REDUCTIONISM AND COMPLEXITY:CONTINUUM OR

DICHOTOMY?

DON MIKULECKY

PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF PHYSIOLOGY AND SENIOR FELLOW IN THE CENTER FOR THE STUDY

OF BIOLOGICAL COMPLEXITY-VCU

http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mikuleck/

ONE OF THE MAIN FUNCTIONS OF REDUCTIONISM IN SOCIETY

IF THE SYSTEM IS CORRUPT THEN HOW CAN A PERSON WHO WANTS NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN CORRUPTION BE A PARTICIPANT?

HE MUST REDUCE THE SYSTEM TO UNRELATED ENDEAVORS SO THAT HE CAN ESCAPE RECOGNIZING HIS PARTICIPATION IN THE CORRUPT WHOLE

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

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

IN ORDER TO SEE FURTHER THAN BEFORE IT IS OFTEN NECESSARY TO STAND ON THE SHOULDERS OF GIANTS!

SOME OF MY GIANTS:

AHARON KATZIR-KATCHALSKY (died in terrorist massacre in Lod Airport 1972)

LEONARDO PEUSNER (alive and well in Argentina)

ROBERT ROSEN (died December 29, 1998)

SOME REFERENCES

FOR A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ROSEN’S WORK: http://views.vcu.edu/complex/

Pusner, Leonardo: Two books on network thermodynamics

My book: Application of network thermodynamics to problems in biomedical engineering, NYU Press, 1993

Recent work:

New review:The Circle That Never Ends: Can Complexity Be Made Simple? In Complexity in Chemistry, Biology, and Ecology Bonchev, Danail D.; Rouvray, Dennis (Eds.) 2005

New Book: Into the Cool: Energy Flow, Thermodynamics and Life by: Eric D. Schneider and Dorion Sagan, University of Chicago Press, 2005

THE MODELING RELATION: THE ESSENCE OF SCIENCE ALLOWS US TO ASSIGN MEANING TO THE

WORLD AROUND US STANDS FOR 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

THE MODELING RELATION: A MODEL OF HOW WE MAKE MODELS, A SCIENCE OF FRAMING

NATURAL SYSTEM

FORMAL SYSTEM

NATURAL SYSTEM

FORMAL SYSTEM

ENCODING

DECODING

CAUSALEVENT

MANIPULATION

WE HAVE A USEFUL MODEL WHEN

ARE SATISFACTORY WAYS OF “UNDERSTANDING”THE CHANGE IN THE WORLD “OUT THERE”

THE MODELING RELATION: A MODEL OF HOW WE MAKE MODELS

NATURAL SYSTEM

FORMAL SYSTEM

NATURAL SYSTEM

FORMAL SYSTEM

ENCODING

DECODING

CAUSALEVENT

IMPLICATION

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

WHY IS “OBJECTIVITY” A MYTH? (OR: WHY IS SCIENCE A BELIEF STRUCTURE)

THE FORMAL SYSTEM DOES NOT AND CAN NOT TELL US HOW TO ENCODE AND DECODE. (MODELING IS AN ART!)

THE FORMAL SYSTEM DOES NOT AND CAN NOT TELL US WHEN THE MODEL WORKS, THAT IS A JUDGEMENT CALL EVEN IF OTHER FORMALISMS ARE ENLISTED TO HELP (FOR EXAMPLE: STATISTICS)

MODELS EXIST IN A CONTEXT: A FRAME

WHY WHAT “TRADITIONAL SCIENCE” DID TO THE MODELING RELATION MADE THE PRESENT SITUATION INEVITABLE:

WE ARE TOO AFRAID OF “BELIEFS” (SCEPTICISM IS “IN”)

WE DEVELOPED THE MYTH OF “OBJECTIVITY”

WHAT IS “FRAMING THE QUESTION”?

Based on the work of George Lakoff Cognitive Linguistics Frames are the mental structures that shape

the way we see the world Facts, data, models, etc. only have meaning

in a context Leads us to a scientific application of framing:

Rosen’s theory of complexity

Framing the question

Don’t think of an elephant Impossibility of avoiding the frame In science the dominant frame is reductionism

and the associated mechanical thinking The dominant modern manifestations include

molecular biology and nonlinear dynamics

WHY ARE THERE SO MANY DEFINITIONS OF COMPLEXITY?

SCIENTISTS FOCUS ON THE FORMAL DESCRIPTION RATHER THAN THE REAL WORLD

THE REAL WORLD IS COMPLEX FORMAL SYSTEMS COME IN VARYING

SHADES AND DEGREES OF COMPLICATION

Reductionism has framed complexity theory

Rather than change methods we have the changed names for what we do

The consequences are significant It is impossible for you to believe what is being taught in

this lecture and to then simply add it to your repertoire The reason is that in order to see the world in a new way

you have to step out of the traditional frame and into a new one. Once done, you can never go back. The ability to reframe a question is the basis for change and broadening of ideas.

WHAT “TRADITIONAL SCIENCE” DID TO FRAME THE MODELING RELATION

NATURAL SYSTEM

FORMAL SYSTEM

NATURAL SYSTEM

FORMAL SYSTEM

CAUSALEVENT

MANIPULATION

WHAT “TRADITIONAL SCIENCE” DID TO FRAME THE MODELING RELATION

NATURAL SYSTEM

FORMAL SYSTEM

NATURAL SYSTEM

FORMAL SYSTEM

MANIPULATION

WHY WHAT “TRADITIONAL SCIENCE” DID TO THE MODELING RELATION MADE THE PRESENT SITUATION INEVITABLE:

WE MORE OR LESS FORGOT THAT THERE WAS AN ENCODING AND DECODING

WHY WHAT “TRADITIONAL SCIENCE” DID TO THE MODELING RELATION MADE THE PRESENT SITUATION INEVITABLE: IT

FRAMED THE QUESTIN

THE “REAL WORLD” REQUIRES MORE THAN ONE “FORMAL SYSTEM” TO MODEL IT (THERE IS NO “UNIVERSAL MODEL”)

Syntax vs Semantics

The map is not the territory An equation is just an equation without

interpretation This means we use formalisms in a context This context dependence also exists in nature This is one reason why there can never be a

largest model

Context dependence necessarily introduces circularity

A process happens in a context The process usually changes that context If the context changes the process usually

changes as a result. Living systems are replete with examples

of this

SELF-REFERENCE, CIRCULARITY AND THE GENOME

REPLICATION

TRANSCRIPTION

HOMEOSTASIS

CAN WE GET RID OF SELF-REFERENCE, THAT IS, CIRCULARITY?

IT HAS BEEN TRIED IT FAILED THE ALTERNATIVE IS TO “GO AROUND”

IT – THAT IS TO IGNORE CASES WHERE IT POPS UP

WHAT IF IT IS VERY COMMON?

WHAT IS COMPLEXITY?

TOO MANY DEFINITIONS, SOME CONFLICTING OFTEN INTERCHANGED WITH “COMPLICATED” HAS A REAL MEANING BUT AFTER THE

QUESTION IS REFRAMED THAT MEANING ITSELF IS COMPLEX(THIS IS

SELF-REFERENTIAL: HOW CAN WE DEFINE “COMPLEX” USING “COMPLEX”?)

ROSEN’S CONCEPT FOR COMPLEXITY: A NEW FRAME

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

The Mexican sierra [fish] has "XVII-15-IX" spines in the dorsal fin. These can easily be counted ... We could, if we wished, describe the sierra thus: "D. XVII-15-IX; A. II-15-IX," but we could see the fish alive and swimming, feel it plunge against the lines, drag it threshing over the rail, and even finally eat it. And there is no reason why either approach should be inaccurate.

Spine-count description need not suffer because another approach is also used. Perhaps, out of the two approaches we thought there might emerge a picture more complete and even more accurate that either alone could produce. -- John Steinbeck, novelist, with Edward Ricketts, marine biologist (1941)

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

An Example of Reframing the question to get an answer : The work of Robert Rosen

What is life?

Why is an organism different from a machine?

ROBERT ROSEN: THE WELL POSED QUESTION AND ITS ANSWER-WHY ARE ORGANISMS DIFFERENT FROM MACHINES?

Rosen used relational ideas to apply category theory to living systems

These were called “Metabolism/Repair” systems oo M-R systems

Causal mappings were diagramed a syntax involving category theory mappings and the semantics were used along with this to apply the causal interpretaion

The result was a clear demonstration that the machine and the organism are disjoint in this context

An organism is closed to efficient cause while a machine is not

AMONG OTHER CONCLUSION THAT CAN BE DRAWN FROM THIS ELEGANT STUDY IS ONE THAT MIGHT SEEM SURPRISING

Since machines are causally impoverished, they lead to an infinite regress of causes.

Descartes led us to use the machine metaphor for organisms

In so doing he made a concept of God necessary Today, “Intelligent Design” is based on this

erroneous Cartesian metaphor: The Machine Metaphor

Real orgainisms are closed causually and escape this fallacy

WHAT IS SCIENCE?

HAS MANY DEFINTIONS SOME OF THESE ARE IN CONFLICT SCIENCE IS A BELIEF STRUCTURE SCIENCE OF METHOD VS SCIENCE OF

CONTENT

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT MAKE “COMPLEXITY THEORY” NECESSARY? (WHAT HAS “TRADITIONAL SCIENCE” FAILED TO EXPLAIN?)

WHY IS THE WHOLE MORE THAN THE SOME OF THE PARTS?

SELF-REFERENCE AND CIRCULARITY THE LIFE/ORGANISM PROBLEM THE MIND/BODY PROBLEM

CIRCULARITY (SELF-REFERENCE) CAUSES PROBLEMS FOR LOGIC AND SCIENCE

I AM A CORINTHIAN ALL CORINTHIANS ARE LIARS OR “THE STATEMENT ON THE OTHER SIDE

IS FALSE”-ON BOTH SIDES

WHERE DO CELLS COME FROM?

DNA? GENES? PROTEINS? OTHER CELLS? SPONTANEOUS GENERATION?

THE CELL THEORY

CELLS COME FROM OTHER CELLS

WHY WHAT “TRADITIONAL SCIENCE” DID TO THE QUESTION MADE THE PRESENT SITUATION INEVITABLE:

THE MACHINE METAPHOR TELLS US TO ASK “HOW?”

REAL WORLD COMPLEXITY TELLS US TO ASK “WHY?”

THE FOUR BECAUSES: WHY A HOUSE?

MATERIAL: THE STUFF IT’S MADE OF EFFICIENT: IT NEEDED A BUILDER FORMAL: THERE WAS A BLUEPRINT FINAL: IT HAS A PURPOSE

WHY IS THE WHOLE MORE THAN THE SOME OF THE PARTS?

BECAUSE REDUCING A REAL SYSTEM TO ATOMS AND MOLECULES LOOSES IMPORTANT THINGS THAT MAKE THE SYSTEM WHAT IT IS

BECAUSE THERE IS MORE TO REALITY THAN JUST ATOMS AND MOLECULES (ORGANIZATION, PROCESS, QUALITIES, ETC.)

SELF-REFERENCE AND CIRCULARITY

THE “LAWS” OF NATURE THAT TRADITIONAL SCIENCE TEACHES ARE ARTIFACTS OF A LIMITED MODEL

THE REAL “RULES OF THE GAME” ARE CONTEXT DEPENDENT AND EVER CHANGING- THEY MAKE THE CONTEXT AND THE CONTEXT MAKES THEM (SELF-REFERENCE)

EXAMPLE: THE LIFE/ORGANISM PROBLEM

LIFE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAWS OF PHYSICS

PHYSICS DOES NOT PREDICT LIFE LIVING CELLS COME FROM OTHER

LIVING CELLS AN ORGANISM MUST INVOLVE CLOSED

LOOPS OF CAUSALITY LIFE DOES INVOLVE PURPOSE: See Into

the cool

Complexity is inescapable even in reductionism Thermodynamics is an example of how

attempts to remove complexity from reductionist thought can not succeed

The nature of thermodynamic reasoning had resisted this tendency very well and we will look at why this is so

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

EXAMPLES:

CAROTHEODRY’S PROOF OF THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS

THE PROOF OF TELLEGEN’S THEOREM AND THE QUASI-POWER THEOREM

THE PROOF OF “ONSAGER’S” RECIPROCITY THEOREM

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

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”

THERMODYNAMICS OF OPEN SYSTEMS THE NATURE OF THERMODYNAMIC

REASONING HOW CAN LIFE FIGHT ENTROPY? WHAT ARE THERMODYNAMIC

NETWORKS?

DISSIPATION AND THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS

ENTROPY MUST INCREASE IN A REAL PROCESS

IN A CLOSED SYSTEM THIS MEANS IT WILL ALWAYS GO TO EQUILIBRIUM

LIVING SYSTEMS ARE CLEARLY “SELF - ORGANIZING SYSTEMS”

HOW DO THEY REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH THIS LAW?

HOW CAN LIFE FIGHT ENTROPY? DISSIPATION AND THE SECOND LAW OF

THERMODYNAMICS PHENOMENOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION OF

A SYTEM COUPLED PROCESSES STATIONARY STATES AWAY FROM

EQUILIBRIUM

PHENOMENOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION OF A SYTEM WE CHOSE TO LOOK AT FLOWS

“THROUGH” A STRUCTURE AND DIFFERENCES “ACROSS” THAT STRUCTURE (DRIVING FORCES)

EXAMPLES ARE DIFFUSION, BULK FLOW, CURRENT FLOW

A GENERALISATION FOR ALL LINEAR FLOW PROCESSES

FLOW = CONDUCTANCE x FORCE

FORCE = RESISTANCE x FLOW

CONDUCTANCE = 1/RESISTANCE

COUPLED PROCESSES

KEDEM AND KATCHALSKY, LATE 1950’S

J1 = L11 X1 + L12 X2

J2 = L21 X1 + L22 X2

STATIONARY STATES AWAY FROM EQUILIBRIUM

AND THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS

T Ds/dt = J1 X1 +J2 X2 > 0 EITHER TERM CAN BE NEGATIVE IF THE

OTHER IS POSITIVE AND OF GREATER MAGNITUDE

THUS COUPLING BETWEEN SYSTEMS ALLOWS THE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF SYSTEMS AS LONG AS THEY ARE OPEN!

STATIONARY STATES AWAY FROM EQUILIBRIUM LIKE A CIRCUIT REQUIRE A CONSTANT SOURCE OF

ENERGY SEEM TO BE TIME INDEPENDENT HAS A FLOW GOING THROUGH IT SYSTEM WILL GO TO EQUILIBRIUM IF

ISLOATED

HOMEOSTASIS IS LIKE A STEADY STATE AWAY FROM EQUILIBRIUM

INLET VALVE

OUTLETVALVE

PUMP

ORIFICE CONNECTING TANKS

RESERVOIR

IT HAS A CIRCUIT ANALOG

x L

J

THE RESTING CELL

High potassium Low Sodium Na/K ATPase pump Resting potential about 90 - 120

mV Osmotically balanced (constant

volume)

WHAT ARE THERMODYNAMIC NETWORKS? ELECTRICAL NETWORKS ARE

THERMODYNAMIC MOST DYNAMIC PHYSIOLOGICAL

PROCESSES ARE ANALOGS OF ELECTRICAL PROCESSES

COUPLED PROCESSES HAVE A NATURAL REPRESENTATION AS MULTI-PORT NETWORKS

ELECTRICAL NETWORKS ARE THERMODYNAMIC RESISTANCE IS ENERGY DISSIPATION

(TURNING “GOOD” ENERGY TO HEAT IRREVERSIBLY - LIKE FRICTION)

CAPACITANCE IS ENERGY WHICH IS STORED WITHOUT DISSIPATION

INDUCTANCE IS ANOTHER FORM OF STORAGE

A SUMMARY OF ALL LINEAR FLOW PROCESSES

PROCESS FLOW FORCE CONSTANT

DIFFUSION Jn /t

C=C1-C2 P

BULK FLOW Q p=p1-p2 LP

CURRENT

v/t

IV=V1-V2 G

MOST DYNAMIC PHYSIOLOGICAL PROCESSES ARE ANALOGS OF ELECTRICAL PROCESSES

x

LJ

C

COUPLED PROCESSES HAVE A NATURAL REPRESENTATION AS MULTI-PORT NETWORKS

x1

LJ1

C1x2C2

J2

An Epithelial Membrane in Cartoon Form:

A Network Model of Coupled Salt and Volume Flow Through an Epithelium

REACTION KINETICS AND THERMODYNAMIC NETWORKS

START WITH KINETIC DESRIPTION OF DYNAMICS

ENCODE AS A NETWORK TWO POSSIBLE KINDS OF ENCODINGS

AND THE REFERENCE STATE

EXAMPLE: ATP SYNTHESIS IN MITOCHONDRIA

EH+ <--------> [EH+]

E <-------------> [E]

EMEMBRANE

S

P

H+ [H+]

EXAMPLE: ATP SYNTHESIS IN MITOCHONDRIA-NETWORK I

IN THE REFERENCE STATE IT IS SIMPLY NETWORK II

x2L22

J1

x1

L11-L12 L22-L12

J2

THE SAME KINETIC SYSTEM HAS AT LEAST TWO NETWORK REPRESENTATIONS, BOTH VALID

ONE CAPTURES THE UNCONSTRAINED BEHAVIOR OF THE SYSTEM AND IS GENERALLY NON-LINEAR

THE OTHER IS ONLY VALID WHEN THE SYSTEM IS CONSTRAINED (IN A REFERENCE STATE) AND IS THE USUAL THERMODYNAMIC DESRIPTION OF A COUPLED SYSTEM

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)

CONCLUSIONS

THE REAL WORLD IS COMPLEX THE WORLD OF “SIMPLE MECHANISMS” IS A

SURROGATE WORLD CREATED BY TRADITIONAL SCIENCE

WE ARE AT A CROSSROADS: A NEW WORLDVIEW IS NEEDED

THERE WILL ALWAYS BE RISK ASSOCIATED WITH ATTEMPTS TO PROGRESS

YOUR CRYSTAL BALL MAY BE AS GOOD AS MINE OR BETTER

POST SCRIPT

WE LIVE IN A WORLD DOMINATED BY COMPUTERS MOST COMPLEXIFIERS BELIEVE THAT COMPLEXITY IS

SOMETHING WE CAN DEAL WITH ON THE COMPUTER THIS NOTION OF COMPLEXITY FOCUSES ON THE

MECHANICAL ASPECTS OF THE REAL WORLD WHAT MAKES THE REAL WORLD COMPLEX IS ITS NON-

COMPUTABILITY