Less scientistic paraphrase please

The real trouble with paraphrase is that it's information poor: the whole point of a good paraphrase is to lose information, to slim down. So paraphrase contains an inherent blind spot (or more).

If you push the world through complexity theory, for instance, you lose the quantum level (at least).

And Occam's razor tells me that of these two explanations:

1) The potential immanent in the copper sulfate solution self-actualized via a singularity resulting in crystallization.

2) Warm or moving air evaporated the water leaving crystals behind.

2) is correct, while 1) is lavalamp.