|
|
|
The temporary opposition and the delay in the state change, currently known as inertia, is mainly due to the fact that an overall (external) state variation may occur only after this variation is transmitted (distributed) to all the system’s elements which are found inside RBS. Since these elements interact one another, it must that the state variation to be propagated (to be transmitted from one element to another) along the entire set of the inner elements, propagation which always requires a finite time. But, since the SM model is obviously the same, regardless of their structural level, the inertia and implicitly, the opposition to change is also applicable to the elements with lower organization levels which are in the composition of a system. As it was mentioned above, within the opposition interval against the state change, MS responds to the action of the flux agent with a flux which is contrary to the agent one - the reaction flux.
Definition 7.5.1: The property of the material systems of changing the outer state (the action’s external effect) only after the completion of the composition process between the traflux agent and the previously stored flux inside MS (that is the action’s internal effect) is named inertia.
Comment 7.5.1: If we kick a ball with the foot, or a pool ball with the cue, in both cases, the incident flux is a coherent kinetic flux of the foot or of the cue, which are transformed at the impact with the driven object (which was initially considered motionless), in a coherent/stochastic flux (a pressure shock wave starting from the kicked area). Despite of this incident flux, the driven object would not be moved (but it would be locally deformed), up to the moment when the incident shock wave would have not been propagated towards the opposite wall of the impact area, propagation which means a distribution of the immergent flux over all the elements of the inner medium of the driven object (transmitting motion), distribution which requires a finite temporal interval for its completion (as any other real process). The definition 7.5.1 is also valid with no restrictions for the actions in which information fluxes are involved, actions which are frequently found in the biotic world. In case of the bio-systems, an immergent data flux (we shall see in chapter 8 that that particular flux must be included into the perception domain of the inner IPS), shall initiate a processing of the information contained in that flux (process equivalent to a composition of fluxes), processing which means the comparison of this information with the already-existing (saved) information stock, and only after the completion of this process, the decision regarding the outer state modification may be taken, the behavior act released as a response to the incident flux (stimulus). As regards this temporal interval needed for the information processing (mostly concerning the processing which involves the central system - brain), as a result of the evolution, the advanced bio-systems have preserved for some information fluxes which show an imminent danger, requiring a fast response, a way of avoiding the normal information processing (which is time consumer, with high inertia level), by means of pre-programmed behavior acts, released by specific stimulus (reflex acts), which requires a much shorter time for its initiation, with only a low number of neurons involved.
At a first analysis, taking into account the general structure of a MS produced by the flux triad model, the result is that the quantitative value of the inertia property of a MS as compared to a k-type agent flux is:
In direct ratio to the system’s isolation degree as compared to the k-type external agent flux (the isolation degree regarding k-type flux is in inverse proportion with RBS permeability against k-type flux, and with RBS area). The higher is the isolation degree for an outer incident flux with specific density, the lower is the immergent flux and accordingly, the lower state variation will be;
In direct ratio to the proper inertia of the inner elements of MS and to their number;
In inverse ratio to the intensity and the temporal distribution of the interactions between the inner elements of MS (in case of the powerful and permanent interactions, the inner propagation rate of the state variations is higher, so the response is faster). If the number of the inner elements of a MS is known, as well as their type, and if they have their own inertia, in case they make-up a G medium and because this medium type has the lowest interaction rate (mediated throughout time), and therefore, the lowest propagation rate, MS inertia will be also higher as compared to the cases when the inner elements would make-up L or S-type systems.
Comment 7.5.2: As for the information interactions between people, it may be noted that the informational inertia (determined by means of the temporal interval between the impact of an information flux received by a person and the external behavior changes produced by that particular flux), is related to “the permeability” of the driven person to the information flux. A man which is cursed in its native language may have a fast and violent behavior reaction; the same man which is cursed in a language who does not know it, and in the absence of other visible hostile gestures, has an infinite inertia (lack of behavior reaction) which is due to a total isolation, because when a language is not known, this is the equivalent of a null permeability at the semantic component of the information flux released in that language. The state variation (behavior) at the same incident flux is different depending on the amount of the stored information fluxes (related to the education level and to the life experience), but also depending on the temper type of the individual (which may be equivalent with the type of inner interactions deployed between the organism’s elements - nervous, hormonal ones - determined by the genetic legacy). If we are still referring to the information inertia domain, a rumor with the same interest degree (an agent information flux with the same intensity) shall be distributed on a set of human individuals which are engaged in a information interaction (possible communication), and it will generate a general opinion of the individuals (outer state) regarding the rumor’s semantic content, in different ways, depending on the existing community type. Thus, in a rural settlement where the population is spread and the communication between families takes place only occasionally, the rumor propagation is much more slower (as well as the formation of a general opinion), as compared to the case of some company’s employers which have closer and more frequent information interactions. These examples of information inertia in the field of the human bio-systems, which are much easier for the reader to understand them, have also a precise goal: if the agent information flux would be substituted by an energy flux, and the human individuals would be substituted by abiotic MS, we could better understand the explanation given for the “physical” inertia of these systems, stated by the objectual philosophy.
Copyright © 2006-2011 Aurel Rusu. All rights reserved.
