A scientist who proved the spontaneous generation of life and discovered the process of decay. Spontaneous generation hypothesis

The fact is that creationists do not need any theory to prove the spontaneous generation of life. They have faith that the Creator created living things, and he himself was, is and will be, and that is enough for them. Their task is to prove that the materialists are wrong. They have some pretty serious arguments against the materialist theory.
One of them concerns the synthesis of the DNA molecule. Because the modern science cannot build a given molecule, then they assume that the molecule must have assembled randomly. Naturally, the probability of randomly collecting the required molecule is very low. Something like this. If you take the TV apart into parts and then shake them in a bag, they are unlikely to come back together into the original TV. Indeed, it is impossible to create a modern TV by shaking. So after all, nature can’t do everything. Centaurs or minotaurs are not found anywhere. But it is quite possible to make a TV that can be shaken. For example, a detector receiver that is assembled by shaking can be made by a semi-skilled engineer. It consists of only three parts: inductance, capacitance and diode. If all these parts are made in the form of, for example, cubes with corresponding holes and pins for each connection, then it is quite possible that the required pins will fall into their corresponding holes as a result of shaking. By creating latches, in the case of a normal connection, we will increase the likelihood of assembly. The use of magnets in connections can further increase the likelihood of assembly. You can increase the concentration of details. In general, you can come up with a lot of things for this type of assembly. If this were the only assembly method, then engineers would have come up with a technology for assembling televisions.
Nature does nothing by chance. Adenine never combines with guanine or any other molecule. Its connecting node (hole) is only suitable for the connecting node (pin) of thymine. Moreover, they also have individual “magnets” with which they attract each other without affecting other molecules. And so on for each connection. This only means that the molecule was synthesized naturally; only suitable conditions were required for this. So the thesis of creationists about the improbability of the emergence of the required molecule turns out to be untenable.
The second argument of creationists is the reproach that scientists cannot create even the simplest living organism. A fair reproach. But this does not mean that living things cannot be built. To do this, one must move from the molecular and atomic level of knowledge to the quantum level of knowledge. Then “holes”, “pins” and “magnets” will become clear - concepts that scientists hide behind the words “recognizes”, “lock-key” and the like.
An attempt to transfer science to the quantum level of knowledge is presented in the small book “Quantum Physics” (ISBN-13: 978-3-659-40470-2), and how quantum works in living matter is described in the books “Quantum Biology” (ISBN: 978- 3-659-33209-8), and "Consciousness and Photons" (ISBN: 978-3-659-33209-8). They can be ordered in the online store at http://ljubljuknigi.ru/.

Spontaneous generation

Spontaneous generation- spontaneous generation of living beings from non-living materials; in general, the spontaneous emergence of living matter from nonliving matter. It is now generally accepted that the origin of living organisms is impossible, and the emergence of living matter from nonliving matter is practically impossible in modern times. natural conditions. However, possible scenarios for the emergence of life in the early stages of the Earth's existence are actively discussed in science.

Development of the theory of spontaneous generation

Ancient world

Since ancient times, humanity has resolved issues of the origin of life quite clearly. There was no doubt that living things, or at least their lower representatives, are capable of arising on their own from literally nothing. Information about how various living creatures emerge from water, mud and rotting remains can be found in ancient Chinese and Indian manuscripts, as well as Egyptian hieroglyphs and cuneiform scripts of Ancient Babylon. For example, the people of Ancient Egypt firmly believed in the belief that existed at that time that frogs, toads, snakes and even larger animals, such as crocodiles, were born only from a layer of silt remaining on the banks of the Nile after its seasonal floods . And in Ancient China people believed that aphids appeared spontaneously on young bamboo shoots. Moreover, great importance in this process was attached to heat, moisture and sunlight. In Babylon, people believed that worms appeared on their own in canals.

Antiquity

The belief in the spontaneous generation of living beings from non-living materials was accepted by philosophers Ancient Greece and Rome, as a matter of course. It is obvious that, in contrast to eastern civilizations, which were characterized by a theological interpretation of the origin of life, in Ancient Greece there is an empiricism of pre-evolutionary scientific theories and an almost complete absence of religious overtones. At some point, the idea of ​​spontaneous generation began to be subsumed under a certain theoretical basis, interpreting it from materialistic or idealistic positions.

Eg, ancient Greek philosopher- Thales of Miletus (late 7th-early 6th century BC), who adhered to elemental materialist positions, believed that life is a property inherent in matter. A similar material source from which the world naturally arose, according to Thales of Miletus, was water. Another ancient Greek philosopher Democritus (460-370 BC), the founder of the atomic theory, also adhered to the materialistic principles of interpreting the spontaneous generation of life. He believed that everything in the world consists of many tiny indivisible particles - atoms, and life arises due to the interaction of the forces of nature - for example, due to the interaction of atoms of fire and wet earth.

And the ancient Greek materialist philosopher Empedocles (- BC) believed that the world’s first living organisms (and these, as he believed, were plants) arose in river silt under the influence internal heat Earth. Following the plants, parts of animals appear: ““heads came out without necks, arms moved without legs, eyes wandered without foreheads,” from the combination of which the first animal organisms subsequently appeared.” The connection itself happened like this: “Drawn by the power of Love, these parts sought each other and formed into whole living beings, and the connections of the parts occurred by chance, so that monsters were formed in the form of animals with human heads, multi-headed creatures, etc. But these ugly creatures, according to the teachings of Empedocles, were incapable of long-term existence and, by the will of Enmity, had to die, giving way to more harmoniously arranged organisms. Over time, according to the laws of Love and Enmity, forms adapted to the environment and capable of reproduction were obtained.” About the same thing (only in the form work of art) wrote the ancient Roman poet Lucretius Car (c. 98-55 BC) in the poem “On the Nature of Things.”

The opposite, idealistic approach to the theory of spontaneous generation of life was adhered to by Plato (428-347 BC). He believed that animal and plant matter itself is in no way living. She becomes alive only after the immortal soul, “psyche,” descends to her. This idea of ​​Plato turned out to be more than viable, and after him it was accepted by his student Aristotle, whose teaching formed the basis of the entire medieval scientific culture and existed for more than 2 thousand years. In his writings, Aristotle cites countless “facts” of the spontaneous generation of living beings - plants, insects, worms, frogs, mice, some sea animals - indicating the conditions necessary for this - the presence of decomposing organic remains, manure, spoiled meat, various garbage, dirt. Under these “facts” Aristotle even summed up a certain theoretical basis- he argued that the sudden birth of living beings was caused by nothing more than the influence of some spiritual principle on previously lifeless matter. But at the same time, Aristotle also expresses quite sound thoughts, close in essence to evolutionary theory: “In addition, it is possible that some bodies from time to time transform into others, and those, in turn, decaying, undergo new transformations, and thus In this way, development and decay balance each other.” It is also worth noting that Aristotle was the first scientist to express the idea of ​​a “ladder of beings” (from the less developed and more primitive to the most developed, and in a broader sense - from inanimate nature to live). This is what Aristotle's “ladder” looked like: 1) Man; 2) Animals; 3) Zoophytes; 4) Plants; 5) Inorganic matter.

At the same time, the development of living beings occurs through their ascent along the steps of the ladder from lower to higher and is carried out due to the inherent tendency of matter to self-improvement. No matter how funny it may sound, such ideas were truly advanced in the 5th century. BC e., progressive compared to the unscientific religious approach. Unlike previous religious views, the theory of the spontaneous generation of life was no longer theo-, but cosmogenic, secular in nature. The role of God in the process of the origin of life no longer seemed so clear, which laid the boundary between religion and science and determined the further path of development of science outside of religious dogmas. And some researchers even believe that in Empedocles’ ideas about the origin of life one can discern the beginnings of the theory of evolution and natural selection with her ideas of the struggle for existence and preservation of the strongest species.

Middle Ages

The Middle Ages were characterized by significant regression scientific knowledge, associated mainly with the colossal power of the church over all branches human activity, as well as with the development of Christian philosophy and the formation of an appropriate, religious way of life and thinking. Back in the 3rd century. n. e. Plotinus (chapter philosophical school Neoplatonists) spoke of “that living beings could arise from the earth not only in the past, but also arise now in the process of decay” under the influence of the “life-giving spirit” (“vivere facit”), then already in the 5th century AD. e. the ideas of “life-giving spirit” and “life-giving force” turned out to be unclaimed, since Christianity, which presupposes a single act of creation, became the cornerstone. On top of everything else, everything scientific activity was under the control of the church, which did not at all contribute to productive scientific creativity and the emergence of new achievements in the field of the organic world.

TO XVI century The theory of spontaneous generation of living organisms reached its apogee. During the Renaissance, a legend borrowed from Judaism about a golem or homunculus, artificially created from clay, earth or other inanimate matter with the help of magical spells and human rituals, actively spread in the scientific world. Paracelsus (1493-1541) offered this recipe for making a homunculus: take a “known human fluid” (sperm) and make it rot, first for 7 days in a sealed pumpkin, and then for forty weeks in a horse’s stomach, adding human blood daily. And as a result, “there will be a real living child, having all the members, like a child born from a woman, but only very small in stature.”

Refutation of the theory of spontaneous generation

Francesco Redi's experiments

Illustration from Francesco Redi's Essays on the Origin of Insects (1668)

Spallanzani continued to be concerned with the question of the proliferation of microorganisms. Observing them through a microscope, he more than once saw small animals stuck together, but he was never able to discern the division process itself. A little later, this process was discovered by another scientist, de Saussure, and Spallanzani was delighted with this discovery.

At the same time, the Englishman Ellis put forward the hypothesis that microorganisms do not divide in half at all, but reproduce like all living things - by viviparity, even claiming that with his own eyes he saw new microbes arising in the body of old ones. And the so-called division is nothing more than the splitting of an animal in two due to its collision with another microorganism.

Spallanzani was not at a loss here either - with the help of a brush made of camel hair, he managed to separate one microbe from the army of his fellows and, through short observations, confirm de Saussure's discovery - in place of one microbe on a glass slide, Spallanzani found four, although there could be no collisions and speeches.

Thus, Lazzaro Spallanzani made a series of most important discoveries, which served as a major milestone on the path to debunking the theory of spontaneous generation and on the path to the development of microbiology in general.

Experiments of Louis Pasteur

By the time the French scientist Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) began to solve the question of the origin of microorganisms, he had already made a number of discoveries in chemistry and microbiology. In particular, he was responsible for the discovery of spatial isomerism, the process of fermentation and pasteurization. Throughout his life, his scientific activity was in one way or another connected with industrial production, and it was to him that Pasteur owed most of his achievements.

Pasteur, like most scientists of that time, was concerned about the origin of living beings, the study of whose activities he devoted so much time and effort. He repeated Spallanzani’s experiments, but supporters of the theory of spontaneous generation argued that natural, unheated air was necessary for the spontaneous generation of microscopic animals, because according to the vitalists, heating killed the “life-giving” or “fruitful” force. In addition, they argued (however, Pasteur himself understood this) that for the purity of the experiment it is necessary that yeast fungi and vibrios do not penetrate into the vessel containing unheated air. The task seemed impossible to Pasteur.

But soon, with the help of the French scientist Antoine Balard, famous throughout the world for the discovery of bromine, he managed to find a way out of this difficult situation. Pasteur instructed his assistants to prepare very unusual flasks - their necks were elongated and bent downwards like swan necks (S-shaped), Balard suggested this idea and blew out the first copy on the fire. He poured the decoction into these flasks, boiled it without clogging the vessel, and left it in this form for several days. After this time, there was not a single living microorganism in the broth, despite the fact that unheated air freely penetrated into the open neck of the flask. Pasteur explained this by the fact that all the microbes contained in the air simply settle on the walls of the narrow neck and do not reach the nutrient medium. He confirmed his words by shaking the flask thoroughly so that the broth rinsed the walls of the curved neck, and this time finding microscopic animals in a drop of the broth.

This theory was common in ancient China, Babylon and Egypt as an alternative to creationism, with which it coexisted.

Aristotle (384 – 322 BC), often hailed as the founder of biology, adhered to the theory of the spontaneous origin of life. Based on his own observations, he developed this theory further, linking all organisms into a continuous series - the “ladder of nature.” “For nature makes the transition from lifeless objects to animals with such smooth succession, placing between them beings that live without being animals, that between neighboring groups, due to their close proximity, scarcely any difference can be noticed” (Aristotle). With this statement, Aristotle strengthened Empedocles' earlier statements about organic evolution. According to Aristotle's hypothesis of spontaneous generation, certain "particles" of matter contain a certain "active principle" that, under suitable conditions, can create a living organism. Aristotle was right in believing that this active principle was contained in the fertilized egg, but he erroneously believed that it was also present in sunlight, mud and rotting meat.

“These are the facts - living things can arise not only through the mating of animals, but also through the decomposition of the soil. The same is the case with plants: some develop from seeds, while others seem to spontaneously generate under the influence of all nature, arising from decaying earth or certain parts of plants” (Aristotle).

With the spread of Christianity the theory spontaneous generation life was not honored: it was recognized only by those who believed in witchcraft and worshiped evil spirits, but this idea continued to exist somewhere in the background for many more centuries.

Van Helmot (1577 - 1644), a very famous and successful scientist, described an experiment in which he allegedly created mice in three weeks. All you needed was a dirty shirt, a dark closet and a handful of wheat. Van Helmot considered human sweat to be the active principle in the process of mouse generation. In 1688, the Italian biologist and physician Francesco Redi, who lived in Florence, approached the problem of the origin of life more strictly and questioned the theory of spontaneous generation. Redi discovered that the small white worms that appear on rotting meat are fly larvae. After conducting a series of experiments, he obtained data supporting the idea that life can only arise from previous life (the concept of biogenesis).

“Conviction would be futile if it could not be confirmed by experiment. Therefore, in mid-July, I took four large wide-mouthed vessels, placed earth in one of them, some fish in another, eels from the Arno in the third, a piece of dairy veal in the fourth, closed them tightly and sealed them. Then I placed the same thing in four other vessels, leaving them open... Soon the meat and fish in the unsealed vessels became wormy; one could see flies freely flying into and out of the vessels. But I did not see a single worm in the sealed vessels, although many days passed after the food was placed in them. dead fish"(Redi). These experiments, however, did not lead to the abandonment of the idea of ​​spontaneous generation, and although this idea faded somewhat into the background, it continued to be the main theory in non-clerical circles. While Redi's experiments seemed to disprove spontaneous generation in flies, Anton van Leeuwenhoek's early microscopic studies strengthened the theory as it applied to microorganisms. Leeuwenhoek himself did not enter into the debate between proponents of biogenesis and spontaneous generation, but his observations under the microscope fed both theories and eventually prompted other scientists to conduct experiments to resolve the question of the origin of life through spontaneous generation.

In 1765, Lazzaro Spallanzani conducted the following experiment: after boiling meat and vegetable broths for several hours, he immediately sealed them and then removed them from the heat. Having examined the liquids a few days later, Spallanzani did not find any signs of life in them. From this he concluded that high temperatures destroyed all forms of living beings and that without them nothing living could arise. In 1860, Louis Pasteur took up the problem of the origin of life. By this time, he had already done a lot in the field of microbiology and managed to solve problems that threatened sericulture and winemaking. He also showed that bacteria are ubiquitous and that nonliving materials can easily be contaminated by living things if they are not properly sterilized.

As a result of a series of experiments based on Spallanzani's methods, Pasteur proved the validity of the theory of biogenesis and finally refuted the theory of spontaneous generation.

However, confirmation of the biogenesis theory gave rise to another problem. Since another living organism is necessary for the emergence of a living organism, then where did the very first living organism come from? Only the steady state theory does not require an answer to this question, and all other theories imply that at some stage in the history of life there was a transition from nonliving to living. Was this primary spontaneous generation?

According to theory creationism, life arose under the influence of some supernatural forces. Since science studies only those phenomena that it can observe and test itself, it cannot either accept or refute the theory of creationism.

Ideas about spontaneous generation of life were widespread back in Ancient China, Babylon and Ancient Egypt. Aristotle was also a proponent of this assumption.

Until the second half of the 17th century. there were ideas according to which living organisms can arise not only from their ancestors in a biogenic way, but also, under favorable conditions, from inorganic substances abiogenic way. For example, mythical ideas were widespread that crocodiles could emerge from mud, lions and tigers from desert stones, and mice from dirty clothes (Fig. 53).

Experience of Francesco Redi

In 1688, the Italian scientist F. Redi experimentally proved the impossibility of the spontaneous generation of life. He left individual vessels with meat open, and closed the rest with gauze (Fig. 54).

There were no fly larvae in the vessels covered with gauze, but countless numbers of them appeared on the meat in the open vessels. Thus, using simple experience it has been proven that fly larvae cannot spontaneously germinate on rotten meat, but appear from eggs laid by flies. F. Redi proved through experience that at present life can develop biogenically only from existing life forms.

Louis Pasteur's experience

In the middle of the 19th century. French scientist Louis Pasteur also proved the impossibility of spontaneous generation of microorganisms.

He subjected a nutrient medium to prolonged boiling in an open-necked flask in which microorganisms could multiply. After a few days, a proliferation of microorganisms was observed in the flask (as a result of bacteria and their spores entering it). In the next experiment, so that microorganisms and their spores could not penetrate into the contents of the flask from the outside, he placed a thin S-shaped glass tube on its neck (Fig. 55). As a result, microorganisms and their spores settled in the bends of the tube and could not penetrate inside the flask. Microorganisms and their spores located in the contents of the flask died during prolonged boiling, the liquid remained sterile, and no microorganisms appeared in it.

Pasteur's experiments were of great practical importance, as they opened up possibilities for conservation food products, pasteurization of dairy products, sterilization of wounds and surgical instruments in medicine.

According to theory panspermia, life exists forever and wanders from planet to planet. The supporters of this theory were the famous Swedish physicist, laureate Nobel Prize S. Arrhenius, Ukrainian scientist V.I. Vernadsky, famous American biophysicist and geneticist, Nobel Prize laureate F. Crick, etc. According to these scientists, life did not originally appear on Earth, but arose on one of the planets and was brought to Earth Together with a meteorite or under the influence of light rays and under favorable conditions, it developed from simple to complex organisms. Research conducted in space by Russian and American cosmonauts did not provide positive data on the presence of “life particles” within the boundaries of the Solar System. Neither in space, nor in soil brought from the Moon, nor in meteorites, bacterial spores or other convincing “life particles” have yet been found. Material from the site

American scientists managed to create artificial conditions for the planet Mars in the laboratory. Under these conditions, by exposing a mixture of water vapor, methane, ammonia and carbon oxides to ultraviolet rays in the presence of soil and dusty glass, they obtained simple organic compounds. However, due to the absence of free nitrogen in the Martian atmosphere, the synthesis of amino acids is impossible under these conditions. According to the American scientist F. Crick, life was deliberately brought to Earth from other planets space system. However, there are not enough facts to confirm or refute such views. Thus, the theory of panspermia also did not solve the problem of the origin of life. Even if we admit that life originated outside the Earth and only then came to it, it still remains unknown how it arose elsewhere.

Theory of biochemical evolution of life began to take shape in the 20-30s of the 20th century. According to this theory, climatic conditions Earth on initial stages its development was very different from modern ones. Under these conditions, primarily abiogenically, simple organic compounds were synthesized, which, gradually becoming more complex as a result of chemical evolution, turned into the simplest life forms. After that it started

Abiogenesis is the theory of the emergence of living beings from inorganic substances. Until the middle of the 19th century. A. was understood as spontaneous generation, that is, the sudden emergence of complex living beings from nonliving materials. So, back in the 17th century. They believed in the spontaneous generation of worms, fish, frogs and even mice from dew, silt, and dirt. However, the Italian scientist F. Redi showed in 1668 that fly larvae in rotting meat appear only from eggs laid by flies. In the 18th century Italian scientist L. Spallanzani found that microorganisms do not develop in boiled broths. This was finally proven in 1861 by the French scientist L. Pasteur, whose experiments do not, however, deny the possibilities of aeration in previous geological eras.

The Spontaneous Origin of Life Aristotle (BC), often hailed as the founder of biology, believed that certain “particles” of matter contained a certain “active principle” that, under suitable conditions, could create a living organism. Aristotle wrote that frogs and insects breed in damp soil.

Propagation of the hypothesis. The hypothesis of spontaneous generation was widespread in Egypt, Babylon, China, and also spread in the Middle Ages. The hypothesis of spontaneous generation was widespread in Egypt, Babylon, China, and also spread in the Middle Ages.

Refutation of the theory. Experiments by Francesco Redi Francesco Redi questioned the theory of the spontaneous generation of living things. In 1668, Redi performed the following experiment. He placed pieces of meat in different vessels, covering some vessels with muslin and leaving others open. The flies that swooped in laid eggs on the meat in open vessels; Soon the larvae hatched from the eggs. There were no larvae in the covered vessels. Refuting the concept of spontaneous generation, Redi suggested that life can only arise from previous life (the concept of biogenesis).

Experiments by Louis Pasteur The scientist boiled various substrates in water in which microorganisms could form. With additional boiling, the microorganisms and their spores died. L. Pasteur attached an S-shaped tube to the retort, with a free end. Air freely penetrated into the S-shaped tube, but the nutrient medium remained transparent. Microorganism spores settled on the curved tube and could not penetrate the nutrient medium. A well-boiled nutrient medium remained sterile; the origin of life was not detected in it, despite the fact that air access was provided.

Conclusion. Currently, most scientists believe that the emergence of life is a long process that took place on Earth in distant geological epochs, when conditions (temperature, chemical composition gas, liquid and solid shells of the Earth, radiation mode, etc.) were very different from modern ones. One of the widespread theories of Abiogenesis belongs to the Soviet scientist A.I. Oparin.