The relation between physiology and physics and chemistry suggests
similar considerations; it is necessary to make some preliminary
remarks in explanation of this relation, because we often meet with
the view, especially in modern times, that vegetable physiology is
virtually only applied physics and chemistry, as though the phenomena
of life could be simply deduced from physical and chemical doctrines.
This might perhaps be possible, if physics and chemistry had no further
questions to solve in their own domains; but in fact both are still
as far distant from this goal, as physiology is from hers. It is true
indeed, that modern vegetable physiology would be impossible without
modern physics and chemistry, as the earlier science had to rely on
the aid of the physics and chemistry of the day, when she was engaged
in forming a conception of ascertained vital phenomena as operations
of known causes. But it is equally true, that no advance which physics
and chemistry have made up to the present time would have produced
any system of vegetable physiology, even with the aid of phytotomy;
history shows that a series of vital phenomena in plants had been
recognised in the 17th and 18th century, at a time when physics and
chemistry had little to offer, and were in no condition to supply
explanations of any kind to the physiologist. The true foundation of
all physiology is the direct observation of vital phenomena; these must
be evoked or altered by experiment, and studied in their connection,
before they can be referred to physical and chemical causes. It is
therefore quite possible for vegetable physiology to have reached a
certain stage of development without any explanation of the phenomena
of vegetation from physics or chemistry, and even in spite of erroneous
theories on those subjects. What Malpighi, Hales, and to some extent
Du Hamel produced, was really vegetable physiology, and of a better
kind than some moderns are inclined to believe; and their knowledge was
derived from observations on living plants, and not from the chemical
and physical theories of their time. The discovery even of important
facts, for example, that green leaves only can form the food suitable
to effect the growth and formation of new organs, was made a hundred
years before that of the decomposition of carbon dioxide by the green
parts of plants, at a time indeed when chemistry knew nothing of carbon
dioxide and oxygen. A whole series of physiological discoveries might
be mentioned, which were distinctly opposed to chemical and physical
theories, and even served to correct them. We may give as examples,
the establishment of the facts that roots absorb water and the
materials of food without giving up anything in return, which seemed
quite unintelligible on the earlier physical theory of the endosmotic
equivalent; and that the so-called chemical rays of the physicists are
of subordinate importance in vegetable assimilation, while contrary
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