4 ms·
Well essentially thats how a hive mind works but I think it's a stretch to classify, idk say a bee colony, as constituting a single organism. Considering my la
by mortdeus 11y ago
Well essentially thats how a hive mind works but I think it's a stretch to classify, idk say a bee colony, as constituting a single organism.
Considering my lacking but informed understanding of the fundamental requirements of life as it exists here on earth, I see a fundamental flaw with the idea that a galaxy sized organism could sustain the engine of life, protein folding.
There has to be some source of external energy that is fueling these organisms and galaxy sized anything make even the most massive stars in the galaxy look infitismally tiny in comparison.
Perhaps gravity of a super massive black hole could kick-start and spin some sort of electric turbine like biological organ or something to get things put into motion but considering life starts small such a scale would hit hurdles.
Of course this is assuming that life on distance planets all use the primarily carbon based deoxyribonucleic acid system of life.
- mortdeus 11y agoTheir could be forms of life that we don't even have a clue about the biological nature of itz composition.
- codeulike 11y agoWe are colonies of cells.
- mcguire 11y agoSpeak for yourselves. I'm a miniscule subcomponent of Gaia.
- spacehome 11y ago> idk say a bee colony, as constituting a single organism. Humans try to classify collections of matter into coherent objects. Otherwise there would be no way we'd be able to understand the world without that abstraction. But you live in that world long enough, and you begin to believe that reality neatly fits into the categories, however the categories exist only in our minds. But you can always make the categories break if you push them far enough. Plenty of philosophical discussions are really just about definitions of words and not anything 'real': Does life begin at conception? Is Theseus' ship the same? Is a bee colony a single organism? From http://www.paulgraham.com/philosophy.html http://www.paulgraham.com/philosophy.html: > Outside of math there's a limit to how far you can push words; in fact, it would not be a bad definition of math to call it the study of terms that have precise meanings. Everyday words are inherently imprecise. They work well enough in everyday life that you don't notice. Words seem to work, just as Newtonian physics seems to. But you can always make them break if you push them far enough.