What is life?

Originally posted by Akka
From a strictly scientific point of view, life is the ability to create your own ATP.
I assume this is true for life on earth, but it might not be true for other lifeforms in the universe.

I wrote an essay on life in the universe a year ago and these are seven properties of life I found on a major Swedish university's homepage:
1. Reproduction
2. Breathing
3. Absorbing nutrients
4. Excreting waste products
5. Growing
6. Cooperating with the environment
7. Is not artificially created by other lifeforms

These aren't 100% waterproof though, since lifeforms like viruses don't fit in.
 
I think 2 to 6 can be rolled up into one: the ability to maintain it's "shape" in a changing enviroment.
 
Originally posted by funxus
These aren't 100% waterproof though, since lifeforms like viruses don't fit in.
Well, viruses generally aren't considered living, AFAIK.
Originally posted by Aphex_Twin
I think 2 to 6 can be rolled up into one: the ability to maintain it's "shape" in a changing enviroment.
Homeostasis is the word, I think. :)

If I'm not mistaken, these are generally considered to be the main components of life:

Reproduction
Heredity
Homeostasis
Metabolism
Cellular structure and function
Responsiveness
Growth and devolopment

Technically, though, I don't think the last one is necessary, and saying it all has cellular structure and function isn't really saying anything, since if something's organized into a pattern, each component of the pattern can be called a cell, and if it isn't, the whole thing can be considered one cell (thus, anything can be considered cellular).
 
Originally posted by WillJ
Homeostasis is the word, I think. :)

And it is... if you're so kind as to browse through my post on paga one. Ahem... ;)
 
Originally posted by Aphex_Twin
And it is... if you're so kind as to browse through my post on paga one. Ahem... ;)
I see...

*points memory-erasing-light thing in the Men in Black movies at Aphex, making him forget this ever happened* *does the same thing to everyone else*

Ahem.
 
Originally posted by CurtSibling
@onejayhawk: So when do you introduce the religious slant to this thread?
I defer to you on that point.

No one has come close to answering the question though. Something changes irreversably at the point of death, so that the body no longer continues to function, that is to maintain homeostsis. What?

To invoke the word homeostsis is basically circular, since it comes very close to meaning "being alive." By definition, it is a characteristic of higher order organisms to have interacting systems which maintains internal stability. "Life" then is having the characteristic of homeostsis. Why am I uninformed by this train of reasoning? Because it tries to define a larger concept with an included smaller one.

Let me throw a couple of things into this. Some, not all, but a portion of those who have had "near death" experiences are changed in some significant way. Significant to the person and those around them at least. Is this psychological, physiological, paranormal,imaginary or something else. Of the people that have actually been fully dead, their impressions have not been recorded, even in the handful of cases where this was possible.

The other thing is the flip side of near death. It is the case of predeath, for lack of a better term. The body continues to function, for a time, but no one is home, and the body rapidly breaks down and homeostasis collapses. What gives?

J
 
Life isnt about chemical reactions, homeostasis, cellular structure etc. What force is it that makes matter arrange itself in such a way that it can begin to reason and ask questions like the ones we're discussing here? Why does some matter form itself into "life" of varying complexity, and other matter doesnt? This force that acts upon matter in this way, is it analogous to gravity? What is it that lies at the root of all life that draws matter to itself in such a way that it eventually "wakes up" and starts looking around? Is that attracting center of gravity the soul? To me, those are the real mysteries about life.
 
Originally posted by Dumb pothead
Life isnt about chemical reactions, homeostasis, cellular structure etc. What force is it that makes matter arrange itself in such a way that it can begin to reason and ask questions like the ones we're discussing here? Why does some matter form itself into "life" of varying complexity, and other matter doesnt? This force that acts upon matter in this way, is it analogous to gravity? What is it that lies at the root of all life that draws matter to itself in such a way that it eventually "wakes up" and starts looking around? Is that attracting center of gravity the soul? To me, those are the real mysteries about life.
This is more along the lines of a philisophical inquiry, but you come near the point I wished to discuss. You use the term "life", where I might have used the term "awareness." One need not be awake to be alive, but if no one is awake the point is moot. Life is only interesting, for humans, if there is awareness.

As you say, all this cataloguing of biological activity does not tell us about what life is, only some of its activities. More to the point it gives us no clue why life ends, or how, simply that it observed to stop. What I want to know is if anyone has a clue as to what really happens. Is it a hard line that no one crosses?. Is there a gray area, where one may step in and step back out quickly?

J
 
Seems to me that life is simply any organized structure with the ability to reproduce its self in a non-perfect fashion. Most typically this would involve physical things made up of atoms, but I don’t see that as a show stopper. The ability to reproduce implies similar energetics to a ball rolling down a hill. There must be a driving force.

Not all life uses ATP, it is just so efficient to do so that most of what we see around does.

J seems to be referring to human life in particular though, our metabolism is so complicated that it doesn’t seem a very good place to start inquiries into the scientific question you pose. You seem bent on a more philosophical inquiry.

Life in the absence of a community/environment does not exist. A singular organism is not ‘life’. Is a virus alive? How about a plant spoor that has been dormant for a million years? Medical science has allowed us to bring people back to health that in former times would have been dead. This is no more than a mechanical exercise. It seems to me that we have a continuum here, and a question that only makes sense to the self-aware.
 
Onejayhawk : you asked for a scientific, technical way of describing life. You had answers. You can find them unsatisfactory, but then you specifically asked NOT to go on the philosophical side...

Gothmog : I thought that all known lifeforms used ATP. Which one don't ? I'm curious on this subject, would be interesting to see alternative kind of life :)
 
I believe all extant life does have some form of ATP synthase, I am not sure though. It seems that you just can't compete without it.

But there is much evidence for life that did not have it. Many functions in procaryotes are powered by simple proton motive force (the same force that drives ATP synthase) instead of coupling to ATP. If we look at lineage in these 'motors' it seems that they are precursors to the ATP dependent 'motors'. Thus it seem that many (or more likely all) of the energetic mechanisms of life were ATP independent at one point. It also seems likely that a potential difference across a membrane was the original source of energy for life. Just a hypothesis though, it may be that God created ATP synthase in the first moment of creation.
 
Originally posted by Akka
You can find them unsatisfactory, but then you specifically asked NOT to go on the philosophical side...
A discussion based on the question "What is life" that didnt include philosophy, wouldnt be complete. The biology of life is what we see, and its fascinating, but theres alot more to us than that.
 
Life is advence organic chemistry which is carbon base, ATP ( adenosine triphosphate) is indeed a phosphate bond energy transfer. But its only a step within many other chemical reaction.

The carbon dioxyde-oxygen cycle is a marvelous symbiosis exemple within plants and animals.
Photosynthetesis is the primary fuel but other energy source have been reported. ( deep sea bacteria using sulfur coumpound and thus able a kind of worm to live around).

Carbon chemistry ( organic chemistry) is fascinating, i recommand it to anybody who want to understand a little bit more about life.
 
But Carbon is not the only element capabile of bonding into molecular chains. Some have suggested that Silicone would have a chemistry just as complex as Carbon. Again, my former Biology teacher mentioned that in such a chemistry, liquid Nitrogen would fill in the role of water (anyone have more on this?)
 
I dont think silicon can make such complex molecules like DNA or protein, with their 3D structur. At this level, the arragement in space is much more important than founctional group ( like acide react with alcool to form ester).

But, maybe, who know, under totaly different condition ( temperature,pressure,solvent,catalist...) if it can lead to silicon base living form in liquid ammonia or nitrogen.

Chemistry is so complex that you never know. The sulfur metabolism of deep sea bacteria was a thrue surprise ( about 15 year ago).
 
ok, here's my take on the subject: Living things all share the property of local action against entropy. That is to say, within a living thing there is much more order than you would find in a random distribution of compounds from the earth's crust, or in a distribution of basic organic building blocks. Essentially, these pieces (amino acids, sugar molecules, nucleotides, etc.) are arranged in specific patterns. More than that, though, is the fact that they continuously work against entropy. If all the chemical machinery in a cell stops working, it's not long before the component molecules begin to decay. Some have longer life-spans than others, and some are actively disassembled by specific proteins, but without a supply of replacement parts being made, the cell will die. (this is similar to what others have already said about homeostasis)

Death, then, is the point where the organism isn't able to start back up again and repair itself after some block is inserted/removed, or injury sustained. If a bacteria is physically sliced open, cut in two, it won't be able to repair the damage quickly enough and will lose its self-sustaining capability as its contents spill out into the surrounding medium. If you instead deprive it of all food, or just a certain specific nutrient, it will be unable to reproduce but will still survive for a while. It must be considered dead at the point where it has decayed internally so much that even with the addition of food it is not able to revive. With a person or other multicellular organism, this window is pretty short because of the interdependence and complexity of the body. If your heart stops on the operating table, the doctors have mere minutes to revive you before too many cells die and you are beyond recovery.
 
So the key is entropy. Thanks, DT, you've put some order in my toughts on the subject.
 
@Deep Thought: What makes you say that life is going against entropy? How are the molecules/atoms in living things less random (which is what I'm assuming you mean)?

Sure, they're arranged in specific patterns, but so are many things. And if the pattern is broken the life ends, but that isn't really defining life.

I think we've already established the scientific definition of life and death (ATP, reproduction, and all of that), so all that remains is more philosophical definitions, which I guess OJH has asked us to stay away from.
 
Back
Top Bottom