Didn't I say something about measuring all the particles and energies? Ah, yes, I did. But I also meant measuring their every relationship to each other. If you attempt to do this, you will find that the energies, the particles, their conversions molecularly, their relational positions, inside the conversion process, are way more complex than the end result that they produce.
Attempts to make measurements like this have been attempted for years using microcalorimetric functions. But it still is way beyond our reach because of the complexity involved.
This is an unfalsifiable hypothesis. There is no way to test it, because you state that this concept of complexity is (as yet) unmeasurable. Unless you meant the "calorific measurements"? Measurement of heat is not measurement of complexity.
Do you have any other suggested measures of complexity that actually *do* exist?
Which is more complex, ice or water?
Measuring heat vibrations and how they react on individual sub-atomic particles in their relationships with each other is a complexity beyond understanding at present. This unmeasurable complexity is what produces the result.
So you're not sure if ice or water is more complex? Then how can you say that some level of complexity is only a result of something more complex?
Here's how. Since entropy pervades everything, ultimately everything that is made out of something else is at least slightly less complex than the thing that made it, due to entropy.
Are you trying to go for a swim inside ice, or what
If you don't know which is more complex in that case, how can you be certain which is more complex in any arbitrary case? I will accept answers other than "Because that's the way I think it is".
If you really want the answer to the complexity of ice and water, do the research.
