Nature's Known Laws Are Too Simple to Explain Vast Levels of Organization and Functional Complexity in Organisms

 Occasionally materialists will tell a lie as big as the sky, by claiming that all of the phenomena of life can be explained by the laws of physics and chemistry. You could hardly state a bigger falsehood. The truth is that the main discovered laws of nature are laws that are simple, and that laws so simple are utterly incapable of explaining either the vast levels of organization and fine-tuned functional complexity that we see in living organisms or the vast levels of diverse functionality and capabilities that we observe in the minds and behavior of such organisms. 

Let's take a look at the main laws of nature. The Google Gemini infographic below discusses some of the most important laws of nature: the law of gravitation, Coulomb's law of electromagnetism, the Pauli Exclusion Principle, and the laws of thermodynamics. 

The law of universal gravitation (often called Newton's law) is a law that can be expressed by the very simple equation shown above, an equation so brief if could be written on the slip of paper inside a fortune cookie. The law is stated like this:

In the equation, F means the force of gravitational attraction between two bodies, m1 means the mass of the first body, m2 means the mass of the second body, and r² means the square of the distance between the bodies. The G stands for a fundamental constant of nature called the gravitational constant. 

This law of gravitation is a law following a very simple rule stated in Section 1 of the infographic above. The law of gravitation helps explain the formation of planet Earth. But this law does almost nothing to explain why our planet is  habitable. The law of gravitation also does nothing to explain any of the wonders of biology. The gravitational force within a living body (and between nearby living bodies) is negligible. 

The law of electromagnetism (Coulomb's law) is a law following a very simple rule stated in Section 2 of the infographic above. It's a law that (when stated in an equation) has a look very similar to the law of gravitation stated above. The law is twice as complex as the law of gravitation, because while gravitation involves only a force of attraction, electromagnetism can involve either attraction or repulsion. The rules here are simple:

(1) Each proton in the universe has the same positive charge equal to 1.602176634 times 10^-19 Coulomb.

(2) Each electron in the universe has exactly the same charge as each proton, the only difference being that the charge on every electron is negative, while the charge on every proton is positive. (The equality of the absolute value of these two types of charges is a dramatically stunning example of cosmic fine-tuning.)

(3) Between any positive charge and a negative charge, there is a force of attraction, inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. 

(4) Between any two charges of the same sign (such as two positive charges or two negative charges), there is a force of repulsion, inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. 

While significantly more complicated than the law of gravitation, Coulomb's law (the fundamental law of electromagnetism) is still very simple, simple enough for a guy like me to easily explain. Coulomb's law (the law of electromagnetism) has the most supreme relevance to the existence of life. A human can exist in a zero-gravity spaceship, without getting any benefit from gravitation. Conversely, no human being would last even an hour without Coulomb's law (the law of electromagnetism), which is necessary for all biochemistry. 

But while being absolutely necessary for biochemistry, Coulomb's law does almost nothing to explain the origin of life or the origin of visible organisms or the origin of the human species; nor does  Coulomb's law do much of anything to explain the nine-month progression from a speck-sized zygote to the vast organization of the human body. Such marvels of fine-tuned complexity and hierarchical organization cannot be explained by simple mechanical principles such as attraction or repulsion. 

Another law mentioned in the infographic above is the Pauli Exclusion Principle. The Pauli Exclusion Principle is explained in my story "When I Trained to Be an Electron." I could explain the principle by expounding on the explanation in the infographic above, but I would much rather you read my story to hear an explanation of the principle. The Pauli Exclusion Principle is a very simple law of nature that is necessary for the existence of elements such as carbon and oxygen. But the principle does nothing to explain how such elements get organized into the fantastically complex and fine-tuned organizations of matter that are the bodies of humans.

There's another very important law of nature, one that scientists seem to have never given a name to. I can call it the Strong Nuclear Force law. This is the law that when nucleons (either protons or neutrons) get very, very close to each other, then they bind together as if they were bound by the strongest superglue. This very simple law is absolutely necessary for the existence of complex elements such as carbon and oxygen. But this law does nothing to explain how such elements get organized into the fantastically complex and fine-tuned organizations of matter thar are the bodies of humans.

The infographic above also mentions the very simple law that goes under the name of the Law of the Conservation of Energy or the Law of the Conservation of Mass-Energy. This is simply that mass-energy (which can exist as either mass or energy) cannot be created or destroyed. This law does nothing at all to help explain the wonders of life. 

The infographic above also mentions what is called the second law of thermodynamics, often described as the law that entropy (a measure of disorganization) always increases over time. This is a simple law, and it does nothing at all to explain how we ever got the wonders of life on Earth. To the contrary, many have argued that the progression of life on Earth seems to have acted in a way contrary to the second law of thermodynamics. 

An important law of nature not mentioned in the infographic is Boyle's Law, which holds that the pressure and volume of a confined gas are inversely proportional when temperature and mass are held constant. This does nothing to help explain the wonders of life on Earth. Another important law of chemistry is Avogadro's Law, which states that equal volumes of all gases, at the same temperature and pressure, contain an equal number of molecules. This very simple law does nothing to help explain the enormous complexity and organization of living things. 

Other important laws of physics include Newton's laws of motion. They are important in the preservation of life, but do not do much of anything to explain life's organization and complexity. Newton's laws of motion are also very simple (for example, one has the simple formula of f=ma, where m is a mass, a is an acceleration, and f is the force caused by the acceleration of such a mass). 

A very important law of nature that is not needed today is the law of the conservation of charge. This is the simple law that whenever charge is created, there must be an equal number of positive and negative charges created.  So if two high-speed and high-energy photons collide, they may create positively charged protons and negatively charged electrons -- but only in a way that the amount of positive charge created is equal to the amount of negative charge created. The law of the conservation of charge was supremely important in the early moments of the universe, when the universe was super-dense. Because of such a law, we ended up with a universe that  seems to be electrically neutral, one in which the number of protons is apparently equal to the number of electrons. But nowadays the law of the conservation of charge never comes into play, except in relation to what is going on in big expensive particle accelerators. In any case, the law is a very simple law. 

So above I have given a discussion of the main laws of nature. Have I left out any big law? What about a "law of evolution"? Is there any such thing?

No, there is not. To the great embarrassment of those wishing to explain evolution as an explanation for life's wonders, there does not exist in nature any such thing as a "law of evolution." Nor does there exist any such thing in nature as a "force of evolution." Things such as electromagnetism and gravitation are real forces that push and pull matter around. There is no "law of evolution" that pushes matter around or pulls matter in some direction. The organization of matter cannot be explained by such a law. There is no real force associated with evolution, and when Darwinists refer to a "force of evolution" they are using language loosely and metaphorically. 

What about a "law of development" or a "law of morphogenesis"? Is there any such thing that might explain the nine-month progression from a speck-sized zygote (existing just after impregnation) to the vastly more organized state of a full human body? There is not. We know of no laws of nature that can explain such a thing. 

So when materialists occasionally claim that all of the phenomena of life can be explained by the laws of physics and chemistry, they are telling a lie as big as the Pacific Ocean. The only laws of nature we know of are laws way too simple to explain the sky-high levels of functional complexity, purposeful dynamism and hierarchical organization we see in organisms such as humans. 

When it comes to explaining minds and memory, we find no laws of nature that are of any real help. Electrical transmission between neurons does not actually explain human cognition, despite common claims to the contrary. Is it perhaps a law of nature that the transmission of electricity gives rise to minds? No, it certainly is not. In thunderstorms there is electricity transmission with vastly more voltage than anything going on in the human mind; but all that electricity passing around does not give rise to the slightest bit of cognition. You could create some dramatic electrical gizmo like Tesla experimented with, and let it run all day. This would not produce the slightest amount of consciousness. 

 There is a state in which the human brain starts transmitting electricity much more dramatically than normal. This state is the tonic-clonic epileptic seizure (also called a grand mal seizure), which has been very roughly described as a lightning storm in the brain. This state does not produce higher levels of cognition, but produces unconsciousness.

Contrary to claims that electrical transmission between neurons is an explanation for human consciousness, we know that many people undergoing cardiac arrest have very vivid near-death experiences, when their brains have flatlined, becoming electrically inactive, as the brain does within 5 to 20 seconds after the heart stops. This is the opposite of what we would expect if minds are produced by electrical transmission in the brain. 

Below are some quotations in which scientists confess that they don't really understand morphogenesis, contrary to claims that known laws of physics or chemistry explain how a speck-sized zygote progresses to become a full human body.  

• "Yet while these are several examples of well-understood processes, our study of animal morphogenesis is really in its infancy." -- David Bilder and Saori L. Haigo1, "Expanding the Morphogenetic Repertoire: Perspectives from the Drosophila Egg." 
• "Fundamentally, we have a poor understanding of how any internal organ forms." -- Timothy Saunders, developmental biologist (link).
• "An adult human body is made up of some 30 to 40 trillion cells, all of which stem from a single fertilized egg cell. The process by which the right cells appear to arrive in their right numbers at the right time at the right place -- development -- is only understood in the roughest of outlines." -- Five scientists (link). 
• "Our understanding of how our organs form is still in its infancy" -- A research project abstract written by scientists (link). 
• "Biochemistry cannot provide the spatial information needed to explain morphogenesis...Supracellular morphogenesis is mysterious...Nobody seems to understand the origin of biological and cellular order."  -- Six medical authorities (link). 
• "Understanding the rules underlying organismal development is a major unsolved problem in biology. Each cell in a developing organism responds to signals in its local environment by dividing, excreting, consuming, or reorganizing, yet how these individual actions coordinate over a macroscopic number of cells to grow complex structures with exquisite functionality is unknown." - Five scientists (link). 
• "However, our understanding of the molecular and physical basis of morphogenesis in plants or in any other eukaryotic system [e.g. mammals] is still in its infancy due to the complexity and non-linearity of processes involved in morphogenesis dynamics (or Morphodynamics)." -- A description of a 2017-2021 scientific project, presumably written by scientists (link). 
• "Understanding morphogenesis in vertebrate tissues in development and disease poses one of the most significant challenges in the life sciences. Despite the impressive technical advances aimed at cellular and subcellular characterization and manipulation over the past half century, a clear picture of how form is created still remains in its infancy." -- Four scientists in 2025 (link). 
• "We don't know what dark matter is, we don't understand how the brain works or consciousness, we don't understand morphogenesis, we don't understand the origin of life." -- Physics PhD Michael Nielsen (link). 
• "You start off as a sperm and an egg, and nine months later [your body has been built], through a magical process of morphogenesis, which we don’t understand." -- Donald Hoffman, Professor Emeritus of Cognitive Sciences at the University of California, Irvine (link). 
• "We take it for granted that we go to bed with two sets of fully functional kidneys and that we wake up with them the next morning but we don't understand the fundamental processes that give rise to this very well choreographed maintenance of an organism's form and function." -- Scientist Sanchéz Alvarado (link). 
• "A quarter of the way through the twenty-first century, we still lack basic knowledge regarding the formation and function of the organ that gives its name to all mammals, and which provides important health benefits for children and their breastfeeding parent through the creation and delivery of breast milk." -- 3 scientists (link). 
• "Despite increasing knowledge of pathways controlling the differentiation of many cell types in the eye, we still lack a basic understanding of the mechanisms controlling its morphogenesis." - 3 scientists (link).  
• "The remarkable amount of data we now possess regarding genes, gene expression, and molecular epigenetics still has not enabled a clear conceptual understanding of the emergence of biological form during vertebrate morphogenesis." -- "Epigenetics Beyond the Cell: Supracellular Organization of Fate and Form in Morphogenesis " paper by four scientists in the year 2025 (link). 
• "The molecular mechanisms that control the three-dimensional forms of animal organs remain poorly understood." -- M.A. Krasnow (link).
• "In most instances, the molecular basis of morphogenesis in the eye is poorly understood." -- Donald F. Ready (link).
• "Many organs form globular structures, but how this is achieved is poorly understood." -- Two scientists in the year 2026 (link).
• "It is poorly understood how, in complex tissues, cells self-organize in a robust manner." -- Karl H. Palmquist, 2024 (link). 
• "Developmental morphogenesis reliably builds species-specific large-scale anatomies....The algorithms that guide growth and form are still poorly understood." -- Two scientists, 2023 (link).
• "How tissues develop distinct structures remains poorly understood." -- Two scientists, 2024 (link).