No, you didn't quite hit the point.
That's because your "point" is fuzzy.
Colors are not that hard to identify with the eye. I know yellow when I see it and I know blue when I see it.
Then you are applying a definition of those colors relative to your vision.
The problem is when we "zoom in" on the boundaries and then realize that they are fuzzy, there is a whole range of green in between them. The instrumentation helps expose that fuzziness.
So yellow is clear? Blue is clear? And green is fuzzy? Can't you also just as easily recognize green? It is defined as well.
See, what you are missing is that the reason you recognize any color at all is because it is defined. Sure, I agree with you that there is a continuum of light and colors. But isn't a ruler a continuum also? But can't we define 1mm, 1cm, 1m? Once we define it it is recognizeable.
Is there a visible difference in .999m and 1.0m. It's fuzzy at arms length, but is is clear close up, because of the definition.
For example, yellow is wavelengths of 590 - 560 nm and blue is 490 - 450 nm, in between we have green from 560 - 490 nm.
If we have light that has a wavelenth of 525 nm, should we put it on the yellow side or the blue side?
It is green, because it is defined that way.
Could we all agree that 525.1 nm is definately yellow and 524.9 nm is definately blue?
We could argue all we want. But if it is defined, it is defined.
Is light that is exactly 560 nm yellow or green?
Again, that depends on the definition.
When we zoom in that closely, we find that our compartmentalization of color, which seems to work just fine for the everyday "zoomed out" uses, fails to accurately describe the continuum of color that actually exists in nature.
Again, I agree that light is a continuum. But a continuum can be defined in science. However, You are claiming that "Life" is a continuum. So I ask you to establish that claim. Life is nothing like light.
So I have provided the seven pillars. what is fuzzy about them?
Its not the pillars that are fuzzy, just like the wavelength definition of yellow is quite clear. Its that
life is fuzzy and not as easily distinguished from non-life as the definition suggests.
What you have here is a bold claim that needs supporting evidence. As I understand you, you are saying "life' is just a contiuum of chemical reactions. Ok, you need to establish that continuum.
For instance. Metabolism. All life has it. All non-life doesn't. It appears digital to me. Please demonstrate that this is a continuum.
Reacting to stmuli. This also appears digital to me.
Now one might could argue that some pillars are contiuums, but not all. So I ask you to scientifically support your claim that life is a continuum.
Edited by AlphaOmegakid, : added clarification