Newsgroups: comp.ai.alife
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.bluesky.net!udel!news.mathworks.com!uhog.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!eru.mt.luth.se!news.luth.se!sunic!news.chalmers.se!news.gu.se!gd-news!d6244
From: sa209@utb.shv.hb.se (Claes Andersson)
Subject: Re: STOP blahblah on LIFE #1
Message-ID: <1995Feb10.193450.3066@gdunix.gd.chalmers.se>
Sender: usenet@gdunix.gd.chalmers.se (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: d6244.shv.hb.se
Organization: Dept. of economy and computer science.
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #2.1
References: <1995Feb7.171215.21796@news.unige.ch>
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 1995 01:54:12 GMT
Lines: 35

sylvere@unige.ch (Silvere Martin-Michiellot) wrote:
>All right, I think that defining life is a problem that could produce interesting results, don't you ? So, we have to be productive.
>
>I propose (but, it's up to you to propose something else) everyone to put his name, his first name and then his definition in one single following mail. Then, let's say next Monday, everyone will propose a new definition in the same way on a new single following mail, after having read all the definitions of the previous week. If you agree with someone else's definition then it is no longer necessary to put a new definition, just simply add your name to the definition of the guy you agree with. The p
>
>
> stops by itself when there is only one definition left.
>
>Just 2 IMPORTANT notes :
>	EVERY time you change something to the message (whatever), add 1 to the number in the subject line.
>	IF you want to comment this idea, DELETE the number in the subject line.
>
>
>
>FIRST IDEA :
>NAME : Silvere Martin-Michiellot
>TITLE : Life cannot be defined a priori
>EXPLANATION : Life detectors don't exist. The idea of what is alive is simply cultural : what is considerer as "inert" today could be considered as living tomorrow. Thereafter, we cannot say that things we could find on another planet would be alive or not. Conclusion, the only way to define life is to choose arbitrary criterions.
>
>SECOND IDEA :
NAME : Claes Andersson
TITLE : Life is a mechanism for preserving low entropy
EXPLANATION : Anything that can be distinguished as a lifeform has to have an entropy that
	         is lower than its environment. Furthermore, the entropy has to be maintained
	         in a way that results in a longer "life" than would the chemical nature of the
	         same composition of matter usually allow. There is therefor a distince difference
	         between a living lifeform and a dead lifeform. A virus is formed by evolution
	         but still not a lifeform since it lacks metabolism and can therefor not keep down
	         its entropy. A tornado doesn't fill this criteria either unless it use some of the
	         things it sucks up to increase its rotation speed, a fire is firstly an entropy
	         transfer of high entropy and also unable to maintain itself beyond its chemical
	         life expectance. It has noting to do with culture.



