"The constant
synthesis then of specific material from simple compounds of a
non-specific character is the chief feature by which living matter differs
from non-living matter.... This problem of synthesis leads to the
assumption of immortality of the living cell, since there is no _a priori_
reason why this synthesis should ever come to a standstill of its own
accord as long as enough food is available and the proper outside physical
conditions are guaranteed.... The idea that the body cells are naturally
immortal and die only if exposed to extreme injuries such as prolonged
lack of oxygen or too high a temperature helps to make one problem more
intelligible. The medical student, who for the first time realizes that
life depends upon that one organ, the heart, doing its duty incessantly
for the seventy years or so allotted to man, is amazed at the
precariousness of our existence. It seems indeed uncanny that so delicate
a mechanism should function so regularly for so many years. The mysticism
connected with this and other phenomena of adaptation would disappear if
we would be certain that all cells are really immortal and that the fact
which demands an explanation is not the continued activity but the
cessation of activity in death. Thus we see that the idea of the
immortality of the body cell if it can be generalized may be destined to
become one of the main supports for a complete physico-chemical analysis
of life phenomena since it makes the durability of organisms
intelligible...." (_The Organism as a Whole_, by Jacques Loeb.)
The outlook for those who live and profess selfish, greedy, "space-binding
animal standards" is not very promising as disclosed by the "spiral," but
unhappily we cannot help them; only time-binding--only fulfilling the
natural laws for humans--can give them the full benefit of their natural
capacities by which they will be able to raise themselves above animals
and their fate.
The results obtained in scientific biological researches are growing very
rapidly and every advance in their knowledge proves this theory to be
true. If they differ in a few instances it is not because the principles
of this theory are wrong, but because they intermix dimensions and use
words not sufficiently defined which always results in confusion and the
checking of the progress of science.
Most of the problems touched upon in this appendix from a mathematical
point of view are based upon laboratory facts. We h
|