Entropic and Negentropic Transitional Model: A SemioPhysical Context

Abstract

The two very complex symbols, Bethel and Ai, are associated with two very specific axiological communicational sources for the people living on the earth, with information and knowledge transmitted in every possible direction, having a different impact on the listeners. BETHEL is considered to be the place where negentropic actions are happening, where Wisdom and goodness are speaking to all the smart people interested in the message. AI is the source of the entropic events, where complete chaos and madness spread outward to all the people of the city, where foolishness and evil have a permanent voice. The transitional processes are well-defined processes, aimed to create new emergent states, evil or goodness; also, using the Kuramoto weak coupled oscillators model as a basis in order to explain the entropic and negentropic transitions in different semiophysical contexts by introducing the interaction parameter fp of faithfulness within the environment, represented in this context by the Pantokrator. The use of the transdisciplinary knowledge search window as a new methodology works with the top-down and bottom-up levels of knowledge, integrating complementarily the advanced knowledge through DIMLAK (Data, Information, Messages, Learning, and Advanced Knowledge) model. The apokataphatic method identifies the most probable trend of the transitional processes in a given context x, as a pattern of three main questions: what is, what isn't, and how does it work as a transitional process in a synergistic context (space-wise, time-wise, and actwise).

Keywords: contextual messagesynergistic significanceentropic and negentropic transitionsKuramoto modelsemiophysical ethic-semiotic valuation

Introduction

There are two kinds of messages in a communicational process, Io , named standard information, with its level of advanced knowledge No , and Ix, as information in a given context x (space-wise, time-wise, action-wise), with the correspondent level of advanced knowledge Nx (Šlaus, 2003; Pop, 2011; Pop & Soriţău, 2014; Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015). In every communicational process there can be identified two different situations; the first one being a negentropic way to achieve the complete advanced knowledge (Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015; Ho, 1994), when the sequential information Ix tends to become coincident with standard information Io , so Ix→Io , or Ix - Io→ 0, with the correspondent knowledge levels, No and Nx , quite identical, or No - Nx→ 0, when the synergistic communication is realized. The second situation, with Ix - Io→ ∞ (infinite), is identified with lack of knowledge, or evil knowledge, with the correspondent levels, No and Nx very different one from another, where No - Nx→ ∞, the communicational process working as an entropic degenerative process (Ho, 1994; Georgescu Roegen, 1971; Bernstein, 2009). Generally speaking, entropy defines the loss of the informergy (informaction incorporated in matergy) present in a closed source system, and negentropy is connected to the increase or maintenance of the informergy present in such systems (Pop, 2011; Pop & Maties, 2011).A semiophysical system (Pop & Maties, 2011; Thom, 1990; Locke, 1975) has three pillars of the knowledge building: a) phenophysics (phenomenological physics, or common sense physics with structural functionalities) (Petitot, 1990; Arecchi, 2007); b) semiotics (with the logical-creative significance of a message in a given context) (Eco, 1997; Sebeok, 2001; Morris, 2003); and c) ethics (with the perspective of power through authority in leadership, learning, and relations, as moral, axiologic, deontologic, and even aesthetic aspects) (Pop, 2011; Henry, 1996; Rae, 2009). The seven fundamental questions considered as seven habits necessary to be put everywhere and at all times, to the “here and now; and/or; then and there”, in order to achieve the integrated knowledge about the future trend of the knowledge-based society (Pop, 2011; Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015) are: (A) " where" , through spatial participative sequence, space-wise-SPS, configured by the shape, dimensions, and proximity in which specific agents are to be found in a specific distribution and relationship; (B) " when", through temporal connective sequence, time-wise-TCS, marked by synchronic events in kairotic significance, and finally five questions (C) " who, with whom, what, how, and why" , as a synergistic contextual message (SCM), through interactions which can be described in time and space through the actional-interactive sequence, act-wise-AIS (Pop & Maties, 2011; Pop, 2011; Pop & Soriţău, 2014). The synergistic significance (synergy, 1+1>2, and significance, 1-1≠0), works as a transdisciplinary whole-transcending barriers, demolishing walls, and building bridges through the gaps, in order to optimize the synergistic communicational process, assuring the connection between the Sender as the transmitter and the Receiver as a recipient of the information while facilitating the transmission of significant information from an ethic and semiotic point of view as well. The synergistic significance works with a positive consequence from the negentropic action Nx - No→0, or as a negative; entropic action with Nx - No→ ∞ (Pop, 2011; Pop & Soriţău, 2014; Soriţău & Pop, 2014).

The Semiophysical Context in the Knowledge Process

The synergistic contextual message model works by three spheres of the communicational process:

Pathos, for the Sender (transmitter); E (to know who), determined by the authoritative-expressive

principle with its specific rules: responsibility, credibility, and deference ; the complementary

communicational sphere Ethos , for the Receiver; R (to know with whom), governed by the

participative-conative principle with specific rules: receptivity-choice, availability-accountability, and

involvement-action, and the synergistic contextual message (SCM) working through the cooperative-

referential principle-knowledge sphere Logos- with the rules: the quantity and quality of the message

(selection-to know what), the contextual relevance of the message (legitimacy-to know why), and the

manner of transmission (code, channel, communication by participation, noises, feedback, feed-

forward, to know how), in a specific transdisciplinary way (Pop, 2011; Pop & Soriţău, 2014; Locke,

1975). Considered as an interface between Sender and Receiver, the Synergistic Contextual Message

( SCM) works in a transdisciplinary communicational pattern as an arrow, needle, and bullet; bridging

the gaps and assuring the avoidance of the specific barriers, walls, and any other confusion in a

superior ethic-semiotic valuation of the advanced knowledge products (Pop, 2011; Lute, 2006;

Nicolescu, 2008).

See Full Size >

Synergy exists through the function of memory-messages that are conceptually integrated and that

repeat essential units of meaning over time through different channels and from different sources that

come together to create coherent knowledge and attitude structures in the receiver (Pop, 2011; Zhu,

2002). Every message is identified through its informational content (transthematic identificators-

what), the manner the messages are presented (code and channel - phenomenological descriptors-how),

and the context the messages created are sent (logical abstractors-why) (Pop & Maties, 2011).

It is necessary to introduce a new transdisciplinary perspective to work pragmatically by an

integrative sustainable all life learning in order to introduce open learning concepts as a movement

toward integrated knowledge contextually as complex dynamics in the chain of knowledge (Pop,

Talpos & Prisac, 2015; Waldorp, 1992; Nicolescu, 2007; Montuori, 2013). The result of this inquiry is

the DIMLAK model, as a holistic way of knowledge integration, with different heterarchic-hierarchic

stages of knowledge integration represented as a transdisciplinary chain, as follows: Data ( D , statistics

approach)  Information ( I ), as syntactic way to relate descriptions, definitions, or perspectives 

Synergistic Contextual Message ( M ), as semantics in order to give significance in a synergistic

context Sustainable integrative all life Learning ( L ), as pragmatic pattern comprising strategy,

practice, method, or approach  Advanced Knowledge ( AK ), as an apobetic embodying principle,

insight, moral, or archetype, to attend the desired level of Expertise (Wisdom as top-down perspective,

and Skills as bottom-up perspective), in order to achieve its final goal-the Truth, representing an

emergent continuum flow. In this way the new perspective of the knowledge creates a better,

transdisciplinary understanding about knowledge as a dynamic synergistic integrative process (fig. 2)

(Pop & Soriţău, 2014; Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015).

See Full Size >

Two very complex symbols, Bethel and Ai, are detected and associated, in the Biblical context, with

two very specific ethical (as moral, axiological, deontological, aesthetic issues) communicational

sources for people living on the earth with information and knowledge transmitted in every possible

direction, having a different impact on the listeners (Pop & Soriţău, 2014; Bernstein, 2009; Henry,

1996; Rae, 2009). Wisdom is speaking from Bethel, through the voice of the Priest of God, and

madness is speaking from Ai, through the voice of the priest of Evil. The message presented by the

madness has a lot of negative consequences acting “like chaff that the wind blows away” (Ps. 1:4 ). In

the backstage, with both of these sources, there are two specific authorities: God, the wellspring of

good, and Satan, as a source of evil. BETHEL is representing the place where negentropic actions are

happening, and AI is the source of the entropic events, where the madness offers bad things to the

people at all the times. There is a permanent opposition between the two mentioned messages-the

negentropic discourse of the wisdom coming from BETHEL, and that of the madness, as an entropic

message coming from AI, addressed as well to wise people who take account the messages of

goodness, and the foolish people, who hate the council of the wise and embrace the evil (Ho, 1994; Pop

& Soriţău, 2014; Soriţău & Pop, 2014). The only way to refuse the call of the madness and fall prey to

the chaos is to stay under the authority of God, affirming: “… He is my refuge and my fortress, my God

in whom I trust” ( Ps 91, 2 ). There is a key verse working here as a “ janus ”, with a two-faced function,

determining the decisive choice about death and life, wrong and right, curses or blessings, as entropic

and negentropic ethic-semiotic concepts (Pop, 2011; Pop & Soriţău, 2014). The feedback of the

communicational process is very important for its final assessment: „If you are wise, your wisdom will

reward you, if you are a mocker, you alone will suffer” (Prov. 9:12). The contextual message

transmitted to all the people walking in the city does contain enough information to eliminate any

confusion, even from the final consequences: „Leave your simple confusing ways and you will live”

(Prov. 9:6) (Pop, 2011; Pop & Soriţău, 2014; Soriţău & Pop, 2014).

The Seven Churches from Revelation as Complementary Entropic-Negentropic Systems

Transitional processes are present in many fields of knowledge (engineering, economy, psychology,

politics, etc...) as a well-defined uncertain process, entropic or negentropic, aimed to create new

emergent states, evil or goodness. In the context of transitional processes the transdisciplinary

knowledge search window is introduced as a new methodology working with the top-down and

bottom-up levels of knowledge and integrating complementarily the advanced knowledge through the

DIMLAK model (Pop, 2011; Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015; Gibbons et. al., 1994; Kuramoto, 1975) (fig.

2). The Kuramoto weak coupled oscillators model is introduced to explain the entropic and negentropic

transitions in different semiophysical contexts (Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015; Ho, 1994; Pop & Maties,

2011; Strogatz, 2001; Acebrón, 2005). As a consequence, by using the apokataphatic method it is

possible to identify the most probable trend of a transitional process in a given context x , as a pattern of

three main questions: what is, what isn't , and how does it work, as a transitional process in a synergistic

context (space-wise, time-wise, and act-wise), (Mushakoji, 1988; Staune, 2006), with the included

middle as transdisciplinary instrument for contextual choosing (Lupasco, 1987); lateral thinking (De

Bono, 2003); and the bootstrap theory (Nicolescu, 2007). The proposed study is focused on the church

systems, especially on the seven churches from Revelation. Every sociocultural system, in this case

every church, (no matter what historical period) is under a dangerous threat, and naturally is falling

from the top desired state of faithfulness ( fp =1) in a known pattern, through the three sequences, to the bottom level state of faithfulness ( fp =0) (fig.3). At the same time, in determined sequences there is a possibility to realize negentropic transitions from bottom to top (Soriţău & Pop, 2014) (fig.4). In the Bible, such negentropic transitions are presented in John 4, Psalm 40, and Ephesians 4 as spiritual ladders to heaven, known as “metanoia” , a very specific negentropic concept of faith (Pop & Soriţău, 2014; Brooke & Basden, 2004). If the couplage between weak oscillators characterized by connecting coeficient fp is strong enough, a totally synchronized oscillation with the same frequency has a place, even the phase could be randomly different with fp =1 (sequence A). In the intermediate transitional entropic sequence some of the connections are synchronized and others are suffering a non coherent drift with 0<fp <1 (sequence B). The statistical steady-state, with connecting faithfulness coefficient fp→ 0 is correlated with random oscillations and with no coherence between the agents involved (sequence C) (fig. 3). The negentropic transitional system of integrative knowledge is starting from the bottom contextual level Nx to the top level No , as a process where Nx - No→0 (Pop, 2011; Ho, 1994). The first stage of a negentropic process is working as a statistical steady-state configuration with connecting coefficient fp→ 0 where oscillations are randomly correlated, with no coherence between them. In the intermediate transitional entropic sequence some of the connections are acting as synchronized oscillators and others are suffering a non-coherent drift, with 0 < f p < 1. At the top there is a strong couplage between weak oscillators characterized by connecting faithfulness coefficient with

value fp =1, with a totally synchronized oscillation having the same frequency, even the phase could be randomly different (fig. 4).

See Full Size >

In order to explain the framework of the transitional process, both entropic and negentropic are used

the special spline-cubic functions, fuzzy logic, exploring complex networks, and crossing from one

sequence to another through the critical point of the transition (Strogatz, 2001; Pop & Iancu, 2006; Pop,

2009).

See Full Size >

A complex dynamic analysis of the behavior of a system of believers is made by the well-defined

interaction parameter fp (faithfulness) with the environment, represented by the Pantokrator with his specific contextual message using the Kuramoto model (Kuramoto, 1975). The seven churches from Revelation are grouped in a new paradigmatic pattern, "2+3+2", following the values Nx of knowledge associated with the faithfulness connective parameter fp in a given space-wise, time-wise, and act-wise context x (Pop, 2011; Pop, & Soriţău, 2014; Šlaus, 2003). The entropic degeneration of the situation is determined by internal causes and external attacks, as well as the perseverant resistance to preserve the

values that are present (Soriţău & Pop, 2014; Patterson, 2012). The negentropic aspect is represented

contextually by the positive test of life "through faithfulness till death" where God gives a promise, to

Philadelphia: “…no one will take your crown” (Rev. 3:11); and to Smyrna: “I will give you life as your

victor’s crown” (Rev. 2:10). In every semiophysical context the splendor and the power of the earthly

world is not the currency of heaven, as entropic characteristics, but the precious values of the Kingdom

of God are the souls of the believers with a good testimony speaking the words of God and live them

every day, as negentropic representation of the advanced knowledge (Pop, 2011; Pop, Talpoş & Prisac,

2015; Georgescu Roegen, 1971). On the other hand, because of the gradual entropic growth of

compromise there are external and internal threats such as: false doctrines, immorality, idolatry, a

slippery slope, or a self-esteem slide that causes spiritual death and flirting with the values and

operational methods of the world due to the mixing of true religion with paganism resulting in a

complacent attitude and compromise with the world on all levels (Soriţău & Pop, 2014; Patterson,

2012). The doctrinaire, moral and institutional obscurity could cause sleep paralysis and spiritual death,

as well as a compromised testimony as a result of a total interchanging of values with the world,

resulting an entropic disaster (Ho, 1994; Georgescu Roegen, 1971).

The three groups identified in the analyse are: (A) - the group of two faithful living churches

(Philadelphia, Smyrna); (B) - the group of three churches involved in a falling entropic process

(Ephesus, Pergamum, Thyatira); and (C) - the group of two dead churches, as completely disordered

systems (Sardis, Laodicea) as is presented in fig. 3 . The first group (A) has a high value of the

parameter of faithfulness fp (very close to 1), working as totally synchronized oscillators with the same frequency, with commendation (praise without reproof) and faithfulness, steadfastness, conservatism, pro-life attitude, awareness of the true membership to the Kingdom of God, authentic knowledge of God, as high negentropic values (Soriţău & Pop, 2014; Patterson, 2012). Both of these two churches are holding Grace while victoriously fighting against their doctrinaire opponents, the persecution, and martyrdom. The second group (B) works in the intermediate transitional state where some of the connections are synchronized, others suffering a noncoherent drift, with negentropic commendation (praise), coming out from Bethel, and entropic condemnation (reproof and admonition), having as source Ai (Georgescu Roegen, 1971; Soriţău & Pop, 2014; Patterson, 2012). Here there is a tolerant destabilizing attitude in a descending transition from commendable deeds (not a few) to first-love loss (Ephesus), acceptance of Nicolaitans’ practices (Pergamum), and tolerance with an active cohabitation with the prophetess, Jezebel’s doctrines (Thyatira) (Patterson, 2012; Soriţău & Pop, 2014). The last group (C) is working in the statistical steady-state configuration, with randomly connections of the agents and with no coherence between them, in a very low state of valuation with the faithfulness parameter fp close to zero. It is expressed here a very high entropic degradation level with a majority, or total compliance with the world resulting in a bad testimony as individuals, and as a group as well, with condemnation (reproof and admonition) without commendation (praise). This group represents the dead churches, the chance for a negentropic ascending transition being only for individuals (fig. 4). Nevertheless, as negentropic signs in very entropized systems, there are a few people who are to be rewarded for their faithfulness, being dressed in white clothes in Sardis, or sitting by the Lord’s Supper, in Laodicea (Bernstein, 2009; Soriţău & Pop, 2014; Patterson, 2012). For them the positive change of

mind is very present, as a metanoia process presented in fig. 4 , where "the darkness is changed into

light of the Lord, with fruit of light consisting in all goodness, righteousness and truth, doing what

pleases the Lord" (Ephesians 5: 8-10). There is here an "all life integrative sustainable educational

process (lifelong learning, wide-life learning, and learning for life)", in order to create a new life

pattern from a negentropic point of view ("you were taught with regard to your former way of life, to

put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires, to be made new in the attitude of

your minds, and to put on the new self-created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness,"

Ephesians 4:22-24 ). In such a semiophysical significant synergistic context only the victorious people

from each church could achieve a possible conversion of the entropic transitional trend into a

negentropic one (Pop & Soriţău, 2014; Ho, 1994; Bernstein, 2009). Every believer from the seven

churches has access to the triumphant level only with the help of the Sender, as a combined top down

and bottom up process (Bernstein, 2009; Pop, 2009). This transition follows the specific known pattern

in order to achieve the high triumphant level of reality (Soriţău & Pop, 2014; Patterson, 2012). The

specific semiophysical context integrates the message, coming from the Panthocrator, and identified by

the Promises to Conquerors (Overcomers), as follows: “…a memorial pillar…” for the faithfulness

church, Philadelphia (Rev. 3:12), … the eternal life …for the suffering church, Smyrna, (Rev. 2:11),… a

spiritual food … for the first love church, Ephesus (Rev. 2:7), “… a new name …” for the mixed church,

Pergamum (Rev. 2:17), “… the authority …” for the church of tradition, Thyatira (Revelation 2:26),

“… the robes of righteousness…” , for the sleeping church, Sardis (Rev. 3:5), and “… the

enthronement …” for the delusional church, Laodicea (Rev. 3:21) (Soriţău & Pop, 2014; Patterson,

2012). In order to achieve the triumphant spiritual ethic-semiotic level for the churches as conquerors,

every believer and part of the community has to ascend with the help of the Almighty on the Ladder of

Heaven as a negentropic process, entering the reality of the overcoming triumphant church (fig. 4) (Ho,

1994; Soriţău & Pop, 2014).

Discussions and Conclusions

On the subject of the relevance and novelty of the presented research, there could be identified three

important original aspects. The first one is the semiophysical contextualization of every communicative

process, using two complex symbols, Bethel and Ai, as sources for synergistic significant messages

transmitted for the people living on earth, in every possible direction, to all interested people, with a

different impact on them, and with various consequences, negentropic transitions, and entropic

transitional events, respectively. The second original aspect of the paper is the use of the Kuramoto

weak coupled oscillators model to explain the entropic and negentropic transitions by introducing the

interaction faithfulness parameter fp . Considering every analyzed church system under a dangerous

threat, it is natural that every church falls from the top desired state of faithfulness, where fp =1, in the established pattern, through the three sequences, to the bottom level state of faithfulness, where fp =0, with the possibility to observe negentropic transitions from the bottom to the top. The third original contribution takes into account that within an entropic or negentropic transitional process, with a given context x , the apokataphatic method allows to identify the most probable trend as well as a pattern of three main questions: what is, what isn't , and how does it work, in a synergistic context with the

included middle as transdisciplinary instrument for contextual choosing; lateral thinking, and the

bootstrap theory, focused on the seven churches from Revelation. Connected with this the specific new

methodology of the knowledge search window, with top-down and bottom-up levels of knowledge,

allows to integrate in a synergistic way the advanced knowledge, identifying the most probable trend of

the transitional processes in a synergistic context, with a possible synergistic significant contextual

chance for a negentropic transition, but only with an external informergic authoritative influence.

Finally, having the roots in two very different fields of specialization, the research is putting together

science and theology in a very original methodological approach as a novelty in both fields, coming

from a transdisciplinary perspective. Because till now there is no publication in the field of the

synergistic communication on faith as a semiophysical approach of transitions between different levels

of reality, this research could be considered as a challenge for both scientists and theologians, as well,

with possible controversies and welcoming researches on this field of knowledge integration in the

very next future.

References

1. Acebrón, J.A., Bonilla, L.L., Pérez, V., Conrad, J., Ritort, F., & Spigler, R. (2005). The Kuramoto model: a simple paradigm for synchronization phenomena. Reviews of Modern Physics, 77, 137–185.
2. Arecchi, F.T. (2007). Physics of cognition: Complexity and creativity. European Physics Journal, Special Topics, 146, 205–216.
3. Bernstein, J.H. (2009). The Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom Hierarchy and its Antithesis. Proceedings North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization, Vol 2.
4. Brooke, C., & Basden, A. (2004). Faith in Information Systems? “Continuity + Change: Perspectives on Science and Religion”, June 3-7, 2006, Philadelphia.
5. De Bono, E. (2003). Lateral Thinking (romanian, Gândirea laterală). Bucuresti: Curtea Veche.
6. Eco, U. (1997). A Theory of Semiotics. London: Macmillan.
7. Georgescu Roegen, N. (1971). The Entropy Law and the Economic Progress. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. (romanian, Editura politică, 1997).
8. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge - The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.
9. Henry, C.F.H. (1996). God, Revelation, and Authority (romanian, Dumnezeu, revelaţie şi autoritate), Vol. 1, 2. Oradea: Editura Cartea Creştină.
10. Ho, M.-W. (1994). What is (Schrödinger’s) negentropy? In: Gnaiger, E., Gellerich, F.N., Wyss, M. (eds) What is controlling life? (Modern Trends in Bio/Thermo/ Kinetics, vol. 3.), Innsbruck University Press: Innsbruck, Austria, pp. 50–61.
11. Kuramoto, Y. (1975). Self-entrainment of a population of coupled nonlinear oscillators. In Araki, H., (editor), International symposium on mathematical problems in theoretical physics, pp. 420 - 422, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Springer.
12. Locke, J. (1975). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. In J. Locke, Chapter XXI, Of the Division of the Sciences, 1975.
13. Lupasco, S. (1987). Le principe d’antagonisme et la logique de l’énergie - Prolégomènes à une science de la contradiction. Hermann & Cie. Colloque Actualités scientifiques et industrielles. 1133. Paris. 2nd ed.. “Transdisciplinarité” Series. Monaco: Le Rocher.
14. Lute, B.E. (2006). Win/Win-The Art of Synergistic Communication. Canada: Trafford Publishing.
15. Montuori, A. (2013). Complexity and Transdisciplinarity: Reflections on Theory and Practice. World Futures: The Journal of Global Education, 69, 4-6, 200-230.
16. Morris, Ch. (2003). Fundamentals of Signs Theory (romanian translation Fundamentele teoriei semnelor). Cluj-Napoca: Editura Fundaţiei pentru Studii Europene.
17. Mushakoji, K. (1988). Global Issues and Interparadigmatic Dialogue. Torino: Albert Meynier.
18. Nicolescu, B. (2007). Transdisciplinarity as Methodological Framework for Going beyond the Science-Religion Debate. Metanexus Conference, Transdisciplinarity and the Unity of Knowledge: Beyond the "Science and Religion Dialogue", Philadelfia; Pennsylvania.
19. Nicolescu, B. (2008). Transdisciplinarity - Theory and Practice. NJ, USA: P Hampton Press, Cresskill.
20. Patterson, P. (2012). Revelation. The American Commentary. Vol. 39. Nashville, TN: Publishing Group. Petitot, J. (1990). La Physique, le Morphologique, le Symbolique.Remarques sur la Vision. Revue de Synthése, 4, 139-183.
21. Pop, G.I. (2009). Considerations about the Transdisciplinary Knowledge Search Window in Mechatronical Education. The 5th Balkan Region Conference on Engineering Education & 2nd International Conference on Engineering and Business Education, October 15th-17th, pp. 159-165, University Lucian Blaga, Sibiu, Romania.
22. Pop, G.I. (2011). Contributions to the Transdisciplinary Approach of the Mechatronics in the Knowledge Based Society, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Technical University, Cluj Napoca.
23. Pop, G.I., & Soriţău, I. (2014). The Mankind between Betel and Ai, a Synergistic Contextual Communication Model on Faith. Paper presented at Conference: ComSymbol 2014 Montpellier, At Beziers, Volume: Communication on Faith, published in Espace Public et Communication de la Foi, pp 487-502, DOI: 10.13140/2.1.2932.5448).
24. Pop, G.I., Iancu, C. (2006). Switch function model in transition between levels of reality. Paper presented at ENBIS‘6 Confference, Wroclaw, Poland.
25. Pop, G.I., Talpoş, M.F., & Prisac, I. (2015). A Transdisciplinary Approach on the Advanced Sustainable Knowledge Integration. Proceedings of the IETEC-BRCEBE Conference, Sibiu, Romania, pp. 228-233. Pop, I.G., Maties, V. (2011). Transdisciplinary Approach of the Mechatronics in the Knowledge Based Society, in Advances. In H. Martinez-Alfaro (ed.), Advances in Mechatronics, Intech Open Access Publisher, Rijeka. Rae, S. (2009). Moral Choices, An Introduction in Ethics (romanian, Alegeri morale, O introducere în etică). Oradea: Editura Făclia.
26. Sebeok, Th.A. (2001). Signs, Bridges, Origins in Global Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
27. Šlaus, I. (2003). Political Significance of Knowledge in Southeast Europe, Croat. Med. Journal, 44, 3-19. Soriţău, I., Pop, G.I. (2014). Transdisciplinary Perspective through the Synergistic Communication on Faith in the Seven Letters of Revelation. Paper presented at Conference: ComSymbol 2014 Montpellier, Beziers, Volume: Communication on Faith, Published in Espace Public et Communication de la Foi, pp. 453-468. Staune, J. (2006). Apophatism in Modern science and its Implications for Religion. In Basarab Nicolescu & Magda Stavinschi (ed.). Science and Orthodoxy – A Necessary Dialogue, Curtea Veche, Series “Science and Religion”, Bucharest, 2006.
28. Strogatz, S.H. (2001). Exploring Complex Networks. Nature, 410, 268-276.
29. Thom, R. (1990). Semiophysics, A sketch. UK: Adisson-Wesley, Publishing Company.
30. Waldorp, M.M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. New York, NY: Touchstone.
31. Zhu, Z. (2002). Towards Synergy in the Search for Multi-Perspective Systems Approaches. UK: Springer eBook, Springer, Synergy Matters, Part 8, pp. 475-480.