After reading the question answered by Adams on “Speed of Gravity,” I remembered a question I pondered years ago, and was partially answered by Cecil’s responce to “Time of Death,” or, “How long is a severed head alive?”
Whether you might classify the transition between a person being living of dead as analogue (gradual) or digital (one or the other with no gray area), also applies to all matter, in my opinion.
First, I need that last statement critiqued; one’s ear might turn gangrenous and dead while they live, insulated from healthy flesh by dying cells, but the cells themselves are functioning, then not.
My question is: can we distinguish living and dead atoms, which constituted living or dead matter? Can distinction be drawn in behavior, combination, innate constitution?
This may relate to whether soul and body are seperable. Tell ya what, let’s bet on it: if there is an afterlife, you owe me $10 (US). If there isn’t, I owe you $10 (US).:dubious:
Atoms are neither dead nor alive. The distinction between dead and lilving matter is in the relative arrangement of the atoms, and wether they make a functioning biological system. Life is a pattern, not a mystical essence. When the pattern of atoms is such taht ic can no longer do those things we define life by, we call it dead.
That almost convinces me, except for various functions that continue post-mortem: hair and finger nail growth, for example. While obviously those heavily automated functions simply cease when no more nutrients are distributed, that says nothing for the actual moment life, as the sentient organism cares about it, ceases to exist. Ones brain is matter, and it functions, then it doesn’t. Mechanically, it relies on many systems to keep going, and there’s a period of viable resusitation before the brain cannot function at full capacity.
But what of failures in the brain, not of a mechanical nature? Can it be said any truly exist? In old age, one may pass without catastrophic failures in any organ, including the brain. Life ceases in what seems a choice.
I’d appreciate your take on this. Thanks.
It is absolutely not true that hair and fingernails grow after death.
What happens is that the skin surrounding them tends to shrink back, possibly exposing more of the base of the hair or fingernails. Growth stops at death.
I forgot how recent the developments in antibiotic-resistant diseases were. I figured this branch of innate immunity would have been simpler to advance and improve. I guess the said molecules are harder to formulate than educating an intelligent immune system with crippled diseases.
Ok, thanks, I think I’ve got a good picture now.
Sorry, misposted. Intended message:
Okay, thanks for clarifying that!