26^ 



NATURE. 



[October 31, 19 12 



chemistry of the protein compounds, on the one hand, 

 and the metabolism and modes of hfe of the simplest 

 living things on the other. He referred to the ex- 

 treme view, represented by Arrhenius, that life had 

 had no origin in finite time, but was coeval with 

 matter and energy, and then turned to consider the 

 view, more prevalent among biologists, that living 

 matter had arisen at some time from that which was 

 not living. If life arose under conditions not now 

 ■existing in nature, there seemed to be no reason why 

 such conditions could not be reproduced artificially, 

 hvA if the conditions under which life arose dc novo 

 were not different from those existing there seemed 

 to be no reason why it should not do so again. Why, 

 then, did we not see new forms of life appearing on 

 I he earth? Prof. Minchin doubted if the simplest 

 forms of life were yet known, or even if we could 

 recognise them or be aware of their existence at their 

 first appearance. The first origin of life involved a 

 synthesis of protein substances in nature by some 

 process as yet totally unknown. For light on these 

 problems we must look to the future advance of know- 

 ledge, and especially of chemical science. In the pre- 

 sent state of our knowledge, the attitude towards the 

 problem of the origin of life could only be one of 

 ■expectancy for more light in the future ; at present it 

 was not possible to frame a hypothesis which could 

 have any greater value than that of a pious belief. 



Mr. Harold Wager said that the more one saw of 

 the lower forms of life, the more remote seemed to 

 become the possibility of conceiving how life arose. 

 He opposed Prof. Minchin 's view that chromatin was 

 the primary living substance, and in support of his 

 contention referred to the structure of the blue-green 

 algae. These, he said, were interesting as the only 

 organisms which would survive in very hot water (e.g. 

 hot springs), and had been regarded as probably the 

 last remnants of the early vegetation of this earth. 

 Each cell of those algEe contained an irregular network 

 «f chromatin without a limiting membrane, and not 

 ■clearly differentiated from the surrounding protoplasm, 

 i.e. the chromatin more nearly resembled the cyto- 

 plasm in these than in higher organisms. Further, in 

 certain bacteria there were granules of nuclear matter, 

 but in others there were none, the organism consist- 

 ing of cytoplasm only. These facts impelled Mr. 

 AVager to regard the cytoplasm, and not the chromatin, 

 as the fundamental life-substance. 



Prof. F. W. Keeble thought that, having regard to 

 the highly complex interacting phenomena presented 

 bv living organisms, it was improbable that the 

 creation of "synthetic life" would be seen in the near 

 future. 



Prof. K. B. Macallum believed, with Tyndall, that 

 matter was endowed with the potentiality of life, and 

 to that extent he was in sympathy with the view of 

 Arrhenius. No doubt the organism which first came 

 into existence was ultra-microscopic, and comprised 

 tut a few molecules. The conditions necessary to 

 produce such organisms do not now hold, but at one 

 time the earth's surface was a vast laboratory in 

 which syntheses of various kinds took place, and a 

 favourable conjunction of forces produced the com- 

 bination of a number of molecules in which life was. 

 This organism would not be a cell, with cytoplasm 

 and nucleus, but an ultra-microscopic body. The cell 

 was as far removed from such a minute body as man 

 is from the cell. 



Prof. Benjamin Moore said that vitalism was a 

 purely static view of life, and was untenable. Struc- 

 ture was .important, but something more than structure 

 was necessary for life ; dynamic energy — energy, 

 motion, change — was essential, and was manifest in 

 all living organisms. To suppose that life began as 



blue-green algse, or some such complex organism, 

 was nonsensical. It was necessary to begin with the 

 formation of organic molecules from the inorganic, 

 then to build up more complex molecules (in which 

 all the atomic combinations were saturated), and 

 group them into colloidal substances. The colloids, 

 which are large aggregates of molecules, show the 

 properties of dawning life, for in presence of sunlight 

 colloids begin to form organic bodies, but it would be 

 necessary to add to the colloid an energy-transformer. 

 He regarded the problem under discussion not as 

 metaphysical, but experimental. 



Prof. J. S. Macdonald regarded the problem from 

 the point of view of a physiologist, and said he could 

 not accept the statement that chromatin was the most 

 important portion of the living cell, for in muscle the 

 contractile mechanism is located in the cytoplasm, the 

 functional activity of a red blood-cell is resident in 

 the cytoplasm, and the main functions of the central 

 nervous system are also associated with the cytoplasm. 

 He held, therefore, that the nuclear materia! was not 

 concerned in carrying out the main functions of the 

 body. 



Prof. Marcus Hartog referred to the power of multi- 

 plication of organisms, and said ho could see no 

 reasonable probability of our being able to create life 

 afresh, or, indeed, to understand how it came into 

 existence. 



Prof. Patrick Geddes put forward a plea for the 

 psychological aspect of the inquiry, for he held that 

 even the simplest organisms presented a dawn of 

 psvcho-biosis, and that life was not merely a question 

 of matter (e.g. chromatin). 



Dr. J. S. Haldane said he belonged to a school 

 which believed life could not be explained, or inter- 

 preted finally, by the known chemico-physical proper- 

 ties of matter, and he could not imagine any labora- 

 tory experiment, according to our present knowledge, 

 which would bring us anv nearer to the origin of life. 



The Rev. T. R. R. Stebbing pointed out that for 

 years past many evolutionists had recognised, as a 

 necessity of the theory, that organic life must have 

 been derived from what was inorganic, and that it 

 was reassuring to find that this a priori speculation 

 could be supported on grounds of scientific probability. 



Dr. P. Chalmers Mitchell stated that in his opinion 

 there was not a single property of protoplasm which 

 had not its exact physical parallel, nor a single 

 quality of life which would show there existed in life 

 something which was not to be found in matter. 



J. H. A. 



THE SCIENTIFIC THEORY AND OUT- 

 STANDING PROBLEMS OF WIRELESS 

 TELEGRAPHY.1- 



IN opening a discussion on the present state of the 

 theory of wireless telegraphy and its outstanding 

 problems, I am, to some extent, embarrassed by the 

 wide field which presents itself for consideration. 



I venture to think that we may best take advantage 

 of the simultaneous presence here of physicists, mathe- 

 maticians, engineers, and electricians, if we endeavour 

 to focus attention, in the first place, on some of the 

 chief scientific problems which are yet unsolved in 

 connection with it. 



Perhaps a word of explanation may be offered on 

 the reason for giving prominence to the scientific 

 aspect of the subjoct rather than its practical achieve- 

 ments. The achievements loom large in the public 

 eye, and are astonishing to the uninitiated, but experts 

 in radio-telegraphy are well aware that many of the 



1 Introdurtorv rem.-irk'i Ky Prof. I. A. Flemine, T.R.S., .it a joint dU- 

 cussion by Sections A nnd G of the British .Association at Dundee. 



NO. 



2244, VOL. qo] 



