Not long after, he decided to look at his ejaculation – definitely not an accident – and discovered tiny creatures, wiggling with sin that he nicknamed “animalcules.”
As scientists over the centuries have continued to look down at their microscopes, there is no doubt about what they saw and recorded with their eyes on film: The sperm swims by moving their sin from one side to the other. for the other.
Why should we not trust our eyes? So that’s the science I never believed.
It turns out our eyes were wrong.
“If you want to see the real beating of the tail, you have to walk with the sperm and turn around with the sperm. So it’s almost like you need to make (a camera) really tiny and stick it in the sperm’s head,” Said Gadelha.
Gadelha co-authors Gabriel Corkidi and Alberto Darszon from the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico have developed a way to do this. Using state-of-the-art tools, including a high-speed camera that can record more than 55,000 frames per second, the researchers were able to see that the sideways movement was actually an optical illusion.
In reality, a sperm tail binds on one side only.
That one-sided stroke should cause the sperm to swim in a perpetual circle, Gadelha said. But no, sperm was smarter than that.
“The human sperm was seen if you roll by swimming, as big as an otter playing to connect the water, the stroke with one side of them would be average by itself, and swim forward,” said Gadelha, who is fertility math expert.
“Sperm rotation is something that is very important. It’s something that allows sperm to regain symmetry and actually be able to go straight,” he said.
The findings came as a real surprise, Gadelha said, so the team spent nearly two years repeating the experiment and checking the math. Results held: same as Earth It turned out not to be flat, the sperm don’t really swim like snakes or eels.
So why does it matter?
“It may be that the continuous movement hides some subtle aspects about the health of this sperm or how fast it can travel,” Gadelha said.
“These are all very hypothetical questions. What we hope is that more scientists and fertility experts become interested and ask, ‘OK, how does this influence infertility?’
As for what it feels like to go back over 300 years of scientific assumptions, Gadelha is modest.
“Oh gosh, I always have a deep feeling inside that I’m always wrong,” he said.
“Who knows what they will find? This is a measurement given by an instrument that has its limitations. We are right at this time, but we can be wrong again as science moves on. And hopefully it will be something very exciting. to learn in the next few years. “