A quote I remember: "Given enough time, Hydrogen will begin to understand itself".

Doesn't "try" imply intending? But the universe isn't a someone who can intend to do something.

Your statement sounds like mysticism, trying to soften the emotional coldness of the materialist view of the universe.

The space dust that coalesced into our solar system and planet eventually (picture it in fast-forward) became us and we "try" to understand stuff, no?

Yes. But the space dust didn't intend to become us. It's something, not someone.

Are the neurons and chemicals and electrical impulses in our brains someone?

collectively, yes.

so the question is, where does the line between animate and inanimate lie?

What about the brains of other animals or the nervous systems of insects, or the neurons in an octopus tentacle? Are they someone?

It’s an interesting line of questioning. What makes “someone?”

Is a living but braindead/comatose human body someone?

Many may be inclined to say yes, yet a statue or other inanimate likeness of a human wouldn’t be considered someone..

How about a thing that doesn’t resemble a human at all but gives the exact same responses to inputs that a human brain would? Say, on a computer screen?

If you were told that a real person is sitting somewhere and sending these responses, you’d say it was someone, but probably not if you were told that it’s an AI...

It’s mostly all subjective and we just pick the definition that’s convenient for us to work with and comprehend.