UMD Finding May Hold Key to Gaia Theory of Earth as Living Organism (Photo credit: University of Maryland Press Releases)
Hindu Mythology calls The Earth as Prithvi and it is also one of the Five Elements-Pancha Butas-Earth,Water,Fire,Air and Ether.
All these entities are Living Organisms.
This again depends on what we define as an Organism.
If an Organism defined as ‘one that has an Origin,Growth ,Decay and Death’ -then Earth is an Organism
If we add Consciousness to this list, the answer is then Earth is ‘we do not know’ as we have not really found what Consciousness is.
We have a Theory that The Earth is a Living Organism.
Interesting Read.
Story:
The Gaia hypothesis, also known as Gaia theory or Gaia principle, proposes that all organisms and their inorganic surroundings on Earth are integrated to form a single and self-regulating complex system, maintaining the conditions for life on the planet. Topics of interest include how thebiosphere and the evolution of life forms affect (and in some cases contribute to) the stability of global temperature, ocean salinity, oxygen in the atmosphere and other factors of habitability.
The hypothesis was formulated by the chemist James Lovelock and co-developed by the microbiologist Lynn Margulis in the 1970s. While early versions of the hypothesis were criticized as teleological and contradicted principles of natural selection, later versions focused on the large-scale effects of life on the planet and are studied in the disciplines of geophysiology and Earth system science. Some of its principles have been adopted in fields likebiogeochemistry and systems ecology.
The Gaia hypothesis has also inspired analogies and various interpretations in social sciences, politics, and religion under a vague philosophy andmovement.
…
The importance of the large number of species in an ecosystem, led to two sets of views about the role played by biodiversity in the stability of ecosystems in Gaia theory. In one school of thought labelled the “species redundancy” hypothesis, proposed by Australian ecologist Brian Walker, most species are seen as having little contribution overall in the stability, comparable to the passengers in an aeroplane who play little role in its successful flight. The hypothesis leads to the conclusion that only a few key species are necessary for a healthy ecosystem. The “rivet-popper” hypothesis put forth by Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife Anne H. Ehrlich, compares each species forming part of an ecosystem as a rivet on the aeroplane (represented by the ecosystem). The progressive loss of species mirrors the progressive loss of rivets from the plane, weakening it till it is no longer sustainable and crashes.[15]
Later extensions of the Daisyworld simulation which included rabbits, foxes and other species, led to a surprising finding that the larger the number of species, the greater the improving effects on the entire planet (i.e., the temperature regulation was improved). It also showed that the system was robust and stable even when perturbed. Daisyworld simulations where environmental changes were stable gradually became less diverse over time; in contrast gentle perturbations led to bursts of species richness. These findings lent support to the idea that biodiversity is valuable.[16]
This finding was later proved in a eleven-year old study of the factors species composition, dynamics and diversity in successional and native grasslands in Minnesota by David Tilman and John A. Downing wherein they discovered that “primary productivity in more diverse plant communities is more resistant to, and recovers more fully from, a major drought”. They go on to add “Our results support the diversity stability hypothesis but not the alternative hypothesis that most species are functionally redundant”.[15][17]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis#Biodiversity_and_stability_of_ecosystems
Related articles
- Random Facts About Life (ktrmurali.wordpress.com)
