[yovav (OP)]

I think that the essence of A  is whatever distinguishes it from B.

Again, my intention in essence: the initial state of some object, regardless of the form we perceive it in our senses.

[Bored chemist]

I think that the essence of A  is whatever distinguishes it from B.

Again my intention in essence: the initial state of some object, regardless of the form we perceive it in our senses.

You seem to have scrambled that.

[alancalverd]

The initial state of a table is a tree. Or a seed of a tree.

[Bored chemist]

The initial state of a table is a tree. Or a seed of a tree.

Or the seed that became the tree that became the seed that became the tree that became the table.

I think the OP is talking nonsense, what do you think?

[yovav (OP)]

You seem to have scrambled that.

I would love to receive an explanation from you: Where is the mistake?

[yovav (OP)]

The initial state of a table is a tree. Or a seed of a tree.

The fact that I am unable to convey my message only shows how important it is to make that distinction.

[yovav (OP)]

Or the seed that became the tree that became the seed that became the tree that became the table.

I think the OP is talking nonsense, what do you think?

If you fail to get to the root of the matter does that make it nonsense?
I'm serious now, I can say you're so and so. But try to pay attention to what I am trying to explain.
Each object is perceived by the five senses. Can I say about him that he is in himself so and so? The answer is no. I can only say about it through the way my same senses experience the object.
So far you agree?

[alancalverd]

Each object is perceived by the five senses.

We have no sensory perception of a proton, and although we perceive light, the photon is merely a mathematical model with most of the characteristics of photons that we can't see.

I think the OP is talking nonsense, what do you think?

I think the OP is talking ancient Greek philosophy. However Wikipedia states

Essence (Latin: essentia) is a polysemic term, used in philosophy and theology as a designation for the property or set of properties that make an entity or substance what it fundamentally is, and which it has by necessity, and without which it loses its identity.

which is a complicated and unscientific  way of saying what I wrote in #19 above.

[Origin]

Again, my intention in essence: the initial state of some object, regardless of the form we perceive it in our senses.

I think we have a pretty good idea what the essence of an object is.

[alancalverd]

I think that the essence of A  is whatever distinguishes it from B.

I might add "in context". In most cases a table is distinguishable from a chair unless the context demands firewood. Or in the freight forwarding industry, everything has the same essence: 167 kg per cubic meter. 

[Bored chemist]

You seem to have scrambled that.

I would love to receive an explanation from you: Where is the mistake?

You have attributed a quote to me, but I didn't say it.

The fact that I am unable to convey my message only shows how important it is to make that distinction.

As far as I can tell, the fact that you can't communicate your message either shows that you are bad at communication, or that you don't really know what your message is.

Each object is perceived by the five senses.

Most objects in the universe are not perceived by anyone.

Can I say about him that he is in himself so and so?

It may be a linguistics thing, but that does not make sense.

So far you agree?

You said one thing which is plainly false.
Of course I do not agree.