380 SESSION I. DISCUSSION 



predominate markedly over all other forms. The RNA corresponding to fibroin should 

 contain many individual bases arranged in such a way as to correspond with the repetitive 

 peptide Ala. Gly. Ala. Gly of the protein. 



Such a frequency encountered sequences of bases in the RNA could be associated with 

 the peptide Ala. Gly. Ala. Gly of the protein. 



Thus there is a Rosetta stone. It would be possible to decipher the RNA symbols for 

 two amino acids, alanine and glycine, and also that for the tetrapeptide Ala. Gly. Ala. Gly. 



REFERENCES 



1. K. G. lOFFE, Biokhimiya, 19, (4), 1954. 



2. F. Lucas, J. T. B. Shaw & S. G. Smith, Biochem.J., 66, 468, 1957. 



N. I. NuzHDiN (U.S.S.R.): 



I. The Qualitative Specificity of Living Material 



The first question with which I want to deal is that of the quaUtative specificity of 

 Uving material. It seems to me that in solving the problem of the origin of life on the 

 Earth, one must first answer the question: What is this hfe which distinguishes living 

 from non-living material ? Otherwise it is hard to look for a solution if there is no clear 

 idea of what one is solving. There is no paradox here, for in the collection of published 

 communications there is no definition of the concept of life or the concept of hving 

 material. In many of the papers this question is touched upon but is relegated to the 

 category of 'proscribed questions', to which it is difficult or impossible to find an answer. 



Furthermore, the necessity for such an answer is dictated by the ever-growing tendency 

 to ignore the qualitative specificity of Uving material which distinguishes it from non- 

 hving material. This tendency has come into biology from physics. Having made such a 

 tremendous jump forwards during the past decades, in the understanding of the structvu-e 

 of matter and in the search for means of directing intranuclear processes, many physicists 

 consider the possibility of a more complete explanation of biological phenomena solely 

 in terms of their understanding of the laws of physics and chemistry. This tendency, 

 which began with Schroedinger's pronouncement, has, unfortunately become more and 

 more extensive. In the meanwhile it is forgotten that Schroedinger himself, having taken 

 up the position that there is a purely physical explanation of life, was unable to maintain 

 it and was forced to appeal to 'divine quantum mechanics'. 



Unfortunately, many biologists accept this tendency uncritically and, following the 

 physicists, ignore the quahtative peculiarities of Hving material and expect to find the 

 solution exclusively in terms of the processes of physics and chemistry. This tendency 

 can also be perceived in a number of the communications presented at our conference. 

 For example, I cannot agree in the slightest with Prof. Brächet, who maintains that 'the 

 definition of the idea of life has a quantitative value rather than being a qualitative con- 

 cept.' (p. 361). 



There can surely be no need to substantiate the incorrectness of this formulation. If 

 hving material did not possess qualitative properties which do not characterize non-Uving 

 ones, then, probably there would be no necessity to call a conference on the problem of 

 the origin of life for there would be no hving material as a pecuhar specific form of the 

 motion of matter. 



I have dealt with this important problem because although it is put correctly in A. I. 

 Oparin's monograph The Origin of Life on the Earth it has not received sufficient attention 

 in the communications put before this conference. 



2. The Origin of Life and the Problem of the Material Carriers of Heredity 



The second problem with which I shall deal is that of the material basis of heredity. 

 In his well-known article defending previously held hypotheses, MuUer, in 1950, stated 

 that the problem of the origin of hfe could only be solved on the basis of the concept of 



