Understanding through Discussion

QuickSearch

 Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ] EvC Forum active members: 86 (8994 total)
 41 online now: 14174dm, Base12, dwise1, nwr (4 members, 37 visitors) Newest Member: Juvenissun Post Volume: Total: 879,360 Year: 11,108/23,288 Month: 360/1,763 Week: 327/390 Day: 48/99 Hour: 3/7

 Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)

EvC Forum Science Forums Origin of Life

# Life - an Unequivicol Definition

Author Topic:   Life - an Unequivicol Definition
AlphaOmegakid
Member (Idle past 1458 days)
Posts: 564
From: The city of God
Joined: 06-25-2008

 Message 211 of 374 (773576) 12-04-2015 8:43 AM Reply to: Message 209 by New Cat's Eye12-03-2015 8:05 PM

Re: Black White or Grey?
I have 2 full years of calculus starting with derivatives then integrals and later matrices. I am also highly trained/schooled in certain scientific fields. etc. I know full well what a gradient is, but it is not I who misunderstands them.

It appears from the evidence in your post that you have some experience with web development. Well whether you create your gradient in Photoshop or using some other website tool, you used the hexadecimal standardized color code. Within whatever program you used to generate the image , you inputted the starting color code and the ending color code and defined the vector direction and shape and distance. The mere fact that you inputted the codes for white and black created the edges of whatever shape function you also inputted or used. There is a line or functional edge in these gradients that you are using. In your newest image it is a circle. Have you ever used a cookie cutter? That's a circular edge. The black circle exists in your image, and I assume there is either a white circle or a white point. The grey vectors are in between.

So please stop burying yourself deeper and deeper trying to argue that there is no edge when you yourself,and in your own words recognize that there is. You apparently are self deceived and the evidence is clear. I would take this to court any day of the week.

 This message is a reply to: Message 209 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-03-2015 8:05 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 213 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-04-2015 9:33 AM AlphaOmegakid has responded Message 214 by Percy, posted 12-04-2015 10:33 AM AlphaOmegakid has responded

AlphaOmegakid
Member (Idle past 1458 days)
Posts: 564
From: The city of God
Joined: 06-25-2008

 Message 212 of 374 (773577) 12-04-2015 8:46 AM

To RAZD
RAZD,

I will reply to you next. I have a busy schedule today and this weekend, but I will try to get it in. I'm not ignoring you. You just present a lot of information in each post, and I have a lot of others also to respond to.

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

 Message 213 of 374 (773586) 12-04-2015 9:33 AM Reply to: Message 211 by AlphaOmegakid12-04-2015 8:43 AM

Re: Black White or Grey?
I didn't create the images, I just found them on the web.

 So please stop burying yourself deeper and deeper trying to argue that there is no edge when you yourself,and in your own words recognize that there is.

My own words explicitly state that there is no edge between one color and the next and nothing I've written implied that there is.

The gradients analogize the lack of a line dividing chemistry and biology. Just like the there is a lack of a line dividing physics and chemistry.

As I tried to initially explain to you, biology is like a derivative of chemistry. It's just really really complex chemical reactions.

This concept exposes the uselessness of trying to define life in a way that sets a hard limit on where life stops and non-life begins.

You have refused to address this point and are demonstrating an inability to understand it.

Giving that you're just trolling anyways, I'll stop trying to help you understand it.

 I know full well what a gradient is, but it is not I who misunderstands them.

If you understood what a gradient is, then you wouldn't say that there is a line between the white and the gray.

The fact that you talked about extending the white edge into infinity and said that the line between white and grey would be in the same spot proves that you've completely failed to understand the concept.

And the level of arrogance that you display can only come from deep seated childish ignorance.

You're simply not worth it.

Edited by Cat Sci, : No reason given.

 This message is a reply to: Message 211 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 12-04-2015 8:43 AM AlphaOmegakid has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 215 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 12-04-2015 10:35 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.7

 Message 214 of 374 (773594) 12-04-2015 10:33 AM Reply to: Message 211 by AlphaOmegakid12-04-2015 8:43 AM

Re: Black White or Grey?
 AlphaOmegakid writes:I know full well what a gradient is, but it is not I who misunderstands them.

And yet to everyone here it appears you're not understanding them. Your arguments are beginning to boil down to, "I'm real smart and I know I'm right."

 So please stop burying yourself deeper and deeper trying to argue that there is no edge when you yourself,and in your own words recognize that there is. You apparently are self deceived and the evidence is clear. I would take this to court any day of the week.

I think what you're saying is that there are obvious edges at the black and white extremes. That's very clear for the square gradient, and in the circular gradient there is a circle of points where it becomes all black and continues black all the way to the edges, with a central circle or point that is pure white. We all agree about this, but it is beside the point.

The key point that you're simply denying is that wherever you choose to draw the boundary between living and non-living (even at the extreme boundary that is white in the gradient analogy), it is arbitrary in the sense that you've invented your own reasons based on your own individual preferences and opinions for drawing it there. You could have looked at things differently, and that would have placed the boundary somewhere else. Other people *have* looked at things differently from you that have placed the boundary somewhere else. That's why wherever you personally happen to draw the boundary between life and death, it is arbitrary.

 So please stop burying yourself deeper and deeper trying to argue that there is no edge when you yourself,and in your own words recognize that there is. You apparently are self deceived and the evidence is clear. I would take this to court any day of the week.

This is an incongruous thing to say for someone so sensitive himself to incivility.

--Percy

 This message is a reply to: Message 211 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 12-04-2015 8:43 AM AlphaOmegakid has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 218 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 12-04-2015 11:50 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

AlphaOmegakid
Member (Idle past 1458 days)
Posts: 564
From: The city of God
Joined: 06-25-2008

 Message 215 of 374 (773595) 12-04-2015 10:35 AM Reply to: Message 213 by New Cat's Eye12-04-2015 9:33 AM

Re: Black White or Grey?
 Cat Sci writes:My own words explicitly state that there is no edge between one color and the next and nothing I've written implied that there is.

 Cat Sci #2 mess 195 writes: Wrong. Just like the with the gradient I posted, you can clearly see that one edge is white and the other edge is black . …. the grey area in between.

 This message is a reply to: Message 213 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-04-2015 9:33 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 217 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-04-2015 10:54 AM AlphaOmegakid has not yet responded

ringo
Member
Posts: 18526
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.6

 Message 216 of 374 (773596) 12-04-2015 10:37 AM Reply to: Message 189 by AlphaOmegakid12-03-2015 12:31 PM

Re: First life
 AlphaOmegakid writes:I guess you cannot understand the difference between science and philosophical thoughts and opinions.

This forum is not the place for philosophical thoughts or opinions. "God is alive" belongs in the religious section.

 This message is a reply to: Message 189 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 12-03-2015 12:31 PM AlphaOmegakid has not yet responded

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

 Message 217 of 374 (773601) 12-04-2015 10:54 AM Reply to: Message 215 by AlphaOmegakid12-04-2015 10:35 AM

Re: Black White or Grey?
 Cat Sci writes:My own words explicitly state that there is no edge between one color and the next and nothing I've written implied that there is.

 Cat Sci #2 mess 195 writes: Wrong. Just like the with the gradient I posted, you can clearly see that one edge is white and the other edge is black . …. the grey area in between.

This reply exposes that you are completely misunderstanding what a gradient is and how I am using it in my argument.

And stop lying about what I wrote. Here is the full Message 195:

quote:
 Percy writes:With something as complex as life you're not going to find clear lines of demarcation.

You can say this over and over again, but you haven't established this evidentially.

A virus is not clearly living nor clearly non-living.

It's in the grey area in between.

 In fact, your own words refute this by saying certain things are "obviously alive" and certain things are "obviously non-living". By doing that you have drawn an "obvious" line somewhere within your mind. You haven't said where that line exists, but it obviously is "obvious" to you.

Wrong. Just like the with the gradient I posted, you can clearly see that one edge is white and the other edge is black, but it is impossible to determine where white stops and black starts.

 Why can't a definition have the same?

Because life is fuzzy.

Your misunderstanding of what a gradient is stems from you thinking that the gray area between the black and white edges is somehow a line between the different colors. It is not. Its a gradient. Gradients don't have lines like that.

 This message is a reply to: Message 215 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 12-04-2015 10:35 AM AlphaOmegakid has not yet responded

AlphaOmegakid
Member (Idle past 1458 days)
Posts: 564
From: The city of God
Joined: 06-25-2008

 Message 218 of 374 (773612) 12-04-2015 11:50 AM Reply to: Message 214 by Percy12-04-2015 10:33 AM

Re: Black White or Grey?
Percy,

I asked you in post 185 to identify how my definition in any way is arbitrary. Can you please do that?

 This message is a reply to: Message 214 by Percy, posted 12-04-2015 10:33 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

 Replies to this message: Message 220 by NoNukes, posted 12-04-2015 12:23 PM AlphaOmegakid has not yet responded

NoNukes
Inactive Member

 Message 219 of 374 (773614) 12-04-2015 12:14 PM Reply to: Message 136 by RAZD11-30-2015 11:35 AM

Re: equine masochistic necrophilia
 Again, are you claiming that every new generation of mules have exactly the same distribution of alleles as the previously existing population?

I am claiming that there are no new generations of mules. I am saying that a population of mules does not produce a new generation of mules.

I thought at this point we at least understood each others arguments. Let's just end this.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

 This message is a reply to: Message 136 by RAZD, posted 11-30-2015 11:35 AM RAZD has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 224 by RAZD, posted 12-05-2015 1:39 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

NoNukes
Inactive Member

 Message 220 of 374 (773616) 12-04-2015 12:23 PM Reply to: Message 218 by AlphaOmegakid12-04-2015 11:50 AM

Re: Black White or Grey?
 I asked you in post 185 to identify how my definition in any way is arbitrary. Can you please do that?

I think Percy answered your question in the post to which you are responding. In short your answer defines things as non-living for which biologists themselves have some doubt the correct classification and because it rules out living organisms that are at least hypothetically possible. Unless you know more biology that a biologist, it seems that the practical thing would be to ignore your definition.

Why don't you instead tell us why (other than for the purpose of being definite) you pick your definition draws the line where it does? Because the rationale for your answer, and your defense when questioned should cover why your definition is not arbitrary.

But it appears to me, and probably to the rest of us, at least Percy and Genomicus have both explained why your definition is unsuitable and arbitrary.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

 This message is a reply to: Message 218 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 12-04-2015 11:50 AM AlphaOmegakid has not yet responded

 Replies to this message: Message 221 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-04-2015 12:50 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

 Message 221 of 374 (773618) 12-04-2015 12:50 PM Reply to: Message 220 by NoNukes12-04-2015 12:23 PM

I've been repeatedly asking him why since my first post.

He has never bothered to explain.

Then he admitted that he is trolling.

So that's why.

 This message is a reply to: Message 220 by NoNukes, posted 12-04-2015 12:23 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

Percy
Member
Posts: 19851
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.7

 (1)
 Message 222 of 374 (773624) 12-04-2015 5:18 PM Reply to: Message 196 by AlphaOmegakid12-03-2015 2:38 PM

Re: Black White or Grey?
You posted five replies ( Message 186, Message 190, Message 187, Message 191 and Message 196) to my two messages (Message 182 and Message 184). Wow! I'll condense my responses into a single message.

 AlphaOmegakid in Message 186 writes:quote: Arbitrariness is the quality of being "determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle".[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArbitrarinessYours, and others claims of my definition as being arbitrary are false. Please Identify how my definition meets any part of the definition of being arbitrary.

It's hard to believe you don't understand what people mean when they say your definition is arbitrary. Cat Sci provided the definition of arbitrary that covers how people are using the term in reference to your definition of life:

quote:
3a: based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arbitrary)

Moving on:

 And what scientific principle requires "sufficient general-ness"? Scientific definitions are specific, except on some items within "biology" which seems to be acceptive of equivocation.

What scientific principle requires more precision than is possible or practical? In weather, what is the boundary between high and low pressure? The answer is 30.0 inches of mercury. Do you know what the answer was in 1965? 29.96. Choosing that boundary was (to some degree) arbitrary and changeable. In our solar system, what is the boundary between a rocky planet and a jovian planet? It used to be simple, but then we discovered that Uranus and Neptune should really be classed as ice giants, and Jupiter and Saturn as gas giants. Where are the boundaries between rocky planets, ice giants and gas giants? Who knows. Scientists can argue about it all day. Pluto was once a planet and there were nine planets in the solar system. Now Pluto's a dwarf planet and there are only eight planets. The definitional precision you claim should be everywhere in science is largely a fiction, except perhaps for the simpler things, like black and white.

 Percy writes:Sorry, I thought it would have been clear from context, but evidently you found use of the term "draw the line" confusing. "Draw the line" is a common English expression meaning, in this context, "an indication of demarcation; boundary." Another way of saying it would have been, "Because anywhere you place the boundary between what is living and what is not is ultimately arbitrary." This is the same thing people have already been telling you.

Ok, I understand now! from your previous example a dog is obviously "arbitrarily" alive, and a rock is obviously "arbitrarily" non-living.

That's a very strange and nonsensical interpretation. Are you trying to be funny again? Is English not your native language? I'm not being uncivil. I'm honestly seeking an explanation for how what you just said makes any sense.

 I know a lot of people keep telling me this, but that doesn't make it not contradictory. I don't know how many time I have to keep demonstrating this in yours, and everyone else's own words. I guess you all have been trained to think this way, but it is not logical.

Declaring things contradictory or illogical while providing no evidence or rationale is all you're doing.

 Percy writes:With something as complex as life you're not going to find clear lines of demarcation.

You can say this over and over again, but you haven't established this evidentially.

Of course we have.

 In fact, your own words refute this by saying certain things are "obviously alive" and certain things are "obviously non-living". By doing that you have drawn an "obvious" line somewhere within your mind. You haven't said where that line exists, but it obviously is "obvious" to you.

This represents a gross misunderstanding of what people have been saying. You seem to have it almost backwards. As Bob and Ray used to say in one of their jokes about baseball, "You've got that base so screwed up no one can play it."

Of course a dog is obviously living, and of course a lead block is obviously non-living, but we believe there is no clear line of demarcation between living and non-living. When you say that, "You haven't said where that line exists, but it obviously is 'obvious' to you," you're saying something that very much is not true. We're saying the opposite, that where that boundary exists is the last thing we'd assert we know because we consider it something not unambiguously knowable nor even useful.

 Ok, I see where the confusion lies. The virus that enters the cell is not the same as the viruses that leave the cell. These are different entities. "offspring" so to speak. So, No, the same entity that infects the cell is basically destroyed and the new virions are released. It is not that a virus is moving back and forth between living and non-living.

It is most certainly the case that by your definition a virus moves back and forth between living and non-living and living again. First it is created in the cell, where by your definition it is living. Then it is released from the cell, where by your definition it is non-living. Then the virus infects a cell by reentering it, where by your definition it is living again.

 The host cell has living tissue within it.

Living tissue inside a cell? I don't think so. You mean living material? Like what? When you're not considering the entire cell together, the mitochondria are all I can think of that fit your description of life.

A single cell of a dog could not live by itself outside the dog. Is that cell living by your definition?

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Clarify a paragraph.

 This message is a reply to: Message 196 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 12-03-2015 2:38 PM AlphaOmegakid has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 223 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-04-2015 7:08 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply Message 231 by NoNukes, posted 12-07-2015 12:32 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply Message 239 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 12-08-2015 11:05 AM Percy has responded

Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2380
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.2

 Message 223 of 374 (773627) 12-04-2015 7:08 PM Reply to: Message 222 by Percy12-04-2015 5:18 PM

Re: Black White or Grey?
 A single cell of a dog could not live by itself outside the dog.

A cell wouldn't be able to live by itself (meaning without outside help), but cells can be kept alive and dividing in a lab, invitro.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

 This message is a reply to: Message 222 by Percy, posted 12-04-2015 5:18 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

 Replies to this message: Message 225 by RAZD, posted 12-05-2015 1:49 AM Tanypteryx has acknowledged this reply

RAZD
Member
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

 Message 224 of 374 (773636) 12-05-2015 1:39 AM Reply to: Message 219 by NoNukes12-04-2015 12:14 PM

Re: equine masochistic necrophilia
 I am claiming that there are no new generations of mules. ...

And yet mules have been around for thousands of years, so either they pop up out of nothing, they are immortal or there are new mules being bred. New mules being bred would be a new generation would it not?

 ... I am saying that a population of mules does not produce a new generation of mules.

You are saying that it is a population that does not breed, and I am saying that it is not a breeding population. The difference is that you need a breeding population to have evolution and not some other arbitrary population.

A population of all males is not considered a breeding population and cannot produce a new generations with hereditary traits.

A population of all females is not considered a breeding population and cannot produce a new generations with hereditary traits.

A population of individual animals from different species, one per species is not considered a breeding population and cannot produce a new generations with hereditary traits.

A population of mules is not considered a breeding population and cannot produce a new generations with hereditary traits.

ALL of these organisms in each one of these populations are products of reproduction carried out in their respective breeding populations.

 I thought at this point we at least understood each others arguments. Let's just end this.

Do you agree that a population of mules is not a breeding population?

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : clrty

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

 This message is a reply to: Message 219 by NoNukes, posted 12-04-2015 12:14 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

 Replies to this message: Message 226 by dwise1, posted 12-05-2015 4:09 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

RAZD
Member
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

 (1)
 Message 225 of 374 (773637) 12-05-2015 1:49 AM Reply to: Message 223 by Tanypteryx12-04-2015 7:08 PM

Re: Black White or Grey?
 A single cell of a dog could not live by itself outside the dog.

A cell wouldn't be able to live by itself (meaning without outside help), but cells can be kept alive and dividing in a lab, invitro.

The HeLa for example, which is generally considered to be living.

Organ transplants and skin grafts fall into the same category. You could say they are transferred from one life support system to another.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

 This message is a reply to: Message 223 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-04-2015 7:08 PM Tanypteryx has acknowledged this reply

 Date format: mm-dd-yyyy Timezone: ET (US)