The accepted fundamental forces governing our universe comprise gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. While life is not typically categorized as a fundamental force, our understanding and definition of life might benefit from its thermodynamic and quantum mechanic properties.
The Second Law of thermodynamics posits that in an isolated system, entropy – a measure of disorder – invariably increases over time. Life, characterized as a complex, self-sustaining, and self-replicating system, initially appears counter-intuitive to the Second Law, as it generates order from chaos, thereby reducing local entropy. However, life's work in reducing local entropy is counterbalanced by an increase in entropy elsewhere in the universe.
Life, via its metabolic processes and environmental interactions, performs work to maintain and propagate itself. In doing so, it releases energy, primarily in the form of heat, contributing to an overall increase in universal entropy.
The principle of conservation of energy (dU = δQ - δW) encapsulates life's metabolic and environmental interactive processes. It performs work (W), transforming heat (Q) into different forms of energy. This work contributes to the persisting life system, and as the principle of natural selection postulates, such work is likely to be selected for, thereby propagating life. This transformational process, driven by life's inherent capacity for work, effectively accelerates the total entropy of the universe.
This understanding aligns life within the framework of the second law of thermodynamics, where life does not contravene the law but works in accordance with it. Life can be postulated as an entropic accelerator (dS_life/dt > 0), enhancing the universe's overall entropy. This paradigm provides a thermodynamic perspective to our definition of life, underscoring life's efficiency in contributing to universal entropy.
Secondly, the role of life within quantum mechanics, specifically regarding the observer effect, may also contribute to our definition of life. The observer effect posits that the mere act of observation alters the observed phenomenon, as notably demonstrated in the double-slit experiment, where the observation of a particle determines whether it behaves as a wave or a particle.
Life forms (and the devices they create) act as quantum observers. They are capable of collapsing quantum wave functions into definite states through observation, influencing quantum states. This interaction suggests that the definition of life could be expanded to include its unique role within quantum mechanics.
Considering life from both thermodynamic and quantum mechanical perspectives, life fundamentally contributes to the workings of the universe. These unique interactions provide the basis for refining and improving our physical definition of life, possibly positioning life as an integral component in the universe, rather than an anomalous agent within it.
This is because it cancels out of the equation. Biology boils down to chemistry boils down to physics and if you reduce variables on both sides of the equation, "life" is not necessary for the universe to exist. "Posits" is not the correct framing. "The Second Law of Thermodynamics requires that entropy increases over time throughout all systems in the multiverse" is accurate. There is nothing controversial, experimental or theoretical about it. If the 2nd law is wrong, everything is wrong and we fly apart into clouds of tachyons. My favorite definitions of thermo come from my 400-level thermo class, which used gambling as an analogy: : “You must play the game (zeroth law), you can't win, (first law), you can't break even (second law) and you can't quit (third law).” There's a lot of lawyerism to the laws of thermodynamics because anyone puzzling about with them is out there on beyond zebra but for normies, "time's arrow moves forward" "energy is neither created nor destroyed" "energy transfer is never 100% efficient" and "everything stops at absolute zero". Thermo don't give no fux about quantum observers. Particle or wave the gods of thermo get their cut. your part in the play changes but to the universe it's all the same. As soon as you start digging into it, all the "spooky action at a distance" schroedinger'scatism of quantum mechanics collapses into boundary conditions and framing; "energy is matter with a constant" is the theoretical physicist's way of saying "it's all just vibes, maaaan" but much like Erwin's zombie cat, pop culture turns it into something it's not. "Life" has to be defined as a thin bright line somewhere and the preponderance of the privilege for doing so belongs to the biologists. "consumes/transforms energy" has been in place since 1749 while "If I observe it I must be alive" comes from Schroedinger himself in 1944. Schroedinger, however, did not feel that the universe needed to be observed to exist but that instead, our existence is defined by our observation. While life is not typically categorized as a fundamental force, our understanding and definition of life might benefit from its thermodynamic and quantum mechanic properties.
The Second Law of thermodynamics posits that in an isolated system, entropy – a measure of disorder – invariably increases over time.
How do we know? What forced the indeterminate? I disagree about Shrodinger. In his What is Life he posited that consciousness was not even something that was seated in the individual, but spread across the lot of us, with an illusion of individuality. I don’t think he was so sure himself. Yeah ‘posits’ is the wrong word for the second law. Biology boils down to chemistry boils down to physics and if you reduce variables on both sides of the equation, "life" is not necessary for the universe to exist.
That's fair. We don't. Flip side of the question, though - what reason do we have for disregarding the current status quo other than egocentrism? There's a lot of effort by the TESCREALists to redefine "life" to include their new favorite plaything, generalized artificial intelligence, so that they can discuss what rights Rosie from The Jetsons might be entitled to. I find this to be deeply disingenuous, considering their utter and total lack of interest in extending rights to, say, black people. "What is life" has taken on a new urgency now that the overwhelming majority of the world rejects the idea that ChatGPT is entitled to discount car insurance. Schroedinger cribbed the Buddhists, Tegmark cribbed Schroedinger. That's fine, hard scientists can be philosophers, too. But my tail gets bushy when hard scientists pass philosophy off as science simply because that's what their degree is in. What function does this definition serve? Why are we defining it? What's wrong with the definitions we already have? What has changed that we now need to re-examine this question? Because biologically and ecologically speaking, nothing has changed. We have not found any new goo armpit deep in a black smoker. Rama is ripping out of the solar system without so much as a chromatograph to remember it by. Nobody's discovered a cave of Sudoku-solving slime molds. What has changed is a whole bunch of too-online chinstrokers have started batting answerbots around and way way way too many of them want to turn their gullibility into profundity by arguing "I noticed it, therefore it matters." Crichton's Andromeda Strain is literally about aperiodic crystals and whether they are entitled to rights as "life." Chrichton consequently digresses for a number of chapters on the definition of life and its reduction. He effectively concludes the question to be unanswerable but moot; regardless of the definition, "human life" takes precedence over any other. That's the step that I see skipped in these discussions. And I see it skipped a disturbing percentage of the time.How do we know?
A couple quick remarks. Growing crystals, arguably one of the most regular well-ordered things out there, increases entropy. Local ordering increases global disorder. Local disorder increases global disorder. You're obviously not wrong, but it's important to state the kind of system (in thermodynamic parlance) explicit and in the open. This, in and of itself, is not a cause for life. If you want to be more precise (accelerator-wise), you should postulate dS_life/dt >= dS_noLife/dt > 0 for a given interval t, as dS/dt > 0 is a) an argument you started with, b) a given. I omniloathe the philosophy of QM, but I suppose that the more Wigner's Friends are involved (I presumed you alluded to it, among other possible interpretations?), the quicker the increase in the growth of entropy. Assuming so and given that, the question should be why the growth in dS be so small in a (monotonically) growing system. I'd like it to be so purposeful. But the strength of this argument would also make life both inevitable and more varied than observed so far. You clearly put a lot of thought to it, I remember you mentioning Heisenberg's On Life (EDIT: not gonna correct it, but god damn past-Devac, you had one job...) and similar musings years ago, so please, don't think I'm nit-picking you or being dismissive. I'd like to help you tighten it to the extent of my time and ability.The Second Law of thermodynamics posits that in an isolated system, entropy – a measure of disorder – invariably increases over time. Life, characterized as a complex, self-sustaining, and self-replicating system, initially appears counter-intuitive to the Second Law, as it generates order from chaos, thereby reducing local entropy. However, life's work in reducing local entropy is counterbalanced by an increase in entropy elsewhere in the universe.
Life can be postulated as an entropic accelerator (dS_life/dt > 0), enhancing the universe's overall entropy. This paradigm provides a thermodynamic perspective to our definition of life, underscoring life's efficiency in contributing to universal entropy.
Life forms (and the devices they create) act as quantum observers. They are capable of collapsing quantum wave functions into definite states through observation, influencing quantum states. This interaction suggests that the definition of life could be expanded to include its unique role within quantum mechanics.
Considering life from both thermodynamic and quantum mechanical perspectives, life fundamentally contributes to the workings of the universe. These unique interactions provide the basis for refining and improving our physical definition of life, possibly positioning life as an integral component in the universe, rather than an anomalous agent within it.
Yes, I can be more clear. I tried to be here: But it’s poorly stated. It’s either life because it does the type of work that persists the system, or crystals are life, but not the kind that does work that persists as a consequence of doing it. Thanks. I’ll reflect on your thoughts and get back.Growing crystals, arguably one of the most regular well-ordered things out there, increases entropy
This work contributes to the persisting life system, and as the principle of natural selection postulates, such work is likely to be selected for, thereby propagating life.