UFOs have approximately 75% of this planet in which to operate undetected. Adding another piece to the puzzle From dissimilar puzzle pieces supplied by ufologists throughout the years of UFO history, a picture is starting to take shape. Ufologist Carl Feindt has not only contributed his own small piece, but he has also connected many of the previous pieces to form an enlightening and highly plausible theory. Feindt�s studies concern Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) that enter and exit the dense medium of water. This aspect aroused his curiosity, because while we humans do not understand alien science, we do know our water. This book contains cases from just about every type of body of water, from puddles to oceans. It opens a long-overlooked door to discover the operating principles of UFOs by closely observing water�s reaction to these craft and finding similarities among cases involving water. �[Carl Feindt] did an excellent job of describing the movement of UFOs in water, entering water, leaving water, and moving above the water...and what the water conditions can tell us about the mechanics of the operation of the vehicles.� �John F. Schuessler, Former International Director of MUFON, commenting on Feindt�s 2006 MUFON award- winning paper, �Physical Influences of a UFO on Water.�

UFOs have approximately 75% of this planet in which to operate undetected. Adding another piece to the puzzle From dissimilar puzzle pieces supplied by ufologists throughout the years of UFO history, a picture is starting to take shape. Ufologist Carl Feindt has not only contributed his own small piece, but he has also connected many of the previous pieces to form an enlightening and highly plausible theory. Feindt�s studies concern Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) that enter and exit the dense medium of water. This aspect aroused his curiosity, because while we humans do not understand alien science, we do know our water. This book contains cases from just about every type of body of water, from puddles to oceans. It opens a long-overlooked door to discover the operating principles of UFOs by closely observing water�s reaction to these craft and finding similarities among cases involving water. �[Carl Feindt] did an excellent job of describing the movement of UFOs in water, entering water, leaving water, and moving above the water...and what the water conditions can tell us about the mechanics of the operation of the vehicles.� �John F. Schuessler, Former International Director of MUFON, commenting on Feindt�s 2006 MUFON award- winning paper, �Physical Influences of a UFO on Water.�

UFOs have approximately 75% of this planet in which to operate undetected. Adding another piece to the puzzle From dissimilar puzzle pieces supplied by ufologists throughout the years of UFO history, a picture is starting to take shape. Ufologist Carl Feindt has not only contributed his own small piece, but he has also connected many of the previous pieces to form an enlightening and highly plausible theory. Feindt�s studies concern Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) that enter and exit the dense medium of water. This aspect aroused his curiosity, because while we humans do not understand alien science, we do know our water. This book contains cases from just about every type of body of water, from puddles to oceans. It opens a long-overlooked door to discover the operating principles of UFOs by closely observing water�s reaction to these craft and finding similarities among cases involving water. �[Carl Feindt] did an excellent job of describing the movement of UFOs in water, entering water, leaving water, and moving above the water...and what the water conditions can tell us about the mechanics of the operation of the vehicles.� �John F. Schuessler, Former International Director of MUFON, commenting on Feindt�s 2006 MUFON award- winning paper, �Physical Influences of a UFO on Water.�

A Simple Unified Theory: From Magnetism to Gravity, a new title by H.C. Huang, probes our current scientific understanding of the universe. Huang’s quest for possible answers to some of modern physics’ most basic, yet baffling, questions, takes the reader on an illuminating journey to the boundaries of science. The author traverses the broad, but interconnected, landscape of particle physics: from the origins of magnetic force, to wave-particle parallelism and color force and color charges, to gravity’s source. Huang’s theories are presented in four, interrelated parts. Part I, “Magnetic Bars: Origins of Magnetic Force,” considers the origin of the “mystic” force and its behavior, including the mechanism of repulsion and attraction. Part II, “Photons: Wave-Particle Parallelism,” considers the dual nature of light. Along with Einstein, who insisted that photons are particles, Huang concurs, proposing the foundation for this agreement. Part III, “On Color Force and Color Charges,” approaches the structure of the atom to derive both the strong and weak forces. Finally, in Part IV, “Gravity’s Source,” Huang discusses the structure of gravity. He also suggests why the Earth’s magnetic polarities change and why beams of light cannot be woven into fabric to hold any mass. Author’s illustrations are included.

A Simple Unified Theory: From Magnetism to Gravity, a new title by H.C. Huang, probes our current scientific understanding of the universe. Huang’s quest for possible answers to some of modern physics’ most basic, yet baffling, questions, takes the reader on an illuminating journey to the boundaries of science. The author traverses the broad, but interconnected, landscape of particle physics: from the origins of magnetic force, to wave-particle parallelism and color force and color charges, to gravity’s source. Huang’s theories are presented in four, interrelated parts. Part I, “Magnetic Bars: Origins of Magnetic Force,” considers the origin of the “mystic” force and its behavior, including the mechanism of repulsion and attraction. Part II, “Photons: Wave-Particle Parallelism,” considers the dual nature of light. Along with Einstein, who insisted that photons are particles, Huang concurs, proposing the foundation for this agreement. Part III, “On Color Force and Color Charges,” approaches the structure of the atom to derive both the strong and weak forces. Finally, in Part IV, “Gravity’s Source,” Huang discusses the structure of gravity. He also suggests why the Earth’s magnetic polarities change and why beams of light cannot be woven into fabric to hold any mass. Author’s illustrations are included.

The great insight of biological science in the last half of the 20th century is that life is a special kind of information. It is the information contained in the genetic program of each organism. Evolution is a continual process shaping the contents of the genetic program of countless species throughout the history of life on this planet. That process itself is now known to be essentially one of information processing. Viewing evolution as a kind of information processing opens the possibility that the laws of evolution operate to shape other kinds of information processing in systems other than those of organisms and their genetic programs.

Business and industry as well as public agencies are the largest users of information processing technologies. If evolutionary processes are discoverable outside of strictly biological contexts it is reasonable to suppose that they'll be found among those systems that use information processing nearly as much, if not more, than does Nature. Indeed, the thesis of this work is that natural selection does operate over organizations that use so-called ‘Fourth Generation’ computerized database technologies.

There are some basic conceptual hurdles that must be cleared before the vantage point of looking at evolutionary processes as information processes will reveal anything more than tantalizing analogies. The first hurdle is that compartmentalized thinking, putting the things of this world into pigeonholes, must be set aside in favor of a systems approach.

By 'systems approach' nothing more complex is meant than being self-conscious about when and why it is sometimes convenient to compartmentalize thoughts, things and perceptions. It also means looking first at systems, at the organized complexity that constitutes not only life, but virtually all of humankind’s activity and physical reality. Using a systems approach, both organisms and organizations can be discussed from a common ground. The justification for adopting this outlook will appear more and more obvious as it is used to develop fruitful insights.

A second conceptual hurdle that needs to be cleared is the frequent habit of thinking about information as some kind of passive "stuff" that gets manipulated, massaged, stored, and retrieved by computers. In the world of computer technology and business the phrase "data processing" is the traditional reference for all forms of information processing and technology. Note that at any given time other phrases such as “MIS” (management information systems) or “IT” (information technology) are more or less synonymous with “data processing.” For our purposes the latter phrase suffices. Unfortunately this phrase tends to solidify the mental habit of regarding information as a passive substance that people and machines manipulate as they see fit (or are directed).

In reality, information has both a passive and an active role in systems. It is passive when we speak of communicating some particular item to another system, be it a person, machine or organization. Information is active when it takes the form of a program, plan, or goal. This includes all the important meanings of what "information" means as well. Thus, the second habit of thought to be put aside here is the belief that information is only acted upon. In fact, information in the human mind and in organizations is usually present just for the active role of shaping and directing their behavior.

A third conceptual hurdle is the assumption that any attempt to generalize a law of biology is simply "transplanting" biology outside its proper domain and therefore is predestined to failure. In this work, biological laws, especially those of evolution, will be sought in the context of human organizations. However, they will not be transplanted there any more than a physical law of force, mass, and acceleration is "transplanted" to outer space when we discover that it describes the behavior of planets as well as billiard balls. The methodology of this essay will be to show that the simplest explanation for what is observed in the behavior of certain organizations is that they are following the law of natural selection for reasons that should appear obvious once revealed.

The skeptic, and I am one also, is motivated to clear these hurdles only so long as the prize at the end is worth the effort. The prize at stake is an entirely new understanding of the relationship of Man and Nature. Stated another way, a growing worldwide ecological awareness has firmly demonstrated that human activity feeds back upon the complex systems that support our clean air, water and food supplies. In addition, genetic engineering shows that humanity can deliberately alter the very stuff of inheritance, producing an entirely new species.

What this essay shows is how a technological achievement in an area most often thought of as the antithesis of life and its processes, allows Nature (with or without the capital "N") to begin to take a further hand in our lives, but at a supra biological level. The same point can also be stated as once organizational information processing reaches a threshold level where the nature and shape of the process itself becomes part of the information content (as is the case in genetic information), the same natural laws that characterize such phenomena in biological systems apply to organizations.

Information processing becoming so complex that the way it is done actually becomes part of the informational contents occurs in only one other arena; human thought. We know that the genetic program, the "message" contained in DNA, (deoxyribonucleic acid) exhibits this level of complexity because it is what controls organismic development. Here we attempt to establish that certain organizational computer technologies likewise exhibit the same properties as do genetic programs.

It is worth conjecturing how much insight into our own minds' workings this knowledge of a more generalized evolutionary process might provide. Of course, the conjectures will themselves be dependent upon successfully generalizing some aspects of evolution to some aspects of some organizations. Only after this is accomplished can further inquiries be posed with any hope of their shedding light upon the nature of thought generally and the creation of so-called "artificial intelligence" as a case in point.

When we speak of reformulating or reconstructing the basic understanding of how Man and Nature are related, the door to philosophy is thrown open.  Whether it is religious, political or moral philosophy or a combination of these, restructuring how we see ourselves will have serious implications for our beliefs and behaviors. Since this is not meant to be a work in philosophy, many of the fascinating issues it raises unfortunately must go unanswered. As far as possible, though, obvious philosophical issues will at least be noted, if not resolved.

By considering whether and how evolution might be making an inroad into human affairs via our modern computer technology perennial questions about the nature of our own minds and of our behavior are reviewed with new insight. To anticipate the results of discussion a little, one of the major illuminations of this study is to point up just how inescapable are the consequences of our collective actions even when from the viewpoint of common sense the actions in question are as exotic and remote from nature as are computers.

In the same vein, the results of this essay show that the long-standing worldview of "Man above, Nature below" is entirely false; nature is sometimes clearly "above" by virtue of our collective activities. Ecology teaches this lesson as well, but often leaves the impression that it is always Man who acts and Nature that reacts. The reverse is true in the case of organizations falling under evolution. Nature is acting and it is Man who must now discover how and in what way to react.

The excitement of breaking new ground should be tempered with a sober realization of what exactly can be accomplished in a single work.  Accordingly, the thesis developed here is that natural selection operates over those human organizations that employ the kind of computerized database technology characterized as "Fourth Generation" or ‘Enterprise Resource Planning’ (ERP) type systems.

Natural selection is not the entirety of evolution theory, nor do I mean to give the impression that selection is the largest aspect of evolution. Natural selection is, however, recognized as the key factor of Darwin's theory and forms the heart of what modern biological science means by "evolutionary theory." The reason natural selection (or simply 'selection') is so central to evolutionary theory is that selection is the creative aspect of evolution; it is what leads to new species.

It is no accident that Darwin's seminal work was entitled The Origin of Species, and concentrated upon demonstrating the process and mechanisms of selection leading to new species. The same concentration is likewise taken here, since if the case can be made for selection operating over organizations using computerized database technology, then the ancillary and supporting arguments fall more or less automatically into place.

Not all organizations use Fourth Generation computer database technology.  Those that do not will remain outside the scope of discussion except as they might be impacted by the actions of those organizations that do use such technology and are of interest to us. This distinction marks a departure from discussions of evolution in biology, because in biology all species fall under the domain of evolutionary processes. Here in contrast only some organizations will be susceptible to evolutionary processes according to the view argued here. Of course, this distinction does have one parallel in biology, namely, the issue of creation.

It is generally accepted that before organisms as we know them got started and began their long participation in evolution, proto-living and pre-living molecular complexes abounded in the early seas and atmosphere. For the sake of intellectual symmetry, one can argue that these pre-living molecular complexes are analogous to those extant organizations that do not utilize the requisite Fourth Generation computer database technology.

Such an analogy, while interesting to speculate about, is not itself germane to the main points of our discussion. It is offered to show that the difference between all organisms being subject to selection while only some organizations are so subject is not a critical flaw (or even a minor one) in the argument being presented. The fact that we can't describe everything by the same law only means nature (in the broadest sense) is varied, not that the law is necessarily erroneous. In sum, laws apply only where preconditions are met for their application. This is an often forgotten, but essential component of what is meant in science by the term “law.”

A further limitation upon the scope of discussion arises from considering that not all aspects of modern computer science are relevant here either. In particular, what we are concerned with is just that aspect that is commonly called "Data Processing." Millions of persons daily interact with the kind of computer technology that is being discussed. It requires no extreme intellectual achievement to use this technology, although some training is often required. Indeed, the overall trend in business, government, and industry today is to make the kind of technology we're discussing even easier and simpler to use than it now is.

A survey in the early 1980’s showed that the kind of database technology relevant here is in place and in use in more than 80% of American industry sampled. Since that time the technology has become even more pervasive in large organizations. Whether all users of this technology use it in the way that leads to their participation in evolutionary processes is another issue. What is known, however, is that the dominant trend in business use of computer technology is towards the so-called "Information Engineering" approach to database systems. It is the Information Engineering kind of approach (or strategy) that leads most directly to an organization's participation in evolutionary processes.

In brief, what is of interest to us from among the vast repertoire of computer science is not hardware, but systems of software; that is, programs and data storage methods. These features are interesting because they reflect a strategy for handling information rather than solutions to particular problems or specific pieces of equipment. It is this higher level of information processing that can become the subject of evolution precisely because it is relatively independent of the hardware (the specific kind of computer or its speed) within which it is used. Systems and software in business, industry, and government is the province of Data Processing. We therefore leave aside in this discussion most of the rest of computer science, acknowledging its role as the knowledge underpinning those areas of our interest, but remaining knowledge nevertheless not itself immediately relevant here.

As noted earlier, other topics in computer science will surface towards the end of the discussion as the implications of the views advanced are examined.  Foremost among the topics that reappear is that of artificial intelligence, or AI as it is often called. To anticipate the discussion and to deliberately curb expectations somewhat, it should be noted that a work of this kind could only suggest a program for AI based upon the context of an expanded view of how systems evolve. As has been noted many times by others, the major open problem that most delays growth in AI is that of how to "write a program that learns from experience," in the words of Stanford University professor Edward Feigenbaum.

Because learning from experience is exactly what evolution is all about at the species level, and since evolution now seems to be reentering human affairs "from above" via some of our organizations that use databases and computers, it is natural to ask what possibility exists for the evolution of those organizations and their database systems to show us how intelligence originated in organisms.

From another perspective, the latter question is no more than asking whether the evolution of certain organizations can be clearly discerned, and once discerned then employed as a kind of laboratory setting for evolution of artificial systems under the same rules as that for natural systems. Clearly much could be learned from the availability of this kind of "laboratory," although obviously there is no guarantee that intelligence will arise within the kind of an entity we call an organization.

Yet, is it not also possible that given an evolving organization with requisite software, that by judiciously adding additional software, a kind of artificially intelligent system that learns might be created? This and related questions cannot be answered at this time. As the discussion proceeds, however, answers will begin to suggest themselves and the outline of an AI strategy will emerge.

A final word concerning the scope of the present work concerns just what the reader believes (or fears) he/she might need to know to read a book of this kind. The answer, fortunately, is that the fundamentals of both evolutionary theory and data processing in organizations are fairly simple and straightforward. Obviously gaining detailed expert knowledge in either field, or in both, requires effort and time.

However, the only assumption made here is that the reader has patience, not a college degree in evolutionary theory, applied computer science or the other fields contributing to the overall discussion. The systems approach itself is likewise readily understood. In fact, most people already possess sufficient understanding of what a system is to make lengthy explanation unnecessary. The topic that is less well understood than data processing, evolutionary theory or the systems approach is that of information itself. What information is perhaps is best characterized by these words of L. L. Gatlin:

"To be honest, information is an ultimately indefinable or intuitive first principle, like energy, whose precise definition always seems to slip through our fingers like a shadow."

For the present, it is enough to suppose that information is like "knowledge" and "meaning." As Gatlin suggests, these terms are often used to define one another. We do not need to delve deeply into the matter of defining "information" in order to use it effectively. What we do need to keep in mind is that "information" sometimes describes the contents of a message, and sometimes the vehicle or carrier of the message. (For example, the genetic program is information and is also carried by DNA when the parental characteristics are transmitted to offspring during reproduction.) For the present we need to take something of a common sense view of what information is and realize that what we mean by the term will vary depending upon when and how it is used.

As far as possible the strategy followed here is a straight-line argument that begins by presenting the relevant aspects of the systems approach as the unifying or common perspective upon evolutionary theory and data processing.  The latter two fields are presented one after the other in order to quickly set forth the relevant aspects of each. Following this review of contributing fields the actual argument demonstrating the action of evolutionary processes in certain organizations begins. This argument can be sketched as follows.

Regarding both organisms and organizations as systems suggests that if laws are found to describe phenomena observed in one kind of system, and if the same phenomena are observed in the other, then the same law should apply to both kinds of systems. This is nothing more complicated than saying that for the same kinds of interactions among relevant entities, the same general description is expected to hold true. It is the contention of this work that aspects of the phenomenon of information processing in both organism and organization are functionally equivalent (if not identical), and therefore is characterized by the same law.

In particular, the genetic program contained within the DNA structure is interpreted as a data model of the organism; that is, a model of what the organism is and will become via developmental processes (guided by the model). Given the occurrence of a data model in organisms, we note that a date model of organizations is also present in the databases used by certain organizations. From this basis, parallel functions, indeed, equivalent functions are discovered that are to be performed by each system's data model and its supporting systems.

The key task in the demonstration focuses upon developing a preponderance of evidence for functional equivalencies between the two kinds of systems to warrant the claim that one and the same law of natural selection applies to both. Again, it should be noted that it is the process of tracking what information is and does in each system that leads us to a perspective which can justifiably claim that a single law of selection operates in those cases where functional equivalencies in information processing are found.

Once it is shown that the same evolutionary law applies, and in what way, the implications of this discovery begin to unfold. As noted above, some of these implications will suggest new ways of dealing with existing issues in a variety of fields; others simply raise new problems and demands upon our attention. This is not the kind of work that promises to make the reader's world simpler, better or easier to understand. That is not its intent.  Instead, it endeavors to uncover an emerging "side-effect" of technology, one whose presence could not be predicted from the nature of the technology itself.

The great insight of biological science in the last half of the 20th century is that life is a special kind of information. It is the information contained in the genetic program of each organism. Evolution is a continual process shaping the contents of the genetic program of countless species throughout the history of life on this planet. That process itself is now known to be essentially one of information processing. Viewing evolution as a kind of information processing opens the possibility that the laws of evolution operate to shape other kinds of information processing in systems other than those of organisms and their genetic programs.

Business and industry as well as public agencies are the largest users of information processing technologies. If evolutionary processes are discoverable outside of strictly biological contexts it is reasonable to suppose that they'll be found among those systems that use information processing nearly as much, if not more, than does Nature. Indeed, the thesis of this work is that natural selection does operate over organizations that use so-called ‘Fourth Generation’ computerized database technologies.

There are some basic conceptual hurdles that must be cleared before the vantage point of looking at evolutionary processes as information processes will reveal anything more than tantalizing analogies. The first hurdle is that compartmentalized thinking, putting the things of this world into pigeonholes, must be set aside in favor of a systems approach.

By 'systems approach' nothing more complex is meant than being self-conscious about when and why it is sometimes convenient to compartmentalize thoughts, things and perceptions. It also means looking first at systems, at the organized complexity that constitutes not only life, but virtually all of humankind’s activity and physical reality. Using a systems approach, both organisms and organizations can be discussed from a common ground. The justification for adopting this outlook will appear more and more obvious as it is used to develop fruitful insights.

A second conceptual hurdle that needs to be cleared is the frequent habit of thinking about information as some kind of passive "stuff" that gets manipulated, massaged, stored, and retrieved by computers. In the world of computer technology and business the phrase "data processing" is the traditional reference for all forms of information processing and technology. Note that at any given time other phrases such as “MIS” (management information systems) or “IT” (information technology) are more or less synonymous with “data processing.” For our purposes the latter phrase suffices. Unfortunately this phrase tends to solidify the mental habit of regarding information as a passive substance that people and machines manipulate as they see fit (or are directed).

In reality, information has both a passive and an active role in systems. It is passive when we speak of communicating some particular item to another system, be it a person, machine or organization. Information is active when it takes the form of a program, plan, or goal. This includes all the important meanings of what "information" means as well. Thus, the second habit of thought to be put aside here is the belief that information is only acted upon. In fact, information in the human mind and in organizations is usually present just for the active role of shaping and directing their behavior.

A third conceptual hurdle is the assumption that any attempt to generalize a law of biology is simply "transplanting" biology outside its proper domain and therefore is predestined to failure. In this work, biological laws, especially those of evolution, will be sought in the context of human organizations. However, they will not be transplanted there any more than a physical law of force, mass, and acceleration is "transplanted" to outer space when we discover that it describes the behavior of planets as well as billiard balls. The methodology of this essay will be to show that the simplest explanation for what is observed in the behavior of certain organizations is that they are following the law of natural selection for reasons that should appear obvious once revealed.

The skeptic, and I am one also, is motivated to clear these hurdles only so long as the prize at the end is worth the effort. The prize at stake is an entirely new understanding of the relationship of Man and Nature. Stated another way, a growing worldwide ecological awareness has firmly demonstrated that human activity feeds back upon the complex systems that support our clean air, water and food supplies. In addition, genetic engineering shows that humanity can deliberately alter the very stuff of inheritance, producing an entirely new species.

What this essay shows is how a technological achievement in an area most often thought of as the antithesis of life and its processes, allows Nature (with or without the capital "N") to begin to take a further hand in our lives, but at a supra biological level. The same point can also be stated as once organizational information processing reaches a threshold level where the nature and shape of the process itself becomes part of the information content (as is the case in genetic information), the same natural laws that characterize such phenomena in biological systems apply to organizations.

Information processing becoming so complex that the way it is done actually becomes part of the informational contents occurs in only one other arena; human thought. We know that the genetic program, the "message" contained in DNA, (deoxyribonucleic acid) exhibits this level of complexity because it is what controls organismic development. Here we attempt to establish that certain organizational computer technologies likewise exhibit the same properties as do genetic programs.

It is worth conjecturing how much insight into our own minds' workings this knowledge of a more generalized evolutionary process might provide. Of course, the conjectures will themselves be dependent upon successfully generalizing some aspects of evolution to some aspects of some organizations. Only after this is accomplished can further inquiries be posed with any hope of their shedding light upon the nature of thought generally and the creation of so-called "artificial intelligence" as a case in point.

When we speak of reformulating or reconstructing the basic understanding of how Man and Nature are related, the door to philosophy is thrown open.  Whether it is religious, political or moral philosophy or a combination of these, restructuring how we see ourselves will have serious implications for our beliefs and behaviors. Since this is not meant to be a work in philosophy, many of the fascinating issues it raises unfortunately must go unanswered. As far as possible, though, obvious philosophical issues will at least be noted, if not resolved.

By considering whether and how evolution might be making an inroad into human affairs via our modern computer technology perennial questions about the nature of our own minds and of our behavior are reviewed with new insight. To anticipate the results of discussion a little, one of the major illuminations of this study is to point up just how inescapable are the consequences of our collective actions even when from the viewpoint of common sense the actions in question are as exotic and remote from nature as are computers.

In the same vein, the results of this essay show that the long-standing worldview of "Man above, Nature below" is entirely false; nature is sometimes clearly "above" by virtue of our collective activities. Ecology teaches this lesson as well, but often leaves the impression that it is always Man who acts and Nature that reacts. The reverse is true in the case of organizations falling under evolution. Nature is acting and it is Man who must now discover how and in what way to react.

The excitement of breaking new ground should be tempered with a sober realization of what exactly can be accomplished in a single work.  Accordingly, the thesis developed here is that natural selection operates over those human organizations that employ the kind of computerized database technology characterized as "Fourth Generation" or ‘Enterprise Resource Planning’ (ERP) type systems.

Natural selection is not the entirety of evolution theory, nor do I mean to give the impression that selection is the largest aspect of evolution. Natural selection is, however, recognized as the key factor of Darwin's theory and forms the heart of what modern biological science means by "evolutionary theory." The reason natural selection (or simply 'selection') is so central to evolutionary theory is that selection is the creative aspect of evolution; it is what leads to new species.

It is no accident that Darwin's seminal work was entitled The Origin of Species, and concentrated upon demonstrating the process and mechanisms of selection leading to new species. The same concentration is likewise taken here, since if the case can be made for selection operating over organizations using computerized database technology, then the ancillary and supporting arguments fall more or less automatically into place.

Not all organizations use Fourth Generation computer database technology.  Those that do not will remain outside the scope of discussion except as they might be impacted by the actions of those organizations that do use such technology and are of interest to us. This distinction marks a departure from discussions of evolution in biology, because in biology all species fall under the domain of evolutionary processes. Here in contrast only some organizations will be susceptible to evolutionary processes according to the view argued here. Of course, this distinction does have one parallel in biology, namely, the issue of creation.

It is generally accepted that before organisms as we know them got started and began their long participation in evolution, proto-living and pre-living molecular complexes abounded in the early seas and atmosphere. For the sake of intellectual symmetry, one can argue that these pre-living molecular complexes are analogous to those extant organizations that do not utilize the requisite Fourth Generation computer database technology.

Such an analogy, while interesting to speculate about, is not itself germane to the main points of our discussion. It is offered to show that the difference between all organisms being subject to selection while only some organizations are so subject is not a critical flaw (or even a minor one) in the argument being presented. The fact that we can't describe everything by the same law only means nature (in the broadest sense) is varied, not that the law is necessarily erroneous. In sum, laws apply only where preconditions are met for their application. This is an often forgotten, but essential component of what is meant in science by the term “law.”

A further limitation upon the scope of discussion arises from considering that not all aspects of modern computer science are relevant here either. In particular, what we are concerned with is just that aspect that is commonly called "Data Processing." Millions of persons daily interact with the kind of computer technology that is being discussed. It requires no extreme intellectual achievement to use this technology, although some training is often required. Indeed, the overall trend in business, government, and industry today is to make the kind of technology we're discussing even easier and simpler to use than it now is.

A survey in the early 1980’s showed that the kind of database technology relevant here is in place and in use in more than 80% of American industry sampled. Since that time the technology has become even more pervasive in large organizations. Whether all users of this technology use it in the way that leads to their participation in evolutionary processes is another issue. What is known, however, is that the dominant trend in business use of computer technology is towards the so-called "Information Engineering" approach to database systems. It is the Information Engineering kind of approach (or strategy) that leads most directly to an organization's participation in evolutionary processes.

In brief, what is of interest to us from among the vast repertoire of computer science is not hardware, but systems of software; that is, programs and data storage methods. These features are interesting because they reflect a strategy for handling information rather than solutions to particular problems or specific pieces of equipment. It is this higher level of information processing that can become the subject of evolution precisely because it is relatively independent of the hardware (the specific kind of computer or its speed) within which it is used. Systems and software in business, industry, and government is the province of Data Processing. We therefore leave aside in this discussion most of the rest of computer science, acknowledging its role as the knowledge underpinning those areas of our interest, but remaining knowledge nevertheless not itself immediately relevant here.

As noted earlier, other topics in computer science will surface towards the end of the discussion as the implications of the views advanced are examined.  Foremost among the topics that reappear is that of artificial intelligence, or AI as it is often called. To anticipate the discussion and to deliberately curb expectations somewhat, it should be noted that a work of this kind could only suggest a program for AI based upon the context of an expanded view of how systems evolve. As has been noted many times by others, the major open problem that most delays growth in AI is that of how to "write a program that learns from experience," in the words of Stanford University professor Edward Feigenbaum.

Because learning from experience is exactly what evolution is all about at the species level, and since evolution now seems to be reentering human affairs "from above" via some of our organizations that use databases and computers, it is natural to ask what possibility exists for the evolution of those organizations and their database systems to show us how intelligence originated in organisms.

From another perspective, the latter question is no more than asking whether the evolution of certain organizations can be clearly discerned, and once discerned then employed as a kind of laboratory setting for evolution of artificial systems under the same rules as that for natural systems. Clearly much could be learned from the availability of this kind of "laboratory," although obviously there is no guarantee that intelligence will arise within the kind of an entity we call an organization.

Yet, is it not also possible that given an evolving organization with requisite software, that by judiciously adding additional software, a kind of artificially intelligent system that learns might be created? This and related questions cannot be answered at this time. As the discussion proceeds, however, answers will begin to suggest themselves and the outline of an AI strategy will emerge.

A final word concerning the scope of the present work concerns just what the reader believes (or fears) he/she might need to know to read a book of this kind. The answer, fortunately, is that the fundamentals of both evolutionary theory and data processing in organizations are fairly simple and straightforward. Obviously gaining detailed expert knowledge in either field, or in both, requires effort and time.

However, the only assumption made here is that the reader has patience, not a college degree in evolutionary theory, applied computer science or the other fields contributing to the overall discussion. The systems approach itself is likewise readily understood. In fact, most people already possess sufficient understanding of what a system is to make lengthy explanation unnecessary. The topic that is less well understood than data processing, evolutionary theory or the systems approach is that of information itself. What information is perhaps is best characterized by these words of L. L. Gatlin:

"To be honest, information is an ultimately indefinable or intuitive first principle, like energy, whose precise definition always seems to slip through our fingers like a shadow."

For the present, it is enough to suppose that information is like "knowledge" and "meaning." As Gatlin suggests, these terms are often used to define one another. We do not need to delve deeply into the matter of defining "information" in order to use it effectively. What we do need to keep in mind is that "information" sometimes describes the contents of a message, and sometimes the vehicle or carrier of the message. (For example, the genetic program is information and is also carried by DNA when the parental characteristics are transmitted to offspring during reproduction.) For the present we need to take something of a common sense view of what information is and realize that what we mean by the term will vary depending upon when and how it is used.

As far as possible the strategy followed here is a straight-line argument that begins by presenting the relevant aspects of the systems approach as the unifying or common perspective upon evolutionary theory and data processing.  The latter two fields are presented one after the other in order to quickly set forth the relevant aspects of each. Following this review of contributing fields the actual argument demonstrating the action of evolutionary processes in certain organizations begins. This argument can be sketched as follows.

Regarding both organisms and organizations as systems suggests that if laws are found to describe phenomena observed in one kind of system, and if the same phenomena are observed in the other, then the same law should apply to both kinds of systems. This is nothing more complicated than saying that for the same kinds of interactions among relevant entities, the same general description is expected to hold true. It is the contention of this work that aspects of the phenomenon of information processing in both organism and organization are functionally equivalent (if not identical), and therefore is characterized by the same law.

In particular, the genetic program contained within the DNA structure is interpreted as a data model of the organism; that is, a model of what the organism is and will become via developmental processes (guided by the model). Given the occurrence of a data model in organisms, we note that a date model of organizations is also present in the databases used by certain organizations. From this basis, parallel functions, indeed, equivalent functions are discovered that are to be performed by each system's data model and its supporting systems.

The key task in the demonstration focuses upon developing a preponderance of evidence for functional equivalencies between the two kinds of systems to warrant the claim that one and the same law of natural selection applies to both. Again, it should be noted that it is the process of tracking what information is and does in each system that leads us to a perspective which can justifiably claim that a single law of selection operates in those cases where functional equivalencies in information processing are found.

Once it is shown that the same evolutionary law applies, and in what way, the implications of this discovery begin to unfold. As noted above, some of these implications will suggest new ways of dealing with existing issues in a variety of fields; others simply raise new problems and demands upon our attention. This is not the kind of work that promises to make the reader's world simpler, better or easier to understand. That is not its intent.  Instead, it endeavors to uncover an emerging "side-effect" of technology, one whose presence could not be predicted from the nature of the technology itself.