The Battle of Thought

People tend to discuss environmental issues from a negative point of view. The discourse is about pollution, shortage of clean water and food, poverty, decreasing biodiversity, greenhouse effect and climate change. The biggest crook in the house of Misery & Trouble bears the codename CO2, the symbol of decline and entropy. People talk about CO2 as if it’s a poisonous gas. Something very, very bad and nasty. Well, it isn’t. It is a colorless, odorless, non-poisonous ‘growth stimulator’. In fact it is more basic to life than sex. It is plant food, and it drives the whole food chain. All life, every cell in every living organism on the planet is based on and contains carbon. Bacteria, algae and plants remove CO2 from the air and water and store it in their tissues. Together with water vapor, CO2 keeps our planet warm, preventing it from being covered in ice, from becoming too hot or devoid of liquid water.

The Battle of Thought between the so-called ‘deniers and sceptics’ on one side and the ‘believers’ of climate change on the other, is outdated before it reaches its climax. But even if the debate is over, still it is important and urgent to change our lifestyles. We will have to stop plundering nature, eat vegetarian food instead of costly meat, bike and walk before driving, use fewer materials and less not renewable energy sources. This is urgent for other reasons than climate change: namely for the health of the human supporting system and therefore the health and continuation of the human race.The discussion whether or not CO2 emissions are caused by human activities and damage the climate and thus the Earth is delusive and dangerous.

In the perspective of ‘the Deniers’ climate change defenders use the issue to create new business, like emission trade and carbon capture & storage, as well as to enforce more legislation and thus ‘to obtain more power over the masses they try to frighten into obedience’. According to some Deniers the issue ‘has become a strict religion, which endures no questions or criticism. Zero tolerance for dissent. They have become suspect because they entered politics. Power and wealth for some and oppression for others are the outcome of their advocacy’.

The Believers strike back with words grilled in sour undertones. Both sides try to pinpoint flaws in scientific reports and batter the arguments of their opponents. On one point they agree: their opinions on politics and politicians (see the following three statements).

Copenhagen (Dec 2009) recognized the case for keeping the rise in temperature below 2 degrees, but failed to produce a binding agreement …

…Leaving leaders with tarnished reputations…

Cancun Summit (Dec 2010) – Conclusion? They have now selected the paint for the deckchairs on the titanic?
Am I too cynical? I am sure a great deal of hard work has been done, but I worry that nothing binding has been agreed and it is all a lot of hot air (please excuse the pun!). Will countries actually do anything as a result?

The polarization – whether greenhouse gasses are or are not damaging the planet – is dangerous, because it puts the spot on the wrong place and has become a struggle for power and money. The stakes are high. Today in the European Union the primary energy supply is 80% dependent on fossil fuels. Economic growth and prosperity, one can argue, have been built on oil, coal and gas. It’s very important that regional opinion leaders learn to see through all manipulation and power lifting. That’s the highway to a learning region.

Energy has made Europe strong. At the same time it is Europe’s Achilles’ heel. Over 50% of the energy supply is mined outside the EU. The situation will worsen when oil and gas wells dry up. Without a transition the EU – especially in the short run - gets more and more dependent on instable monarchies and dictatorial regimes in the Middle East, Africa, et cetera. Thus making the EU still more vulnerable to energy supply disruptions from outside the union and to volatility in energy prices. The solution to this problem may be the entry into the EU of oil- and gasrich Russia. This isn’t science fiction. On the contrary! Russian Prime

Minister Vladimir Putin has said that he does not rule out the creation of a currency union between the Russian Federation and the European Union some time in the future. He was speaking during a joint news conference following his talks with the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, at the end of November 2010. As to this kind of currency union, he said, we understand, of course, that any currency union is a result of the combination of economies, of economic development. Things should grow ripe, the Russian Prime Minister said.

One thing is for sure: energy is a condition for economic growth. Without energy all machines, cars, electrical devices, and more, come to a standstill. The consequences can be huge. But don’t panic. For the next forty years there will be enough energy, especially if people and organisations will bring more efficiency in their use of energy. ‘More Energy, Less Carbon Dioxide,’ is the name of the game at Shell.

The oil company has developed two scenarios: Scramble and Blueprints. ‘The main difference is in the degree of cooperation between companies, governments and people,’ Richard Sears explains. ‘In Scramble everyone acts independently trying to solve their own supply/demand or environmental problem, whereas in Blueprints there is a greater sense of cooperating to find workable solutions for everyone. By acting together under Blueprints, the outcome is more likely an earlier transition to alternative energy sources.’

Systems tend to correct themselves and solve problems, like we’ve seen with oil and the CO2 issue. Another notion is that life supporting systems are too complex to be mastered on a central level by a government, the European Commission or the United Nations. Regionalism, decentralization, self-organization and citizenship are some coined concepts that dressed as leather eggs roll out of the climate scrum.

For more:check Beyond Oil - http://www.ecolutie.nl

Still Cool or Real Hot

Data by NASA show a world on fire. On the other hand geologists say: ‘global warming is over. The next thirty years global cooling makes the scene.' If global warming is dead, what will happen to CO2?

By Frank van Empel

The world is getting warmer, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies shows in global temperature maps. Whether the cause is human activity or natural variability, thermometer readings all around the world have risen steadily since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the Institute states. Planet Ambassadors and other environmentalists are happy with the maps. ‘The next time anyone tells you that the world is actual cooling,’ one of them says on the internet, ‘simply point them to these global temperature maps’. Take a look at the slideshow yourself and make up your own mind. Do they really knock out all critics of global warming?

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/21Tecb/www.good.is/post/real-heat-maps-watch-as-the-world-burns//r:t

According to NASA’s temperature analysis the average global temperature on Earth has increased about 0.8°Celsius (1.4°Fahrenheit) since 1880. Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15-0.20°C per decade. Housewives and stallholders may be impressed by this data, but geologists just laugh at it. They think in glacial and interglacial cycles of 10.000 up to 50.000 years. If we take the long-term view, geologists tell us, currently we live in an ice age that started 37 million years ago. In the meantime the Earth’s climate has changed with cycles of warming and cooling.

According to this special breed of scientists the acceleration of the increase in temperature since 1975 can easily be compensated by a 30 year period of global cooling. That’s the storyline of professor Mojib Latif, who works for the famous Leibniz Institut in Kiel, Germany, and who is a highly respected member of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). His specialism is cool: measuring the temperature 1.000 meter below the watersurface of the ocean. According to Latif, here in the deep water, oceans give birth to the next climate cycle of 30 years. ‘The two decades 1980-2000 formed a warmth cycle,’ Latif says early 2010 to reporters of Daily Mail and Guardian. ‘That has gone.’

We enter a thirty year long period of global cooling now, Latif says. And he knows he has a lot of experts behind him. Geologists and climatologists like Hays, Imbrie and Shackleton for instance, who already in 1976 have stated in Science that a surplus of greenhouse gasses like CO2 are warming up the Earth. Something that can be overcompensated by another period of global cooling. M.F. Loutie and A. Berger, have put the length of the present interglacial in 2002 at 50.000 years. Who then lives, then worries. ‘No,’ comments Berger in the slipstream of a presentation he gave for the European Geosciences Union (EGU) in 2005, we all have to care about emissions right now. Berger believes that the present CO2 perturbation will last long enough to surpress the next glacial cycle entirely.

Amidst this controversy between global warming and global cooling believers, the British quality magazine the Economist runs an article about 2010 as the warmest year ever recorded. Early December that was the measured reality for 2010. Who looks out the window in Amsterdam, Hamburg, Stockholm or London may think it’s an early Christmas dinner joke. But it isn’t. The global temperature record represents an average over the entire surface of the planet.

The temperatures we experience locally and in short periods can fluctuate significantly due to predictable cyclical events (night and day, summer and winter) and hard-to-predict wind and precipitation patterns. But the global temperature mainly depends on how much energy the planet receives from the Sun and how much it radiates back into space — quantities that change very little. The amount of energy radiated by the Earth depends significantly on the chemical composition of the atmosphere, particularly the amount of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

The maps of NASA colour the past. They depict how much various regions of the world have warmed or cooled when compared with a base period of 1951 -1980. They can’t say anything about the future. We have to do here with one of the most complex, nonlinear systems: the weather. Greenhouse gases are just one element in this universe, where Nature still has the power to surprise people with holidays on ice instead of the anticipated hotdays on the beach.

Discussion:
What do you think or believe? Are we getting ‘real hot’, or staying ‘still cool’ in the coming 30 years? And what will happen to the discussion about CO2? Will it fade away too, like the acid rain issue?

Modern Materialism

No one in his senses favours inefficiency. But that doesn’t make efficiency a piece of cake or an attractive, let alone, sexy, subject. On the contrary. The whole concept is narrowed to management literature and practice. It relates only to the material side of things, to the supply side of economics and the ultimate goal of all business people: to make the highest possible profit.

‘Operational excellence,’ (managers’ term for milking out redundant expenses) has nothing to do with demand, planet, or people. ‘Operational excellence’ only has to do with profit. What we need is a whole new concept of efficiency.

Stop rushing for a moment and take some time for reflection. What is business doing with and to people? Daddies and Mammies go to the office or to a factory early in the morning. Their labour is treated as input of useful energy by bookkeepers and mainstream economists. Their bodies are just instruments.

The output of the office or factory is dead matter (paperwork, e-mails, improved commodities, signed documents), whereas the pappas and mammies at the machines get more worn out bit by bit every day. This entropy is labelled: heroic participation in a social-economic adventure, or something like that. Everybody has to shine, even when it is a fake glow.

The prevailing systems (energy, transport, environment, economy) have one thing in common: they are shaped by a technology that drives them into the direction of constantly bigger, more of the same, standardisation, infinite complexity, vast expensiveness, inscrutability and fierce competition.

New social network technology pushes the prevailing systems in the opposite direction, towards smallness, diversity, simplicity, cheapness, transparancy and cooperation. Internet technology supports systems that serve man instead of enslaving him. A kind of modern materialism, that brings organisations, politics and policymaking back to the human scale.

Modern Materialism suggests simple, small and smart solutions for complex environmental issues like the abundant and constantly growing energy-use, as can be seen in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcjgRms6ShQ

The message in three words: BACK TO BASICS.
QUESTION: DO YOU HAVE OTHER SUGGESTIONS?
THEN, PLEASE, POST THEM.

€UROTHINK

HOW TO DEAL WITH KING CHAOS, part 5.

The euro is under pressure. Banks allow less credit, just now people and businessmen need it so bad. As a consequence people and business leaders think and talk themselves into a state of panic. Completely overdone. International rescue is active behind the scenes and on stage. And we have a superhero in our midst, called €URO.

by Frank van Empel

Let’s talk about money. Yesterday, November 28, 2010 the European Union (EU) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) decided to bail out Ireland, the second victim of structural overspending, after Greece. Who is the next candidate in the European default dominoes game to tumble? All analysts bet on Portugal. And so it will be Portugal. Once fear grasps the minds of investors, they behave in ways that make those fears a reality. Portugal has a high debt, meager growth and political disarray, the storytellers say. An easy prey for money hunters and speculators.

Spain will be next in the doom-scenario, but that will change the game. Spain is too big to fail and too big to bail out as well. It has a trillion (1.000 billion, or 1.000.000.000.000) euro in public debt and on top of that almost a trillion of foreign liabilities of the private sector: houses, financial institutions, corporates. As a matter of fact Spain is running a current account deficit for some time to finance an excessive spending of the private sector. It has to attract investors from abroad that want to buy bonds from the government for a certain return (interest) to fill up the gap. If investors become aware of the default risks they’re going to ask a higher return. Et ceterablabla.

Stop!

The point I want to score is that King Chaos again shall make it clear for insiders as well as outsiders that reality is no dedicated follower of expectations. The reason why is simple. There are too many interrelationships between nations, organisations, consumers, et cetera to handle by a human mind. The becoming of reality is a black box containing several ‘chemical’ and social-economic labs that make ever new combinations of human behaviour, technological progress and all kinds of decision making and market shaking.

Apart from this, there is a phenomenon that’s called imperfect knowledge. Which investor or newsreader realizes that Greece and Ireland are totally different cases? Greece’s problems were fiscal. Its public sector was spending more than it could earn in taxes. Ireland’s problems are caused by a real estate bubble that has poisoned the whole financial sector. The Irish government tried to bail out banks and by doing so, weakened the whole system. Imperfect knowledge breeds imperfect foresight and imperfect policy. So far so bad.

Now, the good news. Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and twelve other European countries form one monetary unit: the euro zone, a monetary space shared by 329 million citizens. If some member countries run a current account deficit, that’s no problem, as long as there are other countries, like Germany, that run a surplus. If Spain still had the peseta as a national currency, than it almost certainly would have been devaluated in relation to other currencies. As a consequence Spanish consumers would have paid more for foreign goods and services. Their own stuff however would have been cheaper abroad.

That Spain runs a deficit on its current account is the mirror image of the surplus that Germany runs. The Germans are as responsible for Spain’s deficit as Spain itself. The Germans should have bought more orange juice from farmers in Valencia and should have visited the beaches of the Costa del Sol more frequently. They still can. If they stay in their own Beerhalls and Euroland as a whole is going to run a deficit on its current account with the outer world, that’s no problem either. Maybe the euro looses some value in relation to the monetary units of the other economic powerhouses: the US, China, Japan. But the Euro zone won’t fall of the cliff. On the contrary. A devaluation of the euro makes it easier for us in Euroland to compete.

Moreover, on November 26, 2010 the euro got unexpected support from no one less than the prime minister of Russia, Vladimir Poetin. On a visit to Berlin he declared himself and his big, big country a supporter of the euro. ‘We have to get rid of the overwhelming dominant position of the US-dollar in international trade and finance,’ Poetin said, and he suggested the idea of Russia becoming a part of Euroland. First he wants to work on the realisation of a free-trade zone between the EU and Russia (a kind of extended European Economic Community). ‘The advance approach of Russia and Europe is inevitable,’ the Russian maestro said. If he is right, King Chaos had made his biggest move ever.

In the meantime the jammed motor of the European Economy has been kick-started and is running again, thanks to Germany and investors that throw off their burden of fear and become a little bit greedy again. The year 2009 was a very, very bad year after all, with a shrinking world economy: -4% on average, that’s more than ever. Even in the thirties of the last century it never happened. But the bad days are over. Over viewing the stock markets we observe the same pattern everywhere: investor’s optimism seems to outweigh the bad news labelled ‘realism’.

The stock market is a front-runner, like designers of clothes. If the fashion gets wilder and more colourful, good times are returning, I bet. If I see the girls walk by, I get the spirit and the energy of a recovered former hero too. It’s not all red and yellow yet, but brown doesn’t make it anymore. In winter fashion it’s ochre that rules men and women alike, if my eyes are right. Spring 2011 will give us all the kicks we need. If King Chaos is working it out fine.

King Chaos makes the scene

Maxus has more friends and followers than Zero. You’ll find them in places like China, South Korea, Morocco and Germany. His biggest friend however lives in the United States of America and is called US. Maybe you are not aware of it, but you are an extra in a play about Economics, Ecology and Ethics.

Dealing with King Chaos, part 4.

by Frank van Empel

The quantity of oil in (and on) the Earth is limited. We can explore it, burn it in our furnaces, or use it for medicines. But there comes a time when there will be no oil left. The same story goes for iron, silver, uranium, and all other natural resources. That’s the general pattern of thought in physical science and biology. The world is finite and in a finite world continual growth is impossible. Basta! A matter of logic. When you take from a stock, the stock shrinks until there’s nothing left.
The future looks rather grim, taking into account the forecast that the number of people on Earth will grow from 7 billion now to 9 billion in 2050. The more people, the faster natural resources will shrink until they reach point zero and life on Earth will not be possible anymore.

This though is linear reasoning at top level. All doom stories about climate change, diminishing bio-diversity, fossil fuels et cetera are based on such way of thinking. The environmental doom stories are derived from the assumed positive causal relationship between population growth on one side and depletion and pollution on the other side. And they all lead to the same conclusion: we better hold our horses and start thinking about a higher quality of life in a Steady-State Economy. By steady state the Zero-growth apostles mean a constant stock of physical wealth (capital), and a constant stock of people (population).

In a book on 4 scenarios for the future of energy, we (nonfiXe) wrote in 2003 for then Dutch (now German) energy company Essent, we coined this Steady-State Scenario ‘Voluntary Simplicity’. According to this Zero growth scenario, people start to realise that they don’t need three cars, two refrigerators, four television sets, three holidays a year and sixty pairs of shoes in order to be happy. We can be rich without money if we act different in daily life.

An economist, who shares this pattern of thought, is John Stuart Mill. Mill already in 1857 foresaw that the human economy would some day reach a stationary state, beyond which economic growth is impossible, leaving human ingenuity the task of improving the quality of lives through arts, culture, and improved distribution of incomes. ‘I am not charmed with the ideal of life,’ Mill writes, ‘held out by those who think that the normal state of human beings is that of struggling to get on; that the trampling, crushing, elbowing, and treading on each other’s heels which form the existing type of social life, are the most desirable lot of human kind, or anything but the disagreeable symptoms of one of the phases of industrial progress.’

Sounds good, but a little bit unrealistic. Mill is an odd character in the Land of Growth and Wealth Adepts. The mainstream of economists thinks and acts in a completely different way, although they too have a linear approach to keep their models simple. When there’s no oil left, they say, we’ll find substitutes. They even think it’s likely that the world can get along without natural resources. If cars cannot run on gasoline anymore, we humans let them run on water and air (hydrogen). The sky is the limit. If God doesn’t solve the problem of scarcity, the engineers and entrepreneurs will.

Maybe you are not aware of it, but you are an extra in a play about Economics, Ecology and Ethics. This play has four characters:
1. the sympathetic, idealistic, green and egalitarian fool Zero tells the truth, but nobody listens to him; most people think he’s a dreamer with a lot of imagination;
2. Prince Maxus, who wants to live to the max, who doesn’t have to worry about money and knows how to spend it, a metaphor for the US;
3. King Chaos, who takes care that nothing’s going to happen according to expectations, predictions, plans, whatever.
4. Lady Lay, who has to choose on behalf of the people, falls in love with Zero, but marries Maxus, and is being abused by Chaos.

Maxus has more friends and followers than Zero. You’ll find them in places like China, South Korea, Morocco and Germany. His biggest friend however lives in the United States of America and is called US. Without overstretching the metaphor of the world economy as a play, we conclude that Wealth underlies America's sense of itself as a special country. It's also cited as evidence that America is better than other economies on a range of variables, from economic freedom to optimism to business savvy to work ethic.

Statistics show the flexibility, creativity and mobility of Americans. Economic gloom and doom aside, America remains the world’s richest large country. Of course, there are fools too in America, like former vice-president Al Gore, who gave a splendid presentation about climate change for the whole World, but is loosing his power of words and licked graphics since the financial crises attracts all attention of the public.

When the economy is down and growth is stalled, nobody’s getting applause for a plea for Zero-growth or voluntary simplicity. Especially not the sick – Greece, Ireland – who need financial injections. No lip service for Zero anymore. Maxus rules the stock market and takes every occasion to give positive signals. The American Dream has to be fulfilled. Maxus won’t stop until every American is a millionaire. As a consequence of that drive, the economy bounces back after each crisis, to arrive at a higher ground with more wealth for all after all. Fear is swept aside by greed over and over again. Thirty years after the Club of Rome predicted the end of growth, the economy is performing the same trick over and over; running on oil and feeding ever more mouths. Ecology still is in the doldrums.

The Angles are with Maxus, we think, but Zero knows better. In the end it’s King Chaos who decides what’s really going to happen. And because he’s so unpredictable it is of no use to plan the future. We better stick to some global principles like Mill did in his books On Liberty and Principles of Political Economy, or just listen to our hearts, knowing that everything can change in a whisper. If we want to survive as a species we’ll have to love change.

That is were you come in, the extra player. You may think your acts don’t make a difference on a global level, but they do. You, me, each and every individual make changes happen by our little decisions and our reactions to the decisions of the other, every day again.

Every individual is able to create the world he or she wants to live in. We do so by our behaviour, by using our creativity to find solutions for appearing problems and by the government we accept as a ruler. Maybe Mill was right to formulise ethics as the main force in the world, individual ethics. Martin Luther King, Gandhi and other great change agents followed Mills footsteps. They decided to work on change to come closer to the world they liked to live in. Doing so, they got the support of King Chaos and overthrew every linear reasoning on the future, their contemporaries thought of.

The Frontiers of Exact Science

Disequilibrium Economics Revisited, insights after 30 years of journalism and writing on economics and politics.
Dealing with King Chaos, part 3.



By Frank van Empel

In 1980 I finished my studies at the University of Tilburg in the Netherlands with a thesis about disequilibrium economics. I tried to visualise the process of adaptation in a nonlinear model, by distinguishing three levels in economical processes:
1. the potential- or ex-ante level of intentions and expectations;
2. the effective level, an inbetween level of adapted intentions and expectations;
3. the realised- or ex-post level.

Conventional economists usually take only level 3 into account. They postulate that markets are cleared in no time, faster than sunshine. Moreover the economic players (producers, consumers, middlemen and the like) in scientific models are supposed to have all information about what’s going on in the heads, bodies and souls of consumers, producers, investors, et cetera. They have a perfect view on what is coming. The future holds no surprises or no adventures.
All of this has little to do with reality. In the real world, people go to a market with particular intentions and expectations. Once arrived they usually confront a total different situation. They have to adapt their intentions and accept a compromise, to make a deal. The same kind of adaptation process can be noticed on the demand- as well as on the supply-side of markets in general and the labour market specifically. See box (just for mathematic freaks and whizz people).



The hyperbolic tangent (see box above) is used for modeling complex nonlinear dynamic processes. The S-curve represents a tension. It’s a weight that goes from +1 to -1. At the far end it determines if a variable is positive or negative. It’s something like laughing versus crying or construction versus destruction. If you insert such a tension in just one equation of a traditional linear equilibrium model, it immediately becomes nonlinear. By that we mean, that the outcomes are completely unpredictable.

Simply stated, something is linear if its output is proportional to its input. If, when you're reading late at night, you want twice as much illumination (output) to see the book, then you double the number of light bulbs (input) by bringing over one more similar lamp. Something is nonlinear if its output is not directly proportional to the input. Nonlinear problems are of interest to engineers, physicists and mathematicians because most physical systems are inherently nonlinear in nature.

Nonlinear equations are difficult to solve though. They give rise to interesting phenomena such as chaos. The weather is famously chaotic, where simple changes in one part of the system produce complex effects throughout. Nonlinear systems are irregular, unstable, even chaotic. That leads almost always to unexpected developments. Life is nonlinear. If you’re in your twenties, you simply don’t know where and with who you’ll be when you’re fifty-plus. The human body loves nonlinearity too. The time between two heartbeats differs continuously. Should the time between two beats be the same, better get yourself to the hospital: A heart attack is in the making.

Another nonlinear body process is caused by the army of the Emperor of anomalies - cancer – inside, a chaotic, unpredictable process too. According to the mainstream of scientists nature is actually in a continuing state of disturbance and fluctuation, like the lives of most people, and the economy, yet most economists still don’t know how to handle nonlinearity in their models, like my own professor in Tilburg 30 years ago.

In his book Power and Chaos, published in 1980, prof. dr. D.B.J. Schouten acknowledged that an ‘endogenising of the elasticity coefficients’, which mirrors the amount of wage- and price-competition, is very complex. Schouten: ‘By doing this, our models are no longer linear, which in an inconceivable way raises complexity. That brings us to the frontiers of the exact economy practice.’

###

Living in a non-linear world

(part two of Dealing with King Chaos)

by Frank van Empel

’We have to deal with the world as we find it,’ David Axelrod, President Obama’s top political advisor said two weeks after the Democrats lost their power in the House of Representatives. The World Obama finds is the world we all are living in for already a pretty long time. It’s a non-linear world: irregular, unstable and chaotic. Not the kind of place where parents want their children to go.

The traditional, romantic wisdom is that in the past we were better of. The world was not overcrowded and people were no slaves of Mr. Greed and Mrs. Jealousy. We all lived in a State of Nature. Nature, undisturbed by human influence, was characterised by a certain kind of harmony, balance and order.

During the last three centuries we found out that this whole image is false. If there is a State of Nature, then it’s a State that is characterised by disequilibrium, differences, defects and mutations. Nature is, and always was, in a continuing state of disturbance and fluctuation. Change and turmoil is the rule.

The house we all live in shows such an example of apparent linearity: the human body. Let’s take a look in the Masters Room: the heart, which has an eternal triangle with blood and brain. It exports adrenaline (a hormone) to the blood and imports acetylcholine (a neurotransmitter) from the brain. Adrenaline speeds up the heart rate and activates the emotional brain. Acetylcholine slows down both. In other words: the heart has an accelerator and a brake. We need both functions for cornering through the unpredictable angles of life. Stress, fear, depressions and rage stimulate the production of adrenaline. Pleasure, sympathy, gratitude and nice thoughts give way to a relaxed heartbeat.

Accelerating and slamming on the brakes are irregular activities. The breaks between two heartbeats differ.
When the rhythm of the heart is completely regular, alarm bells should start to ring. It’s the signal for a heart attack in the making. Exactly the opposite of what one would expect.
(to be continued)