All is Living

That's putting a spin on death.

Does motion = life.

No.

If you look at tiny particles under a microscope, you can see them moving around. It's called Brownian Motion. It's caused by molecules in the liquid hitting the particles. When a particle is larger, the impacts are more likely to cancel out.

This is a simulation of the Brownian motion of 5 particles (yellow) that collide with a large set of 800 particles. The yellow particles leave 5 blue trails of random motion and one of them has a red velocity vector.

This is a simulation of the Brownian motion of a big particle (dust particle) that collides with a large set of smaller particles (molecules of a gas) which move with different velocities in different random directions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_motion

No, they're not alive, it's thermal motion.

Instead of Brownian motion, that appears to be Blackian motion..

You might say it's the ant ithesis of Brownian motion...

That is not what I ant tissipated!

To communicate you need mutual agreement on the meaning of terms...

...." A distinctive characteristic of a living organism from dead organism or non-living thing, as specifically distinguished by the capacity to grow, metabolize, respond (to stimuli), adapt, and reproduce."...

https://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Life

A flame exhibits all of the characteristics of a living organism.

...apart from reproduction...

...an airborn glowing ember might be a flame-fetus or combustion-chrysalis.

What sort of is being drunk there, again?

Firewater?

Movement is not life. If I kick a cardboard box, it moves. But it is not alive. Same goes for Brownian motion and any other motion which is produced by a force and follows the laws of physics, not those of biology.

How could it not be when all matter and energy can be shown to be in a constant state of motion if you look closely enough.

This does not however mean something is alive. You cannot say for example a hydrogen atom is alive, nor can you say a large enough group of hydrogen atoms together could somehow develop cognitive thought.

You must live in an alternate universe.

There's a spaceship waiting. One wonders where the return portion of the ticket is...

Please elucidate your definition of "living". In my experience, moving does NOT imply living.

No, I do NOT agree!

If one accepts the statement "all living things reproduce", then no agreement is possible.

'all living things reproduce'...

So the Cavendish banana strain , a worker bee, and a childless woman with a hysterectomy are not within the set of living things?

If they can continue to sell Cavendish bananas, then that variety of bananas can reproduce, albeit with human help. Without that human help the variety would not exist, and wouldn't be alive.

It has to be the ability to reproduce as a species. Otherwise, according to that definition, all men would be considered to be non-living. I suspect that there are individuals in most living species which are incapable of contributing to reproduction, in addition to those which normally don't contribute to reproduction, such as drone bees.

The Cavendish is not reproducing any more than someone who gains a bunch of weight or donates blood is reproducing. It is the same individual extending its size. Same genetics, same plant really.

Remember that last Galapagos Tortoise of a specific kind which had outlived every potential mate? I'd say it was alive until it died even though it couldn't reproduce long before that.

A species may reach a point of non-viability, yet individuals are still alive.

Now what of this allowing things to be considered alive even if humans are required for reproduction. Models of cars reproduce with human help.

.

On a slightly more serious note, drone bees are definitely involved in reproduction. Drone bees are the male bees and they don't do anything other than mate with the queen. They don't gather nectar nor defend the hive, just mate.

Agreement or not with the original poster is optional.

Not for me: agreeing with the OP is not an option. I am not so free as to be able to attain the separation necessary from things like logic, reason, and empiricism to entertain such views as a genuine possibility..