Talk:Protoplasm

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Biology Portal Protoplasm is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. See comments.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

What is a protoplasm?

      Protoplasm:

The viscid, translucent, polyphasic colloid with water as the continuous phase that makes up the essential material of all plant and animal cells. It is composed mainly of nucleic acids, proteins, lipids, carbohydrates, and inorganic salts. The protoplasm surrounding the nucleus is known as the cytoplasm and that composing the nucleus is the nucleoplasm

[edit] what is protoplasm??

'''I'm wondering what protoplasm is for my science project!?!

Please reply back!!Not!!Italic text'''''

[edit] Removed a section on 19th century views of protoplasm.

I removed the following, which was first added by Diza almost two years ago:

Charles Darwin and his 19th century contemporaries viewed "protoplasm" as the sole content of a cell; in other words, cells were nothing but simple blobs composed of "proto-plasm," a substance that had the ability of self replication. This simplified view of cell biology circumvented the problem of the origin of life that Darwin and others struggled with.

The nucleus was discovered in 1801, before Darwin was even born. Views on the origin of life are irrelevant to the theory of evolution (The Origin of Species ends with a bit about "life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one"). There's no reason to say that the origin of life problem was "circumvented" by any particular view of cellular biology that existed at the time.

However, that problem was later introduced in the 1950s when the complex molecular structure of DNA was discovered with following research into the complex biochemistry of living things.

This is faintly redolent of Michael Behe's argument that the complexity of biochemistry disproves the theory of evolution, and it's not relevant to this article. grendel|khan 16:26, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Much like other proto-biological scientists of that time, Darwin was unaware of the cell's innter constructs, or the nucleus function. Being able to see it under a microscope, did not lead researchers of that time to even hypothesis about it's being the sole carrier of the hereditary information. (This was first postulates What is Life? (Schrödinger) 80 years later)

Darwin himself struggled with the possible ramifications of his book for almost 30 years before publishing, some of it social (grandad being a monkey) and some of it scientific, id est - the elevation of the meta-physical vita force to the process of protogenesis , and the cell's seemingly mysterious ability to self replicate. This problem was solve about 90 years after publication by Watson and Crick.

I'm reverting and clarifying this section., please feel free to add more clarifications if you deem them necessary. Thank you.--Procrastinating@^talk2me 11:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)