[Discussion] Gaia Hypothesis | Is Earth An Living Organism?

[Uzumaki Macho]

I don't believe it was mentioned, or maybe I wasn't paying attention or maybe I just forgot like the other 90% of stuff taught in school. Regardless, I like to think outside the box and expand the possibilities of things. It has nothing to do with whether something is right or not.

You must fulfill all 8 characteristics in order to be considered alive, and the Earth doesn't fulfill all of those characteristics.

 

[Punk Hazard]

I don't believe it was mentioned, or maybe I wasn't paying attention or maybe I just forgot like the other 90% of stuff taught in school. Regardless, I like to think outside the box and expand the possibilities of things. It has nothing to do with whether something is right or not.

There's a difference between "I like thinking outside the box" and disregarding facts.

 

[Son Ryuto Uzumaki]

This theory's name os what came from the Greeks. The hypothesis itself was formulated by the chemist James Lovelock and co-developed by the microbiologist Lynn Margulis in the 70-s.

You must be insane if you think a people who just came out the "dark" ages 500 years ago, are the first to theorize the planet is a living. Lol

 

[Aimee Sky]

I think the earth is alive enough to be able to support human life and everything else

 

[Waindo]

You must be insane if you think a people who just came out the "dark" ages 500 years ago, are the first to theorize the planet is a living. Lol

Try reading people's comments before answering. Judging by your responses, you just impulsively write w/o thinking what the hell are you writing, than you wait to see what'll happen. :|

 

[DominiqueX]

Naa, I don't think that earth is "alive". It's a complex, incredible good working system, but I wouldn't call that alive.
Hm, I would like to explain my thoughts, but my english isn't good enough. Sorry D:

 

[Waindo]

One can also look at it from this perspective; Earth is alive cuz one of the definitions of life is in actual existence or use. It can also be considered as growing and living cuz it undisputedly constantly changes, therefore it must be alive. If our planet was not alive, it would just be a plain rock that was never different from the way in which it began.

How the hell could we've be born from, and be sustained by it if it was just a floating rock in space?
Look at it this way; Movement of Earth is repetative, it creates repetitive changes in it's atmosphere (for example changes in weather), that weather generates electricity (lightning), which holds the power to change the molecular structure of most substances it comes into contact with. Lightning creates and links chemicals, and can break them apart. We are made of many of these same chemicals. Believe it or not, our bodies do practically the same thing in order to support our internal metabolic processes.

 

[Son Ryuto Uzumaki]

Try reading people's comments before answering. Judging by your responses, you just impulsively write w/o thinking what the hell are you writing, than you wait to see what'll happen. :|

No i read it. But what baffles me is the hypothesized notion that your intelligentsia can "comprehend" the planet is alive but not realize life may be more precious within it self. Youbcan quote me

 

[Waindo]

What's the point of quoting you? Your comment is just a gathering of invalid points towards me, while you're not sticking to the theme of the debate. For example; answering, validating or breaking apart my last comment.

 

[Excite]

Me personally i believe the universe is a living entity the problem with us humans we think that the world revolves around us and try to validate our existence, Us coming to existences is a paradox of its own the definition of living can't truthfully be define the human brain can perform 10 to the power 16, this universe behaves as a quantum computer where particles not only collide, they compute... Information can be created and stored at the rate of 10 to 106 power. You must be careful when using mathematical concepts to try to understand the physical world, because the laws of mathematics and the laws of physics are somewhat different. For example, true infinities exist only in math and never in the real world. A physical object that was infinitely small wouldn't actually exist, and a physical object that was infinitely large would preclude any other objects from existing! As you can see, you can use math to quantify and test a physical theory, but you can't always use mathematical concepts to define our physical reality.

 

[Waindo]

Is the fact that our physical reality cannot be proven by math connected to the fact that existance of infinity in nature isn't proven yet?