
The behavior of nonliving and living systems is generally viewed as being qualitatively different. The key difference is often summarized by saying that whereas living systems are complex, nonliving ones are simple. This distinction is often the basis for claiming essential differences in conceptual stances, methods, and theories between scientific fields. I argue first that nonliving systems can display the unpredictable, irreducible, irreversible, and emergent-in sum, complex-properties of living systems. Then I discuss an emerging field called complexity theory, the principles of which offer the promise of bringing quantitative unity to an enormous range of phenomena, living or dead.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 19 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
