Visar inlägg med etikett science. Visa alla inlägg
Visar inlägg med etikett science. Visa alla inlägg

20091228

Pantheism?

Pantheism controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: "Jacobi claimed that Spinoza's doctrine was pure materialism, because all Nature and God are said to be nothing but extended substance. This, for Jacobi, was the result of Enlightenment rationalism and it would finally end in absolute atheism. Moses Mendelssohn disagreed with Jacobi, saying that there is no actual difference between theism and pantheism."

People have argued about what Baruch Spinoza meant with his pantheist philosophy before, namely at the end of the 18th century. The pantheist God concept in Religious Humanism anticipates an intermediate existence to a pure materialistic state and a personal being. There is no old man with a white beard but rather a force of some kind. There is hope that we, as we move along with science, will find out more about this existence. A pure materialistic concept is quite barren. It does not inspire creativity. There is no frontier for discovery. It does not deal with the unknown as it can be scientifically anticipated today based on our progress in science so far.

Furthermore, Religious Humanism sees Grace, Resurrection of Christ, Annunciation of Virgin Mary etc. as irrelevant symbols, as are Angels. Also there is no heaven or hell. There is, however, a sense that it would be nice to think that our life has a meaning of sorts, apart from being just another brick in evolution, that there is some sort of life after death, that our experience is being taken into consideration. The explanation for such a scheme remains of course unknown at present.

20091227

Religious Humanism and Evil

Some people think that evil is conquering the world. I don't think it is beneficial for people to think in that way. Prior to World War II there was a type of person that thought the nazis were invincible. They exist today as well. They think fascism is the way to go. They think you can beat people into obedience. They don't have any good arguments. They just use force.

Religious Humanism does not view evil as a separate force but rather according to standard scientific thinking as a type of behavior. People act in an evil manner. There is no devil.

Nature as seen by Darwin where the fittest survives has seen humans evolve. Therefore there is hope because humans can see that evil behavior is less favorable than good behavior.

Evolutionary speaking the teodicé problem might go out of fashion, eventually. Scientifically speaking we are at least able to stop the everyone-eats-everyone-else problem for ourselves which is part of the problem.

SR P1 today feature the program 'Teologiska Rummet' where they discussed the influence of the religious language, especially Biblical, on people of today. It has diminished and is being phased out from literature. It was much more prevalent in the 19th century literature. The classical myth is also gone as a strong influence in literature.

Today people are rather reassured by the detective series and novels where the good side win most of the time. There is very little Biblical influence in detective novels. There is also very little Biblical influence via the Church. As we develop in the future, I am convinced that a new 'scripture' eventually will develop. A new canon that gives people hope.

Ola Sigurdson, who appeared in the program, does not think it is good that religion is private. I'm not sure I agree. For the appearing multicultural societies it is necessary for religion to become privatized and for the church to be separate from the state. This does not mean that religion is marginalized, as Sigurdson argues, but rather that is depoliticized. Power and spirituality are to different matters, neurophysiologically speaking. Primates do power and they are not spiritual.

Personally I think it important with spiritual political leaders and non-power oriented priests.

20091226

Buccinator novi temporis

Francis Bacon (1561-1626) called himself a "trumpeter for a new time". What is interesting in Bacon's argumentation, where he investigates the phenomena that has kept science back since the time of the Greeks, is that he does not complain on the dogmatic Church. On the contrary he talks about a renewal of Man's conquering of Nature. He even cites the Bible in Genesis 1:28 "God blessed them (Adam and Eve) and said to them; be fruitful and increase in number, fill the Earth and subdue it".

Is this what made Europe special in the history of the world? We, as Christians, decided to subdue Earth. In Religious Humanism subduing Earth does not sound optimal. Living in harmony with Earth is probably better since conquering Nature, or God, cannot be a long term goal.

Bacon, a man of the establishment at the time, also said that "knowledge is power". It is probably wiser, and more correct, to state that "information is power" and leave knowledge as a term for bringing to light new knowledge of Nature.

The reason for why I want to point this out is that it is important to understand why new knowledge arrives. In the yearly program 'geniuses speculates' on SVT following the Nobel festivities some of the participants always makes the remark that curiosity into the unknown, not guided by earthly wishes, is what counts. At the same time it is important to popularize science with its profane fruits of technology.

It is not enough anymore to simply study Nature as it is untouched. The obvious example is Oerstedt's discovery of the new natural force electromagnetism by the use of Volta's battery. We need to create new objects that reveal new truths of Nature before us.

The other tenet of the Bible is also wrong, ie, "increase in number". There is definitely a limit to the number of humans that comfortably can inhabit Earth. I wish the Pope would grasp this simple truth and stop preventing the use of contraceptives. What one billion Catholics are supposed to do counts. He is not saving unborn human lives by jeopardizing life on Earth.

20091221

Religious Humanism

Op-Ed Columnist - Heaven and Nature - NYTimes.com: "Pantheism offers a different sort of solution: a downward exit, an abandonment of our tragic self-consciousness, a re-merger with the natural world our ancestors half-escaped millennia ago.
But except as dust and ashes, Nature cannot take us back."

It seems like Douthat thinks we are not part of Nature any longer? I guess this article is a skilled attempt by organized religion to bring down these pantheists as people of a lesser class. People that go to the movies instead of to the church. However, if certain charming tales in the Bible once stimulated the minds of youngsters, it is now correct that they have gotten competition in the form of movie art. I believe this competition is serious and healthy.

I myself am a pantheist but a pantheist that believes in a materialistic God concept of Nature. I'm aware that Richard Dawkins think I am an atheist. Christer Sturmark, the head of the Humanists in Sweden, seems to think I'm an agnostic. But they are both wrong, since I'm deeply religious and believe in a God that I do not need proof of its existence for.

As it turns out this belief has given me peace of mind, because I no longer have a problem of reconciling religion and science. On the contrary science is the study of Nature, ie., of God. Mankind's journey of scientific pursuit has transformed the world the last 450 years. It has influenced philosophy and almost made philosophy a subject of its scope. The true progress of science, something religion have lacked, has seduced people into considering that true knowledge rest in Nature. This translates into religion and belief in Nature, as Douthat points out.

For those of you that want to review our scientific progress you might find is useful to read short posts in my blog 'etiketted' as "scriptures". There are some thirty of them now that highlights the main discoveries since Copernicus in 1543 laid down the Heliocentric Theory.

20091219

Immunology

Immunology began as the study of how bacteria and viruses were taken care of by the individual. In the beginning at the beginning of the 20th century it was very much an antibody affair but in the 1970s it became an intensely cellular story with its own hormone system so called interleukins.

It turns out that microorganism are neutralized by cells, so called phagocytes that ingest and degrade material. Antibodies are formed and can neutralize by themselves but also opsonize, ie, adhere to cells and make targets more tasty. There is also cellular toxicity of various kinds. Blood serum contains so called complement that can punch holes in bacteria.

The interesting problem in immunology is how we recognize specifically the target for neutralization. How can we recognize foreign from self? It so happens that we construct during our development a repertoire of molecules that can recognize targets by tolerizing the self molecules. The spleen and lymphnodes are involved in this.

Antibodies are Y-shaped proteins that are produced by a special type of white blood cells. In the two tips of the Y one finds so called hypervariable regions, ie, in these tips the amino acid sequence can vary a lot and thus it can form many different surfaces that can bind to the target. There is a special area in the genome of an individual that generates this variability.

Emil von Behring (1854-1917) described antibody activity against diphtheria toxin for the first time in 1890. Paul Erlich (1854-1915) laid down his side chain theory in 1900. He concluded that toxins must have chemical structures just like the dyes he worked with, the side chains of which gave rise to different colors. Recognition in the immune system must depend on shapes. In 1904 Almroth Wright (1861-1947) described opsonization by phagocytes.

In the 1920s, Michael Heidelberger (1888-1991) and Oswald Avery (1877-1955) described antigen (target) antibody complex formation and also showed that antibodies were made of protein. Then in the 1940s Linus Pauling confirmed the lock-and-key model of antigen-antibody binding. The Clonal Selection Theory came in 1957 by Frank Macfarlane Burnet (1899-1985). The theory explains how tolerance is created by selecting negative for self antigen. Lymphocytes with the specificity for self antigens are killed during development.

Data from Wikipedia

20091218

Atoms, Molecules and Molecular Interaction

Atoms were supposed to be indivisible, but in 1897 J.J. Thompson (1856-1940), a British physicist, found the electron, a negatively charged particle about 1/1800 the size of the nuclear particles. He then designed what was called a "plum pudding" model of how the atom was shaped that did not convince many.

In 1913, Niels Bohr (1885-1962), a Danish Physicist and then student of Rutherford, laid down a model of the atom based on quantum theory that significantly improved Rutherford's model. He suggested that electrons were confined to clearly defined, quantized orbits around the nucleus. An electron must emit or absorb a quanta to move between these orbits. When the light from a heated object was passed through a prism, it produced a multi colored spectrum. The appearance of fixed lines in this spectrum was successfully explained by these orbital transitions.

Gilbert Newton Lewis (1875-1946), an American chemist, then in 1916 claimed that chemical bonding between atoms involves the electrons in the orbitals. Bonding electrons were shared by the atoms.

In 1932, Linus Pauling (1901-1994), an American chemist, published a landmark paper where laid down his theory of orbital hybridization and analyzed the tetravalency of carbon. That year he also established the concept of electronegativity, and imbalance in the electron cloud that give rise to a partial charge, and developed a scale that would help predict the nature of chemical bonding. Electrons were by then known to circle around the nucleus in particular fashions called orbitals, they thus had forms where they spent most of their time, that explained the nature of bonding when considered.

Sir James Chadwick (1891-1974) found the neutron, the uncharged second main particle in the nucleus, also in 1932. Nuclear physics was now well on the way to the atom bomb.

However, what has become very important in medicine is to be able to visualize how molecules look in space and how they potentially interact. As I earlier mentioned, such knowledge can be used in the production of new antibiotics from knowing the structure of the ribosome to design drugs, new antibiotics, that bind non-covalently, ie, not via chemical reactions. Also other potentially new drugs that can bind to various receptors on cells, that when bound can give desired effects, can be designed in this fashion.

Data from Wikipedia

Endocrinology

Endocrinology started as a discipline in Europe by Arnold Adolph Berthold (1803-1861). He found that castrated cockrels did not develop combs and wattles and did not exhibit male behavior. Replacing gonads to the abdominal cavity of the same animal or another castrated bird cured the animal. It would however take until 1935 for pure crystalline testosterone to be produced.

Castration of animals, however, probably dates back considerably in time. Intentional production of eunuchs was first recorded in the 21st century BCE by the Sumerians. Such individuals have over the millennia performed various services such as courtiers, treble singers, religious specialists, government officials, military commanders, and guardians of women in harems.

The modern view of the presence of a hormone that acts on a receptor on the remote target organ did not come automatically. Berthold guessed wrongly that a substance from the gonad conditioned the blood that then acted on the body. The Chinese were however purifying sex and pituitary hormones from human urine by 200 BCE and used this for medicinal purposes, although no information of eventual effects were provided in the source.

Diabetes mellitus was first described by the Persian, Avicenna, in 1025 by noting that urine tasted sweet and by the increased appetite and lowered sexual interest. Graves' disease, or hyperthyroidism, the combination of goitre and exophtalmus, was first reported in the 12th century by the physician Zayn al-Din al-Jurjani. Robert Graves, an Irish physician, described it in 1835 and Carl Adolph von Basedow described it independently in Germany 1840.

These diseases did however not provide direct clues of a missing hormone. Such a description for Diabetes mellitus came in 1889 when Josef von Mering (1849-1908) and Oskar Minkowski (1858-1931) at the University of Strasbourg surgically removed the pancreas of a dog and found that blood sugar increased followed by coma and eventually death.

In 1922, Frederick Banting (1891-1941) and Charles Best (1899-1978), and John Macleod (1876-1935) at the University of Toronto, found that if one homogenized the pancreas and injected this into the blood of a diabetic dog the symptoms were reversed. This was not a trivial problem because of the presence of protein digestive enzymes in the pancreas. Banting knew form the literature that by ligating the main exit duct of the pancreas, cells producing the digestive enzyme trypsin were digested but cells from the Islets of Langerhans, that now are known to produce insulin, were not digested. Thus given sufficient time he could extract the insulin from the remains of the tissue. The Islets of Langerhans were discovered in 1869 by the German pathologist Paul Langerhans and constitute about 1-2% of the tissue. They are distributed all through the tissue.

In 1922, Banting, Best and Collip used bovine insulin in patients. It then went commercial via Eli Lilly, Hoechst and Nordisk Insulinlaboratorium in Denmark in 1923. In 1978 came the recombinant human insulin from Genentech with the advantage of having the correct amino acid sequence that minimizes immune reactions to the drug. It was approved in 1982.

Banting and Macleod got the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine 1927 for their work on diabetes. Banting shared the money with Best, who did not get the prize. The hormone insulin was later amino acid sequenced by Frederick Sanger (born 1918 ) in 1955. This was a result that led to the general conclusion that proteins had specific sequences of amino acids that in turn led to the genetic code. Sanger got his first Nobel Prize in chemistry 1958. The second Nobel Prize in chemistry he received for his DNA sequencing method in 1980.

Data from Wikipedia

20091217

The Chemical Revolution

In 1789 Antoine Lavoisier published his Traité Élémentaire de Chimie, or Elements of Chemistry. It became the same for chemistry as Newton's Principia of 1687 had been for physics.

Lavoisier is famous for the Law of Conservation of Mass 1783, which is similar to the first law of thermodynamics, in that the mass of a closed system stays the same over time. As I pointed out in another post, he also found oxygen and used this finding to bring down the flogiston theory.

John Dalton (1746-1844), born into a Quaker family and initially prohibited by law as a dissenter to study at English Universities, laid down an atomic theory around 1800 with the following main points:

The atoms of a given element are different from those of any other element. The atoms of different elements can be distinguished from one another by their respective relative atomic weights.

All atoms of a given element are identical.

Atoms of one element can combine with atoms of other elements to form chemical compounds.

A chemical reaction only changes the way atoms are grouped together. The atom is indivisible.

Dalton did not like the simplified notation of Jöns Jacob Berzelius (1779-1848) that became popular. Berzelius became a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in Sweden 1808 and awakened it after a dormant romanticism period in Sweden. He participated with the discovery of several elements.

In 1828 Friedrich Wöhler (1800-1882), a German chemist, accidentally synthesized the organic compound urea for the first time. It was a landmark discovery since it linked chemistry with the biological world and disproved and undermined the Vital Force Theory. He also found several elements.

The creation of the periodic table of elements in 1869 is generally credited to a Russian by the name Dimitry Mendeleev (1834-1907). The table illustrated recurring trends in the properties of elements.

In 1896 Henri Becquerel (1852-1908) discovered that certain elements emit radiation on their own accord.

Ernest Rutherford (1871-1937), a New Zeeland chemist and physicist, became known as the "father of nuclear physics". He discovered in 1911 that the bulk of the matter in an atom is concentrated in a positive core with the electrons moving around it. An unstable configuration, because of the repelling charges.

Data from Wikipedia

Antibiotics

After bacteria was discovered and germ theory was accepted scientists turned their minds to the possibility of treating disease caused by bacteria and vira. If you want to kill bacteria selectively, ie, with low side effects, there has to be a principle for why this would be possible. A difference between bacteria and man.

Paul Erlich (1854-1915), a German medical scientist, and a student of Robert Koch, tested different dyes on human, animal and bacterial cells and found that he could find dyes that discriminated between these variants. He thus had an idea to work on to find selective toxins against bacteria. He thus started the field of synthetic chemotherapy in the late 1880s. In 1908 he developed Salvarsan together with his student Sahachiro Hata that was active against syphilis.

Enter industry, with Gerhard Domagk (1895-1964) a German pathologist and bacteriologist who got the Nobel Prize in physiology and medicine 1939 for the first commercially available antibiotic, a sulfonamide called Prontosil (Bayer). Domagk was forced by the Nazi regime to turn down the prize because the 1935 Nobel Prize, given to a Nazi critic Carl von Ossietsky, had angered them and they had outlawed German citizens to accept the prize.

Sulfonamides were revolutionary at the time but were replaced by the cell wall toxic penicillin that had better effect and fewer side effects. Bacterial cell walls are unique to bacteria. Penicillin opened the field for naturally occurring antibiotics. The antibacterial effect of Penicillum spp was first described by John Tyndall in England in 1875. Unfortunately, his finding went unnoticed until Alexander Fleming found penicillin in 1928. Again its therapeutic potential was not used until Ernst Chain and Howard Florey, pursuing another naturally occurring antibiotic called gramicidin, became interested in penicillin. Chain, Florey and Fleming shared the 1945 Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine.

Bacteria unfortunately have a tendency to become resistant against available antibiotics. Luckily this year's Nobel Prize in chemistry is awarded for the crystal structure of the ribosome. It so happens that the ribosomes of bacteria and those of humans differ significantly and that this has shown to be the basis for many of the naturally occurring antibiotics that bind and inhibit the bacterial ribosome and thus inhibits bacterial proteins synthesis which kills the bacteria. The detailed structure of the ribosome can now be used to develop a new generation of synthetic drugs that bind to new sites on the bacterial ribosome according to a lock-and-key model.

Data from Wikipedia

Microbiology

People have long had the feeling that there must be something that transmits disease from person to person and from the exterior from the experience during plagues and the like. One disease that was particularly deadly was small pox and people had tried to inoculate themselves with material from diseased persons for protection. There are stories from India, China and Asia Minor concerning vaccinations.

The name however, derives from latin for cow, "vacca", because of Edward Jenner's (1743-1829) discovery 1796 that a person that had had cow pox, a milder disease than small pox, might be immune to the real killer. It should be noted that people had been inoculated against the disease earlier and that a letter was submitted to the Royal Society of London in 1724 about the practice of inoculating with real small pox material, a rather more dangerous practice however. Small pox was deadly in 20-30% of cases and accounted for 8-20% of deaths in the 18th century.

Another clear cut evidence that something small was causing child birth fever that was highly deadly in the 19th century Europe was Ignaz Semmelweis' 1847 discovery that he could lower the deaths significantly with introducing hand hygiene in doctor's wards relative wards of midwives. His results where not taken seriously, however, before Louis Pasteur laid down the germ theory between 1860 and 1865. It is interesting that Antonie van Leeuwenhoek's discovery 1676 of bacteria from the mouth was not vigorously followed up and that microbiology did not develop during the 18th century rather than during the 19th century.

Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) is considered one of the three main founders of microbiology, the other two being Ferdinand Cohn (1828-1898) and Robert Koch (1843-1910). Pasteur was born in Dole situated in the Jura region of France in a family of a poor tanner. He gained degrees in Letters and Mathematical Science before entering an elite College, École Normale Supérieur. He became professor of chemistry at the University of Strasbourg 1848. He married Marie Laurent, the daughter of the University rector in 1849. In his early career as a chemist he for the first time described chirality.

However, Pasteur was to become most famous as a microbiologist by firmly establishing the germ theory together with Robert Koch and others. He managed to convince Europe about this theory which had profound effects on the possibility for people to protect themselves against disease. Pasteurization of liquids, especially milk, in 1862 was such an example. Pasteur demonstrated that fermentation was cause by microorganisms and that the theory of spontaneous generation was wrong, ie, fermentation came from the exterior to, for example, a broth solution.

Pasteur also produced the first weakened rabies vaccine from dried spinal cords of infected rabbits. A college of his, Émile Roux, a French physician, worked with the vaccine on only eleven dogs before it was tested on a 9 year old boy that had been bitten by a rabid dog 1885 and who would most probably have been killed by rabies if untreated. The vaccination, which in the case of rabies is therapeutic, worked and the boy's life was saved.

This and Jenner's cow pox vaccination were performed despite the fact that viruses where not yet known. The first known virus, tobacco mosaic virus, was to be discovered in 1892 by the Russian Dimitry Ivanovsky. He used a filter invented 1884 by the French microbiologist Charles Chamberland called the Chamberland-Pasteur filter. Viruses are too small to be seen by an ordinary microscope.

Louis Pasteur was a man of faith. He wrote, for example: "Happy the man who bears within him a Divinity, an ideal of beauty and obeys it, and ideal of art, and ideal of science, an ideal of country, an ideal of the virtues of the Gospel." He was puzzled by the failure of scientists to not recognize God's existence from their observations of the world around them.

Data from Wikipedia

The Origin of Life--The Cellular Perspective

Well, Darwin's evolution theory begins with the first cell on Earth. It does not explain how this first cell was created. It is necessary to be very humble before this question and don't explain fast progress in its explanation.

In Göteborgs-Posten one reads today that Nobel Prize laureate Jack Szostak, who got the prize for his work on telomers, now have switched to origin of life work. So has Ada Yonath, who got this years Nobel Prize in Chemistry for research on the ribosome, according to Dagens Nyheter some days ago.

They have apparently different approaches. Szostak work in recreating simple life forms that would mimic early cells not present any longer on Earth. Yonath work on the possibility that protein biosynthesis might have started as an RNA story all together. Ribosomes have a core that seems to be standing alone in its task of synthesizing proteins. RNA has also been shown to act as an enzyme, so called ribozymes. Yonath and her team is trying to recreate this active principle.

The question is if we don't need an Einstein of Biology for solving this question. A person that will offer a totally new perspective. Because solving the riddle of how Nature created the first cell seems impossible. It can be compared to sitting down in a comfortable chair and waiting for a Boeing 747 to materialize in front of you by itself. You would not want to be in a hurry.

It might be that our present mechanical paradigm for how cells and how our bodies work, that we acquired at the outset of the scientific revolution, somehow is not going to take us all the way. What is comfortable to know, however, is that since we are here it must have happened. There must be a way to explain the creation of life.

Perhaps someone will find out how a chemical "evolution" occurred. Finding a today unknown principle for how the components of a cell where created in Nature. Such a principle would reduce the problem of creating the first cell to one of waiting for the Boeing 747 to materialize from its parts. That would not take as long time as would waiting for both the construction and the production of its parts.

So who would you bet your money on for having the largest impact, Szostak the geneticist or Yonath the chemist? The above reasoning would lead to the origin of life being solved more likely in the chemical domain. However, there are problems in the evolution theory that are unsolved as well. We don't know, for example, how the human brain became so large, so fast, a few million years ago. When it started to think like a human, ie, when human life began.

20091216

Enzymes and Cellular Metabolism

Lavoisier (1743-1794) had exclaimed around 1780 that "la respiration est donc un combustion", ie, respiration is then a combustion. Which is to say that a fire is burning within all living things, a highly controlled fire. Life was beginning to look like chemical reactions in tight control.

Louis Pasteur (1822-1895), the French chemist and microbiologist, came up with a good clue when he was studying fermentation of sugar to alcohol by yeast:

"alcoholic fermentation is an act correlated with the life and organization of the yeast cells, not with the death or putrefaction of the cells".

He called his vital principle for "ferments".

The German physiologist Wilhelm Kühne (1837-1900) coined the word enzyme in 1878 and it is derived from the Greek word for "in leaven". The German Eduard Buchner at the University of Berlin in 1898 continued the yeast experiments and demonstrated that a yeast extract, that did not contain any living yeast cells, did ferment sugar for which he received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1907. An intense activity in biochemistry ensued in the early years of the 20th century. Enzymes, made from protein, catalyses chemical reactions in cells.

Sir Hans Adolf Krebs (1900-1981) was such a worker, a German born British physician and biochemist, that discovered the urea cycle and the citric acid cycle, or the Kreb's Cycle. He got the Nobel Prize for this in 1953. These cycles are a series of enzymatic reactions that are often feed-back controlled of products and substrates.

The citric acid cycle produces energy from glucose, a six carbon sugar, when coupled to the so called glycolysis, or Embden-Meyerhof pathway, first discovered from Gustav Embden (1874-1933) and Otto Meyerhof (1884-1951).

Thus energy in the form of so called ATP, adenosine-tri-phosphate, is produced from sugar via its "combustion", yes oxygen is consumed, via the glycolysis, citric acid cycle and the so called oxidative phosphorylation. This is the internal fire. ATP is then used by all kinds of reactions in the cell for life support.

In the early 1940s the link between the fermentation of sugars and the formation of ATP was finally conclusively proven by the Danish physician Herman Kalckar (1908-1991). The ATP generating mechanism was solved by the so called Chemiosmotic Theory from 1961, the ATP synthase is driven by a proton gradient as suggested by Peter D. Mitchell (1920-1992). Highly controversial at first, he got the Nobel prize for it in 1978, almost 200 years after Lavoisier made his exclamation.

Data from Wikipedia

The DNA Double Helix and above all the Genetic Code

Starting in 1953 the paradigm shifts from function-to-structure to structure-to-function. People had been observing inheritance and found that there must be a defining principle in the structure of a gene. Now the hope was turned to what might appear when the structure of DNA was elucidated at the molecular level.

James Watson (born 1928), Francis Crick (1916-2004) and Maurice Wilkins (1916-2004) received the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine for "their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material". Rosalind Franklin should also be mentioned. The structure of DNA had been solved with the help of X-ray crystallography. It consisted of a double helix of two intertwined strands complementary to each other, a positive and a negative.

It was earlier known, 1950, that the four nucleotides in DNA was not present in stable proportions, they varied, but that adenine seemed to be present in the same amount as thymine and guanine in the same amount as cytosine by the work of Erwin Chargaff (1905-2002). These pairs form through space bonds in the double helix. It could be concluded now that DNA carries a specific sequence of base pairs. Information must reside in this sequence thus explaining the heredity principle of a gene, a sequence of base-pairs in a double helix.

It now became clear that during a cell division the two strands split and served as a precursor for the next double helix to form. In 1941 it was demonstrated that genes code for proteins. It now remained to explain how the information of the protein was encoded in the DNA.

It could be concluded that the "codon", ie, the smallest unit in the code, should be a triplet since one needs at least three bases to form all used 20 amino acids from four bases (4^3). The first elucidation of a codon was performed by Marshall Nirenberg and Heinrich J. Matthaei in 1961 at the NIH in Bethesda. It was possible to use a cell free extract to produce phenylalanine from a poly-uracil strand of RNA, since DNA forms via RNA. The codon for phenylalanine was then UUU. Similar techniques were used to elucidate all 64 codons.

Needless to say, these results yielded a revolution of scientific activity called molecular biology and resulted in the actual sequencing of the complete human DNA in 2001.

Data from Wikipedia

The Chromosome Theory of Inheritance

This was a unifying theory of genetics that in 1902 stated that chromosomes were the carriers of the genetic material, the genes of Mendel. It also stated that chromsomes were linear and that genes were distributed along them. It was proposed independently by Theodore Boveri (1862-1915) and Walter Sutton (1877-1916).

At this time many researchers were working in genetics as Mendel's data had just resurfaced and cellular biology was making headway in the study of chromosomes in both mitosis and meiosis. Mitosis is when a cell divides in two and thus separates its pairs of chromosomes. Meiosis is when germ cells form via division and the cell stays with the half number of chromosomes ready for fertilization. It was therefore possible for both Boveri and Sutton to come up with and publish correct theories without hard core proof. Truth was in the air.

Boveri had some own data at his disposal though. He showed that sea urchins had to have all chromosomes to develop embryologically. Sutton's work with grasshoppers showed that chromosomes occur in matched pairs of maternal and paternal chromosomes which separate during meiosis.

However, Thomas Hunt Morgan (1866-1945) is credited for furnishing hard core proof in 1910 in the form of genetic linkage studies in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, a species that he made into the pet animal of geneticists. He was the first scientist to get the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine in genetics in 1933 "for his discoveries concerning the role played by chromosomes in heridity".

Morgan received his PhD from Johns Hopkins University in 1890 and studied embryology at his tenure in Bryn Mawr. Following the rediscovery of Mendelian genetics in 1900, Morgan began studies on mutations of fruit flies. At Columbia University he was then able to prove that genes are on chromosomes. He had thus, among other things, opened the quest for the biochemical identity of the gene.

As I earlier noted Miescher had found DNA 1869, a weak acid in extracts from nuclei of white blood cells, but this finding had not caught enough attention because it was not functionally defined. Because it was not until 1944 that Oswald Avery, Colin McLeod and Maclyn McCarty isolated DNA, then called the transforming principle.

Data from Wikipedia

A Note on the History of Science in Wikipedia

History of genetics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: "'Animals engage in a struggle for existence; for resources, to avoid being eaten and to breed. Environmental factors influence organisms to develop new characteristics to ensure survival, thus transforming into new species. Animals that survive to breed can pass on their successful characteristics to offspring.'"

I have found that conventional wisdoms in the West on who did what first often is contradicted in Wikipedia of notes that introduce Arab, Hindu or Chinese discoveries that predate them.

The above citation is what can be read in the Book of Animals by the Afro-Arab writer Al-Jahiz from the 9th century of the common era. This would be the first published evidence for the struggle for existence and predates Darwin's book On the Origin of Species from 1859.

What is important then seems to be the context in which an idea is fostered. Breeding of animals is for example clearly described in the Bible, which would predate Al-Jahiz, but did not have a scientific context to develop in.

20091215

Embryology?

Aristotle (384-322BCE) who did work on developing chick eggs, described the two principally possible routes to development, preformation and epigenesis. Aristotle favored epigenesis, ie, when the embryo starts as an undifferentiated mass and parts are added in a specified order. Preformation was however also became popular and stated that either the male or the female provided a miniature individual.

Aristotle, who was rather patriarchal, thought that the semen provided the "form" or the soul and that the first part that developed was the heart.

William Harvey (1578-1657) began working on embryology inspired by his teacher Girolamo Fabrici (c:a1533-1619) and set out to confirm Aristotle's epigenetic theory. His book On the Generation of Animals was published 1651 and contained data on deers and chicks. He was not able to see any embryo in a deer until after six or seven weeks after mating. He did confirm epigenesis but many of his followers turned to preformation.

Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723) who improved the microscope and first saw microorganisms indeed discovered spermatozoa in 1677.

In 1759 Friedrich Wolff (1733-1794) published a celebrated treatise Theory of Generation. He claimed that organs were not preformed but were added step by step. The mammalian egg was discovered during the 19th century, 1826, by Karl Ernst von Baer (1792-1876). Together with Heinz Christian Pander and based on Wolff's work he described the three germ layers ectoderm, entoderm and mesoderm. The human egg was not discovered until 1928.

Von Baer was born in present day Estonia and educated in Tallin and at the University of Tartu. He also studied in Berlin and Vienna. In 1817 he became professor in Köningsberg University and full professor of zoology in 1821 and in anatomy in 1826. In old age he unfortunately diligently argued against Darwin's evolutionary theory.

In the second half of the 19th century microscopes allowed cell nuclei to be visualized and it was seen that nuclei from sperm and egg fused after fertilization. This ended the idea that sperm stimulated the egg by physical or chemical means. It was a German botanist Nathanael Pringsheim (1823-1894) who was among the first to study sperm egg fusion in freshwater algae in the 1850s. At about the same time DNA was discovered in 1869 by Swiss biochemist Friedrich Miescher (1844-1895) but the finding was dismissed as unimportant. Chromosomes were also found. All this time Gregor Mendel's results from 1865 lay dormant.

Data from Wikipedia and from here and here.

Gravitation?

So, for a while people were content to believe that planets circled the Sun in elliptic orbits. However, there was more to learn for the diligent observer. By the end of the 19th century, it was known that the orbit of the planet Mercury could not be accounted for by Newton's theory of gravitation.

This issue was solved in 1915 by Albert Einstein (1879-1955) and his General Theory of Relativity. According to this theory, gravitational attraction between two masses warps the space time. Space time is difficult to perceive since it represents the three Euclidean dimensions plus the dimension of time.

In relativistic contexts time cannot be separated from the three dimensions because the rate at which time passes depends on the velocity of the object relative the speed of light and also on the possible presence of strong gravitational fields that slows the passage of time down.

General Relativity predicts and explain many observed phenomena. It provides the foundation for the understanding of so called "black holes" in space. General Relativity is also part of the framework of the Big Bang cosmology.

General Relativity theory does not, however, provide solutions for all questions either. It can for example not be reconciled with the laws quantum physics to produce a complete and self-consistent theory of quantum gravity. Relativity theory deals with the large scales whereas quantum mechanics deals with the atomic world.

I have included this study of gravitation for illustrating how new questions appear all the time as one move along in science. So far, there is no end in sight. This should make us restless and inquisitive.

Data from Wikipedia

Light--an explanation

James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879), a Scottish physicist, achieved the "second great unification in physics". He synthesized all previous unrelated observations, experiments and equations of electricity, magnetism and even optics into a consistent electromagnetic theory.

Maxwell demonstrated that electric and magnetic fields travel through space in the form of waves and at a constant speed of light. He thought this might not be a coincidence and in 1864 he wrote A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field where he first proposed that light was in fact undulations in the same medium that is the cause of magnetic and electric phenomena.

Maxwell is considered the 19th century physicist with the greatest influence on 20th century science. Both particle and wave theories about light had been proposed earlier. Maxwell was inspired by the work of Michael Faraday (1791-1867) who had shown that a magnetic field rotates the plane of polarized light.

Soon after Maxwells publication of 1864, Heinrich Hertz (1857-1894) confirmed the theory experimentally and showed that electromagnetic radio waves behaved like light. This opened the field for today's communication revolution.

In 1853 Maxwell undertook an evangelical conversion having attended Presbyterian and Episcopal services as a youngster. Evangelicals emphasize being born again, have a high regard for Biblical authority and put an emphasis on the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. As an evangelical he held an anti-positivist position.

Maxwell started out at the University of Edinburgh between 1847-50. He then studied at Cambridge University between 1850-56 after which he got a position at Aberdeen University. The most productive years of his life, after barely having survived a bout of smallpox in 1860, he spent at Kings College, London between 1860-65. He unfortunately died young at 48 in abdominal cancer. He was survived by his wife Katherine whom he married in 1859.

Data from Wikipedia

20091214

Electromagnetism

After Alessandro Volta (1745-1827) in this highly unlikely fashion with Galvani's bioassay had gotten his clue as to how to build the first battery, a device was now in place for discovering one of the now known four forces in nature--electromagnetism.

It did not take that long time. In 1820 Hans Christian Oersted (1777-1851), a Danish physicist and chemist, was preparing for a lecture when he found by chance that the magnetic needle on a compass moved when he turned on and off a battery. He had discovered that there is a circular magnetic field around a conductor carrying a current.

Apparently mariners had known that compass needles moved when there was lightning in storms and an Italian legal scholar, Gian Dominico Romagnosi, had discovered something similar and published it in a local Italian newspaper in 1802. However, Oersted was the person that made it a scientific issue. He is credited by giving name for the CGS unit for magnetic H-field strength Oersted (Oe).

Oersted had during his early years met with Johan Wilhelm Ritter, a German physicist who thought there was some connection between magnetism and electricity. He was also influenced by Kantian ideas concerning the possible existence of deep relations between natural phenomena. Oersted became a professor at the University of Copenhagen in 1806.

A leader of the so called Danish golden age, Oersted was a friend of Hans Christian Andersen and a brother of politician and jurist Anders Sandoee Oersted who served as prime minister of Denmark 1853-54.

An intense activity of research was initiated by the finding and André-Marie Ampère (1775-1836), a French physicist and mathematician, that set up a single mathematical form to represent the magnetic forces between current carrying conductors. The SI unit ampère (A) used to be defined as the current that gives a certain force, 2 dynes, between two parallel wires distanced 1 cm apart.

Data from Wikipedia

20091212

Spiritual Energy and Astrology?

For those of you that thought Astrology had disappeared since Johannes Kepler there is new information from the Pew Forum of an increase in people that believe in a spiritual energy in physical things like mountains, trees and crystals and in astrology (the position of stars and planets can affect a person's life) in the US. As much as 25% of people that have a conventional religion believe in such a fashion. Such pheomena need not be supernatural.

I find this very interesting because of my own religion Religious Humanism which is a kind of pantheism. The poll claims that more and more younger persons believe in this fashion so it is a trend that is coming in in this way. If the whole Universe is God, it might indeed have an affect on you that is unknown today.

Perhaps it is a sign of people respecting the unknown more than earlier. Respect for the power of science as a means of finding out more. That there is indeed more to find out.

It is otherwise conceivable that people might start to think that we will reach a new plateau of learning and like the Greeks be followed by a stage in history where not much new findings became known. I have heard from distinguished scientists that we just have this or that left to explain and I find this very odd.

The poll also describes that more and more people attend services of other denominations and even other faiths. This might mean that faith is becoming more of a private issue for the individual and that the congregation is losing influence or is substituted with other organizational forms.

If the development is the same in Europe, this would mean that we would get less and less problems from the religious differences of people.

Thanks to Charles M. Blow at the New York Times for the reference to the poll.