Morphology deals with the form and structure of objects. Originality speaks to something being the only one of its kind. Placing the two together explains the existence of a naturally-occurring, scientifically observable phenomenon where every item in nature has something completely unique about its structure and/or form.
The concept of originality has been examined in numerous studies throughout the years. The results of one study in particular have brought us a universally accepted understanding that no two snowflakes are alike. We all know about originality with every snowflake, but how many people are aware of Wilson Alwyn Bentley (1861-1931) who’s meticulous observations proved uniqueness among every snowflake? Bentley noted that there were no duplicates found from the 5,381 snowflakes that he photographed.
Anyone can confirm for themselves the total originality found in the 2,000 photographs of snowflakes he photographed. This is scientifically, historically, and culturally significant. Without his observations, we would not have common knowledge of originality in snowflakes.
This introduces just one of the many examples of an absolute lack of redundancy found in different samples in nature. Even better, anyone who doubts this can readily repeat the same observational experiment for themselves.
Common knowledge based in fact can only result from testing that can be proven to a certain degree of probability and reliability. Without the accuracy of a scientific observable process, we have only rumor, wives tales, or speculations at best.
Similarly, we all know that there are no two fingerprints alike. On a case by case basis, we come to understand and believe these facts of common knowledge brought about with evidence-based proof.
The basis for the significance of total originality morphology is in the bigger picture. We accept independent cases for a lack of duplicates within a grouping of objects, but there are greater implications when we find that originality is not just common among several examples, like snowflakes and fingerprints, but rather it is found across all things animate and inanimate.
How is it possible for completely different categories of objects to share such an unusual characteristic, namely originality?
Looking at this phenomenon from a practical, statistical perspective, we should easily be able to formulate an expected outcome. Since there are only two possibilities, similar or different, we should have the same likelihood as any other statistical probability.
In a coin toss, there is a 50/50 chance of turning up heads. The more times it is tested against the hypothesis, the closer to this standard it will become.
We find a similar scenario with protein synthesis, producing left-handed and right-handed results equally.
Statistical analysis provides a simple logic to conclude that just like a coin toss or synthesized protein, we should expect a 50/50 chance that a snowflake will be unique or a duplicate. We should find that fingerprints are originals only half of the time.
This logic is not haphazard. It is well understood that the natural process that produces a snowflake is much more likely to produce duplicates. It would not require the same organization and would not require some kind of mechanism by which there was an unending, vast array of originals. Even the basics of random variation cannot provide explanation for absolute, total originality.
What we are exploring, though, with an originality morphology law, is not specific to the snowflake or to the fingerprint. Rather, it is the fact that objects so different from one another share the characteristic of originality. What other similarities between the two objects can explain their absolutely unique qualities?
5,381 snowflakes and over 3 Billion fingerprints…
and none of them alike.