Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Pablo AM

Earth as a living being

93 posts in this topic

All we know the Gaia theory, it has varios types of perspectives, the most radical of it is to belief the eath IS a living organism, that is that i believe because some backound scientifically demostrable ideas that point to this kind of concept of varios type of posible live in the universe including planetary.

Added to the Gaia homeostatic-kind ideas, is very interesting the posible profound consecuences of the geomagnetism and Schumann frecuencies, their reciprocal interactions with the beings living in earth surface..

http://www.yave-yavo.org/scien/tiv/living-earth.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All we know the Gaia theory, it has varios types of perspectives, the most radical of it is to belief the eath IS a living organism, that is that i believe because some backound scientifically demostrable ideas that point to this kind of concept of varios type of posible live in the universe including planetary.

Added to the Gaia homeostatic-kind ideas, is very interesting the posible profound consecuences of the geomagnetism and Schumann frecuencies, their reciprocal interactions with the beings living in earth surface..

http://www.yave-yavo...ving-earth.html

This is also gibberish, and you're still promoting your own website? Nice.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So,if the earth lives....can I eat it? Because I have a planet size appetite about now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All we know the Gaia theory, it has varios types of perspectives, the most radical of it is to belief the eath IS a living organism, that is that i believe because some backound scientifically demostrable ideas that point to this kind of concept of varios type of posible live in the universe including planetary.

Added to the Gaia homeostatic-kind ideas, is very interesting the posible profound consecuences of the geomagnetism and Schumann frecuencies, their reciprocal interactions with the beings living in earth surface..

In ecophysiology we treat the earth as a living entity. Just one living thing. We analyze chemical pathways and the flow of energy as if we were dealing with a single being. Nothing magic or hocus-pocus. Just the recognition that all living things are fundamentally the same.

Doug

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Lovelock developed his Gaia theory he was referring to the self regulating properties of a planetary system. Homoeostasis (maintaining a constant state) is one of the defining qualities of life so if you accept the concept that the planet is to some degree self regulating it can also be said to be alive to some degree. However it lacks many of the other qualities which define life (like the ability to reproduce itself) so it cannot be said to be alive in the conventional sense.

However what is absolutely certain is that Lovelock never envisaged the planet as having a self aware conciousness in the same way as humans do. Lovelocks Gaia is not the Gaia of Greek myth or the Durga of Hindu religion.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However it lacks many of the other qualities which define life (like the ability to reproduce itself) so it cannot be said to be alive in the conventional sense.

The biosphere of the Earth is indeed alive, and we are but tiny cells within it. I would think that the consciousness of that being is aware of so much more than any of its individual cells. It's extremely more complex.

As far as reproduction, Mars is currently a "dead" planet, but with the proper technological advances, cells from the Earth (us) could in the future modify Mars (or another planet elsewhere), to sustain a complete thriving biosphere, so you go from one to two (or more) living planets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In ecophysiology we treat the earth as a living entity. Just one living thing. We analyze chemical pathways and the flow of energy as if we were dealing with a single being. Nothing magic or hocus-pocus. Just the recognition that all living things are fundamentally the same.

Doug

Agreed, and the level of complexity of that living thing is enormous relative to any of its individual cells.

I can envisage the Milky Way galaxy as being one living entity being made up of all the individual planet biosphere cells, and the next step being each galaxy is just a cell in the being called the universe, which might be just a cell in the being of the multiverse. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biosphere of the Earth is indeed alive, and we are but tiny cells within it. I would think that the consciousness of that being is aware of so much more than any of its individual cells. It's extremely more complex.

As far as reproduction, Mars is currently a "dead" planet, but with the proper technological advances, cells from the Earth (us) could in the future modify Mars (or another planet elsewhere), to sustain a complete thriving biosphere, so you go from one to two (or more) living planets.

Your proposition would have to be testable to be a useful concept - it would have to allow us to make predictions about the behaviour of the earth. I see no evidence for such a claim other than a belief that it could be true.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your proposition would have to be testable to be a useful concept - it would have to allow us to make predictions about the behaviour of the earth. I see no evidence for such a claim other than a belief that it could be true.

Scientists are making predictions about the behaviour of the Earth all the time, on all kinds of levels.

When you look at a picture of the planet Earth what do you think it is composed of?

Here's a way I like to look at things.

I see an ant, crawling on the ground, then I see it's only a small part of a colony, which is a living entity itself.

It does it's part in the greater entity of a forest, which does its part in the survival of a town of people, which does its part in the survival of a country, which does its part in the survival of the human part of the biosphere which contains all the different species of life and the water, soil and air in which everything survives together as one living being.

You know how you look at an amoeba with a microscope and it survives as a living entity? Same thing when you look at the Earth in space, a living entity, much more complex, yet still, a living entity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, and the level of complexity of that living thing is enormous relative to any of its individual cells.

I can envisage the Milky Way galaxy as being one living entity being made up of all the individual planet biosphere cells, and the next step being each galaxy is just a cell in the being called the universe, which might be just a cell in the being of the multiverse. :)

I imagine we would have a difficult time studying a galaxy as a single living organism.

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine we would have a difficult time studying a galaxy as a single living organism.

Doug

We might, because our individual viewpoint is so small and short relative to it.

From the viewpoint of the consciousness of another galaxy though, it's much easier.

It's all relative.

An amoeba would have a hard time understanding a whole human as a single living organism. It would interact with our cells on a cellular level.

A bacteria is attacked by a white blood cell on a cellular level. Would it realize the extent to which that individual white blood cell is just part of the defence mechanism of a much larger being?

A huge asteroid is deflected away from hitting the Earth in the distant future, saving it from massive damage. The beings in the rocket that did that, and the rocket, are just the white blood cells of the Earth, on a much larger scale. Do the individual beings think of themselves as just part of a larger being? Maybe not, but aren't they?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In ecophysiology we treat the earth as a living entity. Just one living thing. We analyze chemical pathways and the flow of energy as if we were dealing with a single being. Nothing magic or hocus-pocus. Just the recognition that all living things are fundamentally the same.

Doug

In galacticphysiology we treat the galaxy as a living entity. Just one living thing. We analyze interstellar pathways and the flow of energy as if we were dealing with a single being. Nothing magic or hocus-pocus. Just the recognition that all living things are fundamentally the same.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So,if the earth lives....can I eat it? Because I have a planet size appetite about now.

if the earth is living which I believe it is. then the other life forms, us included, are some kind of parasites. remember there are three types of parasites those who help those who hurt and those who just live there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the earth is living which I believe it is. then the other life forms, us included, are some kind of parasites. remember there are three types of parasites those who help those who hurt and those who just live there.

I kinda see us more evolving as the Earth's brain cells, the part that will figure out ways to help save it from things like asteroidal impacts and plagues. Also we're part of its future reproduction system, as we venture out into the galaxy to help create and sustain new baby Earths. :)

Edited by Hugh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Following on from Hughs idea of multiplying cellular levels, that might mean that the universe is an egg. Space is just the yolk. Galaxies, planets, etc are just the DNA within the embryo. Maybe the universe is expanding because it is hatching?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Following on from Hughs idea of multiplying cellular levels, that might mean that the universe is an egg. Space is just the yolk. Galaxies, planets, etc are just the DNA within the embryo. Maybe the universe is expanding because it is hatching?

It's possible. Who knows what the universe we see around us as a whole actually is?

Perhaps if we could zoom out far enough to see our entire universe, it would only be an egg stage of a being that exists in a much larger universe?

I have a feeling that what we think is the totality of the universe is only but a speck of the totality of what actually exists. :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scientists are making predictions about the behaviour of the Earth all the time, on all kinds of levels.

When you look at a picture of the planet Earth what do you think it is composed of?

Here's a way I like to look at things.

I see an ant, crawling on the ground, then I see it's only a small part of a colony, which is a living entity itself.

It does it's part in the greater entity of a forest, which does its part in the survival of a town of people, which does its part in the survival of a country, which does its part in the survival of the human part of the biosphere which contains all the different species of life and the water, soil and air in which everything survives together as one living being.

You know how you look at an amoeba with a microscope and it survives as a living entity? Same thing when you look at the Earth in space, a living entity, much more complex, yet still, a living entity.

This doesn't really address my point in any meaningful way. Your belief in the planet as a living entity is exactly the same as belief in God. It makes no useful predictions and it is totally untestable. We are entitled to whatever beliefs we choose but without proof they can only ever remain nice ideas. I personally see no point in the idea as it brings nothing to our real understanding - just as belief in God's doesn't advance our understanding of how things work,

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Lovelock developed his Gaia theory he was referring to the self regulating properties of a planetary system. Homoeostasis (maintaining a constant state) is one of the defining qualities of life so if you accept the concept that the planet is to some degree self regulating it can also be said to be alive to some degree. However it lacks many of the other qualities which define life (like the ability to reproduce itself) so it cannot be said to be alive in the conventional sense.

However what is absolutely certain is that Lovelock never envisaged the planet as having a self aware conciousness in the same way as humans do. Lovelocks Gaia is not the Gaia of Greek myth or the Durga of Hindu religion.

Br Cornelius

the earth is warm blooded. this part deals with global warming. if the earth gets to hot, it goes through a cooling stage, ie an ice age. if it gets to cold it goes through a warming stage, ie global warming;. there is your constant state.

if the latest theory on how the moon was formed is correct. then it could be said that the earth reproduced once. it also self heals to a degree, ie volcanos.

life does not have to be self aware most life is not self aware. that is bacteria and other single celled organisms are not self aware. at least as far as we know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't really address my point in any meaningful way. Your belief in the planet as a living entity is exactly the same as belief in God. It makes no useful predictions and it is totally untestable. We are entitled to whatever beliefs we choose but without proof they can only ever remain nice ideas. I personally see no point in the idea as it brings nothing to our real understanding - just as belief in God's doesn't advance our understanding of how things work,

Br Cornelius

this post just shows how closed minded you are. if you had stuck the disclamer "with our current tech" we cannot tell if earth is alive or that there is a god. a belief is something you think is happening but you cannot prove it. if you could prove it, it wouldn't be a belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally see no point in the idea as it brings nothing to our real understanding - just as belief in God's doesn't advance our understanding of how things work,

Br Cornelius

A greater understanding of how things work comes with seeing the bigger picture connection.

One can study only one white blood cell and see how it works itself, but a greater understanding occurs when one looks at how that cell works in concert with the body that it works within. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A key property of all living organisms is that they reproduce.

How does that fit into the Giaia theory ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

life does not have to be self aware most life is not self aware. that is bacteria and other single celled organisms are not self aware. at least as far as we know.

I think there is an awareness of some kind for all life, even though it may be extremely basic for the smaller beings.

There is an interaction that takes place with other living beings and systems. How much of that is governed by laws of science and if there is free will involved is debatable.

I'd say that the higher up you go, the more that free will and "bigger picture understanding" is involved. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A key property of all living organisms is that they reproduce.

How does that fit into the Giaia theory ?

When life from Earth ventures out into space and inhabits other planets and moons to start up life there too, isn't that reproduction?

You start off with life on Earth, one planet.

1,000 years from now you have a thriving biosphere on Mars and several of the moons of the solar system.

100,000 years from now you have life from Earth on 100 other planets in the galaxy.

The Earth has reproduced itself, using its reproductive system, us. :)

Edited by Hugh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A greater understanding of how things work comes with seeing the bigger picture connection.

One can study only one white blood cell and see how it works itself, but a greater understanding occurs when one looks at how that cell works in concert with the body that it works within. :)

Understanding comes through proposing a proposition which is testable and if the predicted results are confirmed we can say with some certainty that the proposition is true.

What are your testable tenets ?

Ideas which are untestable are more likely to lead to misunderstanding and error. For me they are only worth entertaining when their effects become testable - that is the scientific method and it has led us to the greatest human understanding we as a species have ever known.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Understanding comes through proposing a proposition which is testable and if the predicted results are confirmed we can say with some certainty that the proposition is true.

What are your testable tenets ?

It's being worked on. Things will be more clearly understood in the years to come. Stay tuned. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.