What is the definition of life?, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times


reply posted on 27-12-2010 @ 01:04 AM by Cosmic.Artifact
reply to post by LOYAL


to live is to love... and learn, in my opinion...

I believe we all have a purpose here and there is a reason to why we are born.

if we all believe we are animals for instance that could lead to some pretty bad things.


reply posted on 27-12-2010 @ 01:20 AM by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by LOYAL



As this happens we don't have any substantial proof of life at any other planet, does not this Support the Creationism Theory?


Creationism isn't a theory. Simply because we do not yet have any examples of life occurring on other planets does not mean that life HERE on Earth occurred by Magic. The rarity of something, in this case life, does not mean that it is supernatural in origin.


Had life to get started at its own that it would have got started at other planets as well and having its own 'visible' species


This is not an assumption you are allowed to make. We only have one observed instance of life, right here on planet Earth is our only example. The sample size is not large enough to make these sorts of assumptions. The same goes for when Creationists attempt the "fine tuned" argument for life, the idea that the Universe is ideal for life and if things were a little different life could not occur. With a sample size of one such assumptions are meaningless.

Please also keep in mind that we've only set foot on the Moon and sent probes to a handful of planets in our solar system. There are trillions of planets in the Universe. Again - with such a small sample size it is too early to assume anything about the scarcity of life in the Universe.


reply posted on 15-1-2011 @ 06:34 AM by TheWill
reply to post by Thain Esh Kelch


Then tell me something alive that doesn't move.

edit on 15/1/2011 by TheWill because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 16-1-2011 @ 07:12 AM by TheWill
reply to post by Thain Esh Kelch


As a zoologist, I was really hoping you'd go with an animal, so thanks - I'd have had a hard time explaining geotaxis or phototaxis in plants. Thank also for not going for a sponge - I know that they do move, but again, it tends to be geotaxis.

Anyway, on polyps:

There are myriad forms of polyps, but they fall into two basic categories, with considerable overlap - those that feed on symbiotic algae, and are thus dependant upon light, and those that feed on suspended matter. Almost all polyps do retract if touched, to reduce harm.

When the lights go out, light-dependant anemones close, as do the polyps on both hard and soft light-dependant corals. =Movement.

In particulate-feeding corals, hydras and anemones (in the case of anemones, the "particles" are a bit vague - fish, in some cases) any tentacle that encounters organic material begins to draw it towards the mouth - movement.

So they all do move, from time to time. To add to these fairly basic movement:

Soft corals expell water and shrink to a fraction of their size when harmed or when conditions are less-than optimal.

Hard corals on reefs spent the night spewing their guts over their neighbors and digesting them

Some larval forms of corals are medusoid - that is, they look like tiny jellyfish, and move in the same way, before finally finding a place to settle down and attach.

Small anemones are often capable of detaching from their perches and "walking" across the substrate until they find more suitable conditions. It sounds bizarre, but I spent about an hour watching a particularly troublesome Aiptasia in my aquarium moving a couple of feet in this manner. It felt like some sort of close encounter of the third kind, if I'm perfectly honest.


reply posted on 17-1-2011 @ 05:48 AM by TheWill
reply to post by Wyn Hawks


Not really. The word "life" originated on this planet, to describe things on this planet.

I think provided that we define life by what it does, rather than what it's made of, it should be applicable. Although I feel that chemically, anything that spends its time pushing away from equilibrium should be defined as life.


reply posted on 17-1-2011 @ 06:15 AM by l_e_cox
reply to post by LOYAL

Your post is mistitled, but you actually have a sort of a point. The problem with your point is this: To many of us there is HUGE evidence of fully-developed life throughout the universe. This is mostly a question of what you are willing to accept as evidence. Scientific research? Eyewitness testimony? Telepathic communication? Human memory?

I accept all the above on some level, and all together the data says very loudly: there is life everywhere!

As for a definition, I think any dictionary should do, It's a common English word.

However, the data I am familiar with point to another seemingly indisputable fact (and there is even some science being done on this one!): that the intention of a living entity has the ability to re-organize (perhaps even create) matter and energy. So, even though I think life is everywhere, I also believe in intelligent design, with the evolutionary process being just one possible assistant to it.

Divine creation? I don't go that far. I don't exactly see what's so divine about it. A lot of times the whole mess can get downright depressing! What created this universe and the life forms in it could only be considered "divine" in the sense that it actually had the power to do this knowingly. But we all, apparently, also have this power. So, by that token, we're all divine. So I stay away from any dogmatic ideas about what God is. However, I am quite sure that life is the creative force in this universe (and that's my new definition of "life".).
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



EVOLUTION - Did YOU Know?
  Posted 19 days ago with 24 member flags
"I was raised an atheist"- Professor František Vyskočil
  Posted 9 days ago with 6 member flags
The meaning or point of existence or life
  Posted 12 days ago with 2 member flags
Sand Castles and Science
  Posted 10 days ago with 2 member flags