Does Fire Have Life?

Fire needs air, grows, dies, consumes, creates waste, reproduces, and........... is not made up of cells, therefore, it is not a life form.

This thread is kind of ridiculous, but still, can anyone answer me this question:

What is Greek Fire?

Just do a google search.....there are pages of it!

www.google.com...

Greek fire, a flammable composition believed to have consisted of sulfur, naphtha, and quicklime. Although known in antiquity, it was first employed on a large scale by the Byzantines. Bronze tubes that emitted jets of liquid fire were mounted on the prows of their galleys and on the walls of Constantinople. The Byzantines in 678 and again in 717–18 destroyed two Saracen fleets with Greek fire.

Long ago we sat around fires telling stories, imagineing and wondering
about "life". Looking into the flames we saw all sorts of things...

T.V. has replaced the fire and it tells us what to think and imagine.

Because your title is just 'FIRE'. It could be anything, one of the most important aspects of getting people to read your thread is to have a title that attracts viewers.

You may be acting like a 'God' but there is one vital reason why you are not God:
Did you create the fish?

We can treat fire like a living creature. We can give birth to it, enable it to reproduce and create an environment that can sustain fire. We can also destory it. That would place us at the same elevation as God.

Touche!
As I said I am in no way a god! It was just a point made to a previous post.

My mind is obviously roaming, I, unlike you, am elaborating on the question at hand. Step outside the box. Its a valid question.

its not alive. you're just humanizing it, why i dont know.

you could use a similar argument for rocks.

A rocks lifespan is millions of years, we cant see it move or do anything because thats just a small fraction of the rocks lifespan. Its alive, its just "living" too slowly for us to realize.

How about a piece of black cloth? when put under a light, it warms up. Its conciously converting radiant energy into Heat, a sure sign of life.

^note sarcasm.

[edit on 13-3-2005 by ZetaGundam007]

What if Elements are the key to Life ??? We know that fire lives by Breathing .... What if the other key ingredients in sustaining Life on some far off planet are and have been right here in front of us throughout time .... we have just been so mezmerized by it ... that we fail to notice its importance other than Hey a fire keeps us warm. Fire causes physical reactions and some chemical reactions in inaniment objects.

If you look at anything close enough under a light ... isn't it made up of elements, particles, and such ? If so, are they not moving when you look at them under a microscope? Doesn't movement prove life? Maybe not , because wind coudl very much moe a kite that wasn't alive. But, if the particles moved by themselves, then would that not be enough information to concede that the elements were alive. Hmmm ... I am befumbled on how anything could be dead .... Even a Kite ... that was being flown by the wind. Has partincles in the wood that are alive and DYING because someone killed it. What about plastic that would be intersting. My Philosophy teacher told me that everything has some kinda of inertia ... or point of force that would make it move. Whether it be a BRICK WALL... or a wood wall if you could find its ... .not sure the word for it ... but basically you can get something moving just by barely tapping it in a certain spot over a period in time ... It will fall .

brownian motion.
small particles suspended in a liquid are constantly in motion, not because they are alive, but because of the individual water molecules bouncing around in the bottle.

CARBON is the key to all of our planet's organic life.
ELEMENTS are not alive. They are the building blocks, not alive themselves.
FIRE is not alive. What you're seeing is just light being emmited from the oxydation of the fuel, an exothermic reaction. It moves because of the heating of the air around it, creating small drafts of wind from the warm air rising and the cool air taking its place.

What life truly is debatable, just not in the manner you guys are going about it. You could not be farther from the truth.

Whether or not Fire is alive is a matter of philosophy not science. The definition of Life is a metaphysical issue not a scientific one. According to the commonly accepted definition of Life life is defined by the capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction.

Well lets work our way through the list.
What is metabolism?
The chemical changes in living cells by which energy is provided for vital processes and activities and new material is assimilated or at least thats what webster says. Well does fire exhibit metabolic behavior? Fire definitely assimilates new material into its essence using it to fuel its expansion. I'd say it exhibits behavior consistent with a metabolism.

What is growth?
Websters says growth is progressive development.
I'd say that fire develops progressively besides I'm sure we can all agree its obvious that fire grows. So once again fire seems to fit the bill.

What is reaction to stimuli?
Well a reaction is a response and stimuli is defined by webster as an agent (as an environmental change) that directly influences the activity of a living organism or one of its parts (at least thats the relevant definition). Well thats kind of vague in my opinion it doesent sound vague at first until you think about it. Water responds to outside stimuli (it turns to steam when heated sufficiently) does it fit the bill? If so then fire does too (fire definitely responds to environmental change sputtering when it encounters water and other inhibitors growing when conditions are favorable for growth). I'd say it does fit the bill here but you may opine differently if it pleases you.

What is reproduction?
Websters says it fundamentally consists of the segregation of a portion of the parental body by a sexual or an asexual process and its subsequent growth and differentiation into a new individual.
If an ember escapes a campfire and lands in a dry leaf bed it will grow into a different individual fire so I'd say it reproduces.

I'd say it fulfills all the neccessary criteria so it should be alive by definition. Now the question to ask is does this definition succesfully encompass what life is. If it does we've succesfully defined fire as alive, if it doesn't then we obviously dont know enough enough to decide whether or not fire is alive in the first place.

This is one of those philosophical questions that are used over and over again to show our lack of a solid definition of life and to show that there is possibly life in other parts of the universe which we don't detect, as it does not fit into our definition of "alive".

No, fire is not alive, although it does fit into many categories we use to define life. One example of why this is so is, all life has the ability to move in some way. People walk, animals walk, fish swim, bacteria..crawl? slither? wriggle?

Anyway, we do this without destroying what we pass over. Fire "moves" through combustion. It finds "food" lying right next to it's borders, and "eats" it, in turn making it "move". If you think about this for a moment, you'll realise it isn't truly alive.

Boogyman,
[I'd say it fulfills all the neccessary criteria so it should be alive by definition. Now the question to ask is does this definition succesfully encompass what life is. If it does we've succesfully defined fire as alive, if it doesn't then we obviously dont know enough enough to decide whether or not fire is alive in the first place.]

What about the criteria for life that it be made up of cells?

Woops good point thats what I get for playing devil's advocate.

I was thinking along the lines of that old scifi standard the energy based lifeform. I completely overlooked the fact that all lifeforms on earth are made of cells. Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees.

I just had to point that out cuz I know that the generally accepted definition of life includes a cellular base. Bacterial, and Viral 'life' especially are at the very boundary of fulfilling that criteria. Some argue that a virus is not a true life form.
I believe in reincarnation, angels, and astral travel, so I felt I must come clean on that. I guess I can't say that I know for certain fire is not alive, but for all the intents and purposes, I feel pretty safe.

Hmmm, interesting thought. I have seen some things on various documentaries that show a fire "jumping" across buildings, or streams to burn on the other side. I never really thought about if it had life or not though. I really do have to think about it. I'll be back.........

woah that is one of the most intresting things ive ever read. i agree with you, fire has a life just like anything else.

jeff

p.s. deny hate