Equilibrium or Steady State of Criticity
'Permanent' transformations are essential when exposed to the risk of identity disaggregation from entropy. Open self-maintaining systems are able to prevent disaggegation by catching in their environment around the taw materials they need for their maintenance to restore themselves via regular metabolic pathways. Preserve unity happens to come from pieces of information you have in, helped by outside ones, to allow to remind most pathways without recreating all; since the beginning of ages (out of embryogenic scheme. Suche trajectories may, within some limits, look more like strange attractors or patterned chaotic motions. Especially when memories grow up: it is not only one pathway that helps you adapt to complexity of intricated complex subsystems. But, take from environment induce, at the same time, the increase its entropy or disorganisation and this environment turned more brutal also increase risk of brutal entropic release (destructions).
Now the concept of "highest complex unit" (of our esential interest) turns to be one field of various hierarchical complex networks of collection(s) of subsystems. Overall, complexity makes evolution and increases the difficulties of drawbacks, reverse or setbacks (mostly critical one being global death and small local ones like as apoptotic "suicide"; even of use in the processes of reproduction of reconstructions. Possibly because reaching a "higher complex construction" means somehow that harder complex sort of dynamic equilibria, maintainance of disequilibria or regular critically arranged transformations (more sensitive to different conditions. They cannot be repeated exactly the same way, from the start of the origin, but somehow can be reproduced. Metaphorically two plates of foods are never exactly the same, when everything taken into account and including environment and situations. But, some metabolic pathways and alternatives will operate either, assume flexibility and balance with essentiel aims and priorities leading to reconstructions. Imperfections have turned essential to adaptation and potential of evolution and have been systemized for more diversity, creating under the shadow of thermodynamics limits, higher complicated units.
Formally, in rational economics, reproduction of hegemony of determinisms (mostly fallacious)have often been mistaken, forcing a stereotypic concept of general stable equilibrium calculus. Where every expressions of pieces could be, neutrally priced and made equal, all independent relative vectors of speculated (undemocratical) changes. Managing some paradox, less clear dynamics and contradictory balances, are still to operate in lesser academics way with many different uses of concepts. So there is a need to look at more concepts and frames of dynamic transformations; preserve essential units of maximum complexity reached. Also to consider what sorts of changes, trends, metastable states, could be managed; in multiple registers of applications and contradictory approaches. So to try to involve more inspired social infrastructuring projects of transformations; as well as promote those caring the renewal of natural environments. Expecting this also calls for mechanisms of sustainability that can help. Since the artificial ones, we try to put, seem to mix industrial-post industrial-posh undue experimental tricks.
About this concept of general equilibrium, as thought by economists, there should be something like a frame of heterogeneous and diverse concepts, to intent to control our human mental disorders, using critical thinking multidisciplinarity and promotion of good collateralism in infrastructuring projects. Projects sets put at responsible levels of (territorial?) collectivities. Like mixing values on quantities and qualities, it can be used to maintain perspectives on humane sustainability. More robust it will be if including maintenance and incorporating better social systems of cooperation. In our mind, a social system has the justification to cover better or envelop enough of complexities, including those it produces, as well as those that can be cared by legitimate citizens.
May be complex reasonable highest social unit able to be productive, wise and peacefull would be communities in regional environments and not so imperial superiority or too centralized authorities since they will prefer to export their entropy. Often enough skilled members to care the future of its ressources, without fighting in regressive environment shaken by destructive conflicts. Not to solve difficulties by "inhumane" means but smart uses of careful sciences. In the (non) respect of Nature, respect or disrespect this will anyhow be human but more easilly also more inhumane. So a formal general economical dynamic equilibrium is ... a chimera not so easy to manage. A sort of mixture looking like stable, needing to incorporate eventually illusions, on materials renewal processes. These being nurtured by Sun's positive energetic inputs (on ground Earth or in solar system). Stable illusion with the effect to maintain metabolic turnovers needed for preserving essential identity. Our essential identities being composed of: complex structured coincidences of matter, subsystems varying in average life, supplying energetic local releases, preserving provisions of raw material; maintains of supports of information, energetic and material economic metabolisms with inputs, so as to sustain, at least, the essential.
Now it would be to take into consideration the human phenomena of extroverted or expansive speculations. Pictures of general natural climax, as provided by Biosphere in absence of critical humans or; local assymetries and heterogeneous-unperfect mixtures. This makes already very relativelly confused maps of distributions of matter and energies. They set sorts of "environments at stacks of equilibria" like: climax or climacic ecosystems. Those are called to change by our doings. Hope them, for humane reasons, letting enough space to tomorrow's humans tribes. Artificial sorts of human engineering systems of transformations of environment, eventually manageable by speculations of "general equilibrium models of precautions"; those may catch better the limits or evidence of speculations. Even when these models are non linear but calculable.
There are modern explorations, like inspired by evolution formal novel issues, against the previous monolithic form of General Equilibrium. For example: "varying the interval of the genetic algorithme (GA) in the Santa Fe Stock market model results in the appearance of 4 distinct kinds of market behavior. These correspond to 4 different rates of evolutionary learning. Evolutionary learning controls the rate at which agents switch between different rules in the population of rules. It also affects the types of different strategies (technical or fundamental) that evolve over time. Differences between rates of switching between rules and the types of rules that evolve in these classes lead to di#erences in the volatility of prices, wealth earned by agents, the complexity of strategies, the types of strategies that evolve in the market over time and the activation history of rules. At low GA intervals, the frequent switching between strategies as well as the significant usage of technical trading rules results in high price volatility, increases in the complexity of strategies and lower overall wealth. At longer GA intervals, the infrequent switching between rules as well as the lower usage of technical trading rules results in lower price volatility, the usage of strategies of lower complexity and higher overall wealth. At the boundary conditions the usage of the same pool of rules over time leads to very low volatility and almost equal usage of technical and fundamental rules. The four classes of behavior can be summarized as follows, starting with the two boundary conditions:
Class I: No evolution so no rule switching. When the GA is never invoked (GA interval is the length of the simulation, i.e. 300,000 time periods), the agents have no choice but to stick with the pool of hypotheses with which they were initially endowed. The main characteristics of this regime are low volatility of prices, low accumulated wealth, and similar levels of fundamental and technical trading.
Class II: Too fast evolution prevents rule switching. When the GA is invoked at every time period (GA interval is 0), the prices are very stable, the complexity of strategies is very low, there is no significant difference between technical and fundamental trading, and wealth earned is high.
Class III: Slow evolution enables only slow rule switching. When the GA interval is moderately high (1000 # interval # 10000), price volatility is moderately low, the complexity of forecasting rules is low, wealth earned is high, and technical trading is low. In previous work the model's authors noted that this class of behavior is consistent with the predictions of the theory of Rational Expectations and the efficient markets hypothesis is finance, so they called this the Rational Expectations (RE) regime.
Class IV: Fast evolution encourages frequent rule switching. When the GA interval is moderately low (100 < interval # 1000), prices are volatile, the complexity of strategies is very high, wealth earned is low, and there is significant technical trading. The model's authors observed that prices in this class of behavior deviate significantly from their fundamental values, bubbles and crashes occur frequently and the market shows statistical properties similar to real world stock markets They called class IV the Complex Regime.
Classes I and II are very similar but we classify them separately because their behavior has significantly different causes. In Class II the GA is invoked at each.
Switches and Transitions non Linear Changes or Bifurcations
Getting in times of greater uncertainties but with surprises to come. Strictly speaking, "a surprise is an unanticipated outcome; by definition it is an unexpected event. Mathematically defined as rapid, non-linear responses of a system to forcing, such as a collapse or the abrupt amplification of a small even (in a large scale frame of diffusibility?). Most global systems are inherently complex. Consisting of multiple interacting sub-units. Scientists frequently attempt to model complex systems alones, for a small audience of academics or pretending to be specialists only along strict disciplinary lines. Producing internally to their speculations stable and predictable behaviors; which increasingly have very distant links with realities. However, when studying scenarii on Real-world management coupling sub-systems; programs can cause sets of interacting systems to exhibit new collective behaviours, called “emergent properties”. Meanwhile responses of the coupled systems to external forcing can also become quite improductive.
Once demolished our exceeded ambitions on systems of perfect formal idealism (like the "I shall maintain" of captains at the top of their sinking boats) and requalified the common sense of "hope it will go on"; we may see our efforts as the pathways to have a sweet slope, prevented from the adverse effects; hazards and dangers produced by our activities on enough good conditions to face all difficulties and cope with adversities of our way. This can have the mathematical form of a saddle-line, be it a trail in the jungle, a suspended ropebridge or a bicycle side-walking in the streets of a big city. Be big changes or 'great leap forward' not at the costs of small ups (premature growth), followed by steep downs (crushes). For finding sort of cautious inputs which - for not being too quantitativelly matter consumming neither energy wasting - may come from understanding of natural information provided by skills, attentions and wisdom, in management of knowledge. By caring not to take all our speculations for definitive knowledge.
Now, since our brain can do better than what we forced it to do ( financial speculations) or lazily allowed (society of fat consumption), it would be to extract doable informative evidences. That could solve mispecified runned programs and care some non comeasurable aspects. Sort of complicated effects, "weird patterns" if they can help to conceive forms of knowledgeable transformations.
Principles of Precautions
Because too reductionist or cartesian approaches or too executive financial management of "social sciences" have prevailed in modern and recent paradigmas, it is hard to conceive good strange social building phenomena and promote properly these changes. Many words of the management of globalization are speechfull tautologies, more eye-catching abstractions than practically applied. It is also hard to know with sure science, what will happen, with what we do and, what to prepare. Observing that Nature itself have shape and hide so many "black boxes" at random; where you do not see much and even often ignore where and whom you are. Observe too confusing "white boxes" where we are dazzled by too much and too many lights. Conception can use simulations with some complex mechanisms mathematicaly already formulated and discovered in physics. Say like irreversibility in evolving systems. Those boxes complicate, but also allow to imagine smarter mechanisms of maintenance and reproduction. Be them like for setting cycles of renewal, with plenty of different scales of time and space. For such sort of mechanisms to be used as models, it is to enhance: imitations, cooperations, congregations, reproductions of consistent information, differenciate democratic treatments, etc.
By side of what can be managed, if management (of complexity) is nevertheless 'necessary', for not staying like passively expecting that the environment will spontaneously recover or let humans' tables empty; there are a increasingly big toolboxes of concepts for expressing our concern about a World better arranged. There are also already (few) hundreds years of systemic investigation discussion on how a 'better civilized World'. If we ought still question large scale adverse effects that are driving modernity into inhumane pathways it exists now principles of precaution, sense that sustainability is needed, resilience or fair respect byside of haunted overgrazzed battlefields of "socially fighting individual utilitarianisms", "geopolitic-sized ideological conflicts" and "absurdly well leadered misspecified generosity".
Either: "In cascading pyramides of uncertainties, ranges are multiplied to encompass a comprehensive range of future consequences; including physical, economic social and political impacts and policy responses. Is - the only policy response implicit on this figure - adaptation? since the processes have shown stops at impacts - in reality, perceptions of “unacceptable” risks can create policies for restorate, that can narrow the range of implemented scenarios. Thus reducing the final impacts range. In that case, awareness of the large range of impacts, might feedback on policies, alter the scenarii of emission so the cascade could be less 'explosive'.
"There are 4 groups of theories that variously explain basic principles of origin, further change and, collapse of complex human social systems: 1) Various unilinear theories of development or evolution; 2) Theories of civilizations; 3) World-systems perspective; 4) Multilinear theories of social evolution. Observing for example an interpretation of the third kind (world-system) ". I. Wallerstein identifies three modes of production: 1) Mini-systems based on reciprocation, 2) Redistributive world-empires, 3) Capitalist world-system (world-economy) based on the commodity and money relations". After this school see then the global processes of investment to gauge sort of processes of civilization imposing, at least, tools and products throught strategies more or less direct (trade, geopolitics, extrations of ressources for transfers to core countries). Whatever your opinion at the respect practical policies of projects are accordingly. At least, observing todays' ecological global trends there are problems of civilization, without liable perfect solutions. Abstain may be not the least of wise solutions. Sort of trends in the same sort of explaination adapted to the macro issues of global environmental problems we can measure as "less-developed countries with higher levels of exports send to more-developed countries; exhibiting lower domestic levels of resource consumption, measured as per capita ecological footprints. Higher-consuming countries externalize their consumption-based environmental costs through the tapping of raw materials and produced commodities from less-developed countries, which tempers material consumption levels, thereby restricting the ecological footprints of the latter countries". "Deforestation at the macro level is best explained by considering effects of socio-demographic processes contextually, in terms of world-system dynamics. To embrace the universal principal of being “ecologically sound” in both places, would lead to very different practices in those places, because the same practices would have different outcomes, depending upon where they are implemented".