Life
2012
,
2
2
The panspermia hypothesis has many forms, some of which suggest that life started elsewherein the universe and arrived on Earth by cometary, meteoric, or planetary delivery [2,3]. The problemwith this group of models is that it does not, in an empirically complete and consistent manner, explainthe molecular origin of the first cell and hence avoids the issue in need of solution. The primordialsoup hypothesis, also know as the Oparin-Haldane model, posits that during the early evolution of theEarth, a reducing atmosphere provided the correct environment for the formation of basic organiccompounds [4,5]. Though the soup model has matured in recent decades, it has difficulty explainingthe exact conditions of the early Earth atmosphere and the manner and order of emergence of polymeric systems. In the iron-sulfur world theory, primitive life is assumed to have started at deep-seahydrothermal vents as a mineral base; redox reactions provided the chemical energy to drive theemergence of cellular life [6]. However, this model does not explain the origin of genetic information,membrane systems, or the complexification or diversity of cellular structure. Finally, the RNA(ribonucleic acid) world hypothesis posits that ribonucleotide-based genetic systems evolved prior to protein and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). This hypothesis does not fit well with the central dogmaand is unable to resolve precisely how the translation apparatus, genetic code, and biometabolic pathways evolved [7-9]. In short, no consensus model for life has emerged. Now, therefore, to know what life is and how life works, scientists need a scientifically accuratetheory. The aim of a scientific theory is to construct a formal structure—in which the natural world is being modeled—to explain, predict, and control systems, events, and objects. Insofar as the physical,chemical, and biological sciences are
true
, physical reality and life itself thus reflexively model such ascientific theory; tautologically, the natural world subsumes said theory. Several investigators havedetailed what would be required of a unifying bioscientific theory [1,10-24]. The correct theory would be expected to not only explain how the living cell works
now
, but also to provide insight into theevolution of life on Earth.In the theory proposed herein, I use the heterodox yet simple
gyre
—a spiral, vortex, whorl, or similar circular pattern—as a core model for understanding life. Because many elements of the gyremodel (
gyromodel
) are alien, I introduce neologisms and important terms in bold italics to identifythem; a theoretical lexicon is presented in Table 1. The central idea of this theory is that all physicalreality, stretching from the so-called inanimate into the animate realm and from micro- to meso- tomacrocosmic scales, can be interpreted and modeled as manifestations of a single geometric entity, thegyre. This entity is attractive because it has life-like characteristics, undergoes morphogenesis, and isresponsive to environmental conditions. The gyromodel depicts the spatiotemporal behavior and properties of elementary particles, celestial bodies, atoms, chemicals, molecules, and systems asquantized packets of information, energy, and/or matter that oscillate between excited and groundstates around a singularity. The singularity, in turn, modulates these states by alternating attractive andrepulsive forces. The singularity itself is modeled as a gyre, thus evincing a thermodynamic, fractal,and nested organization of the gyromodel. In fitting the scientific evidence from quantum gravity tocell division, this theory arrives at an understanding of life that questions traditional beliefsand definitions.
Add a Comment