IF THE WHOLE WORLD IS COMPLEX, WHY BOTHER?

1
IF THE WHOLE WORLD IS COMPLEX, WHY BOTHER?

• D. C. MIKULECKY
• PROFESSOR OF PHYSIOLOGY
• VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY
• http//views.vcu.edu/mikuleck/

2
WHAT I HOPE TO ACCOMPLISH

• PROVIDE A UNIQUE, WORKABLE CONCEPT OF COMPLEXITY
• MAKE A CLEAR DISTICTION BETWEEN THE REAL WORLD
  AND THOSE FORMAL THINGS WE DO TO TRY TO MODEL IT
• SHOW HOW THE FORMAL DESCRIPTION OF THE REAL WORLD
  REDUCES IT TO SIMPLE MECHANISMS
• PROVIDE EXAMPLES OF BOTH MECHANISTIC AND
  RELATIONAL MODELS OF THE WORLD
• USE THE DEFINITION OF ORGANISM TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT
  CAN BE DONE BY STEPPING OUT OF THE TRADITIONAL
  FRAMEWORK

3
CAN WE DEFINE COMPLEXITY?

• Complexity is the property of a real world
  system that is manifest in the inability of any
  one formalism being adequate to capture all its
  properties. It requires that we find distinctly
  different ways of interacting with systems.
  Distinctly different in
• the sense that when we make successful
  models, the formal systems needed to describe
  each distinct aspect are NOT
• derivable from each other

4
COMPLEXITY VS COMPLICATION

• Von NEUMAN THOUGHT THAT A CRITICAL LEVEL OF
  SYSTEM SIZE WOULD TRIGGER THE ONSET OF
  COMPLEXITY (REALLY COMPLICATION)
• COMPLEXITY IS MORE A FUNCTION OF SYSTEM QUALITIES
  RATHER THAN SIZE
• COMPLEXITY RESULTS FROM BIFURCATIONS -NOT IN THE
  DYNAMICS, BUT IN THE DESCRIPTION!
• THUS COMPLEX SYSTEMS REQUIRE THAT THEY BE ENCODED
  INTO MORE THAN ONE FORMAL SYSTEM IN ORDER TO BE
  MORE COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD

5
NATURAL VS FORMAL SYSTEMS

• THE REAL WORLD IS COMPLEX
• WE HAVE TREATED IT FORMALLY AS IF IT WERE SIMPLE
• THE RESULT IS THE DISCOVERY OF COMPLEXITY,
  EMERGENCE,ETC.
• THE IDEA IS BEST SEEN USING THE MODELING RELATION

6
THE MODELING RELATION THE ESSENCE OF SCIENCE

• ALLOWS US TO ASSIGN MEANING TO THE WORLD AROUND
  US
• A MODEL OF OUR THINKING PROCESS
• CAUSALITY IN THE NATURAL SYSTEM IS DEALT WITH
  THROUGH IMPLICATION IN A FORMAL SYSTEM
• THERE IS AN ENCODING OF THE NATURAL SYSTEM INTO
  THE FORMAL SYSTEM AND A DECODING BACK
• WHEN IT ALL HANGS TOGETHER WE HAVE A MODEL

7
THE MODELING RELATION A MODEL OF HOW WE MAKE
MODELS
ENCODING
NATURAL SYSTEM
FORMAL SYSTEM
CAUSAL EVENT
IMPLICATION
DECODING
FORMAL SYSTEM
NATURAL SYSTEM
8
WE HAVE A USEFUL MODEL WHEN
AND
ARE SATISFACTORY WAYS OF UNDERSTANDING THE
CHANGE IN THE WORLD OUT THERE
9
THE MODELING RELATION A MODEL OF HOW WE MAKE
MODELS
ENCODING
NATURAL SYSTEM
FORMAL SYSTEM
CAUSAL EVENT
MANIPULATION
DECODING
FORMAL SYSTEM
NATURAL SYSTEM
10
WHAT TRADITIONAL SCIENCE DID TO THE MODELING
RELATION
FORMAL SYSTEM
NATURAL SYSTEM
MANIPULATION
CAUSAL EVENT
FORMAL SYSTEM
NATURAL SYSTEM
11
WHAT TRADITIONAL SCIENCE DID TO THE MODELING
RELATION
FORMAL SYSTEM
NATURAL SYSTEM
MANIPULATION
FORMAL SYSTEM
NATURAL SYSTEM
12
MORE ON THE MODELING RELATION

• THE FORMAL SYSTEM DOES NOT INCLUDE INFORMATION
  ABOUT ENCODING AND/OR DECODING
• THEREFORE MODELING WILL ALWAYS BE AN ART
• ONLY IN THE NEWTONIAN PARADIGM DOES THE FORMAL
  SYSTEM BECOME THE NATURAL SYSTEM (ENCODING AND
  DECODING ARE AUTOMATIC) AND ALL THAT IS LEFT TO
  DO IS TO MEASURE THINGS

13
SCIENCE REDUCED THE WORLD TO SIMPLE MECHANISMS

• THE USUAL SCIENTIFIC PICTURE OF REALITY IS A
  MECHANISM
• DEFICIENT IN CAUSAL RELATIONS
• FRAGMENTABLE TO ATOMS AND MOLECULES
• NOT GENERIC BUT TREATED AS IF THEY WERE

14
COMPLEXITY

• REQUIRES A CIRCLE OF IDEAS AND METHODS THAT
  DEPART RADICALLY FROM THOSE TAKEN AS AXIOMATIC
  FOR THE PAST 300 YEARS
• OUR CURRENT SYSTEMS THEORY, INCLUDING ALL THAT IS
  TAKEN FROM PHYSICS OR PHYSICAL SCIENCE, DEALS
  EXCLUSIVELY WITH SIMPLE SYSTEMS OR MECHANISMS
• COMPLEX AND SIMPLE SYSTEMS ARE DISJOINT
  CATEGORIES

15
COMPLEX SYSTEMS VS SIMPLE MECHANISMS

• COMPLEX
• NO LARGEST MODEL
• WHOLE MORE THAN SUM OF PARTS
• CAUSAL RELATIONS RICH AND INTERTWINED
• GENERIC
• ANALYTIC ? SYNTHETIC
• NON-FRAGMENTABLE
• NON-COMPUTABLE
• REAL WORLD

• SIMPLE
• LARGEST MODEL
• WHOLE IS SUM OF PARTS
• CAUSAL RELATIONS DISTINCT
• N0N-GENERIC
• ANALYTIC SYNTHETIC
• FRAGMENTABLE
• COMPUTABLE
• FORMAL SYSTEM

16
GENERICITY AND SURROGACY

• GENERIC PROPERTIES ARE THOSE POSSESED BY ALL THE
  MEMBERS OF A CLASS (AS OPPOSED TO SPECIAL
  PROPERTIES WHICH DISTINGUISH THE MEMBERS OF A
  CLASS)
• SURROGACY IS THE ABILITY TO EXTRAPOLATE ONES
  MEASUREMENTS ON A FEW INDIVIDUALS TO THE GROUP

17
COMPLEXITY AND EMERGENCE

• THE GENERIC ASPECT OF REAL SYSTEMS IS THAT THEY
  ARE ALL COMPLEX
• THIS COMPLEXITY WORKS AGAINST SURROGACY AND LEADS
  TO THE NOTION OF EMERGENCE

18
WHY IS ORGANIZATION SPECIAL? BEYOND MERE ATOMS
AND MOLECULES

• IS THE WHOLE MORE THAN THE SUM OF ITS PARTS?
• IF IT IS THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS LOST WHEN WE
  BREAK IT DOWN TO ATOMS AND MOLECULES
• THAT SOMETHING MUST EXIST

19
WHAT IS ORGANIZATION?
DICTIONARY DEFINITION NOUN 1. THE ACT OR
PROCESS OF BEING ORGANIZED 2.THE CONDITION OR
MANNER OF BEING ORGANIZED (ALSO ASSOCIATION OR
SOCIETY AND ITS PERSONNEL)
20
TO ORGANIZE
DICTIONARY DEFINITION VERB 1. TO CAUSE OR
DEVELOP AN ORGANIC STRUCTURE 2. TO ARRANGE OR
FORM INTO A COHERENT UNITYOR FUNCTIONING WHOLE,
TO INTEGRATE 3. TO ARRANGE ELEMENTS INTO A
WHOLE OF INTERDEPENDENT PARTS
21
NOUN OR VERB OR ADJECTIVE?

• AN ORGANIZED DESK
• AN ORGANIZED CORPORATION
• AN ORGANIZED AUTOMOBILE
• AN ORGANIZED FROG
• AN ORGANIZED ECOSYSTEM

22
WHAT MAKES BIOLOGICAL ORGANIZATION UNIQUE?

• SELF-REFERENCE
• CONTINGENCY
• PARALLEL DISTRIBUTION
• MAPPINGS ARE MANY TO MANY RATHER THAN ONE TO ONE
• CAUSALITY IS INTERTWINED
• CATABOLISM AND ANABOLISM ARE BOTH IMPORTANT
• MECHANISMS ARE SPECIAL

23
EVEN IN THE WORLD OF MECHANISMS THERE ARETHE
SEEDS OF COMPLEXITY THEORY

• THERMODYNAMIC REASONING
• OPEN SYSTEMS THERMODYNAMICS
• NETWORK THERMODYNAMICS

24
THE NATURE OF THERMODYNAMIC REASONING

• THERMODYNAMICS IS ABOUT THOSE PROPERTIES OF
  SYSTEMS WHICH ARE TRUE INDEPENDENT OF MECHANISM
• THEREFORE WE CAN NOT LEARN TO DISTINGUISH
  MECHANISMS BY THERMODYNAMIC REASONING

25
THERMODYNAMICS OF OPEN SYSTEMS

• THE NATURE OF THERMODYNAMIC REASONING
• HOW CAN LIFE FIGHT ENTROPY?
• WHAT ARE THERMODYNAMIC NETWORKS?

26
NETWORKS IN NATURE

• NATURE EDITORIAL VOL 234, DECEMBER 17, 1971,
  pp380-381
• KATCHALSKY AND HIS COLLEAGUES SHOW, WITH
  EXAMPLES FROM MEMBRANE SYSTEMS, HOW THE
  TECHNIQUES DEVELOPED IN ENGINEERING SYSTEMS MIGHT
  BE APPLIED TO THE EXTREMELY HIGHLY CONNECTED AND
  INHOMOGENEOUS PATTERNS OF FORCES AND FLUXES WHICH
  ARE CHARACTERISTIC OF CELL BIOLOGY

27
MY BOOK

• APPLICATION OF NETWORK THERMODYNAMICS TO PROBLEMS
  IN BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, NYU PRESS, 1993
• PREFACE, CONTENTS AND REFERENCES ARE ON MY WEB
  PAGE
• http//views.vcu.edu/mikuleck/

28
SOME PUBLISHED NETWORK MODELS OF PHYSIOLOGICAL
SYSTEMS

• SR (BRIGGS,FEHER)
• GLOMERULUS (OKEN)
• ADIPOCYTE GLUCOSE TRANSPORT AND METABOLISM (MAY)
• FROG SKIN MODEL (HUF)
• TOAD BLADDER (MINZ)

• KIDNEY (FIDELMAN,WATTLINGTON)
• FOLATE METABOLISM (GOLDMAN, WHITE)
• ATP SYNTHETASE (CAPLAN, PIETROBON, AZZONE)

29
AN EXAMPLE SODIUM TRANSPORTING EPITHELIA

• CAN BE GROWN IN CULTURE
• HAVE A DISTINCT ORGANIZATION WHICH IS NECESSARY
  AND SUFFICIENT FOR THEIR FUNCTION
• UNDERGO A TRANSFORMATION AS THE EPITHELIUM
  DEVELOPS IN CULTURE

30
An Epithelial Membrane in Cartoon Form
31
A Network Model of Coupled Salt and Volume Flow
Through an Epithelium
32
WHAT IS THE NETWORK THERMODYNAMIC MODEL?

• IT CAPTURES ORGANIZATION AS THE NETWORKS
  TOPOLOGY
• SPHERICAL CELL - SIMPLE TOPOLOGY
• FUNCTIONAL EPITHELIUM - SAME CELL DEVELOPS A MORE
  COMPLICATED TOPOLOGY

33
LIMITS OF THE NETWORK THERMODYNAMIC MODEL

• IT CAN MODEL EITHER CASE, BUT THESE MODELS
  CONTAIN NO INFORMATION ABOUT WHY ONE TRANSFORMS
  INTO THE OTHER
• IT CAN NOT MODEL THE TRANSITION AS WELL
• THE REAL SYSTEM IS COMPLEX

34
MISSING ASPECTS OF THE TRANSITION TO BE MODELED

• CELL SIGNALLING EVENTS
• NUCLEAR EVENT
• MECHANICAL EVENTS
• ONSET OF EMERGENT FUNCTION

35
WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED?

• FORMALISMS HAVE LIMITS (GÖDEL)
• THEREFORE ONE FORMALISM IS NOT ENOUGH
• MECHANISTIC FORMALISMS ARE INADEQUATE FOR CERTAIN
  PROPERTIES, IN PARTICULAR CHANGES IN ORGANIZATION

36
WHAT ABOUT OTHER FORMALISMS?

• RELATIONAL
• OTHERS

37
THE RELATIONAL APPROACH TO A COMPLEX REALITY

• FOCUS ON THE ORGANIZATION
• DEVELOP A SET OF FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS WHICH
  CAPTURE THAT ORGANIZATION
• UTILIZE THE CAUSAL RELATIONS RESULTING FROM
  ANSWERING WHY?

38
FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS

• MUST POSSESS ENOUGH IDENTITY TO BE CONSIDERED A
  THING
• MUST BE ABLE TO ACQUIRE PROPERTIES FROM LARGER
  SYSTEMS TO WHICH IT MAY BELONG
• ITS FORMAL IMAGE IS A MAPPING
  f A -----gt B
• THIS INTRODUCES A NEW KIND OF DYNAMICS
  RELATIONAL

39
THE FOUR BECAUSES WHY A HOUSE?

• MATERIAL THE STUFF ITS MADE OF
• EFFICIENT IT NEEDED A BUILDER
• FORMAL THERE WAS A BLUEPRINT
• FINAL IT HAS A PURPOSE

40
METABOLISM/REPAIR SYSTEMS

• BASED ON INPUT/OUTPUT REPRESENTATIONS OF SYSTEMS
• MORE ABSTRACT
• ALLOW CAUSALITY TO BE REPRESENTED
• LEAD TO NEW INFORMATION
• ARE BASED ON RECOGNITION THAT BUILDING UP AND
  TEARING DOWN ARE PART OF THE LIFE PROCESS

41
THE IMPORTANCE OF CATABOLISM AND ANABOLISM

• NO STRUCTURE IS PERMANENT
• ADAPTABILITY AND CHANGE INHERENT
• NEEDS SPECIAL TYPE OF ORGANIZATION
• IMPORTANT FOR UNDERSTANDING EVOLUTION,
  DEVELOPMENT, AND HEALING

42
THE RELATIONAL REPRESENTATION

• INVOLVES MAPPINGS
• METABOLISM IS f A ? B
• A REPRESENTS METABOLITES WHICH CAN ALSO EXCHANGE
  WITH THE ENVIRONMENT
• B REPRESENTS THE RESULTS OF METABOLISM
• f IS A MAPPING FROM A TO B

43
THE CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS

• A IS THE MATERIAL CAUSE OF B (DOTTED ARROW)
• f IS THE EFFICIENT CAUSE OF B
• OTHER COMPONENTS FOR REPAIR AND REPLICATION COME
  IN BECAUSE THESE COMPONENTS HAVE A FINITE
  LIFETIME CATABOLISM AND ANABOLISM OR TURNOVER

44
ROSENS RELATIONAL MODEL OF THE ORGANISM
45
ROSENS RELATIONAL MODEL OF THE ORGANISM
46
ROSENS RELATIONAL MODEL OF THE ORGANISM
47
ORGANISMS

• ARE COMPLEX SYSTEMS
• ARE CLOSED TO EFFICIENT CAUSE
• ARE AUTOPOIETIC UNITIES

48
SOME CONSEQUENCES

• REDUCTIONISM DID SERIOUS DAMAGE TO THERMODYNAMICS
• THERMODYNAMICS IS MORE IN HARMONY WITH
  TOPOLOGICAL MATHEMATICS THAN IT IS WITH
  ANALYTICAL MATHEMATICS
• THUS TOPOLOGY AND NOT MOLECULAR STATISTICS IS THE
  FUNDAMENTAL TOOL

49
EXAMPLES

• CAROTHEODRYS PROOF OF THE SECOND LAW OF
  THERMODYNAMICS
• THE PROOF OF TELLEGENS THEOREM AND THE
  QUASI-POWER THEOREM
• THE PROOF OF ONSAGERS RECIPROCITY THEOREM

50
RELATIONAL NETWORKS

• THROW AWAY THE PHYSICS, KEEP THE ORGANIZATION
• DYNAMICS BECOMES A MAPPING BETWEEN SETS
• TIME IS IMPLICIT
• USE FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS-WHICH DO NOT MAP INTO
  ATOMS AND MOLECULES 11 AND WHICH ARE IRREDUCABLE

51
THE NEW VITALISM

• LIVING SYSTEMS POSESS A TYPE OF ORGANIZATION
  WHICH NON-LIVING SYSTEMS DO NOT
• THIS BIOLOGICAL ORGANIZATION WILL ALWAYS DEFY
  FORMALIZATION-IT HAS NON-COMPUTABLE COMPONENTS