Classics of modern science : $b (Copernicus to Pasteur)
History
Classics of modern science : $b (Copernicus to Pasteur)
Science; Science -- History
We see then how all the plastic phenomena in the cells may be compared
with phenomena which, in accordance with the ordinary laws of
crystallization, would probably appear if bodies capable of imbibition
could be brought to crystallize. So long as the object of such a
comparison were merely to render the representation of the process
by which cells are formed more clear, there could not be much urged
against it; it involves nothing hypothetical, since it contains no
explanation; no assertion is made that the fundamental power of the
cells really has something in common with the power by which crystals
are formed. We have, indeed, compared the growth of organisms with
crystallization, in so far as in both cases solid substances are
deposited from a fluid, but we have not therefore asserted the
identity of the fundamental powers. So far we have not advanced beyond
the data, beyond a certain simple mode of representing the facts.
The question is, however, whether the exact accordance of the phenomena
would not authorize us to go further. If the formation and growth of
the elementary particles of organisms have nothing more in common with
crystallization than merely the deposition of solid substances from out
of a fluid, there is certainly no reason for assuming any more intimate
connexion of the two processes. But we have seen, first, that the laws
which regulate the deposition of the molecules forming the elementary
particles of organisms are the same for all elementary parts; that
there is a common principle in the development of all elementary parts,
namely, that of the formation of cells; it was then shown that the
power which induced the attachment of the new molecules did not reside
in the entire organism, but in the separated elementary particles (this
we called the plastic power of the cells); lastly, it was shown that
the laws, according to which the new molecules combine to form cells,
are (so far as our incomplete knowledge of the laws of crystallization
admits of our anticipating their probability) the same as those by
which substances capable of imbibition would crystallize. Now the
cells do, in fact, consist only of material capable of imbibition;
should we not then be justified in putting forth the proposition, that
the formation of the elementary parts of organisms is nothing but a
crystallization of substance, capable of imbibition, and the organism
nothing but an aggregate of such crystals capable of imbibition?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account