Beyond Reduction: Reimagining Matter in Living Systems

Author: Denis Avetisyan

A new perspective challenges the assumption that biology can be fully explained by the principles of generic physics, proposing that life embodies distinct material forms.

This review argues that living matter exhibits emergent properties and morphodynamic behaviors necessitating a shift away from purely reductionist approaches and towards a contextual understanding of biophysical principles.

Despite longstanding efforts to explain life through the principles of physics, a complete reductionist account remains elusive, prompting a re-evaluation of the relationship between these disciplines. This paper, ‘Biology and Physics’, proposes a framework characterizing living matter not merely as a special case of physical systems, but as distinct ‘forms of matter’ exhibiting nonunitary organization and sui generis properties-from biomolecular condensates to emergent morphodynamic behaviors. We argue that while generic physical processes operate within living systems, biology also encompasses biogeneric and entirely novel phenomena requiring a contextual, rather than solely reductionist, approach. What fundamentally differentiates living matter, and how can we develop a physical theory capable of capturing its unique organizational principles and enigmatic behaviors?

The Illusion of Unitary Matter

Conventional physics typically conceptualizes matter as fundamentally unitary, meaning its properties are understood as the sum of its constituent parts – discrete subunits interacting and aggregating to form larger structures. This reductionist approach, while powerful in many contexts, proves increasingly inadequate when applied to living systems. Biological entities aren’t simply the sum of their molecules; instead, they exhibit emergent properties arising from complex organizational hierarchies and dynamic interactions between those components. The behavior of a cell, for example, isn’t solely dictated by the properties of its proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids, but by how these molecules are spatially arranged, communicate, and respond to stimuli as an integrated whole. This holistic organization fundamentally challenges the traditional unitary view of matter, suggesting that life necessitates a different framework for understanding materiality – one where the relationships between components are as crucial as the components themselves.

Biological systems often defy expectations rooted in traditional physics, demonstrating properties that aren’t simply the sum of their parts. This nonunitary behavior arises from intricate organization and dynamic interactions within living matter. Consider, for instance, the coordinated beating of heart cells; the rhythm isn’t inherent in any single cell, but emerges from the collective electrochemical signaling across the tissue. Similarly, the complex patterns of a bird flock or the intelligence of a slime mold aren’t localized within individual organisms, but are properties of the system as a whole. These emergent properties highlight that life isn’t merely assembled from building blocks, but actively organizes itself into functional wholes, demanding a shift in how materiality is understood beyond simple aggregation.

Conventional understandings of materiality, deeply rooted in physics and chemistry, typically categorize matter by its constituent parts and their interactions – a bottom-up approach. However, biological systems often defy this categorization, demonstrating properties that arise not from the sum of their components, but from the organization of those components. This fundamental difference compels a reconsideration of what constitutes ‘matter’ within living contexts, pushing beyond simple aggregation to recognize holistic, nonunitary forms. Such a re-evaluation suggests that the very definition of matter must incorporate principles of organization and emergent behavior, acknowledging that a living organism is not merely a collection of molecules, but a dynamically integrated system with properties irreducible to its parts – essentially, a new category of material existence predicated on relationality rather than isolated substance.

From Static Structures to Dynamic Landscapes

Traditional models of biological tissue often conceptualize them as “cellular solids” – stable, largely immutable structures providing static support and compartmentalization. However, current research demonstrates that living tissues are, in fact, dynamic systems characterized by continuous remodeling at the cellular and extracellular levels. This dynamism isn’t simply a matter of growth or repair; it encompasses ongoing alterations in cell shape, adhesion, and migration, even in mature tissues. This adaptability is achieved through a complex interplay of biochemical signaling, mechanical forces, and gene expression, enabling tissues to respond to developmental cues, environmental stresses, and functional demands. Consequently, tissues exhibit a capacity for reorganization that extends beyond simple homeostatic maintenance, allowing for plasticity and functional adaptation throughout an organism’s lifespan.

The concept of liquid tissues challenges the historically dominant paradigm of biological tissues as primarily solid, static structures. Traditional models often emphasize fixed cellular arrangements and extracellular matrix components providing structural rigidity. However, increasing evidence demonstrates that tissues exhibit fluid-like behavior, characterized by non-Newtonian viscosity, dynamic bond turnover, and the ability to undergo rapid, large-scale deformation without catastrophic failure. This fluidity is not merely a passive property; it is actively regulated by cellular processes and allows for enhanced adaptability, efficient force transmission, and the ability to remodel tissue architecture in response to mechanical stimuli or biochemical signals. Consequently, understanding tissues as dynamic, fluid systems is crucial for accurately modeling biological function and pathology.

Morphodynamic processes describe the shaping of tissues through continuous, active remodeling facilitated by the fluid-like properties of liquid tissues. These processes are not passive responses but involve coordinated cellular behaviors – including migration, adhesion, and differentiation – driven by both internal genetic programs and external environmental cues. Signals such as growth factors, mechanical stresses, and cell-cell interactions trigger changes in cell state and location, leading to alterations in tissue morphology. This dynamic reorganization is essential for normal development, wound healing, and adaptive responses to changing conditions; disruptions in morphodynamic processes can contribute to developmental defects and disease states.

The Architecture of Relationality: Phase Separation as a Principle

Biomolecular condensates are a recently recognized means of organizing cellular components, arising from liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS). This process, comparable to the immiscibility observed when mixing oil and water, occurs when certain biomolecules exceed a critical concentration, prompting their segregation into a dense, distinct phase separate from the surrounding cytosol. Unlike traditional membrane-bound organelles, these condensates lack a defining lipid bilayer and are instead stabilized by multivalent interactions – weak, but numerous – between constituent proteins and nucleic acids. The resulting condensates dynamically assemble and disassemble, concentrating specific biomolecules and facilitating biochemical reactions within a defined microenvironment, thereby influencing cellular function and organization.

Biomolecular condensate formation relies on the principle of liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS), enabling the swift and reversible clustering of proteins and nucleic acids into spatially defined compartments. Unlike membrane-bound organelles, these condensates are not delimited by lipid bilayers, but rather are formed through multivalent interactions between constituent molecules, driven by principles of polymer physics. This dynamic assembly and disassembly allows for rapid changes in condensate size and composition in response to cellular signals, facilitating efficient regulation of biochemical reactions and providing a mechanism for organizing the cellular interior without the energetic cost or structural rigidity of traditional membrane-bound structures. The lack of a fixed membrane boundary also allows for facile exchange of molecules with the surrounding cytoplasm, contributing to the functional plasticity of these dynamic cellular domains.

The study of biomolecular condensates relies heavily on principles and techniques from biological physics to characterize their behavior and function. Methods such as optical microscopy, atomic force microscopy, and rheology are employed to measure condensate size, shape, viscosity, and mechanical properties. These biophysical analyses reveal that condensates exhibit liquid-like behavior, diffusion of molecules within them, and sensitivity to temperature and molecular crowding. Furthermore, quantitative modeling and simulations, informed by physical principles, are used to understand the driving forces behind phase separation and to predict condensate formation and dynamics. This approach is fundamentally reshaping our understanding of the cell interior, moving away from a view of homogeneous cytoplasm towards a model incorporating these dynamic, non-membrane bound compartments as key organizers of biochemical reactions and regulators of cellular processes.

Beyond Substance: The Emergence of Nongeneric Matter

The longstanding assumption that life is simply a complex arrangement of matter governed by universal physical laws faces increasing scrutiny with the recognition of nongeneric matter. This isn’t to suggest a rejection of physics, but rather an acknowledgment that living systems exhibit properties-such as self-replication, metabolism, and adaptation-that aren’t readily explained by the behavior of inert matter alone. These emergent qualities suggest life organizes matter in fundamentally new ways, creating materials with unique characteristics and behaviors. The existence of nongeneric matter implies that life isn’t merely described by physical laws, but actively constitutes a new level of material reality, possessing intrinsic features not predictable from purely reductionist approaches. This challenges purely materialistic worldviews, prompting a re-evaluation of how matter itself is understood and whether life represents a qualitative shift in material organization, demanding expanded theoretical frameworks to fully account for its distinctiveness.

Dialectical Materialism presents a compelling alternative to reductionist views of life by proposing that matter isn’t simply inert substance, but exists in varying qualities and organizations. This framework acknowledges that living systems represent a distinct phase of material existence, emerging from-and continuously interacting with-non-living matter, yet possessing emergent properties not predictable from its components alone. Rather than seeking to eliminate qualitative differences and reduce life to purely physical laws, Dialectical Materialism embraces them as fundamental aspects of material reality, emphasizing that new forms of matter-like those found in organisms-arise through internal contradictions and transformations within existing material conditions. This perspective allows for a nuanced understanding of continuity between the living and non-living, while simultaneously respecting the unique characteristics that define biological organization and function, offering a pathway to reconcile materialism with the observable complexities of life.

A truly comprehensive understanding of life’s unique properties necessitates operational coherence-a rigorous consistency in how different scientific disciplines approach its study. This isn’t merely about avoiding contradiction, but actively seeking integration; for instance, the insights gained from studying the complex, self-organizing properties of biological systems should inform and be informed by research in fields like physics and chemistry. Without this interdisciplinary alignment, investigations into nongeneric matter risk becoming fragmented, with findings in one area failing to resonate or build upon those in another. Achieving operational coherence demands a shared methodological framework and a commitment to translating concepts across disciplinary boundaries, ultimately fostering a holistic view of life that transcends the limitations of isolated scientific inquiry and allows for a richer, more nuanced understanding of its fundamental nature.

Towards a Holistic Biophysics: Beyond Reductionist Tendencies

Conventional biophysics, while adept at dissecting biological processes into their constituent parts, frequently encounters limitations when attempting to reconstruct a complete understanding of living systems. This reductionist tendency, though yielding valuable insights into individual molecular interactions and cellular mechanisms, often overlooks the emergent properties arising from the complex interplay of these components. Living matter isn’t simply the sum of its parts; it exhibits behaviors – such as self-organization, adaptation, and resilience – that stem from the intricate relationships and feedback loops within its hierarchical structure. A truly comprehensive biophysics must therefore move beyond isolated analysis, embracing methodologies that account for these holistic properties and recognizing that the behavior of the whole system cannot always be predicted from the characteristics of its individual components. This requires integrating concepts from fields like complex systems theory and non-equilibrium thermodynamics to capture the dynamic and interconnected nature of life.

While the perspective of informationism has proven invaluable in characterizing biological processes – often framing life as the manipulation of data and signaling – it occasionally risks obscuring the fundamental material reality underpinning these phenomena. A purely informational approach can sometimes treat the physical substance of living systems as merely a passive conduit, overlooking how the inherent properties of molecules, cells, and tissues actively shape and constrain biological function. This can lead to incomplete models that fail to account for emergent behaviors arising from the material organization itself – for example, the mechanical properties of the cytoskeleton influencing cell signaling, or the role of lipid composition in membrane protein function. A comprehensive biophysics recognizes that information processing is inextricably linked to, and indeed enabled by*, the specific material properties and physical architecture of living matter, demanding an integrated approach that considers both aspects for a complete understanding.

The emerging field of Biological Physics aims to move beyond traditional disciplinary boundaries, recognizing that life’s phenomena arise not simply from isolated biochemical reactions, but from the complex interplay of physical forces and material properties within living systems. This necessitates a convergence of insights from materials science – understanding how the arrangement of molecules dictates macroscopic behavior – with the fundamental principles of physics, and the detailed observations of biology. Researchers envision a future where biological structures are not treated as static entities, but as dynamic, responsive materials governed by principles of self-assembly, non-equilibrium thermodynamics, and active matter physics. By embracing this inherent complexity, Biological Physics seeks to establish a unified framework for understanding life, bridging the gap between the molecular world and the observable characteristics of living organisms and ultimately offering a more complete and predictive understanding of biological processes.

The pursuit of defining life through solely reductionist physical laws proves, predictably, incomplete. This study rightly challenges the assumption that living systems are merely complex arrangements of generic matter, instead positing emergent properties defining distinct ‘forms of matter’. It echoes a fundamental truth: a system that never breaks is, in essence, dead. As Pyotr Kapitsa observed, “One needs to be able to see the forest, not just the trees.” The insistence on holistic understanding, recognizing morphodynamics and the interplay of biomolecular condensates, acknowledges that life isn’t built, but grown – a complex ecosystem where context and emergence are paramount. The failure to recognize this is not an error, but a necessary purification of thought.

What’s Next?

The insistence on ‘forms of matter’ – a distinction between the generically physical and the biogenetically specific – predictably invites further delineation. The immediate task isn’t simply to catalogue these forms, but to accept the inherent instability of such categorization. Any attempt to define life’s boundaries will, by necessity, reveal exceptions – edges where the ‘rules’ bend, then break. The expectation of neat, universally applicable laws within biology is a vestige of a clockwork universe long since abandoned by physics itself.

Future work must embrace this ambiguity. Morphodynamics, as a potential bridge between physical principles and biological realization, offers a useful, if incomplete, framework. However, the focus shouldn’t be on predicting biological outcomes – a guarantee is just a contract with probability – but on understanding the constraints within which these outcomes emerge. Stability is merely an illusion that caches well. The search for ‘biomolecular condensate function’ risks replicating the functionalist errors of prior decades, presuming a pre-ordained purpose where there is only contextual adaptation.

Chaos isn’t failure – it’s nature’s syntax. The truly difficult questions aren’t about what life is, but about what it isn’t – the spaces outside of self-organization, the limits of emergence. A complete understanding will likely require abandoning the notion of ‘matter’ altogether, recognizing it as a provisional description of patterned energy, and acknowledging that the most profound insights will arise from studying the failures, the anomalies, the beautifully imperfect edges of existence.

Original article: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.11234.pdf

Contact the author: https://www.linkedin.com/in/avetisyan/