Managerial Informatics

The energy of the first excited state in the neutron-rich N = 28 nucleus 45 Cl has been established via in-beam γ-ray spectroscopy following proton removal. This energy value completes the systematics of the E(1/2 + 1 ) − E(3/2 + 1 ) level spacing in odd-mass K, Cl and P isotopes for N = 20 − 28. The results are discussed in the framework of shell-model calculations in the sd-f p model space. The contribution of the central, spin-orbit and tensor components is discussed from a calculation based on a proton single-hole spectrum from G-matrix and π + ρ meson exchange potentials. A composite model for the proton 0d 3/2 − 1s 1/2 single-particle energy shift is presented. PACS numbers: 23.20.Lv, 21.60.Cs, 25.70.Mn, 27.40.+z Neutron-rich nuclei in the neighborhood of 44 S have attracted much attention in recent years. The question whether the high degree of collectivity observed for 42,44 S [1, 2] is due to a breakdown of the N = 28 neutronmagic number or the collapse of the Z = 16 proton subshell gap at neutron number 28 is much discussed in the literature . The vanishing of the Z = 16 subshell closure was inferred from the near-degeneracy of the proton s 1/2 and d 3/2 orbitals in the chain of K isotopes as N = 28 is approached .

The energy of the first excited state in the neutron-rich N = 28 nucleus 45 Cl has been established via in-beam γ-ray spectroscopy following proton removal. This energy value completes the systematics of the E(1/2 + 1 ) − E(3/2 + 1 ) level spacing in odd-mass K, Cl and P isotopes for N = 20 − 28. The results are discussed in the framework of shell-model calculations in the sd-f p model space. The contribution of the central, spin-orbit and tensor components is discussed from a calculation based on a proton single-hole spectrum from G-matrix and π + ρ meson exchange potentials. A composite model for the proton 0d 3/2 − 1s 1/2 single-particle energy shift is presented. PACS numbers: 23.20.Lv, 21.60.Cs, 25.70.Mn, 27.40.+z Neutron-rich nuclei in the neighborhood of 44 S have attracted much attention in recent years. The question whether the high degree of collectivity observed for 42,44 S [1, 2] is due to a breakdown of the N = 28 neutronmagic number or the collapse of the Z = 16 proton subshell gap at neutron number 28 is much discussed in the literature . The vanishing of the Z = 16 subshell closure was inferred from the near-degeneracy of the proton s 1/2 and d 3/2 orbitals in the chain of K isotopes as N = 28 is approached .

The paper presents the basic mathematical concepts of the ergodic finite homogenous Markov chains, necessary to understand the methods of their estimation and simulation. The computing methods are implemented into several customizable MS Excel worksheets, with numeric applications for regular and cyclical Markov chains.

In the view of analyzing the differences and resemblances of the natural and social sciences (with the economics between them), some of their ontological and epistemological problems and solutions are presented. The options for the interactionist, evolutionist and probabilistic-determinist ontological solutions, for the union of explanation and understanding, of iterative analytic and synthetic methods, as for a humanist naturalism (or substantialist) philosophy, are sustained by using both the structural and historical approaches. All these options succeed to preserve the basic unity and autonomy of the natural and human ontological domains and, alike, of their corresponding sciences.

Based on the ontological and epistemological problems and solutions exposed in the previous paper ('Probleme ale filozofiei stiintelor'), we engage in an analysis of the philosophical grounds of three main
schools of economics (Austrian, neo-Keynesian, and neo-Marxian). A careful and unprejudiced examination of the original writings shows that the common ideas and labels (reductionism vs. holism, individualism vs. institutionalism, positivism vs. dialectics, apriorism vs. inductionism etc.) on these schools are misleading. They are not opposing one another as solid blocks of incompatible ideas and theories, but each school contains different approaches and trends, which maintain
their internal life and sustain the dialogue between them.

In the first part (§§1-3), based on the ontological and epistemological problems and solutions and on the analysis of the philosophical grounds of three main schools of economics, exposed in the previous papers, a short overview of the philosophy of the multilevel reality is undertaken. It is shown that the hierarchy of the sciences is not only formal, but corresponds to a true organization of the reality into levels with specific
components and properties. There is an interaction between the components of a level and the respective level itself (as a structural unit). Moreover, a lower level is conditioning its upper level, while the last one is acting on the first one (that is, they interact, too). The degree of freedom and plasticity grows from the microphysical level to the human one. Individual cognition is a process of reciprocal action and accommodation between subject and object, between different subjects, of their ensemble and the whole world. The evolution of scientific and philosophic methodologies of Descartes, Newton, Hegel and Marx is analysed, in relation to their ontologies and hierarchies of sciences, showing the continuities and discontinuities of this evolution. The possibilities and the limits of applying dialectics in natural and social sciences are explored through the views of A. Popovici, G.
Gurvitch, J. Piaget and J.-P. Sartre. In the second part (§§4-5), which will be published latter, the applications of this philosophy in micro- and macroeconomics will be described.

In the first part (§§1-3), an overview of the philosophy of the multilevel reality was undertaken. In the second part (§§4-5), some applications of this approach in economics are exposed. In microeconomics, both the mathematical statement of the multilevel decision processes, and the object modeling of the organizations are described. The problem of the aggregation of the economic data is approached within the micro-, meso- and macroeconomic levels framework, and a solution is sketched, for utililities (use values) and exchange values. At last, the relationships of Juglar and Kondratieff cycles with the levels of production branches and primary energy technologies are analysed and explained, using the economical and technological levels of the production processes and
the mathematical models of M. Kalecki and A. Popovici. The possibility of a flexible and distributed macroeconomic planning is also explored.