I may post something that has not been proven by scientific methods, therefore, this board may be a better avenue than the Space board.
To hank: I agree with you that everything has energy, I also know that energy can not be destroyed, but then you say that “ matter is totally inert and cold” it seems to me that Einstein and I disagree with that view. I would agree with you, but ONLY IF one condition was possible in the laws of physics.
That condition being that ALL energy, including the one represented by the formula e=mc^2, would not exist. Under such conditions the matter would be inert, cold, unmoving and for all purposes dead.
I do not believe that I am confusing “energy” with “entropy”: According to scientific explanations, energy is the ability to do work, As far as I know, “work” can not be done without movement of some kind or another; energy, then is kinetic in nature, in other words, when matter is in motion it contains energy.
Although I agree with you when you say that “not all machines are alive” I still maintain that without energy (or motion) there would be no life/
I do not understand what your consept of energy is.
I understand the word “energy” in its fundamental meaning, as someting that is in motion. That something could be a very diffused form of matter, For instance light has a freguency and therefore a wave lenght; lenght of a wave can only occur if there is motion involved and therefore energy and motion imply the same consept and both require a medium that moves, if the medium is taken away, then energy could not exist.