Yes, it does prove that life is energy. But it does not prove that 'ALL life is energy’ since energy is IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT MASS (therefore ‘LIFE’ – if it is claimed to be energy - is impossible without mass).
AND THERFORE: ALL LIFE IS NOT ENERGY!
Even kinetic energy is the extra energy an object posseses due to its motion. Without that object no energy is possible.
NO, NO, NO, NO. I don't accept the assertion 'all life is energy'.
You will have to amend it. It is incorrect.
All life HAS energy/depletes the energy it has [necessary to remain in motion (alive)]/needs energy.
IS energy? Just energy? As in: ‘all life is energy’ as asserted.
Uh-uh. No way.
It would be very nice if it was that simple. Everything alive is energy. No, it’s also mass. And even that mass once dead is energy and still mass. The mass is consumed and so is its energy.
And the depleted energy is always in equal proportion to the depleted mass.
All life is not energy. Everything alive has/needs energy to continue to be alive . Therefore I agree with what Detente said earlier: all life is not energy.
Beware of the pitfall of a metaphysical explanation. Energy is energy. If you say ‘all life is energy’ a quick disproof of that is to invert the assertion: 'all energy is life'. Nope, all energy is not life.
If all life is energy then all energy must be Life.
EastbayRay Forum Posts (781)
What is Life?
Tell me which bit of an object isn't mass?I love ya Trish. All I am saying - trying to explain - is that energy is not possible without mass and visa versa.
Therefore all life cannot be 'just' energy. Energy is not possible without mass (and visa versa).
Energy-mass equivalence!