Thread: Where does the boundary lie? (Scientific Side)

Okay, so originally this was going to be one huge post in the Philosophy sub-forum. However, the more and more I started typing it, I realized I was using much more science-based justifications than originally planned, to lead up the philosophical side of the post. So, I decided to split it into two parts on two different sub-forums. This will be the "Science Side" of my question and I will post later the "Philosophical Side" on the Philosophy sub-forum. Take in consideration, that there still will be science-based questions on the Philosophical Side, in order to keep that side from running dry. However, those science-based questions and logic will be based on questions which transcend normal science and could also fall into spirituality and morality. Here on the Scientific Side, everything will be based on the physical world.

Throughout the entirety of mankind's existence, human's have been defining millions upon millions abstract concepts in order to explain reality. This act of defining, categorized as "Science", involves placing all things which exist into these boundaries of what is and what isn't. However, I have come to put into question the very fabric of this age-old concept of defining reality. Is all of Science truly an existing fundamental part of the universe? Or is most of it just a concept created from the minds of humanity in order fuel humanity's desire of being in control? Is there actually a boundary which separates one from another? At what point is something this, but not that? The answer may surprise you.

What is a human? Think about for a second. What makes a human a human? According to science, what makes a human a human is the ability to interbreed with other humans and produce fertile offspring. It's what separates two species, the ability to interbreed. Alright, fair enough. How about this question? When did the first human appear? At what point was a human not a Homo Erectus? Think about it. The answer is... never. You are as different from your parents as they were from their parents and their parents and their parents and their parents and so on. But if you follow your lineage back far enough, your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great...grandparent was not human. But their children were still as different as you from your parents. At no single point was Homo Erectus's child a human. This would break the scientific law which states the children of any species have to be the same as their parent's species. However, there was a point in time in which Homo Erectus and humans had similar enough DNA to interbreed. Does that make Homo Erectus human? But this law applies to Homo Erectus's ancestors too and their ancestors and their ancestors and their ancestors and so on. Heck, at one point, in the many greats of your grandparents, your ancestor wasn't even a mammal. He was a lizard of the species Hylonomus whose ancestor was a fish of the species Tiktaalik. But then again, this fish was the ancestor of all land animals. Does that mean Hylonomus and Tiktaalik are also human? Or are all land animals Tiktaaliks? I mean Tiktaaliks always had Tiktaalik offspring, but somehow we can trace our heritage back to a Tiktaalik. Are you confused yet? If so, watch this video. This person explains everything much better than I can.

And yet we can still take it farther and say there is no boundary between living and non-living. What is life? We are living aren't we? This is because we are made of cells right? However, if we go any farther than that, everything is non-living. How can we be living if everything we made of is not? Well, according to science, to be living, one must be able to reproduce and contain genetic information. What about viruses though? They contain genetic information and have the will to reproduce, but they can't do on their own. Also, they don't do anything until put in the right circumstances to reproduce like a non-living object. Are they living or not? No matter which side you are on, one thing is certain. Something seemingly clear as living and non-living can be hard to tell.
Now let's take it one step further. All matter is fundamentally the same thing including you and that rock. You and that rock are both made of elements. These elements, though may be different. Are still made of the same thing. They are made of electrons, protons, and neutrons. According to this, you are technically made of the stuff as that rock.
Even still, we can still take it farther. We can state matter, waves, and energy as also fundamentally the same thing. We can prove this using the Mass-Energy Equivalence equation developed by Einstein, Plank's Equation, and The Planck-Einstein relation. Energy = mass * the speed of light^2. Since matter and energy are convertible, they must be made of the same thing. Same goes for Energy = frequency * Planck's constant. Since waves and energy are convertible, they also must be made of the same thing. We can now finalize this with The Planck-Einstein relation. All we have to do substitute Energy with Einstein and Planck's equations and we get mass * the speed of light^2 = frequency * Plank's constant proving matter and waves are also made of the same thing.
Now that I've pretty much stated that all things in the universe are practically the same thing, you'd think we'd be done with this topic now, but we're not. There is one more step we can take. Is there is an actual distinguish between things and nothing? I know it sounds crazy, but maybe there isn't. You see, all things are made of particles. Let's just stick with matter to make it simpler. So, what makes up matter? Protons, neutrons, and electrons. What makes up protons and neutrons? Quarks. Up, Down, Strange, Charm, Top, Bottom. Alright, what makes up them? String? Alright, what makes up string? Just something? Alright, what makes up that something? You see where I'm getting at now? This will end in either two scenarios. One, is particles of infinitely small volume and space. Or two, the particles will be made of nothing at one point. Either way, we still equal nothing. What was that? What makes the first scenario nothing you ask? Well, I'll explain using math. What is 1/3 as a decimal? 0.33333333333... Alright, what is 2/3 as a decimal? 0.6666666666... It's 0.33333333333... and 0.333333333333... combined right? With that logic, 3/3, is equal to 0.99999999999999... Yet in math, 0.999999999999... is equal to 1. The reason why mathematicians say this is because the decimal expansion 0.99999999999... actually represents the infinite sum 9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + 9/10000 + 9/100000 + 9/1000000... which is summed as an geometric equation with the goal of getting 1 just like how 1's infinite sum would be 1 + 0/10 + 0/100 + 0/1000... with also the ultimate goal of getting 1. How does this apply to the first scenario? Well, the first scenario is pretty much the reverse of 3/3. If we put the scenario in a expression describing the infinitely small base of matter, it would be a infinite difference. This infinite difference would look like this: 1 - 9/10 - 9/100 - 9/1000 - 9/10000 - 9/100000 - 9/1000000... This infinite difference, instead of having the ultimate goal of getting 1 as in 0.99999999999..., would have the ultimate goal of getting 0, therefore confirming the the first scenario as equal to nothing. The two scenarios listed earlier can be applied to any particle, so don't think it is restricted to matter. Anyways, this would explain why, in beta decay, a neutron can continuously convert between proton and neutron by releasing electrons and neutrinos to become a proton and release anti-electrons and neutrinos to become a neutron again without ever running out. Even though, the neutron is releasing something, it is also releasing nothing. This also allows for everything to have an origin, without violating principles which state everything can only be converted, not created as everything could have been converted from nothing. I guess we can say nothing is just everything in its true neutral state which would explain why whenever matter is created, anti-matter is created also and why they annihilate each other whenever they come back into contact with each other. It is to ensure that the nothing which is everything is still nothing.

So, what do you guys think? Is there truly a boundary which divides everything into distinct groups? Or is everything the same thing, just on different parts of a massive spectrum?