About us

Quantitative change and qualitative change

Published on Feb. 16, 2016 : The Denki Shimbun (The Electric Daily News)
Shojiro Matsuura
Chairman of JANSI

In every natural phenomenon, quantity changes into quality and vice versa. That is widely recognized as the most fundamental law in Engels’ Dialectics of Nature.

Take water as an example. Even before it was recognized as a theoretical law, we knew that changes in temperature caused ice to change to water, and water to steam, and we used those changes as a means of livelihood.

Having said that, there is a considerable gap between recognizing a law like that and being able to adequately apply its implications to daily life and social activity. It’s something of a joke in our home, but as an example, my wife knows how to cook and yet still tends to turn grilled fish into burnt fish quite often. If she were to set the flame on the gas stove and cooking time based on actual measurements, she could cook the fish just right. The reason why that doesn’t happen is that she isn’t making effective use of the rules governing the relationship between quantity (gas flow and time) and quality (how well the fish is cooked).

If we take a broader look at global issues, attention is once again starting to focus on the importance of using nuclear energy, based on the established trend towards low-carbon energy sources. There is still the inescapable issue of radiation however.

One aspect of the relationship between quantity and quality that I am particularly concerned with is the excessive sense of fear that most Japanese people feel with regard to the risk of radiation damage.

The risks posed by radiation in terms of physical disabilities can be difficult to understand. I can appreciate that to some extent. Most of us have experienced an injury in the form of a cut or bruise. We do everything we can to avoid serious injuries, but at the same time, we don’t expect to live risk-free. On the other hand, hardly any of us have experienced radiation damage. It’s inevitable that we tend to worry excessively about things that we can’t actually experience for ourselves first hand. If that escalates however, we are basically expecting, unrealistically, to live risk-free.

To counter that, we need to promote a better understanding of radiation damage based on scientific facts, looking at the correlation between quantitative and qualitative changes, and we need to come up with a measure through which everyone can determine their own level of tolerance.

It is scientifically proven that damage does not occur with low levels of exposure to radiation. The greater the level of exposure, the greater the damage, eventually leading to death. The same applies to a cut or bruise. As we can’t immediately feel exposure to radiation however, we can’t determine the level of damage.

Despite the fact that we can’t actually feel the damage, the scientifically proven measure for evaluating radiation is millisieverts (mSv). The ideal example to illustrate this is Japanese currency. If your level of exposure is equivalent to loose change (up to ¥500), there is no reason to be concerned about the risk of damage. If exposure is equivalent to a bank note (¥1,000), then there is clearly damage being done. If exposure rises to higher value bank notes, then there is a risk to life. This is a measure that has been put forward by Dr. Tamiko Iwasaki, an expert in the effects of radiation. Many years of evidence have proven that environmental radiation levels are sufficiently low if using nuclear power under normal conditions. Members of the public only start to think about radiation for themselves if there has been a serious accident, or they are weighing up what to do following such an accident. It is in such circumstances that I feel the Dr. Iwasaki’s approach is particularly effective, because it is based on a rational, easy to understand method.

As civilizations become more advanced, they also become more complex. As that happens, it becomes increasingly difficult to establish a clear picture of how quantitative changes in components and actions in a particular system affect qualitative changes in its characteristics. It is important for society to fully understand this process, and to accept and assist with an adequate response (understanding cause of quantitative change, clarifying mechanisms of how systems are affected, and responding quickly and appropriately based on that knowledge). If we neglect to do that, we will be more likely to run into problems or experience disasters in the future. Providing basic education on how to deal with issues such as these, based on actual examples, is an essential priority in order to ensure that society remains safe and secure.




end