• Home
• Overview
  • Philosophy of HCS
  • What is HCS?
  • Why is HCS Important Now?
  • Ethics and Physics
• Theory
  • Wave Theory
  • History of the Wave
  • History of the Wave - Part 2
  • Emotions of Change
  • The Wiggle and the Pop
  • The Wiggle and the Pop - Part 2
  • A New Look at Normal
• Issues & Solutions
• Reviews
• Articles
  • Sharkonomics
  • The Hard Way: Lessons Learned from Economic Collapse
• Vital Links
• About HCSI
• Contact Us

the wiggle and the pop

Paul Kordis, October 2008

In the movie Enter the Dragon the martial arts expert Bruce Lee is seen working with a student who just doesn't seem to get the essence of a particular kick. Bruce instructs him to do it "with feeling," but the kid still has trouble getting beyond the technique to the spirit of the move. So Bruce provides an illustration, "It's like a finger pointing away to the moon," he observes, stretching out his arm and pointing towards the sky. At the same time the boy begins to stare at Bruce's finger and Bruce smacks him on top of the head, saying, "Don't look at the finger, or you'll miss all of that heavenly glory!"

In these days of economic, environmental, human capital crises not only are the experts, pundits, and provocateurs pointing fingers at each other to avoid blame but they are also staring intensely at the finger itself.

Several years ago I wrote that a convergence of unsustainable political, economic, environmental, and religious trends were about to create a bifurcation of epic proportion, one that would threaten the very existence of life as we know it on this planet. I also suggested that this bifurcation would follow a very predictable pattern. Following is an excerpt from a more recent iteration:

These unsustainable trends are rapidly approaching an omega point or singularity (Broderick, 2001)... . Simply put this means that things might get much better, or they might get much worse, but they will most certainly not continue in the same way. This is where bifurcation comes into play.

In keeping with general models of chaos theory (Briggs & Peat, 1989; Gleick, 1987; Prigogine & Stengers, 1984) and catastrophe theory (Castrigiano & Hayes, 2004; Poston & Stewart, 1996) the following figure illustrates the point:

Note: Using the above equation this simplified bifurcation curve shows the “wiggle” and “pop” phenomena. The "wiggle" is overemphasized relative to the rest of the graph.

The above figure is a simplification of a well-known phenomenon in chaos theory called bifurcation. In this case, the blue line represents the combination of spikes spoken of earlier, although they are turned on their side in order to better illustrate this phenomenon. The horizontal axis represents an increase in the tuning parameter. The vertical axis represents the ability of the system to function.

Natural systems, including humanity and human systems, are generally open systems in that their structure and function are to various degrees determined by the energy moving through them. When this energy, or tuning parameter, increases, so does entropy. With each increase in the tuning parameter the system moves closer to an attractor which appears to the casual observer to be a point of equilibrium. However, when entropy reaches a certain point the system destabilizes and bifurcates, seeking new equilibriums. The number of equilibriums available to the system is predicated by the system’s complexity (Laszlo, 1987, 2006) , but these can be categorized into two simple levels of function. That is, the system can escape into either higher or lower forms of complexity and utility. This phenomenon applies to human and other natural systems and is true in the destruction and creation of societies as well (Omerod, 2000; Raikhlin, 2003) .

As the tuning parameter increases the system will eventually become unstable. At the onset this perturbation may appear slight. But the bifurcation, or pop, follows closely behind. A good example of this phenomenon is the variation in Northern Hemisphere temperature, based on samples taken from ice cores, in the years from 1800 to 2000, which preceded the spike in global warming (Gore, 2006, pp. 64, 65) . While the wiggle in the above illustration is greatly exaggerated, it is important to note because many observers focus only on the small changes preceding the much more profound bifurcation while ignoring the impending bifurcation itself. The media especially seems to expound upon relatively small changes in weather, the stock market, military campaigns, minor political issues, the price of gas, and other relative trivialities while completely missing the larger picture and its implications.

But small perturbations within an apparently stable equilibrium can presage large instabilities. It is my assertion that the United States, if not the world, is heading towards a very important bifurcation, based on the cumulative effects of the previously mentioned spikes. And this bifurcation will either bring America to a time of clarity, sanity and greatly improved quality of life, or to a time of confusion, despair and profound loss. The nation is at a crossroads and must make a choice between better or worse. Standing still is not an option, because one cannot stop time, nor is maintaining the status quo. The following figure illustrates another way to view this choice:

This figure represents the potential entropy and utility outcomes at the point of bifurcation. The horizontal axis in this case is the utility of a certain state, increasing from left to right, and the vertical axis represents an increase in entropy from bottom to top. The blue arrow again represents the cumulative spikes (shown in the original upright position), with the same wiggle and pop mentioned previously. This graph shows the general direction a bifurcation can take with respect to utility and entropy. That is, a bifurcation can certainly lead to a state of higher entropy and lower utility, or it can just as well lead to a state of higher utility but lower entropy. From this vantage the choice would appear simple.

Unfortunately, as noted previously, there are still some who deny that there is anything wrong. Moore and Simon (S. Moore & Simon, 2000; T. Moore, 2000) argue that the state of the planet is nothing to worry about; things are in fact only getting better. Americans, they claim, are living in more affluence than ever before, global warming is a myth, health and diet are better, education has improved, people are safer, there is more environmental protection, and freedom and democracy is on the ascension. They contend that there has been more material progress in America in the twentieth century than in the entire world in all other previous centuries combined.

Musser (2005) makes the same point:

Demographically and economically, our era is unique in human history. Depending on how we manage the next few decades, we could usher in environmental sustainability – or collapse.

p. 44

Kofi Annan (2002) agrees:

Imagine a future of relentless storms and floods: islands and heavily inhabited coastal regions inundated by rising sea levels; fertile soils rendered barren by drought and the desert’s advance; mass migrations of environmental refugees; and armed conflicts over water and other precious natural resources.

Then, think again – for one might just as easily conjure a more hopeful picture: of green technologies; livable cities; energy-efficient homes, transport and industry; and rising standards of living for all the world’s people, not just a fortunate minority.

The choice between these competing visions is ours to make. Current trends may not be very encouraging, and certainly we know enough about ecological problems to fear the worst. But there is time to draw back from the brink. Most important, another path exists – one that is better for people, less harmful to the environment and possible with the policies, knowledge and technologies at our disposal today.

p. A18

Laszlo (2006) also claims that the world is either on the brink of destruction or of giving birth to a new and marvelous civilization. He explains:

At the dawn of the twenty-first century we can no longer ignore that current trends are building toward critical thresholds, toward some of the famous… “planetary limits” that in the 1970s and 1980s were said to be the limits to growth. Whether they are limits to growth altogether is questionable, but they are clearly limits to the kind of growth that is occurring today. As we move toward these limits, we are approaching a point of chaos. At this point, some trends will deflect or disappear, and new ones will appear in their stead. This is not unusual: Chaos theory shows that the evolution of complex systems always involves alternating periods of stability and instability, continuity and discontinuity, order and chaos. We are living in the opening phases of a period of social and ecological instability – at a crucial decision-window. When we reach the point of chaos, the stable “point” and “periodic” attractors of our systems will be joined by “chaotic” or “strange” attractors. These will appear suddenly, as chaos theorists say, “out of the blue.” They will drive our systems to the crucial point where it will select the one or the other of the paths of evolution available to it.

(Laszlo, 2006, p. 9)

Laszlo’s chaos point is the “pop” where the system tips in one direction or the other, towards new equilibriums and the strange attractors that bound the near-to-chaos nature of human behavior.

Mason (2003) asserts that by the year 2030 the driving forces of poverty, depleted fuel supply, population growth, climate change, famine, and a shortage of water will all converge to plunge the world into a catastrophic abyss. He calls this the 2030 spike; a statistical spike that will spell disaster if these six drivers are not halted and reversed. If they are redirected, however, Mason argues that the world would be safer, healthier, and saner with unparalleled peace, prosperity, and well-being.

The September, 2005, issue of Scientific American is almost entirely dedicated to the question of bifurcation. Entitled Crossroads for Planet Earth the editors note that humanity is at a unique turning point and wonder if people will choose the right path. They are optimistic and provide methods for making things better. But they make it clear that the choice has yet to be made.

Omerod (2006) declares:

Failure is all around us. Failure is pervasive. Failure is everywhere, across time, across place and across different aspects of life. Ninety-nine point nine nine percent of all biological species which have ever existed are now extinct… . More than 10 percent of all the companies in America disappear each year. Large and small, from corporate giants to the tiniest one-person business, they fail… . Government policies fail, firms fail, whole economies fail and remain enmeshed in poverty… . The existence of failure on this scale is simply not recognized in economics. Instead, in much of economic theory, getting the right strategy, the right policy, is straightforward. It is simply a matter of following the appropriate formula laid down in the textbook… . [This] has been much less successful, however, when applied to human social and economic systems. The fundamental reason is that this approach regards equilibrium – a static, changeless state of the world – as the natural order of things. The whole panoply of differential calculus, the branch of mathematics that is by far the most widely used in economics, is focused on finding equilibrium solutions, solutions in which the system is at rest, static, in which continuity and lack of change are it hallmarks.

This is simply not the case either with society or with the economy.

pp. ix, 17, 18

Therefore, if Americans rely on old and no-longer-functional methods, on doing the same harder – or worse, if the nation simply waits for a mutation to emerge rather than to act responsibly and make a functional choice – then the default mode of higher entropy and lower utility will very likely be the outcome. This leaves one to ask whether there is there any benefit at all in pretending that humanity’s current course can continue. Does the pain of change, or the comfort of changing nothing, overwhelm the potential for disaster if things remain the same?

As noted in other articles on this site, there has been a renewed interest in environmental sustainability, which will be followed quickly by an energized concern for the economic and human sustainability. In part the economic chickens have already come home to roost. Even as this article is being written the various and sundry wise men of capitalism are meeting to see if there is a way out of America's financial mess. The housing bubble has burst and so have the various mechanisms that buoyed it up with vapor, incompetence, greed, and irrational exuberance. The national debt is racing towards 11 trillion dollars. Americans assumed five or six additional trillion dollars in debt when the government rescued Fanny and Freddie. The war in Iraq is still a huge expenditure and the Pentagon is asking for even more. As of 2006 household debt rose to 100 percent of GDP and in 2007 the financial sectors debt rose to 116 percent. On average the national savings rate went negative several years ago and Americans are now spending more than they make. This year Americans lost around two trillion dollars in retirement savings. Our trade deficit has reached around 800 billion dollars per year and a U.S. economy that was bolstered by consumption and debt is beginning to crumble and nobody seems to have a clearer plan than spending 700 to 900 billion more dollars, in addition to the 600 billion already spent, bailing out the various players in the housing debacle. And this does not take into account the coming unsecured credit crash or the flurry of ensuing filings for bankruptcy.

America is poised to go over an economic Niagara Falls, and the convergence of the other unsustainable trends is poised to only make things worse. As David Korten (2006) would surely say, Americans must now choose between a vibrant and functional earth community and a decaying and dysfunctional empire. But the right choice certainly won't be made if staring at the finger is the only option.

references

Annan, K. (2002, August 25). Beyond the horizon: Will the future be barren or bountiful?: The U.N. Secretary-General offers two visions of where humanity is headed. Time, A18 - A19.

Ayres, E. (1999). God's last offer: Negotiating for a sustainable future. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows.

Briggs, J., & Peat, F. D. (1989). Turbulent Mirror: An illustrated guide to chaos theory and the science of wholeness. New York: Harper & Row.

Broderick, D. (2001). The spike: How our lives are being transformed by rapidly advancing technologies. New York: Forge Books.

Castrigiano, D. P. L., & Hayes, S. A. (2004). Catastrophe theory. Boulder: Westview Press.

Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. New York: Viking.

Gore, A. (2006). An inconvenient truth: The planetary emergency of global warming and what we can do about it. Emmaus, Pennsylvania: Rodale.

Grice, A. (2006). Seven years to save planet, says PM. Retrieved March 4, 2006, from http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article343928.ece

Korten, D. C. (2006). The great turning: From empire to earth community. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Laszlo, E. (1987). Evolution: The grand synthesis. Boston: New Science Library.

Laszlo, E. (2006). The chaos point: The world at the crossroads. Charlottesville, Virginia: Hampton Roads Publishing Company, Inc.

Mason, C. (2003). The 2030 spike: Countdown to global catastrophe. London: Earthscan Publications.

Meadows, D. H., Randers, J., & Meadows, D. L. (2004). Limits to growth: The 30-year update. White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing Company.

Moore, S., & Simon, J. L. (2000). It's getting better all the time: 100 greatest trends of the last 100 years. Washington: Cato Institute.

Moore, T. (2000). Climate of fear: Why we shouldn't worry about global warming. Washington: Cato Institute.

Musser, G. (2005, September). The climax of humanity. Scientific American, 44 - 47.

Omerod, P. (2000). Butterfly economics: A new general theory of social and economic behavior. New York: Basic Books.

Omerod, P. (2006). Why most things fail: Evolution, extinction and economics. New York: Pantheon.

Poston, T., & Stewart, I. (1996). Catastrophe theory and its applications (New ed.). Mineola, New York: Dover Publications.

Prigogine, I., & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of Chaos: Man's new dialogue with nature. New York: Bantam Books, Inc.

Raikhlin, R. (2003). Civil war, terrorism and gangs: The systematic of sociology and social dynamics. Charleston, South Carolina: BookSurge LLC.

Respond to this topic.

Next topic: The Wiggle and the Pop - Part 2

founder

Paul L. Kordis, PhD
Human Capital Sustainability

advisors

James H. Banning, PhD
Campus Ecology

Gary Geroy, PhD
Human Capital & Economic Development

Ed Goodman, P.E., MSCE
Sustainable Architecture

Bruce Hall, PhD
Social Services

M.L. Johnson, EdD, PhD
Education and Physiology

David T. Moran, PhD
Neurobiology

Beverly Title, PhD
Restorative Justice