Note: For previous parts to Dr. Wadhawan’s series on complexity check out the ‘Related Posts’ found at the bottom of this article.

How could the blind forces of Nature create large and highly information-laden molecules like DNA and proteins just by random processes? DNA carries information for the synthesis of proteins, but it requires the prior availability of certain protein molecules for performing its genetic duties. Such proteins help the double-helix DNA molecule to uncoil itself and split into two strands for replication purposes. Therefore, DNA and certain proteins must have emerged independently, by some efficient (and therefore reasonably likely) chemical processes. But how? The answer has to do with the chemical evolution of autocatalytic sets of molecules, which could consume energy-rich molecules and other precursors (’food’) to ‘reproduce’. These molecules were the predecessors of proteins and DNA etc., and thence of life.

9.1 Catalysis

Catalysis is a process that facilitates or speeds up a chemical reaction. Often, a chemical process may involve two or more intermediate reactions. A catalyst is a molecule that speeds up the production of an end product of the chemical process by participating in the intermediate reactions, but separates at the end of the chain of reactions, thus becoming available all over again for further catalysis. Often, a chemical reaction may almost never occur if no catalyst is present. Enzymes are examples of proteins that assist (i.e. catalyze) chemical reactions in biological systems.

Photosynthesis carried out by green plants in the presence of sunlight is another familiar example of catalysis. Chlorophyll is the catalyst here. Through a number of intermediate reactions, the net reaction is as follows:

Photons from the Sun make this reaction possible, and their energy gets stored in the form of chemical energy, resulting in an increase in the degree of complexity, or information content. Living organisms consume the energy stored in glucose, and some of it gets converted into more complex or more information-rich forms. Of course, not all photons from the Sun falling on our ecosphere get utilized like this. Most of them just dissipate their energy, with a corresponding increase of entropy.

9.2 Polymers

A polymer is a very long molecule, made up by covalent bonding among a large number of repeat units (monomers). There can be variations, either in that the bonding is not covalent everywhere, or in that not all subunits are identical. Examples of polymers and polymer solutions include plastics such as polystyrene and polyethylene, glues, fibres, resins, proteins, and polysaccharides like starch.

A homopolymer consists of a single type of repeat unit. A copolymer has more than one type of repeat units. A random copolymer has a random arrangement of two or more types of repeat units.

Sequenced copolymers are different from random copolymers in that, although the sequence of different subunits is not periodic, it is not completely random either. Biopolymers like DNA and proteins are examples of this. Their very specific sequence of subunits, ordained by Nature (through the processes of evolution), results in particular properties. Proteins in humans are sequenced copolymers made up of ~20 amino acids. The sequences of these amino acids in proteins give them the property to fold and self-organize into very specific 3-dimensional configurations.

How do short polymers form spontaneously in Nature? Recall the lock-and-key mechanism outlined in Section 8.4 (Part 8). Suppose a monomer has a shape and charge distribution such that another monomer can fit snugly into some part of it. There are random collisions among the monomers in a fluid medium, and usually they do not stick together, and simply bounce off after a collision. But once in a while the collision may be such that the two monomers have just the right orientation for a lock-and-key fitting. Then the chances of the two sticking together and forming a stable dimer are much larger. Dimers can lead to trimers, and so on, resulting in a polymer. Naturally, this can be a rather unlikely and therefore very slow process, and only short polymers can possibly form spontaneously in reasonable time.

9.3 Cell Biology

All tissues in animals and plants are made up of cells, and all cells come from other cells. A cell may be either a prokaryote or an eukaryote. The former is an organism that has neither a distinct nucleus, nor other specialized subunits or organelles. Examples include bacteria and blue-green algae. Unicellular organisms like yeast are eukaryotes. Such cells are separated from the environment by a semi-permeable membrane. Inside the membrane there is a nucleus and the cytoplasm surrounding it. Multicellular organisms are all made up of eukaryote-type cells. In them the cells are highly specialized, and perform the function of the organ to which they belong.

The nucleus contains nucleic acids, among other things. With the exception of viruses, two types of nucleic acids are found in all cells: RNA (ribonucleic acid) and DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). Viruses have either RNA or DNA, but not both (but then viruses are not cells). Apart from the nucleus, an eukaryotic cell has mitochondria, ribosomes, and vacuoles. Plant cells also have chloroplasts. Mitochondria make energy out of food. Ribosomes make proteins. Vacuoles are used for storage of water or food. Chloroplasts use sunlight to create food by photosynthesis.

DNA is a long molecule that has the genetic information encoded in it as a sequence of four different molecules called nucleotides (adenine (A), thymine (T), guanine (G), and cytosine (C)). There is a double backbone of phosphate and sugar molecules, each carrying a sequence of the ‘bases’ A, T, G, C. This backbone is coiled into a double helix (like a twisted ladder). In this double-helix structure, base molecule A bonds almost always to base molecule T (via a weak hydrogen bond), and G bonds to C. The sequence of base pairs defines the primary structure of DNA.

DNA contains the codes for manufacturing various proteins. Production of a protein in the cell nucleus involves transcription of a stretch of DNA (this stretch is called a gene) into a portable form, namely the messenger RNA (or mRNA). This messenger then travels to the cytoplasm of the cell, where the information is conveyed to the ribosome. This is where the encoded instructions are used for the synthesis of the protein. The code is read, and the corresponding amino acid is brought into the ribosome. Each amino acid comes connected to a specific transfer RNA (tRNA) molecule; i.e. each tRNA carries a specific amino acid. There is a three-letter recognition site on the tRNA that is complementary to, and pairs with, the three-letter code sequence for that amino acid on the mRNA.

The one-way flow of information from DNA to RNA to protein is the basis of all life on Earth. This is the central dogma of molecular biology.

Three letters (out of the four, namely the bases A, T, C, G) are needed to code the synthesis of any particular protein. The term codon is used for the three consecutive letters on an mRNA. The possible number of codons is 64, and only 20 amino acids are processed by these codons. The linking of most of the amino-acid-triplets for synthesizing a protein can be coded by more than one codon.

There are ~60-100 trillion cells in the human body. In this multicellular organism (as also in any other multicellular organism), almost every cell (red blood ‘cells’ are an exception) has the same DNA, with exactly the same order of the nucleotide bases. The nucleus contains 95% of the DNA, and is the control centre of the cell. The DNA inside the nucleus is complexed with proteins to form a structure called chromatin.

The fertilized mother cell (the zygote) divides (self-replicates) into two cells. Each of these again divides into two cells, and so on. Before this cell division (mitosis) begins, the chromatin condenses into elongated structures called chromosomes. A gene is a functional unit on a chromosome, which directs the synthesis of a particular protein. As stated above, the gene is transcribed into mRNA, which is then translated into the protein. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes. Each pair has two non-identical copies of chromosomes, derived one from each parent.

During cell division, the double-stranded DNA splits into the two component strands, each of which acts as a replication template for the construction of the complementary strand. ‘Complementary strand’ means that for every A on the original template these is a T on the new strand; similarly, there is a C for every G, A for T, and G for C. At every stage, the two daughter cells are of identical genetic composition (they have identical genomes). In each of the 60 trillion cells in the human body, the genome consists of around three billion nucleotides.

9.4 Autocatalytic Sets of Molecules

Life depends on molecules of DNA, RNA, proteins, polysaccharides, etc. How did such large molecules get synthesized ’spontaneously’ from their building blocks, namely nucleic acids, amino acids, sugars, etc.? DNA and RNA have the crucial self-replication property. If we can explain their appearance on Earth, then self-replication and Darwinian natural selection can account for the emergence of simple life forms, as also their evolution into more and more complex life forms. Invoking random chance processes for the creation of large molecules like DNA, which are bearers of genetic information, is not a tenable idea because of the miniscule probability, and the correspondingly large time required for this to happen. In any case, there is no evidence that the origin of life on earth can be equated with the appearance of DNA.

The answer came through the idea of autocatalysis. Autocatalytic sets of molecules are those which can catalyse the synthesis of themselves. Autocatalysis requires that a given ‘factor’ (say A) should be able to convert a substrate or precursor B into a new factor of the same type: A + B → 2A + C. Melvin Calvin (1969) introduced the idea of autocatalysis as a mechanism for molecular selection, with implications for how life emerged on Earth.

There was little or no molecular oxygen (O₂) in the original atmosphere around the Earth. A variety of local energy sources were, of course, present (undersea hydrothermal vents; ultraviolet radiation; volcanic energy; radioactive nuclei; lightning; meteoric impacts). Under these conditions, amino acids, nucleotides, and other building blocks of the future living organisms got synthesized in the seas, and in the rock structures, and in the atmosphere around the Earth. Several energy-rich molecules like H₂S, FeS, H₂, phosphate esters, HCN, pyrophosphates, and thioesters, were also produced.

Thus, in this so-called primordial soup, namely a fluid in contact with rocks of various types, there existed small molecules of amino acids, sugars etc. Given enough time, some of them must have undergone random polymerization reactions of various types, producing short polymers. It is entirely possible that at least some of these end-products, with some side chains and branches hanging around, acted as catalysts for facilitating the production of other molecules which may also be catalysts for another chemical reaction. Thus: A facilitates the production of B, and B does the same job for C, and so on. Given enough time, and a large enough pool containing all sorts of molecules, it is quite probable that, at some stage a molecule, say Z, will get formed (aided by catalytic reactions of various types), which would be a catalyst for the formation of the catalyst molecule A we started with.

Once such a loop closes on itself, it would head towards what we now call self-organized criticality (and order). There will be more production of A, which will lead to more production of B, and so on. The plausibility advantage of this scenario visualised by Stuart Kauffman is that there is no need to wait for random reactions for the spontaneous formation of large molecules. And once a threshold has been crossed, the system is likely to inch towards the edge of chaos, and acquire robustness against destabilizing agencies.

Kauffman argued that this order, emerging out of molecular chaos, was akin to life: The system could consume (metabolize) raw materials, and grow into more and more complex molecules. It progressed into a situation where the forebears of DNA started appearing, with potential for replication. An era of chemical Darwinism or molecular Darwinism followed next, in which autocatalytic systems of molecules competed with one another for the limited supply of precursors and energy-rich molecules. These sets of autocatalytic molecules had at least three of the features of what constitutes life: They ‘ate’ the energy-rich molecules; they reproduced themselves; and they competed with other autocatalytic sets of molecules for survival.

9.5 Conclusions

The probability is next to nil that highly complex molecules like RNA, DNA and proteins got created spontaneously through purely random or chance processes. However, the nearly-impossible became possible, i.e. the unlikely set of events became likely, through the mechanism of autocatalysis. As John Avery has pointed out in his book Information Theory and Evolution (2003), ‘A notable feature of autocatalysis (apart from providing a credible mechanism for the origin of life) is that it has the seeds of natural selection at the molecular level: The precursor molecules and the energy-rich molecules are ‘food’. And the alternative autocatalytic systems compete for this supply of food. The efficient ones have a better chance of dominating and winning (through faster reproduction). Supply of free energy, of course, was/is the prerequisite for all this to become possible.’

Once a set of autocatalytic reactions had established itself, it went on incrementally evolving into still more complex sets of molecules. Chance events and/or new external conditions resulted in the emergence of a slightly more complex version of, say, one of the molecules in the autocatalytic set. A further round of chemical Darwinism and evolution of a new set of autocatalytic set of molecules followed. And so on, till molecules as complex as RNA, DNA and proteins emerged on the scene, which have life-sustaining and life-propagating properties.

This explanation is an important milestone in our quest for understanding in a rational manner the origin, or origins, of life on Earth. But what is life? I shall address this question in the next article in this series.

“The more we learn about the unbelievably complex, immensely varied, and yet simultaneously simple origin and development of life on earth, the more it looks like a miracle, and one that is still unfolding. The miracle of evolution.”

Sharon Moalem

Dr. Vinod Kumar Wadhawan is a Raja Ramanna Fellow at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai and an Associate Editor of the journal PHASE TRANSITIONS.

Share on Facebook

Related posts:

1. COMPLEXITY EXPLAINED: 8. Evolution of Chemical Complexity
2. COMPLEXITY EXPLAINED: 3. Thermodynamic Explanation for the Increasing Complexity of our Ecosphere
3. COMPLEXITY EXPLAINED: 6. Emergence of Complexity in Far-from-Equilibrium Systems

In my previous article I described Hinduism as Obsessive Compulsive Religion, and that its practices are rooted in the antiquated belief system of Brahmanism, the prevalent religion of India three thousand years ago. This explains why India has more gods, more mindless rituals, more bizarre superstitions and more fraudulent “holy men” than the rest of the world put together and why there is the pernicious caste system. The reality is that today more than ever before, highly educated people in India have fallen prey to the relics of Brahmanism such as superstitions, Yajnas, Poojas and Abhishekas dedicated to their personal gods. More than ever before, there is such frenzy in India to build huge ornate temples, some of which are covered with gold. More than ever before, today millions of Hindus are thronging to temples and donating their life-savings to them. And more than ever before religious frauds are thriving in India and abroad.

A comprehensive approach is needed

What factors in India’s ancient history contributed to these phenomena? What meaningful and sustainable remedies can we come up with to deal with these truly mind-boggling issues?

For one thing, without understanding the religious, psychological and historical bases for the irrational practices of Hindus, rationalist won’t be able to put forth an effective and scientifically sound solution, which engenders least amount of unintended negative consequences. Therefore, a detailed history of Hinduism going back to three thousand five hundred years ago; the process by which it came to be possessed by Brahmanism even after it separated itself from Brahmanism; a detailed study of all failed attempts in the past to overthrow Brahmanism, and, finally, a realistic assessment of why Brahmanism continues to have formidable influence on the psyche of Hindus, are essential for any rationalist to formulate a viable solution.

Never underestimate the formidable power of Brahmanism

Rationalist should never underestimate the indomitable power of Brahmanism. Brahmanism’s victory against every single adversary -Buddhism, Jainism, Lokayata, Ajivika, Upanishadism, Bhagavathism, Dasa movement- was always decisive and absolute as evidenced by its continued stranglehold on all aspects of Hindu society -cultural, social, religious and psychological. Today Brāhmanism pervades every atom of Hinduism. Hinduism, as we know it today, is the supreme symbol of how Brāhmanism prevailed through invasions, conquests, occupations, revolts, revolutions, reforms; how it tenaciously hung on to its hollow cultural traditions and mindless rituals; how it promoted the class and caste system just to maintain superiority of Brāhmins; how it destroyed religious adversaries entirely, and engulfed religious reformers completely; how it suffocated all dissenting sects and stifled dissident groups, and absorbed them all into its ever-resilient body; and how it inexorably dug its powerful nails deep into the body of the ever-assimilating and all-inclusive Hindu Dharma which succeeded it. It is also a testament to the infinite sustaining power of Brāhmanism, whose iron hand has had such ruthless grip on the psyche of a whole Indian nation for over three thousand and five hundred years.

Brahmanism’s “Deshabhaktha“ goons

Even in the twenty-first century, Brahmanism has millions of mindless goons ready to be summoned instantly to do the bidding of Swamis and Gurus, not to mention their political patrons. These goons have formed paramilitary outfits named after their gods and heroes. In the garb of Deshabhakthas, these miscreants will not hesitate for a moment to rush into their critics’ offices, destroy their property, manhandle their staff and set their building on fire. Little do these ignoramuses know that their true identity is that of Deshadhrohis, not Deshabhakthas. They have little regard for the long-term consequences of their criminal actions on the well-being of the democratic, diverse and freedom-loving India.

A scientifically sound approach

This being the case, what should be a rational and scientifically sound approach to this problem? Instead of engaging Brahmanism in sporadic and local skirmishes, we need to develop broad array of strategies and tactics based on fairly accurate assessment of the problem and realistic and achievable goals. Below, I have suggested a few broad strategies and tactics in dealing with the mindboggling problem we face in India. Other rationalists are welcome to add to or delete from this list their ideas based on their experience and expertise.

Suggested broad strategies:

1.    It should be persistently pointed out to the religionists that their current belief system and practices are rooted in the remote past and they have little relevance to their present life circumstances. They will neither fulfill their desires nor protect them from the unknown evil. Practicing this religion is like flying a Boeing 747 using the flight manual from Kitty Hawk.

2.    To buttress our point of view, we should systematically expose the literary fraud perpetrated by Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya and Madhvacharya who misinterpreted, misrepresented and obfuscated various literatures of the ancient anti-Brahmanic movements such as Upanishadism.

3.    We should educate the religionists that their current Dharma is India’s Constitution. They should be encouraged to abandon all Dharma and seek refuge in the Constitution of India alone. The Constitution will give them all opportunities to lawfully fulfill their own desires, and protect them from all evil forces (corrupt politicians, bureaucrats, police, etc.).

4.    Dharmo Rakshathi Rakshatah: This Dharma will protect him who protects it. Protecting this Dharma consists of exercising their right and carrying out their responsibilities as enlightened citizens of a civilized modern Nation.

Suggested tactics:

1. Empathize: We cannot change religionists by confrontation, argument, threats or condemnation. We must show empathy for their predicament. They are no different than patients I see who are trapped in their mindless rituals. We must avoid ridiculing their beliefs, gods and practices. No one can be changed by means of these methods. We must win their respect and trust by our own scientific temperament, honesty and rational behavior. The religionists should have faith in the purity of our intentions and fairness in our approach. Besides, we must accept the reality that deep-rooted beliefs and behavioral patterns are extremely difficult to change. And so we must be patient.

2. Educate: We must attempt to enlighten the educated people about the irrationality of their behaviors by means of sensible articles, books, seminars, and public discussions. Rationalist activists must have good knowledge of the historical roots of people’s current irrational behavior. We cannot just tell them, “Stop behaving this way!” We must show them why it is in their own best interests to do so. Very often just knowing the basis of one’s irrational behavior is enough to give it up. We must then give them a realistic alternative belief system and rational behaviors rooted in them. Exposing Brahmanic fraud against anti-Brahmanic literature will be part of this effort.

3. Demonstrate: Rationalists should hold public demonstrations for the benefit of less educated Hindus to debunk tricks and magic by which “holy men” bewilder people and swindle them. Many rationalists have been doing this very successfully all over India.

4. Promote the Constitution: Rationalists should educate people about the fact that the Constitution of India is their New Dharma and its practice consists of defending, protecting and strengthening it by constantly exercising their rights and responsibilities as citizens. If there is an organization dedicated to protecting the Constitutional rights of people, such as Civil Liberty Union, we should support it wholeheartedly.

5. Fight injustice: We must recognize the fact that the widespread corruption we encounter with bureaucrats (modern day Brahmins) and politicians (modern day Kshatriyas) has its roots in the corruption evident in the nexus of Brahmins and Kshatriyas three thousand years ago. Rationalists should be at the forefront of movements, which expose fraud and corruption practiced by the elected officials, bureaucrats, judges and police, who are all supposed to be the guardians of Indian Constitution. Corruption and oppression undermines rationalists’ work to instill faith in the Constitution. It is a sad commentary that people have more faith in the fraudulent guardians of Brahmanism than these crooked public servants. Consumer movements to fight political and bureaucratic corruption and Human Rights movements to fight oppression should be part of rationalist movement.

6. Promote social activism: We need to induce people to invest their energies into socially relevant tasks such as improving civic amenities, sewage system, garbage collection, water supply, electricity supply and the like instead of wasting them in mindless rituals. Service of people is service of their new Dharma.

7. Moral education: Brahmanism had one major advantage over the Constitution of India: it had literature, such as the Mahabharata, which taught people morals. Since the Constitution does not teach people morals, but merely punishes them for breaking the law, some non-religious system to educate people to distinguish right from wrong must be developed. History teaches us that without a strong moral foundation all societies perish. Parents and teachers should start teaching children morals at an early age. There is an urgent need for a Book of Virtues, a Book of Morals and a Book of Etiquettes for young Indians. Success of all civilized societies rests on these three foundations. To its credit Hinduism did have a strong tradition of teaching morals, which more recently has fallen by the wayside due to its preoccupation with mindless rituals. We must identify moral moorings of ancient India and readily acknowledge them. We should not throw out the baby with the dirty bathwater.

8. Fight caste system: We must expose the irrationality and anachronism of caste system. We must come to the assistance of those who have suffered injustice on account of their supposed “lower caste” status.

9. Identify the wisdom from India’s past. It is said that wisdom comes from experience; experience comes from stupidity. We are all products of India’s past. While we should reject mindless rituals and fraud associated with Hinduism, we should diligently search in India’s past any wisdom we can use in the present instead of condemning all of it as obsolescent. For example, the Upanishadic wisdom, which was directed toward corrupt Brahmins and Kshatriyas, that their obsession and entanglement with wealth, power, people, honor, title, heaven and the like led to their self-destructive and evil acts, is as true today as it was twenty-five hundred years ago, and will be as true twenty-five hundred years from today.

10. Be careful: While attempting to reform society, all rationalist must keep in mind the dictum that all solutions for societal problems, no matter how noble their original intents were, become problems themselves sooner or later. This is especially true in India. Don’t be surprised that someday in the future Rationalism will become a religion riddled with gods and mindless rituals! People bring into organizations their own unconscious beliefs and behaviors rooted in them and destroy the original goals of the organization. That is exactly what happened to Buddhism, which was born from revolt against ritual-ridden Brahmanism. Brahmins infiltrated Buddhism and made it into the mirror image of Brahmanism.

(To be continued)

Dr. Prabhakar Kamath, is a psychiatrist currently practicing in the U.S. He is the author of Servants, Not Masters: A Guide for Consumer Activists in India (1987) and Is Your Balloon About Pop?: Owner’s Manual for the Stressed Mind.

Share on Facebook

Related posts:

1. Obsessive-Compulsive Religion
2. A Rational Approach to Understanding the Irrational Behavior of Indians
3. Selling Rational Thinking

Here are the notes that were posted with the video:

My own musical tribute to two great men of science. Carl Sagan and his cosmologist companion Stephen Hawking present: A Glorious Dawn - Cosmos remixed. Almost all samples and footage taken from Carl Sagan’s Cosmos and Stephen Hawking’s Universe series.

RIP Dr. Sagan, you will be missed!!

Please, click HQ to watch in better quality.

Go here to download the track:
http://www.symphonyofscience.com

And here for another scientist remix:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGK84P…

And my website for more original music:
http://www.colorpulsemusic.com/

Share on Facebook

Related posts:

1. Watch BBC Video: Supernatural Revealed in India
2. Religulous

The Science Trust was formed three years back on the advice and wishes of the veteran rationalist Mr. B Premanand. It was he who proposed to us the name ‘Science’. Our main objective is to develop scientific temper, humanism, spirit of enquiry and reforms in the society.

As you might be aware, Mr. Premanand passed away on the 5th of October last and, as per his will, his body was donated to Coimbatore Medical College the next day. With his sad demise we lost a friend and adviser who helped us in promoting our objectives.

The Science Trust is organizing a two-day program in remembrance of its founder Mr. Premanand, which will be held on the 9^th and 10^th of January 2010 at Calicut, his birth place. Eminent personalities like Dr. P.M. Bhargava , Mr. Babu Gogneni (IHEU), Dr. Vijayam of Atheist Centre, Dr. Narendra Nayak, Sri Kumaresan etc. etc. have agreed to attend the function.

As a means of paying tribute to Mr. Premanand’s commendable method of promoting scientific outlook it is also proposed to organize a ‘ WORKSHOP EXPOSING 100 MIRACLES ‘, which will be held on the 9th of January, from 3 pm to 9 pm, with the participation of his students from various parts of the world. Dr. Narendra Nayak has agreed to moderate this six-hour program. We cordially invite all the students of Premanand to participate in the function and make it a grand success. Also, we eagerly wish and request them to help us by passing on this massage to all their friends.

Contact:

Email   : sajit_c@hotmail.com

Mobile :+91 9846024230

Share on Facebook

Related posts:

1. Basva Premanand (17 February 1930 - 04 October 2009)- The Passing of a Great Man
2. An interview with Basava Premanand
3. Premanand - My Ideological Father

In my previous article I wrote that all current irrational beliefs, and behaviors rooted in them, served a perfectly rational purpose some time in the remote past, but they serve no useful purpose in the present time. What we call religion today was in the ancient times a solution for some grave societal problem, which was creating serious chaos in it. In a sense religion was the Constitution of the ancient society. However, even though all religions served useful purposes during the time they were invented they have now themselves become sources of serious conflicts, chaos and destruction in the world. This is an example of how a solution for a serious problem itself could become a problem. Why then does religion exist? Well, once a solution for a problem is found out, it becomes a source of livelihood for the priestly class, who claim custody of the religion. The priests of every religion have developed vested interest in keeping the masses deluded in order to make a comfortable living and enjoy a superior status in the society. This is true of all religions. Even the very educated amongst us can be deluded by their shenanigans.   

Helplessness to resist evil forces and taking refuge in a higher power

The belief system of Hinduism is characterized by multiple gods, and worshiping these gods by means of Poojas, Yajnas, Abhishekas and thousands of other mindless rituals. These are behaviors meant to please a particular god, either to fulfill one’s desires (wealth, success, power, child, job, etc.), or for protection from evil (illness, failure, loss, death, etc.). For example, if we ask a Hindu why he worships Ganesha, his ready answer would be something like, “I worship Ganesha because he is Vighneshwara, Lord of Calamities! If I invoke him before my daughter’s wedding ceremony, he will prevent Vighnas (calamities). There is no doubt about it!” Obviously, this man believes that there is some kind of evil lurking out there, which is ready to ruin his daughter’s wedding ceremony, and he has been brainwashed into believing that he is totally helpless to prevent it. He never bothers to ask himself, “What is this evil that could ruin my innocent daughter’s wedding? Why should I feel so helpless against anything going wrong? What proof is there that there is a god by the name of Ganesha and how can he ward off evil?” He is not used to this kind of rational thinking. It takes too much mental energy to think and question deep-rooted beliefs. Instead, he resorts to taking refuge in Ganesha, whom he has never met, to protect him from the unknown evil. He does not mind spending any amount of money to perform elaborate Pooja of Ganesha’s idol. He does not think twice about dumping toxic, mercury-smeared Ganesha’s clay idol into the pristine water of his well or the local river.

Roots of helplessness in Hindus

The roots of this pervasive feeling of helplessness in the face of evil go back to three thousand five hundred years ago. Brahmanism, which was the Dharma during the Vedic period (1500-1000 B.C. E.), brainwashed people into believing that everyone was completely helpless against the irresistible force of the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma (BG: 3:5, 27, 33; 18: 59-60). This they did to bring order into a society, which was in turmoil due to successive waves of immigrant minorities mingling with the society of the locals called Dasyus. They divided the society into four great classes based on these doctrines (BG: 4:13). The doctrine of the Gunas and Karma were literally the two gods of Brahmanism. No one, they said, not even their petty gods, could defy these two forces. Those who defied this dictum were declared as deluded by Ahamkara (egoism, self-centeredness), and were shamed and dishonored in the society and condemned to hell (BG: 2:33). Over the next thousand years, Brahmanism became decadent due to its obsession with corrupted Yajnas known as Kamya Karma. The Dharma, which had been invented to bring stability to the ancient society itself, became the problem.

The Upanishadic rationalists create a superman to counter Brahmanism

Decadence of Brahmanism created tremendous turmoil in the society. A large section of Brahmanic society abandoned it and started various rationalist Dharmas such as Buddhism and Lokayata. During this time, Upanishadic rationalists, with the intent of overthrowing decadent Brahmanism, declared both the Gunas and Karma as evil, which one should transcend (BG: 2:45) or even slay (BG: 3:41, 43). They created a Super Man (Purushotthama, Brahman) to counter the force of the Gunas. They created a Super Weapon (Buddhiyoga, Yoga of Reason) to break the shackles of Karma. They said one could conquer these evil doctrines by taking refuge in Brahman, and by using Buddhiyoga as a weapon (BG: 2:39-53; 15:1-5).

Brahmanism launched a counterrevolution and did everything within their powers to counter the Upanishadic revolution. They neutralized Brahman and Buddhiyoga by adding pro-Brahmanism shlokas in the Upanishads as well as the Bhagavad Gita. This necessitated creation of an even greater force to combat Brahmanism. This is how the real god of Hindus, Parameshwara, was invented. Parameshwara, the Great Lord, of the Bhagavathas, took the place of Brahman, and Bhakthiyoga became the weapon against the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma. The ultimate shloka of the Bhagavad Gita reveals this theme par excellence: 18:66: Abandon all Dharma (Brahmanism and all its sub-Dharmas such as Varna Dharma, Jati Dharma, Kula Dharma) and take refuge in me alone. I shall liberate you from all evil (of the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma). Do not grieve (for them).

Brahmanic subterfuge

Brahmanism would have none of it. They resorted to extreme editing of the text of the Bhagavad Gita and concealed the Upanishadic and Bhagavatha revolutions. They retained the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma and all the evil caused by it such as Varna and Jati system. They continued to drum in the doctrine of helplessness in the minds of people and offered various gods such as Ganesha, Hanuman, Shiva and the like to take refuge in. Even after two thousand five hundred years, we can see this pervasive feeling of helplessness against evil and taking refuge in a higher power in most Hindus even in their daily lives. If they encounter an evil official who refuses to oblige without a bribe, they take refuge in a person they perceive as more powerful to “influence” the corrupt official to do their bidding, or they take refuge in the greatest force on earth, even more powerful than any god: bribery.

Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

There is a psychiatric disorder in which we see this type of delusional thinking and consequent irrational ritualistic behavior. It is called Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). In this disorder, the patient has a fixed belief, which forces him to indulge in fruitless repetitive ritualistic behaviors. For example, he might believe that his hands are contaminated with germs (evil) and he must take refuge in washing hands hundreds of times a day. His gods are soap and water. If he does not wash his hands with soap and water, his fear of dreadful disease would bring on a panic attack. Some time in the remote past, this patient experienced an event in which his hands were grossly contaminated by feces of an animal. He had then every reason to wash his hands very scrupulously. This event left such a bad memory in his subconscious mind that now he has become obsessed with it. Now he compulsively washes his hands hundreds of times a day, resulting in denudation of the skin of his hands. If ever he fell ill, he would blame it on his not washing his hands well enough. Now soap and water have created a new problem for the patient. Not only do his gods cost him a lot of money, but also now he has to spend money on psychiatrists and dermatologists.

Obsessive-Compulsive Religion

Careful examination of Hindus indicates that most of them indulge in some type of “fearing evil and taking refuge in a higher power” pattern of behavior every single day. There are thousands of superstitions floating around in India, and educated and well-to-do classes are as likely to fall prey to them as poor and illiterates. I know a brilliant doctor who feels compelled to move his car forward even if it is just one half inch before driving it in reverse out from his garage. His explanation is that that would ward off evil. Now his relatively more rational wife has followed suit. So, OCD can be contagious. Here in America, highly educated Hindu women exchange coconuts with other women once a year during Gowri Pooja season. If you ask them why they do it, they have absolutely no idea. However, if they don’t do it, they begin to feel very anxious. I know an educated man who unfailingly mistreated his mother during her entire life, and yet he travels all the way to India every year to officiate her annual  ‘Kriya.’ If you ask him why he does it, his answer is “If I don’t do it, it does not feel right.” What he is not saying is that he fears his mom’s ghost would come back to haunt him. Taking full advantage of such disorder in Hindus, crackpot astrologers and fraudulent Swamis are inducing them to perform expensive Poojas, Yajnas or Abhishekas. Recently, here in St. Louis, Missouri, thousands of Hindus performed Kumbhabhishekam of the god in the Hindu temple under the delusion that the “power of god has diminished in the idol over the years. So we need to perform rituals to reinstall the idol and bring god’s power back into it.” Some fraud told them this and they believed him. The priests of Hinduism have succeeded in creating an Obsessive-Compulsive Religion. Look at the throngs of mindless people crowding the streets shouting, “Ganapathi bappa Morya!” Or look at the thousands of worshippers of Sai Baba pulling his chariot, while he is laughing all the way to the bank. In their literature known as the Upanishads as well as the Bhagavad Gita, the rationalist of ancient India referred to these ritual-addicted Brahmins and Kshatriyas as ignorant, fools, dullards, idiots, stupid, degraded, blind, worst among men, so on and so forth.

Double Jeopardy

In the case of the man we discussed above, his fear of evil has become an obsession and taking refuge in Ganesha has become a compulsion. So, if we tell this man not to worship Ganesha at all before any ceremony, he would suffer from a panic attack due to fear of evil befalling him any time, or due to fear of Ganesha’s wrath for failing to please him. The Hindus constantly find themselves in this double jeopardy. In fact, if something bad did happen to him shortly after failing to invoke Ganesha, he would certainly conclude that either the evil force has succeeded in ruining him, or Ganesha was punishing him for failing to perform his worship. Even if no evil struck him, he would constantly be looking for some bad omen (Apashakuna) indicative of some evil about to befall him. If during this period his doctor diagnoses him with high blood pressure, he would surely blame it on his omission of Ganesha Pooja rather than on his irrational fear of both the evil and Ganesha. He is so thoroughly brainwashed that he is now incapable of rational thinking whatsoever. Almost all Hindus I know are slaves to this double jeopardy predicament. It is impossible for us to convince them not to perform rituals they are addicted to. Just as a drug addict suffers withdrawal symptoms when he quits drugs, ritualists suffer from anxiety and panic if they quit performing the mindless rituals.

Almost total loss of critical thinking leads to parrot-like talk

When it comes to their religion, most Hindus suspend their critical thinking capacities even though they put on a perfectly intelligent façade while dealing with their fellowmen. If we ask a Hindu religionist, “Why do you practice all these mindless rituals?” he might babble something like, “Oh, our Sanatana Dharma is the greatest religion ever! In fact, it is a way of life! All these rituals had great significance to our ancestors!” or some such hyperbole. He is merely repeating parrot-like whatever his elders told him while growing up. He is absolutely clueless as to what Sanatana Dharma is; nor does he have any understanding as to why his ancestors performed these rituals; nor does he ask the question, “What relevance do these rituals have for me in my present life circumstance?” This kind of questioning takes too much mental energy. He wants to take the path of least effort. Recently, when I asked a highly educated Hindu, “Who wrote the Mahabharata epic?” he shot back without bothering to think even for a second, “Was it not dictated by Vyasa and written by Ganesha?” On the screen of his unthinking mind he was perhaps visualizing a short, potbellied man with a disproportionately large elephant’s head -not to mention a golden crown on it- sitting on a small mouse and taking dictation from an old, half naked ash-smeared sage with matted hair and long grey beard, sitting on deer skin in Yogic position. If you listen to Hindu religionists’ conversations, most of what they say appears to be parrot-like utterances devoid of much thoughtfulness. Most of what they talk is so automatic that when I listen to them my head starts spinning.

Rational approach is needed

If rationalists are to put some sense into the heads of these religious people, simply telling them that their belief in god is a grand shared delusion, and their religious behavior is irrational, will not change them. In fact it will only harden their attitude. Rationalists must give them rational explanation with valid evidence straight from the scriptures regarding the origin of Hindus’ feelings of helplessness against evil forces and the reason for inventing god as a refuge to ward it off. Since we have no way of traveling back in time to interview our ancestors who invented god and religion, we can only depend upon dispassionate study and analysis of ancient scriptures, such as the Vedas, the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita, to get insight into their thinking and methods of solving societal problems. Our approach should be to review them as valuable documents, which reveal various historical events and forces, and not as religious scriptures promoting god and religion. It is like an architect studying an ancient temple to understand the origins of temple-building art taking into account religious beliefs that might have shaped the architecture. The rationalists’ formidable task is to teach the unthinking religionist to think outside the “ancient culture box.” However, this is easier said than done. Entrenched beliefs and behavioral patterns are extremely difficult to change.

Why facts can’t compete with belief

Here is an excerpt from The Atlantic by Lane Wallace, which sums up the difficulty a rationalist faces:

“Why do people cling to an opinion even after they are presented with contradictory evidence?” said Lane Wallace. “The easy answer, of course, is simply that people are irrational.” But the way in which they are irrational is telling. In a new study, social science researchers have found that people employ “motivated reasoning to fend off any evidence that their strongly held beliefs are wrong. Many people feel that they are their opinions, and hate to lose arguments; as Vince Lombardi once said, “Every time you lose, you die a little.” So when confronted with new, troubling information, ideologues selectively interpret the facts or use “contorted logic” to make conflicting evidence just go away. In the study, even when presented with “compelling, factual data” from a trusted source, many subjects “still found ways to dismiss it. ” In fact, researchers found that exposing people to contradictory information actually “intensified” their existing beliefs, making them more rigid and entrenched. Needless to say, the findings do not offer much hope of “changing anyone else’s mind with facts or rational discussion.”

So, in the articles to follow, I will analyze the origin of religion and gods in India, hoping that at least one ritualist Hindu could be converted to thinking Hindu.

(To be continued)

Dr. Prabhakar Kamath, is a psychiatrist currently practicing in the U.S. He is the author of Servants, Not Masters: A Guide for Consumer Activists in India (1987) and Is Your Balloon About Pop?: Owner’s Manual for the Stressed Mind.

Share on Facebook

Related posts:

1. A Rational Approach to the Problem of Obsessive Compulsive Religion
2. Producing Priests (How Government Funded Educational Institutions Are Promoting Religion in India)
3. Hinduism: Religion, Culture or Way of Life?

Thanks to Karen Armstrong, the author of The Case for God, we religious people FINALLY have a powerful strategy for combating reason. Contrary to its title, the book does not make a case for God at all. The story Ms. Armstrong lays out is, in actuality, the most succulent red herring that we can throw down to protect religion from critical thought. This is the basic idea: Atheism causes religious fundamentalism.

According to Ms. Armstrong, before science came on the scene people did not have any desire to know the ‘facts’ about reality. All pre-enlightenment Christians viewed the stuff in the Bible about Adam and Eve, the devil, the queers, the adulterers and the son of god, as metaphors for states of emotional well-being. They assigned no factual significance to all of this, until the atheists came along and forced some religious people to start understanding the scriptures as literal truth. Thus, atheists (and science itself) gave birth to religious fundamentalism!  The same goes for all the world’s religions. Thanks for your awesome revisionism, Ms. Armstrong. In my religious apologetics I have always wanted to employ Karl Rove’s strategy of going for your opponent’s strength while ignoring the facts.

Of course it is the new atheism that is responsible for religious literalism. Without people shoving facts down our throats why would anyone ever feel the need for any answers to fundamental questions about the nature of reality? Religion was never a response to primitive man’s quest towards understanding the natural world. If it weren’t for these sciencey types, we could all just get along without wasting time looking for ‘facts’ that could help us understand the universe. We could all just accept that inner intuition is the only true way of understanding anything, and leave it at that. This is what all religious people did before science came along with its ‘facts’ and numbers.

Ms. Armstrong writes in the November/December issue of Foreign Policy magazine,

“…it was the empirical emphasis of modern science that encouraged many to regard God and religious language as fact rather than symbol, thus forcing religion into an overly rational, dogmatic, and alien literalism.”

Ms. Armstrong understands that the best way to defend religion from fact-based criticism is to divorce religion of facts. In the process, we must also ignore the norms of fact-based debate while inventing arguments for use against atheists. Kudos, Ms. Armstrong, for your dexterity at cherry-picking the aspects of religion that appeal to us progressive believers, and for belittling literalistic versions of religion as being a reaction to science, while actually coming up with the best reaction to science there is- ignoring reality!

A significant portion of the book is devoted to establishing how religions make us human, by pointing to the essential facts about culture and society that religious institutions have absorbed into themselves. Karen Armstrong writes with spiritual conviction about all the social, emotional and developmental support that religion provides to us, while decreeing that all the bad stuff in religion comes from atheism! Not only is religion vital, but anything bad about religion arises because of the criticism of religion. Brilliant! The Organization of the Islamic conference must have had something similar in mind when they petitioned the UN to ban blasphemy because it causes religious violence. Instead of getting religious fundamentalists to be tolerant of appropriate criticism when they get their facts wrong, we must attempt to abolish all forms of rational criticism of our religious beliefs. This will make religious fundamentalism disappear. The Muslims will embrace the Jews, and so on.

Here is another quote from Ms. Armstrong:

“Homo sapiens is also Homo religiosus. As soon as we became recognizably human, men and women started to create religions. We are meaning-seeking creatures. While dogs, as far as we know, do not worry about the canine condition or agonize about their mortality, humans fall very easily into despair if we don’t find some significance in our lives. Theological ideas come and go, but the quest for meaning continues. So God isn’t going anywhere. And when we treat religion as something to be derided, dismissed, or destroyed, we risk amplifying its worst faults. Whether we like it or not, God is here to stay, and it’s time we found a way to live with him in a balanced, compassionate manner.”

This is such a refreshing way of ignoring science to make the amazingly insightful point that human beings need meaning. It’s true that all over the world secular humanists have long promoted social alternatives to replace old institutionalized superstitions, but we must ignore these kinds of atheists and focus our ire on the few atheists who dare to criticize our institutions. If we can get the humanists to condemn the criticism of religion that comes from those atheists who are primarily anti-religion, we can continue to keep secular humanism itself irrelevant. Actually acknowledging that a secular moral education can impart a limitless sense of wonder and meaning in life is dangerous to our agenda. So, Ms. Armstrong is right to criticize atheism for leading to fundamentalism in religion and removing meaning from human existence. People need to see that atheists are nothing but mean-spirited folks who are obsessive compulsive about ‘facts’. Atheists are, obviously, one-dimensional. Atheism cannot offer any meaning. It’s true that atheism is simply a non-belief, like aunicornism, and there are other fact-based ways of giving life meaning, but if we keep the focus on atheists and ignore the secular humanists, the latter will never have a chance to show religious folk that there are perhaps better and more meaningful ways of perceiving human existence and our place in the universe.

Karen Armstrong’s strategy seems to be working already.A number of secular humanists have come out criticizing the “New Atheists” for being too abrasive towards religion. Great job, Ms. Armstrong, for getting the humanists to do our work for us.

I am emboldened by Ms.Armstrong’s courage to go after the giants of atheism,

“…in claiming that God is the source of all human cruelty, Hitchens and Dawkins ignore some of the darker facets of modern secular society, which has been spectacularly violent because our technology has enabled us to kill people on an unprecedented scale.”

The hyperbole in representing Hitchens and Dawkins’ view of God as the source of all human cruelty may be considered a straw man argument in some circles, but I see exactly where you are going with this one, Ms. Armstrong. If we let it be known that these men actually have a more complex, compassionate and complete view of human morality, the cat is out of the bag. It works to our advantage if we present these so-called leaders of the new atheism as ignorant of all deep human affairs. It must be true, since after all, atheists have no meaning or purpose in their lives.

In conclusion, Karen Armstrong does more for religion by attacking any criticism of the idea of God as ill-posed, while presenting her book as an actual argument for God. In essence, Ms. Armstrong has shifted the argument from why it matters that understanding the ‘facts’ about religion, god and belief are important, to why such analysis of ‘facts’ is dangerous. I recommend that you go out and purchase this book if you, like me, feel that the debate between science and religion is best presented as a black and white dichotomy with no shades of grey, or red or purple.

Share on Facebook

Related posts:

1. The Case for Naturalistic Spirituality

For example — the name of your new serial is going to be ‘Pagal’ (means ‘mad’ or eccentric). Your numerologist tells you your lucky number is 6. How do you make it? You change the name into ‘Ppagal’ or ‘Paggal’ . Isn’t it interesting? Now you are not just mad, you’re quite mad!

This practice caters to people’s craving to know, influence or improve their future. Soothsayers, horoscopewallahs of all kinds thrive because of this human weakness. In fact our lives are influenced or molded by so many myriads of factors –things, people and happenings– that there cannot be and there has never been any way of   knowing, leave alone changing, one’s future. There can be no magic.

It would be wonderful if the Numerologists themselves explained how exactly their thing works. How anyone’s name can possibly affect the future, or the total of the digits of their dates of birth have anything to do with their good fortune? In fact, it is the claimant’s duty to explain and establish their claim. But they will not do so. On this ground anybody can claim anything. For example - I can say ‘God sent me a message that you would do better if you …’ or ‘I had a dream that you should name your child Gobardhan’. Who can stop me? I do not have to explain!

So, what all these people use is their common sense and their knowledge of human nature. Even astrologers do not read your palm-they try to read your mind and find out your weaknesses. I have faced the leading Astrologer/palmist of Bengal, Ms Jaya Ganguly, in a TV show and showed how to defeat these people. It also proved that they do not see the palm - they see your dress, attitude and listen to you. That’s another story.

In this era of cut-throat competition intensified by the global recession, people will do anything before going into a new venture. So these practices - Reiki, Vaastu, Stone-therapy, Numerology, Name-ology(!) and such are thriving. Try to understand that these practitioners themselves are struggling to make money by cheating people. Their best targets, let me tell you, are the -’Moneyed Fools’. Why do they advertise and open chambers if they could predict or influence their own future?

These items are expensive and so are thriving in Mumbai, the finance capital of India and also the home of Bollywood. In Bengal, the middle class is happy with palmists and astrologers who come cheap, though they prescribe stones costing anything between 5000 to 50000 rupees depending on your pocket.

Anyway, to date I haven’t met anyone who could foretell the future. There is this challenge issued for the last 20 years -anybody who can prove accurately under fool-proof conditions the authenticity of Reiki, Vaastu, Astrology, Numerology etc will be paid Rs.20 lakhs as prize money. And also our organization - Science & Rationalists Association of India, will close down in such an instance. Many have tried, but found excuses to vanish at the last moment.

Share on Facebook

No related posts.

(Note: All previous parts in the Complexity Explained series by Dr. Vinod Wadhawan can be accessed through the ‘Related Posts’ listed below the article.)

How did life originate on Earth? Chemical or molecular evolution preceded the emergence of life. Under the influx of low-entropy energy from the Sun, and aided by the presence of certain rocks, atoms and molecules underwent chemical reactions resulting in the emergence of molecules of higher and higher information content or complexity. This article explains how this occurred.

8.1 From Atoms to Molecules

The chemical symbol H is used for an atom of hydrogen, which is the first element in the periodic table of elements. It has a nucleus, which is just a proton in this case, and there is an electron orbiting around the nucleus. The electron has a negative charge, exactly equal in magnitude to the positive charge of the proton. Taking this quantity as the unit of charge, we say that an H atom has a charge number 1 (Z = 1). Taking the mass of the proton as the unit mass, we say that H has a mass number 1 (A = 1). The electron is ~2000 times lighter than the proton.

Element number 2 in the periodic table is helium (chemical symbol He). There are two protons in its nucleus, and two electrons orbiting around the nucleus. There are also two neutrons in the nucleus. Neutrons are so called because they have no charge. The mass of a neutron is not very different from the mass of a proton. So, for the He atom, Z = 2, and A = 4.

Life on Earth is based on organic chemistry, i.e. the chemistry of the carbon atom, denoted by the symbol C. For this atom, Z = 6, and A = 12.

A molecule of hydrogen is denoted by the symbol H₂. It consists of two nuclei of hydrogen, and there are two electrons orbiting around them. Why does hydrogen ‘prefer’ to exist as H₂, rather than as H? Because H₂ is more stable that H. Why? Consider the two electrons of H₂. Quantum mechanics tells that they have no individuality, and are therefore indistinguishable. Let us consider any of them. Since positive and negative charges attract one another, the electron stays close (but not too close) to the two nuclei. [But for the Heisenberg uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics, the electrons of all the atoms would have gone right into their nuclei, and you and I would not be here, discussing chemical complexity!] Naturally, the positive charges on the two nuclei of H₂ are better than only one positive charge in H, when it comes to exerting an attractive force on the electron. Thus H₂ is more stable (it has a lower internal energy) than H because the former is a more strongly bound entity. Thus H atoms form H₂ molecules because by doing so the overall free energy gets reduced (the second law of thermodynamics demands that the free energy be as small as possible). Formation of H₂ from two atoms of H is an example of evolution of chemical complexity. More information is needed for describing the structure and function of H₂, than of H.

What is the nature of the bonding between the two atoms of H₂ or H-H? It is described as covalent bonding. Each of the two H atoms contributes its electron to the chemical bond between them, and the two electrons in the bonding region belong to both the nuclei.

Another kind of chemical bonding is the so-called electrovalent bonding (also called ionic bonding). It is the bonding that occurs between oppositely charged ions. Take sodium chloride (NaCl). For the Na atom, Z = 11, and for the chlorine atom, Z = 17. The laws of quantum mechanics are such that an atom of Na is more stable if it is surrounded by only 10 electrons, instead of 11. Similarly, Cl is more stable if it has 18 electrons, rather than 17. They can solve the problem together by getting readily ‘ionized’; i.e. an Na atom can become a positively charged ion Na⁺ by losing an electron (called the valence electron), and a Cl atom can become a negatively charged ion Cl^- by gaining an electron. The two oppositely charged ions can lower the potential energy (and therefore the free energy) by coming close to each other, thus forming an ionic bond between them.

The third important and generally strong type of bonding is metallic bonding. It occurs in metals like aluminium (Al), copper (Cu), silver (Ag), gold (Au), etc. Take the case of Al. For it, Z = 13. But like an atom of Na considered above, it is more stable if it has just 10 electrons around the nucleus. So Al atoms, when in the close vicinity of one another, lose their three valence electrons to a common pool, and these valence electron become the common property of all the Al ions. A lump of Al metal is held together by this cloud of negatively charged electrons, compensating for the positive charges on the Al ions.

8.2 The Hydrogen Bond and the van der Waals Bond

The covalent, electrovalent, and metallic bonds described above are the so-called primary bonds. They are strong bonds. Diamond, for example, consists of covalently bonded carbon atoms, and is a very hard material. In metals also the atoms are strongly bonded to one another, as are the atoms in a crystal of sodium chloride in which the electrovalent interaction dominates. There are a number of other types of bonds or interactions which are substantially weaker, but are very important for biological systems in particular, and soft matter in general. Particularly ubiquitous is the hydrogen bond. Take the example of water, H₂O or H-O-H. The oxygen atom forms covalent bonds with the two hydrogen atoms. Each such covalent bond (O-H) has two electrons associated with it, one coming from hydrogen and one from oxygen. The electron distribution around the two hydrogen nuclei in such a bond is not like that in a symmetrical bond like C-C in the structure of diamond. The oxygen nucleus has a charge number 8, which is much more than the charge number 1 of H, so it hogs a larger share of the electron charge cloud associated with the bond (we say the oxygen atom is very electronegative). This makes the nucleus of the hydrogen atom somewhat less shielded by the electron which was orbiting around it when there was no bonding of any kind. For similar reasons, the oxygen nucleus and its charge cloud of electrons are together a little more negative than they would be in an isolated atom of O. The end result is that the water molecule is like a little dipole. It has two positive ends and a negative end. All the water molecules are dipoles, so they tend to orient themselves such that a positive end (the hydrogen end) of one molecule points towards the negative end (the oxygen end) of another molecule. So we speak of hydrogen bonds, denoted in this example by O-H…O.

The most crucial aspect of the hydrogen bond in the evolution of chemical and biological complexity is that it is of intermediate strength, not as strong as the covalent bond, and yet not as weak as the so-called van der Waals bond (or the London dispersive bond). The van der Waals interaction is very weak, though always present between any two atoms. Quantum-mechanical fluctuations in the electronic charge cloud around an atom can result in a transient charge separation or dipole or multipole moment, and the electric field of this multipole induces a multipole moment on any neighbouring atom. This results in a small attraction between the two atoms.

The energy required to break a chemical bond is a measure of its strength. The melting point of a solid is an indicator of the strength of the weakest bonding in it. The covalent bond is the strongest, with a typical bonding energy of ~400 kilocalories (kcal). The electrovalent bond is typically half as strong as the covalent bond. The metallic bond shows a wide range of strengths, two extreme examples being the bonding in mercury on one extreme, and the bonding in tungsten on the other. The strength of a hydrogen bond is typically 14 kcal. And van der Waals bonding involves energies below 1 kcal. The most relevant fact for our purpose here is that the energy involved in hydrogen bonding is typically only ~10 times larger than the energy of thermal fluctuations, but is still much lower than the energy of a typical covalent bond. At typical temperatures at which biological systems exist, it is difficult for thermal fluctuations to break covalent bonds, but there is a fairly good chance that they can break hydrogen bonds.

8.3 The Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions

We have seen above that water is an aggregate of tiny dipoles. We say that it is a polar material. By contrast, there are a large number of ‘hydrocarbons’ which are nonpolar materials. [A hydrocarbon is a compound made predominantly of hydrogen and carbon atoms.] In contrast to the O-H bond in water, which is a bond with a dipole moment, the C-H bond in a hydrocarbon is largely nonpolar: The two electrons forming the C-H covalent bond are shared almost equally between C and H. Thus, a C-H bond hardly results in the creation of a dipole, and therefore it does not form a hydrogen bond with a water molecule. Now suppose we mix polar and nonpolar fluids. Segregation will occur. The nonpolar molecules will tend to huddle together because they cannot take part in the hydrogen bonding. They have a kind of ‘phobia’ for water molecules, and so we speak of the hydrophobic interaction. Since the hydrogen bond is of intermediate strength, the hydrophobic interaction is also of intermediate strength.

There are many types of organic compounds that are predominately of hydrocarbon structure, but have polar functional groups attached to them. Examples of this type are cholesterol, fatty acids and phospholipids. Such molecules have a nonpolar or hydrophobic end, and a polar or hydrophilic end. When put in water, they self-aggregate such that the hydrophilic ends point towards water, and the hydrophobic ends get tucked away, avoiding interfacing with water. This is why oil does not mix with water. By contrast, alcohol and water mix so readily that no stirring is needed; both are polar liquids. I forget the name of the king who said: ‘I do not care where the water flows, so long as it does not enter my wine!’

Beautiful self-assemblies like micelles, liposomes, and bilayer sheets may ensue because of the hydrophobic interaction.

8.4 Molecular Recognition and Self-Assembly

Let us go into some details of how the lowering of free energy occurs at the atomic scale. If two atoms are close to each other, they will bond together to form a molecule if the molecule has a lower free energy than that of the two separate atoms. Next, let us consider the possible bonding among molecules to form still larger assemblies (or ‘supramolecular aggregates‘). Things get more interesting now. The important concept of molecular recognition becomes operative here. Those types of molecules are likely to form assemblies which have a certain degree of complementarity. There are two types of complementarity to consider: That of lock-and-key-like shapes, and that of complementary charge distributions (remember, positive attracts negative). These complementarities, if present, enable two molecules to fit snugly into each other, thus lowering the overall potential energy, and thence the free energy. This is a more stable configuration because thermal fluctuations are less likely to knock the snugly-fitting molecules apart, and is the essence of chemical self-assembly in Nature. Self-assembly is like crystal growth, except that the end product may carry a lot more information; i.e. it is more complex.

The phenomenon of molecular complementarity was discovered by the Nobel Laureate Paul Ehrlich. As a student he was working on the newly discovered aniline dyes, which he used for staining biological cells. He found that each dye stained only a particular type of tissue or a specific species of bacteria, and not others. What happens is that the dye molecule moves around in the solution till it finds a binding site exactly fitting the pattern of atoms in one of its side chains. For stability, the complementarity of the ‘lock’ and the ‘key’ should be not only spatial, but also electrostatic; otherwise the specificity is not very strong: Not only the two shapes should be complementary, even the regions of positive excess charge on one molecule should be complementary to regions of negative excess charge on the other molecule. Here are some examples of spatial and charge complementarity in Nature:

• The complementarity between the active site of an enzyme and the substrate of the enzyme.
• The well-known ‘base-pair complementarity’ in DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) and RNA (ribonucleic acid) strands. [I shall discuss this later.]
• Self-assembly of viruses and subcellular organelles.
• Receptors located on the surface of cells only bind a very limited number of substrates (often only one). The receptor is typically much more complicated (larger) than the substrate (hormone) that binds to it, as indicated in the accompanying sketch.

Supramolecular aggregates, normally formed under near-ambient conditions, do not involve covalent interactions usually. Instead, they are governed by weak, i.e. noncovalent or secondary, interactions (van der Waals; weak-Coulomb; hydrogen bond; hydrophobic; etc.). Because of this feature, the bonds in a supramolecular assembly at or near room temperature can get readily broken and re-formed, in a time-reversible manner, until the system has found its most stable configuration. Reversibility of bonding is a very important feature of self-assembly through molecular recognition.

Biological and other soft materials can self-assemble into a variety of shapes, and over a whole range of length scales. There is usually some amount of water present, and the most important factor mediating self-assembly is the hydrophobic interaction. Incidentally, self-assembly per se is a far more ubiquitous phenomenon than just molecular self-assembly. Some examples are: crystals; liquid crystals; bacterial colonies; beehives; ant colonies; schools of fish; weather patterns; even galaxies.

Self-assembly may be either static or dynamic. The former occurs in systems which are in local or global equilibrium, and which do not dissipate energy (e.g. crystals). Dynamic self-assembly is more relevant from the point of view of evolution of complexity, and always involves dissipation of energy. Here are some examples: oscillating and reaction-diffusion reactions; weather patterns; galaxies.

Weak interactions, with energies comparable to thermal energies, ensure that the bonds can be made and unmade reversibly, until the lowest-energy ordered configuration has been reached.

Growth of molecular crystals is an example of this. Reversibility also implies that the growing (self-assembling) system is close to equilibrium at all times.

8.5 Evolutionary Drug Designing

As a small digression, I want to mention here the use of the lock-and-key idea for designing drugs. Very often, for a drug to be effective, its molecular structure should be such that it can fit snugly into a relevant cleft in a protein molecule. In more general terms, drug activity is obtained through the binding of one molecule, i.e. the ‘ligand’, to the pocket of another, usually larger, molecule called the receptor. In their binding conformations, the molecules exhibit geometric and chemical complementarity, both of which are necessary for successful drug activity.

It can be very expensive to actually synthesise all those trial drugs and test their compatibility with the cleft in the protein molecule. Therefore, computers are used to carry out what is called ‘evolutionary computing‘. The computer code generates billions of random drug molecules, which it tests against the cleft in the protein. One such imaginary molecule may contain a site which matches one of, say, six sites on the cleft. This molecule is then ’selected’ (it has an ‘evolutionary advantage’), and a billion variations of it are created, and tested using a suitable ‘fitness test’. And so on to the next generations of trial molecules, till the best drug shape is obtained. I shall discuss such ‘artificial evolution’ in a future article, after introducing the basics of biological evolution. As Kevin Kelly (1994) said: ‘Evolutionary breeding of drugs is the future of biotechnology.‘

8.6 The Tobacco Mosaic Virus

I consider here the example of the tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) to illustrate the hazy, perhaps nonexistent, line between life and nonlife. Any virus (including TMV) typically has an RNA core and a protein coating. It is possible to separate these two components, and purify and store them in the laboratory. At any later time the components can be mixed and incubated, and the TMV gets reconstituted by self-assembly. The reconstituted TMV thus not only comes back to ‘life’, it can even reproduce itself if placed on a tobacco leaf!

8.7 We Owe Our Lives to the Hydrogen Bond

Life and its evolution depend on the hydrogen bond. This bond is much weaker than the covalent bond, and yet strong enough to sustain self-assembled biological structures, enabling them to withstand the disintegrating influences of thermal fluctuations and other perturbations. Hydrogen bonding, and the associated hydrophobic interaction, has the right kind of strength to enable superstructures to self-assemble without the need for irreversible chemical reactions. There is a strong element of reversibility associated with these weak interactions, enabling the spontaneous making and breaking of assemblies until the lowest-free-energy configuration has been attained.

8.8 Self-Organization

The amount of information contained in organized or complex matter is very high. This information is distributed among the shapes of the component molecules, and in the interaction patterns among them. The build up of this information involves a succession of stages: molecular recognition; self-assembly; self-organization; and chemical adaptation and evolution. We have already considered the first two. Let us now focus on self-organization.

Lehn (2002) defined self-organization as the ’spontaneous but information-directed generation of organized functional structures in equilibrium conditions’. The necessary information (’coding’) for self-organization is contained in the molecular-recognition and self-assembly proclivities of the component molecules. This coding also determines how the self-assembled edifice self-organizes into a functional structure in equilibrium. For a recent survey of the various types of coding for self-organization, see my book Smart Structures: Blurring the Distinction between the Living and the Nonliving (2007).

Self-organization is a far more ubiquitous phenomenon than something at just the molecular level. Here are some examples:

• A laser is a self-organized system. Under properly engineered conditions, photons spontaneously group themselves into a configuration in which they all move in phase, resulting in a powerful laser beam.
• A hurricane is a self-organized system. The steady influx of energy from the Sun draws water from the oceans, as well as drives the winds. Mild tropical winds may grow into an organized configuration of a hurricane when some critical threshold is crossed.
• A living cell is a self-organized system, which organizes itself all the time, depending on the environment.
• An economy is a self-organizing system. The demand for goods and services, as also the demand for labour, constantly organizes the economy in a spontaneous way, without any central controlling authority.

8.9 Chemical Adaptation and Evolution

Given a set of conditions, molecules in a system tend to self-organize so as to minimize the overall free energy. This is chemical adaptation. Now suppose this set of conditions changes. This is very likely, in fact inevitable, because we are dealing with an open system. A further round of self-organization must occur, governed as always by the second law of thermodynamics. This is chemical evolution. Moreover, the set of changing conditions, i.e. the changing environment experienced by the molecules, need not necessarily be that external to the set of molecules. Even internal changes in the molecular system present a changed environment to every member of the set. And molecular configurations are changing all the time. Thus, chemical adaptation and evolution occurs in an open system of molecules (including our ecosystem) all the time.

One can draw analogies with Darwinian evolution to see if ‘natural selection’ (i.e. molecular selection) and ’survival of the fittest’ also occurs in chemical evolution. The answer is ‘yes’ because when the resources are limited, there is competition among the alternative molecular-reaction pathways, and only the fittest pathways can survive so far as consumption of precursor molecules and energy-rich molecules is concerned. Such considerations aroused special interest for explaining the origin of life-sustaining molecules. Some pioneering work in this direction was done by Melvin Calvin (1969), who introduced the idea of autocatalysis as a mechanism for molecular selection. I shall consider autocatalysis in the next article.

8.10 Concluding Remarks

The lock-and-key idea is crucial for explaining the evolution of molecules and molecular assemblies of increasing complexity in Nature. Two molecules may ordinarily interact only weakly, but a snug fitting of portions of the two molecules can lead to a much stronger degree of cohesion between them, because they ‘touch’ or attract each other at many points.

Another crucial factor for the chemical evolution of complexity is the reversibility of the non-covalent bonding between molecules; reversibility is the key to self-assembly. And once a stable self-assembly has got created (through molecular trial and error), generally there is no ‘looking back’. The overall large cohesive energy has a stabilizing effect. But there can still be a looking forward: If the environment changes, the self-assembled system can respond (i.e. adapt) by again exploiting the reversible nature of its non-covalent interactions. This is chemical evolution. As we shall see in due course, chemical evolution has led to biological evolution. And as I have said many times, evolution and emergent properties are the hallmarks of complexity.

I conclude by saying a few words about vesicles, which provide a good, even dramatic, example of self-organization in a nonliving complex system. Vesicles are spherical supramolecular assemblies separating an aqueous interior volume from the external solvent by means of lipid bilayers. They are also called liposomes, and are quite similar to micelles (see figure above). Given the right conditions, lipids can self-assemble into giant vesicles the size of biological cells. The basic driving force for their self-assembly is the hydrophobic interaction. As vividly described by Menger and Gabrielson (1995), vesicles can mimic the living cell in many ways, even though they are not living entities:

When a giant vesicle, which happens to have a smaller vesicle inside it, is exposed to octyl glucoside, the smaller vesicle can pass through the outer membrane into the external medium (’birthing’). The resulting injury to the membrane of the host vesicle heals immediately. Addition of cholic acid, on the other hand, induces a feeding frenzy in which a vesicle grows rapidly as it consumes its smaller neighbours. After the food is gone, the giant vesicle then self-destructs (a case of ‘birth, growth, and death’). Such lifelike morphological changes were obtained by using commercially available chemicals; thus these processes should be assigned to organic chemistry, and not to biology or even biochemistry.

Share on Facebook

Related posts:

1. COMPLEXITY EXPLAINED: 7. Cosmic Evolution of Complexity
2. COMPLEXITY EXPLAINED: 9. How Did Complex Molecules Like Proteins and DNA Emerge Spontaneously?
3. COMPLEXITY EXPLAINED: 6. Emergence of Complexity in Far-from-Equilibrium Systems

Prabir Ghosh, General Secretary of Science & Rationalist Association of India was invited as the chief guest to handover the certificates and mementos to the winners of the inter-school competition on scientific outlook being arranged by the Orissa Rationalist Association for the last 10 years.

On this occasion, Prabir with his team was asked to conduct anti-supernatual programs for 2 days– 10 and 11 October, at various venues.

Over two days, programs were held in two colleges, two schools and one slum in Rourkela, and in a village and a tribal bustee near Rourkela. Sumitra Padmanabhan, president of the organisation and Biplab Das, secretary were among the team. The pictures below were taken by Ms. Padmanabhan.

Mr. D.D. Patra, secretary of O.R.A. had made excellent arrangement so that all together 7 programs, the award ceremony and a Press conference were fitted into 2 days. The students were keen and active partcipants, full of questions and ideas. Even the poor villagers and slum dwellers were very attentive and full of excitement.

The whole experience was interesting and very satisfying for the team from Kolkata. The idea of a number of campaigns in different venues was highly appreciated. The rationailst message could be conveyed to a large number of people through a cross-section of society. There were students, parents, slum dwellers, villagers–people of all ages, women and small children.

Special thanks to Dr. Banamali Kar, a professor of Metallurgy and senior prof. N. R.Mohanty, a civil engineer who are staunch rationalists themselves and were constantly with the team. Sri Gaganbihari Dhal, Sri Debendra Dash, Dr. Nagen Das, Sri Kirtan Parida and Ms. Chhabi Mohanty were others who made the programs successful with their support.t.

Share on Facebook

Related posts:

1. Science Trust Organizing Two-day Program In Remembrance Of Founder B. Premanand

Those who agree with the idea are free to offer new points, ask questions based on the article mentioned above and design a short draft for starting signature campaign -in print and via internet. All are welcome to join and help.

The need is more now than ever. With the government’s apathy towards the needs of poorer classes, with no easy insurance scheme in sight, with no chance of free healthcare in the near future, it is reasonable that people would like to have an option. I mean, why spend all our hard-earned money on doctors, pathologists and nursing homes? We even need to bribe the government hospital staff for common assistance. We still suffer and die in the end, don’t we?

We can eat well, read and travel more with that kind of money and have a better life in general even if a little shorter; I mean minus those months in the hospital, in Intensive Care Unit or under ventilation. Isn’t money meant for buying better stuff?

I see thousands of people turning paranoid as they approach old age. They save money for treatment, they suffer from constant fear and some become patients of depression. No, not in fear of death, but in fear of suffering alone in ill-equipped and expensive hospitals. For example, morphine is in acute shortage. So, a cancer patient is often forced to suffer acute pain. What right do hospitals have to keep you in exchange of good money when they cannot offer relief? The patients’ suffering does not end there. They lose all their life’s savings, their family suffers physically and mentally. Finally death comes to all when the bereaved are financially drained too. It is a sort of catch 22 situation and people after a healthy, happy, active life surely do not deserve this in the end.

Legalizing euthanasia does not mean that people will rush for it. It will only assure us that in irreversible cases or intolerably painful situations, there is some solace. We need not be blackmailed into spending and suffering simultaneously. And it will be entirely as per our own will. No ‘benevolent’ family member need to take the decision of hospitalizing on our behalf.

Only this knowledge would improve the quality of life. People in the age-group of 60-90 can then really enjoy life. Having control over our own life –and death is a wonderful idea. In fact it’s beautiful.

***

[So, we request the government to give a thought, go through the pros and cons, and make 'Swechhamrityu' legal in India.

In fact, clearing the hospital bill of anything from 25000 to 25, 00,000 while taking delivery of the lifeless body of your near ones is a common experience many of us are faced with in our life. And we are lucky, if you consider the 78% of Indians who cannot spend more than 20 rupees per day. As long as the government can spend crores for keeping military and police force, there is no logic behind not providing medical help free of cost. So, logically speaking, the provision for euthanasia in exceptional situations, or after a certain age is a must.

What I mean to highlight is that death should be at a person's own will always and everywhere. In India it is all the more essential and urgent because of the social system.]

Sumitra Padmanabhan is the General Secretary of the Humanists’ Association, Kolkata

[Website: www.srai.org ; E mail :  sumitra_humanist@hotmail.com]

Share on Facebook

Related posts:

1. Euthanasia: A Death Wish