Why can We Not Live Forever?

[DrGather]

If we're going to take God out of the equation for a few seconds, Why can't we live forever? Why is it that we die. Assuming Evolution created Humans, and Nothing else. There was no God, there was no anything. We just were. The Big Bang, Evolution, Us.

So why do we die?

 

[David Gould]

If we're going to take God out of the equation for a few seconds, Why can't we live forever? Why is it that we die. Assuming Evolution created Humans, and Nothing else. There was no God, there was no anything. We just were. The Big Bang, Evolution, Us.

So why do we die?

If there was no death, there would be no natural selection*. And thus no evolution. There is also the point that any lifeform requires energy to remain alive. There is a finite amout of energy available, so death is inevitable**.


*This is simplistic: there would still be some evolution, as the allele frequences in the gene pool would still alter over time due to other factors. But evolution would be much, much slower.

**I should say that there is the possibility that with sufficient energy death can be overcome by those creatures that learn how to apply it. We may end up being one of those creatures.

 

[Jetgirl]

If we're going to take God out of the equation for a few seconds, Why can't we live forever? Why is it that we die. Assuming Evolution created Humans, and Nothing else. There was no God, there was no anything. We just were. The Big Bang, Evolution, Us.

So why do we die?

Because we wear out.

We've made enormous advances in combating wear though. Compared with, say, 300-500 years ago, it's utterly mindboggling that one can both die at the age of sixty AND with have all of one's teeth intact. Our ancestors would have thought it must be magical to be so well-preserved.

 

[pantsman52]

Because we wear out.

We've made enormous advances in combating wear though. Compared with, say, 300-500 years ago, it's utterly mindboggling that one can have both die at the age of sixty AND with all our teeth intact. Our ancestors would have thought it must be magical to be so well-preserved.

Not only that, but in about 50 years, we will have the technology to end the wear and tear on our cells, effectively letting us naturally live forever (not considering accidental death and murder)

 

[Jetgirl]

Not only that, but in about 50 years, we will have the technology to end the wear and tear on our cells, effectively letting us naturally live forever (not considering accidental death and murder)

Well, they thought that 50 years ago as well... but they also predicted flying cars and self-cleaning houses for the masses.

I wouldn't mind living forever. I would choose not to breed for quite a while if that were to come about. Maybe around 2000 or so I'd consider having a child.

 

[DrGather]

If there was no death, there would be no natural selection*. And thus no evolution. There is also the point that any lifeform requires energy to remain alive. There is a finite amout of energy available, so death is inevitable**.

Sorry but it doesn't seem right.

Why do things die? Even the original Amoebas that made us who we are. Why do we die? Why did evolution predispose us to die? Was it necessary? Why do things wear out and die? In general?

This answer doesn't seem right.

If you're saying we die for the sole purpose of natural selection, than why does Natural Selection occur, and things not die?

In regards to the Energy thing... why is there a finite amount of energy?

 

[justin88]

We're like a pair of shoes. As we go through life walkin around all over the place, the soles begin to wear out and start falling off the body and when gravity starts winning its constant fight against us, we start to collapse and when the sole falls off, we die. So think of life like a pair of shoes. When we walk around alot for a long time, we eventually wear out. Or maybe some gum gets attatched to the shoe and starts helping pull off the sole very slowly with every step, or we'll step on some poo and just begin to stink. The possibilities are endless. Haha.

 

[David Gould]

Sorry but it doesn't seem right.

Why do things die? Even the original Amoebas that made us who we are. Why do we die? Why did evolution predispose us to die? Was it necessary? Why do things wear out and die? In general?

'Necessary' according to who?

Things wear out because that is the way the universe operates: "You can't win; you can't break even; you can't even quit the game."

This answer doesn't seem right.

If you're saying we die for the sole purpose of natural selection, than why does Natural Selection occur, and things not die?

There is no 'purpose'. The universe did not decide, 'Oh, we're gonna have to have natural selection. And that means that we are going to have death. Put some electrons to work on that death thing right away.'

In regards to the Energy thing... why is there a finite amount of energy?

Because no-one planned the universe.

 

[David Gould]

And you are right: I confused the question in my original answer.

 

[DrGather]

Things wear out because that is the way the universe operates:

And that's what I'm asking. Why would the UNiverse operate that way? Now you are beginning to catch on.

There is no 'purpose'. The universe did not decide, 'Oh, we're gonna have to have natural selection. And that means that we are going to have death. Put some electrons to work on that death thing right away.'

That is the purpose you placed on Natural Selection. I was flowing with it.

'Necessary' according to who?

I am asking if it was necessary. Positing that it is necessary would be foolish. I am asking if Death is necessary in any chain of anything at all.

 

[David Gould]

Asking why the universe operates the way it does is a pointless exercise. You end up in an infinite chain of 'whys'. This is the case whether God exists or not.

 

[DrGather]

Asking why the universe operates the way it does is a pointless exercise.

So you do not understand why the Universe operates with death, however it does and you accept it.

That seems rather shallow. That sounds almost like something one of those Christian's many make fun of would say.

You end up in an infinite chain of 'whys'.

An infinite Chain of whys is impossible. Everything has a source to it.

 

[David Gould]

So you do not understand why the Universe operates with death, however it does and you accept it.

That seems rather shallow. That sounds almost like something one of those Christian's many make fun of would say.

I do not know many things about the universe. How is that shallow?

As to the 'why there is death' question, we will end up in an infinite chain. I answered 'because there is finite energy available'. You asked, 'Why is there finite energy available?' Any answer I give to this will be along the lines of 'Because of X and Y.' You will then ask, 'Why does the universe operate with X and Y'?

Do you see where I am going with this?

An infinite Chain of whys is impossible. Everything has a source to it.

And when you get to that source you can ask, 'Why that source and not another?'

Get it?

 

[DrGather]

And when you get to that source you can ask, 'Why that source and not another?'

If Ever I find a source that seems logically stable and that I can no longer ask a why question to that switches over an obvious source to a different one (Like the question stated) I will be pleased.

I do not know many things about the universe. How is that shallow?

Not you... Sorry, I was actually stating something that applied to something sort of related, but sort of different.

As to the 'why there is death' question, we will end up in an infinite chain. I answered 'because there is finite energy available'. You asked, 'Why is there finite energy available?' Any answer I give to this will be along the lines of 'Because of X and Y.' You will then ask, 'Why does the universe operate with X and Y'?

I am satisfied with your answer. It is merely a point of view, but at least it states something that I can believe in.

 

[wowbagger]

It is not natural to live forever. It would upset the balance of what is here. Why is it that way? Becasue that is the course it followed. We do not know the exact source for why nature chooses its options.

Example: The puddle fits neatly in its space, because that is the only way it can exist as it is. Get it? There is no special reason for the existence of the precise dimensions of this puddle. But it works.

Incidently, the only cells that can seem to live forever are cancer cells which don't know when to stop dividing. So even if we could live forever, we'd all die of cancer in the end. *until a cure of course.

 

[Freodin]

You seem to be hung on the term "death".
Why does the universe operate with "death"? Well, it doesn´t.

"Death" is a human concept, to describe the end of a certain perceived condition.

What the universe operates with is "change".

 

[HouseApe]

I'm really talking out my as* here, so take it with a large grain of salt. I read somewhere awhile ago )) that our cells age because some little doodads on the end of DNA strands get screwed up and the cells cannot reproduce themselves as quickly. Now, apparently these doodads screwing is a good thing, because it reduces the opportunity for cancer cells to multiply. So the idea is that aging is evolutions way of maximizing our life spans under the constant onslaught of cancer.

IIRC, some genetically educated scientist types discovered this when they figured out how to stop the doodads from getting screwed up, but then whatever animals they were experimenting on all died fairly quickly from cancer.

I'd google for the info, but "doodad" doesn't seem to be an appropriate search phrase.

 

[Sitting Duck]

I'd google for the info, but "doodad" doesn't seem to be an appropriate search phrase.

I may be incorrect, but I believe the term you're looking for is telomere:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telomere

Doodad sounds way more cooler tho.

 

[Jetgirl]

Doodad sounds way more cooler tho.

It's a highly technical term.

You don't know comedy until you have a neurosciece professor in front of 500 students use the term "whatsit" to describe his newest discovery.

(He couldn't pronounce his own term, and gave up after about five tries.)

 

[jayem]

This borders on a teleological argument--which is scientifically undesireable--but it make sense to me.

The biological "purpose" of all life forms is to reproduce its DNA (or RNA in the case of some viruses.) If an organism can do this by splitting itself in half, then in a sense, its life continues indefintely. But more complex organisms produce specialized cells, containing its DNA, which then develop into complete organisms. In this case, there is no need for the original organism to continue indefintely. Once its reproductive function is completed, there is no reason that its life should be maintained. (And if it doesn't die, its ecological niche will soon become overpopulated--which may threaten the existence of the species as a whole.) Biochemical mechanisms to maintain eternal life never evolved because they provide no survival value, once reproduction has occurred. And in fact, eternal life would cause a species to outgrow its resources.