Dear Andreas,

Thanks for sharing.

Why do try to relate everything like war to Scientific Laws? War is due to bullying of some thugs here and there across the world. The occurrence of war is not a scientific phenomenon at all, though its continuation may take help of scientific means. Regards!  

War is an unwanted element. 

Science, thermal engineering and technology need to bond the people, thinking and their action towards prosperity. Let us not perceive the wrong picture war. The loss on such events has repercussions not only on the current generation, but would spoil the future generations as well.

World is changing towards peace and the differences are being ironed out.

Dear Andreas,

Thanks for sharing.

Why do try to relate everything like war to Scientific Laws? War is due to bullying of some thugs here and there across the world. The occurrence of war is not a scientific phenomenon at all, though its continuation may take help of scientific means. Regards!  

http://www.schillerinstitute.org/strategic/2011/qaddafi.html

Dear Andreas and All the Friends,

Let's not provide a pretext to warmongers that the occurrence of WARs are based on some Scientific Laws. In that case, every now and then, those war thugs are going to start war wherever they like because of some fake theories that themselves are going to make.  You know what will happen? Nobody can stop them because the started war is nothing but SCIENTIFIC, i.e. another convincing proof from their pockets to feed the people.   

As of today, we have had enough of "Unscientific Wars", let there be no "Scientific Wars", for the sake of God, please! Regards!  

The advent of a third world war does not need any physical law; unbridled greed and stupidity of mankind are enough recipe.

I agree with Mr. Olakunle: The humankind is a shame. But it is enough to say it?The concept of entropy is fundamentally philosophic and mathematic. For this reason it is scientific. In consequence, we need trascend this pesimistic conception about our existence. Up to now, the humankind has been very few responsable and even the democracies and/or republics more advanced in our world, have not given responses to many serious problems that threaten this incredible planet.

We need true revolutionary ideas and not rfraud eligions, bad politics, scientifics and economic frauds that confuse to the inhabitants of this planet. Many false concepts have been diseminated with too much dollars, causing great pain and suffering at thousands of million of persons with a promises that will never be fullfilled. The ignorance and opportunism have been the conceptions more dominants in our planet supported by groups with too much militar power. Is it a fatalism this actitude of the humanity?. Are we condemnned to destroy the earth?

Thanks for sharing. No, I do not believe so. The second law of thermodynamics, although it seems that it has some relevance, is not sufficient alone to increase the risk of a possible outbreak of a World War III. But, the human will is.

''All war is a symptom of man's failure as a thinking animal.''

-John Steinbeck

Regards

Although I sincerely believe in observable patterns in the history of civilizations (especially in the long run) I do not beleive that there is a strict causation in history or that pyhsical laws as such can be directly applied to social phenomena, maybe in the most general sense.

It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets. ― Voltaire

Andreas forget about laws of thermodynamics for some time. But agree with 'ENTROPY', if you take the meaning of the word, the degree of disorderliness is very much increasing in most of the fields. As you are talking about war eg. take the current situation in Middle East and terrorist attacks here and there regularly appears we may face WW III in near future. It is not that easy. Only thing is that their thinking is not at all proper. Let it be any scientific law whether Physics/Chemistry/Biology/or any branch of subject/field that should be useful to uplift the mankind and should fulfill necessities not to encounter the WAR.

Let the whole WORLD be in PEACE.

According to recent rumors, numerous UFO sightings have been reported from all across the globe, indicating that Nostradamus may have been accurate about his predictions. The self-proclaimed physicist and seer prophesied that an alien invasion in 2017 may change the world as we know it.

http://www.hngn.com/articles/221175/20161213/world-war-3-news-nostradamus-predicted-third-alien-attack-2017.htm

In a way yes. But not how any of you had expected. Entropy increase leads to information erase (any kind of information). So, information on CDs, DNA, paper-written and also in our brain deteriorates with time. This is unfortunate as our lessons learned in the past get forgotten in this way. These increased tensions are really caused by economic disintegration, but people blame others for their misfortune. This is false of course as history has taught us many times over. Entropy will de-facto require us to re-learn this. In information, this is called memory refreshment. It is a paradox that such seemingly subtle process known mainly in computers has such vast consequences in real life.

Dear All,

Andreas asked a question on possible impacts of entropy and not on part of science about political side effects.  Entropy as a physical phenomenon is continually increasing. However, I think Andreas might have meant entropy as the disorder and uncertainty. I do not know recent scientific understanding on this scientific field. As I could see none of the participants is a specialist of it.  I ask: is it a thread of general chat or the subject of the discussion started by Andreas matters?   

Dear Andreas?

Regarding your project „New World”

- make living beings (most important: human beings) immortal. There have been a lot of scientific investigations many of them secret supported by wealthy men.

- treatment and prevention of the side effects. Side effects of what? 

Entropy is the degree of freedom. Now a days the freedom is high and many are misusing that. In present scenario world is going through a war of over freedom and over restriction. It may cause conflict in people and leads to horrible end.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics is the most General Law of Physics, since it imply the Forward Direction of Time the Order in Time of Cause and Effect; along with the Flow of Heat Direction. The most general expression for this Thermodynamic Amount is those using the Boltzman S = k ln (#) where # is the number of accessible states for the system.

The point is our foolish selfishness, and not in the second law of thermodynamics. See my RG-website.

In my opinion, entropy is a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system. Despite the large increase in enthalpy and entropy, the free energy difference between the closed and open conformations is relatively small.

Based on this definition, wars are not caused by science and its laws, although they help to carry out them by the production of more and lethal new weapon systems, but the ambitions of politicians and the military of the different countries, generally powerful from the military point of view, although not the only ones that initiate them, and in response to specific situations from the political, economic and military point of view.

Wars are provoked by men and its desire to dominate others as a result of certain types of ideology put in the minds of them by irresponsible governments.

Humans are much more complex than simple physical particles. If there is going to be a war,it is not because of any law of physics, but our greed and foolishness that manifests as a lethal intolerance for our kind.

I do not believe that the third world war is imminent, I think don't is possible unless someone decides to put an end to life on earth. In any case the war can not be regarded as an effect of the second law of thermodynamics. In fact no one can prevent the increase of entropy of the universe because is the same nature of the universe that determines the increase in entropy. While many are the "powerful" they want and can prevent war. The problem is that if the US and Russia are at "war" (more or less cold) all countries of the world are at "war". Trump and Putin, a few days ago, have said they will work for peaceful coexistence which in the time will lead to peace. Both presidents know it will be a long and difficult path, but that need to address with determination, because the two countries have a special responsibility in ensuring the stability and global security.

My theory it is to support a great hope: the outbreak of peace.

Many things discussed are true, but do not follow second law of thermodynamics

Dear Andreas:

Human history --and human society in general-- is a complex phenomenon that cannot be reduced to natural laws. The natural world and the social world are different realms and each one is subject to its own "laws". Of course, in a not too distant future an asteroid may collide with the Earth and all human history would disappear in an instant. But this would just be the accidental interference of an exogenous natural process on a human process --human history--, which is in itself a completely different chain of events. 

Truly: The second law of thermodynamic, as defined by Eddington: as" the arrow of time", is in our life, without want it, from before their find out. Why?. Because even we have not solved, the humankind, a trascendental problem. What it is this problem?: The energy, almost nothing. An pathetic example: We burned hidrocarbons, molecules very ordered with many chemical bond and too much energy, but only, we use a minusculun quantity, the rest of the energy it is disipated as heat. Some authors calculated a yield of less than 0,01 %. This means that we are managing very bad the resources of oil. Creating, at the same time, black carbon, carbon monoxide, CO2, H2O and heat and also, destroing oxigen molecules. This is entrophy. We are so awful destructive that we have made war for the oil, also, we have destroyed economies an killed many persons for this resource very entropic. If the chemical reaction of combustion were reversible, the humankind would not be so entropic.

It is a pity that venezuela be an threaten in this moment for the world. The venezuelan people is under controll of persons who have delivered the petroleum for satisfaction of personal ambition, vanity and to feed sindrome of narcisism of a voracious political cenaculum. They have created the conditions for a next world war.

Dear Artur,

Ultimately and vividly, I could not get your view on the present question!  Regards!

Dear Andreas Mampel

The 5 or 6 factors he mentions can explain and promote together a critical situation in humanity, exalting the less human side of our fellow men, such as intolerance in ideology, race and religion, expressed in aggressive behavior against one another, because they are not as we want and neither do they think the same as us.

These factors are essentially social, such as human miscommunication, selfishness, exploitation of a human for another that does not consider its similar, reification of people, etc ...

It seems to me that in such critical human situations they generate destructive behaviors among human beings, if we can speak of chaos in feelings and emotions, disordered thinking, disease of the spirit and alienation; But I dare not think that this is due to the second law of thermodynamics, which says that energy tends to dispersion and disorganization; That is, to entropy.

I question the participation of entropy in the social conflicts already described, because the life and consciousness of the human are a phenomenon apparently unheard of in the universe; In other words, human life has emerged on organized islands of energy (neguentropia) as on earth and probably in other similar planetary systems, within the surrounding chaos of the universe.

If man destroys his planet and himself along with his fellow men, it will be by inhuman social factors and lack of values and virtues; Eg intolerance, selfishness, anger, aggression, bad communication and corruption of the spirit, and not by the second law of thermodynamics.

regards

Jose Luis

Estimado Andreas Mampel

Los 5 o 6 factores que menciona pueden explicar y potenciar en conjunto una situación crítica en la humanidad, exaltando el lado menos humano de nuestros semejantes, como son la intolerancia en ideología, raza y religión, expresada en conductas agresivas de unos contra los otros, porque no son como queremos y tampoco piensan igual que nosotros.

Estos factores son esencialmente sociales, como mala comunicación humana, egoísmo, explotación de un humano por otro que no considera su semejante, cosificación de las personas, etc...

Me parece que en dichas situaciones humanas críticas que generan conductas destructivas entre los seres humanos, si podemos hablar de caos en sentimientos y emociones, pensamiento desordenado, enfermedad del espíritu y alienación; pero no me atrevo a pensar que esto se debe a la segunda ley de la termodinámica, la cual dice que la energía tiende a la dispersión y desorganización; esto es, a la entropía.

Pongo en duda la participación de la entropía en los conflictos sociales ya descritos, debido a que la vida y la consciencia del humano, son un fenómeno aparentemente inédito en el universo; en otros términos, la vida humana ha surgido en islas organizadas de energía (neguentropía) como en la tierra y probablemente en otros sistemas planetarios similares, dentro del caos circundante del universo.

Si el hombre destruye su planeta y a si mismo junto con sus semejantes, será por factores sociales inhumanos y falta de valores y virtudes; vg intolerancia, egoísmo, ira, agresividad, mala comunicación y corrupción del espíritu, y no por la segunda ley de la termodinámica.

Saludos

José Luis

Would be wrong to apply Scientific Laws to Human Nature. However, Nature has the capacity to handle the adversities and bounce back. I'm hoping the present situation is a short-term blip & better sense will prevail & a new world order will emerge.

Entropy is a measure of disorder. Globalization (less degree of disorder) is the feature of the word during the last few decades. 

The emergence of China, is a factor which can reduce entropy, and tend to avoid the second law of thermodinamics.

I think that historically, polarization (less entropy) was the apparent cause of Napoleon war, WWI and WWII. 

My personal view is that the 2nd law of thermodynamics does not apply in human society. The simple reason is that this system is not an isolated system (see isolated systems in 2nd law).  The human’s society is an open system that interacts with other systems and evolves. The 1st law states that the total energy of an isolated system is constant…, similarly it does not apply for a capitalist system which is the current system. The 3d law of thermodynamics depends on equilibrium and it states that at absolute zero temperature “The entropy of a perfect crystal at absolute zero is exactly equal to zero”.   

I think the lesson to get is that a capitalist system that bypasses by far the 2nd law of thermodynamics, it risks to activate the Reflexive Property of Equality,

the property that a = a and this notion will bring people to realize that are not idiots. Period.

Humans although natural but we are not the natural elements of nature but the human elements of nature that defies and bends the laws and orders of nature in order to behave differently from what nature permits, be cause of our thinking capability. When we live in a very cold or hot place, we are not part of that nature  living according to the behavior of nature but by controlling  the behavior of nature around us so that we live differently from those who live in that area naturally (we use air conditioning, heaters, coolers, etc- products of technology set us apart from those who live naturally and perish just by the timing of nature).

For instance the natural process of dying from natural global understanding is the process of entropy but we disrupt that process by our own creativity and thinking capacity, elongating life by medication and reducing the speed of entropy of nature. Therefore by purposely and mindfully guiding social behaviors on time intervals and patching them continuously can keep us from natural entropy and avoid the complete loss of order and disappear. It is when only humans reduce to pure natural animals abandoning thinking and understanding of collective well being for longevity and living only with instinct behaviors and absolute sense of self, that  we might expect the natural entropy in humans.  

Dear Andreas Mämpel,

I appreciate your level of critical thinking.

Answering to your question: My opinion is no, because any law can be applied to an integrated system model with specific assumptions and boundary conditions, which is exactly not in case of the world. 

This is an excellent question which took me considerable time to find a suitable answer for.  The answer is no, entropy increase itself does not imply social discord as a necessary consequence.  Biological life is itself an expression of negative entropy, an exporting of entropy in order to sustain itself and its organized processes.  The biology should by multiplicative extension increase negative entropy through numerical increase. 

I will speculate to explain the effects witnessed: The effect we see, the horror then, I will hypothesize is a function of the lack of emergent intelligence from the new larger system.  Instead of a healthy intra-connected single human system, as analogously in the case of a mat of bacteria, the connection between the microorganisms allowing a cooperative intelligence to emerge which guides proliferation and development, a function terminated with interrupted intra-connectivity, our race is set against itself, the single system broken apart, our unconscious connectivity in my estimation…has been shut off: we compete at every turn, and our mental topography has removed the inner means to support the healthy effect!  I believe, this paper contains the answer.  To have altered the aspects in this document, has changed my ‘luck.’  My entire world seems effortless and on track.  I believe, the loss of identifications with the world and our fellow humans, is the cause of the discord.  Theoretically, as a mat of bacteria, we should operate in cooperative mutual adjustment…I hypothesize: but for this.   

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309566203_Super-ego_and_the_neuroscience_of_empathy_from_unconscious_wish_to_manifest_behavior--a_new_human_model

Article Super-ego and the neuroscience of empathy: from unconscious ...

Where can I enter a paper on my project? Here? Let's go. but there should be a more straight-forward way. This format will not allow me to enter the figures.

SOLVING TODAY’S PROBLEMS TO ACHIEVE A BETTER WORLD

Donald V Steward

[email protected]

THE WORLD HAS FALLEN INTO A STATE OF CHAOS

Why? Because in this increasingly complex world, we are no longer able to solve the problems that are constantly facing us.

As the world is more interconnected, an action taken here can have consequences elsewhere that we are unable to predict. And those consequences elsewhere will in turn affect us in ways we might not have expected. And we don’t understand why this happens. So we do more stupid things that only exacerbate the situation.

We are floundering in a sea of problems we cannot deal with.

When we choose an action to solve one problem, there are side-effects with consequences that are likely to produce other and perhaps more severe problems that we had not anticipated. We become tangled more and more into a web we cannot escape.

This situation should not be a surprise. It should be expected if we appreciate what is happening.

The current condition has become a fertile environment for growing authoritarian governments, which we are beginning to see develop everywhere.

ENTER THE EXPLAINER

The Explainer is a novel problem solving method that uses cause-and-effects. Given a problem, the Explainer finds multiple approaches to solving the problem, and for each approach it finds the side-effects that would occur if that approach were taken. With anything less than this information, while attempting to solve one problem, there is a danger of creating other problems some of which may be more severe.

Today we are seeing this happen most everywhere. As we try to solve problems, we only dig our way further into the swamp.

The Explainer is a new way of solving problems that allows us to solve many of these problems that we could not conceive of solving before. Such a problem concerning economics and how to achieve a more prosperous future will be demonstrated later in this article.

WHY DO WE NEED A NEW PROBLEM SOLVING METHOD?

When people cannot conceive of any way a problem that adversely affects them could be solved, they become frustrated. Frustration often leads to irrational behavior, which in turn leads to disagreements, hostilities, rage, extremism, and wars. When there is a critical mass of people in this condition, the world can become extremely chaotic. That seems to be the case today.

What is needed is a new way to solve these problems so that the people who had argued over how to solve a problem can now see a new approach that will produce a solution that they might agree is superior to those they previously had in mind.

Thus, if we had a better method for solving these problems, we might have fewer disagreements, and thus have a more peaceful world.

OVERCOMING OUR HUMAN LIMITATIONS TO SOLVE MORE COMPLEX PROBLEMS

There is a limit on the number of facts and cause-and-effects that an individual has in his repertoire that he can use to solve problems. The Explainer can bring together more cause-and-effects in order to solve problems that humans would otherwise not be capable of solving.

When people have different repertoires of facts and cause-and-effects, they often disagree.

Explainer helps people who disagree see a larger set of cause-and-effects with which they may see a better solution to their problem than they each perceived before. They might then find they can agree on this better solution.

THE DISCIPLINE OF CAUSE-AND-EFFECTS

In the model we will discuss, an effect is associated with a variable that can have one of two values. Either the variable can move in the positive direction of being more desirable, or in the negative direction of being less desirable.

A cause-and-effect can have either the property that the effect moves in the same direction as the cause, or that the effect moves in the opposite direction as the cause.

This simple model has many implications and can be used to solve a very wide variety of problems.

Humans tend to act on whether their actions would be more desirable or less desirable without consideration of the size of the effect.

The Explainer begins with a set of cause-and-effects and strings these cause-and-effects together to produce paths through the cause-and-effects. In a path, each effect except the last is the cause of the next effect. Paths are also referred to as mechanisms.

Given certain but not all aspects of a behavior, one can trace backwards through the cause-and-effects to find what would produce those aspects of a behavior. But the behavior can also have many other aspects. Those aspects of the behavior can be produced in many different ways. But those things that have these aspects in common may have many other aspects that are not shared by the others.

For example, plants and animals have various behaviors in common such as the ability to acquire and metabolize food and the ability to reproduce. There are many species of plants and animals that have at least these aspects of behavior. But the other aspects of their behavior may be quite different, causing a wide variety of plants and animals.

CAUSE-AND-EFFECTS AS HYPOTHESES

The set of cause-and-effects is a hypothesis. As with any hypothesis, if it does not predict what is observed, it must be rejected.

Usually the Explainer will produce sufficient information to be able to identify the cause-and-effects that may be wrong so they can be fixed. Or it can suggest other cause-and-effects that should be added. This is a trial-and-error process.

CAUSE-AND-EFFECT CIRCUITS

The cause-and-effects can form circuits, e.g. A causes B, B causes C, and C causes A. The explainer confines the circuits into blocks. In a block, there is a path from every effect in the block to every other effect in the same block, but this would not be true if any other effect were added to the block.

A problem may have no blocks or several blocks.

The blocks can be found by rearranging the order of the effects by partitioning. See Figure 2. Partitioning reorders and renumbers the effects such that the effects occur after their causes except when this is impossible because the cause-and-effects form circuits.

After the partition, the cause-and-effects that form circuits occur in square blocks on the diagonal.

Blocks can be replaced by an equivalent set of cause-and-effects that do not contain circuits. These are called pass-throughs.

A cause entering the block can exit the block with the entering cause and exiting effect moving either in the same direction, or with them moving in opposite directions.

They can be replaced by simple cause-and-effects called pass-throughs.

If the solution of the block has the same value where the cause enters the block as the value where the effect exits the block, the pass-through cause-and-effect is positive. If the values are opposite, the pass-through is negative.

These simple cause-and-effects imitate the effects of the blocks. So from outside the block, these pass-throughs can have the same consequences as the blocks and thus together these pass-throughs can replace the blocks.

Once these replacements are made, there are no longer any cause-and-effect circuits. See Figure 3. The pass-through cause-and-effects are shown with a /. One can then begin the process of tracing paths from actions that one might take to find its effects on the goals that one wishes to achieve.

The effects along the paths are the side-effects that would also occur for each action if taken.

These paths can be found by a depth-first search, which will be discussed later.

THE EXPLAINER ON THE WEB

I propose that the Explainer be made available on a website so that people who have different perspectives on a problem can collaborate to solve that problem. This would allow people at the bottom who have knowledge about a problem to solve the problem and make their solution available to those who could implement their solution, usually the government.

This is in contrast to people with unknown sources of money and hidden agendas working from the top in secret to coerce the solutions from which they would profit without consideration for the harm done to others.

HOW THIS NEW PROBLEM SOLVING METHOD WORKS

Figure 1 shows a matrix where the columns are causes and the rows are the effects. The entries in the matrix are either S’s or O’s to indicate whether the effect moves in the Same or Opposite direction as the cause. For example, the S in the column corresponding to the effect ‘4. Current austerity’ and in the row corresponding to ‘6. High financial uncertainty about future’ means that current austerity and high financial uncertainty about the future move in the same direction. The O in column ‘8. Stimulus and Quantitative easing’ row ‘9. Small businesses do not have investments to be profitable’ shows that 8 and 9 move in opposite directions, i.e. increasing ‘8. Stimulus and Quantitative easing’ causes a decrease in ‘9. Small businesses do not have investments to be profitable’.

The cause-and-effects shown in this example relate to the various economic actions that can be taken to produce the goal of a prosperous future.

THESE FIGURES DON'T FIT THIS FORMAT. PLEASE TELL ME HOW I CAN ADD THIS PROJECT MORE PROPERLY.

Figure 1 The System of Cause-and-Effects Shown as a Matrix

Figure 2 shows a partition of the matrix in Figure 1. Square blocks appearing on the diagonal contain the circuits. Otherwise the marks are below the diagonal indicating a sequence. There can be no or several blocks.

Within a block there is a path from every effect in that block to every other effect in that same block, but this would not be true if any other effect were added to the block.

The first six effects in this example are considered primaries. They do not depend on any other effects. They may be actions that can be taken, or assumptions that might be made that will also have consequences. 1, 3, 5, and 6 are actions. 2 and 4 are assumptions. Whether or not one makes an assumption can affect consequences just as whether one takes an action will.

Figure 2 The System of Cause-and-Effects Partitioned to Show Blocks Containing the Circuits

The square blocks on the diagonal contain the circuits. The O in the upper right hand corner of the big block can be ignored because is it only a feedback that reinforces the solution. It tells us nothing new. We are only interested in circuits that are not just simple feedbacks.

SOLUTIONS FOR THE BLOCKS

A solution for the small block that does not include any feedbacks can be found by depth-first search. If a search does not find values for all of the variables in the block, the search may be repeated starting with a variable that has not yet been assigned.

A solution for a block can cycle in either the Forwards or Backwards direction. The assignment of which is called Forward and which is called Backwards is arbitrary.

The two solutions are shown to the right of the block.

We have looked as cause-and-effects from the basis of whether the cause and effect move in the same direction or opposite directions. It is often easier to understand by considering when the initial cause in the path moves Up, how the other effects in the path move either Up or Down.

In the forward direction we see that as ’15. Small businesses unable to invest in themselves’ moves Up, ’16. Big businesses invest in or take over small businesses’ moves Down, causing ’17. Small businesses do not have investments to be profitable’ to move Up, causing ’18. Small businesses profitable’ to move Down, causing ’15. Small businesses unable to invest in themselves’ to move Up, completing the circuit.

The backwards solution causes the Up’s and Down’s to be reversed. As ’15. Small businesses unable to invest in themselves’ moves Down ’16. Big businesses invest in or take over small businesses’ moves Up, causing ’17. Small businesses do not have investments to be profitable’ to move Down, causing ’18. Small businesses profitable’ to move Up, causing ’15. Small businesses unable to invest in themselves’ to move Down, completing the circuit.

It can be seen that the Forward cycle is undesirable, while the backwards solution is desirable. Various actions may produce paths that select either the undesirable or the desirable solution. We will see later how this selection occurs.

REPLACING THE EFFECTS OF THE BLOCKS WITH EQUIVALENT PASS-THROUGHS

When a cause enters a block, the effect that exits the block may have the same or opposite value in the solution as the entering cause.

If the solution has the same value when it exits the block as the cause that entered from outside the block, it is equivalent to a simple cause-and-effect with the characteristic of Same. If they are opposite, it is equivalent to a simple cause-and-effect with the characteristic of Opposite.

Since the solutions have values for each effect that are the opposite of each other, what is same and opposite will be identical for either solution chosen.

These simple cause-and-effects have the same result for causes that don’t enter a block as if they passed through the block. They are called pass-throughs.

Thus, we can replace the blocks with their equivalent pass-throughs. This allows us to work with a system that no longer has blocks.

Figure 3 shows the new matrix once the blocks have been replaced by simple pass-through cause-and-effects that together are equivalent to the effects of the block. These pass-throughs are shown in the matrix with a / before the cause-and-effect.

Then given this new matrix that no longer has circuits because they have been replaced by pass-throughs, one can begin to trace the cause-and-effect paths from each action that one may take or assumption that one might make to determine how it affects the goal or goals that one wishes to achieve.

Figure 3 The Blocks Containing the Circuits Replaced by Equivalent Pass Throughs

If an action has a negative effect on the goal, the action can be reversed to produce a positive effect on the goal, and vice versa.

There can be multiple paths from the same action to the goals. The cause-and- effect paths from the action to the goals give the side effects that would occur if that action were taken. To get all of the side effects of an action, one must consider all the paths from that action to the goals.

Figures A1 and A2 in the appendix show all the paths from the actions that can be taken or the assumptions made in this example to the goal of improving future prosperity.

One can read these paths as follows: ‘a S b’ means that whatever the value of a is, the value of b is the same. ‘a O b’ means that whatever the value of a is, the value of b is the opposite.

Consider ‘a S b O c S d’. Because it has an odd number of O’s, it would have a net meaning equivalent to a ‘a O d’. If there were an even number of O’s, it would be equivalent to ‘a S d’.

For example, if we had ‘a S b O c S d S e’, it could also be interpreted as ‘Up a’ causes ‘Up b’ that causes ‘Down c’ that causes ‘Down d’, that causes ‘Down e’, where Up means more desirable and Down means less desirable. This may be easier to understand than using Same and Opposite.

Since the values can be positive or negative and a cause-and-effect can make the value of the effect to be either the Same or Opposite as the value of the cause, a path can have a net effect that reflects whether the initial cause has the same or opposite effect on the goal. If the number of O’s in the path is even, the net effect of the path is Same. If the number of O’s in the path is odd, the net effect is Opposite.

These individual paths are shown in the Appendix in Figures A1 and A2. An S is shown to the right of a path if the net effect of that path is S, i.e. if there is an even number of O’s in the path. It shows an O for Opposite if the number of O’s in the path is odd.

Paths can be found by a depth-first search. In a depth-first search, a cause is traced until it finds a branch. A branch occurs when a cause has more than one effect. The search then traces each branch one at a time, and does this every time it confronts a new branch.

Paths that enter the blocks

Paths the do not directly enter a block will have no effect on the cycling of the solutions. Paths that do enter a block will cause the solution for that block to cycle either Forward or Backward. Figure A1 in the appendix shows the paths that do not enter a block. Figure A2 in the appendix shows the paths that do enter a block.

To the far right of the paths in Figure A2 in the appendix is shown either an F or B to indicate whether that path causes a cycling in the Forward or Backwards direction.

Whether the cycling is Forward or Backward depends on whether the net effect, U or D, of the path entering the block lines up for that same effect with the same U or the D in the solution. The net effect of the path entering the block will be Up if the path to that point is S, i.e. the path up to that point has an even number of O’s. The net effect of the path entering the block will be Down if the number of O’s in the path to that point is odd.

One might say that the path entering a block selects the cycle upon which it can catch a ride in the same direction.

Figure A1 shows the paths that DO NOT enter the block. Figure A2 shows the paths that DO enter the block.

Paths that DO NOT enter a block will not select cycles. Paths that DO enter the block will select the cycle in either the Forward or Backward direction. An F in Figure A2 is shown to the far right of the path indicating that the entering path selects the Forward cycle. A B is shown to the far right if the entering path selects the Backward cycle.

HERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF THE CONCLUSIONS WE CAN DRAW FROM THE ANALYSIS OF THIS PROBLEM

Effects ‘1 Government guarantees loans by big businesses to small businesses’, ‘3. Automation’, ‘5. Severe deficit reduction’, and ‘6. Stimulus and Quantitative easing’ are actions that one can take or not take.

Effects ‘2. Fear Congress will not resolve fiscal crisis’, and ‘4. Belief that increase in wealth at top will create jobs’ are assumptions that one may or may not accept. Both actions and assumptions can affect the path to the goal.

Here are the actions that can affect the goal and how they affect the goal.

‘1 Government guarantees loans by big businesses to small businesses’ has the result of advancing the goal.

‘3. Automation’ will advance the goal.

‘5. Severe deficit reduction’ can through either of two mechanisms either advance or inhibit the goal, as will be shown later.

‘6. Stimulus and Quantitative easing’ also can involve different mechanisms that will either positively or negatively affect the goal. Those paths that do not include ’12. Tax increase on wealthy’ have a positive effect on the goal. Those paths that do include 12 have a negative effect on the goal since less tax will be collected on the wealthy that we can assume will have less income.

Let’s refer to Figure A1 in the appendix where we will see two paths between ‘5. Severe deficit reduction’ and their effects on the goal ’20. Future Prosperity and Competitive advantage over other countries’.

5 S 8 S 20 S

5 O 19 S 20 O

Note that by the first path ‘5. Severe deficit reduction’ can have a positive effect on the goal by ‘8. Decreased deficit burden on future generations’. But by the second path, it will have a negative effect on the goal by crowding out ’19. Spending on education, infrastructure, and research’. That path would have a harmful effect on the goal of future prosperity. Thus, when considering how to decrease the deficit, one should balance the consequences of these two different mechanisms.

We might expect that ‘6. Stimulus and Quantitative easing’ would have an unalloyed positive effect on the goal of ’20. Future prosperity and Competitive advantage over other countries’. But we note that each path that shows where 6 decreases 20 involves a decrease in ’12. Tax increase on wealthy’, which results in a decrease in ’19. Spending on education, infrastructure, and research’ that inhibits the goal 20. We assume that the wealthy have a higher income on which they will pay more taxes.

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge the contributions of Stuart Williams for his contribution to the programming, and Margaret Barson and Alison Weber for their contributions to making this more comprehensible.

APPENDIX – PATHS

Paths that do NOT enter blocks

1 S 20 S

2 S 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S19 S 20 S

2 S 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 20 S

2 S 10 S 11 S 12 S 19 S 20 S

3 S 7 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 19 S 20 S

3 S 7 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 20 S

3 S 7 S 11 S 12 S 19 S 20 S

3 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 19 S 20 S

3 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 20 S

3 S11 S 12 S 19 S 20 S

4 O 12 S 13 S 14 S 19 S 20 O

4 O 12 S 13 S 14 S 20 O

4 O 12 S 19 S 20 O

5 S 8 S 20 S

5 S 9 S 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 19 S 20 S

5 S 9 S 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 20 S

5 O 19 S 20 O

5 S 9 O 20 O

5 S 9 0 19 S 20 O

5 0 19 S 20 O

6 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 19 S 20 S

6 S 11 S 12 S 19 S 20 S

6 S 19 S 20 S

6 S 20 S

6 O 7 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 19 S 20 O

6 O 7 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 20 O

6 O 7 S 11 S 12 S 19 S 20 O

6 O 9 S 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 19 S 20 O

6 O 9 S 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 20 O

6 O 9 S 10 S 11 S 12 S 19 S 20 O

6 O 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 19 S 20 O

6 O 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 19 S 20 O

Figure A1 Paths/Mechanisms through the Cause-and-Effects that DO NOT enter blocks

A gap shows when there is a branch because a cause has more than one effect.

Figure A2 shows the paths that DO enter the block. These paths will produce either a Forward cycling or a Backward cycling. This is shown as an F or B to the far right of the path.

1 S16 S 20 S B

1 S 18 S 20 S B

2 S 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 18 S 20 S B

2 S 10 O 16 S 20 O F

3 S 7 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 18 S 20 S B

3 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 18 S 20 S B

4 O 12 S 13 S 14 S 18 S 20 O F

5 S 9 S 10 S 12 S 14 S 18 S 20 S B

5 S 9 O 16 S 20 O F

6 O 9 O 18 O 20 S B

6 O 10 O 16 S 20 S B

6 S 18 S 20 S B

6 0 15 S 20 S B

6 O 17 O 20 S B

6 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 18 S 20 S B

6 O 7 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 18 S 20 O F

6 O 9 S 10 S 11 S12 S 14 S 18 S 20 O F

6 O 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 18 S 20 O F

6 O 10 S 11 S 12 S 13 S 14 S 18 S 20 O F

Figure A2 Paths/Mechanisms through the Cause-and-Effects that DO Enter Blocks

PLEASE TELL ME HOW I CAN ENTER THIS MORE PROPERLY WHERE I CAN INCLUDE THE FIGURES!

I do not think the risk of WW is increasing.  Steven Pinker has made a strong case that violence and war has been decreasing for a long time, and continue to do so.   Prevention of another WW is likely to be driven by computer science and artificial intelligence rather than by physics.

Dear All,

Thanks for the answers… and, sorry for the long silence – I needed some time to give a valuable feedback.

First, I have to add some answers which where send to me via private messages (I think they accidentally pushed the 'reply' button...).

Dibakar Pal:

'Man is basically imperialist. Some can conquer it, by the influence of good culture. Some cannot. The second category is a threat to the civilization and enhances the 2nd law.'

Padmanabhan Krishnan:

'As more and more economies are out of the third world bracket, those still impoverished but abundant in resources are occupied by predatory and hegemonistic countries. Actually it is not third world war that is the impending danger but the war for the third worlds (or to put it with pun ` third world'-war) that is disturbing the whole world. Syria, Iraq and a few other countries are standing examples of what some countries invite, by not following the path of peace. Extremes are to blame in this case. Entropy increases because of these extremes.'

Ana María Sánchez Peralta:

‘Life is opposite to disorder. The consequence of life can be the same like Life. I think for that this cannot be a good premise. But it's a good idea. (Our knowledge make US to decide our steps. Freedom. We have freedom to choice). Best regards.’

Sushanta Kumar Bhowmik:

‘In also economics, it is a meaningless development of this world of non-WWIII situation. In thermodynamics, entropy in the environment is the major factor of temperature equilibrium, that is completely ignored by the world-leaders, even in motivated research that full of corruption.

May I request you all to follow my presentation : https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0FqvLHfNDWuY2NaYVVFRGF6Z3M

We, the member of this civilization never want to be self-destroyed from this universe. Still our economist and policy-maker international power-leaders are undoubtedly practicing the same of WWII in 1940. The NASA-scientist has informed that the present invention of Mars is a resultant environment of only two blast of hydrogen bombs.

Still, we have to try our best to save our beloved world.

Andreas Mämpel, and others may try to communicate ’

Taimur ul Hassan:

‘Human intelligence has the largest potential to keep life as blissful as it could, but only by engaging in collective consciousness -as said by Rich.‘

I hope I did not forget something…

Now let me give some summary and further information:

The question I asked can on the one hand be seen as a continuation of the following questions:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Are_we_already_in_the_middle_of_3rd_world_war_or_at_least_close_before

https://www.researchgate.net/post/In_the_unlikely_case_that_a_third_worldwide_war_would_break_out_what_would_be_the_possible_trigger_and_scenario

https://www.researchgate.net/post/If_World_War_III_WWIII_should_break_out_whom_would_you_hold_responsible

I added answers in all of these threads.

On the other hand I think about my Project ‘New World’ and some strange problems occurring there. The link to thermodynamics I got while reading a book of Gerard t' Hooft ("The Cellular Automaton Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics", see: https://www.researchgate.net/project/1-Wrapping-up-the-proofs-for-my-book-on-The-Cellular-Automaton-Interpretation-of-Quantum-Mechanics-2-The-pure-state-theory-for-black-holes-using-antipodal-identification and http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319412849 or http://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-319-41285-6) which suggests that the whole universe can be seen as a deterministic cellular automaton. This means that everything what happens now or in the future is already determined by the initial conditions of the big bang - but we cannot make an exact prediction of the future because it is impossible to calculate 'faster than nature itself'. Because of the mentioned determinism I came to the idea to take the well known (and well proven) thermodynamics as the basis for our discussion because this is more calculable and understandable compared with a cellular automation which rules as well as the initial condition are almost unknown.

Finally I asked this question because many things happens which probably can cause war (see the explanation in the question) and on the other hand many things which could prevent war does not happen (although they seem to be possible). The most painful fact (at least for me) is that there is only very few progress on my project 'New World' - it is like crashing into an 'invisible wall' again and again... - so I wonder why I am hindered. So, in a dark hour I feared that thermodynamics is that 'invisible wall'.

I am very glad to hear that most of you think that the second law of thermodynamics is not the (only) reason for war - entropy can increase without malicious destruction. The (direct) application of thermodynamics to social and/or cultural issues might be an oversimplification – as many of you mentioned. On the other hand it seems to be possible to apply some similar statistics to this topics. One main difference between thermodynamics and the emergence of war is that war is often declared by few powerful politicians – not (or better: not directly, if the politicians are democratically elected) by the whole population. And the few politicians do not act as statistical as a huge population (i. e. less ‘thermodynamical’ if we assume such a connection). Another point is the fact that the second law of thermodynamics is only applicable for closed systems (it was mentioned in some newer posts) - so the earth is able to release its entropy into space and keeps its entropy low this way. Another example for 'exporting' the entropy is live: every living being keeps its own entropy low and releases entropy into the environment (living cells are far away from thermodynamical equilibrium, therefore they need energy, a cell in thermodynamical equilibrium is dead). Finally the application of thermodynamics to a whole planet is difficult because the entropy is hard to define for such a complex system (how many states, which distributions, do we really want to consider every single atom?!)

There was also information entropy mentioned whose increase could destroy our data – there are some connections between thermodynamical entropy and information entropy, but I have to read some more articles about that to understand that properly. To my understanding, re-writing increases the magnitude of the wanted data and/or suppresses noise.

The publication mentioned by Artur Braun (“Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf’s law”, https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0412004.pdf) is very exciting and let me think about some of my unfinished theories. It is very interesting which various effects can be predicted and described by power laws. Some years ago I investigated a process which is similar to the random walk – it was just a ‘fun project’ but now, with the information of the paper I think that it is more valuable than expected. I found my old statistics about that some days ago and when I find some time I will bring them in a readable form and add them to my RG-Profile.

Ok, lets start with the distribution of the size of cities and the distribution of wealth. As shown in the paper, both follow a power law. But it is a frightening fact that the distribution of wealth has an exponent of about 2.1 – it means an extremely imbalance which can cause social riots. To make the world safer it would be necessary to increase the exponent to avoid the extremes (richness as well as poverty; for the statistics, see FIG. 6 on page 11, an exponent of about 3.5 would be much better for a stable society). We should be aware that the concentration of money is accompanied by a concentration of (political) power which enforces itself (recently I heard that democratic processes are undermined by such influences – it is more likely to organize a majority if the supporters of a law have more money!). To finally solve that problem we must abolish the money and find a new social system (a quite good attempt has been made in my thread https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_anyone_have_an_idea_how_to_abolish_money_and_replace_it_by_something_better).

Let us consider the distribution of the size of cities – the exponent is about 2.3. The size of a city has some influence to the environment, so if the exponent becomes extreme (below 2) the hugest cities will cause problems (although it is an indirect effect – for example smog is caused by pollution, so if we have a clean huge city everything is OK, but a small city with few inhabitants will have no smog even with low environmental standards…). One can think ahead: for example if one considers the (distribution of) distance of transports if the exponent of the distribution of the size of cities has a given value… Then one can optimize the distributions.

Now let me go back to the completely different issue of Gerard t’ Hooft’s cellular automata: If we assume that one cell has the size of the Planck scale (about 10^-35 m in distance and about 10^-44 s in time) we will get an extremely huge grid even to simulate an atom! And, on the other hand we must be aware that the atoms (or at least the protons and electrons) are stable – this necessarily requires a periodic or quasi-periodic structure in our cellular automaton. So, we have to go back to statistics… for example we could make a coarse-grained grid which gives the number of activated cells in each ‘super’-cell… some lines below I will develop the model further but simplification will be even more difficult.

It is very interesting that the maze (in: Maze Solving Using Fatty Acid Chemistry, mentioned in Artur Brauns post from 29th December, link: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263396991_Maze_Solving_Using_Fatty_Acid_Chemistry) can be solved and the process driven by Marangoni flow ‘knows’ the concept of distance to find the shortest solution (and also all solutions, which is also a difficult task if the maze is larger).

Although it is a huge jump I want to derive a theory (or better: a working hypothesis – it is highly speculative and therefore it could be horribly wrong) which combines the information about distances with the cellular automaton mentioned above. A cellular automaton has rules which defines the state of a cell using the states of the adjacent cells. Let us now consider a world which is not quantized. Then we must replace our cellular automaton by a system which is based on distances instead (and maybe some directions, if the model is anisotropic – but I do not expect that there is such an anisotropy). Now we have to consider the number of dimensions of the system. We know the existence of four dimensions for sure (three spatial and one temporal dimension – these are unified to the 4-dimensional space-time in general relativity). Other theories (like String Theory) use 10 or 11 dimensions. For our model I expect that the number of dimensions should be infinite (maybe even fractal – it is hard to define if ‘infinity’ is a continuation of the integers or the real numbers but probably it will not have an influence). Nevertheless, I hope that it is possible to derive something useful from a simplified model with a finite number of dimensions. Because we have removed the quantization from our model we need a continuous function which describes the behavior of the system. I am quite sure that this function can be described in terms of fractional differential equations (i.e. differential equations which contains non-integer derivatives) with its non-local properties (see: https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_can_I_improve_my_numerical-analytical_approximation_of_fractional_derivatives_integrals_to_achieve_good_approximation_quality_at_higher_times – the problems I face in numerical calculations are mainly due to non-local effects). Each point in space-time only contains information about the distance to every other point in the universe. So we finally have just an empty space which knotty space-time defines all the matter and energy and all the effects we know or do not know. Simplification (to keep the model calculable) might be possible by reducing the number of dimensions and the complexity of the differential equations of distance function. One can also think about the re-introduction of a grid but one should be aware that this generates a considerable loss of information.

In Gerard t’ Hooft’s Book it is also discussed if free will can exist or not. Since his model is strictly deterministic he states that there cannot be a free will (i.e. free will is an illusion). Unfortunately it is very likely that he is right. Our thoughts are driven by quantum effects which we cannot control since they simply follow the laws of nature. So maybe we have the problem that a 3rd World War is predefined in the initial conditions of Big Bang and the laws of nature (although it is also predefined that I will fight against an outbreak of war).

Finally, I hope that I can establish contact to Gerard t’ Hooft, since I need his model (maybe with my extensions mentioned above) as a major base for my project ‘New World’ – it is necessary to develop the point 1.1.3 ‘Space-time geometrical approach’, which is the key point for success (at least the key point of the theoretical part).

Let me now go back to thermodynamics again (that is much easier …) some time ago I found a project by Mirza Arshad Ali Beg which discusses the connection between war and thermodynamics as well (see: https://www.researchgate.net/project/1-Living-in-Entropy-Driven-World-Socio-Physicochemical-Theory-on). There are also some publications concerning this issue. Unfortunately it is quite huge, so, until now I found only some time to skim over it.

@Vladimir Valentinovich Egorov

I am a follower of your project ‘Dozy chaos’, so I know your argumentation. But one can probably derive similar results although starting from completely different premises. Starting from introspective dozy chaos we get genomes which are programmed to form egoistic humans. This egoism leads finally to self-destruction (war). Starting from the second law of thermodynamics we observe the tendency that the amount of disorder increases. So ‘highly ordered systems’ like humans should tend to self-destruction to fulfill the laws of thermodynamics. So, both approaches lead to the same result. (Maybe both are only special cases of the same, more general theory, see above). Question: If we are ruled by dozy chaos, would it be possible to ‘help’ dozy chaos by forming a ‘super intelligence’ in order to explore itself much more effectively?

@András Bozsik

The problem of secret project is that the investigations are often done in relatively small research groups. If the groups become bigger usually some information accidentally come out. So it is not very likely that some of these groups will be successful. Nevertheless, if you know someone who work in such a group, try to persuade him/her or even the whole group to join RG and follow (or better: contribute to) my project – it would increase the likeliness of success extremely.

The side effects of immortal life consists of two parts:

1. Those effects which are already known in 'mortal life' but could be magnified if immortality becomes possible. The main problems of this category are environmental problems (which would be magnified due to increasing population) and social problems (which cannot be 'solved' by any violently interaction any more).

I already started to tackle the social problems using Q&A in RG. Money as well as our government should be replaced by some self-organising structures. The replacement of money is partly developed (although the details must be improved) while for the replacement of government there exists just the idea - that needs further creative thinking.

2. Effects which arises due to increasing population. This leads us to the huge topic of space colonisation. Until now I found a project that has to do with space colonisation but, unfortunately, its author calls it a 'fun project' which is mainly thought as an exercise for his students. So I would not expect too much...

On the other hand there are many side effects which are very positive (social problems due to aging, old-age poverty, expensive health-care, … all these problems will simply vanish, if the project will be completely successful)

@All

Why not ‘redesigning the rollercoaster‘ as mentioned in the article linked in Artur Brauns last Post (link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4090434/Is-civilisation-heading-COLLAPSE-Mathematical-historian-predicts-political-turmoil-peak-2020s.html)?

@Anthony G Gordon

I hope you are right, but unfortunately it can happen that politicians think that war is very unlikely (or even impossible) which might lead to risky politics (nationalism, for example). I am quite sure, if the European Union decays it will take less than ten years before war between France and England or France and Germany occurs.

We must convert our world to a safer place to make sure that no war will happen again – that means destroy all weapons.

@All

I hope I did not forget too much – the problem is highly non-linear, so it might be an advantage to think in networks as I always do, but, of course, it is hard to write it down since a written text is linear … sorry again for the very late answer, I hope you are still interested.

Best Regards

Andreas

Article Maze Solving Using Fatty Acid Chemistry

Dear Friends:

 In other scenery of RG I said, the thermodynamic is a consequence of an philosophycal conception that state the man is a big problem and not a solution. After, this philosophycal conception transform in science when was mathemathized. But, this means that the man is right now even throwing stones. We have not advanced mentally, because the dominant paradigms are selfishs, ambitious and irresponsables.

In scenery pre war, the anarchy domine, so that, some groups play to the reorganization and employ the resources with only one benefit: own. If the science is a social construction, then the true is a quimeric target, false, absurd. The important is to have power and reach it.

The conception that gave birth to entropy is being superated slowly, but we must jump large and high, this is a moment very important to change the paradigm. From not do it, we will be losted.

Regards

Dear Andreas,

                          Second law of Thermodynamics may be considered as 'Theory of Everything' but the scientists are nowhere near using or even relating the activities of the universe in this frame.

If we go by your question then please consider the first 2 world wars. the world wars happened but the world was REBUILT (arranged/ in-randomized) again to give us a more advanced & efficient world. So, does that goes against the II law of Thermodynamics? of course not.

I believe in the first line of your question in the following context:

 wars/destruction followed by resettlement followed by wars/ destruction......this chain AS A WHOLE, 'until the end of the universe' are happening in such a way that the II law of thermodynamics is being followed.

Dear Colleague,

You write: “The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system always increases over time.”

This statement is incorrect in this case. The point is that this statement is valid only for an ideal gas system! All this can be read in good textbooks of physics, physical chemistry! Read, please, the Application about entropy (5.1. Misunderstandings in Ideas about Entropy) in my article “On General Physical Principles of Biological Evolution”

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314187646_On_General_Physical_Principles_of_Biological_Evolution :

“Many  discrepancies  in  understanding  the  problems  of  life  and  evolution  from  the  standpoint  of physics and physical chemistry are typically associated with misconceptions in understanding entropy [4-7].  The  term  "entropy"  was  coined  by  Rudolf  Clausius.  Following his model of the world (universe), he  stated: "The energy of the  world is constant.  The entropy of the  world tends to the maximum".  Later this  statement was  chosen by  J.W. Gibbs  as an  epigraph  to his  paper  "On the Equilibrium of Heterogeneous Substances". These scientists have given this statement in relation to their model of the universe. This model corresponds to a simple isolated system of ideal gas, i.e., an isolated  system of  ideal gas,  in which the  energy and  volume are  constant and  only the  work of expansion is performed. The entropy of such a system can only increase! It  should be  noted  that when we  speak  about the  ideal  model that would  correspond to  the real

universe, it would be necessary to accept the unreal assumption that any form of energy in the real universe will be transformed into thermal energy. Only in this case, and under additional unrealistic assumptions, the real universe "would turn" into the Clausius–Gibbs model of the ideal system. However, science amateurs applied  representations of simple systems to systems of other types, in which interactions takes place between particles of different nature (interactions of  molecules or other objects of different hierarchies) and to systems which interact with the environment.  Some scientists, who are not professionals in the relevant fields of knowledge, did not escape such errors. This led to unimaginable confusion and slowed down the development of science for more than a century. There are  thousands  of  publications  in  scientific  journals  and  popular  literature  containing  marked misunderstandings. To these were added incorrect ideas on negentropy and on dissipative structures in the living world  and the  false identification of "the information entropy" with the thermodynamic entropy.

The origin of life and its evolution can be easily explained from the standpoint of hierarchical near-equilibrium thermodynamics of complex dynamic systems. This thermodynamics is established on a solid foundation  of equilibrium thermodynamics,  thermodynamics of R. Clausius,  J.W. Gibbs, and other great scientists.”

Hierarchical thermodynamics of society in the long-term time scale can predict war with a certain probability under conditions of the constancy of numerous parameters of the existence of societies and states. Here, the "spontaneous" emergence of conflicts is determined by the change in the specific values of Gibbs energy of the formation of the corresponding "structures of human society". Entropy has nothing to do with the very complex issue under discussion. I would not advise colleagues who do not know thermodynamics professionally to discuss such issues.

See please about spontaneous and non-spontaneous processes in evolution:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314187646_On_General_Physical_Principles_of_Biological_Evolution

Thank you!

Article On General Physical Principles of Biological Evolution

May be, chaos theory is more suitable

Dear Dr. Tez,

In thermodynamics and the sciences associated with this field of knowledge, there are many mistakes and misunderstandings. This is primarily due to the fact that amateurs and people who do not have a proper education want to join the big science and make discoveries. However, science requires education and professionalism! I would advise you to be cautious of any unreasonable statements.

Yours faithfully,

Georgi

Misunderstandings in ideas about entropy and second law

Many misunderstandings in understanding the problems of life and evolution from the standpoint of physics and physical chemistry are typically associated with misconceptions in understanding entropy. The term "entropy" coined Rudolf Clausius. According to his "model" of the world (universe), he presented a statement: "The energy of the world is constant. The entropy of the world tends to the maximum". Later this statement    was chosen by JW Gibbs as an epigraph to the paper "On the Equilibrium of Heterogeneous Substances". These scientists have given this statement in relation to their model of the universe. This model corresponds to a simple isolated system of ideal gas, i.e. isolated system of ideal gas, energy and volume of this system are constant and in which only the work of expansion is performed. Entropy of such a system can only increase!

It should be noted that when we say on ideal model, which would correspond to the real universe, it would be necessary to accept the unreal assumption that any form of energy real universe will be transformed into thermal energy. Only in this case, also under additional unrealistic assumptions, the real universe "would turn" into the model of ideal system of Clausius - Gibbs.

However, lovers of science have applied representations on simple systems to systems of other types, in which the interactions takes place between particles of different nature (interactions of molecules or other objects of different hierarchies) and to systems which interact with the environment.  Some scientists, who are not professionals in the relevant fields of knowledge, have not escaped such errors. This has led to unimaginable confusion. This has slowed down the development of science, more than on a century. There are thousands of publications in scientific journals and popular literature containing marked misunderstandings. To these were added incorrect ideas on the negentropy and on the dissipative structures in the living world, and the false identification of "the information entropy" with the thermodynamic entropy.

The origin of life and its evolution can be easily explained from the standpoint of hierarchical near equilibrium thermodynamics of complex dynamic systems. This thermodynamics established on a solid foundation of equilibrium thermodynamics - thermodynamics of Rudolf Clausius, JW Gibbs and other great scientists. http://www.membrana.ru/particle/17266 

Scan the shelves of a bookshop or a public library and you will see that most of the books are about the evanescent concerns of today... They take so much for granted, wholly forgetting how hard won was the scientific knowledge that gave us the comfortable and safe lives we enjoy. We are so ignorant of the facts upon which science and our scientific culture are established that we give equal place on our bookshelves to the nonsense of astrology, creationism, and junk science. At first, they were there to entertain, or to indulge our curiosity, and we did not take them seriously. . Now they are too often accepted as fact. 

James Lovelock

Science, 8 May, 2000

Thermodynamics and its second law are definitely unacceptable here. Thermodynamics relates only to inanimate systems and generally does not explain the phenomenon of the origin of life, and therefore can not explain its decline. All this does not exclude the risk of World War III, but the causes of these risks are not related to thermodynamics, but are directly related to two factors. The first factor is the strongly selfish nature of man. The second factor is an extremely high level of modern technological progress, with which the egoistic nature of man can not cope constructively. Hence the risk of a global catastrophe is initiated by the modern man himself. This leads to a constructive way of solving this problem. We should become much better, thinking more about others than about ourselves. Either we need to slow down the technological progress. It is even better to do both.

Dear Vladimir Valentinovich,

Your statement «Thermodynamics and its second law are definitely unacceptable here. Thermodynamics relates only to inanimate systems and generally does not explain the phenomenon of the origin of life, and therefore can not explain its decline» contradicts all the achievements of science! This I find it difficult even to comment on. I think this is a bad joke!

Dear Georgi,

Thermodynamics gives us an even less detailed description of nature in comparison with statistical physics. Statistical physics, which operates with random processes, certainly can not claim to explain the phenomenon of life, the nature of which is obviously not accidental, but purposeful, which is associated with the self-organization of organic matter, both structural and dynamic. To apply thermodynamics, as the author of this question suggests, to such an extremely complex self-organized system, that is the human community, is impossible because of the considerations I have quoted above. In fact, the question under discussion takes us to the field of scholasticism, which is an extremely dangerous behavior, if we bear in mind that this is about the fate of human civilization.

Уважаемый Владимир Валентинович,

Термодинамическая самоорганизация вещества на всех уровнях организации живых систем хорошо описывается близкой к равновесию термодинамикой. Для оценки стабильности структур используются методы равновесной термодинамики!

Что касается конфликтов, то вероятность их возникновения увеличивается в связи с ростом удельной функции Гиббса образования социальных структур. Конечно, вероятность возникновения конфликтов также определяется и случайными факторами. В связи со сложностью задачи, я не собираюсь давать какие-либо предсказания в настоящее время.

Посмотрите, пожалуйста: Life - A Complex Spontaneous Process Takes Place against the Background of Non-Spontaneous Processes Initiated by the Environment

https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/life--a-complex-spontaneous-process-takes-place-against-the-background-of-nonspontaneous-processes-initiated-by-the-environment-2157-7544-1000188.pdf

и прикрепленный файл.

Entropy: A concept that is not a physical quantity

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230554936_Entropy_A_concept_that_is_not_a_physical_quantity

No. The second law of thermodynamics has nothing to do with the risk of war for a number of reasons, including ones presented above by Dr. Egorov. In his reference to the real culprits - "a selfish man" and "high level of technological progress", Dr. Egorov believes that we have to reduce either one of those factors to reduce the risk of war. I would add that reducing both factors concurrently wouldn't do it too. However, I don't buy either of those solutions as unrealistic ones.

There is a saying that a man falling off a cliff will catch any extended hand, regardless it is a close fried or a bitter enemy. That's a fear factor. It worked in the past, and it will work in the future. Several bitter nuclear enemies will have to unite together against the most scary one - the nuclear weapon itself. Unfortunately, a full comprehension of this necessity will most likely come by the time the rivals' capabilities in producing, delivering, and protecting weapons will become very close and competitive. It will take time and resources, and will keep the world in a high jeopardy. If we survive this period, and once the global balance will be understood, people will see the agreement of a drastic drop of the level of nuclear weapons and its auxiliary means. So that it's gonna be a fight between a fear to be behind and a comprehension of huge danger and economic losses in peoples' minds.

Dear Len,

I support your realistic view of things. First, fear as a quick reflection on nuclear danger, then the inclusion of the mind in the mass consciousness as a long-term reflection.