The mathematics of the scientific theory known as "complexity" describes those phenomena that are not quite stable and not quite chaotic. For example, the mathematics of complexity can be used to describe sand dunes: although sand dunes generally retain their shape, the addition of a tiny amount of sand can cause a sandslide. Certain scientists have concluded that there is good evidence that complexity is correct. After entering complexity-based mathematical models of real-world phenomena in computers, they found that the computerized mathematical models evolve much like the real-world phenomena actually evolve. Which one of the following principles, if valid, most justifies the scientists' conclusion? ['If actual phenomena can be pictured as computerized models, computers themselves will eventually discover the mathematics of the correct theory explaining those phenomena.', 'If computers verify that there are mathematical errors in the calculations of scientists, then the theories of those scientists are probably incorrect.', 'If computerized models based on a theory behave like their real-world counterparts behave, then that theory is probably correct.', 'If they evolve exactly like real-world phenomena, computer models are neither purely stable nor purely chaotic, which is what complexity predicts.']