HUMAN CONTROL AND CHAOS: REFLECTIONS ON A CONJECTURE THAT

INTEGRATES THE THERMODYNAMIC AND QUANTUM ARROWS OF TIME

The second law of thermodynamics, which is an empirically legitimized postulate which

roughly states that an isolated thermodynamic system would always spontaneously move
towards a state of greater entropy, actually has a number of challenging philosophical
implications if we attempt to examine beyond its popular pragmatic representations, like for
example the characterization of the law through the consequent phenomenon that no machine or
engine could ever be 100% efficient.1
One philosophical angle of inquiry is from an existentialist point of view. The universe
can be thought of as the ultimate isolated thermodynamic system and we can reflect on how the
universe constantly and inevitably moves towards a state of greater chaos, at least
thermodynamically speaking. This ever expanding chaos is manifested by the constant
generation of heat energy, which is the thermodynamic waste that will continue to accumulate
and eventually lead to the heat death of the universe.2 Following the second law of
thermodynamics as a foundational physical law, one can imagine how in every thermodynamic
process that approximates an isolated system, a fraction of the free energy input always gets
converted into thermodynamic waste or heat energy. This goes on until such a point that
practically all of the thermodynamic free energy in the universe has been depleted and all that
1. For a more elaborate account of the second law of thermodynamics, see any introductory thermodynamics
text. For instance, I could recommend the text I used in chemical engineering thermodynamics when I was an
undergraduate. See J.M. Smith, Hendrick Van Ness, and Michael M. Abbott, Introduction to Chemical Engineering
Thermodynamics, Seventh Edition (Mcgraw-Hill Professional, 2005)

2. For a classical account of the notion of the heat death of the universe, see Sir William Thomsons On
the Dynamical Theory of Heat and On the Age of the Suns Heat.

remains is heat energy, in such a way that the universe can no longer sustain any thermodynamic
process that requires free energy (e.g. life) and is thus, in effect, in a state of heat death. Thus, the
second law of thermodynamics can be thought of as one dimension of the absurdity of existence
within which the struggle for meaning is to be carried out.
However, in this short paper, I shall not dwell on this existential reckoning of the second
law of thermodynamics, which can probably be pursued in another juncture, but instead I intend
to reflect on its fundamental metaphysical character. Such an examination can be motivated by a
philosophical intuition that there should be a law behind the law, so to speak. Why is the
universe constantly and spontaneously moving towards a state of greater chaos? What
fundamental quality of reality explains the second law of thermodynamics? In attempting to
address these questions, it is probable that the notion of the heat death of the universe as well as
the interlinked existential conceptions can be invoked nonetheless.
In this reflective discussion, I conjecture that the second law of thermodynamics is a
consequent phenomenon of the quantum mechanical character of physical reality. My intuition
is that this hypothesis can be developed into an alternative interpretation of quantum theory or
more particularly, an alternative characterization of the nature of the wave function collapse.3 By
this I mean that it can be posited that the generation of thermodynamic waste or heat is a direct
consequence of the quantum collapse from probabilistic quantum mechanics to deterministic
physical macro-reality. In more general terms, it is the transition from uncertainty to certainty
which generates ever increasing entropy. More particularly, we can think of some sort of
3. For an introductory account of quantum theory, see Daniel Kleppner and Roman Jackiw, One
Hundred Years of Quantum Physics, Science, New Series 289, no. 5481 (2000): 893-898, ; Stephen M.
Barr, Faith and Quantum Theory, reprinted in The Best American Spiritual Writing 2008, ed. Philip
Zaleski (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2008), 1-10; and Max Tegmark and John Archibald
Wheeler, 100 Years of Quantum Mysteries, Scientific American, February 2001, 72-29.

controlling force which drives this transition from uncertainty to certainty and it is this
controlling force which leads to waste and chaos.
Thus, the key conjecture at this point is that control and certainty create waste and chaos.
This could seem paradoxical at the start because control can be intuitively perceived as a force
that brings about order, and certainty can even be thought of as ontologically linked to order, but
intuitively, I think this hypothesis makes sense, and I now attempt to argue that it does by
providing a practical characterization.
Let us attempt to take a foundationalist approach in constructing this practical
characterization. In establishing the foundational premise, let us assume a reductionist linear
model of the time arrow there is an infinitesimally instantaneous moment in time, the present,
and before it is the past, and after it is the future. The instantaneous present spontaneously
moves forward in this linear time arrow such that the immediate next instant in the future
becomes the present and the present becomes part of the past. The foundational premises in our
practical characterization are the following:
(i) There can be certainty on what has transpired in the past.
(ii) There can be certainty on what is transpiring in the present.
(iii) In the present, there is always uncertainty on what will transpire in the future.
(iv) The uncertainty in (iii) eventually transitions to certainty as the future eventually
becomes the present, and then the past.
Again, it needs to be emphasized that this practical characterization being constructed is
highly reductionist and the foundational premises above are being stipulated in a hasty intuitive
manner. Now, it is evident from the foundational premises above that the subject of interest is
the transition from uncertainty to certainty, as the future becomes the present and then the past.

It has been conjectured that this transition from uncertainty to certainty is the very phenomenon
that generates waste and chaos, and since the notion of the time arrow has been invoked, this
conjecture can probably described as an integration of the conceptions of the thermodynamic
arrow of time and the quantum arrow of time.4 Thus, we can think of a unitary conception of the
time arrow which locates the past, the present, and the future, in an account that integrates and
unifies the direction of the wave function collapse (i.e. the quantum collapse) from uncertainty to
uncertainty and the direction of increasing entropy. Conceivably, since quantum theory is
constitutive of a plausible theory of everything, then the unitary conception of the time arrow just
described could also be a plausible singular account of the arrow of time in a monistic notion of
reality.5 This is because other conceptions of the time arrow such as the cosmological arrow, the
radiative arrow, and the causal arrow, have generally been linked, in a somewhat unifying way to
the thermodynamic arrow and thus, establishing an integrating link between the thermodynamic
arrow and the quantum arrow, which could be linked to the perceptual arrow through positivist
and idealist interpretations of quantum theory, could be the key to a singular conception of the
arrow of time.
It has also been hypothesized above that some form of controlling force possibly
accounts for the phenomenon of the generation of waste in the transition from uncertainty to
certainty. Now, we construct the practical characterization to make sense of this hypothesis by
arguing that contrary to the initial intuition that control is ontologically linked to order, control is
4. For an elaboration of the arrow of time conception, see David Wallace, The Arrow of Time in Physics, in
A Companion to the Philosophy of Time, eds. Adrian Bardon and Heather Dyke (Wiley-Balckwell, 2013)

5. For an account of a theory of everything founded on quantum theory, see James B. Hartle Theories of
Everything and Hawkings Wave Funstion of the Universe, in The Future of Theoretical Physics and
Cosmology: Celebrating Stephen Hawking's 60th Birthday, eds. G.W. Gibbons, E. P. S. Shellard, and S. J.
Rankin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).

actually ontologically linked to disorder, chaos, and waste. In practical terms, one can think of
how the force of control from uncertainty to certainty essentially constitutes of safety factors
that initially account for the uncertainty and which eventually reduce to waste once the
deterministic result comes about. We can immediately think of examples from our own personal
lives of how in the process of wanting to make sure that a certain desired outcome happens, we
often allocate safety factors we can call these allowances, buffers, etc. to increase the
probability, and even to some extent make certain, that our desired result comes about. And
when the deterministic result comes about, whether or not it is in line with our desired outcome,
the safety factors we have allocated previously to account for the uncertainty would all become
waste. This can be quite evident in engineering where we apply safety factors in designing
structures, machines, and processes to ensure that our designs would function as intended.
Incidentally, I recall in one of my engineering science classes when I was an undergraduate that
factors of safety are also called factors of ignorance. Such a terminological equivalence seems
sensible enough since in applying factors of safety in engineering design, we essentially create
waste to make up for our uncertainties. I have also witnessed this in my experiences of working
in a manufacturing environment where stability and predictability are of primary importance and
where manufacturing management systems are employed as modes of control to ensure that the
desired result, which is an efficient and stable supply chain, is achieved. Chaos and waste seems
to be the unavoidable price that has to be paid for controlled certainty.
At this point, this paper becomes even more conjectural. I now hypothesize that
controlled certainty is functioning that is essentially and exclusively human in such a way that
only human beings, as possessors of human will, intelligence, and reason, can develop intentions,
carry out deliberations, and perform actions of control towards the goal of certainty. It can be

assumed that the integrated thermodynamic and quantum arrows of time mentioned above can
have a somewhat universal character and apply to physical reality in general, and that
conceivably there are other forces of control that makes it hold, but here the human functioning
of controlled certainty can be set apart as a special form of controlling force that leads to the
generation of waste and chaos in the controlled transition from uncertainty to certainty. My
suspicion at this point is that this human functioning of controlled certainty is what marked the
Anthropocene in geologic history. In other words, it is human beings actions of control towards
the intention of bringing about the certainty of desired deterministic outcomes, which has made
human beings such impactful agents of geologic history, so much that it can be argued that a
whole geologic age can be defined and bounded by the existence of humans. It can further be
speculated how the human functioning of controlled certainty has been a powerful force that has
shaped many aspects and dimensions of reality, but probably what remains to be an area of
primary prominence is how the human functioning of controlled certainty has impacted the earth,
which is the fragment of the universe that sustains human life.
One point of reference from which the history of humanity can be characterized is
through an account of how human beings have struggled to gain power and control over nature
through the ages. Through advancements in science and technology, human beings have
discovered more effective means of controlling the uncertainties of nature towards greater
certainty of achieving desired results. Thus in a sense, the empowerment of the human
functioning of controlled certainty has brought about stability and order in human life. However,
somewhat paradoxically, it seems that empowered human control has not only generated greater
certainty but has also brought about greater disorder, chaos, and waste. The phenomenon of
global warming and climate change can probably be associated with this notion, perhaps

prematurely but in a way that that is definitely not without merit. It is not difficult to think of
climate change as a consequence of human beings obsessive employment of the human
functioning of controlled certainty and it is also not difficult to associate global warming with the
image of ever increasing disorder.
Given everything that has been conjectured so far, one might ask how humanity can
move forward to a future of an Anthropocene that is characterized by the glory of humanness and
not by the chaos that human beings have brought about to the earth. If the logical implications of
the conjectures are considered, formulating a solution in terms of a search for some form of
optimality in terms of the extent of employment of the human functioning of controlled certainty
would seen unfeasible. It is only in an absolute absence of controlled certainty that the
generation of greater disorder and waste can be precluded but it is implausible to conceive of
such a state in the context of concrete human affairs. From this state of absolute absence of
controlled certainty, the direction appears to move in a single direction more controlled
certainty means more generation of greater chaos and waste. There is no optimum point wherein
a certain amount of controlled certainty precludes the movement towards greater disorder.
Reducing human controlled certainty would simply slow down the process of creating chaos.
What seems to be a more plausible solution is to advance the human functioning of
controlled certainty to the point of dualism, meaning to the point where it becomes separated and
in a sense, emancipated from the rest of physical reality. It is a plausible notion that the root of
the inevitability of chaos is the monistic state of reality, wherein the human functioning of
controlled certainty is imprisoned within the reality that if aims to shape. Thus it seems that it is
only through the advancement towards dualism that humanity can find some sort of salvation,
where the human functioning of controlled certainty can be employed to truly control the

uncertainties of nature towards the desired deterministic outcomes without creating chaos and
waste. My suspicion is that advancing science and technology would be constitutive of this path
towards dualism, and it is at least conceivable that science and technology could liberate
humanity from the boundaries of physical reality and empower human beings to have virtually
absolute control of the uncertainties of nature.6 It is thus conjectured that the achievement of
dualism could be the single most important milestone towards a utopian Anthropocene. In
imagining such a state of human affairs, it is conceivable that a new set of philosophical
problems could arise. For one, a dualistic state of reality immediately opens up new possibilities
of conflict which is a consequence of the new relational connections that are brought about by
the dualism. I concede that such is to be expected since it seems inevitable that an account of
utopia brings about a consequent account of dystopia but I do not wish to dwell on this for the
time being as perhaps an elaboration of the consequent dystopia of dualism can be pursued at a
separate juncture.
Apart from evidently being self-indulgent pursuits in philosophy, the conjectures
presented in this short paper could hopefully provide a richer dimensional characterization of
human existence on earth in terms of the metaphysical characters of uncertainty and certainty,
control, and chaos. Moreover it is my humble hope that the rough arguments and hypotheses
presented here could be further developed and elaborated to open up more interesting discussions
in philosophical areas of inquiry that have been touched here.

Marlon Jesspher B. De Vera

6. The notion of gnostic scientism could be helpful in elaborating on this premise. See Thomas M.
Lessl, Gnostic Scientism and the Prohibition of Questions, Rhetoric and Public Affairs 5, no. 1 (2002):
133-157.

Department of Philosophy, University of the Philippines, Diliman