Energy is the most fundamental and pervasive “substance” underlying everything we observe. In physics, energy is defined as the capacity to do work. The principle of conservation of energy tells us that energy can neither be created nor destroyed—only transformed from one form to another. Because energy exists everywhere and in all things, it invites a wider question: might the universe itself, in some sense, be alive?
If “life” implies the capacity to act, to change, to persist, then perhaps the presence of energy everywhere means that life may exist in forms radically different from the familiar biology of Earth. Our usual basic prerequisites for life—air (oxygen) and water—are derived from terrestrial biology. But who can say with absolute certainty that life cannot exist under other conditions, if there is energy?
Of course, this doesn’t mean that everything we call “energy” is “life” in the usual sense. But it does suggest that the boundary we draw around “life” (water, oxygen, carbon-based cells) might be narrower than the universe itself. If matter is simply a highly organised manifestation of energy (via mass-energy equivalence, E = mc²) , then matter, energy, and “life” may be more deeply connected than our everyday categories allow.
---
Scientific Anchors
The definition: “Energy … may exist in potential, kinetic, thermal, electrical, chemical, nuclear or other various forms.”
The conservation principle: “The total energy of a system … remains constant; energy can neither be created nor destroyed; rather it can only be transformed or transferred from one form to another.”
The notion that living systems emerge through flows of energy: For example, scientist Harold J. Morowitz asserted that “the energy that flows through a system acts to organize that system.”
This last point is crucial: living systems are not static; they are sustained by energy flows (for instance sunlight → chemical → biological). If we broaden our view, perhaps any system with sufficient energy flows, organisation, and persistence could qualify as “alive” in a more general sense.
---
Philosophical Reflection & Expert Insight
Consider the famous words (although their attribution is debated) often linked to Albert Einstein:
> “Everything is energy and that’s all there is to it. Match the frequency of the reality you want and you cannot help but get that reality. It can be no other way. This is not philosophy. This is physics.”
While scholars have shown that Einstein likely never said exactly those words, the sentiment echoes real scientific ideas: matter and energy are interchangeable; vibration and frequency underlie physical phenomena.
More reliably, Einstein is quoted as saying:
> “I like to experience the universe as one harmonious whole. Every cell has life. Matter, too, has life; it is energy solidified.”
This formulation resonates strongly with your perspective—that life may be far more universal and subtle than our terrestrial biology suggests.
From a philosophical/biological vantage, the work “Living is information processing: from molecules to global systems” by Keith D. Farnsworth and colleagues argues that life is essentially “functional information” embodied in physical systems, integrated across scales. In other words: wherever you find organised physical-information flows maintained over time (powered by energy), you may find “life” in a very broad sense.
---
Implications & Invitation
If we take seriously the idea that energy is everywhere and underpins matter and change, then:
We may need to expand our definition of life beyond water, oxygen, carbon-cells.
We might accept that life could thrive in forms utterly unfamiliar to us—perhaps on non-Earth planets, or in ways we can scarcely imagine.
We should remain humble about declaring that only our form of life is “true life.” The universe may host forms of “vibrant existence” beyond our current sensing.
Of course, this is speculative—and science demands empirical evidence. Yet the speculation is anchored in real physical principles and philosophical openness.
In conclusion: yes, it is reasonable, logical even, to propose that the whole universe might be alive in some sense, because energy pervades everything and underlies every transformation. The prerequisites for life as we know it (air, water) may be just a special case, not the universal rule.
And who, with absolute certainty, can say that in the presence of energy there is no life?
No comments:
Post a Comment