we have already confirmed that the direct kinetic energy in the biological cycle of substances comes from microorganisms. Of course, some people may say that the kinetic energy of matter motion should come from the sun, which is nothing wrong. But the effect of the sun is indirect, not direct. In this sense, the metabolism itself has a undivided relation with microorganisms, and the kinetic energy of metabolism is bound to come from microorganisms too.
Since the spaces of the plant and animal digestive tracts are in vitro, they could not directly absorb physical substances, and enzymes, coenzymes and vitamins would play their role in advance before the physical substances enter the plant and animal bodies, it explains that the functions of these functional substances are correspondent with the microorganisms'
First of all, since we have confirmed that the needed substances of plants are started by microorganisms, then, is it possible that the needed substances of animals are started by the plant and animal bodies themselves?! Is it possible that the substances in the digestive tract could be transformed into the animal substances without outcomers?!
If no animal, and only plant and microorganisms in the biosphere, the biological cycle of substances would still go on as usual, and its form is just the simple phytosynthesis from inorganic substances and restoration of organic ones. If there are still some natural physical phenomena to share a partial function of autotrophic microorganisms at the starting point of biological cycle of substances, then all the restoration of organic substances would fall on heterotrophic microorganisms. On this point there should be no disagreement. In other words, in this simple type of biological cycle of substances, its overall phytosynthesis and restoration, in particular the restoration, are done by microorganisms. It is very clear that the motion of the substances in biosphere begins from (autotrophic) microorganisms, and ends with (heterotrophic) microorganisms. It fully embodies the "artificer" role of microorganisms, which has been reflected very clearly through the start and end points of biological cycle of substances as well as numerous research materials. But the reality is that, against the backdrop of the substance cycle in the biosphere, it has evolved into such a branch - animals who utilizes the organic substances, and has dichotomized a turn in the large circulation and generated a small turnabout in the process of restoring organic substances. Under this background, the metabolism of the human or animal body would be naturally subject to the general law of substance transformation, and certainly controled by microorganisms. Their synthesis must be built on the basis of the microbial breakdown of the organic substances, because there was no breakdown there would be no synthesis in the unity of opposites of the metabolism in the animal body. Otherwise, if the breakdown and synthesis in the animal body created a new law of substance transformation by itself and made it independent from the natural law, would not that be a monstrous absurdity?!
please refer to the "Diagram of biological cycle of substances (hereinafter called "diagram"). May see from the diagram, the substance cycle is divided into two steps: the first step is phytosynthesis; second step is restoration. Since the plants or organic substances are phytosynthesized from inorganic substances, whether utilized by animal or not, they have already stepped into the journey of restoration. Also can see from the diagram, animals appear in the second step – the restoring process. The decomposition of plants, and then synthesized into animal body, all occur in this process. It should be noted that the above-mentioned and shown in the diagram, only inorganic or organic substances can not have a metabolic activity, which must take place accompanied by microorganisms. The diagram also reflects, during the entire process of biological cycle, it is microorganisms to promote the substances in motion all the time, never gap. This reflects the universal law of nature, and is difficult to deny. In particular, the restoration of organic substances, all is controlled by microorganisms, which is particularly important in examining the errors in the traditional theory. We all also know, the condition of the animal generation is the decomposition of organic substances, and animals can synthesize themselves only on complying with the decomposition of organic substances. From the practical viewpoint of the needed substances of animals, they are also decomposed in the digestive tract before the absorption of the body. From the major aspect, whether animals themselves or their needed substances, both of them occur in the second step and are started by microorganisms in general, because, in view of the animal body alone, there must be the decomposition before synthesis. This has been decided by the natural law of matter motion, and could not allow us to create side issues.
In the (phytosynthesis or) synthesis of plants and animals, they are synthesizees, belong to the synthetic object and are equal to the "house". If plants and animals could synthesize the enzymes, coenzymes and vitamins responsible for their metabolism by themselves, they would become the subject of their synthesis and re-synthesis after decomposition, and belong to the "artificers". Such a situation both as the object synthesizees and as the subject synthesizers, itself has formed an irreconcilable conflict, and is equal to "the house has built itself with the building materials", which could not make sense in any case.
Moreover, we have already ascertained that the procedure to remove electrons is the start point of the biological cycle of substances. It shows that the total amount of the substances in biosphere is determined by autotrophic microorganisms. Similarly, the restoration of all the organic substances is also determined by heterotrophic microorganisms. In other words, how much organic matter to be phytosynthesized and restored are all determined by microorganisms. Since there is such a general law of the substance transformation in the biosphere, then it is bound to be disassembled in the substance transformation in different habitats. According to the different substances and habitats (such as nature and animal digestive tract), the microbial reproduction and variation would also be different, their secretions - enzymes, coenzymes and vitamins would be different too. Where there is how much substances need to be transformed and need how to be transformed, there would be how many microorganisms to phytosynthesize and restore them, as a result having determined how much enzymes, coenzymes and vitamins secreted by them to carry out these actions. Speaking from this point, the plant and animal bodies can only comply with the law of the generation of enzymes, coenzymes and vitamins, should not make a fresh start and create another ritual of the generation of enzymes, coenzymes and vitamins.
At present, the theory circle has all recognized in the study of microorganisms that they must catalyze inorganic and organic substances with the enzymes secreted by them in their growth, development and reproduction, and obtain the nutrients and energy needed by themselves. But when the substances went into the biological cycle, people would completely ignore the reality that microorganisms have been secreting enzymes, seek new secretors for these functional substances and gather the vision on the plant and animal cells. Although it was full of contradictions, they have been still caring nothing, thus which has formed an obvious fault in the theoretical research and popularization.
It can be seen from Table 2 that these substances, enzymes, coenzymes and vitamins, have the completely different properties from the other substances involved in the biochemical reactions, and show their characteristic of catalytic functions, which form a corresponding relationship of subject and object with the other substances. This corresponding relationship is just the one between microorganisms and those ordinary substances.
Therefore, both of the catabolism and anabolism in the animal body are inevitably the behavior of microorganisms. That microorganisms are going to have a relationship with the substances, only can be carried out by the catalysts or functional substances, enzymes, coenzymes and vitamins, secreted by them, which is the necessary way that microorganisms have a relationship with the substances,
So far as discussed, we may have a comparative study of the traditional theory and re-understanding with a schematic table.
7.1. According to the traditional theory that enzymes come from the self-synthesis and plants, its schematic table should be as follows:
Schematic contrast table of plant and animal metabolism
in the traditional theory
(available at http://www.bbfactor.com/group.php?keyno=26)
Table 3
From Table 1 and Table 3, we can see that there is a very apparent asymmetry between the substance / energy metabolism of plants and animals.
7.2. Based on our re-understanding of the substance / energy metabolism of plants and animals, Table 3 should be amended as follows:
(available at http://www.bbfactor.com/group.php?keyno=26)
Table 4
On the absorption of the enzymes secreted by microorganisms, people might be worry about whether they would adapt to the immune system of our body. In fact, our body absorbs the microbial enzymes every day. A). For example, the foods we eat every day, there are always microorganisms attached to them (even at high temperatures, there would be the presence of microorganisms, because microorganisms have a superior adaptation to the extreme environments). As long as there is the presence of microorganisms, they would surely produce enzymes, and all of these enzymes would go into our digestive tract for our body to absorb. B). For another example, some beggars sometimes pick up food from garbage, but allergic reactions rarely occur. C). One of the most telling is that the microorganisms in our oral cavity and colon secrete enzymes and vitamins in large quantities, but our body have no immune response after the absorption.
8. conclusions
The unity of opposites in vivo and in vitro, the unity of opposites on functional substances and ordinary organic substances, the unity of opposites on plants and animals as well as their needed substances (equal to the natural world), the unity of opposites on the autotrophic and heterotrophic, the unity of opposites on phytosynthesis and restoration, the unity of opposites on biological metabolism and biological cycle of substances, the unity of opposites on macroscope and microscope , the unity of opposites on inorganic world and organic world, as well as the universal connexions among things, these are the basic thinkingfollowed in this paper.
Using the philosophical methods as analyzing tools, upon an extensive connection and full analysis of the ready-made conclusions and general knowledge in different relevant respects, this paper pulled out several key points:
① By the re-understanding of in vivo and in vitro, grasped the contradiction on the absorption of the plant leaves and roots and restored the chloroplasts, discovered that all the required substances of plants and animals need a preprocessing procedure when these substances entered their bodies, and there exists a preprocessing transitional space of their required substances in vitro or in vivo. As a result, it led us to go deep into the core of the problems step by step and found a key for these locks.
② Based on the current theory that only the inorganic substances in ionic form can be absorbed by plants, discovered that plant and animal bodies can not have a direct relationship with physical substances. Following this clue, subsequently discovered that plants have not a direct relationship with heterotrophic microorganisms. From this, it revealed the serious loopholes in the traditional theory.
③According to the reality that the traditional biological chain has omitted autotrophic microorganisms, discovered that the traditional theory has also simultaneously omitted heterotrophic microorganisms.
④ Through the generating mode of inorganic ions and filling up the theoretical loopholes in the traditional biological chain, pulled out the start point of the biological cycle of substances, thus also pulled out the end point of the biological cycle of substances. According to the essential functions of autotrophic and heterotrophic microorganisms, discovered that they are the real promoters of the biological cycle of substances.
⑤ According to the essence of metabolism, the metabolism of plants and animals formed a relationship of the unity of opposites, and made animals subject to plants in biosphere. Meanwhile, in the unity of opposites on the phytosynthesis and restoration, confirmed that the phytosynthesis is primary, which is just the opposite that the animals' decomposition is primary.
⑥According to the essential function of enzymes, found there is a relationship of the unity of opposites between them and ordinary proteins, so then treated them in different ways. According to the commonness of enzymes, coenzymes and vitamins in the biochemical reactions, listed all of them as the functional substances. Then according to the different essence of the functional substances from ordinary organic substances, and their specific properties completely consistent with the microorganisms', related the functional substances to microorganisms.
⑦ By the list of Table 2, found all the substances involved in the biochemical reactions must be chemicalized, and all the substance transformations in the biological world are the results of the biochemical reactions. Confirmed that enzymes, coenzymes and vitamins are part of the necessary substances and special mode that microorganisms take part in the biochemical reactions in different habitats. Then classified respectively the phytosynthesizing and breakdown / restorative enzymes to autotrophic and heterotrophic microorganisms.
Based on the breakthrough in biological enzymes coming from microorganisms and combined with the classification of the "functional components (2)" in the current university textbooks, both of enzymes and vitamins fell to functional substances, so that created a opposite and untied relation between them and ordinary (organic) substances. In addition, also including the re-understanding of in vivo and in vitro and restoration of chloroplasts, they were the keys of all the above key points. It was based on these three keys that led a comprehensive breakthrough in the puzzles of many contradictions. Except the above three key points, all the materials cited in this study were some ready-made conclusions and general knowledge recognized by the current scientific community. It was mainly because of the different analysis and research methods that led the different conclusions.
The features of this study do not lie in experiments, but in its analysis and research methods. By means of the ready-made conclusions on experiments and general knowledge, it is able to overcome the limitations of only relying on experiments, thereupon then to solve what relationships the various substances in the biological cycle should be and how they should have a relationship with plants and animals, and also cause a remedy and adjustment to the relationships among various factors in the biological metabolism and biological cycle of substances. Generally speaking, it has remedied and adjusted the relationships among the three categories of creatures in the biological world – microorganisms, plants and animals, as well as between them and physical substances. As a result, this theoretical exploration has formed a notable difference from the traditional theory, and created a completely new understanding of the theory.
Autotrophic microorganisms are a major biological population in the biosphere, are the very opposite of heterotrophic microorganisms, and even more are the basis of heterotrophic microorganisms. Their importance is by no means less than heterotrophic microorganisms and we have to pay serious attention to them.
These conclusions are not racking our brains to collect facts in order to reinforce the argument, but the theory and the various contradictions in reality make them so. They are the inevitable outcome caused by the theory and those contradictions in reality, and also the subtext implied in the research articles of many scientists for many years. They are indeed many more than we had expected at the beginning and in the process of exploring the various contradictions.
From the above discussions, it is not difficult to find that the current theoretical studies of life sciences have remarkable achievements, but always can not break the shackles of the traditional theory, causing the theoretical research moves forward gradually in one side, while its practice in another side (for example the application of the basic theory in nutriology, medical science and the production of agriculture, forestry and animal husbandry) is still persisting in their old ways, having formed a very contradictory situation that they act wilfully. This contradiction is more and more outstanding, more and more obvious. At the same time it also shows that, at present we are still too little understanding of micro-organisms (it is only a few hundred years that mankind cognized microorganisms, and the found quantity is estimated only 20% of their total), the research direction is not enough clear (such as the classification of the autotrophic and heterotrophic micro-organisms in strategy and the research of their essential functions), the accumulation of power is not enough strong to break the shackles of the traditional theory, and we have yet to carry on a greater impact to the traditional theory with stronger evidence.
As my thinking and understanding in this paper are very young, in addition my ABC is very poor, so hope your experts give directions to me!
First draft: Nov. 28, 2009. Revised: Dec. 31, 2009. Finished: Mar. 17, 2010.
Revised upon the opinions of experts: Apr. 06, 2010.
References:
1, Endosymbiotic theory, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (8 April 2010), available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiotic_theory.
2, (China) He Sui-Yuan and Jin Yun-Yun, Environment Chemistry（December 1996），P 31/23，available at http://wenku.baidu.com/view/c1598fc24028915f804dc266.html.
3, (China) Drinking water and human health, Sohu Home (31 January 2010), available at http://home.focus.cn/msgview/1713/184979934.html.
4, (China) biological cycle of substances, From Baidupedia (15 January 2008), available at http://baike.baidu.com/view/1364250.htm?fr=ala0_1.
5, (China) Six Main Nutrients, Baidupedia (04 May 2010), available at http://baike.baidu.com/view/782649.htm.
6, (China) Latest Complete Collection, National Food Safety Quality Identification and Test Standard, The Web Site of bbs.foodmate.net (02 May 2007), available at http://bbs.foodmate.net/viewthread.php?tid=115968&extra=&page=1.
No comments:
Post a Comment