RESEARCH ARTICLE

Copyright 2008 American Scientic Publishers All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America

Advanced Science Letters

Vol. 1, 199211, 2008

Enigma of The Great Encephalization: Explanation by Means of Irreducible Field Principle

Michael Lipkind
Unit of Molecular Virology, Kimron Veterinary Institute, Beit Dagan, P.O. Box 12, 50250 Israel; International Institute of Biophysics, Neuss-Hombroich, D-41472 Germany

Delivered by Ingenta to: An extraordinary rate of hominid brain evolutionary development labeled The Great Encephalization proceeded without any respective functional (behavioral) manifestations. Such an unusual discrepancy looking like a sponGuest User taneous brain expansion with no connection : 24.162.219.101 IP to environmental conditions is not compatible with the Darwinian paradigm based on fortuity of mutations and selection by environments. The proposed explanation of this excepSat, 06 Aug 2011 21:27:57 tional occurrence is associated with a concept of eld which, as previously reviewed,1 has been employed in some theoretical models of consciousness. The suggested conception is associated with the theory of biological eld by Gurwitsch2 which includes species-specic eld anisotropy as the main postulate determining the respective species-specic morphology. In light of this theory, the exotic trend of the Great Encephalization is regarded as a consequence of a peculiar mutation in the non-coding genome portion which is widely considered as junk DNA with no functional signicance. The mutation in this portion distorts the species-specic eld anisotropy, which can be restored on a new steady level via a chain of further eld-hitting mutations. Such a lasting eld-based evolution imitating a certain trend explains the puzzling phenomenon of the absence of correspondence between the unprecedented speed of the hominid brain evolutionary development and a very slow behavioral advance that is evidenced on paleoantropological and genetic grounds.
Does anything about the history of vertebrates indicate why one peculiar species should be so brainy? Heres closing item for thought. we simply do not know the answer to one of the most important questions we can ask. S. J. Gould, 19733 Why are some species brains so large despite the metabolic and developmental costs? Why would two species with the same body size have two different brain sizes? These have been central questions in the eld of brain evolution for decades L. Marino, 20054 essay a concept of an irreducible eld in the role of such a categorically different principle, which has not yet been employed in genetic and evolutionary studies.

2. INTRODUCTION
The evolutionary development of human consciousness reveals entanglement of two prodigies of nature. The rst one is the consciousness emergence as a hitherto unprecedented phenomenon overstepping the limits of the existing scientic approach and intervening in the natural regularities of the evolution itself. The second problem relates to the unprecedented speed of the evolution of consciousness, exceeding the bounds of the Darwinian paradigm and having resulted in the withdrawal of the Homo sapiens s. as a species from the evolutionary path. Although both the problems are closely connected, the rst one transcends a purely scientic signicance reaching the acme of philosophical sphere, while the second one seems to be within the scope of strictly scientic investigation. The Darwinian paradigm comprised in different neo-Darwinist renderings including the modern expressions of the triplet-codebased molecular genetics is grounded on three central principles: (1) the notion of a gene as a bearer of an inherited trait; (2) the randomness (fortuity) of genetic variations, and (3) the selection of descendants with the changed traits according to their survival in the conditions of the environmental demands. doi:10.1166/asl.2008.021 199

1. PREFACE
The above epigraphs clearly demonstrate that the central questions in the eld of brain evolution uttered more than three decades ago have remained unanswered until today: still, we simply do not know the answer to one of the most important questions we can ask. Correspondingly, the situation concerning the evolutionary trend of the hominid Great Encephalization has been recently characterized by the nal verdict: To accomplish so much in so little evolutionary time requires a selective process that is perhaps categorically different from the typical processes of acquiring new biological traits5 (boldface is mine). The present article may be considered as a venture attempt to Adv. Sci. Lett. Vol. 1, No. 2, 2008

1936-6612/2008/1/199/013

RESEARCH ARTICLE
These principles of evolution were the deep motive power behind the biological investigation carried out during the last century up to now. As a result, the whole natural history of life presented in its monumental multimillion-measured thread seems to be in full harmony with the Linnaean slogan Natura non facit saltus6 .a However, in the case of the consciousness evolutionary emergence, the nature seems to upset this law: a tremendous leap has occurred with all the irreversible consequences.

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

According to the paleoantropological data, the use of stone tools began roughly 2.5 millions years ago (Stone Age) and ended differently in different regions. The use of the stone tools seems to have progressed stepwise: each phase (H. habilis, H. ergaster, H. erectus, and H. neanderthalensis) started at a higher level than the previous one, but once that phase had started, there was a slow conservative development of cultural manifestations. So lazy employment of such a beautiful instrument as anatomically perfect human brain was continued until the crucial epoch of 50,00040,000 years ago13 14 that can be 3. PREMISES: EVOLUTIONARY TREND considered as the big bang of the human consciousness,15 or Minds Big Bang.16 But even this great leap forward17 The above tremendous leap is connected with a puzzling phedid not display a real revolution: the modern humans started to nomenon which can be designated as an evolutionary trend that bury their dead more carefully, made clothing out of hides, and is an opposite of the evolutionary fortuity. The most striking developed more sophisticated hunting techniques.18 The next step trend is the so-called Great Encephalization79 expressed in a expressed four higher capabilities: abstract thinking (concepts drastic extension of the brain size (almost fourfold in a mere free from specic examples), planning (taking steps to achieve 2.5 million years) that occurred during the hominidb phylogenic a further goal), innovations (nding new solutions), and symc evolution. Such an extraordinary extension of the brain size, bolic behavior (such as images, or rituals). But this was still which means an enormous increase of the amount of neurons pre-civilization period which was expressed in specialization leading to innumerable overall number of inter-neuronal connec- by Ingenta to: Delivered of tools, use of jewelry and images (such as cave drawings), tions, was not accompanied by immediate adequate enrichment User Guest organization of living space, rituals (burials with grave gifts), of functional activity of the expanding brain to be expressed by IP : 24.162.219.101 of less hospitable geographical areas, and barter trade exploration the respective expansion of the behavioral manifestations.8 10 The Sat, 06 Aug 2011 21:27:57 networks. Artifacts such as sh hooks, buttons, and bone neeconclusion is that such remarkable evolutionary augmentation of dles have shown signs of variation among different populations the brain size proceeded with no immediate functional benets. of humans, something that had not been seen in human cultures prior to 50,000 years ago. 3.1. Paleoantropological Background However, it is of a queer interest that many of the above innovations are known to occur occasionally much earlier, Bigger brains were not generally smarter brains toolsome of them even during the late period of the Acheulian age making techniques didnt gradually improve despite a lot of (1.65 millions200,000 years ago), for example, the use of re gradual brain size increase (500,000 years ago), building shelters (400,000 years ago), grindW. H. Calvin, AAAS Meeting, Washington, DC, 18-Feb-2005 ing stones and production of stone blades or knives (280,000 The anatomical completion of the Homo sapiens is accounted years). Even after the anatomical completion of the H. sapiens d to occur about 130,000 (Africa)90,000 (Near East) years ago, with its denitive brain size, there was still rather tardy develi.e., before the development of language, of cooking, of agriopment of innovations like long distance barter trade (140,000 7 9 culture. That was preceded by about 5.5-millions-years-long years ago), shing gear (110,000 years ago), mining (100,000 evolutionary development after splitting hominid and protoyears ago), beads (75,000 years ago). However, those innovations chimpanzee lines from a common ancestor. The evolutionwere only incidental and short-lived not becoming commonly ary succession included the fossils-based reconstructed species used until the decisive era of 50,00040,000 years ago. Ardipithecus ramidus (the earliest hominid representative after the chimpanzee-hominid splitting), the series of species belong3.2. The Peculiarity of the Situation: Three Paradoxes ing to the genus Australopithecus, and the series of species Thus, the anatomically consummated human brain was readybelonging to the genus Homo. The latter including the species to-use about 130,000190,000 years ago, while there was a sitHomo habilis (handy man), Homo ergaster (workman), uation of the big brain but not much to show for it.8 The Homo erectus (upright man), and Homo neanderthalensis vertiginous burst of the human mental development, which led (Neanderthal) was crowned by the species Homo sapiens.e nally to astounding growth of human civilization, happened just
a

Nature doesnt make any leaps (Carl von Linn, Philosophia botanica). b The hominid designation as commonly used was chosen amongst other, more specic, designations, like hominine, hominoid. According to incomplete taxonomic classication, the family Hominidae includes three genera: genus Homo(human), genus Australopithecus (Southern ape), and genus Ardipithecus (ground ape), the latter being often related to the subfamily Hominine. c The other trends like the development of the birds feathery wing from the reptilian ancestors scales, or the Cambrian explosion hypothesized as a sudden origin of all the animal taxonomic types, cannot be compared with the Great Encephalization characterized, rst of all, by a highly rapid (in evolutionary range) while strictly directed (as if aimed or targeted) development. d The new evidence seems to constrain the dates of the earliest human fossils in Africa to an age near 195,000 years ago.11 e New ndings suggest that H. habilis and H. erectus coexisted and may be separate lineages from a common ancestor.12

recently, during historical period originated about 10,000 years ago. This means that throughout a long period of sleeping (more than 100,000 years!), the anatomically complete human brain was out of full use, while potentially ready for the maximal use, i.e., for the full expression of the mental capacity. This is in contradiction with the main foundation of the Darwinian paradigm based on selection of a variant (among a plenty of randomly appearing variants), which is the most appropriate to the existing environments. So evident violation of the selection principle may lead to an extravagant assumption about the evolutionary trend consisting in a preliminary (as if in advance) development of a highly specic anatomical basis the brain, which is sufcient for the subsequent origination and development of the consciousness per se expressed in a full spectrum

200

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

RESEARCH ARTICLE

of human mental activities. Such in advance anatomical brain the modern human development, is tremendously higher, as compared to the slow rate of the blind mutation-based Darwinian development, i.e., long before its adequate physiological funcevolution. tioning, leads to an awkward situation of the anatomy without Thus, the evolution of human consciousness reveals a peculiar physiology, that is the case for atavistic organs, like appendix, situation. First, there was the trend of the Great Encephalization but the brain is not an appendix. leading to the Homo sapiens brain size without a parallel develThus, the Great Encephalization reveals a set of paradoxes. opment of mental manifestations; then, there was a sleeping The rst paradox concerns the absence of any accord between period without any further anatomical development and without the monotonous course of the ordinary, genetically determined, employment of the anatomically perfect ready-to-use brain; trend-free biological evolution, on one hand, and the accelerthen, there was an exploding burst of human civilization with ating pace of the evolutionary trend-determined hominid brain all its remarkable intellectual-spiritual ights and cruel horrors development up to the Homo sapiens size, on the other hand. unprecedented in animal evolution. As a nal result, the Homo The second paradox concerns the absence of any interdependence sapiens s. has gone out of the frame of biological evolution. between the rapid development of the hominid brain and an adequate expression of the brain mental potential.f The third paradox 3.4. Modern Versions of the Darwinian Paradigm concerns the discrepancy between the modern anatomically complete (and evolutionarily frozen) human brain of the constant Evidently, the evolutionary trend of the Great Encephalization sizeg and an enormous lot of information, which is accumulated with the above-described paradoxes cannot be explained by the with exponentially accelerated speed during a current generation. initial Darwins Darwinism21 based on the immediate advanOn the rst glance, the above paradoxes do not seem comtage of a selected trait for the survival of the ttest: indeed, the patible with the Darwinian paradigm, which, therefore, needs anby Ingenta to: large brain expressing no functional advantage must not make its Delivered additional postulation in connection with the evolutionary trend host Guest User the ttest. of the Great Encephalization. As to the IP : 24.162.219.101 neo-Darwinian versions of evolution, the situation is as follows. Sat, 06 Aug 2011 21:27:57 3.3. Predicament of the Darwinian Theory of The germ-plasm neo-Darwinism22 23 is based on the discovConsciousness Evolution ered reduction division and formation of gametes as well as on the hereditary transfer of determinants, whose variation is Thus, a crucial step in the consciousness evolution befell when either random, or induced in the germ line (the determinants anatomically complete but sleeping up to 50,00040,000 years of germ line correspond to the genes of the modern glosago and then dreaming up to about 10,000 years ago human sary). The Modern Synthesis of neo-Darwinism employing the brain had suddenly awakened causing a powerful incentive to rediscovered Mendelian laws, the notion of mutation,24 the newly impetuous development of human civilization that led nally to established term called genetics,25 the dened gene functional the exclusion of the Homo sapiens as a species out of the frame notion (genotype-phenotype conception,26 and the overall formuof Darwinian evolution: the hierarchical organization of human lation of the Morganist genetic basis of evolution2729 ) paved the society and the humanist principle of equal rights for the ttest way for the molecular neo-Darwinism, which led to the douas well as for the weakest (which even are especially cared of) ble helix revolution.3031 This revolution included the biochemare in contrast to the Darwinist principle of struggle for survival. ical and genetic respects, i.e., the elucidation of the chemical This led to an unprecedented situation. Due to the indisputable nature of the gene (DNA nucleotide sequence), formulation of fact that scientic progress grounded on human mental potential the triplet codon notion followed by the cracking of the genetic will never reach the situation when everything has been discode, and explanation of the hereditary transfer grounded on covered, one comes to conclusion that the process of scientic the DNA replication and transcription together with the RNAexploration has no end, and, correspondingly, the development to-protein translation.3239 The evolutionary rate expressed at of the brain mental capacity must be also practically unlimited. the molecular level became a highly debated topic after pubHowever, since the Homo sapiens came out of the evolutionary lication of the neutral theory of molecular evolution,40 which regularities, the size of the human brain must be considered as claimed that the unexpectedly high rate of evolutionary changes constant, i.e., genetically nished: any accidental variations in at the molecular level are caused not by Darwinian selection the brain size will not be naturally selected because such selecbut by a random genetic drift as the fundamental mechanism tion could be realized only on the hereditary level, namely, by of biological evolution that occurs as a statistical rather than the preferable reproduction of the selected trait, that is not the selective phenomenon. The neutralist-selectionist dilemma has case in the contemporary human society. However, even if to become the central point in the current development of evolution claim the opposite, i.e., to stubbornly apply the Darwinian contheory4145 .h ception to the present human evolution, the rate of the science Recently, however, the biological thinking about heredity and progress and knowledge accumulation, that is the expression of evolution has undergone a signicant change. This is expressed
f A hidden peculiarity of this paradox is that, on one hand, the mental capacity of the hominid brain must depend on the brain size (e.g. the chimpanzees brain size is evidently insufcient for the mind development), while, on the other hand, a drastic extension of the brain size during the hominid evolution was not accompanied by the immediate adequate enrichment of the brain functional activity. g The idea itself of the cessation of any further natural anatomical development of the human brain may meet understandable objection from the proponents of unlimited development (at least intellectual) of the human race, but that would be achieved only by articial, i.e., eugenic,19 20 but not by natural evolutionary way. h In this respect, the remark of Charles Darwin himself is very instructive. He wrote in the last (1872) edition of The Origin of Species:46 As my conclusions have lately been much misrepresented, and it has been stated that I attribute the modication of species exclusively to natural selection. I may be permitted to remark that in the rst edition of this work, and subsequently, I placed in a most conspicuous positionnamely at the close of the Introductionthe following words: I am convinced that natural selection has been the main but not the exclusive means of modication. (boldface is mine).

201

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

planetary movements. Consequently, the question is where in the by the development of the non-genetic inheritance systems, which are based on a new principle, namely, that a gene has sphere of consciousness evolution there is a place for such Copera meaning only within the system as a whole. Accordingly, the nican revolution. gene is not the sole focus of the natural selection. Anyhow, the above new dimensions of the evolution cannot Non-genetic inheritance systems include epigenetic inherexplain the trend of the Great Encephalization. First of all, the itance, behavioral inheritance, and symbolic communication behavioral inheritance, and symbolic communication inheritance (cultural) inheritance.21 The epigenetic inheritance47 occurs could not serve the role, because, as the paleoantropological evidespite of a lack of change in the DNA sequence itself (i.e., dence demonstrates, the evolutionary course of Great Encephalthe gene), that meaning the dependence of the activity state of a ization was not accompanied by the respective rate of cultural gene on its genealogical history (trans-generational inheritance). development, which, in contrast, was quite slow and conservaThe mechanisms of the epigenetic inheritance are based on the tive, i.e., both the developments were not evolving in unison. 48 49 chromatin remodeling including methylation of DNA, modiThe ultimate example is the theory of the universal grammar cation of chromosomal histones, binding of transcription factors by Chomsky,59 60 which cannot be imagined as developed in the to chromatin, and timing of DNA replication.21 The behavioral ordinary slow rate of the classic Darwinian evolution. In geninheritance means that the behavior and preferences selected eral, Chomsky considered as impossible to construct the evolu50 through social learning are inherited. Symbolic communicationary origin of the language capacity on such kind of evolution: tion (cultural) inheritance means that the information transmitted In the case of such systems as language or wings it is not easy through language and any other forms of symbolic communicaeven to imagine a course of selection that might have given rise tion is inherited.5154 to them.61 This theoretical direction was further developed by Delivered Thus, to: Dawkins5557 that was manifested by his famous expressions of by Ingentathe above analysis shows that any variations of the Guest Darwinist doctrine-based understanding of evolution are nally selsh genes and selsh memes. The central idea consists User IP : than come to the in that the natural selection occurs among groups rather 24.162.219.101 same principles: (1) the concept individuals, i.e., some kinds of behavior are good Sat, 06 Aug 2011 21:27:57 of gene; for the survival (2) the principle of the fortuitous variation, and of the species with no benet to the individual, so that the gene/meme are selsh as opposed to altruistic individuals (3) the principle of selection dictated by environments. serving as just vehicles for the selsh genes. The concept of In the modern triplet-code-based molecular genetics, the gene, a meme, as the central notion of the symbolic communication, as a stretch of double helix DNA, is a chemical entity, and the is dened as a unit of cultural inheritance, hypothesized as mechanism of its expression (DNA-mRNA transcription, mRNA analogous to the particulate gene, and naturally selected by translation and synthesis of species-specic proteins) is described virtue of its phenotypic consequences on its own survival and also as a chain of chemical reactions.i The fortuitous variation replication in the cultural environment.56 The meme as a new based (apart from direct external inuences) on inevitable DNA replicator is accounted by Dawkins as a unit of the residing replication errors, which may overcome (escape) the DNA selfin the brain information that is embodied as neural circuits. repairing system, is also of chemical nature. Then, the main theThe classic genotype/phenotype formula is exchanged for the oretical shortcoming of genetics is that a gene, as a chemical replicator/vehicle duet. entity, acts on molecular intracellular level, while the majority Another direction of the Darwinist doctrine was developed of the traits, e.g., morphology, constitution, fecundity, etc. (and by Gould who, as opposed to Dawkins, claimed that individespecially any intellectual capacities) are the result of combiual organisms, groups, and species, rather than genes, are the nations of various processes realized not only on the molecular targets of natural selection, which, in turn, is just one of many intracellular but also on morphological (organismic) levels. The factors of evolution, including also catastrophic climate changes, evolutionary trend looks like successive, consecutive, as if targeological accidents, different constrains, and side effects that affect the amount of genetic variation.3 58 Some of his utterances geted, accumulation of mutations in a certain denite direction directly concern the problem accounted in the present article, e.g., that is in deep divergence with the fortuity of blind mutations [B]rain size is a functional adaptation to modes of life, not that is specic to Darwinian paradigm. a quantity with an inherent tendency to increase . Brain size Therefore, the nal verdict is that the Darwinian paradigm reects mode of life, not time of evolutionary origin3 (boldface which cannot explain the above-described paradoxes of the evois mine). This assertion contradicts the main claim of the present lutionary trend is untenable as foundation for a comprehenstudy, namely, that the Great Encephalization proceeded with sive biological theory which must include the evolutionary trend. no practical use, i.e., if to paraphrase the above Goulds assertion, Hence, novel principles, which are beyond the genetics dogmas, the brain size is not a functional adaptation to modes of life. are to be elaborated. Accordingly, a novel approach is suggested However, the proponents of the non-genetic forms of evoluin the present study which sticks to that a valid theory must tion based on their own regularities not starting from variations explain all the above paradoxes using the Occam razor (lex in DNA sequence, reduce nally (rather reluctantly) this nonparsimoniae) law meaning the usage of a minimal number of genetic evolution to the same notorious genes (But its still factors (principles) underlying any suggested theory. 21 all genes, isnt it? ). Therefore, the idea of the non-genetic inheritance, which in the end returns to the same vaunted gene concept, reminds the adding epicycles predicament adjusted in the Middle Ages to Ptolemaic geocentric system, which became i The only thing exceeding the limits of the purely chemical sphere is the triplet intolerably complicated until the appearance of the in princicode combinatorics which includes some deep mathematical principles62 (Berryman ple different Copernican heliocentric system elegantly describing and Abbott, 2006). 202

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

RESEARCH ARTICLE

(or, probably, identity with) the existing four physical elds (electromagnetic, gravitational, weak intra-nuclear and strong intranuclear), or a suggested eld is autonomous, i.e., irreducible to The suggested new principle is associated with the eld conthe physical fundamentals.1 The argumentation is as follows. 1 cept, which, as previously reviewed, has been already employed As to the established physical elds, from general and pracin the current theoretical models of consciousness including the tical considerations based on the common sense and biological electromagnetic eld6369 and quantum mechanical eld,64 7076 reality, the electromagnetic eld is worth to be preferably taken on one hand, and the autonomous eld irreducible to established for the analysis. Then, the evolutionary process of the Great 7791 on the other hand. physical fundamentals, Encephalization should be imagined as led by the respective Thus, in the present study, the eld notion is to be applied development of the corresponding electromagnetic eld deterfor the analysis of evolutionary development. In this respect, the mined by (or at least correlated with) the spatial conguration of primary aim would be to provide a eld-connected theoretical the neuronal intracellular electromagnetic eld,k which, hence, explanation of the evolutionary trend of the Great Encephalizais the leading evolutionary factor. However, the specicity of tion considered as an odd uncommon phenomenon in animal spatial conguration of the electromagnetic eld within a living evolution, which cannot be explained on the molecular genetics cell will be completely determined by the spatial distribution of basis. In such a case, the eld notion would become only an the charged intracellular substances, which are the sources of additional condition to the established genetic foundations that the integral electromagnetic eld. This means that the electrolooks like a typical ad hoc approach contradicting the Occam magnetic eld within a living cell is not a leading factor, but razor principle. A more valid idea would be if the eld notion a consequence of the spatial distribution of the charged intrawould have served not only for the description of some peculiar cellular components appearing as a result of the cells biologDelivered by Ingenta to: paradoxes but underlain the whole theoretical edice of the evoical (metabolic) activity, which, in turn, is determined by and lution of life, consciousness in particular. In such a view, theGuest User eld regulated level. Then, the specicity of the spaIP : 24.162.219.101on the geneticintracellular electromagnetic eld would principle confronting the genetic approach should be analyzed as tial conguration of the Sat, 06 Aug 2011 determined by the usual genetic regularities, which, as it 21:27:57 a general basis of the life evolution. be Consequently, the following axiomatic platform is suggested: has been claimed before, cannot explain the evolutionary trend. instead of the concept of gene as a chemical entity, a conA similar consideration can be used for the cases of the other cept of eld as an evolving spatial state is proposed as a facphysical elds. Therefore, the idea of the autonomous eld tor determining the evolutionary trend. The gene is represented irreducible to the established physical fundamentals is to be by the nucleotide sequence of a respective piece of the double considered. helix DNA determining (coding) specicity of a respective proThe idea of the autonomous eld has been already employed tein molecule, while the eld is postulated as a factor producing for explanation of consciousness. The published theories are specic spatial conguration of the protein intracellular continof two kinds, the rst one including: Morphic resonance uum. In such a situation, the postulated eld concept rested upon by Sheldrake,78 Integrated eld by Kinsbourne,80 Mental an exotic evolutionary trend of Great Encephalization must be eld by Libet,81 Receptive eld by Rosenberg,88 Field of opposed to the gene concept, which, although unable to explain consciousness by Hasker,89 and Unied conscious eld by the trend, has had a century-long experimental basis obtained Searle.91 The theories of this kind, although different in confrom all the lifes kingdoms. The asymmetry in the comparison tent, have a common denominator: the notion of eld in each of the confronting concepts is so evident that it doubts worthiness theory has no eld-specic postulations. However, although of a revolutionary revision of the genetic paradigm. However, a autonomous (irreducible) means, essentially, non-physical, small nasty fact corrupts a beautiful hypothesis,j and the Great a danger is that a postulated irreducible eld would lose, Encephalization trend is that nasty fact. together with physicality, its eld face. Then, the notion of eld becomes to be either tautological (Libet81 ), or metaphoric Accordingly, the theoretical thread of the eld hypothesis con(Searle91 ), or esoteric (Sheldrake78 ), or allegoric (Rosenberg88 ), sists of the following points: or symbolic (Hasker89 ), so that in the expression eld of con(1) The nature of a postulated eld; sciousness, the word eld could be easily exchanged with (2) The functional axiomatics of the postulated eld explainthe words state, stream, process, phenomenon, etc. Howing the evolutionary trend paradoxes; ever, the declared irreducibility does not free any hypothetical (3) The elaboration of a general eld-based theory capable to eld from subordinating to the axiomatic postulates inherent to explain not only a specic case of the evolutionary trend but the any kind of eld, irrespective of its physical essence. Another evolution in general, and distinctive characteristic of those theories is that the proclaimed (4) The place of the existing triplet code-based genetic regularelds are associated exclusively with consciousness considered ities in the frame of a eld-based theory to be suggested. as a matchless phenomenon without any relation to its biological grounds or origin. 4.1. The Existing Field-Based Theories of Meanwhile, a preliminary conclusion is as follows: (1) The Consciousness established physical elds cannot in principle explain the evolutionary trend; (2) In the above-described theories employing the As far as the nature of the suggested eld is concerned, the immediate question is whether there is a possible relationship to
k The neuronal intracellular electromagnetic eld can be imagined as related to a single neuron as its source and, respectively, to the integral eld of the neuronal massifs.

4. FIELD PRINCIPLE AS ANTITHESIS OF THE GENE NOTION

From scientic folklore dening the tragedy of science.

203

RESEARCH ARTICLE
idea of the autonomous eld for explanation of consciousness, the eld concept is emasculated being used purely symbolically. As to the other kind of the autonomous eld theory,1 86 87 the main effort was to formulate, rst, the postulates formalizing the eld as an abstract notion independently of its physical (or metaphysical) nature. Therefore, the necessary step is to consider those postulates.

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

The eld characteristics of Gurwitschs theory are not symbolic or allegoric but deeply rooted in biological reality. Although there is no space for the detailed consideration of the above eld characteristics, which are comprehensively described,83 84 86 87 117 118 121 122 a short clarication must be provided for the further theoretical account on the suggested eldbased theory of evolution. Accordingly, every living cell is a source of the eld generated in the cell nucleus. The eld is of a vectorial nature and 4.2. The Postulates of an Abstract Field Notion the vectors are directed centrifugally from the eld source. Thus, Such postulates, having been summarized earlier,1 are as follows: as opposed to the attractive eld of Newtonian gravitation, the (1) Implication of actual eld source(s). Gurwitschian eld is repulsive. The generation of the eld is (2) Action-at-a-distance from the eld source upon sensitiveassociated with certain processes in the cell nucleus related to to-eld entities (substrate) as opposed to direct (mechanical) transformations of chromatin.p There are elementary ashes contact (collisions).l of generated eld that are connected with certain elementary (3) Unboundedness absence of any distinct boundaries of the acts of the chromatin metabolism, depending on the general cell eld inuence, which, hence, theoretically is innite. metabolism. A total number of such ashes per time unit deter(4) Field integrity, i.e., continuity where the hole cannot be.92 mine the eld intensity. The elementary ashes of generated eld (5) Dependence of certain parameters of any in-eld-occurring can occur only if these acts proceed within the sphere of inuprocess on its coordinates within a certain whole, which is under ence of the already existing eld. This, essentially, is the expresDelivered by Ingenta to: the eld inuence. Guest sion of the same principles declared by Harvey (omne vivum ex (6) Field directionality, which may have different expressions User and Pasteur (denial of spontaneous generation of life). The ovo) IP : 24.162.219.101 directed from the nucleus are the resulting values from the classic scalar and vectorial elds up to the modern eld vectors Sat, 06 etc.) from a total statistical number of the elementary ashes of the highly complicated eld expressions (string-tensor-twistor,Aug 2011 21:27:57 associated with an over-classic number of dimensions (e.g. The eld at any moment. Therefore, the eld intensity is a dynamic, Theory of Everything.9396 ). uctuating parameter subtly reacting to metabolic changes. The (7) Measurability, i.e., in principle possibility for quantielementary eld is spatially anisotropic, and this is the main tative estimation of certain eld particulars, like intensity, postulate. Its meaning is that the imaginary isodynamic eld surdecrement (distance dependence), uctuations, and some other face around the nucleus at which all the vectors are equal is parameters.m not spherical but ellipsoidal. The anisotropy of the ellipsoid can be expressed as a particular ratio between its three axes, and The above postulates of an abstract eld are claimed as an this ratio, being species-specic, is considered as an invariant obligatory conceptual basis for the suggested here autonomous species-specic constant. An innite number of possible intereld-based theory of evolution, which is grounded on the theory axis ratios cover any number of potentially possible species. The of the cellular eld by Alexander Gurwitsch. eld vector has a certain rate of decrement with increasing distance from the eld source, the exact function of the dependence being a matter of empirical examination. In spite of the decre5. THE THEORY OF THE CELLULAR ment, the inuence of the eld is not limited to the cell morAUTONOMOUS FIELD BY GURWITSCH phological boundaries. The eld vectors make inuence on the A miracle in the history of science is that a theory of the excited protein molecules (those that have just got a portion of autonomous eld irreducible to the physical fundamentals was metabolic energy and are in the excitation state), transforming a elaborated rather long ago by Gurwitsch who was the rst to portion of the general molecular excitation energy into directed introduce the eld principle into biology97 .n The theory of biokinetic energy, and the direction of the movement is determined logical eld was successively elaborated by Gurwitsch throughby the eld vector at this spatial point. This is expressed either in out his life starting from the initial abstract models of the embryonic eld108112 and resulting in the comprehensive then This fact was acknowledged in contemporary reviews98100 as well as in more ory of the cellular biological eld113115 with its last editing nrecent works by the biologists who employed the concept of eld in their theoretical ished in 1954 and published posthumously only in 1991 (Ref. considerations.101107 o [2]).o Recently, Gurwitschs eld theory has been applied to the The last version of the theory, which concerned cellular eld related to all the levels of biological organization was elaborated by Gurwitsch in the 1940s in consciousness problem.8284 86 87 The Gurwitschs autonomous Soviet Union; it was published mainly in Russian113 114 and in French,115 and has eld theory is to be used as a theoretical ground for the suggested remained practically unknown to Western science. The rst review of Gurwitschs attempt to explain the evolutionary trend. eld theory was published in Russian in 1963.116 The rst comprehensive review
l According to the General Relativity, action-at-a-distance principle loses its direct meaning since the Newtonian void is exchanged for the curved space. m None from the above-mentioned theories based on the autonomous eld, i.e., Morphic resonance by Sheldrake,78 Mental eld by Libet,81 Unied conscious eld by Searle,90 Integrated eld by Kinsbourne,80 Field of consciousness by Hasker,89 Receptive eld by Rosenberg88 respond to those postulates. Only in the Libets and Sheldrakes theories, the postulate of the action-at-a-distance, although not formulated, is meant.

of Gurwitschs eld theory written in a Western European language (German) was published in 1987,117 118 and the rst English review on the theory was published in 1992.119 Some excerpts from the Gurwitschs book (written in 1954 and published in 1991 in Russian) were translated into English and published in 1994.120 The most detailed English reviews were published just recently.84 87 121 122 p The Gurwitschs style belongs to the period preceding the DNA-double-helix revolution. Therefore, the classic chromatin (generalized designation of the chromosomal apparatus of the cell nucleus) means nucleoprotein, and the elementary acts in the chromatin metabolism are hypothetically connected with dynamic interactions between the nucleic acid (DNA) and protein parts of the nucleoprotein.

204

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

RESEARCH ARTICLE

the directed movement of the excited protein molecules along the 6.1. The Functional Axiomatics of the Suggested Field Theory direction of the vector or in specically directed deformations of the protein molecules, if they are anchored to any structures. This According to Gurwitschs axiomatics, the source of the cellular means that under living conditions, the eld works against eld relates to the nuclear chromatin (using Gurwitschs glosthe chaotic movement (agitation) of the protein molecules. The sary) including the genes-containing nucleoprotein, i.e., DNAintensity of the eld at a certain cell point (the length of the protein complex. The species-specic characteristics of the vector at this point) determines what proportion of the molecular suggested eld are expressed by the eld anisotropy, which excitation energy is transformed into directed kinetic energy. The is determined by the respective species-specic internal strucvectors from separate eld sources are composed geometrically, ture of the DNA, i.e., nally, by its nucleotide sequence. On and the resulting vector at the point of composition will deterthe other hand, according to the genetic laws, the species specimine the direction of the kinetic constituent of the protein moleccity is determined by the triplet code-determined nucleotide ular excitation energy. Therefore, all the parts of a living system sequence of the DNA. Confronting both the statements, the outconsisting of a number of cells as eld sources are under integral come is that the DNA nucleotide sequence determines the eld (actual) eld that results from the total geometrical composition anisotropy. This conclusion can express a universal problem of of all the vectors originating from all the sources (nuclei). The how an abstract geometrical form can be coded by mathematgeometrical conguration of the integral actual eld determines ical combinatorics. Although such problem has no decision (at the dynamic conguration of the protein molecular continuum. least it is not available at hand), the validity of the assertion Such dynamic associations of the energetically excited protein is evident. The further confrontation makes it obvious that the molecules maintained by continuous metabolic energy inux are evolution from the genetic point of view is determined by the called unbalanced molecular constellations. These constella-by Ingenta to: mutational changes in the nucleotide sequence of genes that are Delivered tions provide dynamic conditions for steric (spatial) facilitation transferred onto the respectively changed amino acid sequence of Guest User or hindrance for certain reactions. IP eld is the corresponding proteins, while from the elds point of view, Although the question of the nature of the biological : 24.162.219.101 Sat, 06 Aug any mutational changes in the nucleotide sequence of the genes not especially touched upon in the above postulates, two princi- 2011 21:27:57 can cause the respective change of the eld anisotropy. pal comments should be added. First, Gurwitschs biological eld In this respect, an important point concerns the DNA cannot be reduced to any known physical eld: it is an immanent non-coding regions designated introns, whose nucleotide property only of living objects. Second, Gurwitschs biological sequences are not in accordance with the triplet code regularield is not energetic which means that no special energy is ties and, hence, they cannot be translated into proteins. Consefocused in the eld source. The eld vector just transforms a porquently, the whole nuclear DNA consists of non-coding introns tion of the metabolic energy accumulated in the excited protein and protein-coding exons, i.e., genes. In eukaryotic organisms, molecules into directed kinetic energy, moving or deforming the a large percentage of the total nuclear DNA is comprised of the molecules. The energy is not supplied by the eld at its point non-coding introns. It has been found that the protein-coding of action, but the eld vector as if harnesses the local energy DNA (exons) makes up about 2% of the human genome, so accumulated at this point.q that the rest of it including most regions within the introns and Thus, the Gurwitschs eld inuence is expressed on the most intergenic regions has been designated as junk DNA.125 molecular, cellular, and morphological levels. The mode of the The functional signicance of this non-coding DNA is still not eld action on the molecular level is expressed by vectorizaknown that may justify its junk designation. However, there tion of molecular processes in living cells (working against the is rather emotional uneasiness to accept the non-coding DNA as molecules chaotic movements). On the cellular and morphologijunk. A common vague suggestion is that the junk DNA regions cal levels, the eld action is expressed by subjection of cells to a could be composed of the remains of ancient genes (pseudocommon morphogenetic factor (integral eld vector) causing the genes), which lost the coding ability. This has led to some not cells spatial orientation or eld vector-directed movement. conclusively established hypotheses for how junk DNA arose

6. THE SUGGESTED FIELD-BASED THEORY OF EVOLUTION

The remarkable situation is that, on the background of the impetuous scientic development during the last half-century, the axiomatic basis of Gurwitschs eld theory has kept its original value. However, as far as Gurwitschs theory does not especially concern the problem of evolution, the eld-based theory of evolution suggested in the present study and employing Gurwitschs basic axiomatics has needed substantial revision, modernization, and theoretical additions to the original Gurwitschs postulations.
q Recently, the idea of harnessing of existing energy sources was analyzed in connection with the assertion about violation of physical laws (namely, the second law of thermodynamics and the principle of conservation of momentum) as a result of realization of a volitional act.86 123 Such energy harnessing can be allegorized by the idea of the Maxwells demon whose mode of functioning was recently theoretically analyzed.124

and why it persists in the genome.126131 A surprising recent nding in this respect is the discovery of nearly 500 ultraconserved elements found in the DNA junk regions of different vertebrate genomes.132 The function of these sequences is currently under intense scrutiny, and there are preliminary indications that some of them may play a regulatory role in vertebrate embryo development.129 132 133 Such urge for the inquiry is due to the valid scientic instinct not assuming existence of such incredibly complex systems like major part of the hereditary DNA without any functional load. From the evolutionary point of view, it does not seem evolutionarily logical to provide replication of such a large amount of useless information during each cell division, so that the evolutionary tendency would be directed toward elimination of the non-functional junk DNA. Since this is not the case, it seems reasonable to accept, or at least to suggest that the non-coding DNA should have functional signicance. Such a situation offers a possibility to ascribe to the nonediting DNA a function, which is within the axiomatic frame of 205

RESEARCH ARTICLE
the Gurwitschs eld theory. In accordance with the original Gurwitschs postulation, the species-specic eld anisotropy must be associated with the respective specicity of the cell genome considered as a whole. Since the predominant part of the nuclear DNA consists of the non-coding regions, it is tempting (and quite reasonable) to assume that the Gurwitschian elds anisotropy is associated with (caused by) the whole nuclear DNA structure including internal specicity of the non-coding DNA. Moreover, since the functional role of the coding portion of the DNA is fully determined, it could be reasonable to suggest that the burden to serve as a source of the Gurwitschian eld should fall namely upon the prevailing non-coding portion. In such a frame, the non-coding region of the genomic DNA is not a junk but is the main carrier of the species-specic autonomous eld, and certain mutational changes in the non-coding region may have substantial consequences. Such assertion is employed below for explanation of the evolutionary trend.

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

anisotropy is achieved in a certain mutated variant, which is genetically stable. The restoration of the lost geometrical perfection of the eld anisotropy may be re-established on another qualitative level, that expressing the course of the intron-based evolution. It is postulated that the achievement of the geometrical nish of the eld anisotropy is combined with sharp decrease of the high mutation rate. Henceforth, as opposed to the gene-directed evolution in which case the criteria for selection are based on immediate advantage of new traits, a peculiar property of the eld-directed evolution is that the selection is not dictated by the environments but is due to internal drive toward geometrical perfection (intrinsic mathematical beauty) of the mutants eld anisotropy. However, this is a kind of internal, passive, selection: the members of the population with still imperfect eld anisotropy keep the high mutation rate, so that the resulted population, becoming more and more heterogeneous, loses stability and nally dies out with no especial connection to the environments, being, nally, fully exchanged by the variant(s) with the achieved per6.2. The Field-Based Explanation of the fect eld anisotropy. Such a way of achieving new perfect Evolutionary Trend Delivered by Ingenta to: may be prolonged in paleoantropological scale. eld anisotropy Mutations can occur with a certain probability in both the coding User Guest Accordingly, even initial small change of the elds anisotropy and non-coding DNA regions, and the differences in the probabilIP : 24.162.219.101 caused by a mutation in a particular intron region parameter(s) ity may be considerable.134 Evidently, there should be a06 Aug 2011 21:27:57 Sat, principal would lead to a lasting eld evolution imitating a trend, that difference between the exon-based and intron-based mutations, is in contrast to the accidental dot mutations principle of the the former resulting in the appearance of the respectively mutated classic Darwinian evolution even if supported by the Baldwin proteins, while the latter being of an especial signicance within effect.135 the frame of the suggested eld theory. The intron-based mutation Thus, a new mutant gradually becomes to be predominant not cannot be translated, and in the axiomatic arsenal of the modern because of its better survival but because its progeny will not genetics, there is no denite apprehension of any potential conmutate anymore in the extraordinary rate, while the progeny of sequence of such mutation. However, according to the suggested all the other mutants continues to mutate further, i.e., again, until eld theory, the intron-based mutation would result in a certain a mutant with a geometrically perfect anisotropy appears. As a change of the eld anisotropy. Then, the picture is as follows: result, a more balanced eld-determined spatial arrangement of In the case of the exon-based mutation, the mutated protein intracellular molecular substrate favoring more effective realizawould make a certain inuence on the organisms functioning tion of metabolic processes develops. A particular point is that or/and morphology and, thus, could become a bearer of a new such kind of the intron-based mutations will not be reected trait, which will be selected in accordance with the Darwinian by any extensive DNA changes: as it is well established, the paradigm. In the case of the intron-based mutation, an initial human DNA is about 98% identical to the chimpanzees DNA. mutation-caused change in the eld anisotropy would disgure However, such evolution of the mutation-caused perverted eld the integral elds geometrical conguration. Such a mutation anisotropy was followed by the important consequences realized hitting a specic point of the intron, lesion of which distorts on the phenotypic level, the Great Encephalization being the most the species-specic eld anisotropy, induces the mechanism spectacular example. Accordingly, the unprecedented expansion of reparation of this lesion consisting in a chain of consecutive of the brain size is suggested to be the result of realization of mutations which may look as if directed toward a restorathe above-described process of approximation of the mutationtion of geometrical perfection of the eld anisotropy but not damaged eld anisotropy to a geometrically perfect pattern. selected according to their tness to environments. The damaged Consequently, in the frame of such hypothesis, the descendants eld anisotropy immediately affects the eld-arranged intracelwith such more balanced eld anisotropy are selected without lular molecular continuum, thus adversely affecting the settled any immediate advantage for the progeny survival, which relates intracellular biochemistry. It is postulated that such intron-based to a parallel selection of any traits among the exon-associated mutation is combined with signicantly increased mutation rate genetic changes leading to immediate advantage for the progeny. that is due to a poorer activity of the DNA reparation sysThen, the intron-based mutations may look like adjusting to the tem. Hence, the fate of the intron-based mutants will depend frame of the ordinary selection of the traits based on the exonnot on immediate connection with environmental demands but coded proteins. However, the achieved perfect eld anisotropy on the degree of approximation of the eld anisotropy of conis not for nothing: it determines the optimal (geometrically pertinually appearing variants to a more geometrically perfect fect) spatial arrangement of the intracellular protein substrate pattern of the eld anisotropy. The evolutionary process of conand, respectively, the whole species-specic macro-morphology. tinual mutants appearance will advance until the appearance of Thus, the eld anisotropy-hitting mutation is contrastingly difa mutant having a nal intrinsically perfect eld anisotropy patferent from a gene-based mutation, namely: tern, which could substitute the original geometrical design lost (1) The gene-based mutation results in the synthesis of a as a result of the initial mutation. Such evolutionary progress changed (mutated) protein, which, as a chemical entity, is active on the intracellular level. would advance until a denitive geometrical nish of the eld 206

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

RESEARCH ARTICLE
examine the developing brain-containing hominids by such criteria. This is a clear demonstration of the non-correspondence of the hominid brain development to the Darwinian paradigm.

6.3. Outline of a General Field-Based Thus, such lasting eld evolution imitating some trend Theory of Evolution explains the puzzling evolutionary phenomenon of the absence There could be a general impression that the suggested of correspondence between the unprecedented speed of the irreducible eld-based theory ts only a unique case of the brain anatomical development (the Great Encephalization) and evolutionary trend of the Great Encephalization, while the gena very slow behavioral advance that was mostly demonstraeral evolution considered in its entire diversity and multiformity tive after anatomical completion of the modern human (about including all the kingdoms of the living world is fairly well 190,00130,000 years ago), i.e., an anatomically nished highly described by the Darwinian paradigm. Such comparison is not in complicated brain was without its parallel functional employfavor of the present eld theory, which could look like an exotic ment during more than 100,000 years. It may be imagined ad hoc hypothesis suitable only for the description of a highly that the above-suggested crucial mutation had occurred in the specic evolutionary trend of the Great Encephalization. Theregenome of the Homo habilis exactly in such a highly specic non-coding (introns-containing) genomic region associfore, the question is whether the suggested eld theory could ated with the eld anisotropy (i.e., a lesion in this region explain the global regularities of the biological evolution. affects the eld anisotropy). That event had triggered the In this respect, the logical thread is rather clear. A more genermutational chain expressed as the trend of the Great Encephalalized signicance of the suggested eld theory, as compared to ization, which, as could be speculated on the Delivered by Ingenta to:foundations, is due not only to a strict explanation basis of the the genetics paleoantropological data, was developing via two evolutionary User Great Encephalization phenomenon, which in principle Guest of the pathways: H. habilisH. ergasterH. erectus lines and H. habilis cannot be IP : 24.162.219.101 explained by the Darwinian evolution. The fact that H. ergasterH. heidelbergensisH. neanderthalensisH. sapiens the present theory Sat, 06 Aug 2011 21:27:57 takes into account (and even is based on) the line. The rst line was ended about 300,000100,000 years ago, major part of DNA designated as a non-coding junk, whose when H. erectus, before its extinction, reached about 75 percent function is out of the main road of the modern genetics, votes for (950 to 1100 cc) of the brain size of the modern human, while the favor of the physical (by its realization within the suggested the second line was crowned by the emergence of the H. sapiens, theory) eld notion versus the chemical gene concept. By nomwhich, nally, came out of the biological evolution. inating the functional signicance to the intron genomic region, During such sequence of piercing developments, there was which is enigmatic from evolutionary and biochemical perspeca slow conservative development of the cultural manifestations. tives, the suggested eld theory of evolution provides a deeper The anatomically perfect human brain potentially capable to theoretical import as compared to the modern genetics. apprehend the laws of nature and experience the art masterHowever, a comprehensive eld theory describing both the pieces was employed in the smallest range as contrasted to its exon-based genetic regularities and the intron-based extravagant exceptionally high potential. Namely those accidental innovations spatial phenomena would look like arranging two marriages in (use of re, building shelters, grinding stones) occurred 500,000 the same bed. Consequently, the peaceful Solomon solution is 280,000 years ago, i.e., before the completion of H. sapiens, to divide the spheres of activities: the source of the irreducible testify that those innovations could be made by the H. sapiens eld is the entire cellular chromatin, i.e., the DNA-containing precursors with still imperfect brain, and the same innovations nucleoprotein accounted as a certain whole including both the were as if rediscovered by the H. sapiens and became to coding exon and non-coding intron regions, while the coding be widely dispersed only during the consciousness big bang exon region remains to be under highly specic triplet code-based period of 50,00040,000 years ago. This gives evidence that the genetic regularities. In such account, the exon-based frame of human brain rapid development ran ahead of its employment, genetic regularities is just a special case of the common heredithis factual occurrence proving that such rapid development was tary mechanism grounded on the whole nuclear DNA. not caused by its necessity dictated by environments that is in contrast to the Darwinist principle. Hence, the Cro-Magnon 7. DISCUSSION H. sapiens had received the perfect anatomical brain as a present. Contrary to that, elephant had not received its trunk as a present, The explanation of the evolutionary trend of the Great Encephaland, similarly, giraffes neck and horses hoof were not presents: ization is the main immediate accomplishment of the present the long continual development of those organs was going on study. However, an explanation of such an exceptional phein full correspondence with the demands of the environments, nomenon, taken from the ocean of various evolutionary forms of so that the Darwinist law of selection of the variants according the developing organic world, by means of an uncommon halfto the environmental demands was realized in its full potential. forgotten Gurwitschs eld theory would not seem a persuasive However, in the human brain development, there was no selection proof of a universal signicance of the suggested eld theory. according to the brain size with all its complexity and potenA conceivable uneasy feeling is a good sign of a valid instinct of tial capacity for conscious behavior: the environments did not suspicion toward a hypothetical ad hoc explanation, especially, when an enigmatic phenomenon is explained by an extravagant r Such physical inuence is realized by vectorization of molecular processes in theory. Another point of suspicion is due to a common distrust to living cells (working against the molecules chaotic movements). any theory based on irreducibility to the established physical funs There are debates whether the H. erectus is an evolutionary dead-end or it was damentals that is symbolic for the contemporary science rested somehow crossed with the H. sapiens line becoming one amongst the H. sapiens on the dominating reductionist philosophy. Anyhow, since the precursors.136 137 207

(2) The eld-based mutation results in the change of the eld anisotropy which, as having a physical inuence,r reveals an immediate effect at all the three levels of biological organization: molecular, cellular, and morphological.

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

not expanded so drastically, being remained almost of the apes plausibility of a theory is estimated by its capacity to describe the brain size!u factual reality as comprehensively as possible, a natural expecHowever, the evolution of the hominid bipedal anatomy may tation is to obtain additional arguments demonstrating a wider be explained quite reasonably within the traditional Darwinism, theoretical applicability of the suggested theory and, in particualthough there have been different hypotheses about a model lar, the original Gurwitschs eld theory, to the basic biological of selective pressure leading to bipedalism: behavioral model problems. (social, sexual and reproductive conduct),139 thermoregulatory As far as Gurwitschs eld theory is concerned, it has been model (increased heat loss, increased cooling, reduced heat gain used for explanation of some embryological, morphogenetic and and reduced water requirements in a hot, tropical climate),140 and physiological problems2 113118 as well as of some aspects of ecological model (postural feeding hypothesis).141 the consciousness problem, like binding problem,83 denition 84 86 Another even a greater wonder is that the bipedalism and of consciousness, free will, formulation of protophenomenal the Great Encephalization were not associated with each other, fundamental and rudimentary psychic act,87 and the riddle of although such association would have been naturally anticipated. spatial-temporal organization of episodic memory.138 Hence, the Contrary to this, the Great Encephalization had started far later, trend of the Great Encephalization is not the only phenomenon namely, after completion of the bipedal anatomy, this emphasizexplained by means of the Gurwitschs eld theory. ing its uniqueness as a veritable trend not caused or supported The main benet of the analysis of the Great Encephalization by selection pressure. by means of the suggested eld theory is that the eld concept As to the mechanism of the miraculous brain expansion, the harbours deep potential advantages as compared to the genetics genetic level is of high importance if it includes both the codpostulatory grounds. The rst advantage is that the eld coning exons and cept works as an active factor at all the three levels of bio- by Ingenta to: the non-coding introns regions. However, the Delivered latter, as it has been discussed earlier, has not been included logical organization: molecular, cellular, and morphological, in User Guest into intensive studies on accelerating evolution of the human contrast to the gene notion whose real action is limited: to the IP 24.162.219.101 studies were attempted to identify the genes involved brain. The molecular intracellular level. The second advantage concerns the 2011 21:27:57 Sat, 06 Aug into such dramatic increase of the brain size and complexity in aptitude for determination of the species specicity which must order to understand the exceptionally accelerated mutations rate be adjusted to the incredibly high number of species.t In this of the respective genes somehow involved into the nervous sysrespect, the eld concept provides the possibility for an innite tem development.142152 The main question, namely, how can number of potential eld states, as compared to the, although we identify the smoking guns of human genetic evolution from incredibly high, but nite amount of potential genes combinaneutral ticks of the molecular evolutionary clock?147 was contions based on the triplet code combinatorics. Another advantage cretized in a more specic question whether brain evolution of the eld notion associated with the suggested theory is that involved a small number of key mutations in a few genes or a the source of the eld induction is related to the whole genomic very large number of mutations in many genes.5 However, this DNA including non-coding intron-containing regions, which are question was concluded to be a matter of speculation147 and has useless (junk) in the frame of the triplet code-based genetics. remained without answer. It stays unknown whether evolutionarFrom the evolutionary paleoantropological point of view, an ily important mutations have occurred predominantly in regulainteresting comparison can be made between the Great Encephaltory sequences or coding regions.5 153156 However, the denite ization trend and the origin and further development of the fact is that the genes underlying nervous system biology exhibit bipedalism, which began soon after the splitting of the protoa higher average rate of protein evolution in primates (and within chimpanzee and hominid lines from a common ancestor and primates a higher rate in humans) than in rodents.5 which also could have been accounted as a trend and, consecApart from these studies, there is an idea of a hypothetical utively, explained by the above-postulated intron-based mutation fortuitous mutation that promoted the fully modern brain.15 distorting species-specic eld anisotropy. Indeed, after the splitSuch a miraculous fortuitous macro-mutation is indeed a savting from the human-chimpanzee common ancestor, the hominids ing notion since the ordinary micro-mutations cannot explain passed an unparalleled amount of evolutionary changes before the directed chain of promotion toward the fully modern brain. reaching the stage of the Great Encephalization, i.e., the evoThe idea, itself, of the fortuitous mutation would seem to have lutionary development of the bipedal handy man (H. habilis) something in common with the main idea of the present themight be considered as a result of the postulated lasting, trendory concerning a highly specic mutation as a causal factor of imitating, eld evolution. In contrast to this, the difference the Great Encephalization. However, in their book (Klein and Edgar, 200215 ), the authors give no even tentative description of between the proto-chimpanzee and the modern chimpanzee was an extraordinary nature of such a fortuitous mutation, while in not as drastic as that between the Ardipithecus ramidus (the the present theory, such mutation is determined to occur in the earliest hominid ancestor after divergence between the hominid intron region associated with the postulated eld anisotropy. and chimpanzee lines) and H. habilis, which is only on the half A remarkable outcome from the conclusion that the modern way toward the modern H. sapiens. A wonder is that during all H. sapiens came out of the frame of the biological evolution this rather crucial period of becoming up-right creature with the is that the human brain, having reached its denitive anatomupper extremities free for making (using) tools, the brain had ical size more than 100,000 years ago, was doomed to accept
t The potential number of possible species must include all the species which populate the Earth now, all those which populated the Earth since the origin of life, and those to evolve on Earth in the innite future including those to be genetically engineered. u Taking into account a rather high rate of uctuations of the brain size in different hominid species, e.g., 600800 cc of Homo habilis, 12001700 cc of Neanderthal, 10001850 of Homo sapiens, a cranial volume of 750 cc has been proposed a cerebral Rubicon designating belonging to the genus Homo.

208

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

RESEARCH ARTICLE

the burden of the entire potential knowledge to be absorbed by the living world. It might seem that in the organism-environment the future humanity. The intellectual development of humanity coexistence, the environment is a determining factor testing the will do with the same brain size: there is no hope that intellecappearing mutational changes, while the organism is a rather pastual development of humanity will cause an inherited anatomical sive participant automatically generating a spectrum of mutaextension of the brain. The Einsteins descendents did not inherit tions which are checked by the environments for their tness and his geniality; any newborns brain, while having some personal suitability.w Hence, it may look that the evolutionary development peculiarities, is tabula rasa that is lled with knowledge a posof any new trait is as if induced by the environments, the respecteriori, which, in turn, will not be further inherited biologically. tive regularities being pretty well described by genetics postulaIf, however, a certain striking mutation, which potentially would tions. The naked essence of the evolutionary trend is that it looks promote the brain expansion, suddenly occurs, it will hardly have spontaneous, i.e., is not based on natural selection and even on a chance to disperse in population because of the absence of its natural causality. The hope is that the eld theory suggested in biological propagation (see the footnote g). the present article provides a certain explanation. A curious question concerns the future of human civilization. The trend of the Great Encephalization was nished about References and Notes 130,000 years ago, but the anatomically complete brain remained functionally unemployed and began manifest its real potential 1. M. Lipkind, Mind and Matter 3, 29 (2005). 2. A. G. Gurwitsch, Principles of Analytical Biology and the Theory of Cellular capacities only about 10,000 years ago. What are the frontiers Fields, Nauka, Moscow, Russian (1991).x of potential progress of the mankind which, it appears, is depen3. S. J. Gould, Ever Since Darwin: Reections in Natural History, W. W. Norton dent, if not determined, by the brain capacities which are asso& Co, New York, London (1973). 4. L. Marino, PNAS 102, 5306 (2005). ciated with (limited to?) its constant, i.e., evolutionarily frozen,v Delivered by Ingenta to: E. J. Vallender, P. D. Evans, J. R. Anderson, S. L. Gilbert, 5. S. Dorus, anatomical size? M. Mahowald, C. M. Malkolm, and B. T. Lahn, Cell 119, 1027 (2004). Guest There are two alternative answers: (1) the brain, although User C. von Linn (C. Linnaeus), Philosophia botanica (1751), Translated from 6. IP unlimremaining of the same anatomical size, has practically : 24.162.219.101 S. Freer, Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005). Latin by 7. W. H. Calvin, Sat, 06 Aug ited capacities for further knowledge absorption; (2) there will 2011 21:27:57 The River that Flows Uphill: A Journey from the Big Bang to the Big Brain, Sierra Club Books, San Francisco (1986). be a stage in the mankind development when the human brain of 8. W. H. Calvin, Sci. Am. 271, 100 (1994). the same anatomically constant size will not be capable to con9. D. Dennett, Consciousness Explained, Little, Brown & Company, New York front with the avalanche of the impetuously accumulated infor(1991). 10. H. M. McHenry, Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 11, 151 (1982). mation. Although both the possibilities seem to belong rather to 11. I. McDougall, F. H. Brown, and J. G. Fleagle, Nature 433, 733 (2005). science ction, the perspective is quite realistic, and, taking into 12. F. Spoor, M. G. Leakey, P. N. Gathogo, F. H. Brown, S. C. Antn, account the swift pace of the human progress, is within the notI. McDougall, C. Kiarie, F. K. Manthi, and L. N. Leakey, Nature 448, 688 (2007). too-far-distant future. The rst possibility looking rather more 13. B. Wood, Human Evolution: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University optimistic bears a serious doubt in practical realization of the Press, Oxford (2005). unlimited absorption of new information. The second possibility 14. C. Butler, Prehistoric Flintwork, Stroud, Tempus (2005). assumes the situation of a relatively abrupt decrease in compre15. R. G. Klein and B. Edgar, The Dawn of Human Culture, John Wiley and Sons, New York (2002). hension of not only current informational abundance, but also 16. W. H. Calvin, A Brief History of the Mind, Oxford University Press, Oxford a more and more complicated macro- and micro-physical the(2004). oretical constructions, abstract mathematical complications, and 17. J. Diamond, The Third Chimpanzee: The Evolution and Future of the Human philosophical revelations. In all likelihood, the most probable Animal, Harper Perennial, New York (2006). 18. S. H. Ambrose, Science 291, 1748 (2001). perspective is an incredible specialization supported by eugenics19. S. M. Rhind, J. E. Taylor, P. A, De Sousa, T. J. King, M. McGarry, and directed efforts using genetic engineering with all the related I. Wilmut, Nature Rev. Genet. 4, 855 (2003). ethical problems, so that the science ction will soon become a 20. J. Glad, Future Human Evolution: Eugenics in the Twenty-First Century, Hermitage Publishers, Schuylkill Haven, PA (2008). current reality. In such a perspective, there is no hope that the 21. E. Jablonka and M. J. Lamb, Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigeabove-discussed eld anisotropy-based evolutionary trend of the netic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life, A Bradford Great Encephalization is still going on, meaning that the once Book, The MIT Press, Cambridge MA, London (2005). mutated eld anisotropy has not yet restored its geometrical per22. A. Weismann, The Germ-Plasm: A Theory of Heredity, Translated from the German edition (1892) by W. N. Parker and H. Roennnfeldt, Walter Scott, fection, i.e., the modern human brain has not yet reached its eld London (1893a). anisotropy-determined nal size. The absence of the human brain 23. A. Weismann, Contemp. Rev. 64, 596 (1893b). anatomical development after appearance of the modern Homo 24. H. De Vries, Die Mutationstheorie: Versuche und Beobachtungen ueber die sapiens about 130,000 years ago denies such a possibility, and, Entstehung der Arten im Panzenreich, Veit, Leipzig (19011903). 25. W. Bateson, Mendels Principles of Heredity, Cambridge University Press, hence, natural evolutionary development of a macro-cephalous Cambridge UK (1909). large-headed (super)human species is not expected. 26. W. Johannsen, Amer. Naturalist 45, 129 (1911).

8. EPILOGUE
The Great Encephalization remains to be a challenge not only to the theory of evolution but to a general scientic description of
A high dispersion of the human brain size (10001850) should be taken into account together with the absence of any correlation between the individual brain size and intellectual level. Evidently, the microanatomy which reects specic human distinctiveness is decisive, which, however, is limited to a certain critical macro-size of the brain.
v

27. M. Demerec, What is a gene? J. Heredity 24, 368 (1933). 28. T. Dobzhansky, Genetics and the Origin of Species, Columbia University Press, New York (1937). 29. G. E. Allen, Amer. Zoologist 23, 829 (1983).

w In such a situation, some indifferent new mutations can appear which are not especially suitable to the environments while are not harmful to the organism as well. x The latest version of the Theory of Cellular Fields was nished in 1954 (just before Gurwitsch passed away), but its publication was suppressed. The manuscript which was well known in Russian scientic circles could be published only in 1991.

209

RESEARCH ARTICLE
30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. J. D. Watson and F. H. C. Crick, Nature 171, 737 (1953a). J. D. Watson and F. H. C. Crick, Nature 171, 964 (1953b). F. H. C. Crick, Symp. Soc. Exper. Biol. 12, 138 (1958). F. H. C. Crick, L. Barnett, S. Brenner, and R. J. Watts-Tobin, Nature 192, 1227 (1961). M. Nirenberg and P. Leder, Science 145, 1399 (1964). F. H. C. Crick, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B, Biol. Sci. 167, 331 (1967). J. D. Watson, The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London (1968). H. G. Khorana, Biochem J. 109, 709 (1968). F. H. C. Crick, Nature 227, 561 (1970). M. Nirenberg, Trends Biochem. Sci. 29, 46 (2004). M. Kimura, Nature 217, 624 (1968). M. Kimura, The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1983). M. Kimura, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. B, Biol. Sci. 312, 343 (1986). T. Ohta and J. H. Gillespie, Theor. Popul. Biol. 49, 128 (1996). T. Ohta, PNAS 99, 16134 (2002). E. G. Leigh, Evol. Biol. 20, 2075 (2007). C. R. Darwin, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, 6th edn., with Additions and Corrections, John Murray, London (1872). R. Holliday, Develop. Genetics 15, 163 (1994). A. D. Riggs, Cytogenet. Cell Genet. 14, 9 (1975). A. Regev, M. J. Lamb, and E. Jablonka, Molec. Biol. Evol. 15, 880 (1998). R. Aisner and J. Terkel, Animal Behav. 44, 327 (1992). W. D. Hamilton, J. Theor. Biol. 7, 1 (1964a). W. D. Hamilton, J. Theor. Biol. 7, 17 (1964b). L. L. Cavalli-Sforza and M. W. Feldman, Cultural Transmission and Evolution, Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ (1981). T. W. Deacon, The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain, Norton, New York (1997). R. Dawkins, The Selsh Gene, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1976). R. Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype: The Gene as the Unit of Selection, Freeman, Oxford (1982). R. Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, Longman, Harlow, UK (1986). S. J. Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA (2002). N. Chomsky, Language and Mind, Harcourt, Brace & World, New York (1968). N. Chomsky, Reections on Language, Pantheon, New York (1975). N. Chomsky, Language and Problems of Knowledge: The Managua Lectures, MIT Press, Cambridge MA (1988). M. J. Berryman, Mathematical Principles Underlying Genetic Structures, From Stars to Brains: Pathways to Consciousness in the Natural World, Proceedings of the Conference of the Australian Academy of Science in honor of Professor Paul Davies, edited by A. Glikson, June, Canberra, Australia (2006). S. Pockett, Cons. Cognit. 8, 45 (1999). S. Pockett, The Nature of Consciousness: A Hypothesis, Universe Ltd., Lincoln NE (2000). S. Pockett, J. Cons. Stud. 9, 51 (2002). E. R. John, Cons. Cognit. 10, 184 (2001). J. McFadden, J. Cons. Stud. 9, 23 (2002a). J. McFadden, J. Cons. Stud. 9, 45 (2002b). H. Romijn, J. Cons. Stud. 9, 61 (2002). L. M. Ricciardi and H. Umezava, Kybernetik 4, 44 (1967). G. Vitiello, Intern. J. Modern Phys. B 9, 973 (1995). S. Hameroff, Geometry and the Foundations of Science, edited by N. Woodhouse, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1997), pp. 103127. S. Hameroff, Cajal and Consciousness: Scientic Approaches to Consciousness on the Centennial of Ramn y Cajals Textura, edited by P. C. Marijuan, Annals of the New York Academy of Science 929, 74104 (2001). S. Hameroff and R. Penrose, J. Cons. Stud. 3, 36 (1996a). S. Hameroff and R. Penrose, Toward a Science of Consciousness (The 1st Tucson Discussions and Debates), edited by S. Hameroff, A. Kaszniak and A. Scott, Bradford Book, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA & London (1996b), pp. 507540. R. Penrose, Cajal and Consciousness: Scientic Approaches to Consciousness on the Centennial of Ramn y Cajals Textura, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 929, 105, Proceedings of the International Centennial Conference Commemorating the Publication of Textura, edited by P. C. Marijuan, NovemberDecember, Zaragoza, Spain (2001). R. Sheldrake, A New Science of Life: The Hypothesis of Formative Causation, Tarcher, Los Angeles (1981). R. Sheldrake, Dialogues with Scientists and Sages: The Search for Unity, edited by R. Weber, Routledge and Paul Kegan, London (1986), pp. 7188.

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62.

Delivered by Ingenta to: Guest User IP : 24.162.219.101 Sat, 06 Aug 2011 21:27:57

63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73.

74. 75.

76.

77. 78.

79. R. Sheldrake, Morphic Resonance and Collective Memory, Science and Consciousness, Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium of the Athenian Society for Science and Human Development, edited by D. Elliot, January, Athens, Greece (1992). 80. M. Kinsbourne, Consciousness in Contemporary Science, edited by A. J. Marcel and E. Bisiash, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1988), pp. 239256. 81. B. Libet, J. Cons. Stud. 1, 119 (1994). 82. M. Lipkind, Current Development of Biophysics, edited by C. Zhang, F.-A. Popp, and M. Bischof, Hangzhou University Press, Hangzhou (1996), pp. 223251. 83. M. Lipkind, Biophotons, edited by J. J. Chang, J. Fisch, and F.-A. Popp, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1998a), pp. 359373. 84. M. Lipkind, Integrative Biophysics, edited by F.-A. Popp and L. Beloussov, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2003), pp. 467503. 85. M. Lipkind, The Concept of Field in Consciousness Theorizing: Is it a Tool for Solving the Hard Problem? Toward a Science of Consciousness, Proceedings of the 6th Conference, edited by D. Chalmers, A. Freeman, and S. Hameroff, April, Tucson AZ, USA (2004). 86. M. Lipkind, Biophotonics and Coherent Systems in Biology, edited by L. V. Beloussov, V. Voeikov, and V. N. Martynyuk, Springer US, New York (2006), pp. 235277. 87. M. Lipkind, Consciousness and Learning Research, edited by S. K. Turrini, Nova Science Publishers, Hauppauge NY (2007a), pp. 145. 88. G. H. Rosenberg, J. Cons. Stud. 3, 76 (1996). 89. W. Hasker, The Emergent Self, Cornell University Press, Ithaca (1999). 90. J. Searle, Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 23, 557 (2000a). 91. J. Searle, J. Cons. Stud. 7, 3 (2000b). 92. K. Campbell, Abstract Particulars, Blackwell, Oxford (1990). 93. J. D. Barrow, Theories of Everything, Fawcett-Columbine, New York (1992). 94. B. Greene, The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory, W. W. Norton & Company, New York, London (1999). 95. R. Weingard, Physics Meets Philosophy at the Planck Scale, edited by C. Callender and N. Huggett, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001), pp. 138151. 96. B. Greene, Sci. Am. 289, 48 (2003). 97. A. G. Gurwitsch, Biologische Zentralblatt (in German) 32, 458 (1912). 98. L. von Bertalanffy, Modern Theories of Development: An Introduction to Theoretical Biology, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1933). 99. W. McDougall, The Riddle of Life: A Survey of Theories, Methuen, London (1938). 100. P. Weiss, Principles of Development, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York (1939). 101. C. H. Waddington, Fields and Gradients, In Major Problems in Developmental Biology, edited by M. Locke, Academic Press, New York, London (1966), pp. 105124. 102. C. H. Waddington, Towards a Theoretical Biology (Prolegomena), edited by C. H. Waddington, Aldine Publishing Co., Birmingham (1968), pp. 131. 103. D. J. Haraway, Crystals, Fabrics, and Fields: Metaphors of Organicism in Twentieth-Century Developmental Biology, Yale University Press, New Haven (1976). 104. B. C. Goodwin, Science and Beyond, edited by S. Rose and L. Appignanese, Blackwell, Oxford (1986), pp. 4760. 105. G. R. Welch, Progr. Biophys. Molec. Biol. 57, 71 (1992). 106. E. Laszlo, The Creative Cosmos: A Unied Science of Matter, Life and Mind, Floris Books, Edinburgh (1993). 107. S. F. Gilbert, J. M. Opitz, and R. A. Raff, Develop. Biol. 173, 357 (1996). 108. A. G. Gurwitsch, Roux Arch. Entwicklungsmech. (in German) 39, 516 (1914). 109. A. G. Gurwitsch, Roux Arch. Entwicklungsmech. (in German) 51, 383 (1922). 110. A. G. Gurwitsch, Roux Arch. Entwicklungsmech. (in German) 112, 433 (1927). 111. A. G. Gurwitsch, Roux Arch. Entwicklungsmech. (in German) 116, 20 (1929). 112. A. G. Gurwitsch, Die histologischen Grundlagen der Biologie (in German), G. Fischer Verlag, Jena (1930). 113. A. G. Gurwitsch, The Theory of the Biological Field, Sovetskaya Nauka, Moscow, Russian (1944). 114. A. G. Gurwitsch, Collection of Works on Mitogenesis and the Theory of the Biological Field, edited by A. G. Gurwitsch, USSR Academy of Medical Sciences Publishing House, Moscow, Russian (1947a), pp. 141147. 115. A. G. Gurwitsch, Une theorie du champ biologique cellulaire (Theory of the Biological Field). Bibliotheca Biotheoretica, ser. D, 11, Leiden, French (1947b), pp. 1149. 116. L. V. Beloussov, Physical and Chemical Foundations of Life Phenomena: Historical Essays, edited by I. V. Nikitinskaya and G. A. Astaeva, USSR Academy of Sciences Publishing House, Moscow (1963), pp. 59117. 117. M. Lipkind, Fusion (German edition) (in German) 8, 30 (1987a).

210

Adv. Sci. Lett. 1, 199211, 2008

RESEARCH ARTICLE
140. P. E. Wheeler, J. Human Evol. 21, 107 (1991). 141. K. D. Hunt, South African J. Sci. 92, 77 (1996). 142. H. H. Chou, H. Takematsu, S. Diaz, J. Iber, E. Nickerson, K. L. Wright, E. A. Muchmore, D. L. Nelson, S. T. Warren, and A. Varki, PNAS USA 95, 11751 (1998). 143. H. H. Chou, T. Hayakawa, S. Diaz, M. Krings, E. Indriati, M. Leakey, S. Paabo, Y. Satta, N. Takahata, and A. Varki, PNAS USA 99, 11736 (2002). 144. W. Enard, P. Khaitovich, J. Klose, S. Zollner, F. Heissig, P. Giavalisco, K. Nieselt-Struwe, E. Muchmore, A. Varki, R. Ravid, G. M. Doxiadis, R. E. Bontrop, and S. Pbo, Science 296, 340 (2002). 145. W. Enard, M. Przeworski, S. E. Fisher, C. S. Lai, V. Wiebe, T. Kitano, A. P. Monaco, and S. Paabo, Nature 418, 869 (2002). 146. M. Caceres, J. Lachuer, M. A. Zapala, J. C. Redmond, L. Kudo, D. H. Geschwind, D. J. Lockhart, T. M. Preuss, and C. Barlow, PNAS USA 100, 13030 (2003). 147. S. B. Carroll, Nature 422, 849 (2003). 148. J. Shi, H. Xi, Y. Wang, C. Zhang, Z. Jiang, K. Zhang, Y. Shen, L. Jin, K. Zhang, W. Yuan, Y. Wang, J. Lin, Q. Hua, F. Wang, S. Xu, S. Ren, S. Xu, G. Zhao, Z. Chen, L. Jin, and W. Huang, PNAS USA 100, 8331 (2003). 149. A. G. Clark, S. Glanowski, R. Nielsen, P. D. Thomas, A. Kejariwal, M. A. Todd, D. M. Tanenbaum, D. Civello, F. Lu, B. Murphy, S. Ferriera, G. Wang, X. Zheng, T. J. White, J. J. Sninsky, M. D. Adams, and M. Cargill, Science 302, 1876 (2003). 150. M. Uddin, D. E. Wildman, G. Liu, W. Xu, R. M. Johnson, P. R. Hof, G. Kapatos, L. I. Grossman, and M. Goodman, PNAS USA 101, 2957 (2004). 151. H. H. Stedman, B. W. Kozyak, A. Nelson, D. M. Thesier, L. T. Su, D. W. Low, C. R. Bridges, J. B. Shrager, N. Minugh-Purvis, and M. A. Mitchell, Nature 428, 415 (2004). 152. P. D. Evans, J. R. Anderson, E. J. Vallender, S. S. Choi, and B. T. Lahn, Hum. Mol. Genet. 13, 1139 (2004). 153. M. C. King and A. C. Wilson, Science 188, 107 (1975). 154. E. H. McConkey and A. Varki, Science 289, 1295 (2000). 155. E. H. McConkey, Trends Genet. 18, 446 (2002). 156. A. Varki and T. K. Altheide, Genome Res. 15, 1746 (2005).

118. M. Lipkind, Fusion (German edition) (in German) 8, 53 (1987b). 119. M. Lipkind, Recent Advances in Biophoton Research and its Applications, edited by F.-A. Popp, K. H. Li, and Q. Gu, World Scientic, Singapore, New Jersey, London, Hong Kong (1992), pp. 469494. 120. L. V. Beloussov, Rivista di Biologia-Biology Forum 87, 119 (1994). 121. M. Lipkind, 21st Century Sci. Technol 11, 36 (1998b). 122. M. Lipkind, 21st Century Sci. Technol. 11, 34 (1998c). 123. D. L. Wilson, J. Cons. Stud. 6, 185 (1999). 124. H. S. Leff and A. F. Rex, Maxwells Demon: Entropy, Information, Computing, Princeton University Press, Princeton (1990). 125. S. Ohno, Brookhaven Symposia in Biology 23, 366 (1972). 126. T. R. Gregory and P. D. N. Hebert, Genome Res. 9, 317 (1999). 127. W. W. Gibbs, Sci. Am. 289, 46 (2003). 128. M. A. Nobrega, Y. Zhu, I. Plajzer-Frick, V. Afzal, and E. M. Rubin, Nature 431, 988 (2004). 129. A. Woolfe, M. Goodson, D. K. Goode, P. Snell, G. K. McEwen, T. Vavouri, S. F. Smith, P. North, H. Callaway, K. Kelly, K. Walter, I. Abnizova, W. Gilks, Y. J. K. Edwards, J. E. Cooke, and G. Elgar, PLoS Biology 3, e7 (2005). 130. S. Prabhakar, J. P. Noonan, S. Paabo, and E. M. Rubin, Science 314, 786 (2006). 131. E. Pennisi, Science 316, 1556 (2007). 132. G. Bejerano, M. Pheasant, I. Makunin, S. Stephen, W. J. Kent, J. S. Mattick, and D. Haussler, Science 304, 1321 (2004). 133. A. Sandelin, P. Bailey, S. Bruce, P. G. Engstrm, J. M. Klos, W. W. Wasserman, J. Ericson, and B. Lenhard, BMC Genomics 5, 99 (2004). 134. B. M. Olivera, C. Walker, G. E. Cartier, D. Hooper, A. D. Santos, R. Schoenfeld, R. Shetty, M. Watkins, P. Bandyopadhyaya, and D. R. Hillyart, Molecular Sreategies in Biological Evolution, edited by L. H. Caporale, Annals N.Y Acad. Sci. (1999), Vol. 870, pp. 223237. 135. M. Baldwin, Amer. Naturalist 30, 441 (1896). 136. G. Bruer and E. Mbua, J. Human Evol. 22, 79 (1992). 137. D. S. Strait, F. E. Grine, and M. A. Moniz, J. Human Evol. 32, 17 (1997). 138. M. Lipkind, Proceedings of the Conference Quantum Mind, Salzburg, Austria, July (2007). 139. C. O. Lovejoy, Science 211, 341 (1981).

Delivered by Ingenta to: Guest User IP : 24.162.219.101 Sat, 06 Aug 2011 21:27:57

Received: 18 December 2007. Accepted: 20 January 2008.

211