.
Observation and experiment are the most important methods
of research in
the process of scientific cognition. It is often said that theory is generalization
of practice, experience or observations. Scientific generalizations often imply
the use of a number of special logical
methods: 1) Universalization /globbing/ method which consists in that general points/aspects/
and properties observed in the limited set of experiments hold true for all possible
cases; 2) Idealization
method consisting in that conditions
are specified at which processes described in laws occur in their pure form,
i.e. the way they cannot occur in
reality; 3) Conceptualization method consisting in that concepts borrowed from
other theories are
entered into the formulation of laws, these concepts acquiring acceptably /accurate/
exact meaning and significance. Major methods of scientific cognition are: 1) Method
of ascending from abstract to concrete. The process of scientific cognition is
always connected with transition from extremely simple concepts to more
difficult concrete ones. 2) Method of modeling and principle of system. It consists
in that the object inaccessible to direct
research is
replaced with its model. A model possesses similarity with the object in terms
of its properties that are of interest for the researcher. 3) Experiment and observation.
In the course of experiment the observer would isolate artificially a number of
characteristics of
the investigated system
and examine their dependence on other parameters. It is necessary to take into
account that about 10 - 25 % of scientific information is proven outdated annually
and in the near future this figure can reach 70%; according to other sources, the
volume of information doubles every 5 years. It means that the system of education/teaching
and “non-stop” retraining applied in some cases will become a universal and mandatory
phenomenon, whereas the boundary between necessary and desirable knowledge will
become more vague and conventional. In modern conditions active and purposeful
studying of someone’s future sphere (spheres) of activity should start 4-5
years prior to entering the university. Considerable development will be seen
in “preventive” (pre-emptive, anticipatory) education taking into account
prospects of development of science for 3-5-10 years from no on. Masterful
knowledge of methods of scientific-analytical and creative thinking is becoming
the same social standard and a sign of affiliation to elite social groups as,
for example, the presence of higher education diploma. The law
of inverse proportionality of controllability
and the ability to development says the more the system
is controllable, the less it is capable of development. Controllable development
may only be overtaking/catching up/. Now, a few thoughts about errors in the
course of training. Traditional
approach tends to consider an error as the lack of learning, assiduity,
attention, diligence, etc. As a result the one to blame
is a trainee. Error should be perceived as a
constructive element in the system of
heuristic training. An educational institution is just the institute where the
person should make mistakes under the guidance of a teacher. An important
element of cognitive system is professional terminology. The lack of knowledge
of terms would not release anyone from the need to understand
… Each term contains the concentrated mass of
nuances and details distinguishing the scientific vision of the matter in
question from the ordinary, unscientific understanding… It should be mentioned
that the process of teaching/educating/ is a stress which has pluses and
minuses, whereas the process of studying is a much smaller stress. One of the
main tasks in terms of (self-) education may be the formation of active desire
(internal requirement) to study and be engaged in (self-) education with
independent search of appropriate means and possibilities. Special consideration
should be given to teaching/training means and methods, i.e. what is comprehensible
to one group of trainees may be useless for others. Major differentiation would
be seen in age categories plus individual features. Training games are quite a
universal tool used for a wide range of subjects and development of practical
skills, since the game reflects the trainee’s behavior in reality. It is a
system that provides an immediate feedback. Instead of listening to a lecture
the trainee is given the individual lesson adapted for his/her needs. Game is
modeling of reality and method of influencing it by the trainee. Some minuses
of game include conventionality and schematic nature of what is going on and the
development of the trainee’s behavioral and cogitative stereotypes. Major
strategic consequences of wide spread of scientific thinking skills may include
systemic (including quantitative - qualitative) changes in the system of science,
education and industry, sharp increase of labor force mobility (both “white”
and “blue collar”) and possible global social-economic and social-political
changes.
Part
1. Meta-skills:
Pass
preliminary test by means of Kettel’s 16-factor
questionnaire (form C), test your IQ (Intelligence Quotient)
using Aizenc’s test. Undergo testing for operative
and long-term memory, attention distribution, noise immunity and will. Plan the
development of these qualities in your character.
Methods of work
with the text
(W. Tuckman “Educational
Psychology. From Theory to Application”. Florida. State University. 1992):
1. Look through the
text before reading it in detail to determine what it is about.
2. Focus your
attention on the most significant places
(semantic nodes) in the text.
3. Keep short
record (summary/synopsis) of the most significant facts.
4. Keep close
watch of understanding of what you read. If something appears not quite
understood,
re-read the paragraph once again.
5. Check up and
generalize (analyze) what you have read in respect to the purpose of your
reading.
6. Check up the correctness
of understanding of separate words and thoughts
in reference literature.
7. Quickly resume
the work (reading) if you have been interrupted.
Training of fast
reading – “Fast Reader 32” Program. Download the program: http://www.nodevice.ru/soft/windows/education/trenning/5072.html
http://kornjakov.ru/index.htm, http://www.freesoft.ru/?
id=670591 - for handheld computer.
Plan 2-week “result-oriented” trainings - your current
maximum is + 50%.
Methods
of critical and
creative thinking
Critical
thinking:
1. Analytical
thinking (information analysis, selection of necessary facts, comparison, collation
of facts, phenomena). Useful questions in this connection are “who?”, “what?”, “where?”,
“when?”, “why?”, “where?”, “what for?”, “how?”, “how many/much?”, “what?”(“which?”)
to be asked in the most unusual combinations, while trying to find (to suppose)
all options of answers.
2. Associative
thinking (determination of associations with the previously studied familiar
facts, phenomena, determination of associations with new qualities
of a subject, phenomenon, etc.).
3. Independence
of thinking (the absence of dependence on authorities and/or stereotypes,
prejudices, etc.).
4. Logic
thinking (the ability to build the logic of provability of the decision made,
the internal logic of a problem being solved, the logic of sequence of actions
undertaken for
the solution of the problem, etc.).
5. Systemic
thinking (the ability to consider the object, the problem in question within the
integrity of
their ties/relations and characteristics).
Creative
thinking:
1. Ability of mental
experimentation, spatial imagination.
2. Ability of
independent transfer of knowledge for the decision of new problem, task, search
of new decisions.
3. Combinatory
abilities (the ability to combine the earlier known methods, ways of task/problem
solution in a new combined,
complex way – the morphological analysis).
4. Prognostic
abilities (the ability to anticipate possible consequences of the decisions
made, ability to establish cause-and-effect
relations).
5. Heuristic way
of thinking, intuitive inspiration, insight. The above stated abilities can be
supplemented by specific abilities to work with information, for which purpose it
is important to be able to select required (for specific goals) information from
various sources to analyze it, systematize and generalize the data obtained in accordance
with the cognitive task set forth, the ability to reveal problems in various
fields of knowledge, in the surrounding reality, to make grounded hypotheses for
their solution. It is also necessary to be able to put experiments (not only
mental, but also natural), make well-reasoned conclusions, build the system of
proofs, to be able to process statistically the data obtained from test and
experimental checks, to be able to generate new ideas, possible ways of search
of decisions, registration of results, to be able to work in the collective, while
solving cognitive, creative tasks in cooperation with others, at that playing
different social roles, as well as to be master of art
and culture of communication.
Research and
search methods
of information processing:
1. Independent
search and selection of information on specific problem.
2. Information analysis
for the purpose of selection of facts, data necessary for the description of the
object of study, its characteristics, qualities; for selection of facts conducive
to the provability and/or refutation of the vision of the task/problem solution;
building of facts, data analyzed in the logical sequence of proofs, etc.
3. Definition,
vision of problems that need examination and solution.
4. Making
hypotheses with definition of ways to check (solve) them.
5. Determination
of methods, ways of solution of the investigated problem, stages of its solution
by an individual or joint, group effort.
6. Registration
of results of research or search activity.
7. Argumentation
of the results achieved.
8. Projecting the
occurrence of new problems in the given area of knowledge,
practical activities.
Universal plan
of scientific management (SM)
1. Statement of
an overall goal (task) - minimum, optimum and maximum.
2. Setting of intermediate
goals (tasks), their prioritization, time-frames of implementation.
3. Mechanisms (methods,
schemes) of their achievement.
4. Required
logistical, informational and
financial support.
5. Personnel (including
statement of problem before each employee following detailed instructional
advice and determination of implementation time-frames).
6. Ways and
means of control, possible failures and disturbances, methods, time-frames, personnel,
materials, equipment, information and
finance to rectify the latter.
7. Task
adjustment in case of changes of situation, adaptation of the work performed (at
all stages) to a new problem.
TRIZ – Inventive
Problems Solution Theory (IPST)
Algorithm of
activity:
1. A. Set a
task. B. Imagine ideal result (is
there a problem at all?). C. What prevents from the achievement of a goal (find
contradiction), why does it prevent from its achievement (reveal cause-and-effect
relations). D. On what conditions prevention will not occur?
2. A. Required
(possible) internal changes (the sizes: larger, smaller, longer, shorter, thicker,
thinner, deeper, shallower, vertically, horizontally, sloping, in parallel, in
ledges, in layers/slices, transpose/rearrange, crosswise, convergence, to surround,
to mix/stir, borders; the quantity: more, less, proportions, to divide, attach,
add, remove; form: usual, unusual, rounded, straight, jags, unevenness, rough,
equal, even/smooth, damage proof, delays, accidents, “foolproofing” and
protection from larceny, to add; movement: to accelerate, slow down, stir
up/revive/brighten up, stop, direction, deviation, pulling, pushing away, to
block, lift, lower/pull down, rotate, fluctuate, arouse; condition: hot, cooler,
firmer, softer, opened, closed, pre-assembled, disposable, combined, divided,
hardening, liquid, gaseous, powder-like, wearability,
to grease, moist, dry, isolated, gelatinous, plasmic,
elastic, resists, superposes/matches). B. Division of an object (and/or subject)
into independent parts: a. Segregation of weak (including
potentially weak) part (parts). b. Segregation of required
and sufficient part (parts). c. Segregation of
identical (including duplicating, similar) parts
(including in other systems). d. Division
into parts with different functions. C. External
changes. D. Changes in the adjacent objects. a. Establishment of links between the
previously independent objects performing
one work (including a network). b. Removal of
objects because of transfer of
their functions to other objects. c. Increase in the number of objects at the
expense of the reverse side of the area. E. Measurement of time: faster, more
slowly, longer, eternal, single-step, cyclic, time-wise marked, update,
variable. F. Ascertainment of ties with other fields of knowledge (how is this contradiction
solved there? what can be borrowed from there at all?). Prototypes in nature. G.
Read the dictionaries for verbal associations (including non-standard). H. In
case of failure revert to the initial problem to expand its situation/formulation.
3. A. Introduce
necessary changes in the object (work). B. Introduce changes in other
objects connected with the given one. C. Introduce
changes in methods and expand the sphere of use of the object. D. Ask questions
“how can we achieve the same result without using this product (using it partially)
or without doing this work (doing it partially)?”, “how can we make the product
(work) easier, more durable, safer, cheaper, in a more accelerated manner,
pleasant, useful, universal, convenient, “friendly”, more ergonomic, harmless,
pure, reliable, effective, attractive and bright, portable,
valuable, status ranking, etc. E. Conduct preliminary tests, finish off, if necessary.
Develop IGM (income generation mechanism). F. Check the applicability of the solution(s)
found in respect of other problems. G. Take out a patent for the idea. See
also: www.triz-journal.com, http://www.altshuller.ru/
Concepts, substance
and laws of dialectics
1) The world (the
being, reality) exists objectively, i.e. irrespective of the will and conscience
of a human being. 2) The world has not been created by anybody and cannot be
destroyed by anybody. It exists and develops in accordance with natural laws. There
are no supernatural forces in it. 3) The world is unique and there are no “extra-mundane”
spheres and phenomena in it (standing “above the world” or “beyond the world”) that
are absolutely abjoint from each other. Diverse objects and the phenomena of
the reality represent various kinds of moving matter and energy. 4) The world
is coherent and is in eternal, continuous movement, development. Objects of the
reality interact with each other, influence upon each other. In the process of development
qualitative changes in objects, including natural transition
from the lowest forms to the higher, take place. 5)
Natural development of a matter through a number of natural steps (the inorganic/inanimate
nature/abiocoen/ – life – society) has led to the origin of human being, intellect,
conscience. The crucial role in the segregation of human being from animality and
the formation of its conscience was played by labor, its social nature,
transition of the human being’s animal ancestors to regular production
and application of instruments of labor. 6) Society being
the higher step of development of substance includes all lowest forms and
levels (mechanical, physical, chemical, biological) on the basis of which it
has arisen, but is not reduced to them only. It exists and develops on the
basis of social laws which qualitatively differ from the laws of the lowest
forms. The paramount law of social development is the determinant role of production
in the life of the society. Mode of production of material life conditions social,
political and spiritual processes of life in general. 7) The world is knowable.
Human knowledge is unlimited by nature, but is limited historically at each
stage of its development and for each separate individual. The criterion for the
verity of thinking and cognition is public practice. In recent years the need arose
for the formation of higher form of dialectic-materialistic outlook -
“spiritual materialism”. Spiritual materialism extends the line of classical
materialism in terms of recognition of objective character of existence, its
cognoscibility, natural evolution of substance from the lowest to the higher
forms, exclusion of notions of supernatural from scientific beliefs/notions,
etc. At the same time, spiritual materialism overcomes absolutization of
superiority of material over the spiritual, contraposition and discontinuity of
these fundamentals inherent in the former forms of materialism, and directs
towards the revelation of their unity, complex interrelation, interpenetration,
definite fixation of relations in which the material and spiritual determine each
other in the process of functioning and development of objects. Three
main laws of dialectics are: the law
of transition from quantity to quality,
the law of unity and conflict of opposites
and the law of
negation of negation. There is more to it
than these three major laws in dialectics. Abscque hoc, there are a number of
other dialectic laws concretizing
and supplementing organic laws of dialectics expressed in categories “substance
and phenomenon”, “content and form”, “contingency and necessity”, “cause and
effect”, “possibility and reality”, “individual,
special and general”, the dialectic triad: thesis,
antithesis and synthesis.
Categories and laws of dialectics exist within a certain system in which the
substance/essence of dialectics proper is
expressed.
Analysis
of the decision-making methods without use of numerical values of probability (exemplificative
of the investment projects).
In practice
situations are often found when it is difficult enough to estimate the value of
probability of an event. In such cases methods are often times applied which do
not involve using numerical values
of probabilities: maximax – maximization of the
maximum result
of the project; maximin – maximization of the minimum result of the project;
minimax – minimization
of maximum losses; compromise – Gurvitz’s criterion: weighing of minimum and
maximum results of the project. For decision-making
on realization of investment projects a matrix is built. Matrix columns
correspond to the possible states of nature, i.e. situations which are beyond of
control of the head of an enterprise. Lines of the matrix correspond to
possible alternatives of realization of the investment project – strategies
which may be chosen by the director. The matrix cells specify the results of
each strategy for each state of nature. Example: The enterprise analyzes the
investment civil-engineering design of a line for the production of new kind of
product. There are two possibilities: the construction of a high power capacity
line or to construct low power line. Net present value of the project depends
on the demand for production, whereas the exact volume of demand is unknown,
however, it is known that there are three basic possibilities: absence of
demand, average demand and great demand. The matrix cells (see table 1) show net
present value of the project at a certain state of nature, provided that the
enterprise will choose the appropriate strategy. The last line shows what
strategy is optimum in
each state of nature. The maximax decision would be to construct a high power
capacity line: the maximum net present value will thus be 300 which correspond
to the great demand situation. The maximum criterion reflects the position of
the enterprise director – the optimist ignoring possible losses. The maximin
decision, i.e. to construct a low power line: the minimum result of this
strategy is the loss of 100 (which is better than possible loss of 200 in case
of construction of a high power capacity line). The maximin criterion reflects the
position of the director who is in no way disposed towards taking risk and is
notable for his/her extreme pessimism. This criterion is quite useful in
situations where risk is especially high (for example when the existence of an
enterprise depends on the results of the investment project). Threat is determined
by two components: possibilities and
intention of the contestant.
Table 1. Example
of construction of the matrix of strategy and states of nature for the
investment project.
Strategy |
State of nature :
absence of demand |
State of nature : medium
demand |
State of nature : great
demand |
Construct a low power
line |
100 |
150 |
150 |
Construct a high
power capacity line |
200 |
200 |
300 |
Optimum strategy for
the given state of nature |
Construct a low power
line |
Construct a high
power capacity line |
Construct a high
power capacity line |
To apply the
minimax criterion let us construct “a matrix of regrets” (see table 2). The
cells of this matrix show the extent/value of “regret”, i.e the difference
between actual and the best results which could have been achieved by the
enterprise at the given state of nature. “Regret” shows what is being lost by
the enterprise as a result of making
wrong decision. The minimax decision corresponds to the strategy, whereby the
maximum regret is minimal. In our case of low power line maximum regret makes 150
(in great demand situation) and for a high power capacity line – 100 (in the
absence of demand). As 100 <150, the minimax decision would be to construct a
high power capacity line. The minimax criterion is oriented not so much towards
actual as possible damages or loss of profit.
Table 2.
Example of structure
of the “matrix of regrets” for minimax criterion
Strategy |
State of nature:
absence of demand |
State of nature:
medium demand |
State of nature:
great demand |
Construct a low power
line |
(-100) – (-100) =0 |
200 – 150=50 |
300 – 150=150 |
Construct a high
power capacity line |
(-100) – (-200) =100 |
200 – 200=0 |
300 – 300=0 |
Optimum strategy for
the given state of nature |
Construct a low power
line |
Construct a high
power capacity line |
Construct a high
power capacity line |
Gurvitz’s
criterion consists in that minimum and maximum results of each strategy are
assigned “weight”. Evaluation of result of each strategy equals to the sum of
maximum and minimum results multiplied by corresponding weight.
Let’s assume
that the weight of the minimum result is equal to 0.5, the weight of the maximum
result equals to 0.5 as well (it is the probabilistic characteristic; in this
case probability of onset of any option of events = 50 %, as far as we have 2 options
: 50 % + 50 % = 100 %; if there will be 3 options, then the ratio can be 33,33
(%) for each or, for example, 20 %, 25 % and 55 %). Then the calculation for
each strategy will be the following:
Low power line:
0.5 õ (-100) + 0.5 õ 150 = (-50) + 75 = 25;
High power
capacity line: 0.5 õ (-200) + 0.5 õ 300 = (-100) + 150 = 50.
Gurvitz’s
criterion testifies in favor of the construction of high power capacity line (as
50> 25). Advantage and simultaneously disadvantage of Gurvitz’s criterion
consists in the necessity of assigning weights to the possible outcomes; it
allows taking into account specificity of situation, however, assigning weights
always implies some subjectivity. As a result of the fact that in real
situations there is often lack of information on the probabilities of outcomes
the use of the above methods in engineering of investment projects is quite justified.
However, the choice of concrete criterion depends on the specificity of
situations and individual preferences of an analyst (the company’s strategy).
“Data mining”, getting/acquisition
of information (it should be noted that many modern “data mining” techniques
focus mainly on search of information based on key
parameters (words, images, matrixes, algorithms), but in that way we will only
be able to bring out ties/links that have already been exposed by someone else).
According to the theory of information (Stanislav Yankovsky), requisite
condition of activity of intellectual (higher) system is the redundancy of incoming
and generated information, read and think “to lay up in store/as a reserve”,
accumulate “assets” which expands your possibilities and get rid of
“liabilities” which reduce your potential. Any phenomenon should be analyzed
from the view point of what it gives to you and what it takes from you. Even
two most universal resources – money and information (sometimes “time” is added
thereto) – also limit to some extent the possibilities of their holder. A very
important point in the evaluation of information is reliability of the source
of information and credibility of data itself. Specific code of marking
information carriers is applied for this purpose. Reliability of source: A –
absolutely reliable source; B – usually reliable source; C – quite reliable source;
D – not always reliable source; E – unreliable source; F - reliability
of source cannot be defined. Credibility of data: 1
– credibility of data is proven by data from other sources; 2 – data are
probably correct; 3 – data are possibly correct; 4 – doubtful data; 5 – data
are improbable; 6 – credibility of
data cannot be established. It should be noted that many elements of
scientific, research and analytical activity are weakly formalizable, in which connection
practical experience in the concrete field of activity gains great importance.
Issues recommended
for independent study:
the Game theory, the theory of fields, the theory of crises, the chaos theory,
the theory of relativity, the management, strategy and tactics theories, basics
of logic and statistics – concepts, substance/essence, stereotypes, paradoxes.
See also: Software “Archivarius 3000” http://www.likasoft.com - highly
effective searcher in database on the basis of keywords.
Now,
be prepared, it is going to be a little bit difficult.
Part 2. Basics
of general theory of systems (GTS) and systemic analysis
The world as a
whole is a system which, in turn, consists of multitude of large
and small systems. In the classical theory of
systems one can single out three various classes of objects: the primitive
systems, which structure is invariable (for example,
the mathematical pendulum); analytical systems,
which almost always have fixed structure, but sometimes undergo
bifurcations – spasmodic changes of structure
(simple ecosystem); chaotic systems continually changing their structure (for
example, atmosphere of the Earth). Chaos is essentially an unstable structural
system. In this sense chaos is a synonym of
changeable, internally inconsistent,
unstable developing system which
cannot be referred to analytical structures.
Having established the general principles of management in any systems, one can
try to determine how the system should be organized to work most effectively.
This approach to research of problems of management from general to particular,
from abstract to concrete is named organizational or systemic. Such approach
provides the possibility of studying of a considerable quantity of alternative
variants, the analysis of limitations and consequences of decisions made.
“The system is a set of interacting elements”,
said Berthalanfie, one of the founders of the
modern General Theory of Systems (GTS) emphasizing
that the system is a structure in which elements somehow
or other affect each other (interact).
Is such definition sufficient to distinguish a system from non-system?
Obviously, it is not, because in any structure its elements passively or actively
somehow interact with each other (press, push, attract/draw, induce, heat up, get
on someone nerves, feel nervous, deceive, absorb, etc.). Any set of elements
always operates somehow or other and it is impossible to find an object which
would not make any actions. However, these actions can be accidental, purposeless,
although accidentally and unpredictably, they can be conducive to the
achievement of some goal. Though a
sign of action is the core, it determines not the concept of the system, but
one of the essential conditions
of this concept. “The system is an isolated part, a fragment of the world, the
Universe, possessing a special property emergence/emergent
factor, relative self-sufficiency (thermodynamic isolation)”, said P. Etkins.
But any object is a
part or a Universe fragment,
and each object differs from the others in some special property (emergence/emergent
factor – a property which is not characteristic of simple sum of all parts of
the given system), including a place of its location, period of existence, etc.
And at that, each object is to a certain degree thermodynamically
independent, although is dependent on its environment. Hence, this definition
also defines not
only a system itself, but some consequences of systemic nature as well. Adequate/comprehensive/
definition of the concept “system” is possibly, non-existent, because the
concept “goal/purpose” has been underestimated. Any properties of systems are ultimately
connected with the concept of goal/purpose because any system differs from
other systems in the constancy of its actions, and the aspiration to keep this
constancy is a distinctive feature
of any system. Nowadays the goal/purpose is treated as one of the elements of
behavior and conscious activity of an individual which characterizes anticipation/vision
of comprehension of
the result of activity and the way of its realization by means of certain ways
and methods. The purpose/goal acts as the way of integration of various actions
of an individual in some kind of sequence or system. So, the purpose is interpreted
as purely human factor inherent
only in human being. There’s nothing for it but to apply the concept of “purpose/goal”
not only to psychological activity of an individual, but to the concept of “system”,
because the basic distinctive feature of any system is it designation for some
purpose/goal. Any system is always intended for something, is purposeful and
serves some definite purpose/goal, and the goal is set not only before the individual,
but before each system as well, regardless
of its complexity. Nevertheless, none of definitions of a system does practically
contain the concept of purpose/goal, although it is the aim, but not the signs
of action, emergence factor or something else, which is a system forming factor.
There are no systems without goal/purpose, and to achieve this purpose the
group of elements consolidates in a system and operates. Purposefulness is
defined by a question “What can this object do?” “The system is a complex of discretionary
involved elements jointly contributing to the achievement of the predetermined benefit,
which is assumed to be the core system forming factor”. One can only facilitate
the achievement of specific goal, while the predetermined benefits can only be the
goal. The only thing to be clarified now is who or what determines the usefulness
of the result. In other words, who or what
sets the goal before the system? The entire theory
of systems is built on the basis of four axioms and four laws
which are deduced from the axioms: axiom #1: a system
always has one consistent/invariable general goal/purpose (the principle of system
purposefulness,
predestination); axiom #2: the goal for the systems is set from the outside (the
principle of goal setting for the systems); axiom #3: to achieve the goal the
system should operate in a certain mode (the principle of systems’ performance)
– law #1: the law of conservation (the principle of consistency of systems’ performance
for the conservation of the consistency of goal/ purpose), law #2: the law of
cause-and-effect limitations (the principle of determinism of systems’
performance), law #3: the law of hierarchies of goals/purposes (the principle
of breakdown of goal/purpose into sub-goals/sub-purposes), law #4: the law of hierarchies
of systems (the principle of distribution of sub-goals/sub-purposes between
subsystems and the principle of subordination of subsystems); axiom ¹4: the result
of systems’ performance exists independently from the systems themselves (the principle
of independence of the performance result). Axiom #1:
the principle of purposefulness. At first it is necessary to determine what meaning
we attach to the concept “system”, as far as at first sight there are at least
two groups of objects”: “systems” and “non-systems”. In which case the object presents
a system? It is not likely that any object can be a system, although both
systems and non-systems consist of a set of parts (components, elements, etc.).
In some cases a heap of sand is a structure, but not a system, although it consists
of a set of elements representing heterogeneity of density in space (grains of
sand in conjunction with hollows). However, in other cases the same heap of
sand can be a system. So, what is the difference then between the structure-system
and the structure-non-system, since after all both do consist of elements? All
objects can be divided into two big groups, if certain equal external influence
is exerted upon them: those with consistent retaliatory actions and those with
variable and unpredictable response action. Thus, if we change external
influence we then again will get the same two groups, but their structure will
change: other objects will now be characterized by the consistency of response actions
under the influence of new factors, while those previously characterized by
such constancy under the former influencing factors will have no such
characteristics under the influence of new factors any more. Let us call the
systems those objects consisting of a set of elements and characterized by the
constancy/consistency of actions in response to certain external influences. Those
not characterized by the constancy of response actions under the same
influences may be called casual sets of elements with respect to
these influences. Hence, the concept of “system” is
relative depending on how the given group of elements reacts to the given
certain external influence. The constancy
and similarity
of reaction of
the interacting group of elements in respect of certain external influence is
the criterion of system. The constancy of actions in response to certain
external influence is the goal/purpose of the given system. Hence, the goal/purpose
stipulates direction of the system’s performance. Any systems differ in constancy
of performance/actions and differ from each other in purposefulness (predestination
for something concrete). There is no system “in general”, but there are always
concrete systems intended for some specific goals/purposes. Any object of our World
differs from another only in purpose, predetermination for something. Different
systems have different goals/purposes and they determine
distinction between the systems. Hence, the opposite
conclusion may be drawn: if there any system exists, it means it has a goal/purpose.
We do not always understand the goals/purposes of either systems, but they (goals/purposes)
are always present in any systems. We cannot tell, for example, what for is the
atom of hydrogen needed, but we can not deny that it is necessary for the creation
of polymeric organic chains or, for example, for the formation of a molecule of
water. Anyway, if we need to construct a water molecule, we need to take, besides
the atom of oxygen, two atoms of hydrogen instead of carbon or any other
element. The system may be such group of elements only in which the result of
their general interaction differs from the results of separate actions of each
of these elements. The result may differ both qualitatively and quantitatively.
The mass of the heap of sand is more than the mass of a separate grain of sand
(quantitative difference). The room which walls are built of bricks has a
property to limit space volume which is not the case with separate bricks
(qualitative difference). Any system is always predetermined
for some purpose, but it always has one and the same purpose. Haemoglobin as a system
is always intended for the transfer of oxygen only, a car is intended for
transportation and the juice extractor for squeezing of juice from fruit. One
can use the juice extractor made of iron to hammer in a nail, but it is not the
juice extractor system’s purpose. This constancy of purpose obliges any systems
to always operate to achieve one and the same goal predetermined for them.
The principle of
goal-setting. A car is intended for transportation, a calculator – for
calculations,
a lantern – for illumination, etc. But the goal of transportation is needed not
for the car but for someone or something external with respect to it. The car
only needs its ability to implement the function in order to achieve this goal.
The goal is to meet the need of something external in something, and this
system only implements the goal while serving this external “something”. Hence,
the goal for a system is set from the outside, and the only thing required from
the system is the ability to implement this goal. This external “something” is another
system or systems, because the World is tamped only with systems. Goal-setting
always excludes independent choice of the goal by the system. The goal can be
set to the system as the order/command and directive. There is a difference
between these concepts. The order/command is a rigid instruction, it requires execution
of just “IT” with
the preset accuracy
and only “IN THAT MANNER” and not in any other way, i.e. the system is not
given the “right” to choose actions for the achievement of the goal and all its
actions are strictly defined. Directive is a milder concept, whereby the “IT”
is set only the given or approximate accuracy, but the right to choose actions
is given to the system itself. Directive can be set only to systems with well developed
management unit/control block which can make choice of necessary
actions by itself. None of the systems does possess free
will and can set
the goal before itself; it comes to it from the outside. But are there any
systems which are self-sufficient and set the goals before themselves? For
example, we, the people, are sort of able of setting goals before ourselves and
carry them out. Well then, are we the example of
independent systems? But it is not as simple as it
may seem. There is a dualism (dual nature) of one and the same concept of goal:
the goal as the task for some system and the goal as an aspiration (desire) of
this system to
execute the goal set before it: the Goal is a task representing the need of
external operating system (super system) to achieve certain predetermined
result; the Goal is an aspiration (desire) to achieve certain result of performance
of the given system always equal
to the preset result (preset by order or directive). The fundamental point is
that one super system cannot set the goal before the system (subsystem) of
other super system. It can set the goal only before this super system which
becomes a subsystem in respect of the latter. We can set the goal before
ourselves, but we always set the goal only when we are missing/lacking
something, when we suffer. Suffering is an unachieved desire. Any physiological
(hunger, thirst), aesthetic and other unachieved desires makes us suffer and
suffering forces us to aspire to act until desires are satisfied. The depth of
suffering is always equal to the intensity of desire. We want to eat and we
suffer from hunger until we satisfy this desire. As soon as we take some food,
the suffering ceases immediately. At that, the new desire arises according to
“Maslow pyramid”. Desire is our goal-aspiration. When we realize our wish we
achieve the objective/goal. If we achieve the objective we cease to act,
because the goal is achieved and the wish disappears. If we have everything we
can only think of, we will not set any goals before ourselves, because there is
nothing to wish, since we have everything. Therefore, even a human being with
all its complexity and developmental evolution cannot be absolutely independent
of other systems (of external environment). Our goals-tasks are always set
before us by the external environment and it incites our desire (goal-aspiration)
which is dictated by shortage of something. We are free to choose our actions to
achieve the goal, but it is at this point where we are limited by our
possibilities. We do not set the goal-task,
we set the goals-aspirations. Then if it is not us, can there be other systems
which can set goals before themselves regardless of whatsoever? Perhaps, starting
from any certain level of complication the systems
can do it themselves? Such examples are unknown to
us. For any however large and difficult system there might be another, even
higher system found which will dictate the
former its goals and conditions. Nature is integrated and almost put in (good)
order. It is “almost”
put in order, because at the level of quantum phenomena there is probably some
uncertainty and unpredictability, i.e. unconformity of the phenomena to our
knowledge of physical laws (for example, tunnel effects). It is this
unpredictability which is the cause of contingencies and unpredictability. Contingency
/stochasticity and purposefulness are mutually exclusive.
Principle of
performance of action. Any system is intended for any well defined and concrete
goal specific for it, and for this purpose it performs only specific (target-oriented)
actions. Hence, the goal of a system is the aspiration to perform certain
purposeful actions for the achievement of target-oriented
(appropriate) result of action. The plane is designed
for air transportation, but cannot float; for this purpose there is an
amphibian aircraft. The result of aircraft performance is moving by air. This
result of action is expectable and predictable. The constancy and predictability
of functional performance is a distinctive feature of any systems – living,
natural, social, financial, technical, etc. Consequently, in order
to achieve the goal any object of our World should function,
make any purposeful actions,
operations (in this case the purposeful, deliberate inaction is in some sense an
action, too). Action is manifestation of some energy, activity, as well as
force itself, the functioning of something;
condition, process arising in response to some influence, stimulant/irritant,
impression (for example, reaction in psychology, chemical reactions, nuclear
reactions). The object’s action is followed by the result of action (not always
expected, but always logical and conditioned). The purpose of any system is the
aspiration to yield appropriate (targeted) result of action. At that, the given
object is the donor of the result of action. The result of action of donor
system can be directed towards any other system which in this case will be the
recipient (target) for the result of action. In this case the result of action
of the donor system becomes the external influence for the recipient system.
Interaction between the systems is carried out only through the results of
action. In that way the chain of actions is built as follows: ... →
(external influence) → result of action
(external influence) →... The system produces
single result of action for single external influence. No object operates in
itself. It cannot decide on its own “Here now I will start to operate” because
it has no freedom of will and it cannot set the goal before itself and produce
the result of action on its own. It can only react (act) in response to certain
external influence. Any actions of any objects are always their reaction to
something. Any influence causes response/reaction. Lack of influence causes no
reaction. Reaction can sometimes be delayed, therefore it may seem causeless. But
if one digs and delves, it is always possible to find the cause, i.e. external
influence. Cognition of the world only falls to our lot through the reactions
of its elements. Reaction (from Latin “re”
– return and “actio” - action) is an action,
condition, process arising in response to some influence, irritant/stimulant,
impression (for example, reaction in psychology, chemical reactions, nuclear
reactions). Consequently, the system’s action in response to the external
influence is the reaction of the system. When the system has worked (responded)
and the required result of action has been received, it means that it has
already achieved (“quenched”) the
goal and after that it has no any more goal to aspire to. Reaction is always
secondary and occurs only and only following the external influence exerted upon
the element. Reaction can sometimes occur after a long time following the
external influence if, for example, the given element has been specially “programmed”
for the delay. But it will surely occur, provided that the force of the external
influence exceeds the threshold of the element’s sensitivity to the external
influence and that the element is capable to respond to the given influence in
general. If the
element is able of reacting to pressure above 1 atmosphere it will necessarily react
if the pressure is in excess of 1 atmosphere. If the pressure is less than 1
atmosphere it will not react to the lower pressure. If it is influenced by
temperature, humidity or electric induction, it will also not react, howsoever
we try to “persuade” it, as it is only capable to react to pressure higher than
1 atmosphere. In no pressure case (no pressure above 1 atmosphere), it
will never react. Since the result of the system’s
performance appears only following some external influence, it is always
secondary, because the external influence is primary. External influence is the
cause and the result of action is a consequence (function). It is obvious that donor
systems can produce one or several results of action, while the recipient
systems may only react to one or several external influences. But donor
elements can interact with the recipient systems only in case of qualitatively homogeneous
actions. If the recipient systems can react only to pressure, then the systems
able of interacting with them may be those which result of action is pressure, but
not temperature, electric current or something else. Interaction between donor systems
and recipient systems is only possible in case of qualitative uniformity (homoreactivity,
the principle of
homogeneous interactivity). We can listen to the performance of the musician on
a stage first of all because we have ears. The earthworm is not able to
understand our delight from the performance of the musician at least for the
reason that it has no ears, it cannot perceive a sound and it has no idea about
a sound even if (hypothetically) it could have an intelligence equal to ours.
The result of action of the recipient element can be both homogeneous (homoreactive)
and non-homogeneous, unequal in terms of quality of action (heteroreactive) of
external influence in respect of it. For example, the element reacts to
pressure, and its result of action can be either pressure or temperature, or
frequency, or a stream/flow of something, or the number of inhabitants of the
forest (apartment, city, country) etc. Hence, the reaction of an element to the
external influence can be both homoreactive and heteroreactive. In the first
case the elements are the action transmitters, in the second case they are converters
of quality of action. If the result of the system’s actions completely corresponds
to the implementation of goal, it speaks of the sufficiency of this system (the
given group of interacting elements) for the given purpose. If not, the given
group of elements mismatches the given goal/purpose and/or is insufficient, or
is not the proper system for the achievement of a degree of quality and
quantity of the preset goal. Therefore, any existing object can be characterized
by answering the basic question: “What can the given object do?” This question
characterizes the concept of the “result of action of an object” which in turn
consists of two subquestions: What action can be done by given object? (the quality
of result of action); How much of such action can be done by the given object?
(the quantity of result of action). These two subquestions characterize the
aspiration of a system to implement the goal. And the goal-setting may be
characterized by answering another question: “What should the given object do?”
which also consists of two subquestions: what action should the given object do?
(the quality of the result of action); how much of such action should the given
object do? (the quantity of the result of action). These last two subquestions are
the ones that determine the
goal as a task (the order/command, the instruction) for the given object or
group of objects, and the system is being sought or built to achieve this goal.
The closer the correspondence between what should and what can be done by the
given object, the closer the given object is to the ideal system. The real
result of action of the system should correspond to preset (expected) result.
This correspondence is the basic characteristic of any system. Wide variety of
systems may be built of a very limited number of elements. All the diverse
material physical universe is built of various combinations of protons, electrons
and neutrons and these combinations are the systems with specific goals/purposes.
We do not know the taste of protons, neutrons and electrons, but we do know the
taste of sugar which molecular atoms are composed of these elements.
Same elements are the constructional material of
both the human being and a stone. The result of the action of pendulum would be
just swaying, but not secretion of hormones, transmission of impulse, etc.
Hence, its goal/purpose and result of action is nothing more but only swaying at
constant frequency. The symphonic orchestra can only play pieces of music, but
not build, fight or merchandize, etc. Generator of random numbers should
generate only random numbers. If all of a sudden it starts generate series of
interdependent numbers, it will cease to be
the generator of random numbers. Real and ideal
systems differ from each other in that the former always have additional
properties determined by the imperfection of real systems. Massive golden royal
seal, for example, may be used to crack nuts just as well as by means of a
hammer or a plain stone, but it is intended for other purpose. Therefore, as it
has already been noted above, the concept of “system” is relative, but not
absolute, depending on correspondence between what should and what can be done
by the given object. If the object can implement the goal set before it, it is
the system intended for the achievement of this goal. If it cannot do so, it is
not the system for the given goal, but can be a system intended for other goals.
It does not mater for the achievement of the goal what the system consists of, but
what is important is what it can do. In any case the possibility to implement
the goal determines the system. Therefore, the system is determined not by the structure
of its elements, but by the extent of precision/accuracy of implementation of the
expected result. What is important is the result of action, rather than the way
it was achieved. Absolutely different elements may be used to build the systems
for the solution of identical problems (goals). The sum of US$200
in the form of US$1 value coins each and the check
for the same amount can perform the same action (may be used to make the same
purchase), although they consist of different elements. In one case it is metal
disks with the engraved signs, while in other case it is a piece of a paper
with the text drawn on it. Hence, they are systems named “money” with identical
purposes, provided that they may be used for purchase and sale without taking
into account, for example, conveniences of carrying them over
or a guarantee against theft. But the more
conditions are stipulated, the less number of elements are suitable for the
achievement of the goal. If we, for example, need large amount of money, say, US$1.000.000
in cash, and
want it not to be bulky and the guarantee that it is not counterfeit we will only
accept US$100 bank notes received
only from bank. The more the goal is specified, the less is the choice of
elements suitable for it. Thus, the system is determined by the correspondence of
the goal set to the result of its action. The goal is both the task for an object
(what it should make) and its aspiration or desire (what it aspires to). If the
given group of elements can realize this goal, it is a system for the achievement
of the goal set. If it cannot realize this goal, it is not the system intended for
the achievement of the given goal, although it can be the system for the achievement
of other goals. The system operates for the achievement of the goal. Actually, the
system transforms through its actions the goal into the result of action, thus spending
its energy. Look around and everything you’ll see are someone’s materialized goals
and realized desires. On a large scale everything that populates our World is
systems and just systems, and all of them are intended for a wide range of
various purposes. But we do not always know the purposes of many of these
systems and therefore not all objects are
perceived by us as systems. Reactions of systems to similar external influences
are always constant, because the goal is always determined and constant.
Therefore, the result of action should always be determined, i.e. identical and
constant (a principle of consistency of correspondence of the system’s action result
to the appropriate result), and for this purpose the system’s actions should be
the same (the principle of a constancy of correspondence of actual actions of the
system to the due ones). If the result fails to be constant it cannot be appropriate
and equal to the preset result (the principle of consistency/permanency of the result
of action). The
conservation law proceeds/results/ from
the principle of consistency/permanency of action. Let us call the permanency
of reaction “purposefulness”, as maintaining the similarity (permanency/consistency)
of reaction is the goal of a system. Hence, the law of conservation is determined
by the goal/purpose. The things conserved would be those only, which correspond
to the achievement of the system’s goal. This includes both actions per se and the
sequence of actions and elements needed to perform these actions, and the
energy spent for the performance of these actions, because the system would
seek to maintain its movement towards the goal and this movement will be
purposeful. Therefore, the purpose determines the conservation law and the law
of cause-and-effect limitations (see
below), rather than other way round. The conservation law is
one of the organic, if not the most fundamental,
laws of our universe. One of particular consequences of the conservation law is
that the substance never emerges from nothing and does not transform into nothing
(the law of conservation of matter). It always exists. It might have been
non-existent before origination of the World, if there was origination of the
World per se, and it might not be existent after its end, if it is to end, but
in our World it does
neither emerge, nor disappear. A matter is substance and energy. The substance
(deriving from the /Rus/ word “thing”, “object” ) may
exist in various combinations of its forms (liquid, solid, gaseous and other, as
well as various bodies), including the living forms. But matter is always some
kind of objects, from elementary particles to galaxies,
including living objects.Substance consists of elements. Some forms of
substances may turn into others (chemical, nuclear and other structural
transformations) at the expense of regrouping of elements by
change of ties between them. Physical form of the conservation
law is represented by Einstein’s formula. A substance may turn into energy and other
way round. Energy (from Greek “energeia” - action, activity) is the general
quantitative measure of movement and interaction of all kinds of matter. Energy
in nature does not arise from anything and does not disappear; it only can change
its one form into another. The concept of energy brings all natural phenomena
together. Interaction between the systems or between the elements of systems is
in effect the link between them. From the standpoint of system, energy is the
measure (quantity) of interaction between the elements of the system or between
the systems which needs to be accomplished for the establishment of link
between them. For example, one watt may be material measure of energy. Measures
of energy in other systems, such as social, biological, mental
and other, are not yet developed. Any objects represent
the systems, therefore interactions between them are interactions between the systems.
But systems are formed at the expense of interaction between their elements and
formations of inter-element relations between them. In the process of interaction
between the systems intersystem relations are established. Any action,
including interaction, needs energy. Therefore, when establishing
relations/links/ the energy is being “input”. Consequently, as interaction
between the elements of the system or different systems is the relation/link between
them, the latter is the energy-related concept. In other words, when creating a
system from elements and its restructuring from simple into complex, the energy
is spent for the establishment of new relations /links /connections between the
elements. When the system is destructed the links between the elements collapse
and energy is released. Systems are conserved at the expense of energy of relations/links
between its elements. It is the internal energy of a system. When these
relations/links are destructed the energy is released, but the system itself as
an object disappears. Consequently, the internal energy of a system is the
energy of relations/link between the elements of the system. In endothermic reactions
the energy used for the establishment of connections/links/relations comes to the
system from the outside. In exothermic reactions internal energy of the system is
released at the expense of rupture of these connections between its internal
own elements which already existed prior to the moment when reaction occurred.
But when the connection is already formed, by virtue of conservation law its
energy is not changed any more, if no influence is exerted upon the system. For
example, in establishing of connections/links between the two nuclei of deuterium
(2D2) the nucleus 1Íå4 is formed and the energy is released (for the purpose of
simplicity details are omitted, for example, reaction proton-proton). And the
1Íå4 nucleus mass becomes slightly less than the sum of masses of two deuterium
nuclei by the value multiple of the energy released, in accordance with the
physical expression of the conservation law. Thus, in process of merge of deuterium
nuclei part of their intra-nuclear bonds collapses and it is for this reason
that the merge of these nuclei becomes possible. The energy of connection
between the elements of deuterium nuclei is much stronger than that of the bond
between the two deuterium nuclei. Therefore, when part of connections between
elements of deuterium nuclei is destructed the energy is released, part of it being
used for thermonuclear synthesis, i.e. the establishment of connection/bond between
the two deuterium nuclei (extra-nuclear connection/bond in respect to deuterium
nuclei), while other part is released outside helium nucleus. But our World is tamped
not only with matter. Other objects, including social, spiritual, cultural,
biological, medical and others, are real as well. Their reality is manifested
in that they can actively influence both each other and other kinds of matter
(through the performance of other systems and human beings). And they also
exist and perform not chaotically, but are subjected to specific, though strict
laws of existence. The law of conservation applies to them as well, because
they possess their own kinds of “energy” and they did not come into being in a
day, but may only turn one into another. Any system can be described in terms
of qualitative and quantitative characteristics. Unlike material objects, the
behavior of
other objects can be described nowadays only qualitatively, as they for the
present the have no their own “thermodynamics”, for example, “psychodynamics”.
We do not know, for example, what quantity of “Watt” of spiritual energy needs
to be applied to solve difficult psychological problem, but we know that
spiritual energy is needed for such a solution. Nevertheless, these objects are
the full-value systems as well, and they are structured based on the same
principles as other material systems. As systems are the groups of elements,
and changes of forms of substances represent the change of connections/bonds
between the elements of substance, then changes of forms of substances represent
the changes of forms of systems. Hence, the form is determined by the specificity
of connections/bonds/ties between the elements of systems. “Nothing in this
world lasts for ever”, the world is continually changing, whereby one kind of
forms of matter turn into other, but it is only forms that vary, while matter is
indestructible and always conserved. At the same time, alteration of forms is also
subjected to the law of conservation and it is this law that determines the way
in which one kind of forms should replace other forms of matter. Forms only
alter on account of change of connections/ties between the elements of systems.
As far as each connection between the system elements has energetic equivalent,
any system contains internal energy which is the sum of energies of
connections/bonds between all elements. The “form: (Latin, philos.) is a
totality of relations determining the object. The form is contraposed to matter,
the content of an object. According to Aristotle, the form is the actuating
force that forms the objects and exists beyond the latter. According to Kant,
form is everything brought in by the subject of cognition to the content of the
cognizable matter - space, time and substance of the form of cognitive ability;
all categories of thinking: quantity, quality, relation, substance, place,
time, etc., are forms, the product of ability of abstraction, formation of general
concepts of our intellect. However, these are not quite correct definitions.
The form cannot be contraposed to matter because it is inseparably linked with the
latter, it is the form of matter itself. The form cannot be a force either, although
it probably pertains to energy because it is determined by energy-bearing connections
within the system. According to Kant, form is a purely subjective concept, as it
only correlates with intellectual systems and their cognitive abilities. Why,
do not the forms exist without knowing them? Any system has one or other shape/look
of form. And the system’s form is determined by type and nature of connections/relations/bonds
between the system elements. Therefore, the form is a kind of connections
between the system elements. Since the systems may interact, new connections/bonds
between them are thus established and new forms of systems emerge. In other
words, in process of interaction between the systems new systems emerge as new
forms. The energy is always expended in the course of interaction between the systems.
Logic form of the conservation law is the law of cause-and-effect limitations because
it is corresponded by a logical connective “if....., then….” Possible choice of
external influences (causes) to which the system should react is limited by the
first part of this connective “if...”, whereas the actions of systems
(consequences) are limited by the second part “then...”. It is for this reason
that the law is called the law of cause-and-effect limitations. This law reads
“Any consequence has its cause /every why has a
wherefore/”. Nothing appears without the reason/cause and nothing disappears
for no special reason/cause. There are no consequences without the reason/cause,
there is no reaction without the influence. It is unambiguousness and certainty
of reaction of systems to the external influence that lays the cornerstone of determinism
in nature. Every specific cause is followed by specific consequence. The system
should always react only to certain external influences and always react only in
a certain way. Chemoreceptor intended for Î2
would always react only to Î2,
but not to Na +,
Ca ++ or glucose. At that,
it will give out certain potential of action, rather than a portion of hormone,
mechanical contraction or something else. Any system differs in specificity of
the external influence and specificity of the reaction. The certainty of
external influences and the reactions to them imposes limitations on the types
of the latter. Therefore, the need in the following arises
from the law of cause-and-effect limitations: execution
of any specific (certain) action to achieve specific
(certain) purpose; existence of any specific (certain) system (subsystem) for the
implementation of such action, as no action occurs
by itself; sequences of actions: the system would
always start to perform and produce the result of action only after external
influence is exerted on it because it does not have free will for making decision
on the implementation of the action. Hence, the result of the system performance
can always appear only after certain actions are done by the system. These
actions can only be done following the external influence. External influence is
primary and the result of action is secondary. Of all possible actions those
will be implemented only which are caused by external influence and limited (stipulated)
by the possibilities of the responding system. If, following the former
external influence, the goal is already achieved and there is no new external
influence after delivery of the result of action, the system should be in a
state of absolute rest and not operate, because it is only the goal that makes
the system operate, and this goal is already achieved. No purpose - no actions.
If new external influence arises a new goal appears as well, and then the
system will start again to operate and new
result of action will be produced.
Major characteristics
of systems. To carry out purposeful actions the system should have appropriate
elements. It is a consequence of the laws of conservation and cause-and-effect limitations
since nothing occurs by itself. Therefore, any systems are multi-component
objects and their structure is not casual. The structure of systems in many
respects determines their possibilities to perform certain actions. For
example, the system made of bricks can be a house, but cannot be a computer.
But it is not the structure only that determines the possibilities of systems. Strictly
determined specific interaction between them determined by their mutual
relation is required. Two hands can make what is impossible to make by one hand
or “solitary” hands, if one can put it in that way. The hand of a monkey has
same five fingers as a hand of a human being does. But the hand of a human
being coupled with its intellect has
transformed the world on the Earth. Two essential signs thereby determine the
quality and quantity of results of action of any systems – the structure of
elements and their relations. Any object has only two basic characteristics: what
and how much work/many things/ it can do. New quality can only be present in
the group of elements interacting in a specific defined mode/manner. “Defined” means
target-oriented. “Interacting in a defined mode/manner” means having definite goal,
being constructed and operating in a definite mode/manner for the achievement
of the given goal. Defined mode/manner cannot be found/inherent in separate given
elements and randomly interacting elements. As a result of certain interaction
of elements part of their properties would be neutralized and other part used
for the achievement of the goal. Transformation of one set of forms of a matter
into others occurs for the account of neutralization of some properties of
these forms of a matter. And neutralization occurs for the account of change of
some connections/bonds between the elements of an object, as these connections/bonds
determine the form of an object. For this reason we say “would be neutralized”
rather than “destroyed”, because nothing in this world does disappear and
appear (the conservation law). The whole world consists of protons, neutrons
and electrons, but we see various objects which differ in color, consistence,
taste, form, molecular and atomic composition, etc. It means that in the course
of specific interaction of protons, neutrons and electrons certain inter-elementary
connections are established. At that, some of their properties would be
neutralized, while others conserved or even amplified in such a manner that the
whole of diversity of our world stems from it. The goal of any system is the
fulfillment of the preset (defined) condition, achievement of the preset result
of action (goal/objective). If the preset result of action came out incidentally,
then the next moment it might not be achieved and the designated/preset result
would disappear. But if for some reason there is a need in the result of action
being always exactly identical to this one and not to any other (goal-setting),
it is necessary that the group of interacting
elements retain this new result of action. To this
end the given group of elements should continually seek to retain the designated/preset
condition (implementation of goal/objective).
Simple systemic
functional unit (SFU). The system may consist of any quantity of functional
elements/executive component, provided that each of the latter can participate
(contribute to) the achievement of the goal/objective and the quantity of such
components is sufficient enough for realization
of this goal.
The minimal system is such group of “k” elements
which, in case of removal of at least one of the elements from its structure,
loses the quality inherent in this group of elements, but not present in any of
the given “k” elements. Such group of elements is a simple systemic functional
unit (simple, not composite SFU), the minimal elementary system having some property
(ability to make action) which is not present in any of
its separate elements. Any SFU reacts to external
influence under the “all-or-none” law. This law is resulting from the definition
of simple SFU (removal of any of its elements would terminate its function as a
system) and discrecity of its structure. Any of its elements may either be or
not be a part of simple SFU. And since simple SFU by definition consists of finite
and minimal set of function elements and all of them should be within the SFU structure
and be functional (operational), termination of functioning of any of these
elements would terminate the function of the entire SFU as a system. Regardless
of the force of external influence, but given the condition of its being in
excess of a certain threshold, the result of its performance will be maximal, (
“all”). If there is no external influence, the SFU would nowise prove out (would
not react, “none”). Simple SFU, despite its name, may be arbitrary complex –
from elementary minimal SFU to maximal complex ones. The molecule of any
substance consists of several atoms. Removal of any atom transforms this
molecule from one substance into another. And even each atom represents a very complex
constitution. Removal of any of its elements transforms it into an ion, other
atom or other isotope. A soldier is a simple SFU of the system called “the army”.
A soldier is a human being’s body plus full soldier’s outfit. The body of a
human being is an extremely complex object, but removal of any of its parts would
render the soldier invalid. At that, the soldier’s outfit/equipment is multi-component
as well. But the equipment cannot shoot without man and the man cannot shoot
without the equipment. They can only carry out together the functions inherent
in SFU named “soldier”. Despite the internal
complexity which may be however big, simple SFU is a separate element which
looks as a whole unit with certain single property (quality) to fulfill one certain
action elementary in relation to the entire system, i.e. to grasp a ball, molecule,
push a portion of
blood, produce force/load of 0.03 grams, provide living conditions for the animal
(for example, one specific unit of forest area) or to an individual (apartment),
fire a shot, etc. Any SFU, once it is divided into parts, ceases to be an SFU for
the designated goal. It is due to interaction of the parts only that the group
of elements can show its worth as SFU. When something breaks a good owner would
always think at first where in his household the fragments may be applied and
only thereafter he would throw them out, because one broken thing (one SFU) can
be transformed into another,
more simple one (another SFU). Haemoglobin is an element of blood circulation system
and serves for capturing and subsequent return of oxygen. Hence, haemoglobin
molecules are the SFU of erythrocytes. Ligands of haemoglobin molecules are the
SFU of haemoglobin, as each of them can serve a trap for oxygen molecules. However,
further division of ligand brings to a stop the function
of retention of oxygen molecules, etc. The SFU analogues
in an inorganic nature/abiocoen are, for example, all material particles possessing
ability to lose their properties when dividing – elementary particles (?), atoms,
molecules, etc. Viruses may probably be the systemic functional units of heredity
(FUH). Thus, it is likely that at first polymeric molecules of DNA type came
into being in the claypan strata or even in the interplanetary dust or on
comets, based on a type of auto-catalytic Butler’s reaction, i.e. synthesis of
various sugars including ribose from formaldehyde in the presence of Ca and Mg ions,
ribose being a basis for the creation of RNA and DNA, and thereafter cellular
structures emerged. These examples of various concrete SFU show that SFU is not
something indivisible, since each of them is multicomponent and therefore can
be divided into parts. Only intra-atomic elementary particles may pretend to be
true SFU that are the basis of the whole of matter of our entire world as it is
still impossible to split them into parts. It is for this reason that they are called
elementary. It may well be that they are of a very complex structure, too, but formed
not from the elements of physical nature, but of some different matter, and are
the result of action of performance of systems of non-physical nature, or
rather not of the forms of the World of ours. It is indicative of the existence
of binate virtual particles, for example, positron and electron, emerging ostensibly
from emptiness, vacuum and disappearing thereto after all. We cannot cut paper
with scissors made of the same paper material. It’s unlikely that we can “cut”
elementary particles with the “scissors” made of the same matter either.
Elementary block
of management (direct positive connection/bond, DPC). In order for any SFU to
be able to perform it should contain certain elements for implementation of its
actions according to the laws of conservation and cause-and-effect limitations.
To implement target-oriented actions the system should contain performance
/“executive”/ elements and in order to render the executive element’s
interaction target-oriented, the system should contain the elements (block) of
management/control. Executive elements (effectors) carry out certain (target-oriented)
action of a system to ensure the achievement of the preset result of action. The
result of action would not come out by itself. In order to achieve it
performance of certain objects is required. On the example of plain with a
feeler /trial balloon/ such elements are plains themselves. But it (the executive
element) exists on itself and produces its own results of action in response to
certain influences external with respect to it. It will react if something influences
upon it and will not react in the absence of any influence. Interaction with
its other elements would pertain to it so far as the results of action of other
elements are the external influence in respect of it per se and may invoke its
reaction in response to these influences. This reaction will already be shown
in the form of its own result of action which would also be the external
influence in respect to other elements of the system, and no more than that. Not
a single action of any element of the system can be the result of action of the
system itself by definition. It does not matter for any separate executive
element whether or not the preset condition (the goal of the system) was fulfilled
haphazardly, whether or not the given group of elements produced a
qualitatively new preset result of action or something prevented it from
happening. It in no way affects the way the executive elements “feel”, i.e. their
own functions, and none of their inherent property would force them to “watch”
the fulfillment of the general goal of the system. They are simply “not able” of
doing so. The elements of management (the control block) are needed for the
achievement of the particular preset result, rather than of any other result of
action. Since the goal is the reaction in response to specific external
influence, at first there is a need to “feel” it, to segregate it from the
multitude of other nonspecific external influences, “make decision” on any
specific actions and begin to perform. If, for example, the SFU reacts to
pressure it should be able to “feel” just pressure (reception), rather than
temperature or something else. For this purpose it should have a special “organ”
(receptor) which is able of doing so. In order to react only to specific
external influence which may pertain to the fulfillment of the goal, the SFU
should not only have reception, but also single it out from all other external
influences affecting it (selection). For this purpose it should have a special organ
(selector or analyzer) which is able to segregate the right signal from a
multitude of others. Thereafter, having “felt” and segregated the external
influence, it should “make decision” that there is a need to act
(decision-making). For this purpose it should have a special or decision-making
organ able of making decisions. Then it should realize this decision, i.e. force
the executive elements to act (implementation of decision). For this purpose it
should have elements (stimulators) with the help of which it would be possible
to communicate decision to the executive elements. Therefore, in order to react
to certain external influence and to achieve the required result of action
it is necessary to accomplish the following chain of
guiding actions:
reception → selection → decision-making → implementation of
decisions (stimulation). What elements should carry out this chain of guiding
actions? The executive elements (for example, plains) cannot do it, because they
perform the action per se, for example, the capturing action, but not guiding actions.
For this reason they are also called executive
elements. All guiding actions should be accomplished by guiding elements (the control
block) and these should
be a part of SFU. The control block consists
of: “X” receptor (segregates specific signal and detects the presence of
external influence); afferent channels (transfer of information from the receptor
to analyzer); the analyzer-informant (on the basis of the information from the “Õ”
receptor makes decisions on the activation of executive elements); efferent
cannels (of a stimulator) (implementation of decision, channeling of the guiding
actions to the effectors).
The “Õ” receptor,
afferent channels, analyzer-informant (activator of action) and efferent channels
(stimulator) comprise the control block. The receptor and afferent channels represent
direct positive communication (DPC). It is direct because inside SFU the guiding
signal (information on the presence of external influence) goes in the same
direction as the external influence itself. It is positive because if there is
a signal there is a reaction,
if there is no signal, there is no reaction. Thus, the SFU control block reacts
to the external influence. It can feel and detect/segregate specific signal of
external influence from the multitude of other external influences and
depending on the presence or absence of specific signal it may decide whether
or not it should undertake its own action. Its own action is the inducement
(stimulation) of the executive elements to operate. There exist uncontrollable
and controllable SFU. The control block of uncontrollable SFU decides whether
or not it should act, and it would make such decision only depending on the presence
of the external influence. The control block of controllable SFU would also
decide whether or not it should act depending on the presence of the external
signal and in the presence of additional condition as well, i.e. the permission
to perform this action which is communicated to its command entry point.
The uncontrollable SFU has one entry point for the external influence and one outlet
/exit point/ for the result of action. The logic of work of such SFU is
extremely simple: it would act if there is certain external influence (result
of action), and no result of action is produced in the absence of external
influence. For uncontrollable SFU the action regulator is the external
influence itself. It has its own management which function is performed by the
internal control block. But external management with such SFU is impossible. It
would “decide” on its own whether or not it should act. That is why it is
called uncontrollable. This decision would only depend on the presence of
external influence. In the presence of external influence it would function and
no external decision (not the influence) can change the internal decision of
this SFU. The uncontrollable SFU is independent of external decisions. It will
perform the action once it “made a decision”. The example of uncontrollable SFU
is, for instance, the nitroglycerine molecule (SFU for micro-explosion). If it is
shaken (external influence is shaking) it will start to disintegrate, thereby releasing
energy, and during this process nothing would stop its disintegration. The analogues
of uncontrollable SFU in a living organism are sarcomeres, ligands of
haemoglobin, etc. Once sarcomere starts to reduce, it would not stop until the
reduction is finished. Once the ligand of haemoglobin starts capturing oxygen,
it would not stop until the capturing process is finished. Unlike
uncontrollable SFU, the controllable SFU have two entry points (one for the
entry of external influence and another one for the entry of the command to the
analyzer) and one outlet/exit point/ for the result of action. The logic of
work of controllable SFU is slightly different from that of the uncontrollable SFU.
Such SFU will produce the result of action not only depending on the presence
of the external influence, but the presence of permission at the command entry
point. Implementation of action will start in the presence of certain external influence
and permission at the command entry point. The action would not be performed in
the presence of the external influence and the absence of permission at the
command entry point. For the controllable SFU the action regulator is the
permission at the command entry point. That is why such
SFU are called controllable. The analogues of controllable
SFU in a living organism are, for example, pulmonary functional ventilation
units (FVU) or functional perfusion units (FPU), histic functional perfusion
units (FPU), secretion functional units (cells of various secretion glands, SFU),
kidney nephrons, liver acinuses, etc. The control block’s elements are built of
(assembled from) other ordinary elements suitable in terms of their
characteristics. It can be built both of executive elements combined in a
certain manner and simultaneously performing the function of both execution and
management, and from other executive elements not belonging to the given group
and segregated in a separate chain of management. In the latter case they may
be precisely the same as executive elements, but may be made of other elements
as well. For example, muscular contraction functional units consist of muscular
cells, but are managed by nervous centers consisting of nerve cells. At the
same time, all kinds of cells, both nerve and muscular, are built of almost
identical building materials – proteins, fats, carbohydrates
and minerals. The difference between the
controllable and uncontrollable FSU is only in the availability of command
entry point. It is it that determines the change of the algorithm of its work. Performance
of the controllable SFU depends not only on the external influence, but on the
M disabling at the command entry point. The control block is very simple, if it
contains only DPC (the “Õ” receptor and afferent channels), the
analyzer-informant and
a stimulator. SFU are primary cells, executive elements of any systems. As we can
see, despite their elementary character, they represent a fairly complex and
multi-component object. Each of them contains not less than two types of elements
(management/control and executive) and each type includes more and more, but
these elements are mandatory attributes
of any SFU. The SFU complexity is the complexity of hierarchy of their
elements. There is no any special difference between the executive elements and
the elements of management/control. Ultimately all in this world consists of electrons,
protons and neutrons. The difference between them lies only in their position
in the hierarchy of systems, i.e. in their positional relationship. The
composite SFU contains 4 simple SFU. In the absence of the external influence
all simple SFU are inactive and no result
of action is produced. In the presence of the external
influence of “Õ”, if the command says “no” (disabling of /ban on action), all SFU
would be inactive and no result of action produced. In the presence of external
influence and if the command says “yes” (permission for action), all SFU would
be active and the result of action produced. The “capacity” of the composite
SFU is 4 times higher than the “capacity” of simple SFU. SFU is activated
through the inputs of command of their control blocks. Every simple SFU has its
own DPC and DPC common for all of them. Uncontrollable and controllable SFU may
be used to build other (composite) SFU, more powerful than single SFU. In the
real world there are few simple SFU which bring about minimal indivisible
result of action. There are a lot more of composite SFU. For instance, the
cartridge filled with grains of gunpowder is a constituent part of SFU (SFU for
a shot), but its explosion energy is much higher that that of single grain of
gunpowder. The composite SFU flow diagram is very similar to that of simple SFU.
It is only quantity variance that stipulates the difference between the composite
and simple SFU. Simple SFU contains only one SFU, just SFU itself, whereas the
composite SFU contains several SFU, so
there is a possibility of strengthening of the result
of action. Thus, simple and composite SFU contain two types of elements:
executive elements (effectors performing specific actions for the achievement
of the system’s preset ovearll goal) and the elements of management (block) (DPC,
the analyzer-informant and the stimulator activating SFU). Composite SFU has the
same control block as the separate SFU, i.e. the elementary one with direct
positive (guiding) connection (DPC). Composite SFU perform based on the “all-or-none”
principle, too, i.e. they either produce maximal result of action in response to
external influence or wait for this external influence and do not perform any
actions. Composite SFU only differ from simple SFU in the force or amplitude of
reaction which is proportional to
the number of simple SFU. If the domino dices are placed in a sequential row the
result of their action would be the lasting sound of the falling dices which
duration would be equal to the sum of series of drops of every dice (extension
of duration of the result of action). If the domino dices are placed in a parallel
row the result of their action would be the short, but loud sound equal to the total
sound volume resulting from the drop of each separate dice
(capacity extension). The performance cycle of an ideal
simple and composite SFU is formed by micro cycles: perception and selection of
external influence by the “X” receptor and decision-making; influence on the executive
elements (SFU); response/operation of executive elements (SFU); function
termination. The “X” receptor starts to operate following the onset of external
influence (the 1st micro cycle). Subsequently some time would be spent for the
decision-making, since this decision itself is the result of action of certain SFU
comprising the control block (the 2nd micro cycle). Thereafter all SFU would be
activated (joined in) (the 3rd micro cycle). The operating time of the SFU
response/operation depends on the speed of utilization of energy spent for the SFU
performance, for example, the speed of reduction of sarcomere in a muscular cell
which is determined by speed of biochemical reactions in the muscular cell.
After that all SFU terminate their function (the 4th micro cycle). At that, the
SFU spends its entire energy it had and could use to perform this action. As
far as the sequence of actions and result of action would always be the same, the
measure of energy would always be the same as well (energy quantum). In order
for the SFU to be able to perform a new action it needs to be “recharged”. It
may also take some time (the time of charging). The way it happens is discussed
in the section devoted to passive and active systems (see below). Any SFU’s
performance cycle consists of these micro cycles. Therefore,
its operating cycle time would always be the same and equal to the sum of these
micro cycles. Once SFU started its actions, it would not stop until it has accomplished
its full cycle. This is the reason of uncontrollability of any SFU in the
course of their performance (absolute adiaphoria), whereby the external
influence may quickly finish and resume, but it would not stop and react
to the new external influence until the SFU has finished
its performance. In real composite SFU these micro cycles may be supplemented
by micro cycles caused by imperfection of real objects, for example,
non-synchronism of the executive elements’ operation
due to their dissimilarity. Hence, it follows that
even the elementary systems represented by SFU do not react/operate immediately
and they need some time to produce the result of action. It is this fact that
explains the inertness/lag effect/ of systems which can be measured by using the
time constant parameter. But generally speaking it is not inertness/lag effect/,
but rater a transitory (intermittent) inertness of an object (adiaphoria), its
inability to respond to the external influence at certain phases of its
performance. True inertness is explained by independence of the result of action
of the system which produced this result (see below). Time constant is the time
between the onset of external influence and readiness for a new external
influence after the achievement of the result
of action. The analogues of composite SFU are all
objects which operate similarly to avalanche. The “domino principle” works in
such cases. One impact brings about the downfall of the whole. However, the
number of downfalls would be equal to the number of SFU. Pushing one domino
dice will cause its drop resulting just in one click. Pushing a row of domino
dices will result in as many clicks as is the number of dices in the row.
Biological analogues of composite SFU are, for example, functional ventilation
units (FVU), each of which consisting of large group (several hundred) of alveoli
which are simultaneously joining in process of ventilation or escape from it. Liver
acynuses, vascular segments of mesentery, pulmonary vascular functional units,
etc., are the analogues of composite SFU. Thus, simple SFU is the object which
can react to certain external influence, while the result of its performance
would always be maximal because the control block would not control it, i.e. it
works under the “all-or-none” law. The type of its reaction is caused by the type
of SFU. There are two kinds of simple SFU: uncontrollable and controllable.
Both react to the specific external influence. But additional external
permission signal at the command entry point is required for the operation of
controllable SFU, whereas the uncontrollable SFU have no command entry point.
Therefore, the uncontrollable SFU does not depend on any external guiding
signals. The control block of controllable and uncontrollable SFU consists of
the analyzer-informant and has only DPC (the “Õ” informant and afferent
channels). The composite Systemic
Functional Unit is
a kind of an object similar to simple SFU, but the result of its action is stronger.
It works under the “all-or-none” law, too, and its reaction is stipulated by
type and number of its SFU. It can really be that the constituent parts of composite
SFU may be controllable and uncontrollable, and the difference between them may
only be stipulated by the presence of command entry point in the general control
block through which the permission for the performance of action is
communicated. The control block of a system is elementary, too, and has only
DPC and analyzer-informant. Hence, any SFU function
under the “all-or-none” law. SFU is arranged in such a way that it either does
nothing, or gives out a maximal result of action. Its elementary result of
action is either delivered or not delivered. There might be SFU which delivers
the result of action, for example, twice as large as the result of action of another
SFU. But it will
always be twice as large. Each result of action of a simple SFU is quantum of
action (indivisible portion), at that being maximal for the given SFU. It is indivisible
because SFU cannot deliver part (for instance, half) of the result of action.
And as far as it is “the indivisible portion” there can not be a gradation. For
instance, SFU may be opened or closed, generate or not generate electric
current, secrete or not secrete something, etc. But it cannot regulate the quantity
of the result of action as its result always is either not delivered or is maximal.
Such operating mode is very rough, inaccurate and unfavorable both for the SFU
per se and its goal/objective. Let’s imagine that instead of a steering wheel in
our car there will be a device which will right away maximally swerve to the
right when we turn a steering wheel to the right or will maximally swerve to
the left if we turn it to the left. Instead of smooth and accurate trimming to follow
the designate course of movement the car will be harshly rushing about from
right to left and other way round. The goal will not be achieved and the car
will be destroyed. Basically the composite Systemic Functional Unit could have delivered
graded result of action since it has several SFU which it could actuate in a variable
sequence. But such system cannot do so because it “does not see” the result of
action and cannot compare it with what should be done/what it should be.
Quantity of the
result of action. To achieve the preset goal the designation of the quality of
the result of action only is not sufficient. The goal sets not only “what
action the object should deliver” (quality of the result of action), but also
“how much of this action” the given object should deliver (quantity of the
result of action). And the system should seek to perform exactly as much of
specific action as it is necessary, neither more nor less than that. The
quality of action is determined by SFU type. The quantity
is determined by the quantity of SFU. There are
three quantitative characteristics of the result of action: maximum, minimum
and optimum quantity of action. In the real world gradation of the results of
action is required from the real systems. Therefore, the system performance
should deliver neither maximum nor minimum, but optimum result. Optimum means
performance based on the principle “it is necessary and sufficient”. It is
necessary that the result of action should be such-and-such, but not another in
terms of quality and adequate in terms of quantity, neither more nor less.
Hence, the SFU cannot be the full-fledged systems. The systems are needed in
which controllable/adjustable grading of the result of action would be
possible. For example, it is required that the pressure of 100 mm Hg is
maintained in the tissue capillaries. This phrase encompasses presetting of
everything what is included in the concept “necessary and sufficient” at once.
It is necessary... pressure, and it is enough... 10 mm Hg. It is possible to
collate the SFU providing pressure, but not of 10 mm Hg, but, for instance, 100
mm Hg. It is too much. It is probably possible to collate the
SFU which can provide pressure of 10 mm Hg and at
the moment it might be sufficient. But if the situation has suddenly changed
and the requirement is now 100 mm Hg rather than 10 mm Hg, what should be done
then? Should one run about and search for SFU which may provide the 100 mm Hg?
And what if it’s impossible to make such system which would be able to provide
any pressure in a range, for example, from 0 to 100 mm Hg, depending on a
situation? In order to provide the quantity of the result of action which is
necessary at the moment, the grading of the results of action of systems is
required. It could have been achieved by building the systems from a set of
homotypic SFU of a type of composite SFU flow diagram. It has what is needed
for the graduation of the result of action as it contains numerous SFU. If it
could be possible to do it so that it enables actuating from one to all of SFU,
depending on the need, the result of action would have as much gradation as
many SFU is present in the system. The higher the required degree of accuracy,
the more of minor gradations of the result of action should be available.
Therefore, instead of one SFU with its extremely large scale result of action
it is necessary to use such amount of SFU with minor result of action which sum
is equal to the required maximum, while the accuracy of implementation of the
goal is equal to the result of action of one SFU. However, composite SFU has no
possibility to control the result of action as it has no the unit able of doing
it. To deliver the result of action precisely equal to the preset one, it (the
result of action) needs to be continually measured and measuring data compared
with the task (with command, with “database”). The “database” is a list of
those due values of result of action which the system should deliver depending
on the magnitude of external influence and algorithm of the control block
operation. The goal of the system is that each value of the measured external
influence should be corresponded by strictly determined value of the result
of action (due value). To this effect it is
necessary “to see” (to measure) the result of action of the system to compare
it to the appropriate/due result. And for this purpose the control block should
have a “Y” receptor which can measure the result of action and there should be
a communication/transmission link (reciprocal paths) through which the
information from a “Y” receptor would pass to the analyzer-informant, where the
result of this measurement should be compared with what should be/occur (with
“database”). The control block of the system should compare external influence
with the due value, whereas the due value should be compared with own result of
action to see its conformity or discrepancy with the due value. Composite SFU
still can compare external influence with eigen result of action, because it
has DPC, whereas it can not any longer compare due value with the result of
eigen action just because it does not have anything able of doing it (there are
no appropriate elements).
Simple control
block (negative feedback - NF). In order for the control block of the system to
“see” (to feel and measure) the result of action of the system, it should have
a corresponding “Y” receptor at the outlet/exit point/ of system and the communication
link between it and a “Y” receptor (reciprocal path). The logic of operation of
such control consists in that if the scale of the result of action is lager
than that of the preset result it is necessary to reduce it, having activated
smaller number of SFU, and if it is small-scale it is necessary to increase it
by actuating larger number of SFU. For this reason such link is called
negative. And as the information moves back from the outlet of system towards
its beginning, it is called feedback/back action.
As a result the negative feedback (NF) occurs. A “Y”
receptor and reciprocate path comprise NF and together with the
analyzer-informant and efferent cannels (stimulator) form a NF loop. Depending
on the need and based on the NF information the control block would engage or
disengage the functions of
controllable SFU as necessary. The difference of this system from the composite
SFU lies only in the presence of a “Y” receptor which measures the result of
action and reciprocal paths through which the information is transferred from
this receptor to the analyzer. The number of active SFU is determined by NF.
The NF is realized by means of NF loop which includes the “Y” receptor,
reciprocal path, through which information from “Y” receptor is transferred to
the analyzer-informant, analyzer proper and efferent channels through which the
control block decisions are transferred to the effectors (controllable SFU).
Thus, the system, unlike SFU, contains both DPC and NF. Direct positive
(controllable) communication activates the system, while negative feedback
determines the number
of activated SFU. For example,
if larger number of alveolar capillaries in lungs will be opened compared to
the number of the alveoli with appropriate gas composition, arterialization of
venous blood will be incomplete, and there will be a need to close a part of
alveolar capillaries which “wash” by bloodstream the alveoli with gas
composition not suitable for gas exchange. If the number of such opened
capillaries will be smaller, overloading of pulmonary blood circulation would
occur and the pressure in pulmonary artery will increase and there will be a
need to open part of alveolar capillaries. In any case the informant of
pulmonary blood circulation would snap into action and the control block would
decide what part of capillaries needs to be opened or closed. Hence, the
diffusion part of vascular channel of pulmonary bloodstream is the system
containing simple
control block. The goal of the system is that the result of action of “Y”
should be equal to the command “M” (Y=M). Actions of system aimed at the
achievement of goal are implemented by executive elements. Control block would
watch the accuracy of implementation of actions. The control block containing
DPC and NF loop is simple. The algorithm of simple control blocks operation is
not complex. The NF loop would trace continually the result of performance of
executive elements (SFU). If the result of action turns out to be of a larger
scale than the preset result, it needs to be reduced, and if the result is of a
smaller scale than the preset one it needs to be increased. Control parameters
(the “database”) are set through the command; for example, what should be the
correlation between external influence and the result of action, or what level
of the result of action will need to be retained, etc. At that, the maximum
accuracy would be the result of action of
one SFU (quantum of action). Systems with NF, as well as composite SFU, also
contain two types of objects: executive elements
(SFU) (effectors which carry out specific actions for the achievement of the
preset overall goal
of the system) and the control block (DPC and NF loop). But besides the “Õ”
informant, control block of the system also contains the “Y” informant (NF).
Therefore, it has information both on the external influence and the result of
action. Some complexification of the control block brings about a very
essential result. The reason for such a complexification is the need to achieve
optimally accurate implementation of the goal of the system. The NF ensures the
possibility of regulation of quantity of the result of action, i.e. the system
with NF may perform any required action in an optimal way, from minimum to
maximum, accurate to one quantum of action. Generally speaking, any real system
at that has the third type of objects: service elements, i.e. substructure
elements without which executive elements cannot operate. For example, the
aircraft has wings to fly, but it also has wheels to take off and land. The
haemoglobin molecule contains haem which contains 4 SFU (ligands) and globin,
the protein which does not participate directly in transportation of oxygen but
without which haem cannot work. We have slightly touched upon the issue of
existence of the third type of objects (service elements) for one purpose only
to know that they are always present in any system, but
we will not go into detail of their function. We
will only note that they represent the same ordinary systems aimed at serving
other systems. Systems with NF can solve most of the tasks in a far better manner
than simple or composite SFU. The presence of NF almost does not complexicate
the system. We have seen that even simple SFU is a very complex formation
including a set of components. Composite SFU is as many times more complex
compared to simple SFU as is the number almost equal
to that of simple SFU. The system with NF is only
supplemented by one receptor and the communication link between receptor and
analyzer (reciprocal path). But the effect of such change in the structure of
control block is very large-scale and only depends on the algorithm of the
control block operation. Any SFU (simple and composite) can implement only
minimum or maximum action. Systems with NF can surely deliver the optimal
result of action, from minimum to maximum; they are accurate and stable. Their
accuracy depends only on the value of quantum of action of separate SFU and the
NF profundity/intensity/ (see below). Stability is stipulated by that the
system always “sees” the result of action and can compare it with the appropriate/due
one and correct it if divergence occurs. In real systems the causes for the
divergence are always present, since they exist in the real world where there
always exists perturbation action/disturbing influences. Hence, one can see
that it is NF that turns SFU
into real systems. How does the control block manage the system? What
parameters are characteristic of it? Any control block is characterized by
three DPC parameters and the same number of NF loop parameters. For DPC it is a
minimal level of controllable input stimulus (threshold of sensitivity);
maximal level of
controllable input stimulus (range of input stimulus sensitivity); time
of engagement of control (decision-making
time). For NF loop it is minimal level of
controllable result of action (threshold of sensitivity of NF loop – NF
profundity/intensity); maximal level of controllable result of action (range of
sensitivity of the result of action); time
of engagement of control (decision-making
time). Minimal level of controllable input signal
for DPC is the sensitivity threshold of signal of the “Õ” receptor wherefrom
the analyzer-informant recognizes that the external influence has already
begun. For example, if ðÎ2
has reached 60 mm Hg the sphincter should be opened (1 SFU is actuated), if the
ðÎ2 value is smaller, then
it is closed. Any values of ðÎ2
smaller than 60 mm Hg would not lead to the opening of sphincter, because these
are sub-threshold values. Consequently, 60 mm Hg is the operational threshold
of sphincter. Maximum level of controllable entrance signal (range) for DPC is
the level of signal about external influence at which all SFU are actuated. The
system cannot react to the further increase in the input signal by the
extension of its function, as it does not have any more of SFU reserves. For
example, if ðÎ2
has reached 100 mm Hg all sphincters should be opened (all SFU are activated).
Any values of ðÎ2
larger than 100 mm Hg will not lead to the opening of additional sphincters,
because all of them are already opened, i.e. the values of 60-100 mm Hg are the
range of activation of
the system of sphincters. Time of DPC activation is a time interval between the
onset of external influence and the beginning of the system’s operation. The
system would never respond immediately after the onset of external influence.
Receptors need to feel a signal, the analyzer-informant needs to make the
decision, the effectors transfer the guiding impact to the command entry points
of the executive elements - all this takes time. The minimal level of the
controllable exit signal for NF is a threshold of sensitivity of a signal of
the “Y” receptor, wherefrom the analyzer-informant recognizes whether there is
a discrepancy between the result of action of the system and its due value. The
discrepancy should be equal to or more than the quantum of action of single
SFU. For example, if one sphincter is to be opened and the bloodstream should
be minimal (one quantum of action), whereas two sphincters are actually opened
and the bloodstream is twice as intensive (two quanta of action), the “Y”
receptor should feel an extra quantum. If it is able of doing so, its
sensitivity is equal to one quantum. Sensitivity
is defined by the NF profundity/intensity. The NF
profundity/intensity is a number of quanta of action of the single SFU system
which sum is identified as the discrepancy between the actual and
appropriate/proper action. The NF profundity/intensity is preset
by the command. The highest possible NF
profundity/intensity is the sensitivity of discrepancy in one quantum of action
of single SFU. The less the NF profundity/intensity, the less is sensitivity,
the more it is “rough”. In other words, the less the NF profundity/intensity,
the larger value of the discrepancy between the result of action and the proper
result is interpreted as discrepancy. For example, even two (three, ten, etc.)
quanta of action of two (three, ten, etc.) SFU is interpreted as discrepancy.
Minimal NF profundity/intensity is its absence. In this case any discrepancy of
the result of action with the proper one is not interpreted by the control
block as discrepancy. The result of action would be maximal and the system with
simple control block with zero NF profundity/intensity would turn into
composite SFU with DPC (with simplest/elementary control block). For example,
the system of the Big Circle of Blood circulation for microcirculation
in fabric capillaries should hold average pressure of 100 mm Hg accurate to 1
mm Hg. At the same time, average arterial pressure can fluctuate from 80 to 200
mm Hg. The value “100 mm Hg” determines the level of controllable result of
action. The value “from 80 to 200 mm Hg” is the range of controllable external
(entry) influence. The value of “1 mm Hg” is determined by NF profundity/intensity.
Smaller NF profundity/intensity would control the parameter with smaller degree
of accuracy, for example, to within 10 mm Hg (more roughly) or 50 mm Hg (even
more roughly), while the higher NF profundity/intensity would do it with higher
degree of accuracy, for example to within 0.1 mm Hg (finer). Maximal NF
sensitivity is limited to the value of quantum of action of SFU which are part
of the system, and the NF profundity/intensity. But in any case, if discrepancy
between the level of the controllable and preset parameters occurs to the
extent higher than the value of the preset accuracy, the NF loop should “feel”
this divergence and “force” executive elements to perform so that to eliminate
the discrepancy of the goal and the result of action. Maximal level of
controllable outlet/exit signal (range) for NF is the level of signal about the
result of action of the system at which all SFU are actuated. The system cannot
react to the further increase in entry signal by increase in its function any
more, because
it has no more of SFU reserves. The time of actuating of NF control is the time
interval between the onset of discrepancy of signal about the result of action
with the preset result and the beginning of the system’s operation. All these
parameters can be “built in” DPC and NF loops or set primordially (the command
is entered at their “birth” and they do not further
vary any more), or can be entered through the command
later, and these parameters can be changed by means
of input of a new command from the outside. For this purpose there should be a
channel of input of the command. Simple control block in itself cannot change
any of these parameters. Absolutely all systems have
control block, but it cannot be always found explicitly. In the aircraft or a
spaceship this block is presented by the on-board computer, a box with
electronics. In human beings and animals such block is the brain, or at least
nervous system. But where is the control block located in a plant or bacterium?
Where is the control block located in atom or molecule, or, for example,
the control block in a nail? The easier the system, the more difficult it is
for us to single out forms of control block habitual for us. However, it is
present in any systems. Executive elements are responsible for the quality of
result of action, while the control block – for its quantity. The control block
can be, for example, intra- or internuclear and intermolecular
connections/bonds. For example, in atom the SFU functions are performed by electrons,
protons and neutrons, and those of control block by intra-nuclear forces or, in
other words, interactions. The intra-atomic command, for example, is the
condition that there can be no more than 2 electrons at the first electronic
level, 8 electrons at the second level, etc., (periodic law determined by Pauli
principle), this level being rigidly designated by quantum numbers. If the
electron has somewise received additional energy and has risen above its level
it cannot retain it for a long time and will go back, thereby releasing surplus
of energy in the form of a photon. At that, not just any energy can lift the
electron onto the other level, but only and only specific one (the
corresponding quantum of energy). It also rises not just onto any level, but
only onto the strictly preset one. If the energy of the external influence is
less than the corresponding quantum, the electron level stabilization system
would keep it in a former orbit (in a former condition) until the energy of
external influence exceeded the corresponding level. If the energy of external
influence is being continually accrued in a ramp-up mode, the electron would
rise from one level to other not in a linear mode but by leaps (which are
strictly defined by quantum laws) into higher orbits as soon as the energy of
influence exceeds certain threshold levels. The number of levels of an
electron’s orbit in atom is probably very large and equal to the number of
spectral lines of corresponding atom, but each level is strictly fixed and determined
by quantum laws. Hence, some kind of mechanism (system of stabilization of
quantum levels) strictly watches the performance of these laws, and this
mechanism should have its own SFU and control blocks. The number of levels of
the electron’s orbit is possibly determined by the number of intranuclear SFU
(protons and neutrons or other elementary particles), which result of action is
the positioning of electron in an electronic orbit. For example, in a nail
system the command would be its form and geometrical
values. This command
is entered into the control block one-time at the
moment of nail manufacture when its values (at the moment of its “birth”) are
measured and is not entered later any more. But when the command
is already entered the system should execute this
command,
i.e. in this case the nail should keep its
form and values even if it is being hammered. In any control block type the
command should
be entered into
at some point of time in
one way or another. We cannot make just a nail “in general”, but only the one
with concrete form and preset values. Therefore, at the moment of its
manufacture (i.e. one-time) we give it the “task”
to be of such-and-such form and values. The command
can vary if there is a channel of input of the command. For example, when
turning on the air conditioner we can “give it a task” to hold air temperature
at 20°Ñ and thereafter change the command for 25°Ñ. The nail does not have a
channel of input of the order, while the air conditioner does. Consequently,
the system with simple control block is the object which can react to certain
external influence, and the result of
its action is graduated and stable. The number of gradation is determined by
the number SFU in the system and the accuracy is determined by quantum of action
(the size, result) of single
SFU and NF profundity/intensity. The result of action is accurate because the
control block supervises it by means of NF. Type of control is based on
mismatch/error plus error-rate control/. Control would only start after the
occurrence of external influence or delivery of the result of action. Stability
of the result of action is determined by NF profundity/intensity. System
reaction is conditioned by type and number of its SFU. Simple control block has
three channels of control: one external (command) and two internal (DPC and
NF). It reacts to external influence through DPC (the “Õ” informant) and to its
own result of action of the system (the “Y” informant) through NF, whereas it
controls executive elements of the system through efferent channels. Analogues
of systems with simple control block are all objects of inanimate/inorganic
world: gas clouds, crystals, various solid bodies, planets, planetary and
stellar systems, etc. Biological analogues of systems with simple control block
are protophytes and metaphytes, bacteria and all vegetative/autonomic systems
of an organism, including, for example, external gas exchange system, blood
circulation system, external gaseous metabolism system, digestion or immune
systems. Even single-celled animal organisms of amoebas and infusorian type,
inferior animal classes (jellyfish etc.) are the systems with complex control
blocks/units (see below). All vegetative and many motor reflexes of higher
animals which actuate at all levels starting from intramural nerve ganglia
through hypothalamus are structured as simple control blocks. If they are
affected by guiding influence of cerebral cortex, higher type (complex)
reflexes come into service (see below). Analogues of the “Õ” informant receptors
are all sensitive receptors (haemo-, baro-, thermo- and other receptors located
in various bodies, except visual, acoustical and olfactory receptors which are
part of the “C” informant, see below). Analogues of the “Y” informant receptors
are all proprio-sensitive receptors which can also be haemo-, baro-, thermo-
and other receptors located in different organs. Analogues of the control block
stimulators are all motor and effector nerves stimulating cross-striped,
unstriated muscular systems and secretory cells, as well as hormones,
prostaglandins and other metabolites having any effect on the functions of any
systems of organism. Analogues of the analyzer-informant in the mineral and
vegetative media are only connections/bonds between the elements of a type of
direct connection of “X” and “Y” informants with effectors (axon reflexes). In
vegetative systems of
animals connections are also of a type of direct connection of “X” and “Y”
informants with effectors (humoral and metabolic regulation), as well as axon
reflex (controls only nervules without involvement of nerve cell itself) and
unconditioned reflexes (at the level of intra-organ intramural and other
neuronic formations right up to hypothalamus). Thus, using DPC and NF and
regulating the performance of its SFU the system produces the results of action
qualitatively and quantitatively meeting the preset goal.
Principle of
independence of the result of action. As it was already repeatedly underlined,
the purpose/goal of any system is to get the appropriate/due (target-oriented)
result of action arising from the performance of the system. Actually external
influence, “having entered” the system, would be transformed to the result of
action of the system. That is why systems are actually the converters of
external influence into the result of action and of the cause into effect.
External influence is in turn the result of action of other system which
interacted with the former. Consequently, the result of action, once it has
“left” one system and “entered” into another, would now exist independently of
the system which produced it. For example, a civil engineering firm had a goal
to build a house from certain quantity of building material (external
influence). After a number of actions of this firm the house was built (the
result of action). The firm could further proceed to the construction of other
house, or cease to exist or
change the line of business from construction to sewing shop. But the
constructed house will already exist independently of the firm which
constructed it. The purpose of the automobile engine (the car subsystem) is
burning certain quantity of fuel (external influence for the engine) to receive
certain quantity of mechanical energy (the result of action of the engine). The
purpose of a running gear (other subsystem of the car) is transformation of
mechanical energy of the engine (external influence for running gear) into
certain number of revolutions of wheels (result of action of running gear). The
purpose of wheels is transformation of certain number of revolutions (external
influence for wheels) into the kilometers of travel (result of action of
wheels). All in all, the result of action of the car will be kilometers of
travel which will already exist independently of the car which has driven them
through. Photon released from atom which can infinitely roam the space of the
Universe throughout many billions years will be the result of action of the
exited electron. Result of a slap of an oar by water is the depression/hollow
on the water surface which could have also remained there forever if it were
not for the fluidity of water and the influence on it of thousand other
external influences. However, after thousand influences it will not any more
remain in the form of depression/hollow, but in the form of other long chain of
results of actions of other systems because nothing disappears in this world,
but transforms into other forms. Conservation law is inviolable.
System cycles
and transition processes. Systems just like SFU have cycles of their activity
as well. Different systems can have different cycles of activity and they
depend on the complexity and algorithm of the control block. The simplest cycle
of work is characteristic of a system with simple control block. It is formed of
the following micro cycles: perception, selection and measurement of external
influence by the “X” receptor; selection from “database” of due value of the
result of action; transition process (NF multi-micro-cycle);
a) perception
and measurement of the result of action by the “Y” receptor - b) comparison of
this result with the due value – c) development of the decision and
corresponding influence on SFU for the purpose of correction of the result of
action – d) influence on SFU, if the result of action is not equal to the
appropriate/due one, or transition to the 1st micro cycle if it is equal to the
proper one – e) actuation of SFU – f) return to “a)”.
After the onset
of external influence the “X” receptor would snap into action (1st micro
cycle). Thereafter the value of the result of action which has to correspond to
the given external influence (2nd micro cycle) is selected from the “database”.
It is then followed by transition process (transition period, 3rd
multi-micro-cycle, NF cycle): actuation of the “Y” receptor, comparison of the
result of action with the due value selected from the “database”, corrective
influence on SFU (the number of actuated SFU mill be the one determined by
control block in
the micro cycle “c”) and again return to the actuation of the “Y” receptor. It
would last in that way until the result of action is equal to the preset
one. From this point the purpose/goal is reached and after that the control
block comes back to the 1st micro cycle, to the reception of external influence.
System performance for the achievement of the result of action would not stop
until there new external influence emerges. The aforementioned should be
supplemented by a very essential addition. It has already been mentioned when
we were examining the SFU performance cycles that after any SFU is actuated it
completely spends all its stored energy intended for the performance of action.
Therefore, after completion of action SFU is unable of performing any new
action until it restores its power capacity, and it takes additional time which
can substantially increase the duration of the transition period. That is why a
speed of movement (e.g., running) of a sportsman’s body whose system of oxygen
delivery to the tissues is large (high speed of energy delivery) would be fast
as well. And the speed of movement of a cardiac patient’s body would be slow
because the speed of energy delivery is reduced due to the affection of blood
circulation system which is a part of the body’s system of power supply. Sick
persons spent a long time to restore energy potential of muscular cells because
of the delayed ATP production that requires a lot of oxygen. Micro cycles from
1st to 2nd constitute the starting period of control block performance. In case
of short-term external influence control block would determine it during the
start cycle and pass to the transition period during which it would seek to
achieve the actual result of action equal to the proper one. If external
influence appears again during the transition period the control block will not
react to it because during this moment it would not measure “Õ” (refractory
phase). Upon termination of the transition period the control block would go
back/resort/ to the starting stage, but while it does so (resorts), the achieved
due value of the result of action would remain invariable (the steady-state
period). If external influence would be long enough and not vary so that after
the first achievement of the goal the control block has time to resort to
reception “X” again, the steady value of the result of action would be retained
as long as the external influence continues. At that, the transition cycle will
not start, because the steady-state value of the result of action is equal to
the proper/due one. If long external influence continues and changes its
amplitude, the onset of new transition cycle may occur. At that, the more the
change in the amplitude of external influence, the larger would be the
amplitude of oscillation of functions. Therefore, sharp differences of amplitude
of external influence are inadmissible, since they cause diverse
undesirable effects associated
with transition period.
If external
influence is equal to zero, all SFU are deactivated, as zero external influence
is corresponded by zero activation of SFU. If, after a short while there would
be new external influence, the system would repeat all in a former order.
Duration of the system performance cycle is also seriously affected by
processes of restoration of energy potential of the actuated SFU. Every SFU,
when being actuated, would spend definite (quantized) amount of energy, which
is either brought in by external influence per se or is being accumulated by
some subsystems of power supply of the given system. In any case, energy
potential restoration also needs time, but we do not consider these processes
as they associated only with the executive elements (SFU), while we only
examine the processes occurring in the control blocks of the systems. Thus, the
system continually performs in cycles, while accomplishing its micro cycles. In
the absence of external influence or if it does not vary, the system would
remain at one of its stationary levels and in the same functional condition
with the same number of functioning SFU, from zero to all. In such a mode it
would not have transition multi-micro-cycle (long-time repeat of the 3rd micro
cycle). Every change of level of external influence causes transition
processes. Transition of function to a new level would only become possible
when the system is ready to do it. Such micro cycles in various systems may
differ in details, but all systems without exception have the NF
multi-micro-cycle. With all its advantages the NF has a very essential fault,
i.e. the presence of transition processes. The intensity of transition process
depends on a variety of factors. It can range from minimal to maximal, but
transition processes are always present in all systems in a varying degree of
intensity. They are unavoidable in essence, since NF actuates as soon as the
result of action of the system is produced. It would take some time until
affectors of the system feel a mismatch, until the control block makes
corresponding decision, until effectors execute this decision, until the NF
measures the result of action and corrects the decision and the process is
repeated several times until necessary correlation “... external influence →
result of action...” is achieved. Therefore, at this time there can be any
unexpected nonlinear transition processes breaking normal operating mode of the
system. For this reason at the time of the first “actuation” of the system or
in case of sharp loading variations it needs quite a long period of
setting/adjustment. And even in the steady-state mode due to various casual
fluctuations in the environment there can be a minor failure in the NF
operation and minor transition processes (“noise” of the result of action of
real system). The presence of transition processes imposes certain restrictions
on the performance and scope of use of systems. Slow inertial systems are not
suitable for fast external influences as the speed of systems’ operation is
primarily determined by the speed of NF loop operation. Indeed, the speed of
executive element’s operation is the basis of the speed of system operation on
the whole, but NF multi-micro-cycle contributes considerably to the extension
of the system’s operation cycle. Therefore, when choosing the load on the
living organism it is necessary to take into consideration the speed of system
operation and to select speed of loading so as to ensure the least intensity of
transition processes. The slower the variation of external influence, the
shorter is the transition process. Transition period becomes practically
unapparent when the variation of external influence is sufficiently slow.
Consequently, if external influence varies, the duration of transition period
may vary from zero to maximum depending on the speed of such variation and the
speed of operation of the system’s elements. Transition period is the process of
transition from one level of functional state to another. The “smaller” the
steps of transition from one level on another, the less is the amplitude
of transition processes. In case of smooth change of
loading no
transition processes take place. The intensity of transition processes depends
on the SFU caliber, force of external influence, duration of SFU charging,
sensitivity of receptors, the time of their operation, the NF
intensity/profundity and algorithm of the control block operation. But these
cycles of systems’ performance and transition processes are present both in
atoms and electronic circuitry, planetary systems and all other systems of our
World, including human body.
If systems did
not have transition processes, transition process period would have been always
equal to zero and the systems would have been completely inertia-free. But such
systems are non-existent and inertness is inherent in a varying degree in any
system. For example, in electronics the presence of transition processes generates
additional harmonics of electric current fluctuations in various amplifiers or
current generators. Sophisticated circuit solutions are applied to suppress
thereof, but they are present in any electronic devices, considerably
suppressed though. Time constant of systems with simple control blocks includes
time constants of every SFU plus changeable durations of NF transition periods.
Therefore, constant of time of such systems is not quite constant since
duration of NF transition periods can vary depending on the force of external
impact. Transition processes in systems with simple control blocks increase the
inertness of such systems. Inertness of systems leads to various phase
disturbances of synchronization and balance of interaction between systems. There
are numerous ways to deal with transition processes. External impacts may be
filtered in such a way that to
prevent from sharp shock impacts (filtration, a principle of graduality of
loading). Knowing the character of external impacts/influences in advance and
foreseeing thereof which requires seeing them first (and it can only be done,
at the minimum, by complex control blocks) would enable designing of such an
appropriate algorithm of control block operation which would ensure finding
correct decision by the 3rd micro cycle (prediction based control/management).
However, it is only feasible for
intellectual control blocks. Apparently it’s impossible for us to completely
get rid of the systems’ inertness so far. Therefore, if the external
impact/influence does not vary and the transition processes are practically
equal to zero the system would operate cyclically and accurately on one of its
stationary levels, or smoothly shift from one stationary level to another if
external influence varies, but does it quite slowly. If transition processes
become notable, the system operation cycles become unequal due to the emergence
of transition multi-micro-cycles, i.e. period of transition processes. At that,
nonlinear effects reduce the system’s overall performance. In our everyday life
we often face transition processes when, being absolutely unprepared, we leave
a warm room and get into the cold air outside and catch cold. In the warm room
all systems of our organism were in a certain balance of interactions and everything
was all right. But here we got into the cold air outside and all systems should
immediately re-arrange on a new balance. If they have no time to do it and
highly intensive transition processes emerge that cause unexpected fluctuations
of results of actions of body systems, imbalance of interactions of systems
occurs which is called “cold” (we hereby do not specify the particulars
associated with the change of condition of the immune system). After a while
the imbalance would disappear and the cold would be over as well. If we make
ourselves fit, we can train our “control blocks” to foresee sharp strikes of
external impacts to reduce transition processes; we then will be able even to
bathe in an ice hole. Transition processes of special importance for us are
those arising from sharp change of situation around us. Stress-syndrome is
directly associated with this phenomenon. The sharper the change of the
situation around us, the more it gets threatening (external influence is
stronger), the sharper transition processes are, right up to paradoxical
reactions of a type of stupor. At that, the imbalance of performance of various
sites of nervous system (control blocks) arises, which leads to imbalance of
various systems of organism and the onset of various pathological reactions and
processes of a type of vegetative neurosis and depressions, ischaemia up to
infarction and ulcers, starting from mouth cavity (aphtae) to large intestine
ulcers (ulcerative colitis, gastric and duodenum ulcers, etc.), arterial hypertension,
etc.
Cyclic
recurrence is a property of systems not of a living organism only. Any system
operates in cycles. If external influence is retained at a stable level, the
system would operate based on this minimal steady-state cycle. But external influence
may change cyclically as well, for example, from a sleep to sleep, from dinner
to dinner, etc. These are in fact secondary, tertiary, etc., cycles. Provided
constructing the graphs of functions of a system, we get wavy curves
characterizing recurrence. Examples include pneumotachogram, electrocardiogram
curves, curves of variability of gastric juice acidity, sphygmogram curves,
curves of electric activity of neurons, periodicity of the EEG alpha rhythm,
etc. Sea waves, changes of seasons, movements of planets, movements of trains,
etc., - these are all the examples of cyclic recurrence of various systems. The
forms of cyclic recurrence curves may be of all sorts. The electrocardiogram
curve differs from the arterial pressure curve, and the arterial pressure curve
differs from the pressure curve in the aortic ventricle. Variety of cyclic
recurrence curves is infinite. Two key parameters characterize recurrence: the
period (or its reciprocal variable - frequency) and nonuniformity of the
period, which concept includes the notion of frequency harmonics. Nonuniformity
of the cycle period should not be resident in SFU (the elementary system) as
its performance cycles are always identical. However, the systems have
transition periods which may have various cycle periods. Besides, various
systems have their own cyclic periods and in process of interaction of systems
interference (overlap) of periods may occur. Therefore, additional shifting of
own systems’ periods takes place and harmonics of cycles emerge. The number
of such wave overlaps can be arbitrary large. That is why in reality we observe
a very wide variety of curves: regular sinusoids, irregular curves, etc.
However, any curves can be disintegrated into constituent waves thereof, i.e.
disintegration of interference into its components using special analytical
methods, e.g. Fourier transformations. Resulting may be a spectrum of simpler
waves of a sinusoid type. The more detailed (and more labour-consuming, though)
the analysis, the nearer is the form of each component to a sinusoid and the
larger is the number of sinusoidal waves with different periods.
The period of
system cycle is a very important parameter for understanding the processes
occurring in any system, including in living organisms. Its duration depends on
time constant of the system’s reaction to external impact/influence. Once the
system starts recurrent performance cycle, it would not stop until it has not
finished it. One may try to affect the system when it has not yet finished the cycle
of actions, but the system’s reaction to such interference would be inadequate.
The speed of the system’s functions progression depends completely on the
duration of the system performance cycle. The longer the cycle period, the
slower the system would transit from one level to another. The concepts of
absolute and relative adiaphoria are directly associated with the concept of
period and
phase of system cycle. If, for example, the myocardium has not finished its
“systole-diastole” cycle, extraordinary (pre-term) impulse of rhythm pacemaker
or extrasystolic impulse cannot force the ventricle to produce adequate stroke
release/discharge. The value of stroke discharge may vary from zero to maximum
possible, depending on at which phase of adiphoria period extrasystolic impulse
occurs. If the actuating pulse falls on the 2nd and 3rd micro cycles, the
myocardium would not react to them at all (absolute adiphoria), since
information from the “X” receptor is not measured at the right time.
Myocardium, following the contraction, would need, as any other cell would do
following its excitation, some time to restore its energy potential (ATP
accumulation) and ensure setting of all SFU in “startup” condition. If
extraordinary impulse emerges at this time, the system’s response might be
dependent on the amount of ATP already accumulated or the degree in which
actomyosin fibers of myocardium sarcomeres diverged/separated in order to join
in the function again (relative adiphoria). Excitability of an unexcited cell
is the highest. At the moment of its excitation excitability
sharply falls to zero (all SFU in operation, 2nd
micro cycle) – absolute adiphoria. Thereafter, if there is no subsequent
excitation, the system would gradually restore its excitability, while passing
through the phases of relative adiphoria up to initial or even higher level
(super-excitability, which is not examined in this work) and then again
to initial level. Therefore, pulse irregularity may
be observed in patients with impaired cardial function, when sphygmic beats are
force-wise uneven. Extreme manifestation of such irregularity is the so-called
“Jackson’s symptom” /pulse deficiency/, i.e. cardiac electric activity is shown
on the electrocardiogram, but there is no its mechanical (haemodynamic)
analogue on the sphygmogram and sphygmic beats are not felt when palpating the
pulse. The main conclusions from all the above are as follows: any systems
operate in cycles passing through micro cycles; any system goes through
transition process; cycle period may differ in various systems depending on
time constant of the system’s reaction to the external impact/influence (in
living systems – on the speed of biochemical reactions and the speed of
command/actuating signals); irregularity of the system’s cycle period depends
on the presence of transition processes, consequently, to a certain degree on
the force of external exposure/influence; irregularity of the system cycle
period depends on overlapping of cycle periods of interacting systems; upon
termination of cycle of actions after single influence the system reverts to
the original state, in which it was prior to the beginning of external
influence (one single result of action with one single external influence). The
latter does not apply to the so-called generating systems. It is associated
with the fact that after the result of action has been achieved by the system,
it becomes independent of the system which produced it and may become external
influence in respect to it. If it is conducted to the external influence entry
point of the same system, the latter would again get excited and again produce
new result of action (positive feedback, PF). This is how all generators work.
Thus, if the first external influence affects the system or external influence
is ever changing, the number of functioning SFU systems varies. If no external
influence is exerted on the system or is being exerted but is invariable, the
number of functioning system SFU would not vary. Based on the above we can draw
the definitions of stationary conditions and dynamism of process.
Functional
condition of system. Functional condition of the system is defined by the
number of active SFU. If all SFU function simultaneously, it shows high
functional condition which arises in case of maximum external influence. If
none SFU is active it shows minimum functional condition. It may occur in the
absence of external influence. External environment
always exerts some kind of influence on some systems, including the systems of
organism. Even in quiescent state the Earth gravitational force makes part of
our muscles work and consequently absolute rest is non-existent. So, when we
are kind of in quiescent state we actually are in one of the low level states
of physical activity with the corresponding certain low level of functional
state of the organism. Any external influence requiring additional vigorous
activity would transfer to a new level of a functional condition unless the SFU
reserve is exhausted. When new influence is set at a new invariable
(stationary) level, functional condition of a system is set on a new invariable
(stationary) functional level.
Stationary
states/modes. Stationary state is such a mode of systems when one and the same
number of SFU function and no change occurs in their functional state. For
example, in quiescence state all systems of organism do not change their
functional mode as far as about the same number of SFU is operational. A female
runner who runs a long distance for quite a long time without changing the
speed is also in a stationary state/mode. Her load does not vary and
consequently the number of working (functioning) SFU
does not change either, i.e. the functional state of
her organism does not change. Her organism has already “got used” to this
unchangeable loading and as there is no increase of load there is no increase
in the number of working SFU, too. The number of working SFU remains constant
and therefore the functional state/mode of the organism does not change. What
may change in this female runner’s body is, e.g. the status of tissue energy
generation system and the status of tissue energy consumption system, which is
in fact the process of
exhaustion of organism. However, if the female runner has duly planned her run
tactics so that not to find herself in condition of anaerobic metabolism, the
condition of external gas metabolism and blood circulation systems would not
change. So, regardless of whether or not physical activity is present, but if
it does not vary (stationary physical loadings /steady state/, provided it is
adequate to the possibilities of the organism), the organism of the subject
would be in a stationary state/mode. But if the female runner runs in
conditions of anaerobic metabolism the
“vicious circle” will be activated and functional condition of her organism
will start change steadily to the worse. (The
vicious circle is the system’s reaction to its own result of action. Its basis
is hyper reaction of system to routine influence, since the force of routine
external influence is supplemented by the eigen result of action of the system
which is independent of the latter and presents external influence in respect
to it. Thus, routine external influence plus the influence of the system’s own
result of action all in all brings about hyper influence resulting in hyper
reaction of the system (system
overload). The outcome of this reaction is the destruction own SFU coupled with
accumulation of defects and progressing decline in the quality of life. At the
initial stages while functional reserves are still large, the vicious circle
becomes activated under the influence of quite a strong external action (heavy
load condition). But in process of SFU destruction and accumulation of defects
the overload of adjacent systems and their destruction would accrue (the domino
principle), whereas the level of load tolerance would recede and with the lapse
of time even weak external influences will cause vicious circle actuation and
may prove to be excessive. Eventually even the quiescent state will be the
excessive loading for an organism with destroyed SFU which condition is
incompatible with life. Usually termination of loading would discontinue this
vicious circle.
Dynamic
processes. Dynamic process is the process of changing functional state/mode/condition
of the system. The system is in dynamic process when the change in the number
of its actuated SFU occurs. The number of continually actuated SFU would
determine stationary state/mode/condition of the system. Hence, dynamic process
is the process of the system’s transition from one stationary level to another.
If the speed of change in external influences exceeds the speed of fixing the
preset result of action of the system, transition processes
(multi-micro-cycles) occur during which variation of number of functioning SFU
also takes place. Therefore, these transition processes are also dynamic.
Consequently, there are two types of dynamic processes: when the system is
shifting from one stationary condition (level) to another and when it is in
transient multi-micro-cycle. The former is target-oriented, whereas the latter
is caused by imperfection of systems and is parasitic, as its actions take away
additional energy which was intended for target actions. When the system is in
stationary condition some definite number of SFU (from zero to all) is
actuated. The minimum step of change of level of functional condition is the
value determined by the level of operation of one SFU (one quantum of action).
Hence, basically transition from one level of functional condition to another
is always discrete (quantized) rather than smooth, and this discrecity is
determined by the SFU “caliber”. Then umber of stationary conditions is equal
to the number of SFU of the system. Systems with considerable quantity of
“small” SFU would pass through dynamic processes more smoothly and without
strenuous jerks, than systems with small amount of “large” SFU. Hence, dynamic
process is characterized by an amplitude of increment of the system’s functions
from minimum to maximum (the system’s minimax; depends on its absolute number
of SFU), discrecity or pace of increment of functions (depends on the “caliber”
or quantum of individual SFU) and parameters of the function’s cyclic
recurrence (speed of increase of actions of system, the period of phases of a
cycle, etc.). It can be targeted or parasitic. It should be noted that
stationary condition is also a process, but it’s the steady-state (stationary)
process. In such cases the condition of systems does not vary from cycle to
cycle. But during each cycle a number of various dynamic processes take place
in the system as the system itself consists of subsystems, each of which in
turn consists of cycles and processes. The steady-state process keeps system in
one and the same functional condition and at one and the same stationary level.
In accordance with the above definition, if a system does not change its
functional condition, it is in stationary condition. Consequently, the
steady-state process and stationary condition mean one the same thing, because
irrespective of whether the systems are in stationary condition or in dynamic
process, some kind of stationary or dynamic processes may take place in their
subsystems. For example, even just a mere reception by the “Õ” receptor is a
dynamic process. Hence, there are no absolutely inert (inactive) objects and
any object of our World somewise operates in one way or another. It is assumed
that the object may be completely “inactive” at zero degrees of Kelvin scale
(absolute zero). Attempts to obtain absolutely inactive systems were undertaken
by freezing of bodies up to percentage of Kelvin degrees. It’s unlikely though,
that any attempts to freeze a body to absolute zero would be a success, because
the body would still move in space, cross some kind of magnetic, gravitational
or electric fields and interact with them. For this reason at present it is
probably impossible in principle to get absolutely inert and inactive body. The
integral organism represents mosaic of systems which are either in different
stationary conditions, or in dynamic processes. One could possibly make an
objection that there are no systems in stationary condition in the organism at
all, as far as some kind of dynamic processes continually occur in some of its systems.
During systole the pressure in the aorta increases and during diastole it goes
down, the heart functions continuously and blood continuously flows through the
vessels, etc. That is all very true, but evaluation of the system’s functions
is not made based on its current condition, but the cycles of its activity.
Since all processes in any systems are cyclic, including in the organism, the
criterion of stationarity is the invariance of integral condition of the system
from one cycle to another. Aorta reacts to external influence (stroke/systolic
discharge of the left ventricle) in such a way that in process of increase of
pressure its walls’ tension increases, while it falls in process of pressure
reduction. However, take, for example, the longer time period than the one of
the cardiocycle, the integrated condition of the aorta would not vary from one
cardiocycle to another and remain stationary.
Evaluation of
functional state of systems. Evaluation may be qualitative and quantitative.
The presence (absence) of any waves on the curve presents quality evaluation,
whereas their amplitude or frequency is their quantitative evaluation. For the
evaluation of functional condition of any systems comparison of the results of
measurements of function parameters to those that should be with the given
system is needed. In order to be able to judge about the presence (absence) of
pathology, it is not enough to measure just any parameter. For example, we have
measured someone’s blood pressure and received the value of 190/100 mm Hg. Is
it a high pressure or it is not? And what it should be like? To answer these
questions it is necessary to compare the obtained result to a standard scale,
i.e. to the due value. If the value obtained differs from the appropriate one,
it speaks of the presence of pathology, if it does not, then it means there is
no pathology. If blood pressure value of an order of 190/100 mm Hg is observed
in quiescent state it would speak of pathology, while at the peak maximum load
this value would be a norm. Hence, due values depend on the condition in which
the given system is. There exist standard scales for the estimation of due
values. There exist maximum and minimum due values, due values of quiescence
state and peak load values, as well as due curves of functions. Minimum and
maximum due values should not always correspond
to those of quiescence state or peak load. For
example, total peripheral vascular resistance should be maximum in quiescence
state and minimum when loaded. Modern medicine makes extensive use of these
kinds of due values, but is almost unfamiliar with the concept of due curves.
Due value is what may be observed in most normal and healthy individuals with
account taken of affiliation of a subject to certain standard group of alike subjects.
If all have such-and-such value and normally exist in the given conditions,
then in order for such subject to be also able to exist normally in the same
conditions, he/she should be characterized by the
same value. For this purpose statistical standard scales are applied which are
derived by extensive detailed statistical research in specific groups of
subjects. These are so-called statistical mathematical models. They show what
parameters should be present in the given group of subjects. However, the use
of standard tables is a primitive way of evaluation of systems’ functions.
First, they provide due values characterizing only a group of healthy
individuals rather than the given concrete subject. Secondly, we already know
that systems at each moment of time are in one of their functional states and
it depends on external influences. For example, when the system is in
quiescence state it is at its lowest level of functional condition, while being
at peak load it is at its highest level. What do these tables suggest then?
They probably suggest due values for the systems of organism in quiescence
state or at their peak load condition. But, after all, the problems of patients
are not those associated with their status in quiescence state, and the level of
their daily normal (routine) load is not their maximum load. For normal
evaluation of the functional condition of the patient’s organism it is
necessary to use not tabular data of due values, but due curves of functions of
the body systems which nowadays are almost not applied. Coincidence or
non-coincidence of actual curves of the body systems’ functions with due curves
would be a criterion of their sufficiency or insufficiency. Hence, application
of standard tables is insufficient and does not meet the requirements of
adequate diagnostics. Application of due curves is more of informative
character (see below). Statistical mathematical models do not provide such
accuracy, howsoever exact we measure parameters. They show what values of
parameters should be in a certain group of subjects alike in terms of certain
properties, for example, males aged 20-30 years, of 165-175 cm height, smokers
or non-smokers, married or single, paleface, yellow- or black-skinned, etc.
Statistical models are much simpler than those determined, but less exact
though, since in relation to the given subject we can only know something with
certain degree (e.g. 80%) of probability. Statistical models apply when we do
not know all elements of the system and laws of their interaction. Then we hunt
for similar systems on the basis of significant features, we somewise measure
the results of action of all these systems operating in similar conditions
(clinical tests) and calculate mean value of the result of action. Having
assumed that the given subject closely approximates the others, because
otherwise he/she would not be similar to them, we say: “Once these (people)
have such-and-such parameters of the given system in such-and-such conditions
and they live without any problems, then he/she should have these same
parameters if he/she is in the same conditions”. However, a subject’s living
conditions do always vary. Change or failure to account even one significant
parameter can change considerably the results of statistical researches, and this
is a serious drawback of statistical mathematical models. Moreover, statistical
models often do not reveal the essence of pathological process at all. The
functional residual capacity (FRC) of lungs shows volume of lungs in the end of
normal exhalation and is a certain indicator of the number of functional units
of ventilation (FUV). Hence, the increase in FRC indicates the increase in the
number FUV? But in patients with pulmonary emphysema FRC is considerably
oversized. All right then, does this mean that the number of FUV in such
patients is increased? It is nonsense, as we know that due to emphysema
destruction of FUV occurs! And in patients with insufficiency of pumping
function of left ventricle reduction of FRC is observed. Does this mean that the
number of FUV is reduced in such patients? It is impossible to give definite
answer to these questions without the knowledge of the dynamics of external
respiration system function and pulmonary blood circulation. Hence, the major
drawback of statistical models consists in that sufficiently reliable results
of researches can be obtained only in the event that all significant conditions
defining the given group of subjects are strictly observed. Alteration or
addition of one or several significant conditions of research, for example,
stature/height, sex, weight, the colour of eyes, open window during sleep,
place of residence, etc., may alter very much the final result by adding a new
group of subjects. As a result, if we wish to know, e.g. vital
capacity of lungs in the inhabitants of New York we
must conduct research among the inhabitants of New York rather than the
inhabitants of Moscow, Paris or Beijing, and these data may not apply, for
example, to the inhabitants of Rio de Janeiro. Moreover, standards/norms may
differ in
the inhabitants of different areas of New York depending on national/ethnic/
identity, environmental pollution in these areas, social level and etc. Surely,
one may investigate all conceivable variety of groups of subjects and develop
specifications/standards, for example, for males aged from... to..., smokers
or non-smokers of cigars (tobacco pipes, cigarettes or cigarettes with
cardboard holder) with high (low) concentration of nicotine, aboriginals
(emigrants), white, dark- or yellow-skinned, etc. It would require enormous
efforts and still would not be justified, since the world is continually
changing and one would have to do this work every time again. It’s all the more
so impossible to develop statistical specifications/standards for infinite
number of groups of subjects in the course of dynamic processes, for example,
physical activities and at different phases of pathological processes, etc.,
when the number of values of each separate parameter is quite large. When the
system’s details are completely uncertain, although the variants of the
system’s reaction and their probabilistic weighting factors
are known,
statistical mathematical
model of system arises. Inaccuracy of these models
is of fundamental character and is stipulated by probabilistic character of
functions. In process of studying of the system details of its structure become
apparent. As a result an empirical model emerges in the form of a formula. The
degree of accuracy of this model is higher than that of statistical, but it is
still of probabilistic character. When all details of the system are known and
the mechanism of its operation is entirely exposed the deterministic
mathematical model
appears in the form of the formula. Its accuracy is only stipulated by the accuracy
of measurement methods. Application of statistical mathematical models is
justified at the first stages of any cognition process when details of
phenomenon in question are unknown. At this stage of cognition a “black box”
concept is introduced when we know nothing about the structure of this “box”,
but we do know its reaction to certain influences. Types of its reactions are
revealed by means of statistical models and thereafter, with the help of logic,
details of its systems and their interaction are becoming exposed. When all
that is revealed, deterministic models come into play and the evaluation of the
systems’ functions is made not on the basis of tabular data, but on the basis
of due curve of the system function. Due curve of a system’s function is a due
range of values of function of the given concrete system in the given concrete
subject, with its load varying from minimum to maximum. Nowadays due curves are
scarcely used, instead extreme minimum and maximum due values are applied. For
example, due ventilation of
lungs in quiescence state and in the state of peak load. For this purpose
maximum load is given to individuals in homotypic groups and pulmonary
ventilation in quiescence state and in the state of peak load is measured.
Following statistical processing due values of pulmonary ventilation for the
conditions of rest and peak load are obtained. The drawback of extreme due
values consists in that this method is of little use
for the patients. Not all patients are able to
normally perform a stress test and discontinue it long before due maximum value
is achieved. The patient, for example, could have shown due pulmonary
ventilation, but he/she just stopped the load test too early. How can the
function be estimated then? It can be only done by means of due curve. If the
actual curve coincides with the due curve, the function is normal at the site
where coincidence occurred. If actual curve is lower than the due one, it is a
lagging curve. Inclined straight line consisting of vertical pieces of line is
the due curve. Vertical dotted straight line is the boundary of transition of
normal or lagging function into the inadequate line (a plateau). The drawback
of due curves is that in order to build them it is necessary to use
deterministic mathematical models of systems which number is currently very
low. They are built on the basis of knowledge of cause-and-effect relationship
between the system elements. These models are the most complex, labor-consuming
and for the time being are in many cases impracticable. Therefore, these models
are scarcely used in
the sphere of applied medicine and this is the reason for the absence
of analytical medicine. But they are the most
accurate and show what parameters should be present in the given concrete
subject at any point of time. Only the use of due curve functions allows for
evaluating actual curves properly. The difference of the deterministic
mathematical models from statistical tables consists in that in the first case
due values for the concrete given subject (the individual’s due values) are
obtained, while in the second case due values for the group of persons alike
the given subject are developed. The possibility of building deterministic
models depends only on the extent of our knowledge of executive elements of the
system and laws of their interaction. Calculation of probability of a thrown
stone hitting a designated target can be drawn as an example of statistical
standard scale in the mechanic. After a series of throws, having made certain
statistical calculations it is possible to predict that the next throw with
such degree of probability will hit the mark. If deterministic mathematical
model (ballistics) is used for this purpose, then knowing the stone weight, the
force and the angle of throw, viscosity of air, speed and direction of wind,
etc., it is possible to calculate and predict precisely the place where a stone
will fall. “Give me a spot of support and I will up-end the globe”, said
Archimedes, having in view that he had deterministic mathematical model of
mechanics of movements. Any living organism is a very complex and
multi-component system. It’s impossible to account all parameters and their
interrelations, therefore statistical mathematical models cannot describe
adequately the condition of systems of organism. However, joint use of
statistical and deterministic models allows, with sufficient degree of
accuracy, to evaluate parameters of living system. In the lapse of time in
process of accumulation of knowledge statistical models are replaced by
deterministic. Engineering/technology is much
simpler than biology and medicine because the objects of its knowledge are
rather simple systems (machinery/vehicles) constructed by a man. Therefore, its
development and process of replacement of statistical mathematical models for
deterministic ones has made great strides as compared with medicine.
Nevertheless, on the front line of any science including technical, where there
is still no clarity about many things and still a lot has to be learnt,
statistics stands its ground as it helps to reveal elements of systems and laws
of their interaction. What do we examine the subject and conduct estimation of
functions of the systems of his organism for? Do we do it in order to know to
which extent he/she differs from the homothetic subject? Probably, yes. But,
perhaps, the main objective of examination of a patient is to determine whether
he/she can normally exist without medical aid and if not, what kind of help
might be provided. Pathological process is a process of destruction of some SFU
of the organism’s systems in which one of the key roles is played by a vicious
circle. However, vicious circles start to actuate only if certain degree of
load is present. They do not emerge below this level and do not destroy SFU,
i.e. no pathological process emerges and no illness occurs below a certain
threshold of loading (mechanical, thermal, toxic, etc.). Hence, having defined
a threshold of the onset of the existence of vicious circle, we can learn the
upper “ceiling” of quality of life of the given patient. If his/her living
conditions (tempo of life) allow him/her not to exceed this “ceiling”, it
suggests that the given subject will not be in poor health under these
conditions. If the tempo of life requires more than the capacity of his/her
organism may provide, he/she will be in poor health. In order not to be ill
he/she should stint himself/herself in some actions. To limit oneself in
actions means to reduce one’s living standard, to deprive oneself of the
possibility to undertake certain actions which others can do or which he/she
did earlier, but which are now inaccessible to the given patient on the grounds
of restricted resources of his/her organism because of defects. If these
restrictions have to do only with pleasure/delight, such as, for example,
playing football, this may be somehow sustained. But if these restrictions have
to do with conditions of life of the patient it has to be somehow taken into
account. For example, if his/her apartment is located on the ground floor, then
to provide for quite normal way of life his/her maximum consumption of Î2
should be, e.g., 1000 ml a minute. But what one should do if he/she lives,
e.g., on the third floor and in the house with no elevator, and to be able to
get to the third floor on foot he/she
should be able to take up 2000 ml/min Î2,
while he/she is able to uptake take up only 1000 ml/min Î2,?
The patient would then have a problem which can be solved only by means of some
kind of health care actions or by changing conditions of life. In clinical
practice we almost do not assess the patient’s functional condition from the
stand point of its correspondence to living conditions. Of course, it is
trivial and we guess it, but for the time being there are no objective criteria
and corresponding methodology for the evaluation of conformity of the
functional reserves of the patient’s organism with the conditions of his/her
life activity. Ergonomics is impossible without systemic analysis. Major
criterion of sufficiency of the organism’s functions in the given conditions of
life is the absence of the occurrence of vicious circles (see below) at the
given level of routine existential loads. If vicious circles arise in the given
conditions, it is necessary either to somehow strengthen the function of the
organism’s systems or the patient will have to change his/her living conditions
so that vicious circles do not work, or otherwise he/she will always be in poor
health with all the ensuing consequences. So, we need not only to know due minimum
or maximum values which we may obtain using statistical mathematical models. We
also need to know the patient’s everyday due values of the same parameters
specific for the given concrete patient so that his/her living conditions do
not cause the development of pathological processes and destroy his/her
organism. To this effect we need deterministic mathematical models.
Stabilization
systems and proportional systems. There exist a great number of types of
various systems. But stabilization systems and proportional systems are of
special importance for us. In respect of the first one the result of action
always remains the same (stable), it does not depend on the force of external
influence, but on the command. For example, ðÍ of blood should be always equal
to 7.4, blood pressure to 120/80 mm Hg, etc., (homeostasis systems) regardless
of external influences. In respect of the second one the result of action
depends on the force of external influence under any specific law designated by
the command and is proportional to it. For example, the more physical work we
perform the more Î2 we
should consume and excrete ÑÎ2.
Stabilization system uses two receptors, “Õ” and “Y”. The “Õ” receptor is used
to start up the system depending on the presence of external influence, while
the “Y” receptor is used for the measurement of the result of action. The
command (the task specifying the value of the result of action) is entered to
the command entry point of the stabilization system’s control block.
Stabilization system should fulfill this task, i.e. support (stabilize) the
result of action at the designated level irrespective of the force of external
influence. Stability of the result of action is ensured by that the “database”
of the control block contains the ratios/correlations of the number of active
SFU and forces of external influence and is sustained according to the NF
logic: if the result of action has increased, it is necessary to reduce it, and
if it has decreased it’s necessary to increase it. For this purpose the control
block should contain DPC and NF. Hence, the elementary control block (DPC) is
not suitable for stabilization systems. At least simple control block which
contains NF as well is necessary. In stabilization system the result of action
of the system up to vertical dotted straight line is stable (normal function,
the curve goes horizontally). Beyond the dotted straight line the function goes
down (increases), stabilization was disturbed (insufficiency of function). With
proportional system, its function increases (goes down) until vertical dotted
straight line proportionally to the external influence (normal function).
Beyond the dotted straight line the function does not vary (it entered the
saturation phase, transited to a plateau condition - insufficient function).
The measuring element in stabilization system continually measures the result
of action of the system and communicates it to the control block which compares
it to the preset result. In case of discrepancy of the result of action with
the task this block makes decision on those or other actions to be taken and
forces the executive elements to operate so that this divergence has
disappeared. External influence may vary within various ranges, but the result
of action should remain stable and be equal to the preset result. The system
spends its resources to do it. If the resources are exhausted, stabilization
system ceases to stabilize the result of action and starting from this point
the onset of its insufficiency occurs. One of stabilization examples is stellar
rotation speed in vacuum. If the radius of the star reduces, its rotational
speed will increase and centrifugal forces will amplify, thus scaling up its
radius and slowing down its rotational speed. If the radius of the star scales
up, the entire process will go in a reverse order. A figure skater regulates
the speed of rotational pirouettes he/she performs on the skating-rink based on
the same principle. Proportional system should also use both “Õ” and “Y”
receptors. One of them measures the incoming influence, while another one
measures the result of action of the system. The command (the task as to what
the proportion between external influence and the result of action should be)
is input to the entry point of the control block. It is for this reason that
such systems are called proportional. External influence may change within the
varying range. But the control block should adjust the performance of the
executive elements so that the “prescribed” (preset by the directive) proportion
between external influence and the result of action is maintained. Examples of
proportional systems are, for example, amplifiers of electric signals,
mechanical levers, sea currents (the more the water in the ocean is warmed up,
the more intensive is the flow in the Gulf Stream), atmospheric phenomena, etc.
So, the examples of stabilization and proportional systems are found in any
medium, but not only in biological systems.
Active and
passive systems. Passive systems are those which do not exspend energy for
their actions. Active systems are those which do exspend energy for their
actions. However, as it was repeatedly underlined, any action of any system
requires expenditure of energy. Any action, even the most insignificant, is
impossible without expenditure of energy, because, as it has already been
mentioned, any action is always the interaction between systems or its
elements. Any interaction represents communication between the systems or their
elements which requires expenditure of energy for the creation thereof.
Therefore any action requires energy consumption. Hence, all systems, including
passive, consume energy. The difference between active and passive systems is
only in the source of energy. How does the passive system operate then? If the
system is in the state of equilibrium with the environment and no influence is
exerted upon it the system should not perform any actions. Once it does not
perform any actions, it does not consume energy. It is passive until the moment
it starts to operate and only then it will start to consume energy. The
balanced state of
a pencil is stipulated by the balanced pushing (pressure) of springs onto a
pencil. The springs are not simply incidental groups of elements (a set of
atoms and molecules), but they are passive systems with NF loops and executive
elements at molecular level (intermolecular forces in steel springs) which seek
to balance forces of intermolecular connections/bonds which is manifested in
the form of tension load of the springs. Since in case of the absence of
external influence no actions are performed by the system, there is no energy
consumption either, and the system passively waits for the onset of external
influence. Both types of systems have one and the same goal: to keep a pencil
in vertical position. In passive systems this function is carried out by
springs (passive SFU, A and B) and air columns encapsulated/encased in rubber
cans (passive SFU, D). The SFU store (use) energy during external influence
(pushing a pencil with a finger squeezes the springs). In active system (C) the
same function is achieved for at the expense of airflows which always collapse.
These airflows create motor fans (active SFU) which spend energy earlier
reserved, for example, in accumulators. Once these airflows are
encapsulated/encased in rubber cylinders they will not collapse any more and
will exist irrespective of fans, while carrying out the same function. But now
it represents a passive system (D). Now external influence occurs and the
pencil has diverged aside. The springs would immediately seek to return a
pencil to the former position, i.e. the system starts to operate. Where does it
take energy for the actions from? This energy was brought by the external
influence in the form of kinetic energy of pushing by a finger which has
compressed (stretched) the springs and they have reserved this energy in the
form of potential energy of compression (stretching). As soon as external
influence (pushing by a finger) has ceased, potential energy of the compressed
springs turns to kinetic energy of straightening thereof and it returns a
pencil back in the vertical balanced position. External influence enhances internal
energy of the system which is used for the performance of the system. The
influence causes surplus of internal energy of the system which results in the
reciprocal action of the system. In the absence of influence no surplus of the
system’s internal energy is available which results in the absence of action.
External influence brings in the energy in the system which is used to produce
reaction to this influence. Functions of springs may be performed by airflows
created by fans located on a pencil. In order to “build” airflows surplus of
energy of the “fans – pencil” system is used which is also brought in from the
outside, but stored for use at the right time (for example, gasoline in the
tank or electricity in accumulator). Such system would be active because it
will use its internal energy, rather than that of external influence. The
difference between airflows and springs consists in that the airflows consist
of incidental groups of molecules of air (not systems) moving in one direction.
Amongst these elements there are executive elements (SFU, air molecules), but
there is no control block which could construct a springs-type system out of
them, i.e. provide the existence of airflows as stable, separate and
independent bodies (systems). These airflows are continually created by fan
propellers and as they have no control block of their own they always collapse
by themselves. Suppose that we construct some kind of a system which will
ensure prevention of the airflows from collapse, let’s say, encase them in
rubber cylinders, they then may exist independently of fans. But in this case
the system of stabilization of the pencil’s vertical position will shift from
the active category to the passive. Hence, both active and passive systems
consume energy. However, the passive ones consume the external energy brought
in by external influence, while the active ones would use their own internal
energy. One may argue that internal energy, say, of myocyte is still the
external energy brought in to a cell from the outside, e.g. in the form of
glucose. It is true, and moreover, any object contains internal energy which at
some stage was external. And we probably may even know the source of this
energy, which is the energy of the Big Bang. Some kind of energy was spent once
and somewhere for the creation of an atom, and this energy may be extracted
therefrom somehow or other. Such brought-in internal energy is present in any
object of our World and it is impossible to find any other object in it which
would contain exclusively its own internal energy which was not brought in by
anything or ever from the outside. Energy exchange occurs every time the
systems interact. But passive systems do not spend their internal energy in the
process of their performance because they “are not able” of doing it, they only
use the energy of the external influence, whereas active systems can spend
their internal energy. The passive system
is the thorax which performs passive exhalation and many other systems of
living organism.
Evolution of systems.
Complex control block. For the most efficient achievement of the goal the
system always should carry out its action in the optimum way and produce the
result of action in the right place and time. The system’s control block solves
both problems: where and when it is necessary to actuate. In order to be able
to operate at the right place it should have a notion of space and the
corresponding sensors delivering information on the situation
in the given space. In turn, the time of delivery of
the result of action with simple systems includes two periods: the time spent
for decision-making (from the moment of onset of external influence till the
moment of SFU activation) and the time spent for the
SFU actuation (from the moment of the beginning of
SFU activation till the moment the result of action is achieved). The time
spent for the decision-making depends on duration of cycles of the system’s
performance which issue was discussed above. The time spent for the
SFU actuation depends on the SFU properties such as,
for example, the speed of biochemical reactions in live cells or the speed of
reduction of sarcomere in muscular cells which to a considerable degree depends
on the speed of power consumption by these SFU and the speed of restoration of
energy potential after these SFU have been actuated. These speeds are basically
the characteristics inherent in SFU, but are also determined by service systems
which serve these SFU. They may also be controlled by control block. Metabolic,
hormonal, prostaglandin and vegetative neural regulation in living organism is
intended just for this purpose, i.e. to change to some extent the speeds of
biochemical reactions in tissue cells and conditions of delivery of energy
resources by means of regulation of (service) respiratory and blood circulation
systems. But the notion of “at the right time” means not only the time of
actuation in response to the external influence. In many cases there is a need
for the actuation to start before external influence is exerted. However, the
system with simple control block starts to perform only after the onset of
external influence. It is a very significant (catastrophic) drawback for living
systems, because if the organism is being influenced upon, it may mean that it
is already being eaten. It would be better if the system started to perform
before the onset of this external influence. If the external situation is
threatening by the onset of dangerous influence, the optimal actions of the
system may protect it from such influence. For this purpose it is necessary to
know the condition of external situation and to be able to see, estimate and
know what actions need to be undertaken in certain cases. In other words, it is
necessary to exercise control in order to forestall real result of action prior
to external influence. In order to perform these actions it should contain
special elements which can do it and which it does not have. Simple control
block can exercise control only on the basis of mismatch
(divergence/discrepancy) of real result of action with the preset one, because
the system with simple control block cannot “know” anything about external
situation until the moment this situation starts to influence upon the system.
The knowledge of external situation is inaccessible to simple control block.
Therefore, simple control block always starts to perform with delay. It may be
sometimes too late to control. If the system (the living organism) does not
know the external situation, it may not be able to make projection as to what
the situation is and catch the victim or forestall encounter with a predator.
Thus, simple control block cannot make decisions on the time and place of
actuation. For this purpose control block needs a special analyzer which can
determine and analyze external situation and depending on various external or
internal conditions elaborate the decision on its actions. This analyzer should
have a notion of time and space in which certain situation is deployed, as well
as corresponding informants (sensors with communication lines between them and
this special analyzer) which provide information on the external situation. The
analyzer-informant has nothing of this kind. When the hunter shoots at a flying
duck, it shoots not directly at the bird, but he shoots with anticipation as he
knows that before the bullet reaches a duck it (the duck) will move forward.
The hunter, being a system intended for shooting a duck, should see the entire
situation at a distance, estimate it correctly, make the projection as to
whether it makes sense to shoot, and he should act, i.e. shoot at a duck, only
on the basis of such analysis. He cannot wait until the duck touches him (until
his “X” is actuated) so that he then can shoot at it. In order to do so he
should first single out a duck as the object he needs from other unnecessary
objects, then measure a distance to a duck, even if it would be “by eye”. He
does it by means of special (visual) analyzer which is neither “X” nor “Y”
sensor, but is an additional “C” sensor (additional special remote receptors
with afferent paths). Such receptors can be any receptors which are able of
receiving information at a distance (haemo-, termo-, photoreceptors, etc). The
hunter’s visual analyzer includes photosensitive rods and cone cells in the eye
(photoreceptors), optic nerves and various cerebral structures. He should be
able to distinguish all surrounding subjects, classify them and single out a
duck against the background of these subjects and locate a duck (situational
evaluation). In addition, by means of reciprocal innervation he should position
his body in such a way that the gun is directed precisely to the place in front
of the duck (forestalling/ anticipation) to achieve the goal, i.e. to hit the
duck. He does all this by means of his additional analyzer which is the
analyzer-classifier. Simple control block of systems with NF does not contain
such additional analyzer-classifier. That is why it is called “simple”. It has
only analyzer-informant which feels external influence by means of “X” sensor
only when this influence has already begun; it measures the result of action by
means of NF (“Y” sensor) only when this result is already evident and analyzes
the information received after the result of action is already produced,
because it takes time for the NF to activate. In addition, the
analyzer-informant contains only “database” in which the table of due values of
controllable parameters (data) which need to be compared to the data of
measurements of external influence and results of action “is written down” in
explicit or implicit form. It elaborates decisions on the basis of these
comparisons. Its algorithm of control is based only on the comparison of the
given measurements carried out by “X” and “Y” with the “database”. If the
mismatch is equal to “M” it is necessary to perform, for example, less action,
whereas if it is equal to “N”, then more action should be done. Simple control
block cannot change the decision as to the alteration of the level of
controllable parameter, time of actuation and the NF intensity, since it does
not have appropriate information. To perform these actions it should contain
special elements which can provide it with such information. What does it need
for this purpose? In order to make a decision the given block should “know” the
situation around the system which can cause certain external influence. For
this purpose it should first of all “see”
it, i.e. have sensors which can receive information
at a distance and without direct contact (remote “C” informant). In addition,
it should contain a special analyzer-classifier which can classify external
environment and single out from it not all the objects and situations, but
those only which may affect the implementation of its goals. Besides, it should
have notions of space and time. The play of fish and even dolphin shoals in the
vicinity of floating combatant ship
cannot affect
its movement to target destination. But the “game”
of the enemy submarine in its vicinity may substantially affect the fulfillment
of its task. The combatant ship should be able to “see” all its surroundings
and, based on the external situation, single out from all possible situations
only those that may create such external influences which can prevent it from
the implementation of its objective. For this purpose it should “know” possible
situational scenarios which may affect the achievement of the goal of the given
system. To this effect it should have “knowledge base” containing the
description of all those situations which can affect the implementation of the
objective. If its “knowledge base” does not have the description of certain
objects or situations it cannot distinguish (classify) an object or a situation
and can not make correct decision. The “knowledge base” should store
information not on the parameters of external influence which are stored in the
“database”, but on the situations around (beyond) the system which may lead to
specific external influence. The “knowledge base” may be introduced in the
control block at the moment of its “birth” or later together with the command,
at that it is being introduced in the given block by the systems external in
relation to the given system. If its “knowledge base” does not contain the
description of the given situation, it can not distinguish and classify it. The
“knowledge base” contains the description of various situations and the
significance of these situations for the system. Knowing the importance of real
situation for the achievement of the goal the system can make projection and
take decision on its actions depending on the projection made. In addition to
the “knowledge base” it should have “decision base”– a set of ready/stored/
decisions that are made by the control block depending on
the situation and the projection, (authorized decisions,
instructions) in which appropriate decisions are stored that need to be made in
respective situations. If it does not have ready decisions regarding external
situation it cannot perform its objective. Having identified a situation and
elaborated the decision, it gives a command to the analyzer-informant which
activates a stimulator in an appropriate way. Thus, the control block is being
complexificated on account of inclusion in its structure of the “C” informant
and the analyzer-classifier containing the “knowledge base”
and the “base of decisions”. That is why such
control blocks are called “complex”. The more complex the decision-making block
is, the more precise decision may be chosen. Consequently, complex control
block includes both the analyzer-informant which has “database
and the analyzer-classifier which has the “knowledge base” and the “decision
base”. Not any living cell has analyzer - classifier. Animate/organic/ nature
is classified under two major groups: flora and fauna. Plants, as well as many
other living forms of animate nature, such as corals and bacteria, do not
possess remote sensors, although in some cases it may seem that plants,
nevertheless, do have such sensors. For example, sunflowers turn their heads
towards the sun as if phototaxis is inherent in them. But they actually turn
their heads not towards the light, but towards the side wherefrom their bodies
get more heated, and heat comes from the side wherefrom the light comes. Heat
is felt locally by a sunflower’s body. It does not have special infra-red
sensors. Photosynthesis process is not a process of phototaxis. Hence, plants
are systems with simple control block. In spite of the fact that there are
plants with a very complex structure that are even capable to feed on subjects
of fauna, their control block is still simple and reacts only to direct
contact. For example, a sundew feeds on insects; it can entice them, paste them
to its external stomach and even contract its valves. It’s a predator and in
this sense it is akin to a wolf, a shark or a jellyfish. It can do variety of
actions like an animal, but it can only do it after the insect alights on it. A
sundew cannot chase its victims because it does not see them (remote sensors
are not available). Whatever alights on it, even a small stone, it will do all
necessary actions and try to digest it because it does not have
analyzer-classifier. This is why a sundew is a plant, but not an animal.
Animate cells, including unicellular forms, even such as amoeba or infusoria
types, are systems with complex
control blocks since they possess at least one of spatial analyzers –
chemotaxis. It is the presence of remote sensors that differs a cell of an
animal from any objects of flora, in which such sensors controls are not
present. Therefore the control block is a determinant of what kind of nature
the given living object belongs to. The jellyfish is not an alga, but an animal
because it has chemotaxis. Remote analyzer gives an idea about the space in
which it has to move. That is why plants stay put, while animals move in space.
Simple control block including only the analyzer-informant is a determinant of
the world of minerals and plants. We will see below where the difference
between the mineral and vegetative worlds/natures lies. Complex control block
including the analyzer-classifier is a fauna determinant anyway. An amoeba is
the same kind of hunter as a wolf, a shark or a man. It feeds on infusorians.
To catch an infusorian it should know where the latter is and should be able to
move. It cannot see the victim at a distance, but it can feel it by its
chemical sense organs and seek to catch it as it has chemotaxis, possibly the
first of the remote sensor mechanisms. But in addition to chemotaxis the amoeba
should also have a notion (even primitive) of space in which it exists and in
which it should move in a coordinated and task-oriented manner
to catch an infusorian. In addition, it should be
able to single out an infusorian from other objects which it can encounter on
its way. Its analyzer-classifier is much simpler than, for example, that of a
wolf or a shark because it does not have organs of sight and hearing and neural
structures at all, but it can classify external situation. It has complex
control block comprising the “C” informant, and that is why an amoeba is not a
plant, but an animal. Since control blocks may be of any degree of complexity,
reflexes may be of any degree of complexity, too, from elementary axon reflexes
to the reflexes including the cerebral cortex performance (instincts and
conditioned reflexes). The number of reflexes of living organism is enormous
and there exist specific reflexes for each system of the organism. Moreover,
the organism is not only a complex system in itself, but due to its complexity
it has a possibility to build additional, temporary/transient/ systems
necessary at the given point of time for some specific concrete occasion. For
example, lamentation system is a temporary system which the organism builds for
a short time interval. The lamentation system’s control block is the example of
complex control block. The purpose of lamentation is to show one’s suffering
and be pitied. This system includes, in the capacity of composite executive
elements, other systems (subsystems) that are located sufficiently far from
each other both in space and in terms of functions (lacrimal glands,
respiratory muscles, alveoli and pulmonary bronchial tubes, vocal chords, mimic
muscles, etc.). At first the external situation is identified and in case of
need lamentation reflex (complex reflex, an instinct) is actuated under the
certain program, which includes control of lifting up one’s voice up to a
certain timbre (control over the respiratory muscles and vocal chords), sobbing
(a series of intermittent sighs), lacrimation /excretion of tears/, specific
facial expression, etc. All these remote elements are consolidated by the
complex control block in a uniform system, i.e. lamentation system, with very
concrete and specific purpose to show one’s sufferings to the other system. The
lamentation reflex can be realized at all levels of nervous system, starting
from the higher central cerebral structures, including vegetative neural
system, subcortex and up to cerebral cortex. But we are examining only child’s
weeping which is realized in neural structures not higher than subcortex level
(instinctive crying). After the purpose has been achieved (sufferings have been
explicitly demonstrated, and whether or not the child was pitied will be found
out later) the reflex is brought to a stop, this complex control block
disappears and the system disintegrates into the components which now continue
functioning as part of other systems of organism. Lamentation system disappears
(it is scattered). Whence the control block (at subcortex level) knows that it
is necessary to cry now, but it is not necessary to cry at any other moment?
For this purpose it identifies a situation (singles it out and classifies). The
analyzer-classifier is engaged in it. Its “knowledge base” is laid down in subcortex
from birth (the instincts). Simple control block cannot perform such actions.
All actions of the systems controlled by elementary and simple control blocks
would be automatic. Biological analogues of elementary control block are the
axon reflexes working under the “all-or-none” law; those of simple control
blocks are unconditional (innate, instinctive) reflexes when certain automatic,
but graduated reaction occurs in response to certain external influence. Simple
control block would be adapting the system’s actions better than the elementary
one because it takes account of not only external influence, but the result of
action of the system which has occurred in response to this external influence
as well. But it cannot identify a situation. Complex control block can perform
such actions. It reacts not to external influence, but to certain external
situation which can exert certain external influence. Biological analogues of
complex control block are complex reflexes or instincts. During pre-natal development
the “knowledge” of possible situations “is laid down” into the brain of a fetus
(the “knowledge base”). The volume of this knowledge is immense. A chicken can
run immediately after it hardly hatches from egg. A crocodile, a shark or a
snake become predators right after birth, i.e. they know and are able of doing
everything that is required for this purpose. It speaks of the fact that they
have sufficient inborn “knowledge base” and “base of decisions” for this
purpose. In such cases we say that animal has instincts. Thus, the system with
complex control block is the object which can react to certain external
situation in which this influence may be exerted. But it can react only to
fixed (finite) number of external situations
which description is contained in its “knowledge
base” and it has a finite number of decisions on these situations which
description is contained in its “base of decisions”. In order to identify
external situation it has the “C” informant and the analyzer-classifier. In
other respects it is similar to the system with simple control block. It can
also react to certain external influence and its reaction is stipulated by type
and number of its SFU. The result of action of the system is also graduated.
The number of gradations is defined by the number of executive SFU in the
system. It also has the analyzer-informant
with the “database”, DPC (the “X” informant) and NF
(the “Y” informant), which control the system through the stimulator (efferent
paths). There are no analogues with complex control block in inorganic
/abiocoen, inanimate/ nature. Biological analogues of systems with complex
control block are all animals, from separate cells to animals with highly
developed nervous system including cerebrum and remote sense organs, such as
sight, hearing, sense of smell, but in which it is impossible to develop
reflexes to new situations, for example, in insects. The analogues of the “C”
informant are all “remote” receptors: eyesight (or its photosensitive
analogues in inferior animals), hearing and sense of
smell. The analogues of analyzer-classifier are, for example, visual,
acoustical, gustatory and olfactory analyzers located in the subcortex. Visual,
acoustical, gustatory and olfactory analyzers located in the cerebral cortex
are anyway referred to analyzers-correlators.
Self-training
control block. No brain is able to hold enormous “knowledge bases” on
all possible conditions of the entire world around.
Therefore, one of the reasons why each species of animals occupies corresponding
biosphere niche is the necessity to limit the volume of “knowledge base”.
Antelope knows what the seal does not, and vice versa. In each separate
ecological niche the quantity of possible situations is much less, than in all
ecological niches all together. Therefore, relatively small volume of necessary
knowledge is required in separate ecological niches. However, if one tries to
somehow input /in the brain/ all the information currently available on
all the situations which have already been occurring
in the world, it would not help either, because the world alters continually
and many situations have never ever arose. The “knowledge base” basically may
not have information on what has not yet happened in the world. Naturally,
the “base of decisions” cannot contain all the possible options of decisions
either. “Genetic knowledge” contains only what the ancestors of animals have
experienced. They materially cannot have knowledge of what is going to happen.
When new situation arises, the system cannot identify, classify it and make
decision on it. Even if this situation will occur repeatedly, if the system is
unable of self-training it will every time fail to correctly identify a
situation because such situations are not contained in its “knowledge base”. The
ant runs along the fence, going up and down, and cannot guess that it is
possible to easily bypass the fence. Millions years ago, when its genetically
input “knowledge base” was formed the fences were non-existent. If one tries to
sink a thread on the web the spider will leave this web and will weave a new
one because it is not familiar with such situation and it does not know and
cannot learn that it is possible to make a hole in a web so that the thread
does not interfere. All this is due to the fact that insects as a class of
animals are not capable of learning anything. They may be perfect builders
amazing us with their sophisticated and fine webs, nests and other creations of
their work. But they can only build based on their innate knowledge. They do have
“knowledge base” (instincts), but they do not have cerebral structures
(elements of control block) capable of supplementing their own “knowledge base”
with new existential situations. They do not have reflexes on new
stimuli/exciters/. To be able to identify and classify new situations the
control block should be able to enter the descriptions of these situations in
its “knowledge base”. But at first it should be able to identify that it is a
completely new situation, for example, by comparing it to what already exists
in its “knowledge base”. Then it should identify the importance (the value
worth) of this particular situation for the achievement of its goal. If there
is no any correlation between the new situation and the fulfillment of the goal
of the system, there is no sense in remembering this situation, otherwise the
brain “will be crammed with trash”. By singling out and classifying external
situations (identifying them) and finding interrelation (correlation) between
these situations, by decisions made and the achievement of the goal of the
system the control block learns to develop appropriate decisions. Thus, the
self-training decision-making block continually supplements its “knowledge
base” and “base of decisions”. But under the conservation law nothing occurs by
itself. In order for the control block to be able to perform the above actions
it should have appropriate elements. The major element of the kind is the
analyzer-correlator. It is the basis whereon reflex on new stimulus/exciter or a
new situation may emerge. Its task is to detect a new situation, identify that
it is new, determine the degree of correlation between this situation and its
own goal. If there is no correlation between this new situation and
implementation of the goal by the system, there is no sense in remembering and
loading its limited “database” memory. If the degree of correlation is high it
is necessary to enter this situation in the “knowledge base” and develop a
decision on the choice of own actions for the achievement of its own goal and
thereafter to define whether there is correlation between the decision made and
the achievement of the goal. If there is no correlation between the decision
made and the fulfillment of the goal by the system it is necessary to arrive at
other solution and again determine the correlation between the decision made
and the achievement of the goal. And it should be repeated in that way until
sufficiently high correlation between the decision made and the achievement of
goal is obtained. Only afterwards the correct computed decision should be
entered into the “base of decisions”. This is the essence of self-training.
Only the analyzer-correlator enables self-training process. As a matter of
fact, the system’s self-training means the emergence of reflexes to new
stimuli/exciters or situations. Consequently, these are only possible when the
control block contains analyzer-correlator. Biological analogue of the
analyzer-correlator is the cerebral cortex. The presence of cortex determines
the possibility of emergence of reflexes to new situations. Cerebral cortex is
only present in animals which represent sufficiently high level of development.
Non-biological analogues of systems with such self-training control block are
unknown to us. Computer self-training systems are built by man and the process
of self-training at the end of the day always involves human cerebral cortex.
There exist various so-called “intellectual” systems, but full-fledged
intelligence is only inherent in human being. Let us specify that there are no
self-training systems, but there are their self-training control blocks,
because executive elements cannot be trained in anything. There may be systems
with simple executive elements, but with control blocks of varying complexity.
In order for the control block to be a self-training structure it should
contain three types of analyzers: the analyzer-informant with “database”; the
analyzer-classifier with the “knowledge base” and “base of decisions” (which is
able of classifying external situation on the basis of the information from the
“C” informant); the analyzer-correlator (able of identifying the interrelation
– correlation between various external situations and the results
of actions of the given system and transferring the
knowledge obtained and decisions to the analyzer-classifier to enter them in
the “knowledge base” and the “base of decisions”). Thus, the system with
self-training control block is an object which can learn to distinguish new
external influences and situations in which such influence may be exerted. For
this purpose it has the analyzer-correlator. In other respects it is similar to
the systems with complex
control block. It can respond to specific external influence and external
situation and its reaction would be stipulated by type and number of its SFU.
The result of action of the system is also graduated. The number of gradations
is determined by the number of executive SFU in the system. It also has
analyzer-qualifier with “knowledge base” and “base of decisions” and the
analyzer-informant with
“database”, DPC (the “X” informant) and NF (the “Y” informant), which operate
the system through the stimulator (efferent paths). In inorganic/inanimate
nature there are no analogues of systems with self-training control blocks.
Biological analogues of systems with complex control block are all animals with
sufficiently developed nervous system in which it is possible to develop
reflexes to new situations (should not be confused with conditioned reflexes).
The analogue of analyzer-correlator is only the cerebral cortex.
Signaling
systems. The appearance in the control block of the analyzer-correlator enabled
the possibility to enhance its personal experience by self-training and
continually update its “knowledge base” and “base of decisions”. But it cannot
transfer its experience to other systems. Personal experience is limited
howsoever an individual would try to expand it. In any case collective
experience is much broader than that of an individual. In order for one individual
to be able to transfer his/her experience to other individual separate device
is needed enabling “downloading” the information from one “knowledge base” to
another. For example, the antelope knows that the cheetah is very dangerous
because it feeds on antelopes and wishes to transfer this knowledge to its
calf. How can it be done? For example, the antelope can simulate a situation
playing a performance in which all characters are real objects, i.e. it should
expose itself to cheetah so that the calf could see it to gain its own
experience by the example of its mum. The calf will see the situation and new
reflex to new situation will be developed and the calf will be on its guard
against the cheetahs. Of course, it is an absurd way as it does not solve the
problem of survival. Anyway, only one out of the two
antelopes will survive. So, what can be done in principle? How one
self-training system
can transfer its individual experience to other self-training system? It is
necessary to simulate a situation by making a show in which all characters are
abstract objects and replace real objects with others, which are conferred
conventional connection/link between them and the real objects (abstracting of
objects). Such abstract objects are prearranged signals. The systems “agree”
(stipulate a condition) that if such-and-such signal occurs, it will speak of
something agreed upon. It is the development of conditioned reflex that represents
replacement of real influence for abstract influence. It is a so-called first
signaling system which is based on conditioned reflexes. The appearance of
cheetah causes producing a panic sound by an antelope. Consequently such sound
is associated with the appearance of cheetah and it becomes an abstract
substitute of cheetah itself, i.e. prearranged signal. Any motional signal may
be an abstract substitute of danger, i.e. raising or dropping of tail, special
jumps, producing special sounds, mimicry, etc. These motional signals affect
the systems in the herd and based on this signal they may know about a danger
nearby. In other words, there was a replacement of real external influence by
some abstract thing associated with this object. Abstracting of real action by
its symbol (vocal, motional, etc) took place. For such abstracting the control
block needs to have an additional device – the analyzer-abstractor which should
contain the “base of abstraction” (“base of prearranged signals”). The “base of
abstraction” contains a set of descriptions of certain signals which are
perceived as conditional situations and correspond to other certain situations.
A prearranged signal is the appearance of some object or movement (situational
signal) which usually does not appear in common routine situation. The
occurrence of prearranged signal does not in itself affect in any way the
achievement of the goals by the systems. For example, raising and fluffing out
a tail does not influence in any way neither food intake, nor running, etc. But
the occurrence of a signal is connected with the occurrence of such situation
which can affect the achievement of goals by the systems. Given the ability to
abstract from concrete situations, then not even seeing a cheetah, but having
seen the lifted tails, may be conducive to guessing that a cheetah is nearby.
Abstracting of real external influence by vocal or motional symbol is performed
by the first signaling
system. It supplements the analyzer-correlator and operates similarly to it, i.e.
is self-training. Unlike the “knowledge base” the “base of abstraction” of a
newly born system is empty. It is being filled out during the system’s lifetime
on account of possibility of self-training, and the newly obtained knowledge is
then downloaded in the “knowledge base”. Sometimes behavior of animals seems to
be indicative of their possibility to transfer the information from one to
another even before the occurrence of the respective situation. For example,
some lions go to an ambush, others start driving the antelopes, so they kind of
foresee the situation. But they only know about ambush possibilities based on
their own experience. They do not have other means of transfer of such
information to their younger generation except for demonstrating this situation
to them. A new way for the development of systems (or rather their control
blocks) is being opened at this point, the way of socialization – associations
of animals in groups for the enhancement of their own experience because
prearranged signals are only intended for an information transfer from one
system (subject) to another. There are probably several levels of such
analyzer-abstractor and the degree of abstraction which may be attained by this
or other subject depends on the number of these levels. One may abstract
external influences, external situations, real objects and even process of
self-training proper. But in any case one should be able to abstract and
understand abstract symbols. This is what analyzer-abstractor does. Abstracting
of real external influence, object or situation by means of situational
prearranged signal (a pose, a sound, a movement, some kind of action) may be
performed by the first signaling system. Abstracting of real external
influence, an object or a situation by means of sign /emblematic/ prearranged
signal (symbol) can only be performed by second signaling system. Control block
having the
second signaling system is an intellectual control block. Intelligence depends
on the presence and the degree of development (number of levels) of
analyzer-abstractor. In animals the second signaling system is very poorly
developed or undeveloped at all. If the horse dashes aside from a whip, it is
not even the first signaling system that works in this case, but rather a reflex
on the new situation which the horse has learnt when it first encountered a
whip. If the horse is coarsely shouted at even without showing a whip to it, it
will draw necessary conclusions. That’s the point at which the first signaling
system takes effect. But if the horse is shown an inscription which reads that
it now will be beaten, the animal will not react to in any way because it
cannot and will never be able to read since it does not have second signaling
system. There are animals which apparently are capable of speaking and
understanding words, written symbols and even making elementary arithmetic
operations. But the second signaling system is very poorly developed in them
and is literally “in embryo” condition. When the trainer demonstrates the dog’s
counting up to five, he bluffs in a way as in fact the dog picks up some
motional signals from him, i.e. the second rather than the first signaling
system takes effect. The second signaling system is developed to the utmost
extent only in human beings. In human beings it is developed to the extent that
it makes it possible to transfer all necessary information on our further
actions to us in the nearest or even quite a distant future only by means of
sign symbols. We can read a book containing just mere squiggles only, however
such a full-blown and colorful pictures are open before us that we forget about
everything on earth. Your dog for sure is surprised that its master looks for
hours at a strange subject (the book) and does not move, run or make any sounds.
And even if you try to explain to it that it is a book the dog will not
understand it anyway, because it has not yet “matured”, it does not have second
signaling system. Thus, the system with self-training control block containing
the first signaling system is an object which can abstract external influences
and situations by means of abstract situational prearranged signal. For this
purpose it has an analyzer-abstractor of the first order. But it can inform of
the presence of such action or situation only at the moment of their
occurrence. It may transfer its experience to other systems only with the help
of the situational prearranged signal which
possibilities are limited. Such block has the “knowledge base” and “base of
abstraction” which it accumulates in its brain within the lifespan. In the
communities of systems with first signaling system accumulation of personal
knowledge is possible, whereas accumulation of social knowledge is impossible
because this knowledge is accumulated only in the control block (cerebrum)
which possibilities are limited. The system which has self-training control
block containing the second signaling system is an object which can abstract
external influences and situations by means of abstract sign /symbolic/
prearranged signal. For this purpose it has an analyzer-abstractor of Z-order.
It can transfer its experience to other systems by transfer of information to
them in the form of conventional signs. Such blocks accumulate “knowledge base”
outside its cerebrum in the form of script thanks to the developed “base of
abstraction”. It gives an opportunity to absolve from dependence of
accumulation of knowledge on the lifespan of an individual subject. In
communities of systems with the second signaling system accumulation of social
knowledge is possible and it strengthens the accumulation of individual
knowledge. In other respects the control block with signaling systems is
similar to the self-training control block examined above. It can react to
definite external influence and learn to react to new external influence and an
external situation, and its reaction is determined by type and number of its
SFU. The result of action of the system is also graduated. The number of
gradations is determined by the number of executive SFU in the system. It also
has the analyzer-correlator, the analyzer-classifier with “knowledge base” and
“base of decisions”, the analyzer-informant with the “database”, DPC (with the
“Õ” informant) and NF (the “Y” informant) which through a stimulator (efferent
paths) operate the system. In an inanimate/inorganic nature there are no
analogues of systems with control block having signaling systems. Biological
analogues of systems with control block containing the first signaling system
are all animals with sufficiently developed nervous system in which conditioned
reflexes may be developed. As a rule such animals do already have social
relations (flocks, herds and other social groups), as signals are transferred
from one animal to another. Biological analogue of systems with control block
containing the second signaling system is only the human being.
Self-organizing
systems. Bogdanov has shown that there exist two
modes of formation of systems. According to the first one the system arises at
least from two objects of any nature by means of the third entity – connections
(synthesis, generation). According to the second one the system is formed at
the expense of disintegration (destruction, retrogression/degeneration) of the
more complex system that previously existed [6]. Hence, the system may be
constructed (arranged) from new elements or restructured (reorganized) at the
expense of inclusion of additional elements in its structure or by exclusion
from its structure of unnecessary elements. Apparently, there is also a third
mode of reorganization of systems – replacement of old or worn out parts for
the new ones (structural regeneration), and the fourth mode – changing of
connections/bonds between internal elements of the system (functional
regeneration). Generation (the first mode of reorganization) is a process of
positive entropy (from simple to complex, complexification of systems). New
system is formed for the account of expanding the structure of its elements.
This process occurs for the account of emergence of additional connections
between the elements and consequently requires energy and inflow of substances
(new elements). The degeneration (the second mode of reorganization) is a
process of negative entropy (from complex to simple, simplification of systems).
New system is formed for the account of reduction of compositional structure of
its elements. This process releases energy and elements from the structure.
Both modes are used for the creation of new systems with the new goals. In the
first case complexification of systems takes place, while in the second one
their simplification or destruction occurs. Structural regeneration (the third
mode of reorganization) is used for the conservation and restoration of the
systems’ structure. It is used in the form of metabolism, but at that, the
system and its goals remain unchanged. Energy and inflow of substances for the
SFU restoration is required for this process. Functional regeneration (the
fourth mode of reorganization) is used for the operation of systems as such.
The principle of the systems’ functioning resembles generation and degeneration
processes. In process of accretion of functions the system
includes the next in turn SFU ostensibly building a
new, more powerful system with larger number of elements (generation). During
the reduction of capacity of functions the system deactivates the
next in turn SFU as if it means to build a new
system with fewer number of elements (degeneration). But these are all
reversible changes of the system arising in response to the external influence
which are effected for the account of the change of the condition of its
elements and the use of DPC, NF and effectors. At that, the system’s structure
kind of alters depending on its goal. New active and passive (reserve) SFU appear
in it. This process requires energy and flow of substances for energy recovery,
but not necessarily requires a flow of substances for the restoration of SFU.
How does the organization (structuring) of system occur? Who makes decision on
the organization or reorganization of systems? Who builds control block of the
new or reorganized system? Who gives the command, the task for the system? Why
is the NF loop built for meeting the given specific condition? Before we try to
answer these questions, we will note the following. First, there is a need in
the presence of someone or something “interested” in the new quality of the
result of action who (or which) will determine this condition (set the goal)
and construct the control block. Someone or something “interested” may be the
case coupled with natural
selection, whereby by way of extensive arbitrary search corresponding
combinations of elements and their interactions may emerge that are the most
sustained/lasting in the given conditions of environment. Thus, the
environment/medium sets condition and the incident builds the systems under
these conditions. At this point we do not consider the conditions in which
generation or degeneration
occurs and which are associated with redundancy or lack of energy (with
positive or negative entropy). We only consider the need and expediency of
creation of systems. The more complicated the system is, the more search
options should be available and the more time it takes (the law of large
numbers). We will note, however, that the goal is set to any systems from the
outside, whether it is an incident, a person,
natural selection or something else. But we cannot
ignore the following very interesting consequence.
Firstly, the survival rate is the main and general
goal of any living organism. And as far as the goal is set from the outside,
the survival rate is also something set to us from the outside and is not
something that stems from our internal inspirations. In other words, the aim to
survive is our internal incentive, but someone or something from the outside
has once imbedded it in us. And prior to such imbedding it was not “ours”.
Secondly, in order to ensure the possibility of building systems with any kind
of control block, even the elementary one, the presence of such elements is
necessary which quality of
results of actions could
in principle provide such a possibility. It follows from the conservation law
and the law of cause-and-effect limitations that nothing occurs by itself.
These elements should have entry points of external influence (necessarily),
command entry points (not necessarily for uncontrollable SFU) and exit points
of the result of action (necessarily). Exits and entries should have
possibility to interact between themselves. This possibility is realized by
means of combination of homo-reactivity and hetero-reactivity of elements.
Physical homo-reactivity is the ability of an element to produce the same kind
of result of action as is the kind of external influence (pressure →
pressure, electricity → electricity, etc.). At the same time,
characteristics of physical parameters do not vary (10g →10g, 5mV →
5mV, etc.). Homo-reactive elements are transmitters of actions. Physical
hetero-reactivity is the ability of an element, in response to external influence
of one physical nature, to yield the result of action of other physical nature
(pressure → electric pulse frequency, electric current → axis shaft
rotation, etc.). Hetero-reactive elements are converters of actions. The
elements with physical hetero-reactivity are, for example, all receptors of
living organism (which transform the signals of measurable parameters into
nerve pulse trains), sensors of measuring devices, levers, shafts, planes, etc.
In other words such elements may be any material things of the world around us
that satisfy hetero-reactivity condition. Chemical reactions also fall under
the subcategory of physical reactions as chemical reactions represent transfer
of electrons from one group of atoms to others. Chemistry is a special section
of physics. Logic hetero-reactivity is the ability of an element, in response
to external influence of one type physical nature, to yield the result of
action of
the same physical nature (pressure → pressure, electric current →
electric current, etc.), but with other characteristics (10g → 100g, 5mA →
0.5mA, 1Hz → 10Hz, 5 impulses → 15 impulses, etc.). Amplifiers,
code converters, logic components of electronics are the examples of elements
with logic hetero-reactivity. Neurons do not possess physical hetero-reactivity
as they can perceive only potentials of action and generate the potentials. But
they have logic hetero-reactivity and they can transform frequency and pulse
count. They do not transform a physical parameter as such, but its
characteristics. Any system consists of executive and operating elements. At
the same time any control block of any system itself consists of some kind of
parts (elements), so it also falls under the definition of systems. In other
words, control block and its parts are specific systems (subsystems) themselves
with their goals, and they have their own executive elements and local control
blocks operating these executive elements. Compulsory condition for part of
them is their ability to hetero-reactivity of one or other sort. The effect of
their control action consists only in their relative positioning. Command is
entered into the local control block (condition of the task, the
goal/objective) and the latter continually watches that the result of action
always satisfies the command. At that, the command
can be set from the outside by other system external in relation to the given
one, or the self-training block may “decide” independently
to change the parameters (but not the goal) set by
the command. So, the elements of control may be the same as the executive
elements. The difference is only in relative positioning. Director of an
enterprise is just the same kind of individual as any ordinary engineer. All
elements of the system, both executive and controlling, are structured
according to a certain scheme specific for each concrete case (for each
specific goal), but all of them must have the “exit” point/outlet/, whence the
result of action of the given element is produced, and two “entry points” – for
external influence and for entry of the command. If the exit points of any
elements are connected to the entry points for external influences of other
elements, such elements are executive. In this case executive elements are
converters of one kind of results of action into the other, because the results
of actions of donor systems represent external influence for the recipient
systems (executive elements). They (external influences) ostensibly enter the
system and exit it being already transformed into the form of new results of
action. If exit points of elements are
connected to command entry points of other elements, such elements are
controlling and represent a part of
control block. In such cases the result of action of some systems represents
the command for the executive elements, the
instruction on how to transform the results of action of donor systems into the
results of
action of recipient systems. But the law of homogeneity of actions and
homogeneous interactivity (homo-reactivity) of the exit-entry connection is
invariably observed. If, for example, the result of action of the donor element
is pressure, the entry point of external influence (for the command) of the
recipient element should be able to react to pressure, or otherwise the
interaction between the elements would be impossible.
Thirdly, in
order to “hack” into the control of other systems the given system should have
physical or any other possibility to connect its own exit point of result of
action or own stimulator
to the entry point of the command of any other system. In this case this other
system becomes the subsystem subordinate to the given control block, i.e. the
systems should have physical possibility to combine exits of their stimulators
and/or results of
action with the command entry points of other systems. For this purpose they
should be mobile. There are types of devices for which the requirement of
physical mobility is not necessary, but, nevertheless, information from one
system may flow into control blocks of other devices. These are the so-called
relay networks, for example, computer operating networks, cerebral cortex,
etc., in which virtual mobility is possible, i.e. the possibility of switching
of information flows. In such networks the information can be “pumped
over”/downloaded/ in those directions in which it is required. For example,
human feet are intended for walking, while hands – for handiwork. How is
predestination effected? In principle hands and feet are structured
identically, with the same autopodium, the same fingers (the same executive
elements). Nevertheless, it is practically impossible, for example, to brush
the hair with feet. Why? Because there are certain stereotypes of movements in
the cerebral cortex, without which hands are not hands and feet are not feet.
But we know cases when a person who lost both hands and nevertheless, he
perfectly coped with many household affairs with the help of feet and took part
in a circus show. How was it possible? Some kind of remodeling/change/ occurred
in his brain and he changed his stereotypes. Cerebral structures which were
previously controlling hands have “downloaded” their “knowledge bases” into
those cerebral structures which operate the feet. Cerebral cortex was only able
to do it thanks to the presence of its property of relay circuits, i.e. the
possibility to turn information flows to the directions required for the given
purpose. Organization and reorganization of systems may be incidental and
target-oriented. In incidental organization or reorganization there is no
special control block which has the goal and decision on building of a new
system, even more so in such a detail that, for example, such-and-such exit
point of a stimulator needs to be connected to such-and such command entry point.
Fortuity is determined by probability. That’s where the law of large numbers
works, which reads: “If theoretically something may happen, it will surely
happen, provided a very large number of occurrences”. The more the number of
cases is, the higher is the probability of appearance of any systems,
successful and unsuccessful, because fortuity creates the systems, the
probability sets their configuration and the external medium makes natural
selection. Therefore evolution lasts very long, sorting out multitude of
occurrences (development options). It is for this reason that various
combinations of connections of parts of systems occur. Therefore, both
nonviable monsters and the systems most adaptable to the given conditions may
be formed. Those weak are annihilated, while those strong transfer their
“knowledge bases” and “bases of decisions” to their posterior generations in
the form of genetically embedded properties and instincts. It is not so
important in the organization of systems which control block (simple or
complex) the coalescing (organizing) systems have. What is only important is
that the exit points of stimulators or results of action of one kind of systems
connect to the command entry points of the others. Control blocks of coalescing
systems may be of any kind, from elementary to self-training. At that, even if
the self-training block (i.e. sufficiently developed) “would not want” to
connect its command entry point to the exit point of stimulator or the result
of action of other system, even the simplest one, it still won’t be able of
doing anything if it fails to safeguard
its command entry point. The virus “does not ask the permission” of a cell when
it “downloads” its genetic information in the cell’s DNA. The decision on
reorganization of the system (purpose) may come from the outside, from the
operating system sited higher on a hierarchy scale. It is passive
purposefulness, since the initiative comes from the outside. The external
system “tells” the given system: “As soon as you see such-and-such system,
affix it immediately to yourself”. The system can undertake active actions for
such an organization, but it is not yet self-organizing as such, but an imposed
(forced, prescriptive) organization. But if it “occurs” to the system that “it
would be quite good if that green thing that stuck to me is included as a
component in my own structure, since the experience shows it can deliver
glucose for me from ÑÎ2
and light”, it would then mean self-organizing. Thus, perhaps, once upon a time
chlorophyll was
included in the structure of seaweed. Most likely, it did not happen
purposefully,
but rather accidentally (accidental organization), as we cannot be sure that
those ancient seaweeds had a self-training control block, and the independent
“thought” may only occur in the system with such control block. This example is
only drawn to illustrate what we call a self-organizing system. But the idea to
take a stick in one’s hands to extend the hand and get the fruit hanging high
on the tree is only a prerogative of the higher animals and the human being,
which is a true example of self-organization. Only the systems with
self-training control block can evaluate the external situation, properly
assess the significance of all the novelty surrounding the given system and
draw conclusion on the expediency of reorganization. It is an active
purposefulness anyway, since the initiative originated inside the given system
and it “decided” on its own and no one “imposed” it on the system. External
medium dictates conditions of existence of the systems and it can “force” the
system to make the decision on reorganization. But the decision on the time and
character of reorganization is taken by the system itself on the basis of its
own experience and possibilities. Only systems with self-training control block
can initiate
active purposefulness, can be deliberately the
self-organizing systems. Thus, a man has invented work tools, having thus
strengthened the possibilities of its body. At that, it should be noted that the
decision on self-organizing does
not indicate at the freedom of choice of the goal of the system, but a freedom
of choice of its actions for the achievement of the goal set from the outside.
In order to implement its goal in a better way, for example, to survive in
such-and-such conditions, the system makes the decision on reorganization so
that to better adapt to external conditions and enhance its survival chances.
Metabolism and
types of self-organization. All the above was only concerning the creation of
new systems and their development. But any systems are continually exposed to
various external influences which sooner or later destroy them. Our world is in
continuous and uninterrupted movement. The speeds of this movement may vary:
somewhere events occur once in millions years, while somewhere else millions
times a second. But most likely it is impossible to find
a single place in the Universe where
no movement of any kind (thermal, electric,
gravitational, etc.) occurs. Hence, the process of negative entropy is always
present. Any systems are always being reorganized at the expense of
disintegration of more complex systems that have been existing earlier, which grow
old (degenerate). Destruction is a process of loss by systems of their SFU.
Systems of mineral nature (crystals, any other amorphous, but inanimate bodies,
planetary, stellar and galactic systems) continuously undergo various external
influences and are scattered with varying speed due to the loss of their SFU.
Mineral nature grows old and changes, because the entropy law - from more
complex to more simple - works. In the mineral nature complexification
(generation) can only occur in case of excess of internal energy or its
continuous inflow from the outside. Thus, in a thermonuclear pile of ordinary
stars nuclei of complex atoms including atoms of iron were formed. But the
energy of such piles is not yet sufficient for the formation of heavier nuclei.
All other heavier nuclei were formed as a result of explosions of supernovae
and the release of super-power energy. Therefore, figuratively speaking, our
bodies are built of stellar ashes. But as soon as energy of thermonuclear
synthesis comes to an end, the star starts to die out, passing through certain
phases. We do not know yet all phases of the development and dying of stars,
but if failing “to undertake some sort of measures” after a very long period of
time not only stars, but atoms as well, including their components (protons,
neutrons and electrons) will be shivered. Thus, the free neutron “unprotected”
by intranuclear system breaks up into a proton, electron and neutrino within 12
minutes. Hence, the atomic and intranuclear system is the system of stabilization
of a neutron protecting atom and its elements from disintegration. But even
such stable and seemingly eternal stellar formations such as “black holes”
“evaporate” in the course of time, expending their mass for gravitational
waves. In the absence of energy inflow the system would just flake/scatter and
lose its SFU. It follows explicitly from thermodynamics laws. The so-called
“thermal entropic death” is coming forth. Destruction of systems under the
influence of external environment is the forced entropic reorganization
(degeneration), rather than self-organization. The objects of mineral nature
possess only passive destruction protection facilities and one of the major
means of protection is integration of elements in a system (generation). Consequently,
the emergence of systems and their evolution in mineral nature represents means
of protection of these elements from destruction. One can not conquer alone.
The system is always stronger than singletons. Formation of connections/bonds
between the elements and the emergence of generation type systems in mineral
nature is the passive way of protection of elements against the destructive
effect of negative entropy. The weakest bodies are ionic and gas clouds, while
the strongest ones are crystals. However, all of them cannot
resist external
influences indefinitely long, because they react only after their occurrence,
and they cannot resist entropy. Consequently, the presence of passive means for
the protection against destruction is insufficient. Whatever solid and large
the crystals might be, they would be scattered /flaked in the lapse of time
either. In order to keep the system from destruction it is necessary to
replenish destroyed parts continually. Systems of vegetative, animal and human
nature also undergo various external influences and also are scattered (worn
out) with varying speed. And it happens for the same reason and the same law of
negative entropy, i.e. from more complex to more simple (degeneration) works.
But these systems differ from the systems of mineral nature that actively try
to resist destruction by continual renewal of their SFU structures. This
renewal occurs at the expense of continuous building of new SFU in substitution
of the destroyed ones. This process of renewal of destroyed SFU also represents
structural regeneration as such – a purposeful metabolism. Therefore,
metabolism of living organisms is an active way of protection of systems from
destructive effect of negative entropy (from degeneration). In mineral nature metabolism
may take place as well, but it essentially differs from metabolism of any
living systems. Crystals grow from the oversaturated saline solution, the
atmosphere exchanges water and gases with the seas, automobile and other
internal combustion engines consume fuel and oxygen and discharge carbon
dioxide. But if a crystal is taken out from saline solution, it will just
collapse and will not undertake any measures on conservation of its structure.
When a camshaft in the automobile engine is worn out the car does nothing to
replace it. Instead, it is done by man. Any actions of the system directed
towards the replacement of destroyed and lost SFU represent self-organization
anyway, which in the living nature is called structural self-reorganization or
metabolism. In mineral nature structural self-reorganization is nonexistent.
Any living system, regardless of its complexity, would undertake certain
actions for the conservation of its structure. At that, there are always two
flows of substances in living systems – flow of energy and
“structural”/constructive/ flow. The energy flow is intended to provide energy
for any actions of systems, including structural self-reorganization, as it is
necessary every time to build new connections/bonds which require energy
(regeneration). “Structural” flow of substances is only used for structural
regeneration, i.e. replacement of worn out SFU for the new ones (in this case
we do not examine the system’s growth, i.e. generation). When we talk about
self-reorganization we mean “structural”
flow of substances, although such flow is impossible without energy. Myocardium
in humans completely renews (regenerates) its molecular structure approximately
within a month. It means that its myocardiocytes, or rather their elements
(myofibrillas, sarcomeres, organelles, membranes, etc.) are continually being
worn out and collapse, but are continually built again at the same speed.
Outwardly we can see one and the same myocardial cell, but eventually its
molecular composition is being completely renewed. Throughout the human
lifespan the type of organization varies. In the early years of life
organization occurs at the expense of inclusion of new additional elements in
the structure (generation, the organism grows and develops), whereas starting
from the mid-life period degeneration predominantly takes place, i.e.
destruction process (disintegration of the previously existing more complex
system). But these are now the particulars associated with imperfection of real
living systems. For any system the overall objective is to exist in this World,
and for this purpose it should counteract destructive influences, for which
purpose it should have specific SFU which facilitate its operation and which
continuously collapse and need to be continuously renewed, i.e. build anew,
since regeneration is the essence of self-reorganization by means of
metabolism. Hence, the living nature differs from inanimate first of all in
that metabolism is intended for the conservation of its structure (structural
regeneration). In principle, any reaction of any systems is directed towards
conservation of the systems. Control block of systems takes care of it using
all its possibilities for this purpose: DPC, NF and analyzers for the SFU
operation. But in mineral nature there are only passive ways of protection. And
when the system of mineral nature loses its SFU, it does not undertake any
active measure to replace them. It would try to resist the external influence,
but no more than that. In vegetative and animal nature and humans the systems
cannot passively resist the destructive effect of environment either, they also
collapse, but anyway they have active means of restoration of the destroyed
parts, they have the purposeful metabolism aimed at replacement of the lost SFU
(structural regeneration). It uses two mechanisms of the so-called genetic
regeneration: reproduction of systems (the parent will die, but children will
remain) and reproduction of elements of systems (regeneration of elements of
cells and tissue cells themselves). These ways of conservation of systems are
sufficiently effective. It is known how complex it is to get rid of weeds in
the field. There are sequoias aged several thousand years that are found in
nature. At the level of separate individuals of a species this genetic system
proves as the system with simple control block, as simple automatic machine
because the DNA molecule does not have remote sensors, is has no
analyzer-correlator and it is impossible to develop conditioned reflexes in it
during the lifespan of one individual. But at the level of species of living
systems genetic mechanism
proves anyway as a system with complex
control block because it “has a notion” of space and it has collective memory
in the form of conditioned reflexes and it is able of self-training (adaptation
of species). It is for this reason that genetic accumulation of collective
experience occurs, which then is shown in the form of instincts at the level of
separate individuals of a species. This collective genetic mechanism watches
that tomato looks like tomato, a cockroach looks like a cockroach and
chimpanzee looks like a chimpanzee, and it watches that the behavior of the
systems is relevant. We do not know yet all the details of this mechanism,
although genomes of many living organisms, including human genomes, are
developed. We know that genes contain recorded genetic information on how to
structure this or another protein, but we do not know yet how, for example, how
the form of the nose constructed from this protein is preset. The gene is known
responsible for the generation of pigment that tinctures the iris /orbital
septum/ but we do not know how the form and the size of this septum is coded.
This mechanism is probably realized only partially in the DNA itself, as a
genome of an insect has much more in common, let’s say, with a human genome,
than the insect itself with the human being. We do not know how the feelers of
any insect of such-and-such length are programmed and where it is recorded that
it should have eight pedicles or one horn on its head. And why from these
proteins programmed in one of the DNA genes structures in the form of the
feelers should be built in this particular place, while the structures in the
form of intestinal tubules should be built in another place. Protein molecules
are very complex and gigantic formations in terms of molecular sizes with a
very sophisticated three-dimensional configuration. Probably, separate
molecules of certain albumen types, incidentally or non-incidentally, may approach
each other so that to form, like in a puzzle,
the albuminous conglomerate only of a specific shape. In that way it is
possible to explain both the form and sizes of albuminous structures. We can
also assume that
casually assembled lame/poor forms have been rejected by evolution, while those
successful were purposefully fixed in genes. Consequently, the difference of
forms of organs constructed of identical proteins is explained by the
difference of the protein molecules structure? It may be true... But why then
keratin here is formed in the shape of elytra, and there – in the form of horns
or some kind of septa in the insect’s body? DNA only programs building material
– albumen/proteins, rather than the structure (form), i.e. the organs built of
these proteins, since DNA contains a record of only how to structure the
proteins (the “bricks” for building a structure). But where is “the drawing of
the entire building” and its configuration recorded? There are no answers for
the present. So, living systems have the purposeful genetic structural
regeneration which is intended for continual renewal of elements of the system.
Genetic mechanism uses the “database” recorded in DNA and realized by means of
RNA. If it were not for the failures in this system, there would have been no
mutations and variability of species. However, the “faulty” mechanism of
mutations is too much subjected to contingencies and cannot be target-oriented
just because of contingency (incidental self-organization). Reproductive
mechanism of mutations allows making selection by some features, and this is
exactly a purposeful mutation (purposeful self-organization). This mechanism
can change its program due to cross mating or at the moment of changing life
phases (larva→chrysalis→moth), although the possibilities of such
change are still very limited. A wolf will never beget a tiger and a trunk will
never grow in a wolf either, even if there would be a sudden need in it, at
least, for sure, not during the lifespan of one generation. But if me myself,
for example, need right now to “reconstruct” a hand to extend it and to tear
off a fruit from a tree, should I then wait for several generations to pass for
my hand to grow and extend? Can’t one get transmuted without resorting to
metabolism? It is possible if “conscious” self-organization is added. All
living beings, including humans, have genetic system of contingency
self-organization and in this sense the human being is the same animal as any
other animal. But “conscious” and purposeful type of self-organization is only
inherent in human beings. Systems with preset (target-oriented) properties will
always be forming only in the event that organization or reorganization of
systems is purposeful. Only the control block “knows” about the goal of the
system and only it can make a decision, including on the system reorganization.
However, not each control block is suitable for target-oriented reorganization.
In order to decide that “that system” needs to be attached to itself it is
necessary to “see” this system, know its property and define, even prior to
beginning interaction, whether these properties suit for the achievement of its
own purpose. And for this purpose it is necessary to be able to “see” and
assess the situation around the given system. All self-training systems are
able of making such an analysis. Therefore, many higher animals can reorganize
their body by enhancing its possibilities with additional executive elements.
They use tools of work (stones, sticks, etc.) for hunting food. But these
animals, perhaps, act at the level of instincts, i.e. at the level of genetic
self-organization, because even insects can use work tools. True “conscious”
self-organization at the given stage of evolution is only present in human
being because only he/she has analyzers-abstractors of respective degree of
complexity. Only the human being could develop instruments of labor up to the
level of modern technologies because it has second signaling system which
helped to accumulate the experience of the previous generations by fixing it in
the abstract form, in the form of the script. And only the human being using
this experience has realized that there exists metabolism in a living organism
and that it is possible to influence an organism so that to reorganize, if the
need arises (to cure sick organism). Structural regeneration is intended
for conservation of the systems’ structure. However,
metabolism is not a full warranty from the destruction of systems either.
Plants cannot foresee the forthcoming destruction because they do not possess
the notion of space and they do not see the situation around them, because they
have simple control block. Fire will creep up and burn a plant, the animal will
approach and eat it, while the plant will quietly waiting for its lot because
it does not see the surrounding situation, does not know the forecast and it
does not have corresponding decisions regarding specific situations. That is
why the systems emerged with more complex control blocks (animals and humans)
which can anticipate a situation and protect themselves from destruction.
Animals know about space and see the situation around, because they have more
complex control blocks. They can compete very effectively with mineral and
vegetative media. But competition between the animal species has placed them in
new circumstances. Now it is not enough to have only complex control block and
to see the surrounding situation. In order to survive it is not enough only to
be able of scampering or be strong physically, it is necessary to better orient
itself in space and better assess the situation and be able to make conclusions
of own failures in case of survival. For this purpose it is necessary to
develop control blocks. The more complex the control block, the higher is the
degree of safety. And now it is not physical strength which is a criterion of
advantage, but cognitive ability, i.e. the more complex the control block is
(the brain with all its hierarchy of neural structures), the better. Knowledge
is virtue. At that, the purposes of metabolism in animals and humans are the
same as in flora, i.e. reproduction of systems and reproduction of elements of
systems. Hence, in process of evolution advancement to ensure higher degree of
safety of systems, the possibilities of regeneration in the form of metabolism
were supplemented by intellectual possibilities of control blocks. Regardless
of what kind of nature the system belongs to (mineral, vegetative, animal or
human) one of its main purposes is always to preserve itself and its structure.
But in mineral nature there are only passive ways of conservation, whereas in
the organic nature active ways of conservation do exist: self-organization at
the expense of purposeful metabolism. Therefore, struggle for food has always
been the foundation of existence. But metabolism only is not sufficient.
Therefore, in animals new active ways of protection are added: assessment of
external situation and protection from the destructive external influences
(complex reflexes, behavioral reactions). However, complex reflexes are not
enough either, as it is necessary also to learn new situations and be able of
making new decisions (reflexes to new stimuli/exciters). But these appeared to
be insufficient as well because of limitation of personal experience.
Therefore, personal experience was supplemented by collective experience for
the account of the first signaling system (conditioned reflexes: the first
signaling system, complex behavioral reactions). And as far as the lifespan of
each system is limited, in order to transfer experience to the subsequent
generations second signaling system emerged which allows to save personal
experience of each system in the form of the script regardless of the system’s
lifespan. Consequently in order to better preserve itself, it is necessary for
the system to change and complicate continually the structure (evolution and
development of species) and, apparently to be on the safe side, it’s
nevertheless better to be more complex rather than simpler (evolution race).
Thus, a system may have: incidental organization; generation (incidental
physical coincidence of exit points of stimulator or result of action of one
systems with the command entry points of control block or entry points of
external influence of other systems; may be present in systems with any control
blocks,
including elementary); degeneration (destruction,
structural simplification, loss of SFU under the influence of environment –
other systems, may be the systems with any control blocks, including elementary);
purposeful organization; forced generation (purposeful
physical combination of exit points of stimulator or
result of action of one systems with the command entry points of control block
or entry points of external influence of other systems; may be in systems with
any control blocks, including elementary); forced degeneration (destruction,
structural simplification, loss of SFU of the system due to the purposeful
effect of other systems; may be in systems with any control blocks, including elementary);
self-organization; functional regeneration (operation of the system proper,
actuation or de-actuation of functions of own SFU, depending on situational
needs, without change of the structure; may be in systems with any control
blocks, including elementary); genetic structural regeneration in the form of
metabolism and reproduction of individuals directed
towards preservation of its structure (may be in
systems with control blocks, starting from simple ones); genetic structural
regeneration in the form of
instinctive/subconscious/ structural
reorganization aimed at strengthening the possibilities of an organism by using
other systems, that are not an immediate part of the given system (subjects)
(uses “genetic” memory and may be present in systems with control blocks,
starting from simple ones); conscious structural regeneration directed to
strengthening of possibilities of an organism by use of other systems, not
being an immediate part of the given system (subjects) (various technologies;
it is aimed at strengthening the possibilities of an organism, may be present
in systems with control blocks, starting from complex ones with the second
signaling system). As we can see, there is a succession present in the given
classification of organization of
systems, as it includes everything that exists in our World, starting from
objects of mineral nature and including human activities in the form of
industrial technologies.
Evolution of our
World. We always say that the objects (systems) exist in our World /Unietse/and
they operate in it. Therefore it is necessary to give a definition of the
concept “our World”. We call “our World” the greatest and universal system in
which based on the law of hierarchy all objects exist as its subsystems which
can be part of it without coming into conflict with the laws of conservation
and cause-and-effect limitations. Such objects are target-oriented associations
of systemic functional units (SFU, elements) – the groups of elements
interacting with specific goal/purpose (systems, or rather subsystems of our
World). These include both the objects which existed before and are
non-existent now and those that exist now and will appear in the future as a
result of evolution. Absolutely all objects of our World have one or another purpose.
We do not know these purposes and we can only guess them, but they are present
in all the systems without exception. The purpose determines the laws of
existence and architecture (“anatomy”) of objects, limits interaction between
them or between their elements and stipulates the hierarchy of both sub-goals
and subsystems for the achievement of these sub-goals. But this architecture is
continually found insufficient (limited) because it is determined by the law of
cause-and-effect limitations. It forces the systems to continuously seek the
way to overcome these limitations, develops them and determines direction of
evolution of the systems. That is why the systems develop towards their
complexification and enhancement of their possibilities (evolve). If there
would be no limitations, there would be no sense in evolution because
ultimately the goal of evolution always consists in overcoming the limitations.
All objects of our World have at least two primary goals: to be/exist in this
World (to preserve themselves) to fulfill the goal and to have maximum
possibilities to perform the actions for the achievement of the goal. However,
any object of our World is limited in its possibilities to varying extent due
to the law of
cause-and-effect limitations
and moreover, since the objects are continually exposed to various external
influences destroying them, the systems have to continually protect themselves
from such destruction. Therefore, the systems at first “have invented” passive
and then active ways of
protection against such destructive influence. The process of “invention” of
these ways of protection and the enhancement of their possibilities is what
evolution of objects of our World means exactly, at that it implies not only
the evolution of living beings, but evolution of everything that exists in the
world. Consolidation of objects in groups strengthens them and ensures the
possibility for them to co-operate against destruction in a target-oriented
manner. It is for the reason of “survival” of elements that the systems came
into being, and complexification of elements just magnifies their
possibilities. The simplest systems are those having only simple control block.
Such objects include all objects of mineral nature, as well as plants. The
possibilities of elementary particles are too small, and the lifespan of many
of them is too short. The lifetime and possibility of an electron, proton or
neutron are tenfold. Grouping of elements not only increases their lifetime,
but also increases their possibilities. What can be done by electron (proton,
neutron) cannot be done by elementary
particles constituting them. What can be done by
atoms can not be done separately by protons, neutrons and electrons.
Grouping of
atoms in molecules has enabled the development of more complex systems, up to
human being, construction of which would have been impossible using elementary
particles. However, although in process of further consolidation of atoms and
molecules in conglomerates (mineral objects: gas clouds, liquid and solid
bodies) the possibilities of these objects increase, but their lifetime starts
to decrease sharply because the law of negative entropy works. Destruction is
the loss by the object of its SFU. There are only two ways to prevent from
destruction: increase in durability of connections/bonds between the SFU,
restoration of the lost SFU, prevention of the SFU losses. The first one is
passive, while the other two are active ways of protection. The increase in
durability of connections/bonds between the SFU (the first way) is the passive
way of protection against
destruction. Mineral bodies have only these passive means of protection from
the destructive effect of the external medium. The weakest of them are gaseous
objects, while the strongest are crystalline. But even the strongest crystal
may be destroyed. Metabolism is aimed at the restoration of the lost SFU (the
second way) and is the active way of protection of systems from destruction. It
is carried out at the expense of capture of necessary elements from the
external medium. There is no metabolism in mineral objects, but it is present
in all living objects, including plants. Hence, our World can be divided
conditionally into two sub-worlds: inanimate/inorganic and animate nature. The
criterion for such division is metabolism – the purposeful process of
restoration of the lost SFU. But for such process the system should contain
corresponding elements (metabolism organs) which are not present in the objects
of mineral inorganic nature, but do exist in plants. Prevention of SFU losses
(the third way) is also an active way of systems’ protection from their
destruction. Systems may be prevented from destruction for the account of their
behavioral reactions depending on the external situation. If the situation is
threatening the system needs to escape from the given situation. But for this
purpose it is necessary to be aware about this situation, to be able to see it,
as well as to have organs of movement which are nonexistent in the systems of
mineral and vegetative nature. For this purpose it is necessary to have at
least complex control block. Hence, in the animate nature it is possible to
single out two more sub-worlds/natures: flora and fauna. The criterion for such
division is the complexity of
the control block and its ability (the
availability of possibility) to show behavioral reactions. The more complex the
control block, the higher is the development of animal as a system. But at
that, note should be taken of the fact that the development of systems from
plants to animals was basically solving only one problem – to be/exist in this
World. The purport of existence of plants and the majority (if not of all) of
animals, except for humans, is only in the metabolism. If the system is hungry
it operates, if is satiated it stays idle. Yes, with complication of the
control block simultaneous increase in the possibilities of systems occurred
too, but it still pursued the goals of metabolism. More adapted animal feeds
better. If the system plays and lives jolly (emotional tint of behavioral
reactions), such reactions as a rule are still directed towards self-training
of systems for better hunting for other systems. Therefore such reactions are
basically inherent in young animals. More adult individuals do not play any
more. Note should be also taken of that division of animals into predators and
herbivorous animals is quite conditional, since it is not eating meat that is a
distinctive feature of a predator and plants may also be carnivorous (for
example, sundew and the like). Absolutely all animals, and not only them, but
plants as well, are predators, since they represent the systems which feed on
other systems. Even among the objects of mineral nature mutual relations of a
victim-predator type may be found. Some systems (plants and herbivores) feed on
systems with simple control blocks (mineral objects and plants) because it is
easier thing to do. However, other systems (carnivorous) feed or try to feed on
systems with complex
control blocks (other animals), although it is much more complex to do so. That
is why the donkey is more stupid than a tiger. The human being differs from
other objects of animate nature first of all in that it is not metabolism which
is the main purport of his/her life, but cognition. Yes, the higher the level
of knowledge, the better the nutrition. But the process of cognition in itself
prevails over all other processes aimed at metabolism. And even the metabolism
itself is raised to the rank of art (the cookery). It is also possible to single
out the human nature in that way as well, since only a human being out of all
objects of our World has second signaling system (the intellectual control
block) and aspiration towards cognition. Hence, the purpose of our World was
evolution which has stipulated the development of systems in the direction
towards complexification of their control blocks up to a human being. And the
purpose of this evolution was to develop systems to such a degree that they
have learnt to cognize the World. We can look back and see the confirmation of
it throughout the entire history of development of our World in general and
biosphere in particular. We do not know what was before the Big Bang, and we do
not even know to which extent such statement is qualified. However, after it
only the emergence and complexification of systems in the Universe was taking
place, at that it occurred only at the expense of complexification of their
control blocks, because their primary SFU (elementary particles) practically
have not changed since then neither qualitatively, nor quantitatively. And we,
the people, are the consequence and the proof of this development either. The
human being is the most complex system, the top of evolution which has occurred
till nowadays. Experience of this evolution shows that major distinctive
feature throughout the entire process of advanced development was only the
development of control blocks of systems. We do not know the purposes of the
majority of systems of our World, although we can fabricate a multitude of
speculations on many issues of this subject. For example, nuclei of atoms of
chemical elements that are heavier than iron in those quantities which exist
now in our Universe, could only and only appear as the result of explosions of
supernovas. Hence, is the purpose of stars with evolution of a supernova type
is the production of nuclei of atoms harder than iron? It may be true, although
no one would avouch for it for the present. But we can surely state that a
human being in the shape it exists today and is known to us would not have been
existent without the elements having atomic weight heavier that iron, because
the structure of its organism requires the presence of such elements. So, there
are sufficient grounds for the assumption that stars of a supernova type are
necessary for the development of the humans. It sounds strange and
extraordinary, but still it’s the fact. But we know for sure and without
speculations the purposes of some of the World’s systems, in particular, the
purposes of many systems of organism. We know one of the main objectives of any
living organism – to survive in the environment, and we know the hierarchy of
sub-goals into which this purpose is broken down. We see how living systems
develop on the way of evolution, we see the differences of systems standing at
different levels of evolutionary process and we can explain the advantage of
some systems over the others. In other words, the possibility is opened to us
to construct classification of all systems of our World, including
that of living systems. Today there is no uniform
classification of all objects of our World, but there are only separate
classifications of various groups of these objects, including classifications
of astronomical, geological, biological and other groups. At that, nowadays the
underlying principle of the majority, if not of all of these classifications,
including classification of both the entire animate nature and the diseases, is
the organic-morphological analysis. But probably it is necessary to substitute
it, as well as classification of diseases, for the classification based on
systemic analysis – the analysis of the goals/purposes. And the basic principle
of the new classification should be not external distinctions, such as the
number of feet or cones on the teeth, but two basic differences: differences by
types of control blocks and types of executive elements. Moreover, it is
necessary to include all objects of our World in this classification – animate
and inanimate, because our World is replete only with systems which differ from
each other only in the degree of development of their control blocks and in the
ways of protection against destruction by the external media. The world is
uniform, because it is a system in itself. Therefore, it is necessary to create
common and single classification of all systems of our World. And systems are
any objects, including animate/organic and inanimate/inorganic. Then it will be
possible to distinguish four worlds/natures (sub-natures) of objects in our World:
the world of minerals/mineral nature/, vegetative, animal worlds/natures/ and
the world of humans/the human nature/. The population of each world differs
from each other, as it was repeatedly underlined, only in control blocks and
metabolism. The objects of mineral and vegetative nature have simple control
blocks. But the objects of mineral nature have only passive ways of protection
against negative entropy (destruction). And all
living subjects, including plants, have active ways of protection against the
same negative entropy, i.e. active substitution of the destroyed SFU at the
expense of metabolism. Animals, unlike plants, in addition to metabolism, have
more complex control blocks which enable behavioral reactions and thus allow
them to control in a varying degree surrounding situation. And the humans have
the most complex control block which contains the second signaling system and
consequently it is capable of cognizing the whole World, including themselves,
but not just what happens/exists nearby. And within each type of nature
classification we should also proceed further to include the criteria of
complexity of control blocks and then the criteria of presence and the degree
of development of executive elements, including the number of feet or cones on
the teeth. In this case classification will be the one of cause-and-effect type
and logical. For example, vegetative nature/the flora/ includes not only
plants, but all the Earth’s population which possesses only simple control
block and metabolism. And those are not only plants and not only metazoan.
Procaryotes and eukaryotes, bacteria, phytoplankton, sea anemones, corals,
polyps, fungi, trees, herbs, mosses and lichens and many others possessing and
those not possessing chlorophyll are all flora. They simply grow in space and
they have no idea of it because they “do not see” it. However, some plants, for
example, trees or herbs, unlike corals,
fungi or polyps, contain chlorophyll (specific executive element). Such
classification of systems has one incontestable advantage: it aligns everything
that populates our World – the systems. The whole World around us is classified
by a single scale, where the unit of measure is only the complexity of control
block and executive elements used by it. In that way it would be easier for us
to understand what life is. May it be so that inanimate nature does not exist
at all? Perhaps, “animate” differs from “inanimate” only in that it “has
comprehended” its own exposure to destruction under the influence of environment
and first has learnt self-restorability and then it learnt how to protect
itself from destructions? Then Pierre Teyjar De
Chardin is right asserting that evolution is a process
of arousal of consciousness. Currently existing
classifications do not provide the answer to this question. New classification
of systems based on the systemic target-oriented analysis will make it possible
to understand, where the “ceiling” of development of systems of each of the
worlds is and which of its subjects are still at the beginning of the
evolutionary scale and which of them have already climbed up its top. But this
classification is based on the recognition of the first-priority role of the goal/purpose
on the whole and purposefulness of nature in particular, which idea is
disputable for the present and is not accepted by all. Therefore, queer
position was characteristic for the XX century: the position of struggle with
nature, position which is still shared by a great many. This position is
fundamentally erroneous, because the nature is not our enemy, but the “parent”,
the tutor and friend. It “produced” us and “nurtured” us, having provided a
cradle, the Earth for us, and it has been creating greenhouse conditions
throughout many millions years, where fluctuations of temperature were no more
than 100ºC and the pressure about 1 atmosphere, with plenty of place,
sufficient moisture and energy, although Space is characterized by range of temperatures
in many millions degrees and of pressure in millions atmospheres. It has
brought us up and made us strong, using evolution and the law of competition:
“the strongest survives”. It is not our task “to take from it”, nor to struggle
with it, but to understand and collaborate with it, because it is not our
enemy, but the teacher and partner. It “knows” itself what we need and gives it
to us, otherwise we would not have existed. This is not an ode to the nature,
but the statement of fact of its purposefulness. Some may object that such
combination of natural conditions which has led to the origination of human
being is just a mere fortuity which has arisen under the law of large numbers
only because the World is very large and all kind of options are possible in
it. However, that many incidental occurrences are kind of suspicious. The
nature continually “puts stealthily” various problems before us, but every time
the level of these problems for some reason completely corresponds to the level
of development of an animal or a human being. For some reason a man “has
discovered” a nuclear bomb at the moment when he could already apprehend the
power of this discovery. Nature does not give dangerous toys to greenhorns. If
there were no problems at all, there would be no stimulus to development and as
of today the Earth would have been populated by the elementary systems, if it
were populated at all. However, if the problems sharply exceed the limit of
possibilities of systems, the latter would have collapsed and the Earth would
have not been populated at all, if it would be existent in abstracto. And in
any case there would have been no development on the whole. But we do exist and
it is the fact which has to be taken into account and which requires
explanation. And the explanation only consists in the purposefulness of Nature.
Systemic
analysis is a process of receiving answer to the question “Why is the overall
goal of the system fulfilled (not fulfilled)?” The notion of “systemic
analysis” includes other two notions: “system” and “analysis”. The notion of
“system” is inseparably linked with the notion of the “goal/purpose of the
system”. The notion “analysis” means examination by parts and arranging
systematically (classification). Hence, the “systemic analysis” is the analysis
of the goal/purpose of the system by its sub-goals (classification or hierarchy
of the goals/purposes) and the analysis of the system by its subsystems
(classification or hierarchy of systems) with the view of clarifying which
subsystems and why can (can not) fulfill the goals (sub-goals) set forth before
them. Any systems perform based on the principle “it is necessary and
sufficient” which is an optimum control principle. The notion “it is necessary”
determines the quality of the purpose, while the notion “is suficient”
determines its quantity. If qualitative and quantitative parameters of the
purpose of the given system can be satisfied, then the latter is sufficient. If
the system cannot satisfy some of these parameters of the goal, it is insufficient.
Why the given system cannot fulfill the given purpose? This question is
answered by systemic analysis. Systemic analysis can show that such-and-such
object “consists of... for…”, i.e. for what purpose the given object is made,
of what elements it consists of and what role is played by each element
for the achievement of this goal/purpose. The
organic-morphological analysis, unlike systemic analysis, can show that
such-and-such object “consists of... “, i.e. can only show of which elements
the given object consists. Systemic analysis is not made arbitrarily, but is
based on certain rules. The key conditions of systemic analysis are the account
of complexity and
hierarchy of goals/purposes and systems.
Complexity of
systems. It is necessary to specify the notion of complexity of system. We have
seen from the above that complexification of systems occurred basically for the
account of complexification of control block. At that, complexity of executive
elements could have been the most primitive despite the fact that control block
at that could have been very complex. The system could contain only one type
SFU and even only one SFU, i.e. to be monofunctional. But at the same time it
could carry out its functions very precisely, with the account of external
situation and even with the account of possibility of occurrence of new
situations, if it had sufficiently complex control block. When the analysis of
the complexity of system is made from the standpoint of cybernetics, the
communication, informo-dynamics, etc. theories the subject discussed is the
complexity of control block, rather than the complexity of the system. Note
should be taken of that regardless of the degree of the system complexity two
flows of activity are performed therein: information flow and a flow of
target-oriented actions of the system. Information flow passes through the
control block, whereas the flow of target-oriented actions passes through
executive elements. Nevertheless, the notion of complexity may also concern the
flows of target-oriented actions of systems. There exist mono- and
multifunctional systems. There are no multi-purpose systems, but only
mono-purpose systems, although the concept of “multi-purpose system” is being
used. For example, they say that this fighter-bomber is multi-purpose because
it can bomb and shoot down other aircrafts. But this aircraft still has only
one general purpose: to destroy the enemy’s objects. This fighter-bomber just
has more possibilities than a simple fighter or simple bomber. Hence, the
notion of complexity concerns only the number and quality of actions of the
system, which are determined by a number of levels of its hierarchy (see
below), but not the number of its elements. Dinosaurs were much larger than
mammals (had larger number of elements), but have been arranged much simpler.
The simplest system is SFU (Systemic Functional
Unit). It fulfills its functions very crudely/inaccurately as the law that
works is the “all-or-none” one and the system’s actions are the most primitive.
Any SFU is the simplest/elementary defective system and its inferiority is
shown in that such system can provide only certain quality of result of action,
but cannot provide its optimum quantity. Various SFU may differ by the results
of their actions (polytypic SFU), but they may not differ either (homotypic
SFU). However, all of them work under the “all-or-none” law. In other words,
the result of its action has no gradation or is zero (non-active phase), or
maximum (active phase). SFU either reacts to external influence at maximum
(result of action is maximum – “all”), or waits for external influence (the
result of action is zero – “none”) and there is no gradation of the result of
action. Each result of SFU action is a quantum (indivisible portion) of action.
Monofunctional systems possess only one kind of result of action which is
determined by their SFU type. They may contain any quantity of SFU, from one to
maximum, but in any case these should be homotypic SFU. Their difference from
the elementary system is only in the quantity of the result of action
(quantitative difference). The monofunctional system may anyway perform its
functions more accurately as its actions have steps of gradation of functions.
The accuracy of performance of function depends on the value of action of
single SFU, the NF intensity and the type of its control block, while the
capacity depends on the number of SFU. The “smaller” the SFU, the higher the
degree of possible accuracy is. The larger the number of SFU, the higher the
capacity is. So, if the structure of the system’s executive elements (SFU
structure) is homotypic, it is then multifunctional and simple system. But at
that, its control block, for example, may be complex. In this case the system
is simple with complex control block. The multifunctional system is a system
which contains more than one type of monofunctional systems. It possesses many
kinds of result of action and may perform several various functions (many
functions). Any complex system may be broken down into several simple systems
which we have already discussed above. The difference of multifunctional system
from the monofunctional one is that the latter consists of itself and includes
homotypic SFU, while complex system consists of several monofunctional systems
with different SFU
types. And at that, these several simple systems are controlled by one common
control block of any degree of complexity. The difference between
monofunctional and multifunctional systems is in the quantity and quality of
SFU. In order to avoid confusion of the complexity of systems with the
complexity of their control block, it is easier to assume that there are
monofunctional (simple)
and multifunctional (complex)
systems. In this case the concept of complexity of system would only apply to
control block. In monofunctional system control block operates a set of own SFU
regardless of the degree of its complexity. In multifunctional system control
block of any degree of complexity operates several monofunctional subsystems,
each of which has its SFU with their control blocks. It is complexity of
control block that stipulates the complexity of the system, and not only the
type of system, but the appurtenance of the given object to the category of
systems. The presence of an appropriate control block conditions the presence
of a system, whereas the absence of (any) control block conditions the absence
of a system. Systems may have control blocks of a level not lower than simple.
The full-fledged system can not have the simplest/elementary control block,
whereas the SFU can.
So, the system
is an object of certain degree of complexity which may tailor its functions to
the load (to external influence). If its structure contains more than one SFU,
the result of its action has the number of gradations equal to the number of
its SFU or (identically) the number of quanta of action. The number of the
system’s functions is determined by the number of polytypic monofunctional
systems comprising the given system. In former times development of life was progressing
towards the enlargement of animal body which provided some kind of guarantee in
biological competition (quantitative competition
during the epoch of dinosaurs). But the benefits has
proven doubtful, the advantages turned out to be less than disadvantages, that
is why monsters have died out. This is horizontal
development of systems. If they differ in quality it is tantamount to the
emergence of new multifunctional systems. Such construction of new systems is
the development of systems along the vertical axis. The example of it is
complexification of living organisms in process of evolution, from elementary
unicellular to metazoan and the human being. What can be done by man can not be
done by a reptile. However, what can be done by reptile can not be done by an
infusorian (insect, jellyfish, amoeba, etc.). Complexification of living
organisms occurred only for one cardinal purpose: to survive in whatever
conditions (competition of species). Since conditions of existence are
multifarious, the living organism as
a system should be multifunctional. The character of a new system is determined
by the structure of executive elements and control block features. If there is
a need to extend the amplitude or the capacity of system’s performance the
structure of executive elements should be uniform. To increase the amplitude of
the system’s performance all SFU are aligned in a sequential series, while to
increase the capacity – in a parallel series depending on the required quantity
of the result of action (amplitude or capacity at the given concrete moment).
Polytypic SFU have different purposes and consequently they have different
functions. The differences of SFU stipulate their specialization, whereby each
of them has special function inherent in it only. If the structure of any
system comprises polytypic SFU, such system would be differentiated, having
elements with different specialization. In systems with uniform SFU all
elements have identical specialization. Therefore, there is no differentiation
in such system. So, the concept of specialization characterizes a separate
element, whereas the concept of differentiation characterizes the group of
elements. The number of SFU in real systems is always finite and therefore the
possibilities of real systems are finite and limited, too. Resources of any
system depend on the number of SFU comprising its structure in the capacity of
executive elements. The pistol may produce as many shots as is the number of
cartridges available in it, and no more than that. The less the number of SFU
is available in the system, the smaller the range of changes of external
influence can lead to the exhaustion of its resources and the worse is its
resistance to the external influence. By integrating various SFU in more and
more complex systems it is possible to construct the systems with any preset
properties (quality of the result of action) and capacities (amount of quanta
of the result of action). At that, the elements of systems are the systems
themselves, of a lower order though (subsystems) for these systems. And the
given system itself may also be an element for the system of higher order. This
is where the essence of hierarchy of systems lies.
Hierarchy of
goals/purposes and systems. The more complex the system, the wider the variety
of external influences to which it reacts. But the system should always produce
only specific (unique, univocal) reaction to certain influence (or certain
combination of external influences) or specific series of reactions
(unique/univocal series of reactions). In other words, the system always reacts
only to one certain external influence and always produces only one specific
reaction. But we always see “multi”-reactive systems. For example, we react to
light, sound, etc. At the same time we can stand, run, lay, eat, shout, etc.,
i.e. we react to many external influences and we do many various actions. There
is no contradiction here, as both the purposes and reactions may be simple and
complex. The final overall objective of the system represents the logic sum of
sub-goals/sub-purposes of its subsystems. The goal/purpose is built of
sub-goals/sub-purposes. For example, the living organism has only one, but very
complex purpose – to survive, by all means, and for this purpose it should
feed. And for this purpose it is necessary to deliver nutriment for histic
cells from the external medium. And for this purpose it is necessary first to
get it. And for this purpose it is necessary to be able to run quickly (to fly,
bite, grab, snap, etc.). Thereafter it is necessary to crush it, otherwise it
won’t be possible to swallow it (chewing). Then it is necessary to “crush” long
albumen molecules (gastric digestion). Then it is necessary to “crush” the
scraps of the albumen molecules even to the smaller particles (digestion in
duodenum). Then it is necessary to bring in the digested food to blood affluent
to intestine (parietal digestion). Then it is necessary... And such “is
necessary” may be quite many. But each of these “is necessary” is determined by
a sub-goal at each level of hierarchy of purposes. And for every such sub-goal
there exists certain subsystem at the respective level of hierarchy of
subsystems. At that, each of them performs its own function. And in that way a
lot of functions are accumulated in a system. However, all this hierarchy of
functions is necessary for one unique cardinal purpose: to survive in this
world. Any object represents a system and consists of elements, while each
element is intended for the fulfillment of respective sub-goals (subtasks). The
system has an overall specific goal and any of its elements represents a system
in itself (subsystem of the given system), which has its own goal (sub-goal)
and own result of action. When we say “overall specific goal” we mean not the
goals/purposes of elements of the system, but the general/overall/ purpose
which is reached by means of their interactions. The system has a goal/purpose
which is not present in each of its element separately. But the overall goal of
the system is split into sub-goals and these sub-goals are the purposes of its
elements anyway. There are no systems in the form of indivisible object and any
system consists of the group of elements. And each element, in turn, is a
system (subsystem) in itself with its own purpose, being a sub-goal of the
overall goal/general purpose/. To achieve the goal the system performs series
of various actions and each of them is the result of action of its elements.
The logic sum of all results of actions of the system’s subsystems is final function
– the result of action of the given system. Thus, one cardinal purpose
determines the system, while the sub-goal determines the subsystem. And so on
and so forth deep into a hierarchy scale. The goal/purpose is split into
sub-goals/sub-purposes and the hierarchy of purposes (logically connected chain
of due actions) is built. To perform this purpose the system is built which
consists of subsystems, each of which has to fulfill their respective sub-goals
and capable to yield necessary respective result of action. That is how the
hierarchy of subsystems is structured. The number of subsystems in the system
is equal to he number of subtasks (subgoals) into which the overall goal is
broken down. For example, the system is sited at a zero level of hierarchy, and
all its subsystems are sited at a minus one, minus two, etc. levels,
accordingly. The order of numeration of coordinates is relative. It means that
the given system may enter the other, larger system, in the capacity of its
subsystem. Then the larger system will be equalized to zero level, whereas the
given system will be its subsystem and sited at a minus one level. The
hierarchy scale of systems is built on the basis of hierarchy of
goals/purposes. Target-specific actions of systems are performed by its
executive elements, but to manage their target-oriented interaction the
interaction of control block of the system with control blocks of its
subsystems is needed. Therefore, the hierarchy scale of systems is, as a matter
of fact, a hierarchic scale of control blocks of systems. This scale is
designed based on a pyramid principle: one boss on top (the control block of
the entire system), a number of its concrete subordinates below (control blocks
of the system’s subsystems), their concrete subordinates under each of them
(control blocks of the lower level subsystems), etc. At each level of hierarchy
there exist own control blocks regulating the functions of respective
subsystems. Hierarchical relations between control blocks of various levels are
built on the basis of subordination of lower ranking blocks to those of higher
level. In other words, the high level control block gives the order to the
control blocks of
lower level. Only 4 levels of hierarchy, from 0 to 3rd, are presented. The
count is relative, whereby the level of the given system is assumed to be zero.
The counting out may be continued both in the direction of higher and lower
(negative) figures/values. The notions of “order” and “level” are identical.
The notions of “system” and “subsystem” are identical, too. For example,
instead of expression “a subsystem of minus second-order” one may say “a system
of minus second-level”. And although a zero level is assumed the level of the
system itself, the latter may be a part of other higher order system in the
capacity of its subsystem. Then the number of its level can already become
negative (relative numeration of level). Elements of each hierarchic level of
systems are the parts of system, its subsystems, the systems of lower order.
Therefore, the notions “part”, “executive element”, “subsystem”, “system” and
in some cases even “element” are identical and relative. The choice of term is
dictated only by convenience of accentuating the place of the given element in
the hierarchy of system. The notion of hierarchic scale (or pyramid principle)
is a very powerful tool and it embodies principal advantage of systemic
analysis. Systemic analysis is impossible without this concept. Both our entire
surrounding world and any living organism consist of infinite number of various
elements which are relating to each other in varying ways. It is impossible to
analyze all enormous volume of information characterizing infinite number of
various elements. The concept of hierarchy of systems sharply restricts the number
of elements subjected to the analysis. In the absence of it we should take into
account all levels of the world around us, starting from elementary particles
and up to global systems, such as an organism, a biosphere, a planet and so on.
For global evaluation of any system it is sufficient to analyze three levels
only: the global level of the system itself (its place in the hierarchy of
higher systems); the level of its executive elements (their place in the
hierarchy of the system itself); the level of its control elements (elements of
control block of the system itself). To evaluate the system’s function it is
necessary to determine the conformity of the result of action of the given
system with its purpose – due result of action (global level of function of the
system), the number of its subsystems and the conformity of their results of
action with their purposes – due results
of their action (local functional levels of
executive elements) and evaluate the function of elements of control. In the
long run the maximum level of function of system is determined by the logic sum
of results of actions of all subsystems comprising its structure and optimality
of control block performance. Abiding by the following chain of reasoning: “the
presence of the goal/purpose for implementation of any specific condition, the
presence of qualitative or quantitative novelty of the result of action, the
presence of
a control (block) loop” it is possible to single out elements of any concrete
system, show its hierarchy and divide cross systems in which the same elements
perform various functions. Systems work under the logical law which main
principle is the fulfillment of condition “... if..., then….”. In this
condition “if ..” is the argument (purpose), while “then...” is the function
(the result of action). This condition stipulates determinism in nature and
hierarchy scale. Any law, natural or social, requires implementation of some
condition and the basis of any condition is this logical connective “... if...,
then…” At that, this logical connective concerns only two contiguous subsystems
on a hierarchic scale. The argument “... if” is always specified by the system
which is on a higher step, whereas the function “then…” is always performed by
the system (subsystem) sited immediately underneath, at a lower step of a
hierarchic scale. Actions of elements per se and interaction between the
elements may be based on the laws of physics or chemistry (laws of
electrodynamics, thermodynamics, mathematics, social or quantum laws, etc.).
But the operation of control block is based only on the logical laws. And as
far as control block determines the character of function of systems, it is
arguable that systems work under the logic laws. Sometimes in human communities
the “bosses” would imagine they may govern/control/ at any levels, but such
type of management is the most inefficient one. The best type of management is
when the director (the control block of multifunctional system)
controls/manages/ only the chiefs of departments (control blocks of
monofunctional systems), sets forth feasible tasks before them and demands the
implementation thereof. At that, the number of its “assistant chiefs” should
not exceed 7±2 (Muller's number). If some department does not implement its
objectives, it means that either the departmental management (control block of
a subsystem) is no good because has (a) failed to thoroughly devise and
distribute the tasks between the subordinates (the SFU), or (b) has
inadequately selected average executives (SFU), or (c) impracticable goal has
been set forth before the department (before system), or (d) the director
himself (control block of the system) is no class for the management. In such
cases the system’s reorganization is necessary. But if the system is well
elaborated and performs normally there is no sense for the director to “pry”
into the department’s routine affairs. A chief of
department is available for this purpose. The decision of the system
reorganization is only taken when the system for some reason cannot fulfill the
objective (system crisis). In the absence of crisis there is no sense in
reorganization. For the purpose of reorganization the system changes the
structure of its executive and control elements both at the expense of
actuation (de-actuation) of additional subsystems and alteration of exit-entry
combinations of these elements. In such cases skipping of some steps of
hierarchy may occur and the principle “vassal of my vassal is not my vassal”
violated. This is where the essential point of the system reorganization lies.
At the same time, part of elements can be thrown out from the system as
superfluous (that’s how at one time we lost, for example, cauda and branchiae),
while other part may be included in the system’s structure or shifted on the
hierarchy scale. But all that may only happen in process of the system
reorganization proper. When the process of reorganization comes to an end and
the reorganized system is able of performing the goal set forth before it (i.e.
starts to function normally), the control law of “vassal of my vassal is not my
vassal” is restored.
Consequences
ensuing from axioms.
Independence of
purpose. The purpose/goal does not depend on the object (system) as it is
determined not by the given object or its needs, but by the need of other
object in something (is dictated by the external medium or other system). But
the notion of “system” in relation to the given object depends on the purpose,
i.e. on the adequacy of possibilities of the given object to execute the goal
set. The goal is set from the outside and the object is tailored to comply with
it, but not other way round. Only in this case the object presents a system.
Note should be taken again of the singularity of the first consequence: the
system’s purpose/goal is determined by a need for something for some other
object (external medium or other system). Common sense suggests that supposedly
survivability is the need of the given organism (the given system). But it
follows from the first consequence that the need to survive proceeds not from
the given organism, but is set to it by another system external with respect to
it, for example, the nature, and the organism tries to fulfill this objective.
Specialization
of the system’s functions. In response to certain (specific) external influence
the system always produces certain (specific) result of action. Specialization
means purposefulness. Any system is specialized (purposeful) and follows from
the axiom. There are no systems in abstracto, there are systems that are
concrete. Therefore, any system has its specific purpose/goal. Executive
elements (executive SFU) of some systems may be homotypic (identical,
non-differentiated from each other). If executive elements differ from each
other (are multitype), the given system consists of differentiated elements.
System integrity.
The system exerts itself as a unitary and integral object. It follows from the
unity of purpose which is inherent only in the system as a whole, but not in
its separate elements in particular. The purpose consolidates the system’s
elements in a comprehensive whole.
Limited
discrecity of system. Nothing is indivisible and any system may be divided into
parts. At the same time, any system consists of finite number of elements
(parts): executive elements (subsystems, elements, SFU) and management elements
(control block).
Hierarchy of
system. The elements of a system relate to each other in varying ways and the
place of each of them is the place on the
hierarchic scale of the system. Hierarchy of systems is stipulated by hierarchy
of purposes. Any system has a purpose. And to achieve this purpose it is
necessary to achieve a number of smaller sub-goals for which the large system
contains a number of subsystems of various degree of complexity, from minimum
(SFU) up to maximum possible complexity. Hierarchy is the difference between
the purposes of the system and the purposes of its elements (subsystems) which
are the sub-goals in respect to it. At that, the systems of higher order set
the goals before the systems of lower order. So, the purpose of the highest
order is subdivided into a number of sub-goals (the purposes of lower order).
The hierarchy of purposes determines the hierarchy of systems. To achieve each
of the sub-goals specific element is required (it follows from the conservation
law). Management/control in a hierarchic scale is performed in accordance with
the law “the vassal of my vassal is not my vassal”. In other words, direct
control is only possible at the level “system - own subsystem”, and the control
by super system of the subsystem of its system
is impossible. The tsar, should he wish to behead a
criminal, would not do it himself, but would give a command to his subordinate
executioner.
System function.
The result of the system’s performance is its function. To achieve the purpose
the system should perform purposefully certain actions the result of which
would be the system’s function. The purpose is the argument for the system
(imperative), while the result of action of the system is its function. The
system’s functions are determined by a set of executive elements, their
relative positioning and control block. The notions of “system” and “function”
are inseparable. Nonfunctional systems are non-existent. “Functional system” is
a tautology, because all systems are functional. However, there may be systems
which are non-operational at the moment (in a standby mode). Following certain
external influence upon the system it will necessarily yield certain specific
result of action (it will function). In the absence of the external influence
the system produces no actions (does not function). When taking into account
the purpose, the argument is not the external influence, but the purpose. One should
distinguish internal functions of the system (sub-function) belonging to its
elements (to subsystems, SFU) and the external functions belonging to the
entire system as a whole. The system’s external function of emergent
property is the result of its own action produced by the system. Internal
functions of the system are the results of action of its elements.
Effectiveness of
systems. Correspondence of the result of action to the goal set characterizes
the effectiveness of systems. Effectiveness of systems is directly linked with
their function. The system’s function in terms of effectiveness may be
sufficient, it may by hyperfunction, decelerating and completely (absolutely)
insufficient function. The system performs some actions and it leads to the production
of the result of its action which should meet the purpose for which the given
system is created. Effectiveness of systems is based on their specialization.
“The boots should be sown by shoemaker”. Doing the opposite does not always
result in real systems’ actions that meet the target/preset results (partial
effectiveness or its absence). The result of action of the system (its
function) should completely correspond qualitatively and quantitatively to the
preset purpose. It may mismatch, be incidental or even antagonistic
(counter-purposeful); at that, real systems may produce all these kinds of
results of action simultaneously. Only in ideal systems the result may
completely meet the preset purpose (complete effectiveness). But systems with
100% performance factor are unknown to us. Integral result (integral function)
is the sum of separate collateral/incidental and useful results of action. It
is this sum that determines the appurtenance of the given object to the notion
of “system” with regard to the given purpose. If the sum is positive, then with
respect to the preset purpose the given object is a system of one or other
efficiency. If the sum is equal to zero, the object is not a system with
respect to the given purpose (neutral object). If the sum is negative, the
given object is an anti-system (the system with minus sign preventing from the
achievement of the goal/purpose). It applies both to systems and their
elements. The higher the performance factor,
the more effective the system is. Discrepancy of the result of action of the
given system with the due value depends on unconformity of quantitative and
qualitative resources of the system, for example, owing to breakage
(destruction) or improper and/or insufficient development of its executive elements
(SFU) and/or control. Therefore, any object is an element of a system only in
the event that its actions (function) meet the achievement of the preset
goal/purpose. Otherwise it is not an element of the given system. Effectiveness
of systems is completely determined by limitation of actions of the systems.
Limitation of
system’s actions. Any system is characterized by qualitative and quantitative
resources. The notion of resources includes the notion of functional reserve:
what actions and how many of such actions
the system may perform. Qualitative resources are
determined by type of executive elements (SFU type), while quantitative
resources by their quantity. And since real systems have certain and finite
(limited) number of elements, it implies that real systems have limited
qualitative and quantitative resources. “Qualitative resources” means “which
actions” (or “what”) the given system is able to perform (to press, push,
transfer, retain, supply, secrete, stand in somebody’s light, etc.). “Quantitative
resources” means “how many units of measure” (liters, mm Hg, habitation units,
etc.) of such actions the given system is able to perform.
Discrecity
(“quantal capacity”) of the system’s functions. The system’s actions are always
discrete (quantized) as any of its SFU work under the “all-or-none” law. There
exists no smooth change of the system’s function, but there always exists
phased (quantized) transition from one level of function to another, since
executive elements actuate or deactivate regular SFU depending on the
requirements of
system. Transition of systems from one level of functions to another is always
effected by way of a leap. We do not always observe this gradation/graduality
because of the fact that the amplitude of the result of action of individual
SFU can be very small, but still it is always there. The amplitude of these
steps of transition from one level to another determines the maximum accuracy
of the result of action of systems and is stipulated by the amplitude of the
result of action of individual SFU (quantum of action). Probably, elementary
particles are the most minimal SFU in our World and consequently indivisible
into smaller parts subjected to laws of physics of our World.
Communicativeness
of systems. Conjugate systems interact with each other. Such communication
implicates the link/connection between the systems,
i.e. their communicativeness. We discern open and
closed systems. However, there are no completely isolated (closed) systems in
our world which are not affected by some kind of external influence and which
are nowise influencing any other systems. One may find at least two systems
which are nowise interacting with each other (do not react) among themselves,
but one can always find the third system (and probably the group of
intermediate systems will be required) which will interact with (react to) the
first two, i.e. be a link between them. If any system does not react at all to
any influences exerted by any other systems and its own results of action are
absolutely neutral with respect to other systems, and it is impossible to find
the third system or a group of systems with which this system could interact
(react to), it means that the given system
does not exist in our World. Interaction between
systems may be strong or weak, but it should be present, otherwise the systems
do not exist for each other. Interaction is performed for the account of chains
of actions: “... external influence → result of action...” By closing
the end of such chain to its beginning we will get a closed (self-contained)
system. The result of action after its “birth” does not depend on the system
which has “gave birth” to it. Therefore, it may become external influence for
the system itself. Then it will be a cyclically operating system, a generator
with positive feedback. But the generator, too, requires for its performance
the energy coming from the outside. Consequently, it is to some extent opened
either. That is why the
absolutely closed systems are non-existent. Each system has a certain number of
internal and external links/connections (between the elements and between the
systems, accordingly), through which the system may interact with other
external systems.
Closeness (openness) of a system is determined by the ratio of the number of
internal and external links/connections. The larger the ratio, the greater the
degree of closeness of a system is. Space objects of a “black holes” type are
assumed to be referring to closed systems because even photons cannot break off
from them. But they react with other space bodies through gravitation which
means that they “are opened” through the gravitation channel through which
they “evaporate” (disappear).
Controllability
of systems. Any system contains elements (systems) of control which supervise
the correspondence between the result of action of the system and the goal set.
These control elements form the control block. Management of system is carried
out through commands given
to its control block, whereas the control over its executive elements is
exercised through sending commands to their control blocks. Any reflex is the
manifestation of the work of the control block. And as far as control block is
the integral accessory of any systems, any systems have their own reflexes.
Executive elements should fulfill the goal exactly to the extent preset by the
command, neither more nor less than that (neither minimum nor maximum, but
optimum) based on a principle “it is necessary and sufficient”. Control
elements watch the fulfillment of the purpose and if the result exceeds the
preset one, the control block would force the executive elements to reduce the
system’s function, whereas if it is lower than the preset result it will force
to increase the system’s function. The purpose is dictated by conditions
external with respect to the system. The command is entered into the system
through the special entry channel. All consequences represent continuation of
axioms, are stipulated by purposefulness of systems, constructed under laws of
hierarchy and limited by the conservation law. The list of consequences could
be continued, but those listed above are quite sufficient for the evaluation of
any system. Such evaluation applies to both the properties of the system and
its interaction with other systems. Evaluation of the first consequence can be
expressed in percentage, i.e. what is the percentage of fulfillment (failure of
fulfillment) of the goal/purpose. The goal may be any due value. Other
consequences may also be characterized either qualitatively or quantitatively,
which actually represents the system evaluation, i.e. its diagnostics, systemic
analysis. The system is characterized by: the purpose/goal (determines
designation of the system); hierarchy (determines interrelations between all
the elements of the system without an exception); executive elements (SFU
performing actions); control block (watches the correctness of performance of
actions for the achievement of the goal). Any
object, not only material, is also a system,
provided it satisfies the above listed axioms and their consequences. Groups of
mathematical equations, logic elements, social structures, relations between
people, intellectual/spiritual values, may also represent systems
in which same principles
of functioning of systems work under the same
logical laws. All of them have a purpose, their own SFU and control blocks
which watch the implementation of the goal/purpose. If the object has a purpose
it is a system. And for the achievement of this purpose it should have
corresponding executive elements and control block with corresponding
analyzers, DPC and NF (which follows from the
conservation law and the law of cause-and-effect limitations). Systemic
analysis examines the systems and their elements in a coordinated fashion. The
result of such analysis is the evaluation of correspondence of results of
actions of the systems with their purposes and revealing the causes of the
discrepancy for the account of determination of cause-and-effect relations
between the elements of systems. The major advantage of systemic analysis is
that only such an analysis allows establishing the causes of insufficiency of
systems. The purpose/goal determines both the elementary structure of systems
and interaction of its elements which is operated by the control block. The
interaction of executive elements (SFU) only is not conducive to yielding
stable result of action meeting the purpose preset for the system. Addition to
a system of the control block adjusted to the preset purpose enables producing
stable (constantly repeated) result of action of the system meeting the preset
goal. The norm is such condition of a system which allows it to function and
develop normally in the medium of existence which is natural for the given type
of systems and to yield reactions of such qualitative and quantitative
properties which
allow the system to protect its SFU from destruction. The notion of “norm” is
relative with respect to average state
of the system in the given conditions. In case if conditions alter, the
system’s condition should change, too. Reaction is the action of the system
aimed at producing the result of action necessary for its survival in response
to external influence, i.e. the system’s function. Reaction is always specific.
Reaction may be: normal (normal reactivity), insufficient
(hypo-reactivity), excessive (hyper-reactivity),
distorted (unexpected reaction occurs instead of the expected one). Normal
reactivity (normal reaction) means that functional reserves of systems
correspond to the force of external influence and the operating possibilities
of control block allow to adjust (control) SFU so that the result of action
precisely corresponds to the force of external influence. Hypo-reactivity of
the system (pathological reaction) arises in cases when functional reserves of
the given system of living organism are insufficient for the given force of
external influence. Hypo-reactivity is always a pathological reaction.
Hyper-reactivity of the system (normal or pathological reaction) is the one
where the result of action of the system exceeds the target. Distorted reaction
is a reaction of the system which mismatches its purpose. Pathology is the lack
of correspondence of the systems’ resources to usual norms. Pathology includes
other two important notions: pathological condition (defect) and pathological
process (including vicious circle). Restoration is active influence on the
system with a view to: liquidate or reduce excessive external influences
destroying the Systemic
Functional Units; liquidate or reduce destructive effects of vicious circle
if it has arisen; strengthen the function of the
affected (defective) subsystem, provided it does not lead to the activation of
vicious circle; strengthen the function of systems conjugated with the
defective one, provided it does not lead to strengthening the destructive
effect of the vicious circle associated with the affected system or the
development of vicious circles in other conjugated systems (does not lead to
strengthening of the “domino principle”); replace the destroyed SFU with the
operational ones. Any owner of the car knows that if something is broken in
his/her car (as a result of excessive external influence) and the defect turns
up, the transportation possibilities of its car sharply recede. If failing
immediately repairing the car, the breakages would accrue catastrophically
(vicious circle) because the domino principle will be activated. And to “cure”
the car it is necessary to protect it from excessive external influences
and to liquidate the defects.
Mark
A. Gaides Hospitality named after Khaim Shiba, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Crisis.
According to Lewis Bornhaim, crisis is a situation
where the totality of circumstances which were earlier quite acceptable, all of
a sudden, due to the emergence of some new factor, becomes absolutely
unacceptable, at that it’s almost inessential, whether the new factor is
political, economic or scientific: death of a national hero, price fluctuations,
new technological discovery; any circumstance may serve impetus for further
events (“the butterfly effect”: the butterfly’s wing at the right place and
time may
cause a hurricane). A well-known scientist Alfred Pokran
devoted a special work to crises (“Culture, crises and changes”) and arrived at
interesting conclusions. First, he notes that any crisis arises long before it
factually comes on the scene. For example, Einstein has published fundamentals
of relativity theory in 1905-1915, i.e. forty years before his works have
ultimately led to the beginning of a new epoch and emergence of crisis. Pokran
also notes that every crisis implies the involvement of a great number of
individuals and characters, all of them being unique: “It is difficult to
imagine Alexander the Great in front of Rubicon or Eisenhower in the field of
Waterloo; it is just as difficult to imagine Darwin writing a letter to
Roosevelt about potential dangers associated with nuclear bomb. Crisis is the
sum of blunders, confusions and intuitive flashes of inspiration, a totality of
observed and
unobserved factors (which in systemic analysis is called a “bifurcation
point”), an unstable condition of a system that may result in a number of
outcomes: recovery
of stable level, transition to other steady
equilibrium state characterized by new
energy-and-informational level,
or leap to a higher unstable level. At a bifurcation point a nonlinear system
becomes very sensitive to small influences or fluctuations: indefinitely small
influences may cause indefinitely wide variation of the condition of the system
and its dynamics. Originality of any crisis hides its striking similarity with
other crises. The unique feature of one and all /most and least/ crises is the
possibility of prevision thereof in retrospect and irreversibility of
solutions; characteristic frequencies of control processes sharply increase (a
time trouble condition, shortage of time).
Power. Power is
any possibility, whatever it is based on, to realize one’s own will in the
given social relations, even notwithstanding counteraction. The power is also
characterized as steady ability of achievement of the goals set with the
support of other people. The concept of power is “sociologically amorphous”,
i.e. the exercise of power does not imply the presence of any special human
qualities (strength, intellect, beauty, etc.) or any special circumstances
(confrontation, conflict, etc.). Any possible qualities and circumstances can
serve for realization of will. These may include direct violence or threats,
prestige or charm, any peculiarities of situation or institutional status, etc.
An individual having a lot of money, holding senior position or being simply
more charming person, the one who is able to use better than others the circumstances
that turned up - that person, as a rule, would be the one having more power.
For characterization of dictatorial/imperious capacity the concept of
supremacy/domination is also used. Domination/supremacy implies the probability
that the command of certain content will induce obedience in those to whom it
is addressed. Domination/supremacy is a stronger notion than power. Domination
is legitimate and institutionalized power, i.e. it is such a power which
invokes the will to subordinate and fulfill the orders and instructions and
which, at that, exists in a sustainable format accepted both by those
dominating and dependent. With regard to the latter it is conventional to talk
about domination structures. Such legitimate and institutionalized power is the
state power. It is very important to distinguish the power from domination. For
example, the person who is taken a hostage is under the authority of gunmen,
but one can not say that they dominate over him/her. They force the hostage to
obey by direct physical violence. But he/she does not want to obey and does not
agree to recognize their right to dominate over him/her.
Elite. Elite is
a group of individuals standing high in the ranks of power or prestige, which,
thanks to their socially significant qualities (origin, wealth, some
achievements), hold the highest positions in various spheres or sectors of
public life. The influence of these people is so great that they affect not
only the processes inside the spheres or sectors to which they belong, but also
the social life as a whole. There are three basic classes of elite:
authoritative/power-holding, valuå-associated and functional.
Authoritative/power-holding elites are more or less closed
groups having specific qualities, and “imperious”
privileges. These are the “ruling classes” - political, military or
bureaucratic. Value-associated elites are creative groups exerting special
influence on the setup of minds and opinions of the broad mass. They are
philosophers, scientific-research expert community, intelligentsia in the
widest sense
of this word. Functional elites are influential groups which in the course of
competition stand out from the crowd in different spheres or sectors of society
and undertake important functions in the society. These are rather open groups,
accession to which requires the presence of certain achievements, for example
holding managerial positions.
Group.
Collective administrative actions differ from those individual in a variety of
parameters. Thus, the group is more productive in generation of the most
efficient and well-grounded ideas, comprehensive evaluation of one or other
decisions or their projects, achievement of individual and team objectives. The
basic drawback of the team decision-making is that it is more inclined to
undertake higher risk. This phenomenon is explained in different ways:
conformist pressure which manifests itself in that some team members do not
dare express their opinions that vary from those stated before,
especially the opinions of team leaders and the majority of team members, and
criticize them; a feeling of reappraisal, overestimation of their possibilities
which develops during intensive group communication (overrated feeling of “us”
that weakens the perception of risk); mutual “contagion of courage”. This
effect arises in group communications; in case of widespread notion (usually
erroneous) that in group decisions responsibility rests with many people and
the share of personal responsibility is rather insignificant (group failures
are usually less evident/appreciable and are not perceived as sharply as
individual’s failures); influence of leaders, especially formal heads whose
vision of their main functions consists in indispensable inculcation of
optimism and confidence in the achievement of the purpose. The symptoms of the
“group thinking” and group pressure
as a whole are: illusion of invulnerability of the group. Group members are
inclined to overestimation of correctness of their actions and quite often
perceive risky decisions optimistically; unbounded belief in moral
righteousness of group actions. Group members are convinced of moral
irreproachability of their collective behavior and uselessness of critical
evaluations by independent observers (“the
collective is always right”); screening of disagreeable or unwanted
information. Data out of keeping with the group opinions are not taken into
consideration and cautions are not taken into account either. Resulting from it
is ignoring off necessary changes; negative stereotypification of the outsiders.
The purposes, opinions and achievements of associations external in relation to
the given group tendentiously treated as weak, hostile, suspicious, etc. Quite
often “narrow departmental interests /localistic tendencies/” and “clannishness”
and self-censorship arise thereupon. Separate group members because of fears of
disturbance of the group harmony abstain from expression of alternative points
of view and their own interests; illusion of constant unanimity. Because of
self-censorship and perception of silence as a sign of consent external
consensus is achieved very quickly without comprehensive discussion and
approval when making decisions on the problems. In this situation internal
dissatisfaction is being accumulated which may further lead to conflict which
may arise because of formal insignificant ground; social (group) pressure on
those who disagree. The requirement of conformist behavior, as a rule, leads to
intolerance with respect to critical, disloyal (from the view point of the group)
statements and actions and to “gag” the bearers thereof; restriction or
reduction of possibilities of the outsiders’ participation in the formation of
collective opinion and decision-making. Separate group members seek not to give
the chance of participation in the group affairs to the people who do not
belong to it, as they apprehend that it (including the information coming from
them) will break the unity of the group.
Rational-universal
method of decision-making implies an unambiguous definition of the substance of
a problem and ways of its solution. Its basic advantage consists in that when
realized it allows complete and radical solving the problem
or a preset task. Branch method implies taking
partial decisions directed towards the improvement of situation, rather than
complete solution of a problem (for example, under conditions of insufficient
clarity of a problem, ways and means of its solution, in the absence of full
information on the situation, given the lack of possibility to foresee all the
consequences of the radical solution, under the pressure of the influential
forces inducing to compromises, the possibility of rise of sharp conflicts
with unclear outcome, etc.). Mixed (mixed-scanning)
method implies rational analysis of the problem and singling out of its main,
key component which is attached a paramount importance and to which
rational-universal method is applied. Other elements of the problem are solved
gradually by making acceptable partial decisions that allows to focus efforts
and resources on the key areas and at the same time have complete control over
other elements of the situation, thus providing its stability.
Selection/choice
mechanism. The optimal selection mechanism may be considered the
consensus-based system in which each participant of decision-making votes not
for one, but for all options (preferably more than two) and ranges the list of
options in the order of his/her own preferences. Thus, if four possible options
are offered the participant of decision-making (the voter) defines a place of
each of them. The first place is given 4 points, the second, third and forth
are given 3, 2 and 1 points, respectively. After voting the points given too
each option (the candidacy/nominee) are summed up and selected option is determined
based on the quantity thereof. If sums of scores for any options are found
equal, repeated voting is held only for these options.
Networks.
Network is
determined as spatial, constantly changing dynamical system
consisting of elements identical in terms of some
parameters: actors (figures), activity and resources (key for this type of a
network), connected among themselves by communication flows. The network
structure is the description of boundaries of interrelations between the
elements and position of
elements in the network. The actors, activity
and resources are connected with each other across
the entire structure of network. The actors develop and maintain relations with
each other. Various kinds of activity are also connected among themselves by
relations, which may be called a network. Resources are consolidated among
themselves by the same structure of network, and moreover, all the three
networks are closely interconnected and represent a global network. Actors,
activity and resources form the system in which heterogeneous (diverse) needs
coalesce with heterogeneous offers. In that way they are functionally connected
with each other. Even in case of destruction of considerable part of network,
the functions of the latter as a system will not be harmed, as they will pass
to other cells of the network (partially their resources as well). In an ideal
network there is no uniform control (coordinating) centre, there is only
“floating” centre (centers) functioning at each specific moment and its functions
may be usually performed by any cell of the network.
So, we have
examined separate aspects of stimulation of scientific thinking. All the
studied materials require the development of skills for their practical
application. See in addition: Alvin Toffler “Shock of the Future”,
“Metamorphoses of Power”, “The Third Wave”. Francis Fukuyama. Our Posthuman
Future. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2002. 272 pp.), “The End of
History and the Last Human”. (Samuel Huntington). "Think tanks" Paul
Dickson, 1971.