See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295128088

Complexity, organization, evolution, and

constructal law

Article in Journal of Applied Physics · February 2016

DOI: 10.1063/1.4941554

CITATIONS READS

24 1,065

2 authors:

Adrian Bejan Marcelo Errera

Duke University Universidade Federal do Paraná
797 PUBLICATIONS 34,384 CITATIONS 39 PUBLICATIONS 596 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Constructal law View project

Freeform Heat Exchangers for Binary Geothermal Power Plants View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Adrian Bejan on 24 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Complexity, organization, evolution, and constructal law
A. Bejan and M. R. Errera

Citation: Journal of Applied Physics 119, 074901 (2016); doi: 10.1063/1.4941554

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4941554
View Table of Contents: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/jap/119/7?ver=pdfcov
Published by the AIP Publishing

Articles you may be interested in

The constructal-law origin of the wheel, size, and skeleton in animal design
Am. J. Phys. 78, 692 (2010); 10.1119/1.3431988

The Constructal Law of “Designedness” in Nature

AIP Conf. Proc. 1033, 207 (2008); 10.1063/1.2979031

The Second Law and Quantum Evolution: Lessons in Entanglement, Locality and Separability
AIP Conf. Proc. 1033, 188 (2008); 10.1063/1.2979026

Particles, Scale, Time Construction, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics

AIP Conf. Proc. 1033, 174 (2008); 10.1063/1.2979024

Power-law scaling for macroscopic entropy and microscopic complexity: Evidence from human movement and
posture
Chaos 16, 013135 (2006); 10.1063/1.2186765

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. IP: 152.3.34.5 On: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:18:23
 JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS 119, 074901 (2016)

Complexity, organization, evolution, and constructal law

A. Bejan1 and M. R. Errera2
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, Duke University, Durham,
North Carolina 27708-0300, USA
2
Department of Environmental Engineering, Federal University of Paran
a, Curitiba, Parana 81531-980,
Brazil

(Received 4 September 2015; accepted 25 January 2016; published online 19 February 2016)
Physics is concise, simple, unambiguous, and constantly improving. Yet, confusion reigns in the field
especially with respect to complexity and the second law of thermodynamics. In this paper, we step
back and take a look at these notions—their meaning and definition—on the background provided by
nature and thermodynamics. We review the central concepts and words that underpin the physics of
evolutionary design today: information, knowledge, evolution, change, arrow of time, pattern,
organization, drawings, complexity, fractal dimension, object, icon, model, empiricism, theory,
disorder, second law, the “any” system in thermodynamics, morphing freely, and the constructal law.
We show, for example, that information is not knowledge, fractal dimension is not a measure of
complexity, and pattern is not a live flow architecture. Drawings, as physical means to facilitate the
flow of knowledge, are subject to the natural tendency toward design evolution. Complexity,
organization, and evolution in nature are most powerful and useful when pursued as a discipline, with
C 2016 AIP Publishing LLC.
precise terms, rules, and principles. V
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4941554]

I. INFORMATION VS. KNOWLEDGE
During the 20th century, statistical thermodynamics,
quantum mechanics, information theory, and computer sci-
ence have changed the scientific discourse on everything,
from science itself to what life is.1 Instead of terms and images
that did not require an advanced education, today it seems that
legitimacy on this topic comes from speaking a language of
disorder, uncertainty, scale, emergence, chaos, entropies of
many types, and, above all, “information.” The fact that few
seem to understand this kind of talk is going unnoticed, obvi-
ously, because the world does not speak jargon.
This does not have to continue this way. In this article,
we go against this movement and draw attention to a simple
truth: words have meaning. We review the key words of the
discourse and start with the observation that information is
not knowledge.2
“Every professor…one day discovers to his great
surprise that the elements of his teaching which stay
with his students are not the things which were “in the
program” but those other things he has communicated
unknowingly to his best students.
(Jean) Jaurès said it well: One does not teach what one
knows, but what one is. The computer knows many
things, it can even know everything; but it is not. It is
incapable of forming minds since it has no ends to offer
them. But it is quite capable of reducing minds to an
official conformity.”
The computer “is not” because it is nothing more than
an extension of the human who uses it to move (to live)
more easily. It is one artifact among very many. On the other
hand, you “are,” with or without that artifact. With what you
are, you make decisions (purposeful choices and changes),
and as a consequence you and your group move (live) more
easily and with longer lasting power.1
Those whose mother language is not English have to
learn English, and along the way they acquire the habit of
checking the dictionary. We did this ourselves, as students
and now while writing this article. Here is the meaning of
some of the key words that do not require advanced
education:
Information is a universal term, like geometry and
energy: it is expressed by the same word in many languages.
It comes from the Latin verb informo-informare, which
means to give form and shape, to form, to fashion. In
English, it means something told, news, intelligence (as in
spying), facts, data, text, and figures. These days, informa-
tion also means data that can be stored in or retrieved from a
computer.
In modern languages all over, information means a sign,
a signal: seeing 24 June instead of 23 June on the headline of
today’s newspaper, or seeing 01 vs 10 in a computer text.
What you, the observer, decide to do with the sign is you.
What I do with it is I. Both are physical changes (design
changes in you and me, with time direction). They are
dynamic. They are the action that knowledge is and are not
to be confused with “information.”
There was an entire landscape of “information” chiseled
on obelisks in Egypt, and it meant absolutely nothing, no
design, no change, no action, no embodiment into anything.
It stayed that way until Jean-François Champollion taught
his contemporaries how to discern signs from obelisks. What
you read and do now with Egyptian information is you, not
somebody else.
Change has a time direction, an arrow of time called
evolution.1 The ability to affect design change is an integral

0021-8979/2016/119(7)/074901/8/$30.00 119, 074901-1 C 2016 AIP Publishing LLC

V

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. IP: 152.3.34.5 On: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:18:23
 074901-2 A. Bejan and M. R. Errera
part of the moving thing that morphs and evolves in order to
move on earth more easily, farther, and longer in time. The
“ability” of the moving system comprises many physical fea-
tures: freedom to change, access to information, memory of
changes that facilitate movement versus those that do not,
and so on, on the staircase of better and better organization
over time. This applies to everything, inanimate and
animate.3–5
II. DESIGN AND ORGANIZATION
To progress beyond information, we now review the
meaning of two words that refer to more subtle and more
complicated notions.
Design is a plan, a scheme, a project with purpose, an
intention (aim) for an outcome. Design is the arrangement of
parts, details, form, and color, so as to produce a complete
unit that has purpose. Design is not “pattern.” The tree-
shaped architecture of so many things that flow (river basin,
lung, etc.) is a changing design because of its purpose, which
is to facilitate flow between a point and an area, or between a
point and a volume. Pattern is a static, regular, mainly
unvarying arrangement of form, parts, or elements. The tiles
on the bathroom floor and the atoms locked in the crystal lat-
tice have pattern but not evolving design, because they are
dead. In them, there is no flow, no change, no freedom, no
time direction, and therefore no life and evolution.
Organization is a consolidated group of live (flowing)
elements, as in an organ. Organization is a systemized
whole, the organs connected and flowing together in the
moving animal body, the river channels and wet interstices
in the drainage basin, and the components moving together
in the vehicle on the highway. In society, organization is the
live group assembled for a specific purpose (activity, move-
ment), such as club, union, political party, executive struc-
ture in business, university, or government. Design is living
organization, not dead pattern.
A picture is worth a thousand words. This is why all
these notions, from information (sign, form) to design and
organization, are images in the mind, before they are spoken
as words. This is also why the most important keyword to
understand is the image, which, coming from the human
hand, is a drawing.
III. DRAWINGS
A drawing is an image that can be discerned by the eye
and understood by the mind. “Understood” means that the
image is connected to other images in the brain, in ways that
make the storage of images more compact and their retrieval
more rapid.6
A drawing has three essential features, which are self-
standing, i.e., independent of each other. The maker of a
drawing can attest to the fact that one feature is chosen inde-
pendently of the others:
(i) The drawing has size. Large or small, the size is rep-
resented by the length scale of its frame, sheet of pa-
per, canvas, or computer screen. The maker of the
drawing selects the size of the image.
Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. IP: 152.3.34.5 On: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:18:23
J. Appl. Phys. 119, 074901 (2016)
(ii) The drawing has a meaning (a message) that is con-
veyed to the viewers. The message is knowledge
when the recipients act based on the received mes-
sage. The message spreads naturally,7 from those who
know to those who need to know. The meaning is rep-
resented by one or more features: shapes, structures,
aspect ratios (proportions), and the organization of all
these features on the viewed plane. Each feature is
distinct. The round shape of the cross section of the
blood capillary is not to be confused with the bifurca-
tion of the blood vessel, or the pairing of smaller
blood vessels into a larger vessel. All the features are
organized in a particular way, and as a consequence,
they convey the message. A simple line drawing of
your face today displays the same organization as a
drawing made 20 years ago, but a few features are dif-
ferent. The drawing morphs with age, but the message
remains: the portrait is yours.
(iii) The drawing has svelteness, which is a measure of the
relative thinness of the lines used to convey the mes-
sage (b). The svelteness is a dimensionless number
defined as8
The external length scale of the drawing
Sv ¼ : (1)
The internal length scale of the drawing
The drawing made with relatively thin lines has a large Sv
value (Fig. 1). The same drawing drawn with a thicker pen
or brush, or copied on a poor copy machine has a smaller Sv.
A water color rendition of the original line drawing has an
even smaller Sv. A good forgery has a different Sv than the
original. The Sv value belongs to the artist, to one brush, and
one style of brush strokes, and it distinguishes the original
artist from the forgerer.
Amazing, even the discussion of a single drawing is
complicated! Then, what is complexity?
IV. COMPLEXITY
Complexity is a difficult concept, like turbulence. In the
beginning, when people knew a lot less than what we know
today, complexity meant difficulty, fuzziness, headache, and
why bother. Its Latin origin betrays this feeling of defeat:
“complex” (cum þ plex, i.e., twisted forms together) comes
from the same Latin observation as “perplex” (through þ
twisted). As science progressed, people began to see organi-
zation and message in the said complexity. As the thinking
became sharper and deeper, the organization of complexity
gave birth to theory, which is the design of the mind with
which to predict the observed complexity. Once understood,
complexity becomes easier, and we call it architecture,
weave, tissue, design, organization, and many more names
that are a lot less puzzling.
It happened this way with turbulence, which as a science
evolved from fuzziness in the late 1800s (complications
effaced intentionally through a time-averaged description,
thanks to Reynolds9), to the “large scale structure” of turbu-
lence in the 1970s and to the evolution of the structure,
which is now predictable.10 For example, a flat jet or plume
 074901-3 A. Bejan and M. R. Errera J. Appl. Phys. 119, 074901 (2016)

FIG. 1. The svelteness property Sv of a

complex architecture: Sv increases, the
line thicknesses decrease, the drawing
becomes sharper and lighter, and is
more svelte. The message of the draw-
ing does not change, but its “weight”
changes. The svelteness of the flow
architecture in this figure was calcu-
lated with Eq. (1), with the square-root
of the area of the dashed rectangle as
the external length scale and the
square-root of the area covered by the
channels (shown in black) as the inter-
nal length scale.

always evolves into a stream with round cross section L ð1  r G=LÞ

Ln ¼ L þ rL þ r2 L þ    þ rn L ¼ ; (2)
(Fig. 2).11 The reverse is not true: round jets and plumes do 1r
not evolve into streams with flat cross sections. This holds
true for turbulent and laminar jets and plumes. where r ¼ 21/2 ¼ 0.707, and G is the smallest length scale of
It will happen the same with complexity. The language the drawing, G ¼ rnL. In the limit n ! 1, the total length
of complexity will be replaced by geometrically precise approaches
notions such as size (i), organization (ii), and svelteness (iii). L
L1 ¼ : (3)
1r
V. FRACTAL DIMENSION
The total length Ln can be expressed in dimensionless form
We often read that the fractal dimension (D) of a geo- as
metrical object (called drawing in this paper) is important ~ n ¼ 1  r e;
L (4)
because it accounts for the complexity of the figure.12 Had
this been true, we would have seen by now a ranking of
drawings according to their complexity, because newly cal- where L~ n ¼ Ln =L1 and e ¼ G=L < 1. The fractal dimension
culated D values appear in the literature unabated. Whether (D) of the toothy line is defined as13
the fractal dimension adds anything to the quantitative
description of complexity is doubtful. ~ n ¼ e1D :
L (5)
Consider the drawing made in Fig. 3. An isosceles trian-
In view of Eq. (4), D depends on e and r. In the limit
gle is divided in half by the bisector of its 90 angle. The
e ! 0, n ! 1; D approaches the irrational number
construction is repeated n times. The bisectors form a toothy
line to which we add the left side (L) of the original triangle. r
D1 ¼ 1 þ ¼ 1:3071: (6)
The total length of the toothy line is ln10

FIG. 2. Above a certain height, all tur-

bulent plumes have round cross sec-
tions: flat plume rising from a row of
smoke stacks; round plume rising from
a concentrated fire; and plume above a
brush fire.

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. IP: 152.3.34.5 On: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:18:23
 074901-4 A. Bejan and M. R. Errera
FIG. 3. The length of the toothy line increases as its smallest detail (G)
becomes smaller.
As e decreases (or as n increases), the D value approaches
D1 from above. For example, when n ¼ 2, e is 0.5 and
D ffi 1:379. When n ¼ 4, the D value furnished by Eq. (5)
drops to 1.338.
What does all this mean? The drawing of Fig. 3 is a
“fractal object” strictly in the limit e ! 0; when the con-
struction algorithm would be repeated an infinite number of
times, and the number of lines used in making the drawing
would be infinite. To the artist who attempts to make the
drawing, this would mean that the fractal object would have
infinite complexity. This is the physical reason why the frac-
tal object is impossible to draw (and, even less, see), and
why the fractal images that populate the literature are not
fractal. They are Euclidean (cf. Mandelbrot,13 page 39),
because the algorithm assumed in making the drawing is
FIG. 4. World variety of icons that convey the messages “Walk” and “Don’t walk” (adapted from Refs. 15–17).
Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. IP: 152.3.34.5 On: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:18:23
J. Appl. Phys. 119, 074901 (2016)
intentionally stopped (cut off) at a small length scale that is
sufficiently large so that the drawing can be made, printed,
viewed, discerned, and discussed.
In view of this, review the fractal dimension calculated
during the construction of Fig. 3. First, the drawing with infinite
complexity has the fractal dimension D1 ¼ 1:3071, which is
finite, not infinite. Second, the Euclidean drawings with com-
plexity (finite n and e) have D values greater than D1 . All the
drawings that the reader can see in Fig. 3 are decidedly less
complex than the fractal drawing, yet, their calculated dimen-
sion D is greater than the fractal dimension D1 of the drawing
with infinite complexity. When D decreases, complexity
increases. The conclusion from these two observations is that
the fractal dimension is not a measure of complexity.
The “fractal object” described throughout fractal geome-
try is not an object. According to its definition, the word
“object” means a thing that can be seen or touched, or a per-
son or thing to which action, thought, or feeling is directed.
The original Latin word, objectus, means something thrown
in front of you, a thing that appears (from the verb objicere,
where ob means toward, for, before, and jacere means to
throw, from which the word “jet” in Romance Languages
and English).
The fractal object is, at best, a thought “in the limit,”
never achievable, never palpable, never to be seen, like Sadi
Carnot’s reversible heat engine. Yet, there is a big difference
between the two thoughts in the limit: the reversible engine
springs in the mind because of physics (the laws of thermo-
dynamics), whereas the fractal object is as arbitrary as the
algorithm chosen by the mathematics artist, or the paint and
brush chosen by the painter.
VI. ICONS
An icon is a simple drawing that conveys the same mes-
sage as numerous and much more complicated drawings.
 074901-5 A. Bejan and M. R. Errera J. Appl. Phys. 119, 074901 (2016)

FIG. 5. Size possibilities of the

“Walk” sign, and the scanning range of
the viewer.

FIG. 6. Possible organizations of the

shape elements that form the icon
“Walk”.

Making drawings is a means of communication that evolved as a set of lit dots, and the mind of the pedestrian creates the
under certain rules, which constitute the discipline of image and then interprets it.
graphic design.14,15 The rules are stricter when the icon is A photograph or a moving picture of a person crossing
about human safety. For example, the design of the pedes- the street would be more realistic than a line drawing, but
trian “Walk” and “Don’t Walk” sign on street corners16 would it be more effective? Key is the minimum detail that
(Fig. 4) must meet traffic regulations. These signs evolved is sufficient to convey a quick, clear, and safe message. The
with the technology available for communicating messages few and simple lines, or the gestalt effect (form) of aligned
visually. dots that are lit, are thick but not too thick to convey the mes-
Today, most of the world has adopted images of a walk- sage to the persons across the street.
ing person (pictogram) and a raised hand (ideogram) or
standing person (pictogram), respectively, to indicate when
to cross the street and when not to cross.17,18 The raised hand VII. MODELS
is an icon because it represents the hand gesture of a traffic Icons and models share one characteristic, which is their
policeman. These signs have a characteristic size: not too simplicity. Yet, the two are different. The icon is a simple
big, not too small. There is a size range that works for most drawing of a mental viewing, observed or imagined. The
pedestrians in most circumstances (Fig. 5). The larger size is model is strictly about the observed: it is a manmade simpli-
easier to see, but it is more expensive to make. The smaller fied facsimile of an object or phenomenon observed in nature.
sign is cheaper but it is more difficult to see and understand. The duck from the wood shop is the model, and the duck on
The aspect ratio of the sign plays an important role on the the lake is the observed natural object. The human action of
speed with which the message is scanned by the two human modeling is empiricism, which means observation first and
eyes.19
The icon represents an individual in the most general
sense (male, female, tall, short, old, and young). The drawing
is an organization of simple elements that resemble the head,
torso, legs, and arms (Fig. 6). By itself, each element is
meaningless. Key is their organization. If the elements are
organized in other ways, the pedestrian is puzzled, and the
message does not flow from the sign to the viewer.
Svelteness is an essential property of the icon. In Fig. 7,
the svelteness of each icon was calculated by considering the
effective outline as inner characteristic length, and the
square-root of the lit area (white) as the external characteris-
tic length in Eq. (1). Icons with higher svelteness are newer
designs. The icon with the highest svelteness appeals to the
knowledge of the pedestrian, that is, it conveys information FIG. 7. Evolution of the svelteness of the “Walk” signs over time.

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. IP: 152.3.34.5 On: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:18:23
 074901-6 A. Bejan and M. R. Errera
description later. Modeling is the opposite of theory (idea first,
comparison with nature later). Modeling is not theory.
VIII. EVOLUTION
Evolution means changes that occur in a discernible
direction in time. Evolution, the word, is defined unambigu-
ously at its origin, the Latin verb evolvo, evolv ere, which
means to roll out, to roll forth, to spread. Contrary to today’s
discourse, evolution is a much older and more encompassing
concept of physics (of everything) than biological evolution.
Drawings—their veracity and complexity—evolve
along with the human ability and technology to describe the
mental image. For example, the evolution toward the sim-
plest drawing that still captures the message is illustrated by
Picasso in the sequence of lithographs called “The Bull”
(Fig. 8). In a sequence of eleven plates, the artist captured
the essence of the message that was ultimately expressed in a
small set of organized lines with high svelteness.
Evolution is also evident in the accuracy with which a
drawing is made or reproduced by a computer, as technology
evolves. Figure 9 illustrates this with two examples of circles
drawn with pens of two thicknesses. The circles are not per-
fect, but this is not why they are used as examples. They are
used because their svelteness can be calculated [cf. Eq. (1)]
1=2
as Sv ¼ p=Ab , where p is the inner perimeter of the black
line and Ab is the area of the black line. To calculate p and
Ab, the circle drawings were processed with a commercial
code.20–22 They were digitized with several resolution set-
tings measured as PPI (points per inch), which are plotted on
the abscissa in Fig. 9. The scanned drawings were converted
into binary (black and white) images in order to calculate
their p and Ab values.
Figure 9 shows that Sv is not a constant, unlike the Sv of
a mathematical circle with rim of constant thickness. The
Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. IP: 152.3.34.5 On: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:18:23
J. Appl. Phys. 119, 074901 (2016)
svelteness of the hand-drawn circle increases monotonically
as the scanning and reproduction technology improves to-
ward more PPI. The reason for the increasing trend is the
rough and ill-defined edges between the black trace left by
the pen and the white paper. The texture of the paper and the
force on the pen on paper are features that belong to the par-
ticular hand drawing and cannot be reproduced fully, not
even in the limit of infinite machine power. Each curve (Sv
vs PPI) is like the length of the coast of Britain, which was
the calculation that served as starting point of fractal
geometry.13
IX. DISORDER
Along with the claim that nature evolves toward increas-
ing complexity, we often read that the natural tendency is to-
ward greater “disorder,” and that this tendency is
commanded by the second law of thermodynamics. This is
not correct, as one can see by reading the statement of the
second law, made by two of its three original proponents in
1851–1852 (the other proponent was Rankine).23
Clausius: No process is possible whose sole results is
the transfer of heat from a body of lower temperature to a
body of higher temperature.
Kelvin: Spontaneously, heat cannot flow from cold
regions to hot regions without external work being per-
formed on the system.
We often read that the second law states that “entropy
must increase,” and that the “classical” laws of thermody-
namics pertain to “equilibrium states.” Many even teach that
thermodynamics should be called thermo“statics.” Such
statements are not thermodynamics. For example, a physi-
cist24 wrote in 2015 that “the second law… applies to closed
macroscopic systems consisting of an extremely large num-
ber of particles, such as liquids or gases…” This is not true.
FIG. 8. Elements from the Picasso’s
lithographs “The Bull” showing the
artist’s quest for the essential drawing
of the bull.
 074901-7 A. Bejan and M. R. Errera
FIG. 9. The evolution of the svelteness of two hand-drawn circles, as the
scanning resolution (points per inch, PPI) increases.
The second law statements hold for any system (open,
closed, isolated, adiabatic, steady state, unsteady state, with
configuration, and without configuration).
The second law says nothing about “disorder.” Many
confuse the second law with the view that in a box filled
with particles the assembly tends toward a larger number of
possible energy states.25,26 This is the core idea of statistical
thermodynamics, yet lost in the teaching of it are three im-
portant observations.
First, to assume a swarm of particles in a closed box is
to throw away the “any system” power of thermodynamics.
The any-system is the most general system in physics. It is
the system with unspecified organization, and, compared
with it, the box with bouncing particles is a very special
case, with a specified configuration.
Second, no one has seen particles, their disorder, and
their tendency toward greater disorder. From such blindness,
how can there be a “law of increasing disorder”? This has
been a source of confusion in science, because as we look
around we are struck by design, self-organization, change af-
ter change (evolution), and order out of lack of order.1
Third, decades before statistical thermodynamics, the
second law and the first law were stated with reference to
systems of unspecified size (e.g., heat engines, animals), not
infinitesimal.
In summary, the second law says absolutely nothing
about “disorder,” “equilibrium states,” “entropy,”
“particles,” “classical,” and “statics.” Important to keep in
Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. IP: 152.3.34.5 On: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:18:23
J. Appl. Phys. 119, 074901 (2016)
mind is that “thermodynamics” is the science that brings to-
gether two kinds of movement, heating and working, previ-
ously seen as separate (caloric theory versus mechanics)23
(Fig. 10). The only relevant question about the second law
statement of 1851–1852 is whether it is correct. The evi-
dence is massively in support of answering “yes,” and it is
based on the machines that have been built successfully by
relying on the second law of thermodynamics of Clausius,
Rankine, and Kelvin. These flow architectures are macro-
scopic, organized, and evolutionary. Order, not disorder, is
their chief characteristic and claim to fame. They are every
day futuristic (not “classical”), they are full of life and
motion (not in “equilibrium”), and are eminently dynamic
(not “static”).
X. CONCLUSION
Words have meaning. This is why words matter. This is
also why it is necessary to define unambiguously the terms
of any discussion about complexity.
The human observation that certain things happen innu-
merable times the same way represents a distinct one natural
tendency, i.e., one phenomenon. To observe the phenomenon
is empiricism. A law of physics is a compact statement (text
or formula) that summarizes innumerable observations of the
same kind. To rely on the law to experience a purely mental
viewing of how things should be (i.e., to predict future obser-
vations) is theory.
The phenomenon covered by the first law of thermody-
namics is the “what goes up must come down.” Today, we
recognize this more generally as the conservation of energy,
from kinetic to potential when a body is thrown upward, to
the energy flow (from heat into work) through a thermody-
namic system such as a power plant.
The phenomenon covered by the second law is the “one
way” tendency of all flows, such as the flow of water under
the bridge. Today, we recognize this natural tendency as
irreversibility. Every flow, by itself, proceeds from high to
low. Fluid through a duct flows from high pressure to low
pressure. Heat through an insulation leaks from high temper-
ature to low temperature. If you do not know beforehand
which is high and which is low, then the direction of the flow
will tell you. Why, because it is the law, and any thermody-
namic system obeys the law.
The phenomenon observed as complexity, organization,
design, and the other terms reviewed in this article is natural
organization, evolution, and life.27,28 The occurrence and
FIG. 10. The evolution and spreading
of thermodynamics during the past two
centuries.
 074901-8 A. Bejan and M. R. Errera J. Appl. Phys. 119, 074901 (2016)

15
evolution of freely morphing configurations is present in N. Skolos and T. Wedell, Graphic Design Process: From Problem to
Solution: 20 Case Studies (Laurence King Publishing Company, London,
everything that flows and moves more easily over time.29,30
2012).
This phenomenon is covered by the constructal 16
Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration
law.1,3–5,24,29–39 Observations of this kind are everywhere: (2000). Section 4E.02 of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
17
river basin evolution,40 lung architecture evolution,41 city Christian G€ odecke, Photo Gallery: Pedestrian Signals Around the
World, June 10, 2011 (Spiegel Online International), http://www.spie-
traffic evolution, heat exchanger evolution,42 and aircraft gel.de/fotostrecke/photo-gallery-pedestrian-signals-around-the-world-
evolution.43 These observations reveal the arrow of time2 in fotostrecke-73655.html, visited on July 6, 2015.
18
nature, which points from existing flow configurations to Richard F. Weingroff, Highway History: Where was the First Walk/Don’t
Walk Sign Installed? (U.S. Department of Transportation - Federal
new configurations through which the flowing is easier. Not Highway Administration, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/
the other way around. Why, because this is the law, and all walk01.cfm, visited on July 6, 2015.
19
systems obey the law. A. Bejan, “The Golden Ratio predicted: Vision, cognition and locomotion
Marching ahead, the study of complexity can benefit as a single design in nature,” Int. J. Des. Nat. Ecodyn. 4(2), 97–104
(2009).
from the example set by the study of thermodynamics. At 20
P. K. Pratt, Digital Image Processing, 3rd ed. (Wiley, New York,
bottom, thermodynamics is a discipline. It has precise 2003).
21
words, rules, and principles. Changing the meaning of the C. Solomon and T. Breckon, Fundamentals of Digital Image Processing: A
Practical Approach with Examples in Matlab, e-book, accessed 10 July
words in mid-course, to benefit the narrative, is not 2015, see http://duke.eblib.com/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p¼644955.
allowed. Complexity and, more generally, organization and 22
MatlabV R Release 2013b, see http://www.mathworks.com/products/.
23
evolution in nature are most powerful and useful when pur- A. Bejan, Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 3rd ed. (Wiley,
Hoboken, 2006).
sued as a discipline, with precise terms, rules, and 24
B. Drossel, “On the relation between the second law of thermodynam-
principles. ics and classical and quantum mechanics,” in Why More is Different,
edited by B. Falkenburg and M. Morison (Springer, Berlin, 2015),
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Chap. 3.
25
D. F. Styer, “Insight into entropy,” Am. J. Phys. 68(12), 1090–1096
Professor Bejan’s research was supported by the (2000).
26
National Science Foundation. Professor Errera’s research F. L. Lambert, “Disorder—A cracked crutch for supporting entropy dis-
cussions,” J. Chem. Ed. 79(2), 187–192 (2002).
was supported by CAPES fellowship BEX 9576/11-8 from 27
T. Basak, “The law of life: The bridge between Physics and Biology,”
the Brazilian Federal Government. Helpful discussions with Phys. Life Rev. 8, 249–252 (2011).
28
Mr. Matthew Hambro on Graphic Novels are gratefully A. F. Miguel, “The physics principle of the generation of flow configu-
ration,” Phys. Life Rev. 8, 243–244 (2011).
acknowledged. 29
A. Bejan, Shape and Structure, from Engineering to Nature (Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2000).
30
1 A. Bejan and J. P. Zane, Design in Nature: How the Constructal Law
A. Bejan, The Physics of Life (St. Martin’s Press, New York, 2016).
2 Governs Evolution in Biology, Physics, Technology, and Social
D. De Rougemont, “Information is not knowledge,” Diogenes 29, 1–17
Organization (Doubleday, New York, 2012).
(1981). 31
3 Constructal Theory of Social Dynamics, edited by A. Bejan and G. W.
A. H. Reis, “Constructal theory: From engineering to physics, and how
Merkx (Springer, New York, 2007).
flow systems develop shape and structure,” Appl. Mech. Rev. 59, 269–282 32
P. Kalason, Le Grimoire des Rois: Theorie Constructale du Changement
(2006).
4 (L’Harmattan, Paris, 2007).
A. Bejan and S. Lorente, “The constructal law and the evolution of design 33 
A. Bachta, J. Dhombres, and A. Kremer-Marietti, Trois Etudes sur la Loi
in nature,” Phys. Life Rev. 8, 209–240 (2011). Constructale d’Adrian Bejan (L’Harmattan, Paris, 2008).
5
L. Chen, “Progress in the study on constructal theory and its applications,” 34
P. Kalason, Epistemologie Constructale du Lien Cultuel (L’Harmattan,
Sci. China, Ser. E 55(3), 802–820 (2012). Paris, 2007).
6
K. N. Ochsner and S. M. Kosslyn, The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive 35
Constructal Theory and Multi-Scale Geometries: Theory and
Neuroscience (Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York, 2014). Applications in Energetics, Chemical Engineering and Materials, edited
7
A. Bejan and S. Lorente, “The physics of spreading ideas,” Int. J. Heat by D. Queiros-Conde and M. Feidt (Les Presses de L’ENSTA, Paris,
Mass Transfer 55, 802–807 (2012). 2009).
8
A. Bejan and S. Lorente, Design with Constructal Theory (Wiley, 36
L. Rocha, Convection in Channels and Porous Media: Analysis,
Hoboken, 2008), Chap. 1. Optimization, and Constructal Design (VDM Verlag, Saarbr€ ucken, 2009).
9
O. Reynolds, “An experimental investigation of the circumstances which 37
G. Lorenzini, S. Moretti, and A. Conti, Fin Shape Optimization Using
determine the motion of water in parallel channels shall be direct or sinu- Bejan’s Constructal Theory (Morgan & Claypool Publishers, San
ous and of the law of resistance in parallel channels,” Philos. Trans. R. Francisco, 2011).
Soc. 174, 935–982 (1883). 38
A. Pramanick, The Nature of Motive Force (Springer, Berlin,
10
A. Bejan, Convection Heat Transfer, 4th ed. (Wiley, Hoboken, 2013), 2014).
Chaps. 6–9. 39
N. Acu~ na, Mindshare: Igniting Creativity and Innovation Through Design
11
A. Bejan, S. Ziaei, and S. Lorente, “Evolution: Why all plumes and jets Intelligence (Motion, Henderson, NV, 2012).
evolve to round cross sections,” Sci. Rep. 4, 4730 (2014). 40
M. R. Errera and A. Bejan, “Deterministic tree networks for river drainage
12
D. P. Feldman, Chaos and Fractals: An Elementary Introduction (Oxford basins,” Fractals 6, 245261 (1998).
University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2012). 41
E. R. Weibel, Symmorphosis: On Form and Function in Shaping Life
13
B. Mandelbrot, “How long is the coast of Britain?” Science 156, 636–638 (Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA, 2000).
42
(1967). A. Bejan and M. R. Errera, “Technology evolution, from the constructal
14
I. Meirelles, Design for Information: An Introduction to the Histories, law: Heat transfer designs,” Int. J. Energy Res. 39, 919–928 (2015).
43
Theories, and Best Practices Behind Effective Information Visualizations A. Bejan, J. D. Charles, and S. Lorente, “The evolution of airplanes,”
(Rockport Publishers, Beverly, MA, 2013). J. Appl. Phys. 116, 044901 (2014).

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. IP: 152.3.34.5 On: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:18:23
View publication stats