engleski

The Destiny of Scientific Theories: Oparin Coacervate Theory Case

The scientific theories are subject to change: this means that (1) sometimes a theory does not represent the best current knowledge about a specific phenomenon anymore and has to be abandoned, (2) sometimes a theory loses parts of its scope and relevance, or (3) its elements need improvements according to new scientific insight and can be repaired. The example of the first is superseded Stahl’s phlogiston theory, the second is classical causal classic physics, powerless in regard to the explanation of quantum phenomena limited to submicroscopic phenomena and probabilistic predictions, and the numerous models of atoms could be seen as an example of the third kind of the destiny scientific theory. A rejected theory is at fault because its propositions do not correspond to facts and/or is not very well supported by other scientific theories or when there is no successful prediction. In the two other cases, theories continue their existence. The Oparin hypothesis is located on the first of these possibilities: some of its premises are not known or definite (prebiotic soup, the long period of times needed for the emergence of life), some of them are even rejected (the coacervate) and recreation of life based on this hypothesis faulted. The Oparin hypothesis is restricted to the very narrow area of the possible prebiotic synthesis of the macromolecules we find in living systems and it did not decrease the most important gap between the most complicated organic substances and the most primitive living organisms.

Scientific Theories ; Oparin Theory

nije evidentirano