Life is defined as....

Been driving a lot lately with weekly trips down to the hill country. This gives me long hours to sit, drive, and think.

On one of these recent drives something occurred to me: life could be simply defined as any system that works consistently and demonstrably against entropy. In other words, life builds order.

Of course, this would mean that planets, solar systems, and galaxies are "alive"....but I believe this could possibly be true.

Anyway, I am throwing this out there to gather input from others. Not so much to have you share your particular viewpoint on how to define life, but rather to deconstruct/construct the premise put forth here.

you can define life as a chemical reaction lol

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Been driving a lot lately with weekly trips down to the hill country. This gives me long hours to sit, drive, and think.

On one of these recent drives something occurred to me: life could be simply defined as any system that works consistently and demonstrably against entropy. In other words, life builds order.

Of course, this would mean that planets, solar systems, and galaxies are "alive"....but I believe this could possibly be true.

Anyway, I am throwing this out there to gather input from others. Not so much to have you share your particular viewpoint on how to define life, but rather to deconstruct/construct the premise put forth here.

I'd go with that definition. Anything that fights entropy is life. However, you need entropy to make room for more life so... they are both parts of a cycle that enable the continuing existence of the other.

Ahh, nice thread

Well life itself as just the state of 'living', my first reaction is to say awareness of some kind. Kind of conflicts with most animals and plants, but maybe "state of being aware of existence" would fit better. Even the meakest of plants can recognize which way the sun faces. The tiniest living microbial is still aware of food and nutrients in its surroundings. And even when comatose and living, though your mind may be completely elsewhere, the body system as a whole has enough awareness of itself to maintain itself at a state of living. It also accounts somewhat for being on life support, because when a machine is completely supporting your body it becomes difficult to call it alive. But the person is difficult to call dead as they still are capable of maintaining homeostasis at a cellular level, despite lacking support from the natural organs.
I dunno, quick random thoughts, debate is welcome

Edit:
and just to expand back to your point on the outward effects too such as galaxies and solar systems: I agree with you that planets and solar systems are alive as well, but a tad different. I once heard from a friend (chemist) that biologist look at life like a system, a cell, and each cell contains smaller cells making life forever expanding inward and outward. Where a physicist would look at the energy holding the particles and cells together, and say that energy is life in a continuing repeating fractal pattern. I believe his analogy for chemistry was particles or something, but I found it a really interesting point now that they are starting to prove each other more right in this debate as the years go by. I've always leaned a bit heavier on the biology perspective in this case but that's probably just my preference :] Your view reminded me somewhat of the physics explanation

Well, I would say the Earth is considered a living thing because the living things on it create an entity or a sort of life. It reacts slow to change, from my research of things it seems to take about forty years average to start initiating change that we can see. I've been comparing events I could find and possible causes. Other planets don't appear to be alive except maybe Venus. Mars has little bulges of Atmosphere at identifiable points close to the surface indicating a previous full atmosphere may have once existed. I don't think life in the solar system means the solar system has to be considered alive.

I'm not alone on my belief of the living Earth. There are presently many others who believe it including many predominant Scientists throughout the world. The definition of life that the dictionary quotes is ignorantly wrong.

Originally posted by cuervo

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Been driving a lot lately with weekly trips down to the hill country. This gives me long hours to sit, drive, and think.

On one of these recent drives something occurred to me: life could be simply defined as any system that works consistently and demonstrably against entropy. In other words, life builds order.

Of course, this would mean that planets, solar systems, and galaxies are "alive"....but I believe this could possibly be true.

Anyway, I am throwing this out there to gather input from others. Not so much to have you share your particular viewpoint on how to define life, but rather to deconstruct/construct the premise put forth here.

I'd go with that definition. Anything that fights entropy is life. However, you need entropy to make room for more life so... they are both parts of a cycle that enable the continuing existence of the other.

Entropy is kNot required in a System that grows purportionally with its occupants growth. And since it's a well accepted fact that the Universe is growing, for what purpose would that growth be but to accomodate its occupants?

There is no sp00n!

There is no entr0py!

Anywhere there is entropy, it's an illusion. The loss is "bleed-thru" energy that ends up being recycled with the rest, so the loss is only in this verse, kNot in totality.

Ribbit

entropy is "satan",,, I believe,,,, that force which disrupts order ( causes chaos) causes destruction... I have had a similar thought to yours recently,, not so much about life and what is alive, because theres a lot of science to that in terms of parts and wholes, but i do see your point...... but i was thinking being a human, has to do with fighting entropy and seeking order like you said,,, creating schedules for ourselves and discipline is a huge factor to what i thought of in a way that it takes much discipline to create order, good and beauty and creation must be built and maintained, an animal is born into its life and it doesnt complain, it does what it has to do to survive and reproduce, the cells in our body our disciplined, humans certainly are in their way different, for we have the seemingly largest area for deviation and not a clear common group goal, and as much knowledge as we do gain, it is doubled and comforted with confusion ,,, humans have orbits like planets,,, orbits of habit and schedule,,, theres a lot more to your thought,,, but its a nice one!!

reply to post by ButtUglyToad



Listen, I hear what you are saying. It is something I have considered as well (such as, gravity...it seems to pull "in". This, to me, indicates that it is a "bleed through" energy, passing from ours into another dimension (tetraspace has "in" and "out" directions, and it seems possible that gravity could be interacting in a tetradimensional manner).

That being said, you give little support. And you use "leet" diction. Neither of these speak well for the viewpoint.

Let me explain my logic (and this may help clarify for anyone thinking in terms of biological life and conscious will creating order):

The "natural state" of any system is entropic. This is the basis of the 2nd law of thermodynamics, correct? It is what prevents perpetual motion machines. So for any system to consistently display creation of order, in any manner, would represent "life", as life is a structured and ordered system.

To go a little further....a single celled organism is considered life. It has order in its cells, its DNA. Often viruses are considered "quasi" life, as they do not really exert conscious behavior, but interact intimately with reproductive capacity within biological cells. In a virus, as well as a prion, we have a basic and simple creation of order: protein strands. These protein strands contain the ability to reproduce and create more of themselves.

Is that not life? I understand that is may or may not be conscious. And "conscious life" is a whole different subject (and one that would likely have plants at the center of the debate).

To contrast, a rock is not life. A rock has some order and structure, however it does not constistently create this structure and order. It is actually entropic as erosion will decay the rock and it will not rebuild and actually fight the entropy. However, the Earth IS alive. It will provide the chemical processes and conditions for restructuring the eroded rock into whole, complete rock again (maybe even making coral into sandstone over billions of years).

So the key here is that it has order and it fights entropy (by creating more order via repair, reproduction, or just plain conscious thought and work). Biological parts not required.

reply to post by ImaFungi



"Satan" is a construct taken out of context by zealots throughout history. The destructive force, numerically, is represented with negative numbers. They are called "irrational'...but i disagree with this designation and think it is a misnomer Nothing could be more rational than entropy, the universal constant of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

There is always a dichotomy at play, isn't there? the human mind seems to like this model of the duality. As above so below, or at least that is what i say. If the universe employs models of juxtaposed duality, why would our brains not prefer processing information presented in formats following such models? Our brains are, after all, products of this universe. Are you familiar with The Mysteries?

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

Listen, I hear what you are saying. It is something I have considered as well (such as, gravity...it seems to pull "in". This, to me, indicates that it is a "bleed through" energy, passing from ours into another dimension (tetraspace has "in" and "out" directions, and it seems possible that gravity could be interacting in a tetradimensional manner).

Gravity is the leeching of energy through Space into the spatial verse below this one and that's also where your entropy goes and since it goes sumwhere and isn't lost, it isn't entropy. Also, the Universe is an Open System, thus, the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics doesn't apply and Perpetual Motion is the way of the Universe, for it is Perpetual Motion.

Furthermore, the Hubble pics prove there's order to all of this and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says there is no order, everything is going to entropy, sew which dew you believe? The physical pictures/facts or sum stupid Law that was applied before We knew what all We now know?

Ribbit

The "natural state" of any system is entropic. This is the basis of the 2nd law of thermodynamics, correct? It is what prevents perpetual motion machines. So for any system to consistently display creation of order, in any manner, would represent "life", as life is a structured and ordered system.

To go a little further....a single celled organism is considered life. It has order in its cells, its DNA. Often viruses are considered "quasi" life, as they do not really exert conscious behavior, but interact intimately with reproductive capacity within biological cells. In a virus, as well as a prion, we have a basic and simple creation of order: protein strands. These protein strands contain the ability to reproduce and create more of themselves.

Is that not life? I understand that is may or may not be conscious. And "conscious life" is a whole different subject (and one that would likely have plants at the center of the debate).

To contrast, a rock is not life. A rock has some order and structure, however it does not constistently create this structure and order. It is actually entropic as erosion will decay the rock and it will not rebuild and actually fight the entropy. However, the Earth IS alive. It will provide the chemical processes and conditions for restructuring the eroded rock into whole, complete rock again (maybe even making coral into sandstone over billions of years).

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Just thinking about your defining life and your contrast with the rock, and it's behavior or lack thereof. Doesn't it, though, interact and respond to its environment and shift or change based on that and its structure, what it is made of? In other words, the right kind of rock under the right kind of pressure after enough time will become a diamond. Or after even more time with different composition, and different stresses applied, oil?
Even the rock has energy, and some kind of movement, adaptation over time. And also, do we not "see" the table in front of us, or anything else because of the speed of the movement of the molecules that it is composed of. This is just the right speed for it to "hold together," "be real," and be observed as such.
Great post. Thanks for making me think, especially on Friday night.

Also, there is a very interesting thread which applies to much of what you are thinking called the Cellular Choir.
Enjoyed reading it a great deal, and think you would as well.
www.abovetopsecret.com...[/url]

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

To contrast, a rock is not life.

I realize you base that on this Matrix but what if this Matrix isn't true life? Then you have based your perspective on flawed input.

What if you and that rock aren't real? What if everything is Energy and We've been programmed to see exactly what We see, even though it's kNot there? Ever realize how you are programmed from birth on what's real and what isn't? You touch it, it's real. You fall down and bang your head on the ground, it's real. You run into the tree and end up with a knot on your forehead, the tree is real and so is the knot on your head.

But what if all of it is an illusion?

Ribbit

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

To contrast, a rock is not life.

I realize you base that on this Matrix but what if this Matrix isn't true life? Then you have based your perspective on flawed input.

What if you and that rock aren't real? What if everything is Energy and We've been programmed to see exactly what We see, even though it's kNot there? Ever realize how you are programmed from birth on what's real and what isn't? You touch it, it's real. You fall down and bang your head on the ground, it's real. You run into the tree and end up with a knot on your forehead, the tree is real and so is the knot on your head.

But what if all of it is an illusion?

Ribbit

Exactly. As we determine "reality," at present (at least most do) , by the experiences of the senses of our physical bodies. But this is just one "representation," if you will, of the energy you speak of--the particular arrangement of molecules that structure a human body. But if the law of energy is that it is neither destroyed nor created but has specific variables to create the impression of a specific structure, which can then change, convert, shift, etc. to become some other structure or substance, such as water upon heating becoming steam.
A cycle going on as it is then reabsorbed into the atmosphere and morphs yet again.
Now the way I perceive your question above is what is the energy, the particles and molecular structures, etc, are all an illusion. Hmmmm. what if, then.....

Originally posted by tetra50

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

To contrast, a rock is not life.

I realize you base that on this Matrix but what if this Matrix isn't true life? Then you have based your perspective on flawed input.

What if you and that rock aren't real? What if everything is Energy and We've been programmed to see exactly what We see, even though it's kNot there? Ever realize how you are programmed from birth on what's real and what isn't? You touch it, it's real. You fall down and bang your head on the ground, it's real. You run into the tree and end up with a knot on your forehead, the tree is real and so is the knot on your head.

But what if all of it is an illusion?

Ribbit

Exactly. As we determine "reality," at present (at least most do) , by the experiences of the senses of our physical bodies. But this is just one "representation," if you will, of the energy you speak of--the particular arrangement of molecules that structure a human body. But if the law of energy is that it is neither destroyed nor created but has specific variables to create the impression of a specific structure, which can then change, convert, shift, etc. to become some other structure or substance, such as water upon heating becoming steam.
A cycle going on as it is then reabsorbed into the atmosphere and morphs yet again.
Now the way I perceive your question above is what is the energy, the particles and molecular structures, etc, are all an illusion. Hmmmm. what if, then.....

First, energy isn't destroyed but it is created constantly because that which exists, had to come from sumwhere, thus it was created and if it was once created, what's to say it isn't still being created.

As to what the energy is that forms the physical realm We see with our eyes and feel with our hands and smell with our noses, it's the virgin inverted energy I just spoke of, before it becomes Light, to then become part of an Atom.

This Verse WE live in from birth, kNot the Verse you actually see, is flooded with virgin inverted energy.

IT powers WE for an eternity!

Ribbit

reply to post by ButtUglyToad



The Matrix was a great movie. Mind blowing. This is not a discussion around that, but rather a discussion to help me clarify some thoughts i had surrounding the way NASA is performing its "search for life".

I do believe that everything is energy. E=mc2 tells us this, essentially. I also believe that our existence is basically experiential, and that this experience is for the most part completely within the parameters of and understanding built around the conscious observation of up to 14 different senses (and the subconscious observation of at least 33 total senses). So we have these organs that tell us basically what the energy around us is doing, and we build a construct of reality around this

However, your prior post made a fairly decent point: the universe is not a closed system.

Which brings up another consideration I had: life is defined by the manipulation of energy. Of course, this is also very similiar to sayng life is the antithesis to entropy....but perhaps more fitting to your understanding?

You stated " So the key here is that it has order and it fights entropy (by creating more order via repair, reproduction, or just plain conscious thought and work). Biological parts not required. "

I agree with most everything you said but this needs more thought. All biological life on earth are parts of the whole. This biological parts make the planet be able to repair itself and do everything else you noted. It also gives it some of it's regenerative properties. We are part of it's skin. The intellect of the earth includes the intellect of the skin because the skin is part of the whole organism. A moss covered rock is an organism, without the rock the moss may not be able to live so in essence both parts constitute the organism.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

The Matrix was a great movie. Mind blowing. This is not a discussion around that, but rather a discussion to help me clarify some thoughts i had surrounding the way NASA is performing its "search for life".

I do believe that everything is energy. E=mc2 tells us this, essentially. I also believe that our existence is basically experiential, and that this experience is for the most part completely within the parameters of and understanding built around the conscious observation of up to 14 different senses (and the subconscious observation of at least 33 total senses). So we have these organs that tell us basically what the energy around us is doing, and we build a construct of reality around this

However, your prior post made a fairly decent point: the universe is not a closed system.

Which brings up another consideration I had: life is defined by the manipulation of energy. Of course, this is also very similiar to sayng life is the antithesis to entropy....but perhaps more fitting to your understanding?

The three parts of Part One of the Matrix Trinity (parts 4/2 & 5/3 are still to come) went above most everyone's head and were absolutely beyond exceptional.

You said:

"life is defined by the manipulation of energy"

What if when your Soul is born, it is born with a sister/brother Soul that's exactly opposite of your Soul, polarity wise, and what if the Verse your Soul is born into is exactly opposite of "this" Verse and within it Likes Attract, Opposites Repel. In that scenario, the two Souls would migrate to where Like Souls reside and take their place amongst them and since our Soul is pure Energy, that would qualify as "manipulation of energy" with the only difference being it would be a natural manipulation.

As to the Energy comprising this reality, the manipulation there isn't the manipulation of Energy, it's your mind that's being manipulated.

Ribbit

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

life could be simply defined as any system that works consistently and demonstrably against entropy.

That's not a bad working definition, although it raises some interesting quibbles. You mentioned one yourself: should all local decreases in entropy be termed life?

And if we take the universe as a whole, does its positive entropy imply that it is nonliving despite the presence of life in it?

What shall we do with Helium-3, an isotope of helium that has negative entropy of fusion at temperatures below 0.6K?

In other words, life builds order.

So does gravity and, under certain conditions, electromagnetic fields. Are they the life, too?

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

"Satan" is a construct taken out of context by zealots throughout history. The destructive force, numerically, is represented with negative numbers. They are called "irrational'...but i disagree with this designation and think it is a misnomer Nothing could be more rational than entropy, the universal constant of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

There is always a dichotomy at play, isn't there? the human mind seems to like this model of the duality. As above so below, or at least that is what i say. If the universe employs models of juxtaposed duality, why would our brains not prefer processing information presented in formats following such models? Our brains are, after all, products of this universe. Are you familiar with The Mysteries?

I know I was just throwing that construct in there imagining its true context being generally and loosely destructive and chaotic forces..... as in humans believed the "devil" was an evil entity,,,,, what a human thinks is evil is something that is disregard less of life, chaotic, destructive,,,,,,

every physical particle of the universe is part of the whole, and every part that exists was brought into existence and attempts consciously or not to remain as is, evolve/grow, .... This system of universe we exist in seems to a system, with uniformity and patterns in the physical nature we can observe ( galaxies,stars, planets, chemicals, elements, particles, life???,???,???) if you believe the universe was formed by the big bang, you believe because entropy is the act of bringing order into chaos,,,, you believe the universe started out in perfect order,,, and the eternal infinite existence of the universe is hurtling into more and more a chaotic state.....

fear mongering if ive ever heard it,,, maybe we should all pray for the universe,, where would it be without us,, we gotta save it its gonna die... we talk about billions of years like its nothing,, we have a hard time holding on for dear life for 80 swings around the sun,, and that year is the base measure for all of our time and distance...