The Simplified Definition of Life
What does it take for something to be considered alive?
Once
in my biology class, we had an experiment about differentiating living
and non-living things. My teacher told us to go out to the school
ground and collect 5 specimens of living and non-living things. When we
went back to the lab, the class started to gather all their collections
and individually classified them either living or non-living things.
Leaves, butterflies, worms, dragonflies, flowers, roots, twigs, birds,
bugs, fruits, dogs, squirrels were considered as living things. Soda
cans, plastic bottles, stones, candy sticks, paper bags, dirt, air,
water were considered as non-living things.
After the lab sheets were completed, the class was asked what makes living things different from nonliving things. And from a very interesting lengthy discussion, two kinds of classifications came up on the board. The first one was according to how science defines life; and, the second one was according to how objects are created.
By the way, I was the one who proposed the second classification. I told my teacher that air, water, and dirt should be in the list of living things since they are all created by nature, while the rest of the specimens were simply non-living things since they are made by man.
My teacher responded saying that my observations were not enough to conclude that air, water and dirt have life. She told us that an object to be considered alive or with life must have or had all the following signs or characteristics.
•Living things consume food in the form of energy.
•Living things are moving or in motion.
•Living things reproduce with an exact copy of itself.
•Living things react to its surrounding environment.
•Living things are made up of cells.
Aside from these criteria, animals and plants can talk, can walk, can see, can feel, can think, can swim and some can even fly. Objects with ALL the above characteristics are considered alive. Bioscientists name these living objects as organisms or species. I call these natural objects, including air, water, earth and fire as Biophysies. Although, water, air, soil and flame have some of the above characteristics, they are not considered alive since they do not have cellular materials. However, this last criterion is somewhat shaky in the sense that there are non-cellular micro-organisms that exist without cells but are alive. On the other hand, there are living organisms that lack one or two of these characteristics but are still considered with life.
Meanwhile, medical scholars and legal experts defined death as:
•Total failure of the heart to function.
•Total failure of the lungs to function.
•Total failure of the brain stem to function.
However, nowadays, clinically dead persons can be revived to life by replacing dead hearts with artificial ventricular mechanical pumps or dead lungs with artificial rubber membranes as long their brain stems are still intact. The functional brain stem is the key that determines if a person is dead or alive.
As we have seen, science experts and medical scholars have contradicting views about life and death. Science provides a general description of life while medicine provides specific descriptions of death. Because of these opposing views, some concrete descriptions or general standards must be established that must be universally embraced by all natural objects.
If life is characterized based on how medical experts define death, then an object is considered alive if it has a functional heart, lungs and brain. But obviously the definition is not applicable with all living things like for example plants. Trees and flowers do not have hearts, lungs or even brains; yet, they are considered alive or with life. Another example is the Moner. It is an organism without organs. This animal life form can walk without feet, eat without a mouth, digest without a stomach and reproduce to new same species without reproductive organs. Others like Octopuses, cuttlefish, nautiluses and squids have three hearts that pump blue blood, could change their skin colors faster than a chameleon, and walks with more than two or four legs. They are alive with more organs than the standard life.
On the other hand, if death is characterized based on how science experts define life, then an object is considered dead when it is no longer moving, consuming energy, reproducing, and reacting with its environment.
The latter definition seems satisfactory since each traits can be applied to both living things and natural non-living things. However, if the criteria of characterizing life is arranged based on their levels of importance and reduced through the process of elimination, then energy is the only criteria that will be left as a viable candidate.
Natural objects, either living or non-living, cannot be in motion without energy, reproduce cells without energy or react to its surroundings without consuming energy. Energy is the litmus paper that determines when a natural object is dead or alive. Non-living things like fire consumes energy from air in the form of oxygen. Non-living things like air is always in motion and when motion is present energy is consumed. Thus, if everything consumes energy, then everything is alive.
Non-living things like water, air and rocks also reproduce. There are various kinds of stones all around us. Thus rocks are reproducing too in some chemical ways. Air is a mixture of oxygen, nitrogen and other gases. Air evolves from simple elements. Water when mixed with other liquids produce new families of fluids. The mere fact that all natural non-living things react with each other, reproduce and possess the basic criteria of life provide us some evidence that they are alive as well.
Moreover, there are non-living things such as robots and space probes that possess the same criteria of a complex system. These man-made objects can talk, walk, see, feel, think, eat, and even die. They even exhibit mechanical "emotions" and "consciousness". They act and interact with the environment. They consume energy, in motion, and programmed to reproduce. They have mechanical organs like the brain and heart. Hence, if these mechanical objects possess the same criteria of living things, then where do we draw now the line if something is alive or with life, if something is conscious or not?
Source: Evolution of Creation.
Once
in my biology class, we had an experiment about differentiating living
and non-living things. My teacher told us to go out to the school
ground and collect 5 specimens of living and non-living things. When we
went back to the lab, the class started to gather all their collections
and individually classified them either living or non-living things.
Leaves, butterflies, worms, dragonflies, flowers, roots, twigs, birds,
bugs, fruits, dogs, squirrels were considered as living things. Soda
cans, plastic bottles, stones, candy sticks, paper bags, dirt, air,
water were considered as non-living things.After the lab sheets were completed, the class was asked what makes living things different from nonliving things. And from a very interesting lengthy discussion, two kinds of classifications came up on the board. The first one was according to how science defines life; and, the second one was according to how objects are created.
By the way, I was the one who proposed the second classification. I told my teacher that air, water, and dirt should be in the list of living things since they are all created by nature, while the rest of the specimens were simply non-living things since they are made by man.
My teacher responded saying that my observations were not enough to conclude that air, water and dirt have life. She told us that an object to be considered alive or with life must have or had all the following signs or characteristics.
•Living things consume food in the form of energy.
•Living things are moving or in motion.
•Living things reproduce with an exact copy of itself.
•Living things react to its surrounding environment.
•Living things are made up of cells.
Aside from these criteria, animals and plants can talk, can walk, can see, can feel, can think, can swim and some can even fly. Objects with ALL the above characteristics are considered alive. Bioscientists name these living objects as organisms or species. I call these natural objects, including air, water, earth and fire as Biophysies. Although, water, air, soil and flame have some of the above characteristics, they are not considered alive since they do not have cellular materials. However, this last criterion is somewhat shaky in the sense that there are non-cellular micro-organisms that exist without cells but are alive. On the other hand, there are living organisms that lack one or two of these characteristics but are still considered with life.
Meanwhile, medical scholars and legal experts defined death as:
•Total failure of the heart to function.
•Total failure of the lungs to function.
•Total failure of the brain stem to function.
However, nowadays, clinically dead persons can be revived to life by replacing dead hearts with artificial ventricular mechanical pumps or dead lungs with artificial rubber membranes as long their brain stems are still intact. The functional brain stem is the key that determines if a person is dead or alive.
As we have seen, science experts and medical scholars have contradicting views about life and death. Science provides a general description of life while medicine provides specific descriptions of death. Because of these opposing views, some concrete descriptions or general standards must be established that must be universally embraced by all natural objects.
If life is characterized based on how medical experts define death, then an object is considered alive if it has a functional heart, lungs and brain. But obviously the definition is not applicable with all living things like for example plants. Trees and flowers do not have hearts, lungs or even brains; yet, they are considered alive or with life. Another example is the Moner. It is an organism without organs. This animal life form can walk without feet, eat without a mouth, digest without a stomach and reproduce to new same species without reproductive organs. Others like Octopuses, cuttlefish, nautiluses and squids have three hearts that pump blue blood, could change their skin colors faster than a chameleon, and walks with more than two or four legs. They are alive with more organs than the standard life.
On the other hand, if death is characterized based on how science experts define life, then an object is considered dead when it is no longer moving, consuming energy, reproducing, and reacting with its environment.
The latter definition seems satisfactory since each traits can be applied to both living things and natural non-living things. However, if the criteria of characterizing life is arranged based on their levels of importance and reduced through the process of elimination, then energy is the only criteria that will be left as a viable candidate.
Natural objects, either living or non-living, cannot be in motion without energy, reproduce cells without energy or react to its surroundings without consuming energy. Energy is the litmus paper that determines when a natural object is dead or alive. Non-living things like fire consumes energy from air in the form of oxygen. Non-living things like air is always in motion and when motion is present energy is consumed. Thus, if everything consumes energy, then everything is alive.
Non-living things like water, air and rocks also reproduce. There are various kinds of stones all around us. Thus rocks are reproducing too in some chemical ways. Air is a mixture of oxygen, nitrogen and other gases. Air evolves from simple elements. Water when mixed with other liquids produce new families of fluids. The mere fact that all natural non-living things react with each other, reproduce and possess the basic criteria of life provide us some evidence that they are alive as well.
Moreover, there are non-living things such as robots and space probes that possess the same criteria of a complex system. These man-made objects can talk, walk, see, feel, think, eat, and even die. They even exhibit mechanical "emotions" and "consciousness". They act and interact with the environment. They consume energy, in motion, and programmed to reproduce. They have mechanical organs like the brain and heart. Hence, if these mechanical objects possess the same criteria of living things, then where do we draw now the line if something is alive or with life, if something is conscious or not?
Source: Evolution of Creation.
==================================================================
"Life is chemistry, not biology." ~ Joey Lawsin
==================================================================
About the Author:
Joey Lawsin is an engineer, educator, and visionary who has coined several terms and theories related to the origin, creation, and evolution of everything. He describes himself as an intuitive revisonist, an empirical truist, and an independent thinker. He has written several books on topics such as information codexation, inscription by design, originemology, autognorics, and the single theory of everything. He is also interested in the fields of science, religion, philosophy, and technology. He is a pioneer and innovator who challenges many conventional views and norms. He has an unusual pet. Its name is gnos, a physarum polycephalum.
Intuitive Machines™ Biotronics™ Zoikrons™ Autognorics™ ELFS™ IM™
are original trademarks and logos
solely distributed by
L.A.W.S.I.N.
Comments
Post a Comment