Chinese Medicine, 2011, 2, 615 doi:10.4236/cm.2011.21002 Published Online March 2011 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/cm) Copyright © 2011 SciRes. CM Mathematical Reasoning of Treatment Principle Based on “Yin Ya ng Wu Xing” Theory in Traditional Chinese Medicine Yingshan Zhang School of Finance and Statistics, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China Email: ysh_zhang@163.com Received December 21, 201 0; revised January 20, 2011; accepted January 28, 2011 Abstract By using mathematical reasoning, this paper demonstrates the treatment principle: “Virtual disease is to fill his mother but real disease is to rush down his son” and “Strong inhibition of the same time, support the weak” based on “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theory in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). We defined two kinds of opposite relations and one kind of equivalence relation, introduced the concept of steady multilateral sys tems with two noncompatibility relations, and discussed its energy properties. Later based on the treatment of TCM and treated the healthy body as a steady multilateral system, it has been proved that the treatment principle is true. The kernel of this paper is the existence and reasoning of the noncompatibility relations in steady multilater al systems, and it accords with the oriental thinking model. Keywords: Traditional Chinese Medicine, “Yin Yang W u Xing” Theory, Steady Multilateral Systems, Opposite Relations, Side Effects, Medical and Drug Resistance Problem 1. Main Differences between Traditional Chinese Medicine and Western Medicine Western medicine treats disease from Microscopic point of view, always destroys the original human being’s balance, and has none beneficial to human’s immunity. Western medicine can produce pollution to human’s body, having strong s ide ef fects. E xcessi vely usi ng med icine can easily paralysis the human’s immunity, which AIDS is a unique product of Western medicine. Using medicine too little can easily produce the medical and drug resistance problem. Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) studies the world from the macroscopic point of vie w, a nd its tar get is in order to maintain the original balance of human being and in order to enhance the immunity. TCM be lieves that each medicine has onethird of drug. She ne v er encourages patients to use medicine in long term. Tra ditional Chinese Medicine has over 5,000year history. It almos t has none side effects or medical and drug resis tance problem [19]. After long period of practicing, Chinese ancient med ical scientists use “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theory exten sively in the tra ditional treat ment to expl ain t he ori gin o f life, human body, pathological changes, clinical diagno sis and prevent i on. It has become an important part of t he Traditional Chinese Medicine. “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theory has a strong influence to the formation and de velopment of Chinese medicine theory. But, many Chi nese and foreign scholars still have some questions on the reasoning of Tra ditional Chinese Medic ine. Zhang’s theory, multilateral matrix theory [1] and multilateral system theory [13,14,19], have given a new and strong mathematical reasoning method from macro (Global) analysis to micro (Local) analysis. He and his colleagues have made some mathematical models and methods of reasoning [217], whic h make the mathemat ical reasoning of T CM possible [13] based o n “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theory [18]. T his paper will use stead y multi lateral systems to demonstrate the treatment principle of TCM : “Real disease is to rush down his son but virtual disease is to fill his mother ” and “Str o ng i nhi b ition of the same time, support the weak”. The article proceeds as follows. Section 2 contains ba sic concepts and main theorems of steady multilateral systems while the treatment principle of Traditional Chinese Medicine is demonstrated in Section 3 and 4.
Y. S. ZHANG Copyright © 2011 SciRes. CM Conclusions are drawn in S ect ion 5. 2. Basic Concept of Steady Multilateral Systems In the real world, we are enlightened from some concepts and phenomena such as “biosphere”, “food chain”, “ecological balance” etc. With research and practice, by using the theory of multilatera l matrices[1] and analyzing the conditions of s ymmetr y [12] and orthogonality [35, 12,17] what a stable system must satisfy, in particular, with analyzing the basic conditions what a stable work ing procedure of good product quality must satisfy [11, 17], we are inspired and find some rules and methods, then present the logic model of analyzing stability of complex systems [710]—steady multilateral systems [13,14,19]. There are a number of essential reasoning met hods based on the stable logic analysis model, such as “transition reasoning”, “atavism reasoning”, “genetic reasoning” etc. 2.1. Equivalence Relations Let V be a nonempt y se t a nd x, y, z be their elements. We call it an equivalence relation, denoted ~, if the follo wing 3 conditions are all true: 1) Reflexive: x ~ x for all x; 2) Symmetric: if x ~ y, then y ~ x; 3) Conveyabl e (Transitivity): if x ~ y, y ~ z, then x ~ z. If there are some x, y, z such that at least one of the conditions abo ve is true, the relation is called a compati bility relation. Any one of compatibility relations can be expa nded into an equivalence relation [19]. Western Science only considers the reasoning under one Axio m sys te m such t hat o nl y rese arc hes on compati bility rela tion reaso ning. However, there are many Axio m syste ms in Nat ure. T radit ional Chinese Science (TCS, or Oriental Science) mainly researches the reasoning among many Axio m s yste ms in Nature. Of course, she also con siders the reasoning under one Axiom system but she only expands the reasoning as the equivalence relation reasoning [19]. 2.2. Two Kinds of Opposite Relations Equivalence relations, even compatibility relations, can not portray the structure of the complex systems clearly. For example, assume that A and B are good friends and they ha ve clo se relat ions. S o are B and C. However, you canno t get t he conclusion that A and C are good friends. We denote A → B as that A and B have close relations. Then the example above can be d enoted as: A → B, B → C do not imply A → C, i.e., the relation → is a non conveyable (or nontransitivity) relation, of course, a nonequivalence relation. In the following, we consider two noncompatibility relations. Let V be a nonempty set and x, y, z be none equal. There are two kinds of opposite relations, called neigh boring relations → and alternate relations ⇒, having the property: 1) If x → y, y → z, then x ⇒ z; ⇔ if x → y, x ⇒ z, then y → z; ⇔ if x ⇒ z, y → z, then x → y. 2) If x ⇒ y, y ⇒ z, then z → x; ⇔ if z → x, x ⇒ y, then y ⇒ z; ⇔ if y ⇒ z, z→ x, then x ⇒ y. Two kinds of opposite relations cannot be exist sepa rately. Such reasoning can be expressed as follows: The first triangle reasoning is known as a jumping transition reasoning, while the second triangle reasoning is known as an atavism reasoning. Both neighboring re lations and alternate relations are not compatibility rela tions, of course, none equivalence relations, called noncompatibility relations. 2.3. Genetic Reasoning Let V be a nonempty set and x, y, z be not equal one another. If equivalence relations exist, neighboring rela tions, a nd alterna te r elation s i n V at the same time, then a genetic reasoning i s defined as follo ws: 1) if x ~ y, y → z, then x → z; 2) if x ~ y, y ⇒ z, then x ⇒ z; 3) if x → y, y ~ z, then x → z; 4) if x ⇒ y, y ~ z, the n x ⇒ z. 2.4. Multilateral Systems For a nonempty set V, if there exists at least an non compatibilit y relatio n, then i t is called a multilateral sys tem about complexit y [13,14,19], or eq uival ent ly, a l ogi c analysis model of complex systems [710]. Assu me that t he r e e xist e q ui vale nc e r e la t ions, ne i g hbo r ing relations, and alternate relations in system V, which satisfy genetic reasoning. If for every x, y ∈ V, at least there is one of the three relations between x and y, and there are not x → y and x ⇒ y at the same time, then V is called a lo gic analysis model o f complex syste ms, which is equivalent to the logic architecture of reasoning model of “Yin Yang” Theory in Ancient China. Obviously, V is
Y. S. ZHANG Copyright © 2011 SciRes. CM a multilateral system with two noncompatibility rela tions. In this paper, we only consider this multilateral s ys t em. Theorem 2.1 For a multilateral system V with two noncompatibility relations, ∀ x, y ∈ V, only one of the following fiv e re lations is existent and correct: x ~ y, x → y, x ← y, x ⇒ y, x ⇐ y. Theorem 2.2 For a multilateral system V with two noncompatibility relations, ∀ x, y, z ∈ V, the following reasoning holds: 1) if x → z , y → z, then x ~ y; 2) if x ⇒ z, y ⇒ z, then x ~ y; 3) if x → y , x→ z, then y ~ z; 4) if x ⇒ y, x ⇒ z, then y ~ z. 2.5. Steady Multilateral Systems The multilateral system V is known as a steady multila teral system (or, a stable multilateral system) with two noncompatibility relations if there exists at least the chain x1, , xn ∈ V, which satisfy any one of the two conditions below: x1→ x2 → → xn → x1; x1 ⇒ x2 ⇒ ⇒ xn ⇒ x1. Theorem 2.3 For a steady multilateral system V with two noncompatibility relations, there exists fivelength chain, and the length of the chain is inte ger times of 5. Theorem 2.4 For a steady multilateral system V with two noncompatibility relations, there exists a partition of V as follows: V = V1 + V2 + V3 + V4 + V5; { } ,1, 5. ii Vy Vyxi= ∈∀= which x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 is a chain. The notation that V = V1 + V2 + V3 + V4 + V5 means that V = V1 ∪ V2 ∪ V3 ∪ V4 ∪ V5, Vi ∩ Vj = ∅, ∀ i ≠ j. Theorem 2.5 The decomposition above for the steady multilateral system with two noncompatibility relations, there exist relatio ns below Figure 1. Theorem 2.6 For each element x in a steady multila teral system V with two noncompatibility relations, there exist five equ ivalen ce classes below: which the five equivalence classes have relations below Figure 2. 3. Relationship Analysis of Steady Multilateral Systems 3.1. Energy of a Multilateral System Energy concept is an important concept in Physics. Now, we intr oduc e this concep t to the multilate ral syste ms and use these concepts to deal with the multilateral system disea ses. In mathematics, a multilateral system is said to have energy (or dyn a m i c ) if there is a none negative function φ( *) which makes every subsystem meaningful of the multilateral system. For two subsystems Vi and Vj of multilatera l system V, denote Vi → Vj (or Vi ⇒ Vj, or Vi ~ Vj) me ans xi → xj, xi Vi, xj Vj (or xi ⇒ xj, xi Vi, xj Vj or xi ~ xj, xi Vi, xj Vj). For sub s ys te ms Vi, Vj and Vi ∪ Vj where Vi ∩ Vj = ∅, i ≠ j, let φ(Vi) = Vi , φ(Vj) = Vj  and φ(Vi ∪ Vj) = Vi ∪ Vj, where φ(Vi ∪ Vj) is the total energy of both Vi and Vj. For an equivalence relation Vi ~ Vj, if Vi ∪ Vj  = Vi  + Vj  (the normal state of the energy of Vi ~ Vj), then the equivalence relation Vi ~ Vj is called that Vi likes Vj whic h mea ns that Vi is similar to Vj. In this case, the Vi is also called the brother of Vj while the Vj is also called the brother of Vi. In the causal model, the Vi is called the similar family member of Vj while the Vj is also called the similar family me mber of Vi. There are not any causal relation considered between Vi and Vj. For a neig hbo ring r elat ion Vi → Vj, if Vi ∪ Vj > Vi + Vj (the normal state of the energy of Vi → Vj), then the neighboring relation Vi → Vj is called that Vi bears (or loves) Vj [or that Vj is born (or loved) by Vi]whic h mea ns that Vi is be nefic ial on Vj each other. In this case, the Vi is called the mother of Vj while the Vj is calle d the son o f Vi. In the causal model, the Vi is called the beneficial cause of Vj while the Vj is called the beneficial effect of Vi. For an alternate relation Vi ⇒ Vj, if Vi ∪ Vj < Vi + Vj (the normal state of the energy of Vi ⇒ Vj), then the alternate relation Vi ⇒ Vj is called as that Vi kills Vj (or that Vj is killed by Vi) which means that Vi is harmful o n Vj each othe r. In this case, the Vi is called the bane of Vj while the Vj is called the prisoner of Vi. In the causal model, the Vi is called the harmful cause of Vj while the Vj is called the harmful effect of Vi. In the future, unless stated otherwise, any equivalence relation is the liking relation, any neighboring relation is the bear ing relation (or the loving relation), and any al ternate relatio n is the killing re la tion. Suppose V is a steady multilateral system having energ y, t he n during no rmal opera tion, its ener gy function for any subsystem of the multilateral system has an av erage (or expected value in Statistics), the state is called
Y. S. ZHANG Copyright © 2011 SciRes. CM no rmal whe n the ener g y funct io n is ne arl y to the a vera ge. Normal state is the better state. A subsystem of a multilateral syste m is called not run ning properly (or disease, abnormal), if the energy devia tion from the average of the subsystems is too large, the high [real disease] or the low [virtual disea se ]. In a subsystem of a multilateral system being not run ning properly, if the energy of this subsystem is in creased or decreased by using external forces and re turned to its average (or its expected value), this method is called intervention (or mak i n g a medical treatment) to the mult ila te ral system. The purp ose of interventio n is to make the multilateral system return to normal state. The method of interven tion is to increase or to decrease the energy of a subsys tem. What kind of treatment should follow the principle to treat it? Western medicine emphasizes direct treatment, but the indirect treatment of oriental medicine (or Tradi tional Chinese Medicine) is required. In mathematics, which is more reaso nable? Based on this idea, many issues are worth further dis cussion. For example, if an intervention treatment has been done to a multilateral system, what situation will happen? 3.2. Intervention Rule of a Multilateral System For a steady multilateral system V with two noncompatibility relations, suppose that there is an ex ternal force (or an intervenin g force ) on the sub system X of V which makes the energy φ(X) of X changed by the increment ∆φ(X), then the energies φ(XS), φ(XK), φ(KX), φ(SX) of other subsystems XS, XK, KX, SX (defined in Theorem 2.6) of V will be changed by the increments ∆φ(XS), ∆φ(XK), ∆φ(KX) and ∆φ(SX), respectively. It is said that a multilateral system has the capability of intervention reaction if the multilateral system has capability to response the intervention force. If a sub syst em X of multilater al system V is inter vene d, then the energies ∆φ(XS) and ∆φ(SX) of t he subsystems XS and SX which have neighboring relations to X will chan ge in the same direction of the force outside on X.We call them beneficiaries. But the energies ∆φ(XK) and ∆φ(KX) of the subsystems XK and KX which have alternate rela tions to X will change in the opposite direction of the force outside on X. We call them victims. Further more, i n general, there is an essential principle of interventio n: a ny one of energies ∆φ(XS) and ∆φ(SX) of beneficial subsystems XS and SX of X changes in t he same direction of the force outside on X, and any one of ener gies ∆φ(XK) and ∆φ(KX) of harmful subsystems XK and KX of X changes in the opposite direction of the force outside on X. The changed size of the energy ∆φ(XS) (or ∆φ(SX)) is equal to that of ∆φ(XK) (or ∆φ(KX)), but the direction opposite. Intervention Rule: In the case of virtual disease, the treatment method of intervention is to increase the ener gy. If the treatment has been done on X, the energy in crement (or, increase degree) ∆φ(XS) of the son XS of X is greater than the energy increment (or, increase degree) ∆φ(SX) o f the mother SX of X, i.e., the b est benefit is t he son XS of X. But the energy decrease degree ∆φ(XK) of the prisoner XK of X is greater than the energy decrease degree ∆φ(KX) of the bane KX of X, i.e., the worst victim is the prisoner XK of X. In the case of real disease, the treatment method of in tervention is to decrease the energy. If the treatment has been done on X, the ener g y decrease degree ∆φ(SX) of the mother SX of X is greater than the energy decrease degree ∆φ(XS) of the son XS of X, i.e., the best benefit is the mother SX of X. But the energy increment (or, in crease degree) ∆φ(KX) of the bane KX of X is greater than the energy increment (or, increase degree) ∆φ(XK) of the prisoner XK of X, i.e., the worst victim is the bane KX of X. In mathematics, the changing la ws are as follows. 1) If ∆φ(X) = ∆ > 0, then ∆φ(XS) = ρ1∆, ∆φ(XK) = –ρ1∆, ∆φ(KX) = －ρ2∆, ∆φ(SX) = ρ2∆; 2) If ∆φ(X) = –∆ < 0, then ∆φ(XS) = –ρ2∆, ∆φ(XK) = ρ2∆, ∆φ(KX) = ρ1∆, ∆φ(SX) = –ρ1∆; where 1 ≥ ρ1 ≥ ρ2 ≥ 0. Both ρ1 and ρ2 are called interven tion reaction coefficients, which are used to represent t he capability of i nter ve ntion reactio n. The larger ρ1, the better the capabilit y of inter vention reactio n. T he state ρ1 = 1 is the best state but the state ρ1 = 0 is the worst state. Medical and drug resistance problem is that such a question, beginning more appropriate medical treatment, but is no longer valid after a period. It is because the ca pabilit y of interve ntion reaction is bad, i.e., the inter ven tion reaction coefficients ρ1 and ρ2 are too small. In the state ρ1 = 1, any medical and drug resistance problem is nonexistence but in the state ρ1 = 0, medical and drug resistance p roblem is always existence. At this point, t he paper advocates the principle of treatment to avoid med ical and drug resistance problems. This intervention rule is similar to force and reaction in Physic s. 3.3. SelfProtection Rule of a Multilateral System If there is an intervening force on the subsystem X of a steady multilatera l system V whic h makes the energy φ(X) changed by increment ∆φ(X) s uch t hat the e ner gies φ(XS), φ(XK), φ(KX), φ(SX) of other subsystems XS, XK, KX, SX (defined in Theorem 2.6) of V will be changed by the
Y. S. ZHANG Copyright © 2011 SciRes. CM increments ∆φ(XS), ∆φ(XK), ∆φ(KX), ∆φ(SX), respectively, then can the multilateral system V have capability to protect the worst victim to restore? It is said that the steady multilateral system has the capability of selfprotection i f the multi latera l sys te m has capability to protect the worst victim to restore. The ca pability of selfprotection of the steady multilateral sys tem is said to be better if the multilateral system has ca pability to protect the all victi ms to restore. In general, there is an essential principle of selfprotection: any harmful subsystem of X should be protected by using the same intervention force but any beneficial subsystem of X s hould not. Selfprotec tion Rule: in the case of virtual disease, the treatment method of intervention is to increase the ener gy. If the treatment has been done on X, the wo rs t v ictim is the prisoner XK of X. Thus, the treatment of selfprotection is to restore the prisoner XK of X and the restoring method of selfprotection is to increase the energy φ(XK) of the prisoner XK of X by using the inter vention force on X acc ording to t he intervention rule. In the case of real disease, the treatment method of in tervention is to decrease the energy. If the treatment has been done on X, the worst victim is the bane KX of X. Thus, the treatment of selfprotection is to restore the bane KX of X and the restoring method of selfprotection is to decrease the energy φ(KX) of the bane KX of X by using the same intervention force on X according to the inter venti on r ule. In mathematics, the following selfprotection laws hold. 1) If ∆ φ(X) = ∆ > 0, then the energy o f subsys tem XK will decrease the increment (–ρ1∆), which is the worst victim. So the capability of selfprotection increases the energy of subsystem XK by increment (ρ1∆) in order to restore the worst victim XK by using the same interven tion force on X according to the intervention rule. 2) If ∆φ(X) = –∆ < 0, then the energy ∆φ(KX) of sub system KX will increase the increment (∆φ(KX) = ρ1∆), which is the worst victim. So the capability of selfprotection decreases the energ y of sub system KX, by the same size to ∆φ(KX) but the direction opposite, i.e., by increment (∆φ(XK)1 = –ρ1∆), in order to restore the worst victim KX by u sin g the sa me inte rve ntion forc e on X according to the intervention rule. The selfprotection rule can be explained as: the gen eral principle of selfprotection subsystem is the most affected is protected firstly; the protection method is in the same way to the i ntervention force. Theorem 3.1 Suppose that a steady multilateral sys tem V which has energy and capability of selfprotection is with interve ntion reaction coefficients ρ1 and ρ2. If the capability of selfprotection can make the subsystem XK to be restore d, then the following statements are true. 1) In the case of virtual disea se, the treatment method is to increase the energy. If an intervention force on the subsy st em X of steady multilateral system V is imple mented such that its energy φ(X) has been changed by increment ∆φ(X) = ∆ > 0, then all five sub systems will be changed finally by the increments as follows: ( )( )( )() ( )( )( ) ( ) ( )( )( )() ( )()( ) ( ) ( )( )( ) ( ) ( ) 21 21 1 21 21 11 21 2 21 21 2 21 21 1 0, 0, 0, , , 0. S SS K KK X XX X XX X XX X XX X XX K KK S SS X ϕϕ ϕρρ ϕϕϕρ ρρ ϕϕ ϕρρ ϕϕ ϕρρ ϕϕ ϕρρ ϕ ∆=∆+∆= −∆> ∆=∆+∆= +∆> ∆=∆+∆=−+∆= ∆=∆+∆=− −∆ ∆=∆+∆=− ∆ ∀∆=∆ > 2) In the case of real disease, the treatment method is to decrease the energy. If an intervention force on the subsystem X of steady multilateral system V is imple mented such that its energy φ(X)' has been changed by increment ∆φ(X)' = － ∆ < 0, then all five subsystems will be changed finally by the increments as follows: ( )( )( )() ( )( )( ) ( ) ( )( )( ) ( ) ( )()( ) () ( )( )( )() ( ) 21 21 2 21 21 2 21 21 11 21 1 21 21 1 0, , , 0, 0, 0, S SS K KK X XX X XX X XX X XX X XX K KK S SS X ϕϕ ϕρρ ϕϕ ϕρρ ϕϕ ϕρρ ϕϕ ϕρρ ϕϕϕρ ρρ ϕ ′ ′′ ∆=∆+∆=− −∆< ′ ′′ ∆=∆+∆=− −∆ ′ ′′ ∆=∆+∆=− ∆ ′ ′′ ∆=∆+∆=− ∆= ′ ′′ ∆=∆+∆=− +∆< ′ ∀∆=−∆ < where the ∆φ(*)1 ’s and ∆φ(*)1' ’s are the increments under the capability o f selfprotection. Corollary 3.1 Suppose that a steady multilateral sys tem V which has energy and capability of selfprotection is with intervention reaction coefficients ρ1 and ρ2. Then the capability of selfprotection can make both subsys tems XK and KX to be restored at the same time, i.e., the capability of selfprotection is better, if and only if ρ2 = . Side effects of medical problems were the questio n: i n the medical process, destroyed the normal balance of a normal system which is not fallingill system or inter vening syst em. B y T he or e m 3.1 and Corollary 3.1, it can be seen that a necessary and sufficient condition is ρ2 = if the capabilit y of selfprote ction of t he steady mul tilateral system is better, i.e., the multilateral system has capability to protect all victims to restore. At this point, the paper advocates the principle to avoid any side ef fects of treatment.
Y. S. ZHANG Copyright © 2011 SciRes. CM 3.4. Mathematical Reasoning of Treatment Principle by Using the Neighboring Relations of Steady Multilateral Systems Tr ea tment p r inci p le by usi n g t he ne ig hb o ri n g re la tions of steady multilateral systems is “Virtual disease is to fill his mother but real disease is to rush down his son”. In order to show the ra tionality o f the treat ment principle , it is needed to prove the following theorems. Theorem 3.2 Suppose that a steady multilateral sys tem V which has energy and capability of selfprotection is with intervention reaction coefficients ρ1 and ρ2 satis fying . Then the following statements a re true. In the case of virtual disea se, if an intervention force on the subsystem X of steady multilateral system V is implemented such that its energy φ(X) increases the in crement ∆φ(X) = ∆ > 0, then the subsystems SX, XK and KX can be restored at the same time, but the subsystems X and XS will increase their energies finally by the in crements ( ) 3 12 1 2 3 1 1 ϕρρ ϕρϕ ρ ∆=− ∆=−∆ =−∆ and ( ) ()( ) ( ) ( ) 3 112 11 2 3 11 , S ϕρρρ ϕρρϕ ρρ ∆=+ ∆ =+∆ =+∆ respectively. On the other hand, in the case of real disease, if an intervention force on the subsystem X of steady multila teral system V is implemented such that its energy φ(X)′ decreases, i.e., by the increment ∆φ(X)′ = –∆ < 0, the subsystems XS, XK and KX can also be restored at the same time, and the subsystems X and SX will decrease their energies finally, i.e., by the increments ( )()( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 3 12 1 2 3 1 11 1 X XX ϕρρ ϕρϕ ρ ′ ′′ ∆=− ∆=−∆ =−−∆ and ()()( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 3 112 11 2 3 11 , X ϕρρρ ϕρρϕ ρρ ∆=+∆=+∆ =−+ ∆ respectively. Theorem 3.3 For a steady multilateral system V which has energy and capability of selfprotection, as sume intervention reaction coefficients are ρ1 and ρ2 which satisfy and ρ1 ≥ 0.5897545123. Then the following statements are true . 1) If an intervention force on the subsystem X of steady multilateral system V i s implemented such that its energy φ(X) has been changed by increment ∆φ(X) = ∆ > 0, then the fin al increme nt ( )∆ of the energy φ(XS) of the subsystem XS changed is greater than the final increment ( )∆ of the energy φ(X) of the subsystem X changed based on the capability of selfprotection. 2) If an intervention force on the subsystem X of steady multilateral sys tem V is imple mented such that its energy φ(X) has been changed by increment ∆φ (X) = –∆ < 0, then the final increment –( )∆ of the energy φ(SX) of the subsystem SX changed is less than the final incre ment –( )∆ of the energy φ(X) of the subsystem X changed based on the capability of selfprotection. Corollary 3.2 For a steady multilateral system V which has energy and capability of selfprotection, in tervention reaction coefficients are ρ1 and ρ2 which sa tisfy and ρ1 < 0.5897545123. Then the follow ing statements are true. 1) In the case of virtual disease, if an intervention force on the subsystem X of steady multilateral system V is implemented such that its energy φ(X) has been changed by increment ∆φ(X) = ∆ > 0, then the final in crement ( )∆ of the energy φ(XS) of the subsystem XS changed is less than the final increment ( )∆ of the energy φ(X) of the subsystem X changed based on the capability of selfprotection. 2) In the case of real disease, if an intervention force on the subsystem X of steady multilateral system V is implemented such that its energy φ(X) has been changed by increment ∆φ(X) = –∆ < 0, then the final increment –( )∆ of the energy φ(SX) of the subsystem SX changed is greater than the final increment – (1 – )∆ of the energy φ(X) of the subsystem X changed based on the cap ab ility of selfprotection. 3.5. Mathematical Reasoning of Treatment Principle by Using the Alternate Relations of Steady Multilateral Systems Treatment principle by using the alternate relations of steady multilateral systems is “Strong inhibition of the same time, support the weak”. In order to show the ra tionality of t he tre at ment principle, it needed to prove the following theo rem. Theorem 3.4 Suppose that a steady multilateral sys tem V which has energy and capability of selfprotection is with intervention reaction coefficients ρ1 and ρ2 satis fying . Assume there are two subsystems X and XK of V with an alternate relatio n such that X encounters virtual disease, and at the same time, XK befalls real disease. Then the following statements are true. If an intervention force on the subsystem X of steady multilateral sys tem V is imple mente d such th at its energy φ(X) has been changed by increment ∆φ(X) = ∆ > 0 , and
Y. S. ZHANG Copyright © 2011 SciRes. CM at the same time, another intervention force on the sub system XK of steady multilateral system V is also imple mented such that its energy φ(XK) has been changed by increment ∆φ(XK) = –∆ < 0, then all other subsystems: SX, KX and XS can be restored at the same time, and the sub systems X and XK will decrease and increase their ener gies by the same size but the direction opposite, i.e., by the final increments ( ) 3 12 1 3 3 1 1 ϕρρϕρϕ ρ ∆=− ∆=−∆ =−∆ and ( )()( ) ( ) ( ) 3 12 1 3 3 1 1, ϕρρ ϕρϕ ρ ∆=− ∆=−∆ =−−∆ respectively. These theorems can been found in [710] and [13,14]. Figures 1 and 2 in T heorems 2.5 and 2.6 are the Fi gure s of “Wu Xing” The ory in Anci ent China . The steady mul tilateral system V with t wo no ncompa tibility relatio ns is equivale nt to the lo gic archi te cture o f reasoni ng model of “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theor y in Anci ent C hi na. 4. Rationality of Treatment Principle of Traditional Chinese Medicine and “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theory 4.1. Traditi ona l Chines e Med icin e and “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theory Ancient Chinese “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theory has been surviving for several thousands of years without dying out, proving it reasonable to some extent. If we regard ~ as the same category, the neighboring relation → as beneficial, harmony, obedient, loving, etc., and the al ternate relation ⇒ as harmful, conflict, ruinous, killing, etc., then the above defined stable logic analysis model is similar to the logic architecture of reasoning of “Yin Yang Wu Xing”. Both “Yin” and “Yang” mean that there are two opposite relations in the world: harmony or lov ing → and conflict or killing ⇒, as well as a general equivalent category ~. There is only one of three rela tions ~, → and ⇒ between every two objects. Everything (X ≠ ∅) mak e s something (XS ≠ ∅), and is made by somethi ng (SX ≠ ∅); Eve rythi ng rest rai ns s omet hi ng(XK ≠ ∅), and is restrained by something (KX ≠ ∅); i.e., one thing overcomes another thing and o ne thing is ove rcome by another thing. The ever changing world V, following the relations: ~, → and ⇒, must be divided into five categories by the equivalent relation ~, being called “Wu Xing”: wood (X), fire (XS), earth (XK), go ld (KX) and wa ter (SX). The relationship among the “Wu Xing” is to be “neighbor is friend”: wood(X) → fire(XS) → earth(XK) → gold(KX) → wa ter(SX) → wood(X), and to be “alternate is foe”: wood(X) ⇒ earth(XK) ⇒ water(SX) ⇒ fire(XS) ⇒ gold(KX) ⇒ wood(X). On the other words, V = X + XS + XK + KX + SX satis fying X → XS → XK → KX → SX → X and X ⇒ XK ⇒ SX ⇒ XS ⇒ KX ⇒ X where elements in the same category are equivalent to one another. We can see, from this, the ancient Chinese th eo ry “ Yin Yang Wu Xing” is a reasonable logic analysis model to identify the stability and relationship of com plex systems, i.e., it is a stea dy multilate r a l system. Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) firstly uses the verifying relationship method of “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theory to explain the relationship between organ of hu man body and environment. Secondly, based on “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theory, the relations of physiological pro cesses of human b ody ca n be shown b y the ne ighb or ing relation and alternate relation of five subsets. Thus a normal human’s body can be shown as a steady multila teral system. Loving relation in TCM can be explained as the neighboring re lation, called “Sheng”. Killing relation in T CM can be explained as the alternate relation, called Figure 1. Uniquely steady archi tecture: “Wu Xing”. Figure. 2 The method of finding “Wu Xing”.
Y. S. ZHANG Copyright © 2011 SciRes. CM “Ke”. Co nstraints and conversion between five subsets are equivalent to the two kinds of triangle reasoning. So a normal human’s body can be classified into five equi valence classes. It has been shown in Theorems 2.12.6 that the classification of five subsets is quite possible based on the mathematical logic. To make sure the cha racteristics of the five subsets is reasonable or not, it needs more research work. It has been also shown in Theorems 3.23.4 that the logical basis of TCM is a steady mu lt ilater a l system. The gas [“Chi”, or “Qi”, energy of life] of TCM means the energy in a steady multilateral syste m. There are two kinds of diseases in TCM: real disease and virtual disease. They generally mean the subsystem is abnormal (or disease), its energy [“Chi”, or “Qi”, energy of l ife] is too high or too low. The treatment method of TCM is to “Xie Qi” which means to rush down the energy if a real disease is treated, or to “Bu Qi” which means to fill the energy if a virtual disease is treated. Like intervening the subsystem, de crease when the energy is too high, increase when the energy is too low. Both the capability of intervention reaction and the capability of selfprotection of the multilateral system are equivalent to the Immunization of TCM. This capability is really exist. Its target is to protect other organs while treating one organ. 4.2. Treatment Principle if Only One Organ of the Human Body System Falls Ill If we always intervene the abnormal organ of the human body system directly, the intervention method always destroy the balance of the human body systems because it is ha vi ng strong side effects to the mother or the son of the or gan which is nondiseas e syst em b y usin g T heor em 3.2. The intervening directly method also decreases the capability of interventio n reaction ρ1, because the method which doesn’t use the capability of intervention reaction make s the ρ1 near to 0. T he state ρ1 = 0 is the worst state of the human body system, namely AIDS. On the way, the resistance problem will occur since any medicine or treatment ha s little effect for small ρ1. Howe v er, b y Co r o ll a r y 3.2, it will e ven be better if we intervene subsystem X itself directly while ρ1< 0.5897545123, i.e. ρ1 + ρ12 < 0.9375648971. It can be explained that if a multilateral system which has a poor capability of intervention reaction, then it is better to intervene the subsystem X itself directly than indirectly. However, similar to above, the intervening directly me thod always destroys the balance of multilateral systems such that there is at least one side effect occurred. Moreover, the intervening directly method is also harm ful to the capability of intervention reaction and might causes the medical and drug resistance problem. There fore , the inte rve nti on met hod directly can be used in case ρ1 < 0.5897545123 but should be used as little as possi ble. If we always intervene in the abnormal organ of the human body system indirectly, the intervention method can be to maintain the balance of the human body system because it has not any side effects to all other organs which are not both the disease organ and the intervened organ by using Theorem 3.2. The intervening indirectly method also increase the capability of intervention reac tion because the method of using the intervention reac tion makes the ρ1 near to 1. The state ρ1 = 1 is the best state of the human body system. On the way, it almost has none medical and drug resistance problem since any medicine is possible good for some large ρ1. Overa ll, t he huma n bod y syst em satisfies the interven tion rule and the selfprotection rule. It is said healthy while intervention reaction coefficient ρ1 satisfies ρ1 > 0.5897545123. In logic and practice, it's reasonable ρ1 + ρ2 near to 1. In case: ρ1 + ρ2 = 1, all the energy for inter vening human body organ can transmit to other human body organs which have neighboring relations or alter nate relations with the intervening human body organ. The healthy condition ρ1 > 0.5897545123 can be satis fied when ρ2 = ρ12 for a healthy human body since ρ1 + ρ2 = 1 implies ρ1 = (√51)/2 ≈ 0.618 > 0.5897545123. If this assumptions is set up , then th e treat ment principle: “Real disea se is to rush down his son and virtual disease is to fill his mother” based on “Yin Yang Wu Xing” Theory of TCM , is quite reasonable. On the other hand, in TCM, real disease and virtual disease have their reasons. Th e bear organ XS causes real disea se of X, while the born organ SX causes virtual dis ease of X. Altho ugh the rea s on cannot be proved easily in mathematics or experime nts, the treatment method under the assumption is quite equal to the treatment method in the intervention indirectly. It has also proved that the treatment pr inciple is true from the other side. 4.3. Treatment Principle if Two Organs with the Loving Relation of the Human Body System Encounter Sick Supp ose t hat t he t wo orga ns X and XS of the human body system are abnormal (or disease). In the human body of relations between noncompatible with the constraints, only two situations may occur: 1) X encounters virtual disease, and at the same time, XS befalls virtual disease, i.e., the energy of X is too low and the e ne r gy o f XS is also to o low. It is because X bears XS. The disease causal is X.
Y. S. ZHANG Copyright © 2011 SciRes. CM 2) X encounters real disease, and at the same time, XS befalls real disease, i.e., the energy of X is too high and the energy of XS is al so to o high. It is because X bears XS. The disease causal is XS. If intervention reaction coefficients satisfy , it can be sho wn by The ore m 3. 2 that if one wants to trea t the abnormal organs X and XS, then the following state ments are true. 1) For virtual disea se of both X and XS, t he one sho uld intervene organ X directly by increasing its energy. It means, “Virtual disease is to fill his mother” because the disease causal is X. 2) For real disease of both X and XS, the one should intervene organ XS directly by decreasing its energy. It means, “Real disease is to rush down his son” because the disease causal is XS. The intervention method can be to maintain the bal ance of the human body because only the energies of two disease organs are changed by using Theorem 3.2, such that there is no side effect for all other organs. And the interventi on method c an al so be to enhance the capability of intervention reaction because the method of using intervention reaction makes the ρ1 greater and near to 1. The state ρ1 = 1 is the best state of the human body sys tem. On the way, it almost has none medical and drug resistance problem since any medicine is possible good for some large ρ1. 4.4. Treatment Principle if Two Organs with the Killing Relation of the Human Body System Encounter Sick Suppose that the organs X and XK of a human body sys tem ar e abnormal (or disease). In the human body system of relations bet we e n no nco m patib le with the constraints, only a situation may occur: X encounters virtual disease, and at the same time, XK befalls real disease, i.e., the energy of X is too low and the energy of XK is too high. It is because it is nor mal when X kills XK but it i s abnormal when X doesn’t kill XK. If intervention reaction coefficients satisfy , it can be sho wn by The ore m 3.4 that if one wants to tr eat the abnormal organs X and XK, the one should intervene organ X di re c t ly by increasing its e nergy, a nd at the sa me time , intervene organ XK directly by decreasing its ener gy. It means that “Strong inhibition of the same time, support the weak”. The intervention method can be to maintain the bal ance of human body system because only two energies of both disease organs are changed by using Theorem 3.4, such that there is no side effect for all other organs. And the i nterve ntio n metho d can a lso b e to enha nce t he capa bility of intervention reaction because the method of us ing interve ntion reac tion makes the ρ1 greater and near to 1 such t hat X can kill XK. The state ρ1 = 1 i s t he b est sta te of the steady multilateral system. On the way, it almost has none medical and drug resistance problem since any medicine is possible good for some large ρ1. 5. Conclusions This work shows how to treat the diseases of a human body system and three methods are presented. If only one organ falls ill, mainly the treatment method should be to intervene it indirectly for case: the capability coef ficient ρ1 ≥ 0.5897545123 of intervention reaction, ac cording to the treatment principle of “Real disease is to rush down his son but virtual disease is to fill his moth er” . The int er ve nti o n method directly can be used in case ρ1 < 0.5897545123, but should be used as little as possi ble. If two organs with the loving relation encounter sick, the treatment method should be intervene them directly also according to the treatment principle of “Real disease is to rush down his son but virtual disease is to fill his mother”. If two organs with the killing relation encounter sick, the treatment method should intervene in them directly accord ing to the treatme nt principle of “Strong inhibition of the same time, support the weak”. Other properties such as balanced, orderly nature, and so on, will b e discusse d in t he next articles. 6. Acknowledgements This article has been repeatedly invited as reports, such as People’s University of China in medical meetings, Shanxi University, Xuchang College, and so on. The work was supported by Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of Ministry of Education of China (Grant No.44k55050). 7. Referen ces [1] Y. S. Zhang, “Multilateral Matrix Theory,” Chinese Sta tistics Press, 1993. http://www.mlmatrix.com [2] Y. S. Zhang, S. Q. Pang, Z. M. Jiao and W. Z. Zhao, “Group Partition and Systems of Orthogonal Idempo tents,” Linear Algebraand and Its A pp lications, Vol. 278, 1998, pp . 249262. [3] Y. S. Zhang, Y. Q. Lu and S. Q. Pang, “Orthogonal Ar rays Obtained by Orthogonal Decomposition of Projec tion Matrices,” Statistica Sinica, Vol. 9, 1999, pp. 595 604. [4] Y. S. Zhang, S. Q. Pang and Y. P. Wang, “Orthogonal Arrays Obtained by Generalized Hadamard Product,”
Y. S. ZHANG Copyright © 2011 SciRes. CM Discrete Math, Vol. 238, 2001, pp. 151170. doi:10.1016/S0012365X(00)004210 [5] Y. S. Zhang, L. Duan, Y. Q. Lu and Z. G. Zheng, “Con struction of Generalized Had amard Matrices,” Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, Vol. 104, 2002, pp. 239258. doi:10.1016/S03783758(01)00249X [6] Y. S. Zhang and S. S. Mao, “The Origin and Develop ment Philosophy Theory of Statistic,” Statistical Re search, Vol. 12, 2004, pp. 5259. [7] Y. S. Zhang, S. S. Mao, C. Z. Zhan and Z. G. Zheng, “Stable Structure of the Logic Model with Two Causal Effects,” Journal of Applied Probability & Statistics, Vol. 21, No. 4, 20 05, pp. 366374. [8] N. Q. Feng, Y. H. Qiu, F. Wang, Y. S. Zhang and S. Q. Yin, “A Logic Analysis Model about Complex System’s Stability: Enlightenment from Nature,” Lecture Notes in Compute r Sc ience, Vol. 364 4, 20 05, pp. 828838. [9] N. Q. F eng, Y. H . Qiu, Y . S. Zhang, F. Wang an d Y. He, “A Intelligent Inference Model about Complex System’s Stability: Inspiration from Nature, ” International Journal of Intelligent Technology, Vol. 1, 200 5, pp . 16. [10] N. Q. Feng, Y. H. Qiu, Y. S. Zhang, C. Z. Zhan and Z. G. Zheng, “A Logic Analysis Model of Stability of Complex System Based on Ecology,” Computer Science, Vol. 33, No. 7, 2006, pp. 213216. [11] Y. S. Zhang, “Data Analysis and Construction of Ortho gonal Arrays,” East China Normal University, 2006. [12] Y. S. Zhang, “Orthogonal Arrays Obtained by Repeat ingColu mn Differen ce Matrices, ” Discrete Mat hematics, Vol. 307, 2007, pp. 246261. doi:10.1016/j.disc.2006.06.029 [13] C. Y. Pan, X . P . Chen, Y. S. Zhang and S. S. Mao , “ Lo g ical Model of FiveElement Theory in Traditional Chi nese Medicine,” Journal of Chinese Modern Traditional Chinese Medicine, Vol. 4, No. 3, 2008, pp. 193196. [14] X. P. Chen, W. J. Zhu, C . Y. P an and Y. S. Zhang, “Mul tilateral System,” Journal of Systems Science, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2009, pp. 5557. [15] C. Luo and Y. S. Zhang, “Framework Definition and Partition Theorems Dealing with Complex Systems: One of the Series of New Thinking,” Journal of Shanghai In stitute of Technology (Natural Science), Vol. 10, No. 2, 2010, pp . 109114. [16] C. Luo and Y. S. Zhang, “Framework and Orthogonal Arrays: The New Thinking of Dealing with Complex Systems Series Two,” Journal of Shanghai Institute of Technology (Natural Science), Vol. 10, No. 3, 2010, pp. 159163. [17] X. D. Wang, Y. C. Tang, X. P. Chen and Y. S. Zhang, “Design of Experiment in Global Sensitivity Analysis Based on ANOVA HighDimen sio nal Mod el Rep resen ta tion,” Communication in Statistics: Simulation and Computation, Vol. 39, 2010, pp. 11831195. doi:10.1080/03610918.2010.484122 [18] Research Center for Chinese and Foreign Celebrities and Developing Center of Chinese Culture Resources, “Chi nese Philosophy Encyclopedia,” Shanghai People Press, 1994. [19] Y. S. Zhang, “Theory of Multilateral Systems,” 2007. http://www.mlmatrix.com
