It cannot preform metabolic processes.
You can study the unknown object under the microscope and look for characteristics like movement, cell structure, and organization. If you observe patterns that suggest the object has cells, shows growth, or displays other biological characteristics, it likely comes from a living thing. If it lacks these features and appears more like abiotic matter, it is likely nonliving.
Some examples of living things that may appear to be nonliving include dormant seeds, non-moving plants, and hibernating animals. These organisms can exhibit characteristics of nonliving objects due to their lack of activity or apparent growth.
Spontaneous generation was observed when living organisms seemed to appear from nonliving matter, such as maggots appearing on decaying meat. This led some to believe that life could spontaneously arise from inanimate materials.
They are all not living, their brains have ceased to function, unless they are kept frozen decomposition will set in. A nonliving thing is also not necessarily just something that has died. It could also be something that was never alive or never will be. (ie: a stuffed animal, an ipod, or perhaps a backpack.) All nonliving things are made up of atoms.
Bourne believed that an object could be made to rise and sink at will by varying the density of the object to be either lighter or heavier than the surrounding fluid. By adjusting the object's overall weight and volume, it could either float or sink based on the principle of buoyancy.
Direct observation is an observation in which you have complete view and capability to observe and experiment with an object- hope i could help
A good example of observation and inference could be a scenario where you see dark clouds gathering in the sky (observation). From this, you might infer that it is likely to rain soon. The observation is based on visual evidence, while the inference is a conclusion drawn from that evidence, predicting future weather conditions.
You can study the unknown object under the microscope and look for characteristics like movement, cell structure, and organization. If you observe patterns that suggest the object has cells, shows growth, or displays other biological characteristics, it likely comes from a living thing. If it lacks these features and appears more like abiotic matter, it is likely nonliving.
Cells came from nonliving things.or Cells could generate spontaneously.
spontaneous generation
A qualitative observation for a penny could be that it is round, small, and made of metal.
Spontaneous Generation
spontaneous generation
no water and something else
nonliving is like the ocean the ocean doesnt breathe and the ocean doesnt talk living is like animals like humens we could talk we could write and breathe but does the ocean knows how to do that? No i dont think so so now you know what nonliving and whats living
He failed to recognize that pure logic could not always bring him to correct conclusions. One example of this was his conclusion that one object twice as massive as another object would fall to the ground in half the time. This seemed logical to him and frankly it also seems intuitively reasonable to us today, particularly if we are not in on the truth. This is complicated a little by questions of air resistance and by the shape and density of the objects, but all things being equal careful observation by Galileo proved Aristotle wrong.
A scientific term for "conclusion" could be "findings" or "results".