First part on an analysis of the world of paints and coatings based on the famous universal concept of Edward A. Murphy Jr.
by Julián Restrepo*
Contextualizing a concept, perhaps philosophical, such as "Murphy's Law" with the world of coatings, may seem challenging, but it is enough to be immersed in it, to find phenomena and situations that, apparently under the precepts of said law, lead us to paradoxical situations.
This is how in this writing, we will try to raise and analyze some of these situations. Therefore, dear reader, I encourage you to be patient and have your mind open to new ideas, since it is a topic with which we will try to bring new elements to the analysis in the world of paints and coatings. This is bearing in mind an industry that increasingly talks about Sustainable Development, which must be concatenated with paint companies that are economically sustainable over time, but at the same time, more aware of a dynamic and globalized environment.
Definition of "Murphy's Law"
Also known as the "Law of Doom", "Law of Inverted Gravity" or more broadly "Murphy's Laws", it is a comic and mostly fictional way of explaining various misfortunes in all kinds of areas that is based on the statement: "If something can fail, it will fail" [1].
But more than a law, "Murphy's Law" is actually a list of hundreds of corollaries of the most absurd, ridiculous and, paradoxically, true at the same time, from which a series of laws and metaphysical truths emerge, created thanks to the contribution of various authors, which has made it find a particular reception in popular thought due to its capacity, although negative, to predict various events; since, apparently, its precepts are fulfilled most of the time.
It is created by the American aerospace engineer Edward A. Murphy Jr., who in 1949 worked on experiments with rockets on rails in the United States Air Force. Thus, "Murphy's Law" synthesizes, in a simple way, the complex development of physical events that allow each project or company undertaken by anyone to end in failure. Although the same "Murphy's Law" mocks its author, with the corollary: "Murphy's law, was not invented by Murphy, but by another man who was called the same" [2].
Since its inception, "Murphy's Law" has spread to various areas of knowledge and its variants have quickly passed into the popular imagination, mutating in turn and creating new versions of it. But as a law it generates various disagreements, obviously because for many it is considered a total show of pessimism, since it speaks of the negative that can be found daily, from the simplest and most routine things in our lives, to the most important decisions.
Generally the spirit of the law captures the general tendency to emphasize the negative things that occur in life; in this sense, the law is typically formulated as a variant of "if something can go wrong, it will go wrong"1; a variant frequently known as "Finagle's Law". Supported by it, there are those who affirm that being a little more pessimistic will live better [3].
Approach to "Murphy's Law"
"If you follow a rule, an exception will apply to you."
"If the cables can be connected in two or more different ways, the first one you try is the one that causes the most damage."
"Every repair creates new breakdowns."
"The solution to one problem adds another problem."
"Exceptions always outnumber the rules."
In this sense, we will also take into account some similar works of the author, who has related various philosophical concepts with the world of coatings, and which are considered to have a close relationship with some of the statements of "Murphy's Law":
- Nash equilibrium: Considered an example raised in a previous work of the author in this same publication [4]:
Between two distant points A and B there are two possible paths: the first, and shorter, is a route that has a narrow bridge; the second, a long highway. Drivers, by default, choose the shortest path, seeking to reduce their driving time, but paradoxically, having this journey a greater number of drivers, it ends with a greater number of traffic jams, making the short journey is actually slower than the long one. So, other drivers who know about the traffic jam, choose the highway route, which, finally, also ends up congested.
This situation was analyzed in this work as the Nash equilibrium, but in this case, it can also be explained in terms of the so-called "Murphy's Law": "Regardless of the path we choose, we will always go slower, even if we go the shortest route", or in the crudest Murphiana version: "the shortest path between two points is forbidden or inaccessible" ("law of minimum distance ") [5].
- Ockham's Razor: This philosophical principle, like "Murphy's Law", has various definitions and related corollaries [6]. Thus, according to some of them:
i)"When two theories on equal terms have the same consequences, the simplest theory is more likely to be correct than the complex one." But based on "Murphy's Law" it could be rewritten as: "When two theories on equal terms have the same consequences, the theory that causes the most damage is more likely to be chosen."
(ii)"The simplest and most sufficient explanation is the most likely, but not necessarily the true one." But based on "Murphy's Law": "The explanation that causes the most harm is the most likely to be chosen"
We must consider that Ockham's principle does not say that the simplest hypothesis is the true one, but that it is the one that is most likely to be true, but considering "Murphy's Law" and its negative aspect in the choice of the hypothesis, we will find that the chosen hypothesis will not be precisely the simplest, but the one that is the most false possible, but that does not appear to be so.
Therefore, we seem to find that, at least in the examples raised, the principle of Ockham's razor and that of "Murphy's Law" are antagonistic to each other. While Ockham's looks for the simplest and most correct solution (although he recognizes that not all the time), Murphy looks for that option that is either more complex, that causes the most damage or that causes more problems and that is not necessarily the solution sought.
- The idea of the "Eternal Return": In this concept the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche states that what we do is repeated again and again, but it is not only the events that are repeated, but also the thoughts, feelings and ideas, time after time, in an infinite and tireless repetition [7].
This is how the Murphian simile would show us that the ideation of diverse and apparently new solutions for a problem, paradoxically these will evolve towards the primary solution that was had from the beginning, perhaps following in some way the theory of Hawkins on progress: "Progress does not consist in replacing a wrong theory with a correct one, but to replace a false theory with a more subtly erroneous one."
Footer
1. The most popular and perhaps humorous version of "Murphy's Law" is "bread always falls to the side where the butter is smeared."
References
[1] (a) http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ley_de_Murphy; (b) http://www.taringa.net/posts/salud-bienestar/13453543/Ley-de-murphy-tiene-explicacion_Seguro-encontraras-la-tuya.html
[2] (a) http://www.calidoscopio.com/calidoscopio/principal36.htm; (b) http://www.frasesgraciosas.es/frases/ley-de-murphy/page/2;
[3] http://www.taringa.net/posts/humor/6724139/Leyes-de-Murphy-ciencia-o-realidad.html
[4] a) Restrepo J.A., "The Nash Equilibrium, Part I". Inpralatina, Vol. 17, No. 5, Sept/Oct 2012, pp. 23-25; b) Restrepo, J.A., "The Nash Equilibrium, Part II". Inpralatina, Vol. 17, No. 6, Nov/Dec 2012, pp. 20-23.
[5] http://www.todohistorietas.com.ar/lapaginadenestor/murphy.htm
[6] Restrepo, J.A:, "Ockham's Razor in formulation". Inpralatina, Vol. 16, No. 4, July/Aug 2011, pp. 35-38.
[7] a) Restrepo, J.A:, "The Idea of eternal return, part I". Inpralatina, Vol. 17, No. 3, May/June 2012, pp. 37-38; b) Restrepo, J.A., "The Idea of eternal return, part II. Inpralatina, Vol. 17, No. 4, July/August 2012, pp. 24-29.
* M.Sc. Ph.D. Julián A. Restrepo R. Factory Service of PPG Industries Colombia, juliá[email protected]
Leave your comment