Thoughts on life.

I had some things pop up in my mind that were interesting. Maybe people could answer them.

Why is it when we die, our cell , ALL our cells, live on for a few minutes afterwards (nerves a few months afterwards) and recent scientific evidence shows heart cells living hours after death. Meanwhile, why don't we die when our cells begin to die.

Why is life defined by the continuation of concisenesses, when cells live on much longer after "death".

Why do people come back from death, long after death. (some Mexican kid came back I think 1/2 hour after death maybe 15 minutes)

Why is it the brain can hold an electric charge while not killing near by cells from electric shock (skin, blood, etc). At the same time, these cells can die from lightning.

Just some thoughts. Any answers?

Originally posted by Gorman91
Why is it when we die, our cell , ALL our cells, live on for a few minutes afterwards (nerves a few months afterwards) and recent scientific evidence shows heart cells living hours after death. Meanwhile, why don't we die when our cells begin to die.

Generally after the heart stops cells all through the body are cut off from their supply of oxygen and die. No cell can survive without oxygen.

Why is life defined by the continuation of concisenesses, when cells live on much longer after "death".

It isn't, an amoeba is alive but isn't conscious. Death is defined by permanent loss of EEG activity in the brain. Everything that makes up an individual person is in it's brain, the memory, consciousness etc.

Why do people come back from death, long after death. (some Mexican kid came back I think 1/2 hour after death maybe 15 minutes)

No idea.

Why is it the brain can hold an electric charge while not killing near by cells from electric shock (skin, blood, etc). At the same time, these cells can die from lightning.

Because the charges are extremely weak, nothing compared to a lightning bolt.

[edit on 1-9-2007 by DarkSide]

Great answers, but again, when we die, most cells still live on weeks after words (mainly the ones not needing O2) I still don't understand why we are capable of dieing if all cells are still alive. Thinkings logically, the cells should be able to send a signal to the brain and react by sending strong heart beat signals to the brain. If it can do it automatically with heat and cold, and the body automatically moves, why not the same for death, why won't the body realize and auto-restart?

Your cellular question is like asking, why when a car engine stops working, do the windows and A/C continue to work? Not all parts of the system need to break down and "die" for the entire thing to stop working. If you want to get technical the "you" now isn't the same as you've always been. You eat food everyday and turn it into energy and new cells. Your skin is continually shedding, along with the death and creation of other types of cells. The misconception is viewing yourself as a physical constant as well as a "whole" object. You are a collection of moving and changing parts that rely on each other to function. Your heart cells do not understand how the liver cells work but they all know (in a sense, no pun intended) that if they do their own job everything will work out. If the lungs stop working the heart cells don't automatically say, oh hey, they took a break I guess we better stop too. They just continue to do their job, slightly oblivious (they will notice effects from no oxygen supply, etc.), but still only concerned with their particular function. As previously mentioned the absence of an EEG signal means that the manager of all the cells and systems, the brain, has stopped coordinating and organizing the homeostasis of the individual. The brain has to rely on the other cells to do their job as well, the brain could be in perfect health but if the lungs fail so will it. Basically, our parts independently work so that if one thing fails (due to illness) there is a chance that it could be cured (like the mexican boy you referenced). If everything shut off at once as soon as one part "died" we'd have a lot of health issues. I hope this helps explain it some, ask away if something doesn't make sense or you have new questions.

[edit on 2-9-2007 by Parabol]

Originally posted by Gorman91
Great answers, but again, when we die, most cells still live on weeks after words (mainly the ones not needing O2) I still don't understand why we are capable of dieing if all cells are still alive. Thinkings logically, the cells should be able to send a signal to the brain and react by sending strong heart beat signals to the brain. If it can do it automatically with heat and cold, and the body automatically moves, why not the same for death, why won't the body realize and auto-restart?

Well first of all I don't know of any cells that don't need O². Second to answer your question, when you put your hand on something that's hot, your finger's nerves send a message to the brain and it's the brain that reacts by triggering a reflex that moves your hand away from the heat source. But if when you die it's your brain itself that ceases to function, so there is nothing left to trigger anything.

What's important is the brain, once that goes the person is dead, you can keep the body itself going with an artificial life support system but the person is dead, it's only a blob of artificially kept alive cells.

Actually, the brain is alive for a full 15 minutes or so after heart failure or loss of consciousness. Plenty of time to trigger a response. But anywho, I suppose It's hard for me to say what I'm trying to point out. Basically, you think your alive, when all you are is cells wanting to live. consciousness is an unneeded asset to the brain. Why evolve it? Why not just stay focused without any secondary thoughts except to imagine up ideas. Obviously, God became strong in the minds of early man, and it seems odd to point to anything to come to thinking up of a God, if they new nothing of the word "God" before then.

Also, digestive cells don't need 02. Yea, thats a bad argument.

Anywho, why would the first cells need to become multi cellular if they were fine already unicellular?

Originally posted by Gorman91
Also, digestive cells don't need 02. Yea, thats a bad argument.

Um... I'm pretty sure that all eukaryotic cells require oxygen. Our cells create their energy through metabolism and oxygen is required as the final electron acceptor during aerobic respiration. The ability to use oxygen greatly increases the energy output of a cell. We are able to produce ~32 ATP per cycle as opposed to 2 ATP for anerobic (does not require oxygen) cells.

Anywho, why would the first cells need to become multi cellular if they were fine already unicellular?

Well that's somewhat up in the air. Among unicellular organisms which share very similar traits competition is a key factor and the fittest of the 'copies' survive. The transition to multi-cellular organisms falls along the same line of questioning of "why do we help other people, even when we may not benefit from it", or rather, altruism. The specialization and cooperation of cells did not give a direct singular advantage to a specific cell, but it increased the chances of the entire organism surviving, thus, indirectly benefiting each cell.

I'm not sure what you mean by already fine, is anything ever fine or perfect the way it is? Is there not one thing in your life you would choose to improve or work towards? The workings of our thoughts are mirrored in the activities of the cells and components that comprise us, our consciousness is part of it all too. Our natural greed for energy, or whatever it may be, will always make us want more than what we have.

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Parabol]

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Parabol]

Originally posted by Gorman91
Actually, the brain is alive for a full 15 minutes or so after heart failure or loss of consciousness.

You lose consciousness after a few seconds of heart failure, and then you have a few minutes to receive CPR if not you will have permanent brain damage.

Also, digestive cells don't need 02. Yea, thats a bad argument.

Every cell needs oxygen, without it their metabolism is cut off and they die.

why would the first cells need to become multi cellular if they were fine already unicellular?

Because colonies of cells were obviously more apt to survive than single ones. Which doesn't mean single cells disappear either.

Originally posted by Gorman91
Actually, the brain is alive for a full 15 minutes or so after heart failure or loss of consciousness.

I agree with Darkside on this. Where did you get that figure from?

Basically, you think your alive, when all you are is cells wanting to live. consciousness is an unneeded asset to the brain. Why evolve it? Why not just stay focused without any secondary thoughts except to imagine up ideas.

On this point I agree with you and this is a mystery for proponents of evolution. Why develop a human consciousness that allows large masses of 'sentient meat' to communicate with each other on forums? It would make sense for consciousness to develop to the point of chimp/dolphin levels which seem perfect for cognitive and social development in order to provide a survival advantage.

Obviously, God became strong in the minds of early man, and it seems odd to point to anything to come to thinking up of a God, if they new nothing of the word "God" before then.

What about animism, attributing God-like powers to natural phenomena?

Anywho, why would the first cells need to become multi cellular if they were fine already unicellular?

Just look around and you will find life forms as single cells (e.g. amoeba) and living as cellular tissue (e.g. jellyfish). Evolution is scientifically strongly feasible but does not preclude the existence of a God that started it. What is needed is a rational relocation of intellectual effort to start from this point and explain why evolution occurred rather than how it occurred.