Igor Kondrashin. Dialectics of Matter

Systemic Approach to Fundamentals of Philosophy

Contents

(C) Igor I. Kondrashin 1997

First published in 1997 by
The Pentland Press Ltd.
1 Hutton Close, South Church
Bishop Auckland
Durham
United Kingdom

All rights reserved.
Unauthorised duplication

   contravenes existing laws.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.

   A catalogue record for this book is available
from the British Library.

ISBN 1 85821 463 7

I.I. Kondrashin

Composition, design (C) Mironenko I.E., 2000
Igor I. Kondrashin - Dialectics of Matter (Introduction)

[ To Contents ]

Igor I. Kondrashin

Dialectics of Matter

Introduction

The nineteenth and the twentieth centuries have brought to humanity a lot of scientific discoveries, and were marked with unprecedented achievements of the intellect. The works of Hegel and Feuerbach, Marx and Engels, Einstein, Pavlov and other great thinkers gave us the opportunity to take a serious view on the universe surrounding us in a new way, to perceive quite differently phenomena and events that are going on around us. The progresses in physics and chemistry, biology and cybernetics, scientific and technological achievements, and as a result, the expansion of industrial production, have considerably increased potential possibilities of the human society in obtaining a large spectrum of consumer goods and articles of general use.

   At the same time, beside the said process, a range of problems and questions, which need urgent replies and definite decisions, becomes wider. Among them: the unrestrained growth of population when natural resources are progressively draining; the research of new alternative sources of energy when climatic changes become more fatal; the increasing number of incurable diseases - cancer, AIDS, etc.; a larger-scale of the social polarization of the society and the growth of organized crime and terror; the pressing necessity of the global rise in efficiency of social labour with environmental protection at the same time, a sooner destruction of accumulated stockpiles of nuclear weapons that have a great potential danger to end all the civilization on the Earth.
   What are the prospects for a further existence of the mankind, the objectives of its evolution, its optimal pattern and numbers of the population? What should be considered justified and sufficient in its consumption? These and other analogous questions are arising more insistently before the intellectual part of humanity, forcing them to make more and more mental efforts to reach equitable solutions to all the problems.
   Meanwhile, after classical ancient philosophers (Heracleitus, Plato, Aristotle), the attempts to solve the mysteries of the universe and to disclose the causality of phenomena of the objective world were undertaken by Bacon, Descartes, Spinoza, Galileo, Newton, Laplace, Kant and other thinkers of the past. Each of them in his own way supplemented the common ACCUMULATING FUND of HUMAN KNOWLEDGE.
   The names of Hegel and Feuerbach are occupying particular places in this line as the philosophical concepts of 'dialectics' and 'matter', that gave a key to the understanding of current events and phenomena we are facing in daily life, were crystallised in their books.
   The category 'matter' was more or less clear to everybody and the dispute was going only to accept it or not to accept at all, and if to accept, then primarily or secondarily. The situation with the category 'dialectics' was much more complicated. All the progressive intellectuals of that time were understanding that exactly with its help our knowledge about the universe would advance forward, but how to do it, or was it possible to do something of that kind with the current volume of knowledge, nobody knew at that time yet, as in the 'dialectics' itself there were too many confused and incomprehensible things. And the 'dialectics' itself, in the opinion of F. Engels, had been so far closely investigated by that time only by two thinkers, Aristotle and Hegel.
   "Any systematisation after Hegel is impossible. It is clear that the universe constitutes itself as a unified system [italicised by me - I.K.], i.e. a constrained unity, but the cognition of this system presupposes a cognition of the whole nature and history, what people never achieve. Therefore those who construct systems, have to fill in an innumerable quantity of blanks by their own inventions, that is to dream irrationally, forming ideologies," - wrote F. Engels in Anti-Duhring. But already this work itself was one of the first attempts to write an encyclopaedic essay of interpretation of philosophical, natural-scientific and historical problems with the assistance of the new method. The systemic approach and certain elements of the materialistic Dialectics were used also by K. Marx during writing of Das Kapital.
   In the meantime searching minds of analysts could not be at peace, wishing to crystallise more and more, to sharpen the 'dialectics' and with its help to reconstruct the whole picture of the universe from a historical point of view. It was obvious that only in this way would it be possible to draw laws of development of the nature, of the society. "When I [Marx wrote in a private letter] will be more independent financially, I will write Dialectics. The true laws of dialectics Hegel already has, indeed, in a mystical form. It is necessary to release them from this form". In another letter, addressed to Engels, Marx wrote (in 1858): "If I would have some time again for such works, I would draft with great pleasure on two or three printers' sheets in a form easily understood for human common sense that rational, what is in the method, which Hegel has discovered, but at the same time mystified."
   Simultaneously with Marx and Engels other analysts were understanding as well the importance of improving the method of the materialistic Dialectics. In this connection we ought to mention the works of I. Dizgen, whom F. Engels described in the following way: "It is perfect, that we have discovered not alone this materialistic dialectics, which already during many years was serving as our best instrument of labour and our sharpest weapon; a German worker, Iosif Dizgen, has discovered it anew, irrespective of us and even irrespective of Hegel."
   Thus already at that time it was evident that to find solutions for problems that humanity was facing, it was necessary with the help of the method of the dialectical materialism to reconstitute the most full unified picture of the universe, and on the basis of the objective laws and regularities being revealed as a result of this brainwork, to determine the nature of links and the mechanism of interaction of elements of Matter in order to exploit them deliberately in our everyday activity.
   However, it was impossible to implement this without extensive knowledge. That is why both Marx and Engels equally showed permanent interest in natural sciences. There was even a peculiar division of labour between them. Marx more thoroughly knew mathematics, history of technics and agrochemistry, besides he was studying physics, chemistry, biology, geology, anatomy and physiology; by comparison with Engels he was studying more mathematics and applied natural sciences. Engels more thoroughly knew physics and biology, besides he was studying mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, anatomy and physiology; by comparison with Marx he was studying much more theoretical natural sciences.
   The founders of Marxism were understanding that in order to create a complete world outlook it was necessary not only to reshape critically previous achievements of philosophy, political economy and socialist teachings, but also to summarise the fundamental achievements of natural sciences of that time, without which it would be impossible to give to materialism a new, dialectical form.
   As a result of many years of thorough studies of natural sciences in order to generalise them theoretically, Engels made up his mind to write a work based on new original ideas - Dialectics of Nature. As its systematising basis Engels decided to use a classification of forms of motion - mechanistic, physical, chemical, biological - in order to determine in the said sequence common dialectical regularities typical for all these forms of motion. Thus in Dialectics of Nature Engels set for himself a grandiose task - by means of synthesis of theoretical outlines of different spheres of knowledge into a unified scientific theory to prove that in the Nature, through it seems to be a chaos of innumerable changes, the same dialectical laws are paving their way, that also in the History they are dominating over what seem to be chance events, hereby to substantiate the universality of fundamental Laws of the materialistic Dialectics.
   Engels himself formulated this task in the following way: "...For me the thing was not to bring the dialectical laws into the nature from without, but to find them in the nature and bring them out of it. However, to fulfil this systematically and in every separate sphere it is a gigantic work. The point was not only that sphere to be mastered is almost immense, but also that the natural sciences themselves in all these spheres are involved in such a tremendous process of radical changes, that only just to observe them one should spend all his spare time he has..."
   After the death of K. Marx in 1883, F. Engels, doing his utmost to complete the publication of Capital and at the same time guiding working-class movement, already had no possibilities to study the natural sciences systematically and practically had to stop writing his work. Dialectics of Nature, being only in manuscript drafts, was left unfinished. It was published in the USSR for the first time only in 1925 and V. Lenin did not read it.
   Apart from this Lenin was also realising the full importance of extending the dialectical method of cognition, of making use of it in theoretical researches and practical activity. Therefore his next opinions in Philosophical Notebooks are typical: "The principal idea of Hegel is of genius: a universal, all-round, lively connection of everything with everything and reflection of this connection... in a human being's conceptions, which also should be trimmed, broken off, flexible, mobile, relative, interconnected, united in antipodes to comprehend the world. The continuation of Hegel and Marx's cause should be a dialectical processing of the history of human's thought, science and technics. ... From live contemplation to abstract thinking and from it to practical activity - such is the dialectical way of cognition of the truth, cognition of the objective reality." After study of his philosophical abstracts, fragments, notices of 1914-15, it becomes clear that Lenin also had it in his mind to write a special work about Dialectics, but the events of following years left him no possibility to carry out his creative plans.
   Since that time there was nobody, in fact, who showed serious scientific interest, trying to guess the meaning of mysteries of Dialectics, who liked to come to know its universal Laws.

In the meantime the Life continues its impetuous flight on our grain of sand - the Earth lost in the boundless ocean of the Universe. The problems of our existence are clambering up higher and higher with every passing day while Humanity now self-sufficiently, now carelessly and at times with fear, is gazing at them in the most part of the mass even not thinking and not suspecting that one day these piles can finally collapse and fall down on their heads, ruthlessly crushing and overwhelming everything, that was created by the human civilization in the course of thousands of years.*) If it happens, then by this it can be only proved, that our civilization appears to be a deadlocked branch in the general Plan of the Evolution of Matter. So deadlocked or passable, self-destructive or not?

  
*) Both fear and unconcern as well as groundless optimism appear as a result of narrow-minded estrangement from generally existing problems.
If objectively there is a reply, then the only one who can grant it, is the joint Human Intellect - the supreme creature of the evolving Matter. And the only reliable tools for this purpose can and should be the Dialectics, that universal instrument, with which help the Humanity can be able to disclose secrets yet not disclosed, to keep safe and even to increase what is already gained, to outline barely visible goals ahead and perspectives. Only with the help of the Dialectics is the Intellect capable of this. The refusal to follow this or even to abstain temporally from contacts with it can lead to the most lamentable results, including also in our every day life. The piling problems of nowadays are an evidence of this.
   "Indeed, dialectics cannot be despised," Engels wrote in Dialectics of Nature, "with impunity. However great one's contempt for all theoretical thought, nevertheless one cannot bring two natural facts into relation with each other, or understand the connection existing between them, without theoretical thought. The only question is whether one's thinking is correct or not, and contempt of theory is evidently the most certain way to think naturalistically, and therefore incorrectly. But, according to an old and well-known dialectical law, the incorrect thinking, being carried to its logical conclusion, inevitably arrives at the opposite of its departure point. Hence, the empirical contempt for dialectics is punished in the way that some of the most sober empiricists are being led into the most barren of all superstitions - into modern spiritualism." Unfortunately these words are actual nowadays as well.
   Thus a continual, more and more extending theoretical way of thinking, a further penetration into mysteries of Matter, revealing the Laws of its motion, drawing of the general Plan of its Evolution - all that undoubtedly requires dialectical generalisation of the achievements of natural sciences of nowadays. On the other hand, the undeserved consigning of Dialectics to oblivion, the refusal to study it further for more than a half century, and as a consequence, a forced necessity to make use of some of its conclusions without taking into account the appeared anew factors of the changed epoch, finally all that leads to the triumph of 'antidialectics' - agnosticism, dogmatism and neospiritualism.
   In connection with this the words of V.I. Lenin from his article 'Our Program', written in 1899, sound more justified: "We do not look at all at the theory of Marx as at something completed and untouchable; on the contrary, we are convinced, that it put only corner-stones of the science, that socialists must [underlined by Lenin] extend further in all the directions, if they do not want to be left behind by the course of life." Unfortunately this very important scientific and practical recommendation of the classic of socialism in fact was left without proper attention by present-day socialists and his warning proved to be oracular.
   Consequently even a temporary suspension of studying Dialectics is a deviation from it, a contradiction to its spirit of permanent development, which is strengthening the position of antidialectics.
   Lenin wrote how to carry out the process itself of dialectical cognition: "It is impossible to understand outside the process of understanding (acquaintance, actual study, etc.) In order to understand something it is necessary to start empirically acquaintance, studies, from empeiria go to general. To learn swimming it is necessary to enter water."
   There are also interesting thoughts of A. Einstein describing the mechanism of a modern theoretical research: "Initial hypothesis become more and more abstract, more and more distant from feelings. But at the same time we are approaching more closer to the most important target of the science - from a fewer number of hypothesis and axiom logically to receive in the deductive way maximum of genuine results. At the same time the way of thinking from axiom to sensible results and verified consequences becomes more longer, more refined. A theoretician has more to be guided during searches of theories by purely mathematic, formal consideration, since physical experience of an experimenter does not give the possibility to rise directly to spheres of the highest abstraction. Primary inductive methods, inherent to the youthful period of science, are replaced by searching deduction. Moreover, it is essential to advance so in the creation of such a theoretical construction, that to come to the results, which are possible to compare with experience. Naturally the experience is serving here as a powerful judge. But its verdict can follow only after long and difficult mental work, making the bridge between axiom and consequence." This scheme is valid for theoretical searches in any sector of scientific knowledge.
   It is well known, that all the existing natural scientific theories usually reply first of all to the question how?, while for disclosing of mysteries of our being it appears much bigger need to find replies to numerous questions why, WHY? This task can be solved only by the creation of a universal theory of evolution, which could be able to comprehend by a unified theoretical scheme the whole way of the Evolution of Matter - from the lowest forms of its existence to the most evolved ones, moreover, to comprehend it in such a way, that it would be possible to show the process of the evolution of the highest forms out of the lowest ones and at the same time to reveal the causality of the said process.
   Until now there was no such universal Theory, and its creation and popularisation was always the first and most important target of all philosophers-theoreticians. The creation of such a Theory can be effected on the basis of the Dialectical Materialism, as only the Dialectical Materialism, differing from any other method of cognition by studying individual regularities of motion, is able to outline laws of universal motion and development. This difference is conditional, as the dialectical logic is not a closed system of concepts, consisting of strictly determinate number of laws and categories, but allows any changes of its essence and the introduction of new categories. The classics of Marxism considered it as a continuously developing system, requiring regular supplements of new elements, making in categories the necessary changes, which are dictated by the course of development of scientific cognition, the creation of new philosophical concepts.
   In order to meet all these requirements the materialistic Dialectics should regularly expose its categorical apparatus to self-examination, define its ability to give a proper appreciation to deterministic conditionality of events and phenomena and find optimal solutions to actual problems, supplement the essence of laws and categories on the basis of generalisation of new facts about the development of society and scientific knowledge, extrapolate evolutional motion of forms of organisation of Matter at least for the nearest historical future (in spite of all neospiritualistic forecasters and pseudo-astrologers) to smooth over, although for Humanity, the consequences of the forth-coming negative events and cataclysms. Hence in its arsenal, besides perceptions and formal logical deduction, there should be the most advanced forms of thought, able more freely and easily to handle elements of scientific abstraction with the help of intellectual intuition in the process of the analysis of numerous phenomena aiming to unite synthetically the revealed regularities in a unified theory.
   Thus the development of dialectical logic means first of all a further elaboration of categories of the materialistic Dialectics, enrichment of the content of their meaning, advancement of new concepts, appearing as categories of Dialectics, establishment of associations between them, creation of a unified logical system, allowing in the most complete and authentic form to reflect the reality and to advance the scientific cognition ahead in the way of further disclosing of mysteries of the evolving Matter.
   In this book the author makes an attempt, summarising well-known scientific knowledge in the considered sphere and adding new necessary elements, to create on this base sought for logical system, continuing and carrying out the plans of founders of Dialectics (first of all of Engels) and meeting at the same time the requirements of the present-day scientific cognition. It is quite natural, that even not every professional philosopher has enough theoretical preparation and a bulk of individual knowledge, especially natural-scientific, to understand adequately all elements of the system being described. Therefore the description is of a somewhat scientific-popular type, and any reader who has enough interest and inclination, by thinking logically can easily get the dialectical essence of the theory being suggested.

[ To Contents ] [ Part I ]

Igor I. Kondrashin - Dialectics of Matter (Part I)

[ To Contents ]

Igor I. Kondrashin

Dialectics of Matter

I. Structural-Functional Synthesis
of Evolving Systems

"The target of any science, like natural science or psychology, is the concordance of our feelings and unification them into a logical system."

A. Einstein
German scientist-physicist

"Each scientific theory should be based on the facts, which it should explain and between these limits it can be considered fair; with the appearance of new facts, which do not correspond to the said theory, this theory earlier or later should be changed by a new one, more generalised."

A.M. Butlerov
Russian scientist-chemist

"With every epoch-making discovery, even in spheres of natural sciences, materialism should change its form."

F. Engels

Matter, Motion and Evolution

"The universe always contains the same quantity of motion." - R. Descartes.

   "The motion is the only way of existence of matter. There was nowhere and never and there is no matter without motion... Matter without motion is as inconceivable as motion without matter. Therefore the motion is as increatable and undestroyable as matter itself - ... : the quantity of existing motion in the universe is always the same." - F. Engels.
   "There is nothing in the universe except matter in motion." - V.I. Lenin.
   These three postulating quotations put the corner-stones to our cognition of the general theory of evolution of the universe.
   So Matter is the objective reality, the nature of which are different forms of motion, being itself her attribute. Hence there is nothing in the universe except motion, all existing construction material is motion. Matter is woven with motion. Any particle of any substance is a regulated motion of micro motions; any event is a determinated motion of elements of the system of motions. It is possible to resolve mentally any phenomena, events or substance into different forms of motion as well as out of different forms of motion in conformity with certain Laws it is possible to synthesize any phenomena, event or substance of Matter. Therefore in order to know how it happens it is necessary to learn the Laws, that regulate different forms of motion of Matter.
   Until now the motion of Matter is associated on the whole only with her motion in space and in time while the attention of researchers was drawn mainly to technical problems of calculating and measuring distances in space and intervals in time, disregarding fundamental problems of the space and of the time.
   However, as it is well known, the first rather clear positive ideas about what Space and Time are were expressed by the Greek thinkers of the classical period (the geometry of Apollony, Euclid, Archimedes, the ideas about time of Aristotle and Lucretius). Since the epoch of Galileo and especially since the epoch of Newton, space and time became integral components of the world and of the scientific view of the Universe. Moreover, the physical space started to be treated with the backing of the geometry of Euclid and time - to be interpreted by analogy with geometrical coordinate. The object of the Science became the description and explanation of things and their alterations in space and time. Space and time were mutually independent and were forming the objective, precisely determined and given to us primordial background. Everything could change except the spatial-temporal system of coordinates itself. This system seemed to be so invariable, that Kant considered it as a priori and moreover as a product of the intellectual intuition.
   The comprehension of relativity of motion was realised only at the time of Descartes, because all equations of motion and their solutions were made in determinate systems of coordinates, and a system of coordinates is a conceptional but not a physical object. Consequently, though motion was relativised in a system of coordinates, the latter was considered as attached to the absolute space.
   And only about a hundred years ago the idea was mentioned for the first time that any motion should be attributed to some system of counting off. Though what was offered in fact was a model of a physical system of counting off made with the help of a geometrical coordinates' system, and accordingly that could not entail any transformations in mathematics as it was only semantic alteration, but it was enough to make the concept of the absolute space depart. After that one could already suppose that if in the universe though one body was existing it could not move as motion is possible only relatively to some material system of counting off. That is why quite irrespective of acting forces the concept of motion started to be meant for the system having at least two bodies. And if the Universe was quite empty then there was neither space nor time. The physical space exists only in the case that there are physical systems (bodies, fields, quantum-mechanical substances, etc.). So the time exists only due to the fact that these systems are changeable in this or that way. The static universe would possess spatial features but would have no time.
   Thus the reasonable philosophy of space and time in contradistinction to the purely mathematical theory of space and time started to proceed from the assumption that space is a system of concrete relations between physical objects and time is some function of modifications which are going on in these objects. In other words it became a relative but not an absolute theory of space and time.
   The next phase in the progress of the theory of motion became the Special theory of relativity developed by A. Einstein in 1905 which revealed:
   a) that space and time are not mutually independent, one from the other, but represent themselves as components of some unity of higher order named the space-time which disintegrates into space and time relatively a certain system of counting off;
   b) that length and duration are not absolute, that is not independent from a system of counting off but become shorter or longer exactly due to the motion of a system of counting off;
   c) that there are no more purely spatial vector magnitudes and mere scalars: three-dimensional vectors become spatial components of four-dimensional vectors, which temporal components are likewise to scalars of the past. Meanwhile the fourth coordinate has quite another meaning than the other three coordinates and temporal component of a spatial-temporal interval has its own symbol contrary to a symbol of spatial components. Due to these and other reasons, time in the special theory of relativity is not equivalent to space though it is tightly linked with it.
   The Special theory of relativity practically added very little to render concrete the concept of motion, since space and time are not more important in it than it was in the till-relativist physics; this theory says really nothing about what the space-time means except as a description of its metrical characteristic. Philosophical aspect of space and time was not broached in it.
   The theory of gravitation or the General theory of relativity developed by A. Einstein in 1915 did its bit in the cognition of physical characteristics of spatial-temporal motion. According to this theory, space and time are not only relativist (but not absolute) and relative (that is relevant to a system of counting off) but they also depend on everything that the world contains. So the metrical characteristics of space-time (that is a spatial-temporal interval and tensor of curvature) should be considered now as dependent on allocation of substance and field in the Universe: the more density of substance and field, the more space is curvatured, the more trajectories of rays and particle are curvatured, the faster clocks are going. According to the General theory of relativity a body or a beam of light generates gravitational fields and the latter are reacting to the former. The interaction is telling on the structure of the space-time. If all substances, fields, quantum-mechanical systems disappear, then according to basic equations of the General theory of relativity the space-time would not only continue to exist but also would retain its rimmanov structure. But it would not be physical space-time. What would remain would be a mathematical system of counting off and have no physical meaning. As a whole the General theory of relativity has not yet received the proper philosophical generalisation due to the fact that its mathematical apparatus is extremely difficult to understand.
   One can say nearly the same about physical researches studying processes that are going on in the whole Universe. During the last decades cosmology stopped being a separate autonomous science and became the highest applied field of physics - megaphysics, studying the problems of the space-time in all the volume: cosmic space and eternity as a whole. But to imagine the evolution of the whole Universe during several temporal eras and give preference to one of many defending hypotheses of its formation on the basis of the astrophysical argumentation is still not enough. That can be done only with the help of serious philosophical research ruling out various antiscientific imaginations.
   Hence nowadays the human cognition has reached such a level when our ideas regarding space and time stop being purely natural scientific and transform more and more into philosophical problems, the solution of which at last would give the possibility to reply to such fundamental questions: what is space and time, how they are linked with existence and coming-to-be, what part they are taking in the evolution of material forms in general.

Motion in space. So for dialectical understanding of the structure and the Evolution of Matter one should underline the following: the motion in space is tightly linked with the motion in time - motion in space cannot be without motion in time. The motion in space has a dual characteristic. First of all it includes the motion of a material spot, or a system relatively another spot, or a system of counting off that is relative spatial motion. It can take place only in more space in comparison with elements of motion size of space and is typical only for those material spots and subsystems which are set in motion within this space. Meanwhile their own spatial size of elements of motion themselves remains constant and they only consecutively occupy the volume necessary for them inside a hyperspace, leaving free exactly the same volume behind them. Models of a relative type of motion in the space-time can be relative displacements of an individual photon, molecule, car or planet.

   But the motion of these material spots and bodies, being considered apart from the whole system of similar units, is a particular case of motion of elements of this system in a hyperspace. In other words, if a molecule of gas substance in motion occupies successively one and the same volume of space S (while and the occupied volume itself , that is constant and equal to a theoretical figure) then a system of molecules - theoretical gas flying away to different destinations in the open space occupies more and more volume (while during each temporal interval and velocity of diffusing in space equal to ). Such spatial motion should be considered as absolute and it characterises a spatial field occupied by a material system of linked similar units. Models of such motion can be a diffusion of gases and liquids, a flying away of photons of light from its source, etc. If in natural scientific researches mainly the first relative type of motion in space is studied then for philosophical understanding of Dialectics of Matter its second absolute type is more important that is combined spatial displacements of all similar elements linked in a system.
   Finishing a short excursus into 'space' let us define more precisely its relative commensurability for systematic formations. In everyday practice to measure space one can use the ordinary 'metre'. But the distance to one of the visible distant galaxies comes to 1025 m, while the diameter of a proton is equal to 10-15 m. Therefore there are grounds to agree with a logical conclusion that all the lengths surrounding us of space can be expressed with any magnitude from 10-n to 10n metres where n can take any significance from 0 to .
   This is an exegesis of universality of space and other forms of existence of Matter as well: from infinity into the depths till infinity into hypersphere.
   In everyday practice people usually use magnitudes from 10-4 m (the thickness of a sheet of paper) to 106 m. But because of our inability to measure distances less 10-30 and more 1030 metres it would be wrong to consider that forms of motion of Matter do not exist in spatial intervals with .
   Directions of motion in space have a purely formal meaning in a philosophical research due to the isotropy of space.

Motion in time. As it is well known any motion in space is tightly linked with the other form of motion of Matter - the motion in time. Any combination of these two motions creates an event.

   The motion in time has the same dual characteristic as motion of material forms in space. Let us look up at a second hand of a watch turning around its axis. Every moment of time it occupies a certain location corresponding to a temporal locality on the coordinate of time. In the next moment it leaves this location, occupying the next one. Together with the tip of a second hand we are steadily moving from one temporal point to another, leaving the former and getting into the next one while the temporal intervals themselves selected by us are equal. Such motion in time should be considered as relative, for temporal intervals successively alternate each other. Their magnitude can be different. For contrasting it is enough to compare the speed of displacement of a point of counting off associated with the end of an hour hand with the speed of a point of counting off associated with the end of a plane's turning propeller. The difference of temporal intervals related to a unit of angular or spatial displacement is obvious.
   As our first example we took an event with duration of one second. But if we take an event with duration of one hour then it is possible to divide its temporal interval into 60 minutes or 3600 seconds. Seconds can be counted starting from the first one into an accumulating total. Although we shall feel ourselves only in the interval of the most recent second the total duration of the event in fact will continue as a sum of all second's intervals starting from the first one. Such summary increase of time during the process of the duration of an event should be related to as absolute motion in time. Consequently after the completion of any event or in its absence, and no absolute motion in time occurs. Due to this fact it is possible to declare that motion in time or growth of time exists only for events combined also with other changes, but for an onlooker always situated in the actual point of count off, the growth of time practically does not happen and it remains constantly as t0. As for the motion in time, an onlooker, i.e. you and me, can judge only by indirect indications, revealing by that his capacity for abstract thinking.
   At present events with different temporal intervals are known: from 10-22 sec. (the duration of one vibration of a proton in a nucleus) to 1018 seconds (a supposed period of existence of the Sun in the form of a star). In everyday practice people use temporal intervals from 10-8 sec. (the time of crossing a room by light) to 109 seconds (the continuance of life of a human being).
   But also as in case with 'space' we can assume that duration of events' intervals can be of any magnitude from 10-n sec. to 10n seconds where n takes any significance from 0 to .
   When speaking about the direction of time's progress and its reversibility we can note the following: if a point of count off of spatial coordinates can be joined with any spot in space and transferred arbitrarily to another spot (following the principle of their equivalent relativity), and any such transference can have a positive symbol, then a point of counting off of the temporal coordinate makes its forward motion only strictly in one direction, measuring off temporal intervals of the development of this or that system or event. Due to this the temporal point of counting off is as if it eats intervals lying ahead of it, changing the symbol of the absolute Time from + to - or vice versa. Hence if we agree the sum of temporal intervals remained till some event to consider with the positive symbol then a point of counting off after a time interval will convert a portion of positive intervals into negative ones. And vice versa, if we agree to consider the duration of development of some process as a sum of positive temporal intervals then intervals not yet added further along the line of the temporal coordinate will be considered as negative and the instantaneous point of count off moving along the coordinate will change the symbol of intervals from - to +. As in our practice we meet this phenomenon constantly we should have clear knowledge about it.

?? Motion in quality. It appears now to be impossible to describe all the diversity of Matter's forms surrounding us only with the motion in space-time. We for sure feel the lack of something else that would unite all phenomena happening continually in the world into a unified chart of its creation and evolution. Such third kind of motion is the motion of Matter in quality that is not cognised, in fact, until now, not yet recognised formally by anyone and is being ignored unfairly by everybody. The Science, disregarding this type of motion of Matter, is incapable even nowadays to submit distinct, full, objective and definite explanations of causality in most events and phenomena, that are going on around us in the Universe.

   But as far back as more than one hundred years ago Leo N. Tolstoj proclaimed that all these phenomena depend at least on three parameters: "To imagine a person," he wrote in his famous philosophical novel War and the Society, "completely free, not being bound by the law of necessity then we should imagine him quite alone out of space, out of time and out of depending on causes" (underlined by L.N. Tolstoj).
   In his Philosophical Notebooks V.I. Lenin later defined that "functionality ... can be a type of causality". And as is well known a function is an outward display of qualitative characteristics of some object in a given system of relationship.
   But the most precise definition of obligatoriness to consider the organisation of constructing Matter through triple motion was given by F. Engels in Dialectics of Nature. "...There are also many qualitative changes to be taken into account," he wrote, "whose dependence on quantitative change is by no means proven. ... Any motion includes mechanical motion, change of place of the largest or smallest portions of matter; to obtain knowledge of this mechanical motion is the first task of science, but only its first task. But this mechanical motion does not exhaust motion as a whole. Motion is not merely a change of place [that is motion in space-time - I.K.], in fields higher than mechanics it is also change of quality." (my emphasis - I.K.).
   Among opinions on this subject of our contemporaries one should note the definition of the Russian academician A.I. Oparin, who characterised "the process of evolution of matter as the way of genesis of new, not existing before qualities" (my emphasis - I.K.). Thus in order to create a full picture of the formation and evolution of the material World it is necessary to observe the motion of material forming in three equivalent philosophical categories: in space - time - quality.
   And indeed, everyone can be easily persuaded in this actuality while just analysing the simplest examples. Let us imagine some close volume of space (), limited for example by a glass capacity. If we start to fill this volume with some gaseous substance, then the motion of gas inside the volume while it's filling during n time will be observed as an absolute motion (, ) of a substance of one quality (gas) in space, occupied with "pregas" substance of another quality. After a temporal interval , the gas will fill the given volume completely and absolute motion in space-time for the given portion of substance of Matter of the assigned qualitative level will terminate. In other words, after the system condition of the given substance of similar quality in a theoretically closed volume of space is balanced, its further absolute motion in space-time does not exercise any more.
   If that can be possible for some part of Matter during some period of time, then the general Evolution of aggregate Matter does not permit the absence of absolute motion in space-time since it is the principal requirement of its actuality. That is why besides the absolute motion in space-time there is also the motion of material forms in quality.
   What should we understand with this?
   According to an ordinary definition quality is a structurally undivided combination of indications, features of some substance or a thing revealed in a system of relations with other substances or things. Quality is the essential determination of substance due to which it is just this substance but not any other one and it makes certain difference with other substances. Hence each qualitative form of Matter has its own definite composition of peculiarities and signs which it reveals while relating with other forms of Matter. But as it is well known an external revealing of qualitative characteristics of an object in a presumed system of relations is its function. That is why with a change of qualitative characteristics of some substance its functional characteristics are changing as well.
   Hence a change in quality or a motion in quality one should consider as motion in functional heterogeneity of substances realised through systemic organisation of material forms.
   At the same time the motion in quality is as tightly linked with the motion in time as the motion in space. Without motion in time it is impossible to imagine qualitative changes, it is an independent variable of the said interrelation. Therefore the motion in quality one should comprehend only as motion in quality-time.
   Equally as with motion in space or time, the motion in quality can be relative or absolute. Changes of functional characteristics of some material formations by comparison with others are the relative motion in quality. Summary accumulation of functional characteristics by all forms of the aggregate Matter is the absolute motion in quality and it is important precisely for philosophical comprehension of dialectical Evolution.
   Functional features of any material formation can be revealed only in a system of relations with other similar elements. A single, isolated material formation cannot reveal its functional peculiarities and be used for material development. Thus the possession of quality or a functional definition dictates to every element the necessity to be included into some system of relations with other material formations, and in the process of those relations its inherent features are realised. Due to this principle the motion of Matter in quality entails a compulsory systemic composition of material forms being at the same time its main reason. All elements of known systemic formations depending on their functional peculiarities make different spatial-temporal displacements during which their peculiarities are revealing. The said displacements strictly correlated with spatial-temporal intervals of absolute motion in space-time are representing functional algorithms while every algorithm is pre-determined by functional characteristics of this or that material formation in a given system of relations.
   The absolute motion in quality constantly adds these or those features to material formations being in that way the reason of appearance of new functional algorithms which in their turn are leading to the organisation of new systemic structures. So the motion of Matter in quality-time determines the permanency of the process of systemic organisation of material forms in that degree in which the quality itself serves as a determinant of systemness of the Evolution of Matter.

Evolution. The three forms of motion of Matter examined by us one can consider at the same time as her unified motion in the three equivalent philosophical categories united by the common attribute belonging to Matter. This unified motion itself regulated by strictly definite rules is directed to provide the existence of Matter itself spread along the objective reality.

   Furthermore, the motion of Matter in three categories ensures not only her existence but it is leading as well to the evolution of her structures' organisation. That is why any modification of structural features of Matter happens as a consequence of motion of her forms in space-time-quality through augmentations along three coordinates: qualitative, temporal and spatial (disintegrated into three components). The general resulting line ultimately would be a tensor of the Evolution of Matter. Thus one can interpret the Evolution of Matter in a simplified manner as a regular appearance of new qualitative features , their stretching in space , for which they need certain time . Without motion of Matter through her forms in quality-space-time neither the evolution nor even her existence is possible:
   a) motion in quality () - is realised by means of the modification of functional characteristics of one system of material spots or localities in comparison with another one. This motion originates qualitative heterogeneity of the Evolution and its systemic organisation;
   b) motion in space () - by means of displacement of one material spot or locality (or a system of spots or localities) relatively another one. By this kind of motion the voluminity of the Evolution is being achieved;
   c) motion in time () - fixes duration of events and is passing from the past through now to the future. By this motion the Evolution's irreversibility is secured.
   All the three forms of motion in the aggregate are dictating the direction of the tensor of Matter's evolution which sense formula is the following:

It is necessary to underline once again that all events of material reality have as their basis an obligatory combination of all three forms of motion. An exclusion from this triune motion of motion in quality () or in space () can be only temporary. In reality there are no events without motion in time. Motion in space can be considered as a derivative from motion in quality which in its turn can be considered as a derivative from motion in time. The motion in time itself is derivative from motion in space as well as from motion in quality. Without both those motions motion in time does not exist.

   An abstraction from one of the forms of motion would give us particular episodes:
   a) in a hypothetically closed space () - "a diagram of evolution ", that is the sequence of qualitative augmentations in time and their duration;
   b) in a hypothetically frizzed time () - "an actual or a historical stop-picture ", that is spatial expansion of qualitative forms at a particular moment of time;
   c) in a hypothetically limited qualitative spectrum () - "the mechanical motion ", that is a displacement of a material spot (or a system of spots) relatively a spot of counting off.
   Any from the above said abstractions can be entirely theoretical or artificial because in the genuine World the motion of Matter is realised in all the three categories generating systemic formations containing two interlinked components as minimum relative each one to the other in space-time. The elements, being united into a unified system and possessing definite functional features, acquire an intrasystemic potential determining the nature of their motion in space-time and regulations of their intrasystemic existence. Any modification of systemic organisation of material formations, its complication and improvement, are real results of the motion in quality-time. Peculiarities of precisely this motion, its driving force and structural mechanics, we shall be examining in the course of our research.

Energy. The description of forms of Matter will not be complete if we do not analyse one more very important philosophical category - energy.

   Energy in the general understanding is a measure of motion of Matter. Another definition characterises it as a function of condition of a system.
   The motion of Matter in quality-space-time is going on not capriciously but complying with the severe law of constancy of the sum total of energy. And if for an inertial material spot moving evenly straightforward the magnitude of energy is simple and equals Ek, then for a system of a great number of spots the quantity of energy will be expressed by the formula:

This formula in a certain way discloses the mechanism and intercausation of all forms of motion of Matter as well as its regulations. Substituting in the formula the expression of value of velocity , we shall receive the regularity of the absolute motion of material forms in space-time. For an uncoordinated multitude of spots the total energy will be:

where mi - a sum of qualitatively similar spots.

   A combination of a number of spots into some stable (that is having a definite temporal interval) system, pre-determining the character of their motion in space-time, originates a kind of a material point of a higher organisational order with its own functional features and with potential energy Epi. Meanwhile Ek of the whole system will decrease and a total energy will be characterized by the detailed formula.
   If the entire sum of a multitude of uncoordinated spots will unite into an integral system constituting a unified material point or a sum of points of a higher order (with obligatory change of their functional characteristics), then a total summary kinetic energy of this multitude of spots of a qualitatively lower order will turn into potential energy of the point-system of a higher organizational order, that is as though the kinetic energy of uncoordinated spots or particles gets completely stuck in a systemic structure they are inserted in, turning into energy of intrasystemic connection.
   And vice versa, during desintegration of a material system of a higher order its potential energy of intrasystemic connection is being transformed into the kinetic energy of a multitude of spots of lower systemic order. As prototypes of described processes can serve reactions of synthesis and desintegration in physics phenomena, association and dissociation - in chemical ones, etc.
   As a whole the energy constant affects most directly both the motion of material forms in space-time and their systemic reorganisation during motion in quality-time. Due to this an isotropic and volumetric space of every preceding systemic organisation of level n appears to be a field of growth of entropy of succeeding qualitative levels of the evolving aggregate Matter in proportion as even temporal intervals are running while a constant sum of energy of the whole Material substance secures a static balance of this Evolution.

[ To Contents ] [ Part II ]

Igor I. Kondrashin - Dialectics of Matter (Part II)

[ To Contents ]

Igor I. Kondrashin

Dialectics of Matter

II. General Theory of Material Systems

Systemness of Matter

All the variety of reality surrounding us is representing qualitatively different forms of Matter developed in space. But location of the forms in space is not accidental, it is pre-determined by the organizational structure of one of the systems into which this or that material spot (or a group of spots) enters as a component.

   Consequently Matter is not an arbitrary piling up of qualitative forms disorderly spread in space and alternating in time. On the contrary, Matter exists in the shape of various types of numerous systemic formations which are very complicated in structure and which are situated in permanent interconnection and interaction, while the order of their organization is strictly regulated by the course of the Evolution of Matter itself through the motion in quality-space-time.
   Each part of any system has definite qualitative features and is performing corresponding functional assignment. The period of functioning of every part of a system is pre-determined by motion along the ordinate of time; displacement in space ensures relative one to another expansion of functional systems' parts; appearance of new qualitative features serves as a factor of further systemformation of Matter. Thus Matter exists not in the form of statically fixed frivolous formations but constitutes a kind of interlinked combination of dynamic systems that constantly and organisationally are transforming and perfecting in accordance with motion in quality-space-time. Seeming staticness of some systemic formations is only a consequence of comparative continuance of their functioning period.
   Depending on their functional maturity, one can separate all systemic formations into:
   1. Forming (originating);
   2. Developing;
   3. Stable;
   4. Dying away;
   5. Dead off;
   while each variety of systems as a rule passes through all the above stated phases of their existence.
   During periods of forming and dying away summary peculiarities of material formations are prevailing in systems based predominantly on motion in space-time. Developing and particularly stable systems have a more integral character that is signified in a precise interconnection of their structures' components by strictly definite actualised functions. Motion in quality-time attaches to these or those components of a system additive characteristic that gradually are increasing objective requirement in this system's reorganisation.
   Now it is possible to separate all systemic diversity of Matter conceptually into a line of organisational levels uniting systemformations of the same type of creation. An alteration of a state of a system of any level characterized by relative displacements of its components in space-time constitutes a functional event. Appearance of new functions as a consequence of motion in quality-time, in proportion as reorganisation of a system is going, determines an evolving process that can be traced through the whole expanse of the Evolution of Matter along the levels of her organisation while the direction of this process is: from summary systems of low level to integral systems of higher level. The whole totality of systemic processes and events pre-determines the motion of the actual point of counting off along the coordinates of quality-space-time and as a result of that the evolution of material substance is being realised.

Functional Cell and Functioning Unit

For better comprehension of the principle of intrasystemic interlink of components of each material formation let us examine peculiarities of the composition of any system. For clarity we shall take a model of a system with the simplest structure.

   For this purpose let us be carried away by thinking into an absolutely 'empty' field of space filled in with a hypothetical uniform 'ether' consisting of a number of material spots. As the given ether has definite space parameters, it means that it constitutes a material substance and is characterised by definite qualitative features described with a strictly defined function, and this function will be the same for any spatial volumes of the given ether due to its similar qualitative feature. Therefore if we move away some part of the ether from the volume of space occupied by it and replace it with another equivalent in spatial magnitude and qualitative characteristic part of the ether from some other field of space then the function of the given spatial volume will remain unchanged due to qualitative uniformity of both mutually replacing portions of the ether, that is to say the general functional background of the given formation will not be transgressed. This feature of material systems is one of the basics.
   That spatial volume from where we have moved away and then where we placed in again a portion of hypothetical ether is designated a functional cell (briefly - fnl. cell) of the structure of the given systemformation and the portion of the ether itself - its functioning unit (fng. unit).
   As from the very beginning we have agreed that the volume of space being examined by us is fully filled with the ether it means that any absolute motion in space-time by the moment of our examination had terminated (). In order to secure further existence of material substance, which is impossible to get without the entire absolute motion, Matter has to make the next step in her own Evolution in the third form of motion - to realise certain displacement along the ordinate of quality ().
   Consequently 'elementary' spots of the ether located in space-time relatively one to another in a definite order start to be re-grouped according to certain regularities, forming structures of concentrations of material spots of another, higher than the structure of the ether, systemic order, and having their own describing function corresponding to their new qualitative characteristics.
   We are not interested yet in the mechanism of systemformation of concentrations but the fact that these accumulations, absorbing a determined part of elementary spots of the ether, have other, different from the initial and characteristic only for them intersystemic structure and motion, is very important for us.
   Now the material spots of the field of space chosen by us are included concurrently into systemic formations of two different organisational levels. At places where the material spots are located in free from newly formed concentrations fields of space, they continue to constitute the initial ether. Conversely, at places where the formation of the material spots into concentrations added new qualitative characteristic to them, fields of space appeared described by a quite different function.
   After all that, if we move away one of the concentrations (fng. unit) from a part of structural space (fnl. cell) and replace it with a sum of material spots equal to it in volume and organised similarly to the system of the ether then such a replacement will not be equivalent due to the difference of functional characteristics of systemic formations of the first and the second levels. For this reason any not equivalent replacement of fng. units always results in corresponding modification of the fnl. background of the given formation. And on the contrary if we, instead of a removed concentration, place into its fnl. cell another of exactly the same concentration of material spots then the functional characteristics of the given part of the system as well as its fnl. background will not change. These regularities of systemformation along with other ones are the basis of the creation of all material systems surrounding us constituting entelehic structures of fnl. cells, each of which incorporates a precise list of definite algorithms. Material formations filling in corresponding fnl. cells in the capacity of fng. units realise during the process of their functioning the required algorithms, ensuring by that the existence of the whole given integral system.
   Fnl. cells in all levels of the organisation of Matter are not static but are originated because of balanced modification of intrasystemic potential now at one place, now at another of spatial-temporal continuance.
   Fng. units permanently drawn by them perform corresponding displacements in space-time. Therefore the motion of Matter in quality-space-time one should consider as perpetual motion of the whole assemblage of fng. units to spatial-temporal location of corresponding fnl. cells because only there with their assistance the realisation of those or other fnl. algorithms can happen, which is actually essential to material substance to ensure its existence and realise this or that phase of its evolution.

Principles of Systemic Formation of Matter

Principle 1 All the motion of Matter in quality comes to systemic differentiation of functions of her formations entailing their systemic-structural integration.

Principle 2 Every material formation has qualitative characteristic typical only of it, described with a strictly definite function and which it reveals in the process of its functioning as part of some system of an organisational level n. Not isolated material formations having fnl. features of the same systemic level enter into an interlink reflecting the process of systemic integration of Matter.

Principle 3 Every material formation constituting an aggregate of interconnected differentiated elements - fng. units structurally combines them into a material system of an organisational level n. Each element - fng. unit of level n is a microsystemic formation of an aggregate of differentiated elements - fng. units of an organisational level n-1 with specific for them functional characteristics. At the same time a steady integral system of level n can constitute a differentiated element - fng. unit of a structure of a macrosystemic formation of a higher organisational level n+1, able to realise corresponding algorithms of a fnl. cell it occupies.

   Thus the whole systemic organisation of material substance divided into different levels has obviously expressed cascaded character and every new integrational phase of differentiation of functions reflects the next stage in turn of the cascaded Evolution of Matter.

Principle 4 Every functional cell differs from another not similar to it fnl. cell by its spectrum of algorithms of functioning that can be realised only with the aid of fng. units filling in cells. That is why a sought for a fng. unit should have the corresponding enumeration of functional potentialities in order to carry out algorithms typical for a given fnl. cell.

Principle 5 A modification of functional features (quality) of any system of level n is a consequence of a modification of its internal structure characterised by the spatial-temporal location of fnl. cells it consists of and their algorithmic interlink. And vice versa, any modification of internal structure of a system of level n entails a modification of its functional features (quality).

Principle 6 Every material formation constituting some fng. unit "a" can reveal its fnl. features only being located into a corresponding to it fnl. cell "A" of a spatial-temporal continuance of a structure of a system of level n. At the same time a system of level n can be considered complete and function normally only on condition that all fnl. cells A, B, C... of its structure will be filled with corresponding fng. units "a", "b", "c"..., through the functioning of which the cells realise functional algorithms characteristic of them.

Principle 7 After replacement in a fnl. cell "A" of a system of level n of some fng. unit "a" to another similar to it fng. unit "a" the functional features of the whole systemic formation will not change. On the contrary, after replacement in a fnl. cell of a system of some fng. unit "a" to a qualitatively different from it fng. unit "b" of the same organisational level n the functional features of the whole given system that is its fnl. background will change accordingly.

   And really if in a molecule of water H2O to move away an included in the composition atom of oxygen from its fnl. cell and instead of it to place there another atom of oxygen then the functional characteristics of the systemic formation - the molecule of water - will not change because of this. If one places an atom of sulphur qualitatively different from the atom of oxygen into the free fnl. cell then the functional features of the given molecule will change since after that it will have the corresponding characteristics of hydrogen sulphide H2S, but not of water.

Principle 8 Every material formation becomes a fng. unit in a fnl. cell of a structure of a system of level n only in the case that it has a stable systemic completeness of a level n-1, being expressed in the presence of a definite spectrum of fnl. features reflecting the functional differentiation of subsystems of a macrosystem. Being in the possession of only a part of systemic fnl. features is forcing the fng. unit to occupy any free fnl. cell corresponding to it in a structure of organisational level n+1 while its autonomous, out of systemic existence becomes practically impossible. Each organised material formation of level n can realise its individual fnl. features only in the process of functioning in the capacity of a fng. unit in one of the fnl. cells corresponding to it of a system of level n+1 but outwardly the complex fnl. features of the whole new systemic formation will be already displayed.

   So atoms of oxygen being possessed of a definite spectrum of fnl. features practically cannot exist in a free condition and have to fill in fnl. cells of molecular structures of, for example, oxygen O2 or ozone O3 or some other chemical compound which includes atoms of oxygen and after that outwardly already the fnl. features of molecules of these compounds are being displayed. Accordingly an atom of oxygen having occupied a fnl. cell in a molecule of water is realising its fnl. features only as a fng. unit of the given systemic formation and its individual characteristic becomes indistinguishable from the spectrum of fnl. features of a system that had absorbed it. That is why in practice it is impossible to distinguish, for example, in a molecule of water the specific qualitative peculiarities of atoms of hydrogen and oxygen. It is possible to do this only after having removed the said atoms from fnl. cells of the molecule but then the atoms will have already other "out of systemic" indications.

Principle 9 Functional cells (fnl. cells) and corresponding to them functioning units (fng. units) of all organisational levels have different periods of time of existence in a structure of a given systemic formation. All functional modifications are based on this principle as well as the temporal continuance of the functioning of physical, chemical, biological and even social systems.

   Thus if a molecule of water because of some reason dissociates to separate atoms then its three fnl. cells will terminate their existence while fng. units - two atoms of hydrogen and an atom of oxygen - will occupy empty fnl. cells of other systemic formations of a given organisational level. On the contrary, during the process of oxidation of hydrogen sulphide H2S an atom of oxygen occupies the fnl. cell of sulphur while sulphur in a free form falls out to a sediment.
   In the same way we can trace rotations of fng. units - albumen and protein in corresponding fnl. cells of organic cells as well as fng. units - workers in structures of fnl. cells of enterprises.
   Besides, it is necessary to note that in the process of motion in quality Matter at first originates more and more new layers of fnl. cells which are being filled in after that with fng. units corresponding to them while the number of fnl. cells of conceptually "upper" layers always exceeds the number of being originated fng. units corresponding to them. Meanwhile the process of reduction of conceptually "lower" layers of fnl. cells is taking place, forcing functioning units which have become free to migration, that is to occupying corresponding functional cells in new structural formations.
   The number of functioning units is regulated by the structural requirement of this or that systemic formation. Any system of level n can be considered integral and functionally complete only in the case that all the fnl. cells of its structure are filled in with functioning units corresponding to them. Such a system is hypothetically closed for all fng. units that cannot get into its filled in fnl. cells. At the same time a system becomes open as soon as free functional cells appear in its structure ready to accept corresponding fng. units. This feature of systems is the basis of all chemical reactions, physical interactions, biological, social and other systemic phenomena.

Principle 10 Groups of functioning units filling in structures of functional cells of systemic formations of level n create different subsystems with distinctive fnl. features while all fng. units by significance are equal in between only in one thing - all of them are bearers of definite fnl. features that they realise in the process of their functioning in a corresponding fnl. cell. But functional cells themselves occupy in a structure of any system rather unequal positions dictated by the systemic organisation of a given material formation. Consequently the more complex a system is organised the more distinctly a particular structural coordination between its fnl. cells is exuding in it regulated by created intercell links, and fng. units filling in corresponding to them fnl. cells form certain kind of fnl. pyramids of coordination and are distinguished in fact only by their fnl. significance.

Principle 11 The functioning of every dynamic complete system is happening under the influence of the three factors:

   1. Energetic - due to the action of which the synthesis of systemic formations is carried out in the way of filling in fnl. cells with corresponding fng. units and closing the system for excessive fng. units;
   2. Entropic - with the help of which the breaking of fnl. cells of systemic complexes having finished functioning happens and as a result of that having become free fng. units move to fnl. cells of other systemic formations;
   3. Accumulative - is used for accumulation of fng. units, preventing their possible desintegration in order to use them actively later on in newly formed systemic formations.
   Therefore in every adiabatic (that is being in conceptual isolation) dynamic system or subsystem the revealing of two as minimum active centres is noticeable. For one of them a predominance of the energetic factor is typical, the influence of which is exposing in origination of fnl. cells on different organisational levels (predominantly along the hypothetical vertical line) and filling them in with being available fng. units. This brings to lowering of the level of relative order in a subsystem but procures its development in quality. For the other centre a predominance of the entropic factor is typical, leading to the origination of functional cells actually on one organisational level (along the hypothetical horizontal line) and correspondingly filling them in with fng. units. This brings a given part of a system to a more balanced state. A location of both centres in structures of systems is not permanent and moves depending on changing intrasystemic conditions. As a result of the effect of both factors an increase of a number of fng. units of one level in one of the centres and shortage of them in the other one are happening. This is the reason for displacements of fng. units from a donoric field, where they are in surplus, to an accepting field of corresponding to them empty functional cells.
   Thus the evolution of any dynamic material system can happen only in the presence of both centres (energetic and entropic), that is during the effect of the factor of bipolarity of developing systems. Its availability one can trace practically in all processes and phenomena happening in the nature as well as in events of social life (beginning from a chemical process of burning and finishing with social phenomena of unemployment or shortage of labour force, etc.).

Principle 12 Regulation of motion of material formations is provided owing to its systemness from which definite rules of motion of fng. units in quality-space-time are following. The analysis of the progress of the evolution of the material substance along the ordinate of quality shows that all material formations - fng. units by functional signs are being divided into a great number of levels of systemic organisation creating strictly regular organisational sequence while every new level includes in the capacity of elements of its structure - fng. units - systemic formations of lower levels. However, because of the fact that the total energy of the whole material substance is of a constant magnitude, its quantity is strictly regulated for every organisational level while the synthesis of systems of higher levels is connected with reduction of kinetic energy of material microformations, which as if getting stuck in a structure of macrosystems of a new level, is being transformed into its hypothetical energetic potential.

   Thus every system of a higher order filling in structures of its functional cells with functioning units - material formations of previous levels as if accumulates kinetic energy of their motion transforming it into potential energy of connection in the structure of a given system. Therefore the formation of functioning systems of each subsequent stage happens simultaneously with the compulsory accumulation of energy of the motion in space-time of units of a previous level. And vice versa, a desintegration of a system of fnl. cells of any level breaks an interconnection between its fng. units, transferring them to the previous, lower level of systemic organisation where they, following the regulations out of formula , increase the velocity of their displacement in space, transforming in that way potential energy of connection in the structure of a disintegrated system into kinetic energy of motion in space-time of functioning units which have become free.

The regulations and principles of the general theory of material systems are partially well-known, but partially are not known at all though in practical Life we have to meet them, often without realising, almost every day. Therefore by tracing the processes of systemic formation and the evolution of the material substance concretely through the already well-known organisational levels one can get additional proofs of their existence and operation.

[ To Contents ] [ Part III ]

Igor I. Kondrashin - Dialectics of Matter (Part III)

[ To Contents ]

Igor I. Kondrashin

Dialectics of Matter

III. Dialectical Genesis of Material Systems

"It is precisely dialectics that constitutes the most important form of thinking for present-day natural science, for it alone offers the analogue for, and thereby the method of explaining, the evolutionary processes occurring in nature, interconnections in general, and transitions from one field of investigation to another."

F. Engels
"Dialectics of nature"

The Cascade Nature of the World Formation

The Science, being the result of human cognition, at present is in the next in turn important phase of its development. Logically generalising more and more empirical material it deduces strictly formulated regularities. Theoretical generalisations obtained become more and more abstract, more and more branching.

   And really, the plan of ontogenesis of our cognition looks like a growing tree when every passing year adds to it more and more sprigs and leaves, pre-determining and dividing the front of yet unknown to more and more narrow sections in every separate direction. Our every new knowledge-leaf covers by itself the next in turn white spot of our ignorance that, if to delay, at a certain moment can turn into rudeness, and for which this or that community of people can pay in their well-being, progress and even existence. The Human Intellect, as the instrument of cognition, serves the natural interests of the Human society to prevent such moments.
   The Human civilisation as a macrosystemic formation of Matter of a very high level n, being at a stage of its further evolution, could make its first theoretical generalisations only through the empiricist cognition of the surrounding world. From the beginning these searches were made by means of casual observations, but then also with the assistance of special research and investigations both in space (macro- and micro-) and in time (mainly in history, that is in -t) and even in quality (by way of research of functions of systemic formations of lower levels of Matter: n-1, n-2, n-3, etc.). Thus, the human civilisation only through abstraction, logical thought and experiment can penetrate (though partially, though theoretically) into one of the neighbouring lower levels of the systemic origination of Matter, going down the stages of cascaded organisation, but not going up from some "zero" level.
   Therefore the Science until now has disputed how "the Universe was created" and what was "the origin" of it. As the requirement in knowledge of that appeared already relatively long ago, clergy of different confessions because of this ignorance advise their own theological versions (naive enough from the scientific point of view and often contradicting each other) about a divine creation of the World. The theory of "the initial explosion", popular among astrophysics, is away in fact not far from that.
   Thus, the absolute zero level of the qualitative development of Matter is unknown yet to the Science as well as the fact whether it was and/or exists in general. However, for a relatively initial level of the systemic evolution we can take theoretically any of the lowest sublevels of the systemic organisation of Matter that have become known. It is necessary to do first of all for the simplification of the chronological description and understanding of the progress of the dialectical Evolution of material systems in accordance with the motion along coordinates of quality-time-space from simple to combined, from early to late, from small to large, etc.

Level a

The lowest level of the systemic structure of Matter, known to modern Science, one can consider the phenomenon of zero vibration of vacuum. Particles filling it have the name virtual. There are no deep serious theories yet about functional features of this systemic organisation of Matter because of the impossibility of carrying out an observation or setting an experiment in the frames of this sublevel, but while studying the microworld one should take into consideration the presence of the said phenomenon. There is an assumption that the time of the functioning of virtual particles is very short, they appear in couples "particle--antiparticle", and disappear right away in order to appear anew.

   The phenomenon of zero vibration of vacuum has something in common with the hypothesis about the existence of particles-tachyons, moving with a superlight velocity and with a very short period of functioning (existence).

Level A

The systemic formations consisting of quarks are at present a more basic lower functional sublevel, piercing the whole structure of Matter. Six types of quarks as minimum are already known nowadays. Besides them at this sublevel there are also gluons connecting functionally differential quarks into structural formations that are fng. units of a higher level (protons, neutrons and others).

   The nature and functional features of quarks are being studied intensively, but already the differences have been found in such characteristics as charge, isotopic spin, oddity, baryonic charge, spin, etc.
   It would be quite natural to say that quarks and gluons are not the smallest systemic formations of Matter, but modern Science unfortunately cannot yet cognise the structure and composition of quarks themselves. It is known only, that it is practically impossible to find quarks in a free form and therefore in order to single them out one should split particles by applying big quantities of energy. This fact indicates that the systemic organisation of the present sublevel has become fully stable and the Evolution is going on at higher organisational levels of Matter.
   As regards the sphere of spreading of the present level then it stretches at least in the spatial volume of our whole Universe. In any case the whole outer space visible by us from the Earth is the field of its spreading. Lack of sufficient information about the nature, time of functioning, functional features and structure of units of the present sublevel does not allow us yet to say with full authenticity what role quarks and gluons have played and plays in the process of the Evolution of Matter, but there are reasons to suppose that this role is very important. In any case, in the philosophical classification these material formations occupy quite rightfully one of the basic sublevels in the cascade of the systemic organisation of material forms.

Level AA

We should pick out into a separate sublevel of the systemic Evolution of Matter the following group of well-known particles that compile material formations of higher levels. Here we can take photons, electrons, gravitons, neutrino as well as similar to them particles and corresponding antiparticles. Because of big difficulties connected with the observation and study of these material formations, their functional features and the character of their interaction are not yet learned in full. But in contradistinction to units of the level A you can find them more often in a free form and that shows functional peculiarities and big spatial metrics of the systemic formations including them.

Level AB

Into the group of units of the present sublevel we should take Pi- , Mu- and K- mesons, hyperons and particles and antiparticles similar to them. Their main distinguishing feature is that they are the systemic formations of units of sublevels A and AA, not long-lived by the time of their existence, that characterises their systemic unstability. As a rule they as fng. units occupy fnl. cells of structures of a higher order, but after leaving them they immediately disintegrate to their components. You cannot observe these units in a free form during a relatively long period of time. Their functional features in systemic formations of higher order have not been studied enough either.

Level B

The stable systemic formations of so-called 'elementary' particles form the next well-known functional sublevel of the evolving Matter. As it is known, the priority of elementarity they were having temporally because of difficulties the early science suffered trying to partition them to components. Now, after it was already done, their name has merely symbolical meaning and possibly will be forgotten soon.

   To this group we should take protons and neutrons as well as particles and antiparticles corresponding to them. As it is already known now, their structural composition constitutes a systemic combination of units of sublevels A, AA and AB, but in contradistinction to material formations of the level AB they are characterised by a longer temporal stability