Information Physics: Identifiable Patterns and Instrumental
Processes
Dianna Wuagneux, Ph.D., Principal
International Center for the Advancement of Adult Learning
P.O. Box 1545 Main Street
Castleton, Vermont 05735 USA
1-7-802-468-2539 phone
1-7-802-468-2583 fax
icaal@msn.com
May 28, 1999
ABSTRACT
Information Physics: Identifiable Patterns and Instrumental Processes
It is the movement and perception of, and reaction to, information that influences living
systems to adapt and evolve. Without it, there is no evidence, there are no concepts, there
can be no analysis, no relevance, no connections, no life.
The universe is defined through interrelationships. Information exists as transmitted
relationships; connections between spatially separated organisms or events through both
isolated and networked signals. Its design is part of the implicate order of complex
systems. It is inherent in all relations, yet is non-manifest. Information is not inert, not
passive. Information is restless; it requires attention and, like any subatomic entity,
information is affected by physical space (region of confinement).
Information travels through attraction and repulsion. It competes for retention space and
seeks dominance. Once embedded, blended and associated, information governs emotion
and perception affecting state of mind; and therefore, individual and organizational
health.
Attempts to control information result in unpredictable repercussions because
fundamental constraints are mechanistic solutions incompatible with complex, living
processes. However, information moves in identifiable ways. It is conducted along routes
forged by experience and self-sustaining processes that have proved adaptive yet thwart
change. It is possible to modify the content and structure of messages in a way that will
improve their receptivity and likelihood of their long-term absorption without interfering
with the information’s resonance and amplification.
Whether in healthcare, education, industry or public policy, in order for information to
be productively diffused, or innovations adopted, comprehension and acceptance of a
message must occur. With an understanding of the basic processes of information
physics, it is possible to create and employ tools and strategies that work along with the
natural flow of directed transmissions improving retention and having a greater
influence on behavior.
Information Physics: Identifiable Patterns and Instrumental Processes
Introduction
Transmitted information travels through attraction and repulsion. It competes for
retention space with information already in place, and seeks dominance over other
simultaneous input in an effort to reach the long-term memory. Once embedded,
associated, and cataloged, new information is blended with existing information, and the
result governs emotion and perception affecting state of mind; and therefore, individual,
communal, and organizational health. Billions are spent in search of personal and
organizational strategies; however, most indicators point to room for improvement. Very
little of what we are exposed to through these exercises stays with us in a way that
activates long term, or meaningful change . The reasons why this is so are complex and
little understood. To solve the mystery and resolve the circumstance would be the
mother lode to every manager, policy maker, educator, and parent.
It’s been said that the true motion which lies at the basis of everything is the motion of
thought; and further, that the energy that motivates, joins and sustains us comes from
sharing the energy of our consciousness with one another. So, why is it so difficult to get
ideas across to one another in a way that moves us to prescribed change? And, why is it
that with all the information available relevant to our needs, we benefit from so little of
it? My research/advisement practice designs learning system streams that accelerate
innovation adoption and information diffusion for both policy makers and organizational
leadership. Our work demands a grasp of the characteristic constraints and essential
processes guiding human response, threat to response, and the influence and direction of
adaptive change. With client expectations high, and the number and complexity of
variables staggering, I began looking to systems dynamics, complexity and chaos theory,
as well as cognitive science and physics for inspiration and guidance. What I’ve found
has convinced me that the elaborate and often convoluted reaction models of human
behavior based on single approach dominance analysis are in need of a new perspective.
I believe that the awareness of the patterns and processes underlying the transference of
information between living organisms, and the role this movement plays in human
interaction is central to defining strategies that benefit from these naturally occurring
transactions.
The question that begs answering is: is the exchange of information that sustains
living organisms guided by a set of principles? (Can direction and influence be reliably
predicted)? And what are the constituents that unify or degrade this process? To date, the
research has yielded some intriguing and important findings.
1. Information travels through, and is affected by, ambient fields surrounding and
adjoining all living organisms.
2. The movement of information between living organisms and systems is either impeded
or accelerated by the degree to which it is both similar and dissimilar to information
already present.
3. The rate at which information is diffused, and the degree to which information affects
changes in behavior is as contingent upon setting and mode of transmission as content.
4. The behavior of information (potentiality, resonance, amplification, regeneration and
evolution) within and between living systems: is largely dependent upon the size,
structure and governing of the system(s).
The significance of these findings is as broad as interpretation and creative thinking
allow. Of greatest interest to organizations and communities is the discovery that the
movement of information can induce or retard the occurrence of dependency, creativity,
collaboration, or resistance behaviors of individuals and groups.
Fields of Information
A theory introduced in the 1980’s known as morphic field theory proposes that
information exists in a collective consciousness, and a process called morphic resonance
retrieves needed information analogous to a television set receives transmitted signals.
Continuing with this comparison, the theory asserts that looking for information stored in
the brain is analogous to looking for programs in a television’s circuitry. While this
premise is lambasted by some in the scientific community, it is determined persuasive by
many biologists, theoretical physicists, among others, and continues to gain attention. I
couldn’t help wondering though, why so little of this available information is accessed or
at least absorbed by people. Still, the idea of fields as a context, if not a mode of
conveyance, is plausible. The value of taking this theory further is to discover not only
function, but also meaningful application. If interrelated fields make knowledge transfer
possible, then there is a process that occupies the systems to which we belong that
participate in the determining of what information is absorbed, and what information is
excluded.
There are no obvious candidates for this theoretical field in standard physics; however,
I’ve been assured by peers in the cognitive sciences that the field concept is appropriate
because biological systems do exhibit behaviors characteristic of physical fields, for
example, continuity and boundaries. Such a field would have a host of underlying
contributing processes, e.g. biological chemical reactions. There are calculations
illustrating a sequence associated with sharing knowledge. It is referred to as quantum
entangled morphic resonance. Supporting this, research by the Foundation of Physics has
found what was labeled as the consciousness atom, complete with “elastic” and
“reactive” interactions. This means accepting that information can be isolated and
discussed as it relates to the learning of habits and the transition from concept to
cognition. But still would not explain the repulsion or resistance of certain available
information. This could be resolved by the existence of what I call “sorbtive fields.”
These fields select, or allow, certain messages to pass from outside the individual into the
subconscious for biological screening. The nature their framework is directed by an
individual’s genetic design, learned experiences, and social/cultural exposure. In affect,
the circumstances that surround our exposure to information directs our tastes,
perceptions and choices, determining our individual and collective receptivity to
information. Policy makers and organizational leadership restrict, modify and
manipulate information for myriad reasons, benevolent and self-serving. The result has
been strikingly bipolar classified by behavior formations either reticent, compliant, and
dependent, or protective, resistant, and reactive.
Both outcomes are harmful to the health of the systems they engender by pulling energy
away from the potential influence and generative direction of the primary system. The
lack of stimulation in the former turns the organization inward, discourages
experimentation, and stifles creativity; while the latter fractures the integrity of the
systems disrupting, and redirecting the flow of information.
Natural Processes Dismantled
Current Practices
It is the movement and perception of, and reaction to, information that influences living
systems to adapt and evolve. Without information, there is no evidence, there are no
concepts, there can be no analysis, no relevance, no connections, no life. The properties
and composition of our universe are due to the relationships brought about by the
transference of information. The universe itself is defined through these relationships. It
is the contingency created by information induced interaction that begets the
interdependence of systems all around us. Of physical laws, ecosystems, culture, and, the
makeup of living things. Nearly all information exchange goes on without our awareness.
Within our bodies, our endocrine and nervous systems provide chemical and electrical
communication between cells, our cardiovascular and respiratory systems transmit,
decode and coordinate billions of signals a day without arousing our slightest attention.
But equally as important, information shapes who we are and how we interact with one
another. Understanding how information moves among us, and behaves within us is the
foundation upon which any conclusions relating to human behavior can be constructed.
As the century draws to a close, we like to think ourselves a kinder and gentler, more
enlightened people than existed in our past. And in many ways we are; unfortunately,
that doesn’t necessarily make us better communicators, and because our survival depends
on how well we communicate, there is cause for reflection and attention. We have
6
worked hard at being more sensitive to other’s needs, feeling and values to the degree of
steadily altering our vocabulary and choice of appropriate communication methodology
with every new published work on the subject. We have homogenized our public health
advertisements, employers’ training manuals and classroom curriculum to be congenial,
and easily digestible. The aim is to make individuals more open to the ideas proposed, to
promote the consumption of the information by making it more palatable in hopes that
people will then choose to make progressive changes for themselves. These experiences
are compatible with accepting responsible leadership. On a commercial organizational
level, for example, this information is embraced in the workplace unconsciously
disrupting old concepts of individual accountability. Instead, as clarity and complexity
have disappeared for our communication, there has been an increased demand for
accountable leadership; a sign of increased dependence.
The “ing” of Information
Defining information presents difficulties because it exists yet is unqualifiable, and
unquantifiable. But, before any meaningful discussion on the subject can be had,
information needs a description. This is a task in itself; information is no more a “thing”
than an idea or an aroma is, because it can’t exist with interpretation, this is what I refer
to as the “ing” of information. To help demonstrate, consider the following. Information
is neither inert, nor passive. Information is restless; it requires attention and, like any
subatomic entity, information is affected by physical space; also known as region of
confinement. It has no mass, no charge. While we discuss its movement, it has no
understandable mode of propulsion, no measurable means of conveyance, no motion that
can be identified in terms of velocity; yet, cannot be at rest. It is neither particle, as it has
no substance, nor wave, as it has no dimension. Information has no identifiable physical
properties; nonetheless, it has behavior revealed as potentiality, resonance, amplification,
regeneration, and evolution. Information exists as transmitted codes designed to create
relationships - connections between spatially separated organisms or events through both
isolated and networked signals. This design is part of the implicate order of complex
systems. It is inherent in all relations, yet is non-manifest. Information can only be easily
specified by what it is not, and by its affect on the observable world. Since it represents
something, by its nature cannot be objective. It exists only upon consideration or
transmission. It is expressed in the transfer of energy; however, no energy is ever lost in
the exchange. Like the smile without the cat. It can only described by its purpose, its
process, and its transitory results.
Information as an Entirety
Being unable to see the forest for the trees is a research analyst’s habitual handicap.
In an attempt to garner some understanding of the movement and behavior of
information, I set about recording professional experiences with regard to information
exchange and transmission outcomes. Even when viewed within the context of the most
recently published systems communications models, much of what I found appeared
contradictory. Suffering from what a colleague calls the “romance of reduction,” I was
searching for answers by attempting to isolate the characteristics of information as it
relates to human interaction in the form of building blocks. While not everything can be
meaningfully analyzed through atomization, there is this tendency to account for the
behavior of the composite system by the properties of the sub-units. It is tempting.
Macro formulated probabilities are the most discernible by way of the most apparent
action. Still, everyone familiar with the complex systems of living organisms has
experience confirming that behavior displayed in the micro is not necessarily exhibited in
the macro.
Given exposure to the same information in the same manner, there is substantial
evidence of the inconsistencies between response-behavior of the individual and the
response-behavior of the organization; between response-behavior of the organization
and the greater community; a particular community and society at large. In the most
dramatic example, the theories of quantum mechanics, describing the fundamental
structure of all matter — atoms and subatomic particles - and the theory of general
relativity governing the behavior of the heavens are mutually incompatible. Either one of
them is wrong, or there are mechanisms at work that can only be understood not by
multiplying the effects of the pieces and applying the outcome on a large scale, but by
observing them in their entirety. Enter the concept of holism, which has troubled the
sciences for a century without visible acceptance or conspicuous disagreement; the idea
of existence of phenomena that can not be described by processes occurring among their
parts. The eloquent, Fritjof Capra has said that there are no fundamental entities, only
interrelated events. With such phenomena, we can only describe residual incidents, and
attempt to capture them in a scientific theory of their own. I believe the physics of
organic information (that which is exchanged within and between living organisms) falls
into this category.
Advantageous Interdependence
The greatest degree of frustration experienced by leaders in a position of imparting
what they consider to be vital information, is due to the still widely held belief that the
way in which we are affected by information is a consequence of our intentional
interpretation of messages; and yet, the exact process of how information is commuted is
still open to speculation. How is it that thoughts make connection with the thoughts of
others? It is known that all living organisms are embedded in an ambient electromagnetic
field; this field with its complex quantum components has been shown to act on the
human organism. These fields may be the vehicle of communication between separate
organisms referred to as a “tangled state” or a functional reaction that as a product cannot
be separated from its process. Researchers are just beginning to explore how our brains
respond to field-encoded information originating from others with similar neural
processes. Or, how it is that those of us who think alike (functional association) and are
built alike (physically related), communicate as effectively as we do.
Deep meditation has been shown to produce the resonant coherence of an EEG rhythm
during which there is indication that the mind has an unusually strong connection to the
minds of others with whom it is familiar. It seems repeated exposure to an individual or
set of individuals from whom we consistently gain what we determine to be valuable
information increases the “connection” and improves bi-directional understanding. This
allows us to follow the train of thought, and even in some instances predict the responses
of someone with which we relate well. This is apparently another evolutionary
adaptation. When information is shared, the boundaries of the self disappear, we expose
our needs and ourselves, we are vulnerable. We build social bonds with those that offer
knowledge that equates to resources, who can help and comfort us in time of need.
10
Accordingly, a more unified, intricate connection such as that described in a connective
field theory, would be supported by increased survival of those that altered their actions
in response to this enhanced connection.
Information and Groups
Behavior Patterns
Patterns are identifiable sequences that can be modeled or illustrated with some degree
of anticipation. Our transpersonal patterns established over time spring from the daily
relations which are the unifying component necessary to our lives, so when the behavior
of the individual changes, so does the behavior of the group, but not predictably. Each
individual has the potential to provoke internal information-intrusion collisions by
introducing atypical insights from the larger external system outside the home or office.
Accepting the value of disruption based development will take time. Nevertheless, in
order to stimulate meaningful change, information must be similar enough to what the
intended recipients already know in order to be considered, and different enough to gain
the attention of the physical learning process. The health of any organization depends
upon the introduction of varied information that counters, or at least challenges current
thinking in order to force interpretation, adjustment and adoption.
People tend to organize according to biological, experiential, and other learned
constructs. This is how and why we find ourselves drawn to others that share our
background, experiences, and interests. It becomes comfortable to continue these
relationships as people find their ideas and opinions supported, and their perspectives
sympathized with and understood. The habits that express their collective thinking are
reinforced by mutual observance of actions and reactions resulting in conglomerate
1
collective behavior. The significant energy produced attracts like thinking and like
behavior. We see this as people “getting along with” each other. As the relationships
develop, more areas of commonality (or associations) are discovered, the level of comfort
grows and these people begin doing things together, these groups are associational-
functional. Good examples are sports teams, civic societies and religious organizations.
It has been found that within these associational-functional groups, the chance for
learning from one another is improved over that of information exchanged in a standard
classroom or office setting.
The implications are significant. Most of the money and effort put into attempts to
educate/train people goes into a method to which group learning is resistant (or at least
less receptive). Long-term potentiation (LTP), the process responsible for adapting to or
from learning experiences, has been studied by testing stimulus responses within the
Hippocampus region of the human brain. It has been proven that degree of excitation
greatly increases when information from the same source was punctuated by periods of
rest (spaced repetition). But interestingly, it was discovered that individuals exhibiting
similarities (physical and circumstantial) who share information regularly evoke a much
greater response. This scenario suggests that the brain increases the adoption rate of
information from revisiting sources that are familiar, or with which we have association. I
believe that it is this biological prompting that spurs interactive behaviors that underpin
adaptive relationships, both social and professional. This confirms the conjecture that
individuals that are related by blood or by interest (profession or association) are better
able to successfully transmit and receive information in a way that is retained long
enough to affect behavior. Although co-workers and classmates clearly have general
12
association, much of the circumstance surrounding their proximity is enforced, a great
deal of their interaction assigned. These conditions give little occasion for people to
recognize or, experience one another as people. Instead, information shared by and with
them is filtered through sorbtive fields according to predetermined constraints, i.e. the
source may be next in line for a promotion coveted by others, from a department
considered a competitor for administrative recognition, or someone seen as a part of a
prejudged clique.
It turns out that associational-functional relationships are largely based upon emotion,
how we feel about a cause, or how much pleasure we get from participation. By
recording the ability to recount personal and professional memories, it becomes evident
that when information is combined with mild to moderate emotion, it imprints more
effectively. Consequently, information exchanged between those engaged in activities
that spark emotion has a better chance of affecting changes in behavior. While this
relationship has been discussed in theory, the phenomena can now be illustrated by
measuring knowledge sharing as a transformation reflected in the activity of information
being received in the subconscious brain, then on to being perceived in the conscious
mind. For the first time, the movement of information can be witnessed and represented
mathematically in sequencing models allowing a glimpse into the what, where, when and
why of competency exchange. It is this process that gives information “motion.” Where
the motion can be measured, knowledge has been transferred.
Timing and degree of these transference events cannot be accurately predicted, but the
existence of group learning cycles (as demonstrated on a very large scale by trends, and
repeating culture shifts), symmetry, and points of inflection, can be identified.
13
Information exists in time rather than space necessitating an acceptance of the
correspondence between the biology of concept formation and the physics of knowledge
transfer. In the study of the sub-atomic world, the laws of quantum mechanics prove
helpful in the contemplation of information in terms of function, reaction, and
relationships. In classical physical mechanics, actions are considered separate and
independent if they are outside the recognized range of reciprocal interaction. That is, the
existence of each can be identified without in any way taking any other event into
consideration. In quantum mechanics, however, actions are expressed as system states
made manifest by the amplitude of signal based interaction. All living systems are born
of this interdependent exchange.
Information itself is not destructible, it can only be transformed; and, this occurs only
through collision with discordant information. Messages or bundles of potential energy,
referred to as “memes,” can only be discussed in relativistic terms since they are only
identifiable through their patterns of activity which hinge upon their attraction to and
repulsion from one another. Without the transmission and reception of information,
conditions remain static. Even the heart will stop beating without the signals it needs.
Humans, like all living things, require continuous information for survival. Within each
transmission is instruction bearing potential for change. If we are to thrive, we need
interchange of information from other life forms, from each other. The information we
share through issued messages has the ability to ignite the physical processes
instrumental to individual and collective learning. Still, complex systems such as
communities and organizations are actually very resistant to information. In fact, their
structure includes selection mechanisms that admit only a tiny fraction of the data
14
available. Because learning is a social process sustained physiologically, and expressed in
basic patterns of behavior adoption, it is learning, rather than exposure to information that
changes behaviors.
This biological, social response is the most powerful tool at our disposal to promote
cooperative behaviors and innovative thinking for organizational change whether that
organization is commercial or communal. By the time we reach adulthood, the way in
which we learn has changed dramatically. Biologically, all of us are successful because
we have reached maturation. For information to be retained by an organism perceived as
being successful, that information is analyzed for its correlation with information already
recorded. Adaptive because this is the information that allowed us to survive through
breeding age. Cooperation within any group has more to do with understanding
contrasting resources than the degree to which people absolutely agree. If a group or
individual offers supporting ancillary information that is not yet knowledge contained in
the larger system, they are clearly more valuable than if they could only offer information
already known; such a person is not a resource. The larger organism is more likely to
employ cooperative behaviors with a group or individual whose information assets
contrast with their own in order to enjoy the benefits of incorporating the new
information for greater collective advantage.
If new information is woven together with familiar associations relevant or irrelevant
to the intended purpose of the message, with various common denominators defined, the
assignment of links is greatly assisted allowing for the fresh ideas to reach the conscious
for attention and an opportunity for more abstract, conceptual relationships. This is the
thinking that transcends what is known, to the formation of thoughts conceived for the
15
first time. We place limits on potentiality because we are conditioned to think in terms of
mechanistic systems that wear down and exhaust their resources. Yet, living systems
regenerate themselves. This is the birthing bed of ingenuity, permutation, and
evolutionary development. These ideas can only germinate and bear fruit if they are able
to get implanted in the first place. The level of comprehension of incoming messages is a
product of the initial connections made; this affects not only the willingness, but also the
ability, for the receiver to respond productively.
Since it would seem that attraction tends to lead to information adoption and
utilization, and repulsion would most often prevent information from reaching the level
of consideration, most progressive parents, managers, and policy makers try to make
information as acceptable, and comfortable as possible to the intended audience. The goal
being for those getting the message to accept and use the new information usually
designed by the sender to instigate some kind of progress or correction, e.g. better grades,
greater productivity, improved public health, etc., with the intended subsequent outcome
being a strengthening of the entire system, whether it be the family, the organization or
the community. Most messages transmitted internally correspond too closely with what
already exists, making it unlikely to achieve dominance over embedded information, and
is therefore unlikely to modify action. If the sender of the message expected change, the
probable result is an agreeable misunderstanding, at best.
Information and Group Response
Learning is the biological mechanism for adaptation; and, there is evidence that
learning together encourages future interaction. Individuals alone respond to transmitted
information differently than do people in groups. Individuals seek and define meaning,
16
value and connections that determine their relationship with the message. In collective,
communal settings, the focus shifts to finding unified and internally consistent
interpretations. Groups urge agreement; they seek a leader to define meaning, suggest
relationships, and reveal common denominators. This is likely an inherited response from
our ancestors who relied on the health of their social groups for their own existence, and
hence the inclination toward cooperative behaviors in group learning contexts. This
premise supports the finding that people that go through challenging learning experiences
together build functional bonds, and during this process develop a sense of cohesion and
a desire to cooperate with one another.
Information Stop-Gaps
Once safely past external fields, information is engaged by an even more formidable
selection process. Everyone, especially educated professionals, has built-in defense
mechanisms to incoming information that default to the status quo and thwart innovative
thinking. In fact, the more specialized a person is by field, education, or experience the
more internal self-reinforcing processes they have. These self-reinforcing processes
encourage/sustain current practices and prevailing theories in use. By reverting to
experience and preconceived knowledge based memories, individuals will often
overlook, go out of their way to avoid, or even aggressively oppose, new information that
could ultimately be of tremendous benefit to them. This default sequence will block,
reroute, and override anything outside an already established construct. This slows
information diffusion/absorption, and inhibits changes in behavior.
Throughout our lives biological processes create physical pathways within to manage
the immense volume of information that invariably surrounds us. These pathways are
17
reinforced, or more deeply etched, over time by consistent thinking, habitual response,
and repetitive behavior. Information congruent to that which carved these channels finds
its way without difficulty and flows easily. Because contradictory information is, at least
initially contested, ignored, or denied, the structures created by the brain act as barriers,
or corridors of resistance. These corridors of resistance are designed to serve a valuable
purpose to the individual; they support reactions and behaviors that have been proven to
work over time. They allow people to benefit from their biological antecedents, education
and experience by engaging self-correcting programming. When familiar circumstances
arise they respond in ways that worked in the past; in that way, they make fewer
potentially costly mistakes. Unfortunately, this mechanism is only adaptive if the external
factors confronting us are unchanging, and that is not the case.
Corridors and Connections
Standard channels of information distribution are typically the slowest and least
effective because messages are frequently too similar to information that has already been
assimilated. These messages are created through the sender’s vision, from his
perspective, and he is often surprised and frustrated when the intention of the message is
ignored or misunderstood. During debriefing and feedback sessions, those receiving a
message intended to inspire, feel equally disappointed, most often feeling as though the
concept or strategy is something that has previously been discussed/tried and then
abandoned. Their lack of enthusiasm and resistance to change is commonly mistaken as
defiant in nature, when in fact it is more likely a matter of information physics. People
don’t just passively absorb knowledge; they interpret it first unconsciously and then
consciously. During the unconscious portion of the process, the brain searches for and
18
locks on the connections that are apparent between the incoming signals, and the
memories made up of billions of chemically encoded information fragments extracted
and cataloged from previously received signals. The pieces of the message that find a
match will bring the associated emotions and intellectual evidence of those connections
into the level of the conscious mind, where it will either be dismissed because the concept
did not bring about the desired outcome in the past, or be given less attention because it is
something that worked well, but is already in place. Alternatively, the parts of the
message that carry new, as yet unknown information, will be scrutinized through the
same process. If the untried ideas are comprised of signals with no identifiable
connections, the brain finds no history of this signal’s importance. There are no
memories, no associations, and with no “links,” there is no chemical path or no reliable
way to file the information in a way that it can be dependably recalled. The usual result
is this piece of the information is lost before it can be considered — much like a sentence
in an unfamiliar language heard for the first time - survival time, thirty seconds.
This selection process could also help explain the level of increased resistance to
information received from outside the immediate system. In general, we would rather listen
to ourselves than others, would rather take advice from a friend than a stranger, are more
willing to express a need to a professional peer than to someone from an unrelated
department, and so on. Following this logic, the relationship between relevant systems
becomes more distant, it would be consistent for willingness to accept information to
steadily decrease but this is not the case. Once the source of the information is removed to
a degree that it is without local association, the information is, for the most part, considered
in terms of content only; hence, the willingness to accept the advice of outside consultants.
The difficulty surfaces when an external system does have association with a smaller
19
subsystem in which it wishes to govern change. Because the larger system is viewed with
shared association, but is too far removed to be considered “connected,” by the smaller
systems, the external system is perceived as an entity to defend against. Attempts by the
ptimary system to control information result in unpredictable repercussions because
fundamental constraints are mechanistic solutions, which are incompatible with complex,
living processes. Examples of this can be seen in virtually every enterprise - departments
resist administration, administration opposes city planners, local government contests state
government, etc. The idea of local representation in unions, civic organizations and national
government works well because it restores the needed connection that association requires.
The emergence of reactive subsystems is most common during the attempted
implementation of new policies by new leaders and least likely to emerge when change is
induced out of peer to peer exchange within. During transformational processes, the
incorporation of as many members of the internal system as possible reduces the chance
of fractionalization, but may also not introduce enough contrasting information to
stimulate actual or perpetual change. Since accepting information from completely
unknown sources carries with it interest tempered by suspicion, and messages that can be
related to by multiple association are most likely to be embedded, organizations and
institutions may want to consider making use of under-used channels of information-
handling. An example of this type of informal information exchange option would be the
disclosure of facts through sources that relate to the intended information recipients
outside the usual setting (be it office, classroom, etc.). Informal sources of information
include family, newspapers, professional associations, and civic organizations. For
example, before introducing an initiative requiring creative interaction, consider how the
information you wish to share may impact individuals outside the present setting. Ask
20
yourself what association the receivers might have with the message, how this
information might relate to other ideas to which they assign value. Would local or
professional organizations be interested in commenting or adding something to the
group? Are there articles already in existence that discuss the issue from a unique
perspective, suggest overlooked relationships, or offer fresh alternative viewpoints?
There is evidence that small systems have a much greater capacity for information than to
which they have access.
A primary culture, which exerts its influence of its internal systems by creating
solutions via programs and performance measurements, becomes a deterrent to the
success of those within the subsystem by instigating derision. The relationship between
leadership and the supporting cast must be without inhibiting artificial boundaries. What
information we choose to share and how it is communicated affects the health of all
systems to which we contribute. Disruptive information (outside the status quo or
direction of present current) can result in temporary reflexive shutdown but is followed
by the next potentially productive cycle.
Intrusion
For information to be productively diffused, understood and remembered, transmitted
messages must access the learning process of the receiver. If nothing is learned from an
information exchange, no new thoughts are prompted on the receiving end. The
biological process of concept formation relies upon “intrusion.” That is, the introduction
of information unfamiliar, incongruent or contradictory to that individual’s current store
of knowledge. If there is nothing exceptional about the content, delivery or conditions of
the information, adaptation is not needed, original thinking is not stimulated, behaviors
21
do not change. This explains why non-adaptive monocultures appear within organizations
that resist diversity of thought, and why the subsequent result is accelerated degradation
of the system.
Confinement, Disorder and Reemergence
Every subatomic article moves faster in confined space. The smaller the space, the
smaller the region of confinement, the faster the movement. This is a typical quantum
effect and is an excellent example of the restlessness of the subatomic world. This rapid
movement could be described as vibration, fluctuation, and oscillation and gives
information its resonance. Amplification of that resonance is made apparent by residual-
event patterns made conspicuous by changes in behavior throughout the system. Low
levels of amplification result from all information exchange. Significant amplification is
brought about by the creation of new pathways, created when the message received
contains new information requiring thought. Connections must be established, and each
correlation offers the possibility of fresh creativity and imagination. Further, this
innovative thinking will not yet have preprogrammed behaviors attached, this fosters the
need for mental scenario building, and is the precursor to individuals changing their
course of action. The greater the challenge to adapt the new information and behavior in
the individual system, the greater the amplification within the individual and the system.
The high energy exchange can touch off a group learning phenomenon I call stimulating
a cascade: new information begets new thinking, and new behaviors, which require new
responses that generate new thinking throughout the system.
Since small systems by definition contain fewer variables than large systems, the
information they generate and receive is more likely to have a significant number of
22
associations allowing for greater impact potential throughout the system. Information that
is restrained either by the small size of a system or intentional repression exhibits
increased activity and more rapid diffusion. Moreover, the energy released can disrupt
information receptivity defense mechanisms allowing greater potential for the
consideration of new information, or intrusion. In most cases however, the disruption
phase of knowledge transfer is interrupted before the information is allowed to interfere
to a productive degree.
Navigating the Current
In the last few years, books and articles relating chaos and complexity theory to
organizations as systems have helped organizations become familiar with the premise
that it is natural, even necessary, to undergo periods of instability as a part of the
development process. In fact, some organizations have begun incorporating basic
systems theory into educational workshops and strategic visioning sessions where these
processes are presented as normal, cyclic adjustments that are the foundation of
adaptability. Typically, however, while managers and other organizational leaders will
acknowledge that, in theory, information collision disruption processes vitalize
flexibility, collaborative spirit, and ingenuity, in practice they still find themselves trying
to regulate, and eliminate its imposition. While the behavior seems contradictory, it is
understandable.
The viability of any group relationship is most often thought to be compatibility.
Anything seeming to threaten what is seen to be the foundation of cooperation such as
seeming breakdown of these vital relationships is frightening, even when the ultimate
advantages and temporary nature of the discomforting conditions are understood. The
23
difficulty then lies not in the cognitive ability of leadership to grasp the value and
necessity of the process, but in the emotional need of those in charge to affect outcomes
in a way they understand to fulfill a common purpose. I submit that it is a matter of using,
rather than interfering with the information adoption process. When the process is
impeded or arrested, the energy is either inflected, resulting in a reversion to the pre-
information state fortifying practices and theories in use, or the energy scatters,
splintering the supporting structure. However, if allowed to run its course, this
concentrated activity tends to interfere with symmetrical amplification making it more
subject to distortion.
The effect appears most evident at the greatest distance from the information origin.
Because of the greater effect on the individual members, the change vision of the local
system tends to be incremental, involves the experiences of the members, and consists of
compromise. Conversely, the change vision of the larger controlling system is often
unconditional, employs the aptitude of the educated few, and consists of solutions to
problems rather than ongoing wellness. Moreover, the subsystem is oriented to the
moment, where as the primary system is oriented to the future; the primary system is
interested in striving toward calculated goals, and the subculture values spontaneity over
planning. The divergence of these systems can pull communities apart by dividing
solidarity
In dynamic, complex systems, information is abundant and varied, ingredients
fundamental in determining malleable structure. For systems to develop, internal system
sets must evolve. If this is to take place, information must be continuously generated
from within and without. It is the process of establishing connections through diffusion
24
of information from myriad sources that prompts collaborative, self governing order to
follow cyclic disorder; information it is the underlying agent of the process. Unaware of
the need for contrasting ideas and opinions, and in a mistaken effort to reduce friction and
opposition, primary systems very often withhold and alter the information they share with
the subsystem. Even when the goals of two coincident systems are identical, withholding
information supports existing perceptions, expectations, and ends meaningful
communication causing reaction fractures in the sub-systems. This is highly significant
because the energies being drawn into the subsystem are drawn away from the direction
intended by those attempting to induce change from the primary system impacting the
success of the intended initiative.
Undetected Variables & Anticipated Response
The being of information cannot be separated from its activity. The very process of
information physics can only be understood in the dynamic context of its movement,
amplification and resonance; interaction based on regeneration, and transformation/
evolution by way of adaptation through behavioral change. The structure of the human
mind affects the physics of information because the process of observation and our
individual and collective perceptions determine the very properties of any observed
phenomena. More significant is the fact that we cannot communicate without affecting
information. In quantum reality information processing, non-local connections of our
collective thoughts result in instantaneous change of each progressive subsequent
thought. If we are unrestricted in our comfort to communicate the result, what we can
share will be as original and as unique as each of us.
25
Influence and Direction
It is the meaningful exchange of knowledge and competency that is the challenge.
During intrusion, new information confronts and challenges existing information
causing a disturbance within the system. The result is an internal resonance leading to
the amplification necessary to learning and adaptation. It is possible to modify the
content and structure of messages in a way that will improve their receptivity and
likelihood of their long-term absorption without interfering with the information’s
resonance and amplification. It was once thought that it was uninterrupted feedback
loops that amplified disturbances creating structures within that diffused energy to cause
systems to reorganize and renew. While true, the free flow of internally generated
information is not enough. For ongoing regeneration, living systems need infusion of
unimpeded, divergent, yet comparable information. Given that, the ability of these
systems to reconfigure gives them a feature more important than compliant stability:
resourceful versatility and resiliency.
Information that is out of the ordinary, but congruous enough to make use of the
existing channels, has a good chance of surviving long enough to resonate, or call
attention to itself. The message is then evaluated for possible cataloging, or disposal.
During this sorting stage, it has been discovered that the number of varied associations
the brain is able to find with the message outweigh the strength of a singular significant
objection. So, if a person is given information that is consistent with their personal values
system, their spiritual beliefs, their professional experience and their social upbringing, it
will stand a better chance as a candidate for long-term memory than if it simply
corresponded with their educational experience. Similarly, the number of areas where the
26
information is inconsistent will outweigh one significant conviction. In other words, a
message with a multitude of connections coupled with contradiction will gain the most
attention.
Information and the Individual
Research has shown that on an individual level, the greatest adaptive behavioral
changes occur in adults involved in self-directed learning from informal information
exchange, meaning casual answers to spontaneous questions with neither intent nor
restriction. People flourish when they have the comfort to contribute to what they
consider to be meaningful exchange without being expected to come up with conclusions
and solutions, or agreement with the current sway. The freedom to participate in
conversation relative to subjects that matter to us as people moves us to want further
interchange, to know one another.
Summary and Recommndations
The fact that so much of what presented here is outside current traditional scientific
thought, is less something to disturb or burden us than it is to enjoy and celebrate. In the
old model, if it couldn’t be plugged in to a prescribed formula, or demonstrate support by
current accepted theory, it was rarely given acknowledgement in scientific or professional
discourse. Instead, we live in a time when at last it has become intelligent to question, to
say “I don’t know,” to exchange interdisciplinary theories, and to admit that when it
comes to living systems, there are no definitive answers, offering us an opportunity once
again for collective curiosity and wonderment. Sadly, much of what we have learned and
passed into collective memory socially in the last several generations has been
maladaptive to our health as a society. The information we share provides us with the
group identity needed as a basis for sound community living. When this is understood,
we can marvel at how careless we have been with the information we generate and
choose to disperse. Very general recommendations based upon these findings include:
1. Before introducing information for the purposes of instigating change, first consider
what behavioral responses would be of the greatest value to the proposed initiative and
the systems over time. Does the project require creativity over collaboration? Or, is
solidarity and allegiance to the present structure more important than generative process?
If the plan calls for continuity and high levels of structure and regimentation, information
should be dispensed to large groups in a generic format with small amounts of new
information blended with very familiar messages. The presentation should be punctuated
by specified steps and explicit correlations made by someone with only general affiliation
with the group whose presence does not induce positive or negative emotion.
Conversely, if inventiveness, imagination, and ingenuity is called for, information
should be shared individually, or in small groups. It should be conveyed by someone
well thought of with as many associations to the individual/group as possible in a format
made up of predominantly new information. Emotion inducing connections that can be
linked to the project should be illustrated. Relationships should be suggested rather than
defined and the exchange should be kept brief.
2. Determine how much instability, over what period, you are willing to accept.
3. In all instances, let individuals self-organize, and to every degree possible encourage
them to become familiar with each other as people. By bringing them together for the
purpose of participating in a community improvement project, for example.
28
There is an unbroken wholeness to which we belong, and in which we have the
opportunity to participate. This emerging understanding is a means to get back to our
place as being a part of the living complexity, instead of reacting to analysis of systems
theory as though we existed outside it. The events in our world are not arbitrary. It is not
only our actions, but also the thoughts, perceptions, and intentions that we share with one
another that shape our universe.
Bibliography
Argyris, C. Reasoning, Learning and Action: Individual and Organizational Action. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1982.
Bandura, A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1986.
Bateson, G. Steps Toward an Evolution of the Mind. London: Paladin, 1973.
Benedict, Ruth. “Synergy: Some Notes.” American Anthropologist. 72 (1970): 325-326
Buzsaki, G. “Two-Stage Model of Memory Trace Formation: A Role for Noisy Brain
States.” Neuroscience 31 (1989): 551-570.
Campbell, Bernard. Humankind Emerging. 3" ed. Toronto: Little, Brown & Co., 1982.
Chahal, Rita. “Understanding Group Process.” Paper presented at the Canadian
Association for University Continuing Education Conference. Cape Breton, Nova
Scotia, 15 June 1998.
Cromer, Alan. Connected Knowledge: Science, Philosophy, and Education. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1997.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. The Evolving Self. New York: HarperCollins,
Deci, Edward L. Why we do What we do: The Dynamics of Personal Autonomy. New
York: Putnam, 1995.
Forrester, Jay. The Collected Papers of Jay W. Forrester. Portland, OR: Wright-Allen
Press, 1975.
Frankel, E. and Cortea, M. (1999) Field of Intentionality: From Family History to
Psychosomatic Organization, 7th Congress of European Association for Body-
Psychotherapy, Kurthaus Traemunde, Germany
29
Freudenburg, W. “The Density of Acquaintanceship: An Overlooked Variable?”
American Journal of Sociology 92 (July, 1986): 27-42.
Granovetter, Mark S. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78,
no. 6 (1973): 1360-1380.
Greenfield, Susan. Journey to the Centers of the Mind: Toward a Science of
Consciousness. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company, 1995.
Hofstadter, D-R. (1985) Metamagical Themes: Questing for the Essence of Mind and
Pattern, Basic Books, New York
Inglehart, Ronald. Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural,
Economic and Political Change in 43 Societies. New York:
Princeton University Press, 1997.
Jaynes, J. (1976) The Origin of Conciousness in the Breakdown or the Bicameral Mind,
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston
Lumsden, C.J., Brandts, W.A., Trainor, L-E.H. (1997) Studies of Nonlinear Phenomena
in Life Science (Vol. 4) Physical Theory in Biology: Foundation and Explorations,
World Scientific Publishing, London
Lumsden, C.J., Wilson, E.O. (1983) Promethean Fire: Reflections on the Origin of the
Mind, Harvard University Press, Cambridge
McClelland, David. Human Motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott and Foresman, 1985.
Merrell, D.W. “The Organization: A Living System.” The Management
Psychologist 6, no. 3 (1984): 3-14.
Mezirow, J. Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991.
Norretranders, Tor. The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to
Size. Middlesex, England: Viking Penguin, 1998.
Oliver, D.W. Education, Modernity, and Fractured Meaning. Albany,
NY: University of New York Press, 1989.
Pinker, Steven. How the Mind Works. New York: W.W. Norton,
1997.
Pitkanen, M. (1999) Illustrations of TGD and TGD Inspired Theory of Consciousness,
Department of Physics, Theoretical Physics Division, University of Helsinki, Finland
30
Price, I. “Organizational Memetics as a Solution to Process.”
Management Leaning 26 (1995): 299-318.
Skolimowski, Henryk. The Participatory Mind. London: Penguin,
1994.
Smelser, Neil. Theory of Collective Behavior. NY: Glencoe, 1963.
Sober, Elliott and David Wilson. Unto Others: The Evolution and
Psychology of Unselfish Behavior. Boston: Harvard University
Press, 1998.
Sulloway, Frank, J. The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the
Evolution of Cooperation. London: Penguin, 1998.
Wheatley, Margaret, J. Leadership and the new Science. San
Francisco, Berrett-Koehler, 1994.
Wlodkowski, Raymond, J. Enhancing Adult Motivation to Learn.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993.
31
