Post by foxythepirate9000 on Jul 12, 2020 8:09:15 GMT 1
Yes, I know it sounds nonsense, but read carefully before saying something.
For start, what is live and what not? It's considered as live to what is born, eats, reproduces, and dies. Well, fire is born (is created), eats (is feed with fuel items), reproduces (burns another things) and dies. Why shouldn't be considered as live?
I see only some problems:
What about their organs?
Fire doesn't have organs, doesn't have an intern working mechanism, so may be a reason for not being considered as live.
How is it possible that live is created from non-live materials?
Well, it's theorised that first forms of live have came by some weird chemical conditions.
I'm not saying fire is live, I'm sure it's not, but it's a doubt that may take time on thinking about it. I've heard about it as an example on a scientific video talking about that science doesn't know well when something is live and when not.
If you are thinking or asking something about this, please reply it.