The future of physics predicts no future for evolutionary theory

By: James V. Kohl | Published on: December 13, 2014

The ever-smaller future of physics

‘Theory of everything’ captures Weinberg’s imagination in Lee Historical Lecture

Excerpt: “…there are hints that the answers to fundamental questions will reveal themselves at around a million billionths — between 10­-17 and 10-19 — of the radius of the typical atomic nucleus.
My comment: Evolutionary theorists may not recognize the problem that this presents. By accepting de Vries definition of “mutation” and rejecting experimental evidence, which links the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA via nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions and the bio-physically constrained chemistry of protein folding, they have left themselves with no quantum energy-level wiggle room. Instead, they must start from a definition and attempt to link assumptions about energy-level independent mutations to increasing organismal complexity manifested in the stability of the morphological phenotypes and the behavioral phenotypes of all species.
Serious scientists have taken a different approach that begins with nutrient-dependent energy and nutrient uptake. Nutrient-dependent amino acid substitutions stabilize protein folding. See: A 3D Map of the Human Genome at Kilobase Resolution Reveals Principles of Chromatin Looping reported as: “More and more, we’re realizing that folding is regulation,” and in DNA Loop-the-Loops. The RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions in the DNA or organized genomes are fixed via the metabolism of nutrients to species-specific pheromones that control the physiology of reproduction in species from microbes to man via conserved molecular mechanisms exemplified in feedback loops.
Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with reproduction These feedback loops also link what is portrayed in Signaling Crosstalk: Integrating Nutrient Availability and Sex Simply put, “The mechanism by which one signaling pathway regulates a second provides insight into how cells integrate multiple stimuli to produce a coordinated response.”
This coordinated response appears to originate from where answers may come to questions about quantum mechanics. Some serious scientists think the answers may reveal themselves at around a million billionths — between 10­-17 and 10-19 — of the radius of the typical atomic nucleus. For comparison, starting from a theory about the role of mutations in evolution based on a definition of “mutation” has told us nothing about links among quantum physics, quantum chemistry, quantum biology, quantum smell, and quantum consciousness. The epigenetic links have since been revealed and what has been learned about molecular epigenetics shows that evolutionary theory has been a ridiculous waste of time and funding that could better have been spent examining facts.
Facts not known to physicists now begin with questions about a theory of everything that clearly infer theories about diversified life should not begin with assumptions about mutations. Mutations perturb protein folding and have always been linked to pathology. Biodiversity is nutrient-dependent and the pheromone-controlled physiology links amino acid substitutions and thermodynamic cycles to protein biosynthesis and degradation, which is exemplified across species in my model of nutrient-dependent top-down causation and bottom-up control of cell type differentiation.
Given the “ever-smaller” future of physics, I think it is safe to say there is no future for evolutionary theorists who start with assumptions about what mutations are; what they do; or how they do it. Indeed, Feynman predicted the future of that pseudoscience many years ago.

When an AAAS fundraiser called me yesterday, she got an earful. I could not help but express my discontent about solicitations based on the reduction in government funding. If all government funding had been directed towards the pursuits of serious scientists and none had been spent on the pseudoscientific nonsense of evolutionary theorists, there would have been plenty of money to fund all experimental approaches that incorporate what is known about physics, chemistry, and molecular epigenetics.

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Want more on the same topic?

Swipe/Drag Left and Right To Browse Related Posts: