So does the body age because *Insert biological reason- DNA deterioration, etc"...

 

 

Or does the body age because of the 'space-time' of the physical universe?

 

 

False dichotomy and a poorly-phrased inquiry.

I agree, human aging isn't an effect of space-time, it's an effect of human biology.

False dichotomy

Let me rephrase the question...

 

 

Is aging an intrinsic built in property of our biology, or is it caused by the properties of the physical universe?...(since "time" is theoretically a property of space.)

Is aging an intrinsic built in property of our biology...

 

Apoptosis (from Ancient Greek ἀπόπτωσις "falling off") is a process of programmed cell death that occurs in multicellular organisms. Biochemical events lead to characteristic cell changes (morphology) and death.

Let me rephrase the question...

 

 

Is aging an intrinsic built in property of our biology, or is it caused by the properties of the physical universe?...(since "time" is theoretically a property of space.)

 

 

Both. The fact that biological things age is because they change over time, as is typical for things in this universe.

Let me rephrase the question...

 

 

Is aging an intrinsic built in property of our biology, or is it caused by the properties of the physical universe?...(since "time" is theoretically a property of space.)

Still a false dichotomy.

 

Anyway, investigate senescence

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senescence

That's an invalid question.

It cannot be just due to biological properties because that depends on how much time has passed.

Every prolongued process depends on time.

 

It's similar to asking ''does the earth's rotation around the sun depend on time?''. Of course it does.

Empirically, definitively, emphatically, human aging is a result of the metabolic processes associated with human biology. Time is not the origin or creator of those processes, it is merely a means by which we measure the perceived progression of those processes. Cellular division and degradation does not emerge from time anymore than the rain or climate events that erode mountains into hills. Time is not causal, it's a subjective measure we initiate at a causal onset.

Yes but it degrades by a certain value in a certain amount of time. In 0 seconds, it does not degrade at all. Raise the time limit linearly and it degrades proportionally to the time increased.

So the question doesn't really make sense.

I agreed; the question is invalid. However, the values we ascribe to time are subjective perspective dependent, which means that time is an invention that is defined by the perspective and observations of an observer. When we remove the metabolic processes proven to produce human aging, time is invalidated as a cause--because without those processes, there is no aging regardless of the length observable time ascribed.

Edited January 6, 20178 yr by DrmDoc