What is into the literature differs from the process that is scientific

What is into the literature differs from the process that is scientific

Writing in his autobiography, the Nobel laureate Franзois Jacob described how the means of science was actually quite distinct from the thing that was eventually written and published into the peer-reviewed literature. 1 He related how his research with Sydney Brenner and Matthew Meselsen initially had setbacks when they attempted to identify a hypothesized intermediary molecule that took information from genes and allowed protein to be synthesized inside cells. He and his colleagues attempted, without luck, to exhibit that the factor, which we know as mRNA, attached itself to ribosomes, the cell’s protein-manufacturing machinery today. So 1 day, discouraged, Jacob said, he and Brenner took a rest and went along to a Pacific Ocean beach, where Brenner sooner or later exclaimed that magnesium was essential for binding.

If the two gone back to the laboratory, they added enough magnesium with their experiments after which showed the factor associated with ribosomes. Without sufficient magnesium, the mRNA would not affix to ribosomes. The scientists had provided evidence for the existence of mRNA, which we now know transcribes information from DNA into a language that ribosomes can understand. However the paper reporting the outcomes, which appeared in general in 1961, had not been a narrative that is historical of happened. Continue reading “What is into the literature differs from the process that is scientific”