Constructal law


The tree is the natural flow design that evolves to achieve flow access between one point and a volume. Alternating trees achieve flow access between two planes. Natural porous media such as soil exhibit multi-scale flow structures consistent with the multiple scales and performance of alternating trees.

The tree is the natural flow design that evolves to achieve flow access between one point and a volume. Alternating trees achieve flow access between two planes. Natural porous media such as soil exhibit multi-scale flow structures consistent with the multiple scales and performance of alternating trees. (By Sylvie Lorente)


Constructal law is a theory in physics concerning the evolution of design (configurations, patterns, geometry) in nature. Natural design evolution and the constructal law unite all animate and inanimate systems [1][2]. In order to have evolution, the system must have freedom to morph. The constructal law was stated by Adrian Bejan in 1996 as follows: “For a finite-size system to persist in time (to live), it must evolve in such a way that it provides easier access to the imposed currents that flow through it.”[3][4][5]. “Constructal law” was coined by Bejan to describe the natural tendency of flow systems (e.g. rivers, trees and branches [6], and engineered forms[7]) to generate and evolve structures that increase flow access [3][8].


The constructal law was proposed in 1996 as a summary of all design generation and evolution phenomena in nature, bio and non-bio. The constructal law represents three steps toward making “design in nature” a concept and law-based domain in science [4]:

  1. Life is flow: all flow systems with freedom to morph are living systems, the animate and the inanimate [2].
  2. Design generation and evolution is a phenomenon of physics [9].
  3. Designs have the universal tendency to evolve in a certain direction in time [10].

The constructal law is proposed as a first principle of physics accounting for all design and evolution in nature. It holds that shape and structure arise freely to facilitate flow. The designs that happen and evolve in nature reflect this tendency: they allow entities to flow more easily – to measurably move more current farther and faster per unit of useful energy consumed [11][12][13][14]. Rain drops, for example, coalesce and move together, generating rivulets, streams and the mighty river basins of the world because this design allows them to move more easily [15].


The constructal law covers natural phenomena of organization, such as tree-shaped flows, round tubes and bones, scaling laws, etc. The lightning bolts that flash across the sky generate a tree-like structure because this is a good design for moving a current (electricity) from an area (the cloud) to a point (a church steeple or another cloud). The circulatory and nervous systems of biological creatures generate a similar tree-like design because they too are moving currents from a point to an area and from an area to a point [16].

Although treelike structures are a very common design in nature, they are only one manifestation of the constructal law. In a simple example, logs floating on a lake or icebergs at sea orient themselves perpendicularly to the wind, which increases the transfer of motion from the moving air body to the water body. A more complex example is the design of animals that have evolved to move mass more efficiently (to cover more distance per unit of useful energy) across the landscape [17-20].

This includes the seemingly “characteristic” sizes of organs, the shape of bones, the rhythm of breathing lungs and beating hearts, of undulating tails, running legs, and flapping wings. The constructal law proclaims that all these designs have arisen—and work together—to allow animals, like raindrops in a river basin, to move more easily across a landscape [21][22]. Because human beings are not separate from but a part of nature, their designs are also governed by the constructal law [18][23][24].

Evolutionary Design

The constructal law defines the time direction of all evolutionary design phenomena. It states that designs should evolve over time to acquire better configurations to provide more access for the currents that flow through them. It defines in physics terms what it means to be “better”, more “fit”, to “survive”, and to be efficient. Not all changes are improvements, but those that stick are the ones that measurably enhance flow [8][25].

Constructal design occurs at every scale. Each component of an evolving flow system—each rivulet, each tree, and each road—acquires evolving designs to facilitate flow access. As these elements coalesce into larger and larger structures (into evolving river basins, forests and transport networks), a hierarchy emerges such that the multi sized components and channels work together so that everything flows more easily [15]. This is seen in the shape and structure of the neural networks in the brain, of the alveoli in the lung, the size and distribution of vegetation in the forest and of human settlements on the map [18][24][26].

In the big picture, all the mating and morphing flows on the largest system that surrounds us, the Earth itself, evolve to enhance global flow. For example, trees and other forms of vegetation that move moisture from the ground to the air are components of the larger global system, including forests, river basins and weather patterns, that have the tendency to equilibrate all the moisture on Earth [27]. The constructal law states that every flow system is destined to remain imperfect. The direction of design evolution is toward distributing the imperfections of the system, such that the “whole” flows easier (e.g., river basin, animal body, human vehicle) [28].

Evolution never ends. Optimality statements (minimum, maximum, optimum, static, end design, destiny) have only local, limited applicability. The constructal law covers them because it is about the time direction of all the evolutionary design phenomena.

The constructal law is a law of physics—the law of design generation and evolution in nature. The natural phenomenon is not the elimination but the distribution (better and better over time) of imperfection. The distribution of imperfection generates the geometry (shape, structure) of the system [29][30]. Today, optimization of many systems arising in engineering such as conductive pathways (fins, and highly conductive inserts), convective channels are inspired by constructal law.

For example, in point-area and point-volume flows, the constructal law predicts tree architectures, such flows displaying at least two regimes: one highly resistive and one with lower resistivity. The constructal-law tendency manifests itself at every scale [31].


The constructal law underpins a unifying theory of evolution. It holds that inanimate and animate phenomena generate evolving configurations to move more easily. The constructal law also provides the physics definition of life, of what it means to be alive. It states that life means flow and the free morphing of design. If the flows stop, the system is dead (in thermodynamic equilibrium with its environment). The constructal law is the physics law of life, design and evolution [2][9][16].

Constructal Thermodynamics

Thermodynamics rests on two laws. Both are first principles: The first law commands the conservation of energy, and the second law commands irreversibility: the tendency of all currents to flow from high (temperature, pressure) to low. These two laws are about systems in the most general sense, viewed as black boxes, without shape and structure.

The two laws of thermodynamics do not account for nature completely. Nature is not made of black boxes. Nature’s boxes are filled with evolving, freely morphing configurations—even the fact that they have names (rivers, blood vessels) is due to their appearance, organization, or design. Where the second law commands that things should flow from high to low, the constructal law commands that they evolve in configurations that flow more and more easily over time [29].


In contrast to fractal models of observed objects in nature, the constructal law is predictive and thus can be tested experimentally [32][33][34][35]. Many natural designs, animate and inanimate, have been explained and unified by the constructal law [14][15][36][37]. For example:


The falsifiability of constructal theories was demonstrated in refs. [52] and [54] and in accord with test proposed by Ellis and Silk [55].


One reservation toward the constructal law is that its formulation is vague [56][57]. The constructal law states that “For a finite-size system to persist in time (to live), it must evolve in such a way that it provides easier access to the imposed currents that flow through it”, but there is neither a mention of what these “currents” are nor an explicit definition of what “providing easier access” means, nor precisely formulating the relationship with math. Without defining the physical quantities or their exact relationships, it is not physical or mathematical. There has been no attempt to prove it from first principles. Contrarily to alternative theories of non-equilibrium thermodynamics [58][59].

There is also the claim that “the constructal law can be seen as a complement to MEP (maximum entropy production)” [56].

Responses to criticisms

No criticism has been published in the peer reviewed literature against the constructal law as a law of physics. Strictly speaking refs. [58][59] published long after 1996 do not refer to the constructal law at all. There is one person who questioned the clarity of the language used in the constructal law [56][57]. In ref. [57], Kleidon wrote “It is as yet unclear how the term ‘access’ in the definition of the constructal theory (sic) can be quantified, but its original roots are undoubtedly in thermodynamics”. Bejan has responded by noting that one cannot prove a first principle based on other first principles [60]. The constructal law is not about what flows, but about the physics phenomenon of how any flow system acquires its evolving configuration (design) over time. The constructal law is not about optimality (max, min, opt)—it is the definition of “life” in physics terms, and of the time direction of the changes in flow configuration [61].

Bejan [60] also noted that the phenomenon governed by the constructal law (evolution of design in nature) is macroscopic (finite size, not infinitesimal). It is the birth of design and the evolution of design in all the parts together. It is dynamic, not static. The evolution never ends. There is no end design, no destiny (max, min, opt) [62][63].

Bejan and Lorente expanded on this [62] by explaining the difference between a law of physics (e.g., the constructal law) and the many invocations of the law, which underpin many “theories” based on the law. In the section titled “The constructal law versus the second law of thermodynamics” they noted that the constructal law and the second law are first principles. The constructal law is a useful reminder not only of what was missing in physics and thermodynamics (the law of design and evolution) but also of what is present. For example, contrary to the critic’s view, the first and second laws of thermodynamics did not require any “proof based on simplified systems of statistical physics.”

The constructal law is a statement of a natural tendency—the time direction of the phenomenon. It is as non-mathematical as the original statements of the second law:

Clausius: No process is possible whose sole result is the transfer of heat from a body of lower temperature to a body of higher temperature.

Kelvin: Spontaneously, heat cannot flow from cold regions to hot regions without external work being performed on the system.

A new law does not have to be stated in mathematical terms. The mathematization of the second law statement (and of thermodynamics) came later. The constructal law underwent the same evolution. The 1996 statement was followed in 2004 by a complete mathematical formulation of constructal-law thermodynamics [64].

Flow leads to better flow. Like any other law of physics, the constructal law is a concise summary of observed facts: the natural tendency of flow systems to evolve toward configurations that provide easier access over time. The word “access” means the ability to move through a confined space such as a crowded room. This is why “finite size” appears in the constructal law statement. This mental viewing covers all the flow design and evolution phenomena, animate and inanimate, because they all morph to enter and to flow better, more easily [62][65][66].

Finally, Reis has showed that MEP (maximum entropy production), like its complete opposite (minimum entropy production) is a special ad-hoc optimality principle that is covered by the constructal law [67].


  1. Livni, Ephrat. “Everything, including the growing income disparity, can be explained by physics”. Quartz. Quartz Media LLC. Retrieved 25 September2017.
  2. T. Basak (2011), “The law of life: the bridge between physics and biology: comment on “The constructal law and the evolution of design in nature” by A. Bejan and S. Lorente”, Phys Life Rev 8(3), pp. 249–52 (doi: 10.1016/j.plrev.2011.07.003); A. Bejan, S. Lorente (2010), “The constructal law and the evolution of design in nature“, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B vol. 365, issue 1545 (doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0302).
  3. A. Bejan (1997), Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics (2nd ed.), New York: Wiley.
  4. A. Kremer-Marietti, J. Dhombres (2006), L’Épistemologie, Paris: Ellipses.
  5. Bejan, Adrian (March 2017). “Evolution in thermodynamics”. Applied Physics Reviews. 4 (1): 011305. doi:10.1063/1.4978611. Retrieved 8 October 2017.
  6. Tondeur, D.; Fan, Y.; Luo, L. (2009). “Constructal optimization of arborescent structures with flow singularities”. Chem Eng Sci. 64: 3968–3982. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2009.05.052.
  7. D. Queiros-Conde, M. Feidt (eds., 2009), Constructal Theory and Multi-scale Geometries: Theory and Applications in Energetics, Chemical Engineering and Materials, Paris: Les Presses de L’ENSTA.
  8. Reis, A. H. (2006). “Constructal theory: from engineering to physics, and how flow systems develop shape and structure”. Appl Mech Rev. 59: 269–282. Bibcode:2006ApMRv..59..269R. doi:10.1115/1.2204075.
  9. Wang, L. (2011). “Universality of design and its evolution”. Phys Life Rev. 8: 257–258. Bibcode:2011PhLRv…8..257W. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2011.08.003.
  10. N. Acuña, Mindshare. Igniting Creativity and Innovation Through Design Intelligence (Motion, Henderson, Nevada 2012).
  11. Miguel, A. F. (2011). “The physics principle of the generation of flow configuration”. Phys Life Rev. 8: 243–244. Bibcode:2011PhLRv…8..243M. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2011.07.006.
  12. Miguel, A. F. (2006). “Constructal pattern formation in stony corals, bacterial colonies and plant roots under different hydrodynamics conditions”. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 242: 954–961. doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2006.05.010. PMID 16839570.
  13. Miguel, A. F.; Bejan, A. (2009). “The principle that generates dissimilar patterns inside aggregates of organisms”. Journal Physica A. 388: 727–731. Bibcode:2009PhyA..388..727M. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2008.11.013.
  14.  A. H. Reis and C. Gama, Sand size versus beachface slope – an explanation based on the Constructal Law, Geomorphology 114, 276-283 (2010).
  15. Reis, A. H. (2006). “Constructal view of scaling laws of river basins”. Geomorphology. 78: 201–206. Bibcode:2006Geomo..78..201R. doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.01.015.
  16. Reis, A. H. (2011). “Design in nature, and the laws of physics”. Phys Life Rev. 8: 255–256. Bibcode:2011PhLRv…8..255R. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2011.07.001.
  17. Bejan, A; Marden, James H. (2006). Constructing Animal Locomotion from New Thermodynamics Theory. American Scientist, July–August, Volume 94, Number 4
  18. G. Resconi, Morphotronics and Constructal theory, LINDI 2011, 3rd IEEE Int. Symp. Logistics and Industrial Informatics, Budapest, Hungary, August 25–27 (2011).
  19. L. C. Kelley and K. Behan, Empathy & evolution: how dogs convert stress into flow. Psychology Today 6 August 2012.
  20. L. C. Kelley and K. Behan, The canine mind bows to the Constructal Law. Psychology Today 16 October (2012).
  21. Bejan, A (2010). “The Constructal Law Origin of the Wheel, Size, and Skeleton in Animal Design”. American Journal of Physics. 78 (7): 692–699. Bibcode:2010AmJPh..78..692B. doi:10.1119/1.3431988.
  22. Miguel, Antonio F. (27 April 2009). “Constructal theory of pedestrian dynamics”. Physics Letters A. 373 (20): 1734–1738. Bibcode:2009PhLA..373.1734M. doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2009.03.020.
  23. Bejan, A; Merkx, Gilbert A, eds. (2007). “Constructal Theory of Social Dynamics.” New York: Springer.
  24. P. Kalason, Épistémologie Constructale du Lien Cultuel (L’Harmattan, Paris, 2007).
  25. Bejan, Adrian (2005). “The Constructal Law of Organization in Nature: Tree-shaped flows and body size”. Journal of Experimental Biology. 208 (9): 1677–1686. doi:10.1242/jeb.01487. PMID 15855399.
  26. Lorente, S; Bejan, A (2010). “Few Large and Many Small: Hierarchy in Movement on Earth”. International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics. 5 (3): 1–14.
  27. Bejan, Adrian; Lorente, Sylvie; Lee, J. (7 October 2008). “Unifying constructal theory of tree roots, canopies and forests”. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 254 (3): 529–540. doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2008.06.026. PMID 18647610.
  28. Ventikos, Y. (2011). “The importance of the constructal framework in understanding and eventually replicating structure in tissue”. Phys Life Rev. 8: 241–242. Bibcode:2011PhLRv…8..241V. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2011.07.007.
  29. Bejan, A; Lorente, S (2008). “Design with Constructal Theory,” Hoboken: Wiley.
  30. Eslami, M.; Jafarpur, K. (2012). “Optimal distribution of imperfection in conductive constructal designs of arbitrary configurations”. J Appl Phys. 112: 104905. Bibcode:2012JAP…112j4905E. doi:10.1063/1.4766443.
  31. M. R. Errera and C. A. Marin, A Comparison Between Random and Deterministic Dynamics of River Drainage Basins Formation, Engenharia Térmica (Thermal Engineering), Vol. 8, n. 01, 65-71 (2009).
  32. Hart, R. A. (2011). “Experimental thermal-hydraulic evaluation of constructal microfluidic structures under fully constrained conditions”. Int J Heat Mass Transfer. 54: 3661–3671. doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2011.02.063.
  33. Hart, R. A.; Ponkala, M. J. V. (2011). “Development and testing of a constructal microchannel flow system with dynamically controlled complexity”. Int J Heat Mass Transfer. 54: 5470–5480. doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2011.07.044.
  34. Z. Fan, X. Zhou, L. Luo and W. Yuan, “Experimental investigation of the flow distribution of a 2-dimensional constructal distributor. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 33, 77−83 (2008).
  35. Cho, K.-H.; Chang, W.-P.; Kim, M.-H. (2011). “A numerical and experimental study to evaluate performance of vascularized cooling plates”. Int J Heat Mass Transfer. 32: 1186–1198. doi:10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2011.09.006.
  36. D. Haller, P. Woias and N. Kockmann, “Simulation and experimental investigation of pressure loss and heat transfer in microchannel networks containing bends and T-junctions. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 52, 2678−2689 (2009).
  37. L. Chen, “Progress in study on constructal theory and its applications. Science China, Technological Sciences 55 (3), 802-820 (2012).
  38.  Bejan, Adrian; Reis, Antonio H. (25 March 2005). “Thermodynamic optimization of global circulation and climate”. International Journal of Energy Research. 29 (4): 303–316. doi:10.1002/er.1058.
  39. Bejan, Adrian (Summer 1996). “Street network theory of organization in nature”. Journal of Advanced Transportation. 30 (2): 85–107. doi:10.1002/atr.5670300207.
  40. Bejan, Adrian; Ledezma, Gustavo A. (15 June 1998). “Streets tree networks and urban growth: Optimal geometry for quickest access between a finite-size volume and one point”. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications. 255 (1–2): 211–217. Bibcode:1998PhyA..255..211B. doi:10.1016/S0378-4371(98)00085-5.
  41. Bejan, A.; Lorente, S.; Yilbas, B.S.; Sahin, A.Z. (26 April 2013). “Why solidification has an S-shaped history”. Nature Scientific Reports. 3: 1711. Bibcode:2013NatSR…3E1711B. doi:10.1038/srep01711.
  42. Bejan, Adrian; Marden, James H. (January 15, 2006). “Unifying constructal theory for scale effects in running, swimming and flying”. Journal of Experimental Biology. 209 (2): 238–248. doi:10.1242/jeb.01974. PMID 16391346.
  43. Charles, Jordan D.; Bejan, A. (August 1, 2009). “The evolution of speed, size and shape in modern athletics”. Journal of Experimental Biology. 212 (15): 2419–2425. doi:10.1242/jeb.031161. PMID 19617435.
  44. Bejan, Adrian (February 2001). “The tree of convective heat streams: its thermal insulation function and the predicted 3/4-power relation between body heat loss and body size”. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. 44(4): 699–704. doi:10.1016/S0017-9310(00)00138-1.
  45. Bejan, Adrian (June 1997). “Theory of Organization in Nature: Pulsating Physiological Processes”. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. 40(9): 2097–2104. doi:10.1016/S0017-9310(96)00291-8.
  46. Reis, A. H.; Miguel, A. F.; Aydin, M. (16 April 2004). “Constructal theory of flow architecture of the lungs”. Medical Physics. 31 (5): 1135–1140. Bibcode:2004MedPh..31.1135R. doi:10.1118/1.1705443.
  47. Bejan, A. (24 Aug 2012). “Why the bigger live longer and travel farther: animals, vehicles, rivers and the winds”. Nature Scientific Reports. 2: 594. Bibcode:2012NatSR…2E.594B. doi:10.1038/srep00594. PMC 3426796Freely accessible. PMID 22924107.
  48. Bejan, A.; Charles, J. D.; Lorente, S. (22 July 2014). “The evolution of airplanes”. Journal of Applied Physics. 116: 044901. Bibcode:2014JAP…116d4901B. doi:10.1063/1.4886855.
  49. Chen, R.; Wen, C. Y.; Lorente, S.; Bejan, A. (7 July 2016). “The evolution of helicopters”. Journal of Applied Physics. 120 (1): 014901. doi:10.1063/1.4954976.
  50. Bejan, A.; Almerbati, A.; Lorente, S. (28 January 2017). “Economies of scale: The physics basis”. Journal of Applied Physics. 121 (4): 044907. doi:10.1063/1.4974962. Retrieved 5 October 2017.
  51. Bejan, A.; Errera, M. R. (28 March 2017). “Wealth inequality: The physics basis”. Journal of Applied Physics. 121 (12): 124903. doi:10.1063/1.4977962.
  52. Bejan, A.; Wagstaff, R. W. (7 March 2016). “The physics origin of the hierarchy of bodies in space”. Journal of Applied Physics. 119 (9): 094901. doi:10.1063/1.4941986.
  53. Bejan, Adrian; Lorente, Sylvie (15 August 2006). “Constructal theory of generation of configuration in nature and engineering”. Journal of Applied Physics. 100 (4): 041301. doi:10.1063/1.2221896.
  54. Errera, M. R. (2017). “Constructal Law in Light of Philosophy of Science”. Proceedings of the Romanian Academy, Series A. in press.
  55. Ellis, George; Silk, Joe (16 December 2014). “Scientific method: Defend the integrity of physics”. Nature. 516 (7531): 321–323. doi:10.1038/516321a.
  56. Kleidon, A (2009). “Nonequilibrium thermodynamics and maximum entropy production in the Earth system: Applications and implications”. Naturwissenschaften. 96: 653–677. Bibcode:2009NW….tmp…18K. doi:10.1007/s00114-009-0509-x. PMID 19241052.
  57. Kleidon, A; Malhi, Y; Cox, PM (2010). “Maximum entropy production in environmental and ecological systems”. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 365: 1297–1302. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0018.
  58. Dewar, Roderick (7 January 2003). “Information theory explanation of the fluctuation theorem, maximum entropy production and self-organized criticality in non-equilibrium stationary states”. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General. 36 (3): 631–641. arXiv:cond-mat/0005382Freely accessible. Bibcode:2003JPhA…36..631D. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/36/3/303.
  59. Dewar, Roderick C (10 May 2005). “Maximum entropy production and the fluctuation theorem”. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General. 38 (21): L371-L381. Bibcode:2005JPhA…38L.371D. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/38/21/l01.
  60. Bejan, A. (2010). Design in nature, thermodynamics, and the constructal law. Comment on “Life, hierarchy, and the thermodynamic machinery of planet Earth” by A. Kelidon, Physics of Life Reviews Vol. 7, No. 4: 467-470.
  61. Rocha, L. A. O. (2011). “Constructal law: from the law of physics to applications and conferences”. Phys Life Rev. 8: 245–246. Bibcode:2011PhLRv…8..245R. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2011.07.005.
  62. Bejan, A; Lorente, S (2011). “The constructal law and the evolution of design in nature”. Physics of Life Reviews. 8 (3): 209–240. Bibcode:2011PhLRv…8..209B. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2011.05.010.
  63. A. Bejan and S. Lorente, Constructal law of design and evolution: Physics, biology, technology, and society, Journal of Applied Physics 113, 151301 (2013); doi:10.1063/1.4798429
  64. Bejan, A; Lorente, S (2004). “The Constructal Law and the Thermodynamics of Flow Systems with Configuration”. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. 47: 3203–3214. doi:10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2004.02.007.
  65. Bejan, Adrian; Zane, Peder (January 24, 2012). Design in Nature: How the Constructal Law Governs Evolution in Biology, Physics, Technology, and Social Organization. New York: Doubleday. p. 11. ISBN 978-0-307-744340.
  66. Bejan, Adrian (May 24, 2016). The Physics of Life: The Evolution of Everything. St. Martin’s Press. p. 272. ISBN 1250078822.
  67. Reis, Antonio Heitor. “Use and validity of principles of extremum of entropy production in the study of complex systems”. Annals of Physics. 346: 22–27. Bibcode:2014AnPhy.346…22H. doi:10.1016/j.aop.2014.03.013.

External links

[*] highly based on Wikipedia Page on Constructal law