We attempted to test and describe living matter, including the brain, using methods based on the ordinary laws of science that we had previously applied to non-living matter. Also, we must understand that the fundamental differences need an accurate understanding of the numerous dychotomies of science; furthermore, biological currents and their measuring processes. Those static methods did not consider its ”special construction”; furthermore, they do not need (and, as a consequence, do not have) dynamic ”laws of motion” in the sense that science does. Their slowness and complexity require explicit consideration of the time-aware handling of processes, including those in biological and technical computing. It is an open question how much the laws of electricity, abstracted from the instant interaction of the continuous electrical fluid of electrons, are valid for the currents represented by slow discrete ions. Essentially, we make the first steps in section 2.4 toward answering E. Schrödinger’s question: ”How can the events in space and time which take place within the spatial boundary of a living organism be accounted for by physics and chemistry?” [12] Notice the need of using events and describing the spatiotemporal behavior (in other words: implementing them by slow currents in a finite volume) implied in the question; three items which our text targets. No presently available theoretical description and simulator can perform that task. We show that when considering the correct physics, we can solve the mystery that the combination of non-living materials shows signs of life at an appropriate combination of their parameter values. We derive the required ’non-ordinary’ (cross-disciplinary) laws for describing life by physics. We emphasize again that the first principles are the same, but the different ”construction” of the living matter needs different – ’non-ordinary’ – approximations and laws.