The biotensegrity of our living body

This article on biotensegrity describes the difference in how we represent our living body. Applying linear math to our biological structures comes form the misapprehension that it works like inanimate machines. Such math comes from a top-down and bottom-up approach noted earlier, the sort of logic that assumes necessary and sufficient conditions to categorize things in a particular set theoretic model. The biotensegrity of our bodies via fascia though doesn't work in that way; it's a whole system functionality that depends on the connectivity of the parts working in unison. The function is distributed in the overall tensegrity of the system, not in the linear set relationships between the parts and the whole.

Contemporary biomechanics uses linear equations to describe this, simplifying the math to a straight line for ease and consistency. However "true linearity does not exist in biology - not even as an approximation."  The math of its function is better represented by a curve, which operates differently "at all its different levels and size-scales [... so it is] incredibly complicated to analyze mathematically." 

Such a complicated math is required to even come close to representing how our living body works. Reducing it to the math of scale-free repetition might work well for a metaphysical set theory but not for living systems. And we are the latter, so if we want to represent it properly then we'll have to do the necessary math. Such a math would itself have to be almost if not as complex and the system it represents: Different at "different levels and size-scales." Of course such a math would need to operate on different axioms or first principles. As the article notes, biotensegrity is indeed based on the first principles of empirical physics, not the Platonic or Aristotelian first principles of metaphysical categories.