This article explores the concept of "computational irreducibility" and its impact on legal practice.
It draws parallels between legal cases and complex systems like chess, where outcomes are difficult to predict.
It emphasises the importance of flexibility and preparedness in legal strategies due to inherent unpredictability.

"Computational irreducibility" is a concept from the field of cellular automata and more broadly from the study of complex systems, first introduced by scientist Stephen Wolfram in his book "A New Kind of Science."

In essence:

Computational irreducibility suggests that for some processes, the only way to know the outcome is to perform the computation itself – there are no "shortcuts" or simpler ways to predict the result.
This is in contrast to "computational reducibility," where one can predict outcomes without having to simulate or perform the entire process.
In certain systems, despite knowing all the rules and initial conditions, the only way to predict the final outcome is to actually carry out the entire process. There's no shortcut, no formula that can give you the answer without going through each step.

For example, in a game of chess, despite the game's rules being quite simple, the number of potential games is SO LARGE, that there's no feasible way to predict the outcome of a game without actually playing it out – each game of chess is computationally irreducible.

The number of possible chess games is so large that it is difficult to comprehend. It has been estimated that there are more possible chess games than there are atoms in the universe. This is because there are so many different ways that the pieces can be moved and so many different possible outcomes.

There are 16 possible moves for the first move in chess. After the first move, there are 32 possible moves for the second move, and so on. This means that there are 16 * 32 * 32 * ... * 32 = 10^43 possible chess games after 64 moves!

I’ve been thinking about this concept "computational irreducibility" for years, and I began thinking about it again after seeing this YouTube video of a conversation between Lex Fridman and Stephen Wolfram:

Life in an illusion: The fabric of reality is constantly being rewritten | Stephen Wolfram

The whole clip is fascinating and worth watching (many times).

At 3:28 mins, Stephen Wolfram says:

… where everything in the world is full of computational irreducibility we never know what's going to happen next the only way we can figure out what's going to happen next is just let the system run and see what happens …

The concept of computational irreducibility has significant implications in fields like physics, computer science, and philosophy. For instance, if the universe is computationally irreducible, as Wolfram suggests, then it means that even with a complete understanding of physical laws, there may be no way to predict certain phenomena without simulating the entire history of the universe up to that point.

The concepts also applies in other, less scientific-based fields.

For me, the idea rings true in the legal profession.

When a client approaches us at the outset of a legal dispute, they often seek reassurance and clarity about how the case might unfold.

While we can provide them with our insights based on our experience and understanding of the law, the reality is that each legal case is a complex system, much like a game of chess.

We're dealing with a myriad of variables - evolving evidence, human emotions, changing laws, judicial discretion, and so much more.

This mindset becomes increasingly relevant as the world becomes more complex.

It's tempting to think that with enough expertise, we can predict the outcome of a case before it reaches trial. However, the concept of computational irreducibility reminds us that the only surefire way to see the result is to go through the process itself - every negotiation, every application, every piece of discovery, every testimony.

This doesn't mean we can't provide valuable advice or make educated predictions.

What it does highlight is the importance of preparing for a range of potential outcomes and staying agile in our strategies.

In the world of law, as in complex computational systems, “sometimes the journey is the only way to the destination” (Ralph Waldo Emerson).