Based on an unfinished paper by Prof. L.W.J. Holleman
The materialistic approach to chemistry began in 1789 with Lavoisier stating the Law of the Conservation of Matter as being axiomatic. Exactly 200 years later Professor Dr. L.W.J. Holleman stopped work on his own attempt to prove that these chemical laws do not [always] apply to living organisms. This provisional review of Holleman's Chlorella work is [and was] written with the intention that others may be able to continue this work.
The reasons for and against such further work were given by Holleman in section 5. Apart from a large body of theoretical and experimental research on sub-atomic physics, the results of which strongly preclude the possibility of biological transmutations, no direct experimental proof for the conservation of matter and the indestructibility of elements has been conducted since the 19th century; no complete elemental analysis of the development of a biological organism in a closed system has been done using modern analytical methods. Further research work is therefore strongly recommended. The basis of such research [by definition] should be essentially empirical rather than based on theory.
I recommend that the exact details of Holleman's Chlorella
experiment II (sections 6.3, 6.3.1, 7 and 10) be replicated as closely as possible; the improved
repeat
experiments failed to produce any measurable effects. It is also
recommended that the insoluble precipitate occasionally observed
after ash hydrolysis should be investigated as a possible cause of
trivial
error. In fact, I consider that his chemical analysis
difficulties are very much worthy of further research, independent
of the rest of this work. If the observed potassium results remain
unexplained then all subsequent improvements adopted by Holleman
(covered in the previous section and elsewhere) should be
considered. The method described for experiment VI in section 6.3.3 showed the greatest potential for
studies on the possible role of the different developmental stages
of Chlorella (see also sections 9 and
10.
The philosophical background of Holleman and his work, as detailed
in section 10, should not be considered as
compulsory reading. The Goethean phenomenologist and
Anthroposophist Dick van Romunde (Beekman1992) stated that there is no compulsory
connection between anthroposophy and phenomenology
. I have
included it, however, for I felt that it was difficult to separate
Holleman's beliefs from a complete understanding of his research.
Nevertheless, I feel that the quality of such work can only be
improved should the approach described in section
10 be adopted. For a further understanding of Wim Holleman and
his motivations I have taken the liberty to include a translation
of his obituary, as co-written by his close friend Dick van Romunde
and his daughter Sophia Holleman (appendix I).