Why Is the Cell So Complex? - Molecular Theory of the Living Cell - page 571

Chapter 17
Why Is the Cell So Complex?
It is useful to compare the complexity of the living cell with that of the atom.
If the complexity of a physical system is expressed in terms of the algorithmic
information content (defined as the number of words or bits needed to describe a
system; see Sect. 4.3 ) and if we assume that the algorithmic information content of
a system is approximately proportional to its volume, the complexity of the average
cell would be about 10 15 times that of the hydrogen atom (see Table 10.3 ) . Think of
the number of the articles (and the words or symbols in them) that have been
published describing the essential features of the hydrogen atom, which can be
easily in the hundreds. Then the number of the papers that would be needed to
describe the essential features of the living cell could well reach 10 17 , a number
equivalent to about a million papers written per person now living on this planet!
This is probably why there are so many biological papers published every week
in Science , prompting nonbiological scientists (such as one of my professors in
chemistry at the University of Minnesota, Duluth, in the mid-1960s) to complain
in effect that there are too many biological articles in Science . The situation is far
worse now than it was a half century ago. As will become evident below, one
simple answer to the title suggested by the Law of Requisite Variety (Sect. 5.3 )
is that the internal structure of the cell has to be complex in order to survive the
environment that is at least as complex.
Before we consider the complexity of the living cell, it may be necessary to have
an overview of the problem of classifying physical entities of the Universe in
general. As pointed out in Sect. 3.1 , the dissipative structure theory of Prigogine
(1977, 1980, 1991) posits that all structures in the Universe can be classified into
equilibrium structures (or equilibrons ) and dissipative structures (or dissipatons ).
Prigogine's division of structures into equilibrons and dissipatons is primarily based
on the nonequilibrium thermodynamics perspective. But there are aspects to physi-
cal entities other than thermodynamic ones. Thus, we can divide each of the two
classes of the structures proposed by Prigogine into three further classes based on the
size of the physical entities, namely, micro-, meso-, and macro-entities, and each of
these, in turn, into two classes based on viability , that is, whether or not the entities