Not the entire difference, as Hayek pointed out in his Nobel lecture. The complexity of physical systems nevertheless remains tractable to science because the variables are geberally independent, and most can be safely ignored in an experimental or modelling situation.
However, the complexity of human systems (he was an economist) is not so because the complexity is what he called “organised”, in that all the variables affect all the others. In that case, unless one knows all the individual factors completely (impossible), one can intrinsically only make generalised approximations, rather than predictions: in other words, it’s not “more difficult”, but “qualitatively dissimilar”.
The problem is, one cannot know for sure just how approximate ones conclusions are: you don’t know what you don’t know until you know it, and so even Bayesian procedures don’t protect one from being wildly wrong.
Biology, of course, lacking willful humans, is somewhere in between physical and humans science, but is closer in its complexity to the human than the physical science situation. That’s been my point all along.