© 2005, Alfredo Suzuki, Ph.D.
What is complexity? A working
definition for it that I am considering here is that of a state or condition of
something difficult to understand, explain or describe. By irreproducible
complexity I mean the state or condition that cannot be reproduced by our best
human efforts, both theoretically and technically.
And if we are plainly free of any
preconceived ideas about things, we will discover that there are plenty of
those things that we cannot explain satisfactorily, although we can deceive
ourselves trying to mimic a "satisfactory" answer and "make
believe" we satisfy ourselves with such and such explanation. None of the
essential "why" questions can be really answered only by means of
mere objective science. Take for example the question of why water is liquid?
You can try to explain it in terms of hydrogen bonding of water molecules, as I
said, trying to mimic a "scientifically satisfactory" answer, but why
is it liquid? What makes it the liquid as it is? I doubt that anyone has a clue
to that. Not even the smartest chemist, Nobel prize awarded, has any idea of
the true reason why water is liquid. We can come up with all sorts of
"plausible" explanations to that, in terms of atomic/molecular
strucutre and characteristic interactions of molecules that are present in it,
but ultimately, why this kind of structure and that kind of interaction is
present in the water molecule in the first place, to make it behave as it does?
No clue at all. We can at best describe
the resulting behavior of water molecules, considering the kind of structure
they do have, that is, two hydrogen atoms bonded to an oxygen atom so that each
of the hydrogen atoms are approximately 104 degrees apart from each other.
Then, there is this group of
people which is (so humanly typical) stereotyped as the ID (Intelligent Design)
people, which introduced the terminology of "irreducible
complexity" to systems such as the living cell. I would argue that
such terminology is not appropriate to describe a cell; it is inadequate in its
essence. However, since the camp of evolutionist believers goes to great extent
in their attempt to have their cosmic view considered as the only and
"correct" view of the universe we live in (by the way a most preposterous
view, to say the least), the efforts of the ID people to argue back such
sophistry is welcome and helpful.
Yet there seems to be necessary a
more complete and thorough consideration on the essence of a living cell, and
by extension, of life itself. So I have no apologies to take the same approach
as the ID "irreducible complex" theme, to introduce a novel concept.
An incandescent electric bulb may be irreducibly complex in that without its
filament it won't work, without its conducting metal parts correctly set up it
won't work, without its inert gas within the bulb it would blow up very
quickly, etc. But even with all the elements of an incandescent bulb correctly
set up and working properly, it won't give any light unless connected to an
electricity outlet, a power source. This electricity, provided by a power
source, is what I call the exogenous (or
extrinsic) essential element (E cubed), without which an incandescent
electric bulb is useless, as far its function of giving light is concerned.
In the same way, a living cell,
which by the ID hypothesis is irreducibly complex, won't work, won't live
without the exogenous (or extrinsic)
essential element which we call life stemming from an ouside source. After
all, what is the difference between the living body and a dead corpse of
someone who just passed away? Nothing, as far as the raw materials with which
they are composed of are concerned. They both have the same chemical elements,
they both are formed with the same prime matter. Yet, as the difference between
a lighted and a non lighted lamp is notorious, so it is the difference between
a living body and a corpse. A living body has running inside it and through its
inner parts, a tremendous amount of information processing; information which
is not part of the matter, since it has no mass and no inherent material
qualities, but "rides" on matter, "writes",
"reads", "translates" and communicates through the medium
of chemical compounds and so forth, the essential exogenous element which we
call life, whose Source is God. No one and nothing else can be. In other words,
a cell must be more than "simply" an irreducible complex system; it
has to have an outside source of information that makes all the internal
"machinery" finely tunned to function. Life, for the cell is like the
electricity for the incandescent electric bulb, though the similarity is by far
very very crude.
Given that information and
information processing reduce the uncertainty within a given system, it follows
that the physical attribute which we call logic entropy, S = - k ln Q, with k a
constant and Q the amount of information within the system, always increases
when information is lost. A mutation within a cell is in essence information
loss, and therefore increases the logic entropy within the system. On the other
hand, given also that no random process can generate information, that is, no
random process can reduce the uncertainty within a given system - on the
contrary - as we just saw, it increases its uncertainty, it follows that life
could not and cannot originate by random processes, simply by the concourse of
matter and energy.
Therefore, according to the most
sound information theory and recent scientific findings and arguments, life
does not, and cannot originate by itself from matter and energy alone. It needs
an Exogenous Essential Element from outiside matter. It needs God, it needs a
Creator God!