Living systems contain immense molecular, structural, and hierarchical complexity, yet complexity alone does not explain why heterogeneous components constitute a determinate living whole. This paper develops an axiomatic theory in which the Life Organizational Structure O(L) is the sole primitive object, and every other theoretical object is derived through a non-circular dependency relation. The framework establishes the formal sequence O(L) => R => C => M => Ω => FO => Σ => Ψ => T, where R denotes organizational relations, C organizational constraints, M organizational boundary, Ω the Organizational Regulatory Domain, FO Fixed Order, Σ an admissible organizational realization, Ψ the complete Life Organizational State, and T organizational transformation. This architecture separates admissibility, order, transformation, irreversibility, and uniqueness. At hierarchical level h, a collection satisfying a common organizational condition becomes a higher-level unit through a boundary, C_h ->[M_h] Uₕ₊₁, providing a recursive mechanism by which internal complexity becomes higher-level organizational simplicity. For DNA-based life, the four-base alphabet B={A,T,C,G} admits an exact quaternary representation, but alphabet cardinality alone does not imply a quaternary biological law. The stronger biological hypothesis concerns ordered organizational realization under a DNA-specific Regulatory Domain and Fixed Order. The theory distinguishes organizational growth, completion, division, inheritance, development, maturity, lifecycle persistence, aging, and pathology as logically separate processes. A complete Life Organizational State is represented as Ψ_L=(X,R,E,V), where E and V denote Explicit and Implicit Organization. An empirical interface connects theoretical organization to measurable prediction, and a biological specialization is experimentally falsifiable only when its predicted measurement set is a proper subset of the possible measurement space. The resulting theory provides a formal path from primitive life organization to restrictive and experimentally testable biological predictions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yao Wu (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: