Inorganic Physiology and Immortality (Type 1)

[NeoSuperior]

I'll put it simply: Do we assume beings with Inorganic Physiology to have a lifespan or not? There is good reason to assume organic beings to have a limited lifespan. But what about those who are not? Shouldn't they possess Immortality (Type 1) by default?

Take Shishou, for example (don't mind the fact that the page maintainers forgot to add Inorganic Physiology to him yet, for a moment).
He is a magical sword that has the ability to self-repair itself. So now what? If someone fights him who can use Time Manipulation to let his/her opponent age for tens or hundreds of thousands of years in a blink of a moment (or more if that's what it takes), do we assume him to just "die from old age"? Or do we assume that he'd survive due to being a "magical sword" and therefore not ageing?

Of course it wouldn't be an absolute rule one way or another, but should we really assume that inorganic beings have a lifespan similar to organic ones?

 

[Ogbunabali]

I mean, it really depends on the what you are. Like if your Inorganic Physiology is being a tree, you certainly won't get Immortality Type 1. But if you're a super unaging robot, or made out of some metal or something, then yeah, you should get it.

It's a case by case basis.

 

[NeoSuperior]

Aren't trees still organic though?

And I think Immortality (Type 1) should perhaps be mentioned in the "Possible Uses" for the Inorganic Physiology page.

But yea, overall I agree that there is a case-by-case basis to be upheld here, but in general I think non-organic beings shouldn't be subject to organic "rules" such as lifespan.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

@Og

Trees are organic.

@Neo

Well, if something is inorganic, it is an "object", a walking talking object. Objects have no lifespans so yes it would be a logical assumption to assume they do not age.

An exception is to be made if there are special mechanics. By default, if we just see a sword that lives, then it has immortality type 1.

 

[Ogbunabali]

Isn't the page meant to be for non-humans in general. I mean hell, there is even wood as the page's gif.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

Isn't the page meant to be for non-humans in general. I mean hell, there is even wood as the page's gif.

Dead wood, though.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Isn't the page meant to be for non-humans in general. I mean hell, there is even wood as the page's gif.

Wood is not tree though.

Your wooden chair is not alive. The flower in your garden is alive doe.

 

[Ogbunabali]

You do realize that's still organic right?

And also metal rusts and deteriorates if not upkept. So a random sword shouldn't have Immortality Type 1.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

You do realize that's still organic right?
And also metal rusts and deteriorates if not upkept. So a random sword shouldn't have Immortality Type 1.

Well yes, but the page specifically states "object". As in, non living.

Well im not sure. Time destroys virtually everything, but like. a piece of metal would get rusty due to other means, not cus it has a lifespan, if you put it in a place with 0 humidity it would never get rusty, so that's just atmospherical/outside actions on the sword, not the sword itself. And still continues being an object even if rusty. So like either way type 1 is a given.

 

[Ogbunabali]

Your arguments were "it's not organic" not "it's not living".

And, have you seen what corrosion does to metal? Like I said, if the conditions are right probably, but you don't give every human type 1 because "if we just put them in cryostasis they won't die", hypothetically speaking of course.

 

[NeoSuperior]

lifespan and regular detoriation are different things though. I mean the idea of "living metal" is already supernatural to begin with. To put it into perspective, any sort of Regenerationn by an organic being usually does nothing to influence that being's lifespan. A sword on the other hand? The parts damaged by rust get restored and the damage is therefore completely undone.

That's the difference. Lifespan is a clock that ticks until your death without stopping unless you can specifically do something to extend (or remove) the lifespan. The process of healing from injuries might sometimes even shorten the lifespan. For swords and other inorganics on the other hand "breaking from detoriation" only happens when there is something actually exterting influence on it, e.g. environmental conditions and maintainance or lack thereof, but there is no "timer". It's a completely different issue.

 

[Ogbunabali]

If you're going down that road. Then you we should start adding Type 5 on every object.

 

[GojiBoyForever]

Ok its settled then, every object gets type 5 someone close this.

 

[NeoSuperior]

Breaking the objects kills them, so no, not Type 5. I didn't say they were invulnerable due to that anywhere in my posts, did I?

It's just about lifespan, which is only covered by Type 1, specifically.

 

[GojiBoyForever]

Well objects by their very definition cannot die.

 

[NeoSuperior]

Actually, that's wrong. Inorganic "living beings" can still "die" by having their consciousness that controls the object being erased, how much damage to the object that takes varies between verses though.

Note that the "fighter" here usually isn't the object itself, but rather the conscious soul/mind that controls it.

Of course that only applies to Type 1. For Type 2 you just replace "living/dead" by "intact/destroyed" instead.

 

[GojiBoyForever]

Maybe that's why I said objects?

 

[NeoSuperior]

Yes, but that's really just a technicality and grasping at straws as far as the wiki is concerned. The usual non-incap winning condition is the permanent elimination of the enemy by making their consciousness disappear, i.e. kill or destroy or soul-destruct or EE them.

 

[N_Kardashev]

If you are some sentient sword you should also have self sustenance at least so the issue of oxidation becomes irrelevant. But the idea of mortality/immortality doesn't even apply to inanimate objects.

 

[NeoSuperior]

In that case, it should be mentioned on the Inorganic Physiology page like that. It already mentions Self-Sustenance even though it's also "obvious" most of the time. So I think Immortality Type 1 should be included as well.

 

[Ogbunabali]

Yes, but that's really just a technicality and grasping at straws as far as the wiki is concerned.

So is yours that's the point. The logical conclusion to what you're saying is that every object gets type 5.

And I don't see how self sustenance somehow removes a chemical process.

 

[GojiBoyForever]

Objects will stay eventually victim to erosion over time unless stated otherwise. Also, objects with regen wouldn't get Type 1 immortality by default.

 

[NeoSuperior]

I don't get where this whole idea of "it's basically Type 5" comes from. Someone whose vessel breaks regardless of organic or inoganic lifeform, ultimately still dies. Under your logic, anyone with Type 1 immortality also should have Type 5.

The difference between organic and inorganic is that organic will eventually detoriate BY ITSELF just by existing, from the inside, due to issues like telomeres shortening. Inorganics don't have that issue. THEIR issue is the fact that they lack the basic self-healing capabilities of organics and those their damage accumulates without being undone, in other words they just "die" from accumulated damage caused by environment, not by their own inner workings. Completely different thing.

Of course there are exceptions, a whole ton of those, infact. That being electronic inorganics. Electronic inorganics suffer their inner circuits detoriating just from being in use. An inorganic sort of "lifespan" might perhaps be applied to them.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Master could probably have it... I think... probably. (Honestly not 100% sure as it depends on which specifications the gods made when they bound his soul to the sword)


In general I would say that it isn't the case, though. Take your computer. Certainly has Inorganic Physiology, but it doesn't life (that is to say function) forever. Eventually wear and tear will have destroyed it.

Given, if all parts are replacable and the inorganic being is continously maintained they could probably exist forever, but I wouldn't call that in itself Immortality.

 

[N_Kardashev]

If you have nanobots that constantly repair your molecules that could be a type 3 immortality.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

That doesn't necessarily give you Inorganic Physiology, though.

 

[NeoSuperior]

Master could probably have it... I think... probably. (Honestly not 100% sure as it depends on which specifications the gods made when they bound his soul to the sword)


In general I would say that it isn't the case, though. Take your computer. Certainly has Inorganic Physiology, but it doesn't life (that is to say function) forever. Eventually wear and tear will have destroyed it.

Given, if all parts are replacable and the inorganic being is continously maintained they could probably exist forever, but I wouldn't call that in itself Immortality.

I agree that those with Inorganic Physiology who are subject to internal wear and tear just from "operating normally", like with electrical circuits, and so are basically showing a similar detoriation to organic beings, shouldn't be excluded from lifespan.

But what if they aren't?

What if they are instead supernatural magic-based or "miracle"-based existences with no notable internal wear and tear? Unless it's something like the Fate/ universe where the assumption is that souls can "rot" as well, shouldn't we assume that objects that are moving via supernatural means are not subject to internal wear and tear and therefore not subject to a lifespan, i.e. that they possess Immortality Type 1?

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

External wear and tear could still affect them.

 

[NeoSuperior]

But "external wear and tear" is entirely dependent on the environment. It's fundamentally indistinguishable from "regular damage", except just much slower. Depending on the environment this factor can possibly be zero or at least converging toward zero.

On the other hand "internal wear and tear" is constant with at most a multiplicator for the constant, and will eventually lead to certain demise under "normal operation".