Live nature contains three ancient mysteries: the origin of life, evolution and death.

To unravel the first of them, intensive attempts are currently being made to reproduce the process of the emergence of life under artificial conditions. The second riddle is no less complex - the riddle of evolution, or the complication and improvement of living systems while maintaining the same structural elements of living matter. Indeed, nature is both surprisingly uniform and amazingly diverse. The simplest living organisms - viruses - have the same structure as the carriers of heredity in higher organisms - genes. Proteins in bacteria and humans are made from the same building blocks - amino acids.

How is the stability of its basic elements ensured in nature and their amazing improvement in the process of evolution on the way from the simplest single-celled organisms to higher organisms? A lot depends on the answer to this question. Including the solution to death. We are accustomed to believe that all life ends in death, that “to live means to die.” But what makes death inevitable? Before considering this issue, let me remind you: in nature, as is known, there are two fundamentally different mechanisms of death - from external and from internal causes.

Theoretically, some of the simplest single-celled organisms are immortal, since after each division of such a creature, two completely identical daughter descendants appear, possessing all the properties of the original organism. Under favorable conditions, the process of successive divisions can continue indefinitely. A classic example: the division of a single-celled organism - paramecium - over 8400 generations. IN in this case it does not matter that in reality only specimens of some protozoa create generations capable of dividing vegetatively (without sexual reproduction) indefinitely. If this ability were observed only in one species of protozoa, or even in one branch, then this would be the basis for the assertion that, theoretically, life exists without internal causes of death in the presence of certain favorable environmental conditions.

The property of potential immortality can also be seen in the example of complex multicellular organisms if so-called malignant changes occur in their cells. Indeed, the normal cells from which a multicellular organism is built are in such interaction with each other that the sizes of the organs remain constant - site. For example, very intensive cell renewal occurs in the gastrointestinal tract. But new cells regularly replace dying ones, that is, exactly as many cells appear as are necessary to maintain their “planned” number. Moreover, normal cells, being in artificial conditions outside the body, in the so-called tissue culture, divide only a strictly defined number of times and then die. When a cell becomes cancerous, its descendants can live both in tissue culture and in the body indefinitely if they are successively transplanted or transplanted. The famous German scientist Paul Ehrlich isolated a tumor in a mouse back in 1906, which is now used in all countries in scientific research, although the maximum lifespan of a mouse does not exceed three years. In other words, paradoxically, cancer provides potential cell immortality.

And yet both single-celled organisms and cancer cells die. Indeed, it has long been calculated that if the death of unicellular organisms had not occurred, the descendants of one ciliate would soon have occupied a volume exceeding the volume of the globe. What limits the lifespan of single-celled creatures? Such a limiter is, first of all, the state of their habitat.

A living organism is in a very close relationship with the outside world. The presence or absence of food, the physical conditions of the environment, the degree of its pollution - these are the main factors with which the vital activity of the organism is inextricably linked. At the same time, any organism can exist only if the composition of its body is maintained within certain, usually quite narrow limits. The great French physiologist Claude Bernard formulated this position more than 100 years ago as follows: the constancy of the internal environment is a necessary condition for the free life of the organism. The law of constancy of the internal environment of the body is a fundamental law of biology. You can even designate it as the First Fundamental Biological Law (although the serial number in this case does not say much: all fundamental laws are characterized by the fact that none of them can be violated).

Metabolism, based on the intake of food, water and oxygen into the body, primarily ensures the constancy of the internal environment. In single-celled creatures, the reserves of energy materials in the body are very small and, accordingly, their dependence on food intake is, as a rule, extremely pronounced. Single-celled organisms depend even more on the physical conditions of their environment. The delicate cell membrane - the cell membrane - cannot be a reliable protection against damaging external factors. This is understandable: both the intake of food and the release of waste occurs through this membrane. Essentially, single-celled organisms are in equilibrium with their environment, and the constancy of their body composition, that is, the requirement corresponding to the First Biological Law, can be fulfilled only to the extent that the constancy of the external environment is maintained. Changes in the external environment, caused, for example, by the very activity of single-celled organisms, can cause their death.

Thus, in most cases, death in unicellular organisms is caused by the action of external factors, that is, it is death from external causes. This gives grounds to assert that, theoretically, some protozoa may turn out to be immortal in conditions where the external environment is favorable for this.

If we talk about humans, then external causes of death are associated primarily with the so-called diseases of civilization. It is believed that excessive or improper nutrition, insufficient physical activity, mental stress (emotional stress), toxic substances, common in the external environment (for example, carcinogens - chemicals that cause cancer) - all these are the causes of major human diseases: atherosclerosis and cancer. Thus, it is assumed that in humans it is external factors that determine the main causes of death. However, it is hardly worth proving that eliminating external causes of disease will not save higher organisms from death. Each type of organism is characterized by a certain limit of life span. A rat cannot live more than four years, an elephant cannot live more than 80, and no one has observed a rat living longer than is normal for an elephant. Elimination of external unfavorable factors can only lead to the fact that the life expectancy of an individual coincides with its species limit. So, if the average human lifespan is now about 70 years, then its species limit is considered to be 120 years. In the meantime, for most organisms, only individual representatives reach the species limits of life.

Today, it is most generally accepted that there are two independent phenomena that limit life expectancy: the physiological process of aging and diseases that increasingly affect a person with age. At the same time, it was calculated that if the main diseases of aging - atherosclerosis and cancer - are eliminated, then human life expectancy will increase by 18 years; if all diseases of old age are eliminated, this will give on average an additional 2-5 years of life. On this basis, it is assumed that in conditions of aging without disease, a person will die at an age close to 100 years. After all, the burden of disease often makes a person’s life very difficult even in middle age, not to mention in old age. However, this optimistic construction is, unfortunately, vulnerable. Mainly due to the division of natural causes of death into diseases and physiological aging. Indeed, how does physiological aging end life? Again due to the development of diseases. Another thing is that their likelihood increases over the years. Moreover, these are, as a rule, very specific diseases. We have already mentioned that in middle and old age, the ten main diseases out of many hundreds of possible ones cause the death of every 85 people out of 100. They are: obesity, diabetes obesity, atherosclerosis, hypertension, metabolic (metabolic) immunosuppression, autoimmune diseases, mental depression and cancer. For reasons that will become clear to you a little later, we refer to these diseases, as well as menopause and hyperadaptosis, as normal diseases of aging.

There are many arguments in favor of the fact that the occurrence of these diseases is very great importance have external factors. Thus, obesity, obese diabetes mellitus and atherosclerosis arise as a result of overeating and decreased physical activity. In turn, obesity causes metabolic immunosuppression, that is, a decrease in immunity due to excessive use of fat as an energy source. Metabolic immunosuppression promotes cancer development. Stress, mental overstrain and long-delayed negative emotions cause hypertension, mental depression and accelerate the course of cancer.

This is all true. But at the same time, it remains undoubted: although the elimination of unfavorable external factors can increase life expectancy, it cannot expand its species limit.

What's the matter here? Why is aging combined with a certain group of diseases, and not with any diseases from the many hundreds of known pathological processes? What determines the species limit of life - physiological aging, that is, wear and tear of the body associated with the cessation of renewal of its cells, or certain diseases that arise under the influence of internal causes? And if the latter is true, then what are these internal causes that act with such regularity?

In living nature, there are examples of the mechanism of death that is clearly not related to the influence of external causes. Everyone knows the type of death characteristic of the mayfly butterfly. Such a butterfly, having emerged from a larva in the morning by the end of the first day and having completed the reproduction cycle, dies. Death occurs regardless of environmental conditions - as if the winding of a watch ends. Such death from internal causes is no exception. It can be observed even more clearly in a more complex organism—pink salmon. This fish lives for four to five years in Pacific Ocean. During this period, maturation and increase in body size occur, and fat accumulates in the liver and body. But now the breeding season is approaching, and pink salmon begins its long journey, sometimes thousands of kilometers, to the mouth of the river in which it was born. From the very beginning of this journey, fish use mainly liver fat reserves as an energy source. The fat reserve decreases, but the concentration in the blood of cholesterol, which is synthesized from fat, increases. And within one to two months the fish “grows old.” Her jaws bend, her eyes become sunken, and her skin becomes thinner. Very profound changes occur in the body of pink salmon - signs characteristic of diabetes mellitus and atherosclerosis appear, and resistance to infection decreases. Finally, the female pink salmon lay eggs, which are inseminated by the male pink salmon. After one or two weeks, the parent fish die. The cause of death is multiple infarctions of the heart, brain, lungs, and kidneys. This is understandable, since the concentration of cholesterol in the blood of pink salmon during the spawning period increases approximately 10 times.

The mechanism of death of pink salmon is a typical example of death from internal causes, and an example that creates the impression of the existence of programmed death. The life of a fish, as it were, ends in accordance with the program stored in the genes, as if a “stop” signal is written in them, which abruptly ends life.

The description of the natural death of pink salmon is very often used as an example characterizing the presence of a genetic program of aging and death. But is it?

Indeed, each species has its own specific limit on life span, therefore, a genetic limit, that is, a limit “recorded” in genes. The most common view on the origin of the limit that limits life expectancy is the theory of “cell death.” It is known that in tissue culture, that is, outside the body, some human fetal cells are capable of dividing 50±10 times and then die. If cells are taken from an older person or from persons with premature aging, then the number of divisions preceding cell death decreases proportionally. Based on these data, it has become fashionable to believe that a clock that measures life time is contained in every cell. It is assumed that cell death or weakening of functions in those cells that do not divide after the end of development ultimately leads to the weakening and death of the organism itself. Thus, the natural death of pink salmon is often seen as an illustration of this construct.

But there is an essential observation that does not fit into this framework. American scientists O. Robertson and B. Wexler removed the gonads from several specimens of a freshwater fish species related to pink salmon and then kept them in special tanks. It seems incredible, but the lifespan of castrated fish has doubled and even tripled in some cases! The above example is instructive in a number of respects. Firstly, it demonstrates the presence of death from internal causes in such a fairly complex organism as pink salmon. Secondly, the castration effect shows that the species limits of life can be expanded, that is, that it is possible to interfere with a program that is reproduced from generation to generation, from year to year, so to speak, from century to century with an unshakable genetic pattern.. The basis of the mechanism The programmed death of pink salmon is due to regulatory shifts, namely such shifts in the regulation of metabolism that lead to a sharp increase in cholesterol levels in the blood. In this case, every individual, every pink salmon, dies, because not a single fish of this species ever returns to the ocean after spawning.

It is generally accepted that death is associated with exhaustion, wear and tear, self-poisoning of the body with the products of its vital activity, and the death of functionally important cells, for example cells nervous system- neurons, that is, it is associated with persistent and gross defects, or organic disorders. Using the example of the mechanism of death of pink salmon, it becomes obvious that the basis of death is dysregulation, that is, functional and therefore, in principle, reversible disorders. In other words, the programmed death of pink salmon is associated with a violation of the law of constancy of the internal environment of the body, or with a deviation from the basic biological law. As a result, excessive cholesterol levels almost directly lead to death.

Now let's ask two more questions. What causes the change in cholesterol production? And are the disorders observed in pink salmon a special case, or is the regulatory type of death observed in nature and in other species, including humans? It is clear that these issues are to some extent interrelated.

It is worth noting that while the example of pink salmon is instructive in many ways, it is precisely in relation to the search for common causes that cause regulatory violations that it can lead to a dead end. Indeed, the fact that removal of the gonads inhibits the execution of the “death program” shows that in pink salmon the gonads are the source of signals that turn on the mechanism of death from an internal cause. In other words, the maturation of the gonads “triggers” the mechanism of reproduction, and then the natural death of pink salmon. Based on such examples, many biologists come to the conclusion that the purpose of living nature is reproduction, the reproduction of their own kind; as soon as this goal is achieved, mechanisms are activated that end life. Externally, this construction looks very plausible. But let's think about it: recognizing the validity of this conclusion, we would thereby have to admit that nature has a goal and that this goal is the death of the individual after the end of reproduction. Meanwhile, it can be stated quite definitely: nature does not and cannot have such a goal (as, indeed, no other).

How can these mutually exclusive provisions be combined? What is actually recorded in the genetic code of an organism is the reproduction of its own kind. This process must be financially supported. In pink salmon, probably due to a number of living conditions, most of the reproductive cells die after spawning without being fertilized. But the ability to produce a large number of germ cells mitigates the effect of this factor unfavorable for reproduction.

What is the point of accumulating fat in the liver and in the “hump” capacity if the pink salmon is destined to die in the near future after spawning? The one made from fat
cholesterol is formed, and each germ cell must contain a lot of cholesterol. This cholesterol is the material for building the membranes (membranes) of cells, which, after fertilization, must begin to develop into a complex organism. At the same time, an increase in cholesterol levels in the blood causes vascular damage in pink salmon and ultimately leads to the death of the body - site. Thus, in essence, excess cholesterol in the blood serves to ensure the reproduction process, and the death of pink salmon is only a side effect caused by a violation of the constancy of the internal environment of the body. The constancy of the internal environment in medicine is designated by the term “homeostasis” (“homeo” - similar, “stasis” - state). Therefore, we consider it correct to qualify the phenomenon that was just discussed as the law of deviation of homeostasis.

Homeostasis is a necessary condition of life. However, the difficulty lies in the fact that the law of deviation of homeostasis is written in the genetic code, that is, higher organisms themselves are simultaneously subject to both the law of conservation and the law of deviation of homeostasis.

But before we go into detail about this issue, you will have to overcome a little difficulty to become familiar with some basics of the structure and functions of the human body. This heavy word - hypothalamus - must be remembered. A hybrid of the nervous and endocrine systems, the junction of two worlds - the internal and external hypothalamus - is a miracle of nature.

The human body is one of the greatest mysteries, because today we cannot say exactly how the brain works or how the circulatory system works. Only theoretically understanding the principle of action, a person is not able to cure diseases, despite a lot of medications and devices, and even more so we cannot give an explanation for some anomalies that occur quite often. Why do some people have an elongated skull shape or what affects the process of fetal formation after fertilization and why do some people have significant anthropological differences from others?

The image of a tall creature, or vice versa, no taller than a ten-year-old child, but always with an elongated skull and huge eye sockets, without brow ridges, is probably familiar to everyone. It is often used by directors in science fiction films, and it also appears in newsreels of the famous Roswell incident, when the military allegedly managed to shoot down an alien flying saucer. However, how did such things end up in graves that, according to the most conservative estimates, are up to ten thousand years old? Modern humanity arose about five thousand years ago, therefore, when such remains are found, official science immediately classifies them as anomalies, that is, a person was born with abnormalities, but if there is a whole cemetery of such remains, how can this be explained? The version about aliens does not really fit here either, because it is unlikely that the aliens, who are technically ahead of earthlings, will bury their dead on an alien planet, while dressing them in some kind of rags.

But the fact that the owners of elongated skulls could be the result of relationships between aliens and female terrestrial individuals has been confirmed by research. Scientists conducted a series of experiments and found that their DNA chain is significantly different from the human one and has a more complex structure. Already today, researchers say that in fact, this is a prehistoric race that existed long before the appearance of the current Homo sapiens. This is also indicated by the presence of remains throughout the entire planet, and not just in one region. How can burials located in North America and Africa be connected? Of course, one of the explanations may be the custom of specially lengthening the skull, which still exists among some peoples. Just as in some tribes they lengthen girls’ necks using metal rings, increasing their number with age, so the skull is deformed by clamping it into boards and wearing such a structure on the head for a long time.

Scientists have suggested that in their desire to populate the lifeless Earth, aliens arriving from a distant galaxy created a hybrid, based on their DNA and that of a monkey, adapted to life in local conditions. The correctness of this version is also indicated by the fact that in many species of apes, in particular gorillas, the skull has a similar elongated shape. The resulting race quickly settled throughout the globe, and the knowledge acquired from alien creators allowed its representatives to take leading positions, although the Neanderthals that had just appeared at that time were unlikely to pose serious competition.

Even today, scientists are discovering quite a lot of artifacts indicating that people with elongated skulls used all the achievements of civilization that today’s humanity will only have in a few thousand years. The wheel, clay and even copper utensils, as well as writing on clay tablets - all this was easily accepted by the mysterious creatures. Despite the universal feature in the structure of the skull, scientists also discovered the main difference - this is height, and its height was characteristic of each tribe. This means that those who created such a race decided not to limit themselves to just one option and experiment to create the most suitable one.

Of course, the most interesting question for researchers is why did all these prehistoric tribes die out? Just as all the dinosaurs suddenly disappeared, leaving behind only a small number of artifacts, the dwarfs, and not only the dwarfs, also disappeared, and in the places of their settlements, it is impossible to find traces of a struggle, as is usually the case when a settlement is destroyed by an enemy. One gets the impression that at one point they simply packed up and left, leaving only their graves.

As you know, anthropologists are still looking for that very mysterious transitional link between the ape and homo sapiens, although today it is clear that humanity could not have descended entirely from the ape. But the genes of these mysterious creatures could very well be used by someone to create a new race, which would later completely replace its ancestors. Comparing DNA modern man With the obtained material, the researchers received such confirmation, but why did they, having a larger brain volume and a more complex structure of the DNA chain, still give way to us?

Humans have a lot in common with animals, and the behavior of most representatives of humanity is not very different from animals, no matter how much one would like to place oneself at the highest level of development. Researchers compared tens of thousands of people on different continents and found that many have the features of one or another animal copied in their face, figure, and gait. It was possible to identify several groups of similarities: monkeys, rodents, dogs, cats, reptiles and fish. At the same time, the character of these people could not at all correspond to the image that was suitable for them. Based on the data obtained, the researchers suggested that not only the monkey, as Darwinian theory states, could give rise to the human race, but also other species of creatures.

Among the creatures that constantly live in the water there are also mammals, for example, dolphins or whales. They also have a brain structure similar to that of humans, which means that the origin of some part of humanity from them or from some fish is quite possible. After all, alien creators could use not only material obtained from a monkey, but also other animals to connect with their genes. All this is strongly reminiscent of selection experiments aimed at identifying the most resistant species, which can subsequently produce strong offspring. The fact that this was most likely the case is also evidenced by the peculiarities of the maturation of the human fetus, because before it acquires the contours characteristic of a human being, transformations occur, during which the fetus alternately becomes similar to the embryos of each of the classes of animals.

This feature led scientists to think about different ancestors on the one hand, and at the same time common ones on the other. In the light of these discoveries, the worship of ancient tribes of any animal does not seem unnatural. The Celts and other peoples who lived on the territory of modern Europe always chose as their patron either a bear, or a wolf, or some other animal, making sacrifices to it and depicting it on shields or dwellings. This suggests that they were excellent at maintaining contact with their ancestors and, by the way, never hunted such animals.

During the Dark Middle Ages, when the authority of the church was above all and anything incomprehensible was immediately attributed to dark forces, a woman in labor who gave birth to offspring with some minor anomaly, such as a missing toe or hand, was immediately sentenced to be burned. Naturally, the birth of a child with genetic defects, or even stillborn children with deformities reminiscent of some kind of animal, was a death sentence, both for the mother and often for the entire family. Today, of course, this is unacceptable, but scientists find it difficult to explain why such malfunctions occur in the body, but it is not uncommon for women to even give birth to offspring that look like a hybrid of fish and humans. Of course, it does not live long, and is often stillborn, but how can this happen, especially if both parents do not have any health problems?

Genetics suggest that the human reproductive system may periodically malfunction; as a result, for the reproduction of offspring, it is not the information stored in the chromosomes of the mother and father, but the information left over from the ancestors that is used. Every person has it, and as a result of the influence of some extraneous circumstances, even the most healthy people, poor-quality offspring may appear. The use of alcohol and tobacco has absolutely nothing to do with it, and so far scientists cannot determine the factors influencing this. One of the most probable is still radiation; its effect on DNA structure has been known for a long time, but since there are not so many open sources of radiation, sunlight is to blame, oddly enough. The fact is that the ozone layer, which has become thinner due to the greenhouse effect, can no longer completely filter out hard radiation, and in some places it has completely disappeared. According to surveys, everyone who had offspring with genetic disorders constantly spent time in the open sun, whether on the beach or at work. Such research results did not become sensational for scientists, since the harmful effects of sunlight on the skin, leading to cancer, have long been known. It may well be that in the near future, due to climate change and rising temperatures on the planet, scientists will have to develop global methods of protection, otherwise the consequences may only get worse.

The human body still holds quite a lot of secrets and, unfortunately, work on studying them is hampered by the banal desire to get rich. Already today, a worldwide pharmaceutical conspiracy is quite clearly visible, when any research on the path to eliminating the disease is blocked, because once cured, the buyer will no longer purchase expensive drugs. When common sense prevails over greed, we will be able to not only eliminate common respiratory diseases, but also many that are considered incurable, including genetic ones.

Any person is living mystery. He is the most perfect creation of nature. Not a single creature on our earth has such a palette of intelligence as man. He creates obstacles for himself, undermines the ground under his feet, sinking deeper and deeper. People personally paint their days in bright and joyful colors, and sometimes in gloomy and gray ones. In the latter case, their life becomes dull. A person should not be alone. He must spread love to someone and, looking into his soul, find a reflection of this love in himself. But there are people who are unable to love, to keep true friends close to them, who do not strive to achieve harmony with others, life’s blessings and pleasures to such an extent that they can surround themselves with those they need and love: “I am like a sailor, born and raised on the deck of a robber brig: his the soul has come to terms with storms and battles... he... peers into the foggy distance: will the desired sail flash there on the pale line separating the blue abyss from the gray clouds..."

These are the words of the hero M.Yu. Lermontov - G. Pechorina. And how consonant they are with other Lermontov lines:

"The lonely sail is white

In the blue sea fog...

And he, the rebellious one, asks for a storm,

As if there is peace in the storms!

Pechorin is always lonely. He is always surrounded by people who sincerely love him and seek friendship with him. But it seems that the hero does not notice this, plays with the destinies of people, interferes in the course of life. In Pechorin’s diary one can increasingly see the word “boring”. It brings with it a feeling of purposelessness in life:

“I am like a man yawning at a ball who does not go to bed only because the carriage is not yet there.”

Disappointment in life, boredom, loneliness haunt the hero:

“And maybe I’ll die tomorrow!... and there won’t be a single creature left on earth who would understand me completely...”

A complex character who sometimes does things that are not entirely understandable. This is Pechorin.

The author places his hero in a different environment each time, showing him in different circumstances and in clashes with people of different social status, giving us the opportunity to see Pechorin from a new side. First, we learn about Pechorin from Maxim Maksimych, who emphasizes in his statements the originality of the protagonist: “He was a nice guy... just a little strange.” “Yes, sir, with great oddities, and must be a rich man.” He classifies Pechorin as one of those people “with whom one must certainly agree.” Maxim Maksimych sees in the hero willpower, courage, and the ability to subjugate others. But the kind Maxim Maksimych cannot discern Pechorin’s inner world, he simply talks about his actions and deeds. In the story “Maksim Maksimych” we learn about the hero from the author himself. In the draft manuscript, Lermontov compared his hero to a tiger: a strong and flexible animal, affectionate, gloomy, generous and cruel. Pechorin, according to Lermontov, is a tiger, capable of constantly fighting and incapable of submitting. The comparison with the tiger shows the author's opinion about the character of his hero. Later, Lermontov removed the comparison of the hero with a tiger from the work so that we ourselves would have the opportunity to judge Pechorin. The first impression of him is deceiving; it does not give us the right idea. To try to solve Pechorin’s riddle, you need to read the other three stories, which are the diary of a hero who trusts him with all his innermost thoughts: “My love did not bring happiness to anyone, because I did not sacrifice anything for those I loved...”. But we read not only gloomy thoughts in Pechorin’s diary: “It’s fun to live on such a land!... The air is clean and fresh, like a child’s kiss; the sun is bright, the sky is blue - what would seem to be more?”

The mystery of the hero is manifested in everything. He constantly experiences boredom and dissatisfaction with his own life. He is always indifferently calm, indifferent to everything. And we could form our impression of the hero as a person incapable of sincere impulses, inattentive to life and relaxed, if not for the story “Taman”. The hero himself speaks very briefly about what happened in Taman: “I almost died of hunger there, and on top of that they wanted to drown me,” but we understand that something unusual happened there. The reader sees the hero interested for the first time. Pechorin is intrigued by the mystery of the people he meets. He is not content with the role of a simple observer, but himself becomes a participant in the events. His intervention in someone else's life determines the conflict in the story. However, Pechorin does not act for the sake of the desire to benefit people, not for his own benefit, he simply becomes interested for the first time; the mystery of what was happening excited him. Here we no longer see a bored hero, indifferent to everything, but an active one.

Yes, nature rewarded Pechorin with wonderful qualities: persistence and self-control, observation and love of nature, courage and bravery. The possibilities inherent in it are great. The author claims that his appointment was “high.” But, unfortunately, these sides of nature have not received real development. Instead of great deeds, Pechorin interferes in other people's lives, makes enemies and rejects friends, and wastes himself on trifles. His soul remains a mystery to all readers. People like him are always lonely, they are not able to feel human warmth and love.

It seems to me that if Lermontov tried to create some kind of ideal of a person, no one would be interested in him. After all, the artist, when painting the most beautiful face, is not afraid of the deepest shadows; they only make the portrait more lifelike and more mysterious. Pechorin in the novel is shown as alive, falling, making mistakes, confused and inconsistent, prickly and boyishly perky, self-confident and doubtful at the same time. He is a real living mystery. And many of us find our own traits in the hero... We are the same as him, alone in a circle of people and having lost faith in the best:

This is what you doomed me to disbelieve

And into the world, and into the life that reigns around,

That I'm afraid, like a tree, to fall,

Go to the grave, preserving the memory,

Just about how unhappy I was always.

Every person is a living mystery. He is the most perfect creation of nature. Not a single creature on our earth has such a palette of intelligence as man. The literature of the 19th century raises an important theme of human individuality.

What works can we use to illustrate this topic? Lermontov “Hero of Our Time” Turgenev “Fathers and Sons” Dostoevsky “Crime and Punishment” Oscar Wilde “The Picture of Dorian Gray” Stendhal “Red and Black”

“Hero of our time” Pechorin is a talented, complex man; A person who is difficult to fully understand. Pechorin is smart, educated, brave, energetic. The hero attracts the reader with his eccentricity, but at the same time he is repelled by his indifference to people, his inability to love, friendship, and his selfishness. Pechorin appears before readers as a destroyer of the lives and destinies of other people (for example, Bela; Mary, Vera suffer, Grushnitsky dies) But people still reach out to him.

We are trying to understand why this unusual person so self-centered, why is society alien. The hero says about himself: “There are two people in me: one lives in the full sense of the word, the other thinks and judges him.” Perhaps he himself has not yet figured out the depths of his soul. Pechorin is a representative of the gallery of “extra people”. Belinsky wrote: “for him everything old is destroyed, but there is nothing new yet...”

“Fathers and Sons” Bazarov is a materialist, an independent thinker, a nihilist. The concept of “nihilism” was new for that time. In literature, Bazarov, as a hero, can be said to be the founder of this concept. Bazarov is smart, educated, but conflicted. The reader immediately wants to guess this person, like a “riddle”. His personal tragedy lies within himself; a person cannot exist in constant conflict with himself. Bazarov’s desire to change the world, to introduce something new, and the sincerity of his motives make him another striking example of Mikhail Bulgakov’s statement.

“Crime and Punishment” Raskolnikov is young, smart, handsome, educated, has a strong character and extraordinary abilities. At the same time, he is arrogant, vain, uncommunicative, and at the same time generous, kind, ready to help his neighbors, risk his life for them, and give his last to them. The hero evokes a contradictory attitude. And at the same time it is very interesting to the reader. In this work, the writer gives us the opportunity to “plunge into the jungle of the soul” of the main character and try to understand his psychology, motives for the crime, etc.

“The Picture of Dorian Gray” Foreign authors also touched on this topic. A striking example of a “man of mystery” is Dorian Gray. The fatal choice of Dorian Gray forces the reader to reflect and analyze what was the reason for such a choice of lifestyle. After all, it was not only the influence of Lord Henry that affected the fate of the hero. A sweet and handsome young man, perhaps, concealed not the best qualities within himself. As they say, “in still waters there are devils."

The heroes of these works are filled with contradictions and mysteries, which sets them apart from other heroes. Their images require careful analysis in order to be understood. Following Pechorin, Bazarov, Raskolnikov and others through the pages, analyzing their soul essences, we can say with confidence that they are all “living riddles” and everyone will solve them in their own way.

Living nature contains three ancient mysteries: the origin of life,
evolution and death.
To solve the first of them, efforts are currently being made
intensified attempts to reproduce the process of the origin of life in artificial
conditions.
The second riddle is no less complex - the riddle of evolution, or complication and
improving living systems while maintaining the same structural
elements of living matter.
Indeed, nature is both surprisingly uniform and
amazingly varied. The simplest living organisms - viruses -
have the same structure as the carriers of heredity in higher organisms
-- genes. Proteins in bacteria and humans are built from the same
building blocks - amino acids.
How is the stability of its basic elements and
their amazing improvement in the process of evolution on the way from
protozoans to higher organisms? From the answer to this question
a lot depends. Including the solution to death.
We are accustomed to believe that all life ends in death, that "to live -
means to die" (Engels F. Dialectics of Nature).
But what makes death inevitable?
Before considering this question, let me remind the reader: in nature, how
It is known that there are two fundamentally different mechanisms of death - from
external and internal reasons.
Theoretically, some simple single-celled organisms are immortal,
since after each division of such a being two completely arise
identical child descendants that have all the properties of the original
body. Under favorable conditions, the process of successive divisions can
continue indefinitely. Classic example: single-cell division
organism - paramecia - for 8400 generations. In this case it does not have
meaning that in reality only instances of some of the simplest
create generations capable of dividing vegetatively (without sexual reproduction)
indefinitely. If this ability were observed in only one
species of protozoa or even in one branch, then even then this would be the basis
to claim that life theoretically exists without internal causes
death in the presence of certain favorable environmental conditions.
The property of potential immortality can also be seen in the example of complex
multicellular organisms, if the so-called
malignant changes. Indeed, normal cells, of which
a multicellular organism is built, are in such interaction with each other
another, that the size of the organs remains constant. So, for example, in
very intensive cell renewal occurs in the gastrointestinal tract. But
new cells regularly replace dying ones, that is, cells appear
exactly as much as is necessary to maintain their “planned”
quantities. Moreover, normal cells, being in artificial conditions
outside the body, in the so-called tissue culture, they are divided only strictly
a certain number of times and then die.
When a cell becomes cancerous, its descendants can live in culture
tissues, and in the body is unlimited if they are successively transplanted, or
transplant. The famous German scientist Paul Ehrlich back in 1906
isolated a tumor in a mouse, which is now used in all countries in
scientific research, although the maximum lifespan of a mouse is not
exceeds three years. In other words, paradoxically, cancer
provides potential immortality of cells.
And yet both single-celled organisms and cancer cells die.
Indeed, it has long been calculated that if death had not occurred
unicellular, then the descendants of one ciliate would soon occupy the volume
exceeding the volume of the globe. What limits life expectancy?
single-celled creatures? Such a limiter is, first of all, the state
their habitat.
A living organism is in a very close relationship with the external
peace. The presence or absence of food, the physical conditions of the environment, its degree
pollution - these are the main factors with which
vital activity of the body.
At the same time, any organism can exist only if its composition
body is maintained within certain, usually quite narrow limits. This
position of the great French physiologist Claude Bernard more than 100 years ago
formulated as follows: the constancy of the internal environment is
a necessary condition for the free life of the organism.
The law of constancy of the internal environment of the body is a fundamental law
biology. I would even call it the First Fundamental Biological
law (although the serial number in this case does not say much: all
fundamental laws are characterized by the fact that none of them can be
broken).
Metabolism based on the intake of food, water and
oxygen, first of all ensures the constancy of the internal environment. U
single-celled creatures, the reserves of energy materials in the body are very
are small and, accordingly, their dependence on food intake is, as a rule,
extremely pronounced. Single-celled animals depend even more on physical conditions
environment. The delicate membrane of the cell - the cell membrane - cannot be
reliable protection from damaging external factors. This is understandable: and
The intake of food and the excretion of waste occurs through this membrane. By
Essentially, single-celled organisms are in equilibrium with their environment
habitat, and the constancy of their body composition, that is, a requirement corresponding
The first biological law can only be fulfilled to the extent that
which maintains the constancy of the external environment. Changes in the external environment,
caused, for example, by the very life activity of single-celled organisms,
may cause their death.
Thus, in most cases, death in unicellular organisms is due to
the action of external factors, that is, death from external causes.
This gives grounds to assert that theoretically some of the simplest
may turn out to be immortal in conditions where the external environment
favors.
If we talk about a person, here the external causes of death are associated
primarily with the so-called diseases of civilization. It is believed that
excessive or improper nutrition, insufficient physical activity,
mental stress (emotional stress), toxic substances,
widespread in the external environment (for example, carcinogens - chemical
substances that cause cancer) are all causes of major human diseases:
atherosclerosis and cancer. Thus, it is assumed that in humans it is
external factors determine the main causes of death.
However, it is hardly worth proving that eliminating external causes of disease
will not save higher organisms from death. Each type of organism has a characteristic
a certain limit on life expectancy. A rat cannot live more than four
years, an elephant is more than 80, and no one has observed a rat live longer than this
normally characteristic of an elephant.
Elimination of external unfavorable factors can only lead to
that the lifespan of an individual will coincide with its species limit. So,
If the average human life expectancy is now about 70 years, then
its species limit, as already mentioned, is considered equal to 120 years. For now
In most organisms, only a few reach the species limits of life.
representatives.
Today it is most generally accepted that there are two independent
phenomena that limit life expectancy: the physiological process of aging
and diseases that increasingly affect a person with age. At
it was calculated that if the main diseases of aging are eliminated -
atherosclerosis and cancer, then human life expectancy will increase by 18 years;
if all diseases of old age are eliminated, then this will give on average
an additional 2-5 years of life. On this basis, it is assumed that
conditions of aging without disease, a person will die at an age close to
100 years old. The picture is very tempting. After all, for now the burden of disease is often
makes life very difficult for an average person, not to mention the elderly
age.
However, this optimistic construction is, unfortunately, vulnerable. Main
way, due to the division of natural causes of death into diseases and
physiological aging. Indeed, how does physiological
Does aging end your life? Again due to the development of diseases. Another thing,
that their likelihood increases over the years. Moreover, this is usually quite
certain diseases. We have already mentioned that in middle and old age
the ten main diseases out of many hundreds of possible causes of death
every 85 people out of 100. They are: obesity, diabetes mellitus,
atherosclerosis, hypertension, metabolic (metabolic)
immunosuppression, autoimmune diseases, mental depression and cancer. These
diseases, as well as menopause and hyperadaptosis for reasons that will become clear to the reader
which will become clear a little later, I refer to as normal diseases of aging.
There are many arguments in favor of the fact that the occurrence of these diseases
External factors are very important. So, obesity, diabetes
obesity and atherosclerosis arise as a result of overeating and decreased
physical activity. In turn, obesity causes metabolic
immunosuppression, that is, decreased immunity caused by excessive
using fat as a source of energy. Metabolic immunosuppression
promotes the development of cancer. Stress, mental overstrain and prolonged
delayed negative emotions cause hypertension,
mental depression and accelerate the progression of cancer.
This is all true. But at the same time, it remains undeniable: although the elimination
unfavorable external factors can increase life expectancy, it does not
may expand its species limit.
What's the matter here? Why does aging fit with a certain group?
diseases, and not with any of the many hundreds of known pathological diseases
processes? What determines the species life limit - physiological
aging, that is, wear and tear, exhaustion of the body associated with
cessation of cell renewal, or certain diseases that
arise under the influence of internal reasons? And if the latter is true, then
Are these internal reasons that act with such regularity?
In living nature there are examples of a mechanism of death that is clearly not related
with the influence of external reasons. Everyone knows the type of death characteristic of a butterfly.
mayfly Such a butterfly, emerging from a larva in the morning by the end of the first day
Having completed the reproduction cycle, it dies. Death occurs regardless of conditions
external environment - as if the winding of a watch ends.
Such death from an internal cause is no exception. Even more clearly
it can be observed in a more complex organism—pink salmon.
This fish lives in the Pacific Ocean for four to five years. In this period
maturation and increase in body size occurs, and in the liver and body
fat accumulates. But now the breeding season is approaching, and pink salmon
begins its long journey, sometimes thousands of kilometers, to the mouth of that river, at
which she was born. From the very beginning of this journey, fish as
energy source uses mainly liver fat reserves. Stock
fat decreases, but the concentration of cholesterol in the blood increases, which
synthesized from fat. And within one to two months the fish “grows old.” She has
Jaws bend, eyes sink, skin becomes thinner. In the body of pink salmon
very profound shifts occur - signs characteristic of
diabetes mellitus and atherosclerosis, resistance to infection decreases.
Finally, the female pink salmon lay their eggs, which are inseminated by the males.
pink salmon After one or two weeks, the parent fish die. Cause of death
are multiple infarctions of the heart, brain, lungs, and kidneys. It's clear,
since the concentration of cholesterol in the blood of pink salmon during the spawning period
increases to 1000 mg%, that is, approximately 10 times.
The mechanism of death of pink salmon is a typical example of death from internal
reasons, and an example that creates the impression of the existence
programmed death. The life of a fish seems to end in accordance with
program stored in the genes - as if a stop signal is written in them,
which abruptly ends life.
The description of the natural death of pink salmon is very often used as
an example characterizing the presence of a genetic program of aging and death. But
Is it so?
Indeed, each species has its own specific limit.
lifespan, therefore genetic, that is, “recorded” in
genes, limit. The most common view on the origin of the limit is
limiting life span is the theory of “cell death”.
It is known that in tissue culture, that is, outside the body, some cells
human fetuses are capable of dividing 50±10 times and then die. If the cells
taken from an older person or from persons with premature
aging, then the number of divisions preceding
cell death. Based on these data, it has become fashionable to believe that watches
measuring life time are contained in each cell. It is assumed that
cell death or weakening of functions in those cells that do not divide after
the end of development ultimately leads to the weakening and death of the
body. Thus, the natural death of pink salmon is often considered
as an illustration of this construction.
But there is an essential observation that does not fit into
these frames. American scientists O. Robertson and B. Wexler (1962) removed
gonads in several specimens of a freshwater salmon related to pink salmon
type of fish and then kept them in special tanks. It seems
incredible, but the life expectancy of castrated fish has doubled and even
in some cases tripled! The above example is instructive in a number of respects.
First, it demonstrates the presence of death from internal causes in
such a rather complex organism as pink salmon. Secondly, the effect
castration shows that the species limits of life can be expanded, then
it is possible to interfere with a program that is unshakable
genetically reproduced from generation to generation, from
year after year, so to speak, from century to century.
But perhaps the most important conclusion is this. At the core
the mechanism of programmed death of pink salmon lies in regulatory shifts, and
It is precisely these shifts in metabolic regulation that lead to a sharp increase
blood cholesterol levels. In this case, every individual dies, every
pink salmon, because not a single fish of this species ever after spawning
returns to the ocean.
It is generally accepted that death is associated with exhaustion, wear and tear,
self-poisoning of the body with the products of its vital activity, death
functionally important cells, for example cells of the nervous system - neurons, then
is associated with persistent and gross defects, or organic disorders.
Using the example of the mechanism of death of pink salmon, it becomes obvious that the basis
death lies in dysregulation, that is, functional and therefore in
basically reversible disorders. In other words, programmed death
pink salmon is associated with a violation of the law of constancy of the internal environment of the body,
or with a deviation from the basic biological law. As a result
An excessive increase in cholesterol levels almost directly leads to
to death.
Now let's ask two more questions. What causes the change in
producing cholesterol? And are the disorders observed in pink salmon
a special case or regulatory type of death is observed in nature and in others
species, including humans? It is clear that these questions are to some extent
interconnected.
It is worth noting that if the example of pink salmon is instructive in many ways, then
specifically in relation to the search for common causes causing regulatory violations,
it can lead to a dead end. Indeed, the fact that removal of genital
glands inhibits the implementation of the “death program”, shows that in pink salmon
the gonads are a source of signals that turn on the mechanism of death from
internal reason. In other words, the maturation of the gonads “triggers”
mechanism of reproduction and then natural death of pink salmon. Based
Similar examples, many biologists come to the conclusion that the purpose of living nature
- reproduction, reproduction of one's own kind; as soon as this goal
achieved, the mechanisms that end life are activated. Externally such a construction
looks very plausible.
But let's think about it: recognizing the validity of this conclusion, we thereby
would have to admit that nature has a goal and that this goal
is the death of the individual after the end of reproduction. Meanwhile you can
state quite definitely: nature does not and cannot have such a goal
(as, indeed, no other).
How can these mutually exclusive provisions be combined? That,
what is actually recorded in the genetic code of an organism is
reproduction of one's own kind. This process must be materially
secured. In pink salmon, probably due to a number of habitat conditions, the majority
germ cells die after spawning without being fertilized. But
the ability to produce a large number of germ cells softens the effect
this factor is unfavorable for reproduction.
What is the point of accumulating fat in the liver and in the “hump” capacity, if pink salmon
destined to die soon after spawning? The one made from fat
cholesterol is formed, and each germ cell must contain a lot
cholesterol. This cholesterol is the material for building membranes
(membranes) of cells that, after fertilization, must begin to develop into
complex organism. At the same time, an increase in blood cholesterol levels
causes vascular damage in pink salmon and ultimately leads the body to
death. Thus, essentially, excess cholesterol in the blood serves
ensuring the reproduction process, and the death of pink salmon is only a side effect
a consequence caused by a violation of the constancy of the internal environment of the body.
The constancy of the internal environment in medicine is designated by the term "homeostasis"
("homeo" - similar, "stasis" - state). Therefore, the phenomenon about which
I just talked about it, I think it’s right to classify it as law
deviations of homeostasis.
Homeostasis is a necessary condition of life. However, the difficulty is
that the law of deviation of homeostasis is written in the genetic code, that is, they themselves
higher organisms simultaneously obey both the law of conservation and the law
deviations of homeostasis.
But before proceeding to a detailed consideration of this issue, the reader
you will have to overcome some difficulties to get acquainted with some
the basics of the structure and functions of the human body - this is precisely what is dedicated to
next chapter.

This heavy word - hypothalamus - must be remembered Hybrid
nervous and endocrine systems, the junction of two worlds - internal and
The external hypothalamus is a miracle of nature