Towards Upward

We are swept along on Earth’s Thermodynamic Velocity like I was on the Grand Ronde River in flood with just my ping-pong paddles. That river taught me the importance of direction in trying to maximize the effectiveness of what little force those paddles gave me. I was always paddling across the current, as close to ninety degrees as possible, never wasting my force on trying to counter the ongoing speed of the flood. My speed slowed, not because I was paddling against the current but because I was paddling across the current, towards its slower-moving side.

I’ve had similar experiences with runoff on my rain walks. I used to build check dams straight across the channel that slowed the runoff’s velocity. But I learned to angle them to smoothly change the direction of the runoff towards the side. This strategy used the runoff’s momentum to lead the runoff onto a new, slower path along which more would soak in and be held higher upon the slopes. I could accomplish more with less effort.

Since I consider the Fifth Dimension as defining a direction within space and time, I assume that Newton’s Laws of Motion might somehow hold true in the Fifth Dimension. Newton said that any change in direction is an acceleration and producing an acceleration requires a force. So in what direction should I direct my force to be most effective in helping turn our Earth’s Thermodynamic Velocity Upward? Directing my paddling force ninety degrees to the direction of the current makes sense in the measureable three-dimensional world we are familiar with but how do I direct my force in the Fifth Dimension of Possibilities? Does the question even make sense?

Watching life respond to my plays brings the following graph into my mind. As my force is applied through time, the path from Downward to Upward will probably look like the green line.

The key insight for me is that most of the green line is not Upward. It is becoming less Downward. That stage, not Upward but less Downward, is ripe for contemplation. Here’s a story to help think about it.

One day at Navajo National Monument, the park staff got a tour of the Peabody coal strip mine on Black Mesa, fifteen miles away. A mammoth dragline scraped away all the ground above the coal seam. This huge, huge machine (more than 8000 tons) had the thickest electric cord you can imagine coming in from behind. This many-stories high machine was electric! (From Wikipedia on “dragline excavators”: “Their power consumption is so great that they have a direct connection to the high voltage grid at voltages of between 6.6 and 22 kV. A typical dragline, with a 55-cubic-metre bucket, can use up to 6 megawatts during normal digging operations.”) When the coal was mined, it was loaded onto an electric conveyor belt that carried it 17 miles to a coal silo where it got loaded onto an electric train that hauled it 70 miles to a huge coal-fired electric generation plant overlooking Lake Powell. I wondered what fraction of that power plant’s electric output went directly back to the dragline and the conveyor belt and the train and all the other electric-powered flows that brought the coal to the turbines that generated the electricity.

Now imagine a vaster machine. Part of it is scraping away the surface of the earth and mining coal that is transported to a massive power plant that sends part of its energy to copper mining and smelting machines that produce more high-voltage power lines to give the machines greater range. Some of this power is sent to iron ore mining machines and smelters where it is refined into steel which is assembled into more of the massive machines.

Imagine that this vast machine network has gone rogue and is just chewing up the resources of the Earth with no purpose other than creating more machines to chew up more resources. The replicating and expanding network of machines is stripping the Earth of its Possibilities at a ferocious, accelerating rate.

Now imagine a master power switch at the control center of all these intertwined machines. If I walk over and flip that switch and all of the machines shut down, did my action cause an increase or decrease in Possibilities for the Earth?

Think about that. All that consumption coming to a halt with a simple flick of the finger. Would the net effect be an increase or a decrease in Possibilities for the Earth? The answer is that it, too, would be a decrease. The physical act of walking up to that switch and flipping it uses up some of my useable energy. So flipping the switch did not increase Possibilities.

However, flipping the switch dramatically lessens the rate at which Possibilities are being consumed in the world. Every second following the flipping of the switch, the Earth will retain more Possibilities than it otherwise would have. Is that a creation of Possibilities? No, it is a dramatic decrease in the rate at which Possibilities are being decreased. Decreasing the rate of decrease is different than having a rate of increase. When we decrease the rate of decrease, we are slowing the Downward Thermodynamic Velocity. It’s like starting to turn the steering wheel when we realize we are going the wrong way. Starting to turn the wheel has to happen well before the car is heading in the right direction. Once the car is heading in the right direction, then we can increase the rate of increase. So decreasing the rate of decrease is the initial stage that must happen in the process of changing a Downward Thermodynamic Velocity to an Upward one.

Here is another example. Imagine two people following an animal trail angling down a steep slope. As they descend, the trail splits. The original trail continues down at the same angle of descent but the new trail heads off to the side at a gentler downward angle. Both trails are continuing downhill but the second trail is descending at a slower rate. One of the people stays on the original trail while the other person turns onto the new trail. To the one staying on the original trail, the person on the gentler downhill trail will appear to gradually rise higher and higher upslope of her. But that second person is not going upward; she’s just going downward at less of a rate.

Less Downward is an important idea. Less downward can sometimes sound like a double negative: decreasing the rate of decrease. But less Downward is the first stage of turning Upward. If, because of my force, the Thermodynamic Velocity around me becomes less Downward, the Relative Balance might still sum to Downward, The Commons might still be diminishing. But the Earth will be losing less Possibilities per unit of time. If this change can be continued, a time will come in the future when the global Relative Balance will shift and the Upper Level expression of The Commons will accumulate once again. We’d again have an Upward Thermodynamic Velocity.

So I can change the Earth’s Thermodynamic Velocity by helping shift this Relative Balance. How can I do this? By using my consciousness to deploy my force more effectively.

The first way is, when I am searching for opportunities to create Upward results, to expand my search to include opportunities to create Less Downward results. If we focus our efforts only on those “plays” that will make things Upward, we will invite a censor into our view of the world that prevents us from seeing so many of the invitations to make a “Towards Upward” difference. There are far, far more opportunities to achieve Less Downward than to achieve Upward. When we see them, the world fills with inviting opportunities. This fullness nourishes hope.

But let me keep theory anchored in the real world by describing a rain walk play illustrated below. The top of the picture is upslope; the runoff flows from the top towards the bottom. The darker blue line on the right denotes the main drainage in this image. I have made the blue line more transparent near the bottom so that you can see the gully starting to cut down through much of this drainage downslope of the old road.

Several small seeps and channels formerly drained the slope on the left side of that drainage. The light blue lines highlight some of these drainages. However, when that ranch road was graded across the slopes, it captured the runoff from those side drainages and gradually gathered them into a road rut-defined drainage that I have marked in red.

There were two effects of this road capturing that runoff. One effect is that the slopes downslope of the road were deprived of runoff they previously received. So less now grows downslope of that road. The second effect is that the road ruts routed almost all of this runoff very quickly into the main drainage at the road crossing (at the dark blue line). This dramatically increases the amount of runoff flowing in that drainage. This runoff is flashy; it courses along the bare road ruts along with the other conjoined runoffs so that almost all of it reaches that main drainage very quickly. This quick surge in runoff spikes the erosive energy and now gullies are cutting that drainage lower into the soil, draining the surrounding soils of groundwater.

I have used my force to create diversions that lead this runoff out of its road ruts in six places (marked in purple) so that it soaks in higher on those side slopes traversed by the road. As a result, more plants will grow on the side slopes and hardly any of that road runoff now makes it all the way down that ranch road to the main drainage. The peak runoff during a storm is now far less.

These six plays leading the runoff out of the road rut are examples of using my force to create “Less Downward” rather than Upward. The water is still flowing downward but at a much slower rate. However, because much of this runoff will spend more time percolating down the slope rather than cascading down the road rut, more of it will be available for photosynthesis. More solar energy will be absorbed into the food web. More solar energy will be creating more plant surfaces that will slow the flow of future runoff. So even though my actual work was only “less Downward”, it gets leveraged by plants into more Possibilities.

These six plays are also an example of how small plays reinforce one another. If I had made only the lowermost divergence, heavy rainstorms would probably wash it out. But the sequence of divergence after divergence keeps shunting portions of the runoff out of the rut so that the rut-bound runoff can never gather sufficient power. Each successive divergence is subjected to less erosive energy than it otherwise would be.

A second way to achieve “Less Downward” is to back things up. The Second Law of Thermodynamics does not allow things to flow up but it does allow flows to back up. By changing the rates at which things flow, the Relative Balance can shift. If outflow becomes less than inflow, things back up and possibilities can emerge and accumulate. That is what happened with my first Porous Stone Dam. I reduced the rate of outflow along the “gutter” which backed the runoff up over the road and onto a higher, slower route where more could soak in. Opportunities for backing up are hard to see unless you have it as part of your search image.

Plants stabilizing steep, loose slopes are examples of this backing up. The plant roots bind the loose material into a more cohesive mass that creeps downhill slower, giving more time for soils to develop. It’s interesting to think of this slowing down from the perspective of the Stream Discharge Equation which (since I assume that everything is flowing) can be applied to more flows than just water. Assume a steady flow of loose material down the steep slopes. If plant roots bind the soil particles and slow their flow, then that steady flow of material has to increase in width and/or depth. That increase in width or depth is the backing up. A slower-flowing, deeper material gives more time and volume for soil to develop, which allows more plants to grow. The soil does not move up but the Upper Level expression of that flow rises.

Being aware of Relative Balances helps one see even more opportunities for backing up flows because there are always two ways of changing a Relative Balance to make it back up. You can increase the inflow or decrease the outflow. Keeping both of those possibilities in mind reveals more plays.

A third method for “Less Downward” is being more efficient, accomplishing more with less energy. On weekends back at the Farm School, I would stretch a long clothesline from our front steps to a distant tree. I carried a basket of wet laundry out from the house, walking out along the clothesline hanging up clothes and then returning with the empty basket. After the clothes were dry, I’d carry the basket out along the line, filling it with the dry laundry and then carry it back to the house.

One day, I realized the same job could be done with less energy. After I hung up the clothes, I left the empty basket out at the far end. When the laundry was dry, I walked empty-handed out to the basket at the far end and gathered the laundry on the way back to the house.  

Original Way	More Efficient Way
1. Hang wet laundry walking out with basket getting lighter as I go	1. Hang wet laundry walking out with basket getting lighter as I go
2. Walk back with empty basket	2. Walk back empty-handed.
3. Walk out picking up dry laundry with basket getting heavier	3. Walk out empty-handed.
4. Walk back with heavy full basket	4. Walk back picking up dry laundry with basket getting heavier

  Energetically, Steps 1 and 2 are basically the same in both ways. Also, Step 3 in the original way is the same (except for direction) as Step 4 in the more efficient way. The big difference is between Step 4 of the original way and Step 3 of the more efficient way. The new way eliminates carrying a full basket of laundry the entire length of the clothesline.  

This new route delighted me every time I walked it because I experienced a phrase from thermodynamics: “the path makes a difference”. The same result can be achieved with less energy by finding a different path.

Doing my Gaia work during rainstorms is another example of efficiency in that the runoff reveals opportunities for making plays that I wouldn’t see at other times. I am more efficient in the rain. My divergences and dams and chevrons are located with greater precision.

The fourth way to use my consciousness to deploy my force more effectively is to de-Hollywoodize my understanding of confrontation. Our movies condition us to think of opposing forces as coming head to head in a dramatic final confrontation. Blow up the Death Star! But the fields have taught me to diffuse the “confrontation” over the ten thousand fractal-like rivulets. More grass stems form a sponge that slows and spreads the runoff. Gophers dig more tunnels that lead more of the runoff below the surface. More leaves feed more insects that pollinate more flowers.

This de-Hollywoodization is important for two reasons. If we assume a final confrontation must happen, then we will see certain people or groups as “enemies” that must be defeated. But when we diffuse the change over space and time, these “enemies” become potential allies that will emerge as balances shift. We will see these people in a warmer light which will lead to warmer interactions and more willingness to work together to move toward a goal that most people actually do want to move towards. (Chrysalis’s mission of “encouraging the light” unifies the political and religious diversity of Chrysalis families. After all, all the parents want to encourage the light within their child to shine brighter.)

The other important reason is because it allows us to realize we have more power than we might otherwise imagine. We will never be Superman directly opposing and stopping the hurtling locomotive. But that is not the most effective use of our power, anyway. Our force develops from awareness of all of the small uplifts and Downward Flows around us every second and in mindfully playing with their rates, learning to slow the Downward ones a bit, and nourish the Upward ones more. As we do this, we become increasingly aware that we are surrounded by allies, other species also doing this work of increasing Possibilities within the Commons. We are not alone.

Instead of thinking of our power as something to be brought to a head at one place at one time, our power can accumulate force by steadily shifting flows. We become what we practice and the world is full of opportunities to practice shifting relative balances so that Downward flows become less strong and more Possibilities accumulate in the world around us – such as a gopher filling in part of a gully for me. As Possibilities accumulate, some of them will seep into our spirits, strengthening us.

So in what direction do I apply my force to help change Earth’s Thermodynamic Velocity so that it will become Upward once again? I call that direction Turning Upwards.

What is the difference between Upward and Turning Upwards?
  Upward refers to the direction of our Thermodynamic Velocity; Turning Upwards refers to the direction of our force.
  Upward is the direction of our Thermodynamic Velocity when our world is increasing in Possibilities, when The Commons is growing. It’s the direction we want our planet moving.
  Turning Upwards is the direction that we are applying our force to change the direction of our Thermodynamic Velocity so it will eventually become Upward.

This distinction is important because they are different directions. We will usually be applying our Turning Upwards force to a Thermodynamic Velocity that is moving Downward. The result of our Turning Upwards force will usually not be Upward but will be a Less Downward Thermodynamic Velocity. But that is equally as important; Less Downward leads the way towards Upward.

---

Next Chapter . . . . . Table of Contents

---