+105

Fire produces energy to sustain itself, it needs to consume matter to survive (often, it's organic matter), moves to where sustenance is, reproduces whenever possible, and can create an environment to help its continued existence. Fire could be an example of a pure energy life form, amirite?

86%Yeah You Are14%No Way
B10ckH34ds avatar
Share
2 36
The voters have decided that B10ckH34d is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

this is really interesting to think about, thanks for posting this

lilobamas avatar lilobama Yeah You Are +5Reply

This is much more helpful than when I ask what fire is in Science class and some kid says 'Fire is fire'

OnePiecepkmns avatar OnePiecepkmn Yeah You Are +4Reply
@OnePiecepkmn This is much more helpful than when I ask what fire is in Science class and some kid says 'Fire is fire'

I've got a pretty good understanding of what fire is, but thank you for that link. Helped me out a bit!

@OnePiecepkmn This is much more helpful than when I ask what fire is in Science class and some kid says 'Fire is fire'

And normal life is basically respiration. What did you expect a pure energy life form to be, anyway? I always pictures one as a chemical reaction, or a cloud of energy that needs chemical reactions to prevent diffusion of itself.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are 0Reply

OP, what career do you want in life?
Your posts are always interesting, by the way.

@notmuchnotmuch OP, what career do you want in life? Your posts are always interesting, by the way.

Scientist (surprise, surprise). Specifically one involved in research on disease or (defensive/deterrent) weapons.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are 0Reply

Flames are just the heat and light energy given off by the rapid oxidation of a material. Combustion doesn't necessarily need oxygen, it just needs an oxidizer. Granted, oxygen is the most common, but it is not the only oxidizer. Thermite, for example, can be made with certain ingredients that allow it to self-oxidize so that it can be used for underwater welding.

It also doesn't truly consume anything. Living organisms take in food, separate what they need from the food, then excrete the waste. Fire combines the oxidizer with the free radicals within a material, and takes nothing for itself. It doesn't consume, it builds other materials.

It doesn't make its own environment suitable, it needs help from outside forces. There has been many a time when I was building a fire that it went out by its own action, and I was able to revive it by manually adding more oxygen to the environment. The whole sustaining itself with convection thing is only due to the laws of thermodynamics. In zero/micro-gravity situations, fires will often put themselves out before all of the fuel is used up. Following the mention of the laws of thermodynamics, it will not always go to where fuel is.

@Mike_Hawk Flames are just the heat and light energy given off by the rapid oxidation of a material. Combustion doesn't...

If you light the top of something on fire, the flame will often not travel down the material. (depending on the flammability, of course)

Finally, one of the biggest reasons I disagree is that it simply doesn't exist without any of the necessary parts. Living things will die without all the necessary constituents, but there are remains. Cut off any of things things a fire needs, and it may as well not have existed at all.

@Mike_Hawk Flames are just the heat and light energy given off by the rapid oxidation of a material. Combustion doesn't...

You're doing it wrong. The point of TL:DR isn't so you can tell me you're an asshole with zero patience, the point is so I can summarize what I said at the end of my message.

@Mike_Hawk Flames are just the heat and light energy given off by the rapid oxidation of a material. Combustion doesn't...

That's the reason I don't think it can be considered a living thing. The criteria for a living thing are already set, and no type of energy will ever meet that criteria. I suppose an exception might be made if a type of energy managed to achieve sentience instead of playing a role in sentient matter. That will never happen unless data can be stored on pure energy, and I'm not sure that can happen. That's all I am, though, is unsure.

To be honest, this post is giving me a lot of inner-conflict about whether or not I should agree. Most of all, fire reminds me of a virus. Technically, viruses aren't living things. However, I tend to think they should be. Perhaps fire is a pure energy virus?

@Mike_Hawk Flames are just the heat and light energy given off by the rapid oxidation of a material. Combustion doesn't...

@Mike
1. It still needs fuel. Animals can also eat different foods.

2. Living organisms take the matter in food. A pure energy lif form would take the bond energy in molecules, much like fire does. The food is fuel and the product is lower-energy waste, much like fire shit.

3. Humans can also be self-destructive. Greece was about to die, but more money was injected to keep it from bankruptcy longer.

4. Fire will go to fuel to the best of its abilities governed by therodynamics. Humans would also not cross the ocean to the most resource rich land if they didn't have boats.

5. A pure energy life form would of course have that quality. With no external force, matter stays in one piece, but energy will disperse, so fundamentally, that is one of the main qualities a pure energy anything will have. If it's made of different stuff, of course there will be major differences. In Bionicle, the Makutas were pure energy. They disperse and die if their armour (acting like a weapised box) broke.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are 0Reply
@Mike_Hawk Flames are just the heat and light energy given off by the rapid oxidation of a material. Combustion doesn't...

It's probable that it is a virus. Viruses are non-cellular life (it really is life, just a different type). If life does NEED to be in cells, why does it NEED to be made of matter? Bu the way, much of the internet is electrons in motion, pretty much pure energy. Nintendo cartridges only store data if power is supplied, so that's pretty close.

Fire is as close to matter life as energy can get, until you end up with a Makuta. Bionicle has a pretty interesting universe, but it was quite force near the end.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are 0Reply

Explanation: Fire exists because of chemical reactions, much like rapid respiration. It even uses oxygen and usually makes carbon dioxide. Burning requires fuel. Flames flicker because that's where wind blows the fuel, and the fire moves to it. Fire spreads. Firestorms (gigantic, maybe highly evolved fire 'civilisations') use convection currents to bring in more oxygen. They die when their fuel runs out (we probably will when fossil fuels deplete if we can't find viable alternatives) and they can cause their own destruction by making pyrocumulonimbus clouds.

It's even possible that fires go to war. When two conflagrations (uncontrolled fires) burn into each other, they compete for fuel (resources) and both sides lose a lot of power.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are +3Reply
@B10ckH34d Explanation: Fire exists because of chemical reactions, much like rapid respiration. It even uses oxygen and...

Well of course a pure energy life form (if they exist) would not fit many of the criteria for matter life, so science would not recognise it until it achieves unmistakable sapience. So, if fire were a simple pure energy life form, it would appear as just a chemical reaction. It probably is, but if anything were discovered to be a pure energy life form, it would be fire.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are 0Reply
@B10ckH34d Explanation: Fire exists because of chemical reactions, much like rapid respiration. It even uses oxygen and...

Fires don't 'go to war' lmfao. After the fight, do they retreat to plan a different attack? They just combine and consume more fuel.

another classic post from blockhead

iamthewalruss avatar iamthewalrus Yeah You Are +2Reply

"...and can create an environment to help its continued existence"

Fire creates an environment that is barren. You can't burn land, or anything, twice.

@thatguys "...and can create an environment to help its continued existence" Fire creates an environment that is barren. You...

That's my point. I don't think life could exist just as energy, but if it could, fire would be a pretty good candidate.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are +2Reply
@thatguys "...and can create an environment to help its continued existence" Fire creates an environment that is barren. You...

Yea, if it were possible, which is what throws off the credibility of this.

Otherwise it's interesting

@thatguys "...and can create an environment to help its continued existence" Fire creates an environment that is barren. You...

Humans also do that. When a building crumbles, we need to put in energy to melt it down and rebuild. Fire would (if it were possible) to use energy to reverse the reaction like how plants photosynthesize. If it were a pure energy lifeform, it would need the energy to sustain itself, so that would be out of the question.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are -1Reply

Fire has no DNA.

@WhatTheSpoot Fire has no DNA.

Not to appear rude, but, so what? And maybe it does, but it's in energy form, and thus undetectable to our equipment. I don't actually think it IS life, but I don't like how people pick a characteristic matter-based life has and say fire doesn't have it, thus it's not life.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are 0Reply
@WhatTheSpoot Fire has no DNA.

I guess that's a possibility. That's just the answer I got when I asked my Bio teacher a few weeks ago.

@WhatTheSpoot Fire has no DNA.

But aren't you doing something similar (just reversed) by only picking characteristics that fire does have in common with matter-based life and proposing that because fire has them, it could be life?

@WhatTheSpoot Fire has no DNA.

No, the reverse would be saying it IS life. I'm saying it COULD be life.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are 0Reply
@WhatTheSpoot Fire has no DNA.

Aww, thanks.

But I'm not changing what life itself is, I'm just suggesting what it could be like if put in a vessel of energy instead of matter. I don't know what the one defining trait of life is (alien life may or may not use DNA), but I think it should be based in instinct. Life is energy, not matter, so it could exist in either one, and its defining trait should be something you don't need to be in one form to have. On the other hand, it could, as long as that defining trait has an energy counterpart too.

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are 0Reply
@WhatTheSpoot Fire has no DNA.

When you say instincts, do you mean the instincts of the life-form in question?

I'm also not sure that life is energy, not matter. Cells are essentially the building blocks of what is currently considered life, and they use energy to "live," which leads me believe that both is needed.

...Then again, you're proposing a purely energy based life form, but a purely matter based life form would just be an empty puppet. So if you were to make the case that energy is THE life force and matter just the machinery, I s'pose it could make sense to say that fire is a life force unbound by physical constraint.

And now I'm rambling d smilie I think I just talked myself in circles, but I'm pretty sure I see where you're coming from. I think calling into question the sentience of life could throw the theory for a loop, though.

@WhatTheSpoot Fire has no DNA.

Actually, you explained my point pretty well :)

B10ckH34ds avatar B10ckH34d Yeah You Are 0Reply
@WhatTheSpoot Fire has no DNA.

Right, but you're really just proposing that it COULD be life if we altered the accepted meaning of what life is. Science is really just defined sets of characteristics, right? So we could really say that anything could be defined as life if the definition were to be changed.

...I don't really think I'm articulating myself very well. I guess I'm just saying that because fire does not have genetic material, it is not life. Sure, it could be if we changed what "life" means, but then so couldn't anything.

ANYWAY, interesting post, 10/10, would read again.

I would've thought this would have been scientist who posted this. Oh well.

Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.