I held a baby. Does that beat a phone?
I held a baby. Does that beat a phone?
While someone can probably cite a more intricate machine that can reasonably be held within a hand, the assemblage of features in a phone certainly makes it one of the more complex machines of its size. Especially when you consider how many fields it draws upon. Digital electronics is sufficiently different from RF electronics, the RF spectrum behaves differently (from an engineering standpoint) from the optical spectrum. That accelerometer may be packaged like an IC but MEMS are quite different from a CPU or solid state memory. The list could go on.
So a baby, a seed, any living thing (or even a chunk of something that was once living I suppose) is more complex, which I why I went with 'machine' to exclude those.
I also toyed with saying 'own' rather than 'held', but a modern electric car is basically a beefed up phone with a bunch of driving stuff too, so they wouldn't pass that test.
There are some edge cases: someone upthread held a classic inertial guidance system, and a modern GPU is arguably more intricate, though much more single-function, and good luck getting your hands on one of those anyway!
Likewise, phones have numerous analog components: microphone, speaker, camera, screen, radio modem, power regulation.
Please don't equate the word "digital" to the notions of being electronic, man-made, or modern. Digital is simply an agreement between a sender and receiver that information is finite and perfectly copyable. (By contrast, analog information is infinite and cannot be copied perfectly.)
—Scott Crossfield, 1954 <https://quoteinvestigator.com/2016/02/01/computer/>