The Hum: do Solar System orbital dynamics display Asynsis-Constructal geometries and behaviours?

Is the Hum a Music of the Spheres for our age?

If confirmed, this appears to be more Asynsis-Constructal QED – more evidence (this time from celestial mechanics), that optimal, analogical geometries best describe Constructal behaviours in nature at all scales and time frames.

“The logical conclusion is that feedback is present via perturbations between the planets and Sun which arranges the planets into an order which minimises work done, enhances stability and maximises entropy. This calls to mind the Constructal law, stated by Adrian Bejan in 1996 as follows:

“For a finite-size system to persist in time (to live), it must evolve in such a way that it provides easier access to the imposed currents that flow through it.”

A true system contains cybernetic feedback. The Phi relationships demonstrated here are evidence that the solar system truly is a system in the full sense of the word.”

So in the spirit of Voltaire (and to paraphrase): we may disagree on some issues (such as the relative importance of anthropogenic vs solar-variation climate change), but we must defend everyone’s right to their opinion, especially if it’s sincerely held.

Time and more good science, will tell.

After all, toleration of dissenting views is not only a sign of enlightened civilisation, (we can hardly revert to how we persecuted Giordano Bruno for his ‘many worlds’ beliefs, which is now part of standard cosmology); but also of optimal system-balancing feedback according to the Asynsis-Constructal position, high-Phi-IIT/self-organised critical, phase transition regimes. Therefore by being pluralistic and tolerating dissent, we are perhaps also, both following and revealing – a newly understood dynamical, emergent property of nature.


~ by Asynsis on May 8, 2014.

One Response to “The Hum: do Solar System orbital dynamics display Asynsis-Constructal geometries and behaviours?”

  1. Thanks for posting about our work. And thanks for recognizing that it doesn’t matter if people disagree about controversial theories around climate change when the furtherance of fundamental knowledge about how our cosmos works is a separate issue.

    We can agree to disagree about the proportions of climate change coming from natural variation and human contribution because mother nature will settle that argument for us in due course (about another ten years on my estimate). Empirical observation trumps theoretical models so long as we keep the shiny side of the scientific method uppermost.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: