118 SESSION I. DISCUSSION 



To demand that a living system should mutate is a purely linguistic restriction and it 

 leads to absurdities. Only a tiny fraction of the organisms that are universally accepted 

 as living have been shown to mutate though many of them probably do. But some very 

 ancient species do not seem to mutate very much. 



It is important to distinguish more clearly than Horowitz does between at least three 

 types of multiplication: Multiplication in many-celled organisms where the process can 

 fail, as in worker bees and mules, although the organism is obviously still alive. Multi- 

 plication in single cells of an organism, or in single-celled organisms, which can be absent 

 as in the brain, although the tissue is obviously still ahve. And the multiplication of cell 

 components such as genes, microsomes and mitochondria. Here there is absolutely no 

 reason to postulate any form of autosynthesis it is probably the system that makes 

 another gene rather than the gene that makes a copy of itself. If we accept all these different 

 types of reproduction, it is unhkely that the ability to reproduce could be used as an 

 adequate criterion of life. 



A. E. Braunshteïn (U.S.S.R.): 



Prof. Horowitz has put forward the view that single molecules might be alive. He 

 refers to the molecules of deoxyribonucleic acid of genes, which have the power of self- 

 reproduction and self-development (variability). In this sense viral nucleic acids could 

 also be said to be alive. 



Attacking the viewpoint that a multimolecular system is necessary for the development 

 of qualities of life, at the end of his paper Prof. Horowitz ingeniously defined the minimal 

 living unit as 'a living molecule in a multimolecular envirorunent'. 



However, if this definition is to describe the position accurately otie word must be 

 added, so that it reads ' ... in a multimolecular living environment'. By doing this, 

 however, the idea contained in Prof. Horowitz's definition is negated. 



A. Kravtsov(U.S,S.R.): 



The Non-organic Origin of Methane and Its Homologues in Igneous 



Formations 



Many years of investigation by the Department of Combustible Minerals at the 

 Moscow Geological-Prospecting Institute have enabled us to draw the conclusion that 

 the fuel gases, hydrogen, methane and its homologues, which are contained in the forma- 

 tions of the Khibinsk alkaline massif, were formed within those formations. 



Methane and the heavier hydrocarbons and hydrogen can be produced as a result of 

 the formation of igneous rocks from magma. Furthermore, ow ing to the action of radio- 

 active radiations, such gases as H2, O2, CH4, CO and CO2 may be formed. 



We have shown that Haand CO were the starting materials for the formation of hydro- 

 carbons, the reaction being, for example, as follows: 4CO I 2H2O -^ CH-j + 3CO2 (the 

 water is present as vapour). Hydrogen is formed by the action of aqueous vapours on the 

 iron-containing silicates which enter into the composition of rock formations, at tempera- 

 tures of 600-800 " C, according to the equation 2l<"eO I- H2O - Fe20;t + Ho. 



Various hydrocarbons are formed by the action of hydrogen on CO or CO2. 



The inflammable gaseous components referred to arc formed at great depths and then 

 migrate (are translocated) to the surface. We suppose that tliis whole process occurs 

 according to the following scheme: At great depths there is migration (translocation) 

 of the separate gaseous components (H2, CO, CO2, etc.). The hydrogen, being the most 

 easily diffusible gas, reaches the surface more quickly than the rest. The diffusion of 

 hydrogen occurs, not only through crevices, but also through the crystalline lattices ofl 



