Addy Pross

And the direction is very simple as that simple differential equation that I described earlier states. Systems go from less persistent to more persistent. But something here also has to be stated because it confuses biologists a lot and it troubled me initially. If I'm saying there's this tendency towards greater complexity, why are bacteria still around? Because they're simple.

And the direction is very simple as that simple differential equation that I described earlier states. Systems go from less persistent to more persistent. But something here also has to be stated because it confuses biologists a lot and it troubled me initially. If I'm saying there's this tendency towards greater complexity, why are bacteria still around? Because they're simple.

So that seems to counter the complexification argument. The answer is bacteria aren't simple at all. They live in in networks, they don't live individually and all life is increasingly an interconnected network where all the living things are interacting with one another Your microbiome lives very comfortably off you. So it's wrong to think of bacteria as an individual as simple.

So that seems to counter the complexification argument. The answer is bacteria aren't simple at all. They live in in networks, they don't live individually and all life is increasingly an interconnected network where all the living things are interacting with one another Your microbiome lives very comfortably off you. So it's wrong to think of bacteria as an individual as simple.

But life is a complex network, and it's complexifying all the time. And that's why life has basically taken over the planet. It's everywhere in this very intricate network. And it goes back to the Gaia ideas of, who was it, Lovelock? Lovelock, yeah. It's very interesting that now biologists are starting to say, hey, you know what?

But life is a complex network, and it's complexifying all the time. And that's why life has basically taken over the planet. It's everywhere in this very intricate network. And it goes back to the Gaia ideas of, who was it, Lovelock? Lovelock, yeah. It's very interesting that now biologists are starting to say, hey, you know what?

Maybe modern biologists recently are starting to say maybe he was onto something and one should view life as almost… I don't want to say one system, but there is something in that idea that it's a dynamic system where everything is connected to everything else.

Maybe modern biologists recently are starting to say maybe he was onto something and one should view life as almost… I don't want to say one system, but there is something in that idea that it's a dynamic system where everything is connected to everything else.

Look, there's no question that the power behind life expanding as it has is the power of replication. If you take one single fertilized egg, a human fertilized egg, it undergoes something like 40 to 45 acts of replication to become something like 50 or 70 trillion cells. I mean, the kinetic power of replication is awesome.

Look, there's no question that the power behind life expanding as it has is the power of replication. If you take one single fertilized egg, a human fertilized egg, it undergoes something like 40 to 45 acts of replication to become something like 50 or 70 trillion cells. I mean, the kinetic power of replication is awesome.

But of course, as Malthus pointed out some years ago, you can't keep doing that. You run out of resources. So what happens is the best you can hope for, and this is where we are all the time, a balance. You have rate of formation balanced by a rate of decay, and these have to be balanced. attuned to one another.

But of course, as Malthus pointed out some years ago, you can't keep doing that. You run out of resources. So what happens is the best you can hope for, and this is where we are all the time, a balance. You have rate of formation balanced by a rate of decay, and these have to be balanced. attuned to one another.

So flies replicate at a rate that requires them to live for one day because that's when the balance comes about. Humans, it's close to 100 years for that balance to be maintained, though I'm beginning to worry about that because we've become, you know, We're starting to edge towards that 9 billion or whatever.

So flies replicate at a rate that requires them to live for one day because that's when the balance comes about. Humans, it's close to 100 years for that balance to be maintained, though I'm beginning to worry about that because we've become, you know, We're starting to edge towards that 9 billion or whatever.

But maybe that'll... Because once you... Nature, once replication forgets about that Malthusian rule, nature is very cruel. Nature doesn't forgive. And it comes back one way or another back to equilibrium, either kindly or unkindly.

But maybe that'll... Because once you... Nature, once replication forgets about that Malthusian rule, nature is very cruel. Nature doesn't forgive. And it comes back one way or another back to equilibrium, either kindly or unkindly.

Yeah. Well, I owe a lot of credit to a young guy, Steve Grant, who wrote a wonderful book in the year 2000, Creation, where he said a statement that I saw was barely acknowledged in the literature. He said, the most important law of nature. That's quite an introduction to a law that you want to propose.

Yeah. Well, I owe a lot of credit to a young guy, Steve Grant, who wrote a wonderful book in the year 2000, Creation, where he said a statement that I saw was barely acknowledged in the literature. He said, the most important law of nature. That's quite an introduction to a law that you want to propose.

And his most important law of nature was things that persist persist and things that don't don't. So he was claiming that a tautology was the most important law of nature. Well, I think that can be improved a little bit, taken away from being a tautology and changed to there's a general tendency for things to go from less persistent to more persistent.

And his most important law of nature was things that persist persist and things that don't don't. So he was claiming that a tautology was the most important law of nature. Well, I think that can be improved a little bit, taken away from being a tautology and changed to there's a general tendency for things to go from less persistent to more persistent.