-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Where did "life" get its drive to reproduce and keep going
- Thread starter We Never Know
- Start date
I think you have the question backwards.
Replicating is what makes something alive. So things that replicate are alive, at least somewhat, as opposed the dead stuff that doesn't replicate.
So things that replicate better reproduce more, and over billions of years become the most obvious life forms. "Driven" as it were.
Sometimes, life is defined as something that metabolises. Viruses reproduce, quite effectively, but they don't metabolize. So they're sorta alive, but sorta not.
There aren't really many clear bright lines here.
Tom
The principle is called 'Entanglement'. If you leave any long, skinny flexible things in a chaotic environment they entangle. There are other situations which cause entanglement, too; such as when planar things touch or slide. There are potentially higher dimensional kinds of entanglement possible involving time measurements. From entanglement come various things: crystallization, knots, stickiness. These support replication, and that provides a possible beginning for life but is not necessarily the beginning. Its certainly the basis of life today from moment to moment.
Factories are full of replicating machines. Computers can easily print their own programs to print their own programs. Nature is full of molecules, polymers crystals and structures that replicate themselves -- all by unguided chemistry or physics. None of these is alive.
Replication. IMHO, is a poor criterion for life. There's much more to it than that.
No they're not.
That's a ridiculous thing to say.
Which is why viruses aren't always considered living things. They reproduce, but they don't metabolize. Metabolizism is a different way of defining life.
Viruses are what they are, things that reproduce but don't metabolize. Whether you consider them alive or not depends on your semantics.
Tom
Quite so.
In re: factories. Is a machine stamping out widgets functionally that different from a rhibosome extruding lysine?
Last edited:
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
If you look at cellular replication, the mother cell stores provisions, especially energy value. At a certain point, the mother cell undergoes a very dynamic state of metabolism and synthesis, leading to one cell becoming two.
If we break this down in terms of water-oil and entropy, the energy that the mother cell stores is based on reduced organic compounds; oil side. She is compounding the surface tension in the cellular water, due to accumulating reduce organics, thereby lowering water entropy. The hydrogen bonding switches are flip the covalent side due to the surface tension. Things remain organized but move toward another gear. The mother cell is creating an entropy potential within the water.
The high rate of metabolism and synthesis to form the needs of the two daughter cells, represents entropy increasing drastically at the surfaces of enzymes. This is due to water having found a way, where it can once again increase its entropy, at the expense of the organics. They end up with the extra entropy potential; high rate of synthesis.
In cancer, these is less of a pause between lowered the entropy of the water and water restoring its dominance. The daughters cells of healthy cells take some time to create the entropy potential in the water for another cycle. In cancer, the cells are able to lowered the entropy of the water, faster and more frequently, such that cell division repeats sooner. Based on the unhealthy changes that can occur, even on the DNA; cancer causes the entropy potential, that water passes on to the organic surfaces, to get too high. This should be easy to fix.
One of the problems with solving the problem of the drive behind life and cancer, since cancer is a life form, is connected to the bias of two science traditions. These traditions are treated like dogma and threatening these dogma, even with sound theory, results in a defensive reaction so progress is not allowed.
The idea of random events is a semi-religious concept. In other words, what causes random events in the first place? Is this due to logical potentials, we are not yet clear of, such that random is actually a logical process, that appears illogical simply due to ignorance? Or is random controlled by a type of divine mystery inherent within creation? The God of random is summoned by statistical oracles to help out human thought, when humans are unable to use logic. For example, the God of random made the first replicators, building only from basic things; abiogenesis. This a feat humans have yet to duplicate. Is this a form of blindman's creationism?
In other words, if Genesis, in the bible had been written, that the universe was created by a God, who had no sense of order or purpose, but randomly formed each step in a random and disconnected way; throws dice, science would be able to accept the bible, since this is their religion in a nut shell. They cannot accept an outline of creation, based on logical order that is not random. They cannot admit their approach is also a form of religion, since this could result in separation of church and state cutting off federal funding.
The other problem, in modern science traditions, is the concept of entropy has been commandeered to be about information, instead of tangible chemical and material reality. The entropy that I have been speaking of is a measurable quality connected to tangible matter, that can be touched with all five senses; life. Information entropy is limited to visual observations and imagination; visual cortex and frontal lobe, and does not include the other senses. It is a spatial illusion. It is good for virtual reality. I am trying to stay away from virtual reality since this is already done by others. Tangible reality is where work is needed.
If we break this down in terms of water-oil and entropy, the energy that the mother cell stores is based on reduced organic compounds; oil side. She is compounding the surface tension in the cellular water, due to accumulating reduce organics, thereby lowering water entropy. The hydrogen bonding switches are flip the covalent side due to the surface tension. Things remain organized but move toward another gear. The mother cell is creating an entropy potential within the water.
The high rate of metabolism and synthesis to form the needs of the two daughter cells, represents entropy increasing drastically at the surfaces of enzymes. This is due to water having found a way, where it can once again increase its entropy, at the expense of the organics. They end up with the extra entropy potential; high rate of synthesis.
In cancer, these is less of a pause between lowered the entropy of the water and water restoring its dominance. The daughters cells of healthy cells take some time to create the entropy potential in the water for another cycle. In cancer, the cells are able to lowered the entropy of the water, faster and more frequently, such that cell division repeats sooner. Based on the unhealthy changes that can occur, even on the DNA; cancer causes the entropy potential, that water passes on to the organic surfaces, to get too high. This should be easy to fix.
One of the problems with solving the problem of the drive behind life and cancer, since cancer is a life form, is connected to the bias of two science traditions. These traditions are treated like dogma and threatening these dogma, even with sound theory, results in a defensive reaction so progress is not allowed.
The idea of random events is a semi-religious concept. In other words, what causes random events in the first place? Is this due to logical potentials, we are not yet clear of, such that random is actually a logical process, that appears illogical simply due to ignorance? Or is random controlled by a type of divine mystery inherent within creation? The God of random is summoned by statistical oracles to help out human thought, when humans are unable to use logic. For example, the God of random made the first replicators, building only from basic things; abiogenesis. This a feat humans have yet to duplicate. Is this a form of blindman's creationism?
In other words, if Genesis, in the bible had been written, that the universe was created by a God, who had no sense of order or purpose, but randomly formed each step in a random and disconnected way; throws dice, science would be able to accept the bible, since this is their religion in a nut shell. They cannot accept an outline of creation, based on logical order that is not random. They cannot admit their approach is also a form of religion, since this could result in separation of church and state cutting off federal funding.
The other problem, in modern science traditions, is the concept of entropy has been commandeered to be about information, instead of tangible chemical and material reality. The entropy that I have been speaking of is a measurable quality connected to tangible matter, that can be touched with all five senses; life. Information entropy is limited to visual observations and imagination; visual cortex and frontal lobe, and does not include the other senses. It is a spatial illusion. It is good for virtual reality. I am trying to stay away from virtual reality since this is already done by others. Tangible reality is where work is needed.
Last edited:
The article says: “Instead of thinking that the Demon takes advantage free energy to help advance its nefarious anti-thermodynamic agenda, what if we imagine that the free energy is simply using the Demon — that is, the out-of-equilibrium configurations labeled “life” — for its own pro-thermodynamic purposes?”
Any which way we see, we see some nefarious design. Ha ha.
Dalai Lama says “The very purpose of life is happiness”.
You may see the enjoyable video all through, but the jewel about purpose of life come at 1:00 to 1:30 minute.
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
Free energy is a function of enthalpy; internal energy, and entropy. A favorable free energy change can occur, if the enthalpy change is favorable enough, to offset an unfavorable change in entropy. It can also occur if an entropy change is favorable enough to offset an unfavorable change in enthalpy. Both terms; entropy and enthalpy do not have to both be favorable for the free energy to be favorable. There are situations where something can happen, due to favorable free energy change, and still end up with a potential.
If we go back to back to a water-oil emulsion, that is changing back into two layers, the free energy change of the water is favorable and involves a favorable change in both the enthalpy and entropy, due to the binary nature of the hydrogen bond; lowers the surface tension.
The oil also sees a favorable free energy change, based on a favorable enthalpy change due to organic bonding forces within the oil. However, since the reduced hydrogen of the oil is only covalent and cannot go polar; mono-switch instead of a binary switch, the entropy is unfavorable. Water can compensate by switching the hydrogen bond switch but the oil cannot. The oil free energy is favorable, but there is some entropy potential left, compared to water.
If we go back to back to a water-oil emulsion, that is changing back into two layers, the free energy change of the water is favorable and involves a favorable change in both the enthalpy and entropy, due to the binary nature of the hydrogen bond; lowers the surface tension.
The oil also sees a favorable free energy change, based on a favorable enthalpy change due to organic bonding forces within the oil. However, since the reduced hydrogen of the oil is only covalent and cannot go polar; mono-switch instead of a binary switch, the entropy is unfavorable. Water can compensate by switching the hydrogen bond switch but the oil cannot. The oil free energy is favorable, but there is some entropy potential left, compared to water.
Last edited:
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
Neurons are special cells in the sense they do not replicate. They form from stem cells, but after they differentiate into neurons, very early in life, they never replicate again. They can live for decades and never replicate.
The reason for this is, neurons expend about 90% of their energy pumping and exchanging ions. The net result is, that potential neuron mother cells, cannot build up sufficient energy reserves, to lower the entropy of their internal water, sufficiently to trigger a cell cycle. It is sort of like trying to put on weight, while exercising too much. You stay the same.
The property of not being able to replicate is useful to the neuron and its function. A mother cell that undergoes a cell cycle, has to break down all the scaffolding that holds everything in place so the contents can be divided into two daughter cells. The neuron, by never replicating, is able to maintain its fundamental scaffolding for long periods of time. This is good for memory functions and can be used to build up long term epigenetic changes, that will be conditioned by long term environmental interaction.
.
The reason for this is, neurons expend about 90% of their energy pumping and exchanging ions. The net result is, that potential neuron mother cells, cannot build up sufficient energy reserves, to lower the entropy of their internal water, sufficiently to trigger a cell cycle. It is sort of like trying to put on weight, while exercising too much. You stay the same.
The property of not being able to replicate is useful to the neuron and its function. A mother cell that undergoes a cell cycle, has to break down all the scaffolding that holds everything in place so the contents can be divided into two daughter cells. The neuron, by never replicating, is able to maintain its fundamental scaffolding for long periods of time. This is good for memory functions and can be used to build up long term epigenetic changes, that will be conditioned by long term environmental interaction.
.