Explaining life from a scientific point of view by Kurzgesagt, seem interesting so I thought to share. Not recommend for strongly religious people or... well... those "other" types.
you mean we are not part of an experiment so that the real world can give birth a bunch of super babies after we die and wake-up from this simulation???????????????????????????????????????????????????
Life... is a struggle. That's life (that's life) that's what people say You're riding high in April Shot down in May But I know I'm gonna change that tune When I'm back on top, back on top in June I said, that's life (that's life) and as funny as it may seem Some people get their kicks Stompin' on a dream But I don't let it, let it get me down 'Cause this fine old world it keeps spinnin' around I've been a puppet, a pauper, a pirate A poet, a pawn and a king I've been up and down and over and out And I know one thing Each time I find myself flat on my face I pick myself up and get back in the race That's life (that's life) I tell ya, I can't deny it I thought of quitting, baby But my heart just ain't gonna buy it And if I didn't think it was worth one single try I'd jump right on a big bird and then I'd fly I've been a puppet, a pauper, a pirate A poet, a pawn and a king I've been up and down and over and out And I know one thing Each time I find myself layin' flat on my face I just pick myself up and get back in the race That's life (that's life) that's life And I can't deny it Many times I thought of cuttin' out but my heart won't buy it But if there's nothing shakin' come here this July I'm gonna roll myself up in a big ball and die My, my
Got confused as f*ck! Started with universe then went to cells then goes to cars then proteins and runs to evolution and pikachus and finish with creating life in a machine? Too much to think about better go to CN young masters
What I got is in summary there is no such thing as death since there is no life it is just a bunch of processes?
Interesting but oversimplified, also makes a couple of totally unfounded claims like Mitochondria being 'dead' (wat?) which doesn't make sense at all. The main issue though is that there is not actually a consensus on a specific definition for life. All current definitions of life are descriptive and have exceptions, hence why Viruses are so problematic. This is because life isn't really a substance or a thing that you can clearly point to; it is an ongoing process that substances are involved in. Its a neat video though; apart from the 'mitochondria are dead' claim that he just tosses out without warning. Death is what happens when the processes stop.
The video doesn't explain what life is. They are also asking the question to what life is. The basic idea is that all things that we consider living and all things that we consider dead are basically the same if you go small enough down to the level of elements and atoms that make up our bodies.
The world isn't as simple as just dead or alive. There are also non-living organisms such as viruses. In order to be alive, there are 5 criteria that need to be true. 1) Organization so we can develop correctly with a specific order in which things are formed 2) Energy We need energy in order to function 3) Growth and Development In order to fulfill our lifespan we have to grow and develop 4) Reproduction We would die off if we never reproduced 5) Response and Adaptation To defend ourselves we must respond, we must adapt to survive changes in our world If something can fulfill these criteria it doesn't matter what it is made of it is life.
There is no 'current definition of life'; the closest we have to that are the biological criteria: Which is that life is a characteristic of something that exhibits all or most of the following traits; Regulation of internal environment (Homeostasis). Composed of one or more cells. Consume and transform energy from external sources (Metabolism). Consumes more energy than it loses (Growth) Reacts to things in a predictable manner (Responds to stimuli) Changes over time in response to the environment (Adaptation) Produces new organisms (Reproduction) Mitochondria meet all of those except the 'composed of one or more cells' trait, and thus are considered biologically alive. However; as mentioned the biological definition of life (which isn't unequivocal anyway) isn't the only one, in Physics life is defined as an organized thermodynamic system that can reproduce and adapt to changing circumstances. In other words a self-sustained chemical system capable of undergoing Darwinian evolution. Mitochondria meet that definition too. And then there are the many, many different systemic definitions which start at the relatively simple 'living things are self-organizing and self-producing' and steadily get more and more complicated from there. No doubt there are some systemic definitions that would put Mitochondria as 'un-alive' but as mentioned there are a lot of different definitions and no clean consensus on which one is right. So making a broad claim like 'Mitochondria are dead' without even explaining which definition of 'alive' you are using and why is a pretty bold move. Especially when there are dozens more definitions of life that I didn't even touch on, some of which consider Mitochondria alive and some which do not. At the end of the day, there simply is not yet a consensus on what the exact definition of 'life' is. It is an ongoing subject of research and the question 'what is life' just hasn't been fully answered yet. If you asked a magic 8-ball that answered questions based on scientific consensus 'What is life?' It would respond with 'Reply hazy, try again later.'