As far as we know, life on earth began approximately 4 billion years ago. The life that emerged as protozoa evolved over time. As a result, there are many complex and intelligent life forms today.
The law of physics governing 'being alive' is called entropy. Entropy can be expressed as the tendency of the universe from a more regular to a more chaotic state. The body of an organism contributes to the entropy by metabolic processes. But it can make it more controlled than an inanimate object.
In fact, in my opinion, being an inanimate entity is a much more effective form of existence than being alive. If you are lifeless, you don't have to perform such controlled chemical events like synthesis or fragmentation for your metabolic processes. For example, a rock is created by nature without any consciousness. And from the moment of its existence, it will continue to exist forever (if there is no external catastrophic effect on it). But the situation is not like this for a living being. The living has to be alive. He has to perform a wide variety of chemical reactions without any discontinuity. Genes have to be transferred to the next generations. It has to feed itself and it has to move.
When we compare living beings and non-living, we see that 'being alive' is much more difficult in the name of 'existing forever'. Well, then why would nature have chosen life?
If you’re in the field of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics, you can join SteemSTEM community in the discord:
The link below is the discord channel of StemQ :
StemQ Notice: This post was originally submitted on StemQ.io, a Q&A application for STEM subjects powered by the Steem blockchain.