Classification of Life

Overview

Under the development of the World Research Council, Project Outwatch has been provided with an initial set of classifications for the identification of life. The identification of life takes place across four axes: substrate, energy-use, replication, and pattern-integrity. Note that the classification scale is not meant to identify the type of life, but rather the probability that something is alive.

data

Substrate

Potential life is classed along the substrate axis with a designation from Sω to S0, where Sω indicates the substrate is identical to terrestrial biology, and the further from Sω the less similar the substrate:

data

Energy Use

The second axis denotes the intake, use and waste of energy along a scale from Eω to E0:

Life that takes in energy (e.g. as food), uses that energy (e.g. to grow or to move) and wastes some energy (e.g. as excrement) will score "higher" on the scale and be most likely to be considered and officially recognised as life.

data

Replication

The third axis denotes replication, including all forms of reproduction, and again moves from Rω, similar to terrestrial life, to R0, most dissimilar.

data

Pattern Integrity

This axis denotes the ability of some entity to maintain a sense of bodily or organisational integrity, including systematic growth, healing and boundedness.

data

Debate

The scale for the classification of life is somewhat debated among researchers, though the ends of the scale are well-agreed upon, as Dr. Rishar Nuws considers:

There is no doubt that at one end of the scale we have a clear description of terrestrial life, and if we were to see a rabbit, or a creature that hops, eats, shits and doesn't fall apart when it moves its paws, we would immediately and uncontroversially consider it life. And at the other extreme end of the scale we have a complete non-entity - it has no form, no limits, no substance, nothing at all. Such an amorphous thing can never be called life. But what the scale does not tell us - and perhaps there is no scale that can - is where the cutoff is between life and non-life. And, as such, the scale is somewhat useless, because we already know the difference between a rock and a rabbit, but the debate still rages between whether a virus is alive or dead.

In response, Dr. Arrew Gusmee wrote:

The job of the scale is to point out things of significance when considering whether something is life or not. At that, it does well. We can tell with a glance whether something is getting close to the unambiguous end of interest or the end of extreme boredom, and seeing R4-E7 will immediately raise our philophical interest.

When developing the scale, Dr. Kanar Daffeace said:

It surprised me to find that a virus lay at about Sω-E1-R5-P2 - a very up and down classification that illustrates the complexity of the situation and how we have to be careful with ambiguity. We should expect the unexpected, and we should expect and embrace debate, because what we are going to find in the universe is likely to be weird and wild, and that's why the word 'alien', though I hesitate to use it, should be very appropriate. The biggest mistake we can make is not that we don't look carefully, but that we dismiss what we look at too quickly and confidently.