Home
DiscussIf you ask scientists what life is you will get some very flawed and pedantic responses. Some will say something is alive if it can reproduce. Rubbish. Mules can't reproduce. They're dead? Viruses can reproduce. How can simple molecules like viruses be compared with the awesome complexity of even the simplest single celled creatures? Others will try to fix the flawed definition by claiming that something is alive if it is borne of parents that can reproduce. It is not hard to imagine that someday a simple life form like a yeast cell could be created in a lab. This organism is almost identical to other living organisms yet it isn't alive?
It can also be argued that reproduction is not just sexual but also protein synthesis and growth. Living things then not only reproduce themselves but proteins they need. This is a good definition but only for a subset of life: organic life. This definition cannot be used for life in general because it sidesteps a massive problem. It implies that life magically arose out of nothing at a certain point. This notion, called emergence, is completely absurd. Note however that after the big bang the Universe made identical copies of hydrogen atoms out of plasma. So according to this argument the Universe is alive because it reproduces.
The usual counter argument is that life is just a term used to
designate a particular point in the evolutionary history. To deal with
this objection you just need to create a new word say: xlife. All organic life forms are xlife. So are
atoms, subatomic particles, quarks etc. Energy is xlife. All the
non-illusory properties of organic life forms are properties of xlife.
Illusory properties can be explained in terms of non-illusory
properties using deep analysis. Magic involves mistaking illusions as
non-illusions. Really though xlife is just life without the bolted on
qualifications to exclude things like the Universe as being alive.
The best explanation of life
seems to be the following.
Life involves a highly complex state of
organizational structure intimately coupled with intrinsic
animation.You and a pile of rocks are made of the exact same energy and
nothing
more.
The difference between a living system and a non-living system is
that living systems are energized or intrinsically animated. Suppose a
person dies. When the person is living you have a
system with a complex state of organizational structure
intimately coupled with intrinsic animation. When that person dies the
complex structure remains for a time but the animation
is gone. The animation is really just energy. This definition explains why you are alive but the rocks are not.
Other definitions can't because they limit themselves to the primitive
world of
chemicals.
OK now how can the Universe be alive? The real question is
actually how can life arise from non-life. This is what
most scientists seem to believe, that life magically arises from
non-living matter. This is of course entirely
absurd. The concept of spontaneous generation was supposedly dismissed
several hundred years ago. Yet believing
that life magically arises at a certain point in the evolutionary
process is just as ridiculous. All complex living
organisms are composed of highly integrated systems of smaller living
things or cells. It is quite logical to continue
in this line by saying that simple cells are also composed of other
smaller living
things. To refute this undeniable conclusion
is to invoke magic.
Now if cells are composed of smaller living things what are
these things? Well atoms seem to be quite complex and
certainly do have intrinsic animation. The same also seems to apply to
what we know of the particles that make up
atoms. Science tells us that ultimately everything is composed of
energy. According to Einstein's famous equation E=MC˛, energy is
equivalent to mass or matter. Mass can be converted into energy and
energy can be converted into mass. The law of conservation of energy
states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, just changed from
one form to another. Therefore since energy can be converted into
matter, matter is just a form of energy. The entire foundation of
modern physics is based on these principles. Matter is energy bound up
by forces into "containers". You break the "container" and the energy
is released. You create a "container" to ensnare energy and you get
matter. Ultimately all you are is a massively complex system of energy.
You are
alive and therefore this energy must also be alive. So energy is life.
To
deny this is to deny science and invoke magic. Life
cannot arise from non-life because energy must be preserved. Energy can
interact with organic molecules to
create a higher life form. But life cannot magically arise without
energy. To do so would require some sort of magic that violates the
known laws of physics. When energy is combined up into
complex systems with feedback loops amongst all its subsystems we call
that a "living thing".
Home
Discuss