>"E&M is far from "simple". It contains special relativity, for starters."
A theory (which is just a set of assumed first principles and rules of logic) can be simple but allow you to deduce vast complexity from it. In fact, it is ideal for a theory to be as simple as possible.
I can't begin to imagine why this would trigger a downvote. Are there people out there who prefer complex theories that make things more difficult to understand than necessary? Perhaps because it makes them feel smart or something, I don't know.
But that is basically saying you dislike science, because the point of science is to synthesize information into a small set of simple "laws" that allow us to deduce accurate and precise predictions.
A theory (which is just a set of assumed first principles and rules of logic) can be simple but allow you to deduce vast complexity from it. In fact, it is ideal for a theory to be as simple as possible.
The "game of life" is not really a theory, but it demonstrates that simple rules can lead to surprising complexity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life
EDIT:
I can't begin to imagine why this would trigger a downvote. Are there people out there who prefer complex theories that make things more difficult to understand than necessary? Perhaps because it makes them feel smart or something, I don't know.
But that is basically saying you dislike science, because the point of science is to synthesize information into a small set of simple "laws" that allow us to deduce accurate and precise predictions.