• Brad McFall


Homo duplex has survived for way too long in the United States. Psychiatrists have over exploited the bio-psychological individual and politicians have become unhealthily tribal as a consequence of imposed involuntary equality of socio-cultural persons. Scientific creationism has appeared to be unrealistically religious and sociobiology has returned racism to the targeted backdrop of former years. This appearance of personal hemi-individuality is the consequence of a binary opposition within an historical manifestation of a duplex of biology and culture. This split characterization that makes up the fictionalized yet realistically extant Homo duplex has caused untold harms and unwanted coercions and yet no assemblage of the halves has ever been wholly considered to correspond to the theoretical dissection the difference accomplishes, whether justified or not. I offer a unification of this populationally distributed clinamina forced by our learned but non-necessary separation of biology and culture. As these deviations are seen rather to be transversally yoked with our life-in-the-making, the frustrations caused by this cultural schism may be found to touch towards surficially appearing progress in solving particular environmental issues. I review solutions to the human overpopulation problem from the perspective of life beyond Homo duplex.

The environment is at the heart of the difference between the sociocultural person and the bio-psychological individual that make up what Tim Ingold introduced as Homo duplex (“Biosocial Becomings Edited by Tim Ingold.” 2013). Hearts however are obviously in bodies and not in environments. We have the potential to process past past objectifications of the environment by attending to this difference and by feeling how it arises from within. Socio-cultural anthropology has shown that people are not well comprehended as objectified nodes in a network of bounded interactivity but rather subsist more humanizingly (Ingold, 2007 “Beyond Biology and Culture”) as meshes of communications of harmonizable motions (Ingold, 2013Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art and Architecture”). From this composable motion emerges a sound understanding of the environment-within that is at the same time, without. This within environment is not that born of biological eugenics. These motions tacitly include biotic and abiotic components reaching beyond the surface of the individual as bound by the skin (Ingold, n.d. “The Sustainability of Everything”). This well researched and critiqued development in the history of anthropology (Fuentes, 2016; Ingold, 1998) has not been fully accepted as a general approach to human nature (Eriksen, 2007; Meloni, 2014) and biologists continue to resist attempts of humanists to mitigate and transcend the division this failure to find common ground has socially created (Ingold, 2007 “The Trouble with ‘Evolutionary Biology’”).

As such, the bio-psychological individual sets the person out individually as an object distinct from its environment. It is one that can be coerced by external forces and institutions to do things that cause the person to be something that it might not have become on its own. It is a being that both selects more than choses and can be selected by cutting against sequential granularity more than by splitting along bifurcatable lines in motion. The bio-psychological individual is one in which its materiality comprehends its potential interactivity with other moving beings and things. It is the person as a particle. It enables the notion of an environment as existing around the person. This is the view that psychiatrists have of patients when they approach resolution of behavioral variations with drugs. When chemicals are themselves considered to be in this bodily externalized environment, it justifies treatment of states of mind, mental states that are likewise objectified as objects of unbalanced materiality and faulty informational communication in the brain. These chemicals are not recognized as the bodies’ own but belong to the environments rather instead than the living thing. Likewise, it is the view of the creationist scientist as a person who is put in the external creation of God and works to understand God’s meaning in this environment from which he has fallen.

Tolerance of this split personhood has curiously marginalized notions of the environment outside the human and other forms of life and prevented it from being described from within them. Homo duplex has hoodwinked not only humanity but also our relations with other living things. By learning how oppositionally to pull these covers over our heads we have simply failed to see what the environment is. We remain emotionally attached to violent actions and destructive tendencies accepting of and tolerating this difference through coercion and forced regulation. The environment however is not something like absolute space was but rather is a dynamic fabric of connected motions that moves marked by materials flowing in and out during life and death.

Evolution has been the focus of intense scrutiny and criticism especially since Darwin and Wallace proposed that natural selection was responsible for originating the diverse and abundant forms of life on Earth. Amongst these investigations and questions emerges a completely missed issue that provides a means to explore and discover how evolution operates with and without us on other planets. During the period of the formation of the modern evolutionary synthesis, quantum mechanics arose from an attempt to understand the theory of the Bohr atom but early suggestions about it’s use in genetics and evolution were eclipsed by increased understandings on the nature of the chemical bond. Modern molecular biology and molecular evolution has had no interest in this old suggestion and indeed have led to an idea that a (completely) physical basis for Darwinian natural selection literally supplants the semantics of Darwin and Wallace’s thoughts that have been continued by evolutionary theorists ever since.

Is the mechanism of evolution reducible to a mere physical regularity or does it perhaps suggest a direction in which quantum mechanics can jerk towards biochemically? JBS Haldane wondered about Kant and Mayr attempted to make his peace with him but if the autonomy of biology emerges actually from a form of Heisenbergian quantum mechanics then Bohr’s complementarity is false. Darwin reduced diversity to speciatable numbers of individuals by choosing some rather than others but in doing so exposed a syntax that logically lead to a physical chemistry division while fermentation and life actually suggests that, it is the Bohr orbits of two state cohesions that may biological adapt as the cardinality of natural selection likewise ordinates - the addition of originating species.

Linus Pauling was so determined to do away with Jordans’s nascent idea that creatures were being steered or governed proximately by subatomic motions and crafted a practical empirics of the chemical bond that did away in the process with the notion that we might not know the influence of our mother’s or father’s inheritance on our own physiognomy even if we already knew that is was more due to nature or nurture generally. This idea raised by JBS Haldane as an ultimate consequence of quantum mechanical exchange energy was never tested but in the assumptions Pauling circumstanced lay issues that belied/relied/lied more on ideology than biology. Delbruck wanted more than lip service paid to Jordan’s fantastical suggestion but politics and world history apparently told a different story.

So while quantum mechanics was being marginalized in biology but being wonderously worked out in chemistry and physics, biologists having found a way to understand Mendel anew, cobbled over generations, a synthesis that eventually came ultimately into question for being too reductionist. This was accomplished while a few remained adamant that even society was simply a numbers game of genetic replications in which no true biotic adaptation exists. Mendel however unlike Darwin whose vision incorporated Malthusian kinematics imagined that hybrids could both remain true to their parental wildtypes while also changing and that they did so in what geneticists now call the heterozygote. The past century however decided as DNA sequence data became available that neither the heterozygote nor the homozygote tended to dominate the evolutionary clinamen of adaptability. It appears that Pauling and Delbruck’s mathematical analysis of the strength of resonance attractions over resonance repulsions without any evaluation whatsoever of their evolutionary significance hid a discoverable relation of natural selection to physiological genetics that has been glossed over ever since Mendel. Post-modern chaos theory offers a new statistical dissection tool that somewhat strikingly provides an empirical means quantum mechanically to keep biological organicism autonomy provided biological time and physical time contra Pearson are one and the same symmetry of a dual but not complementary state genetics. There is something that evolution adapts to – describing this subatomically, is quite intricately involved but cohesive nonetheless. Whether Kant’s metaphysics supports or deflunks the purely mathematical aspects however is not something to lose sleep over since physics remains to resolve the relation of gravity to quantum mechanics.

Kant presented a very detailed metaphysics of attraction and repulsion which can be applied to the currently deflunked suggestion of Jordan ( 1938) -- that there is an attractive force that accompanies quantum mechanical associations of like molecular species. Delbruck and Pauling (1940) pointed out, that there is also a repulsive situation that comes along with the computation of any quantum mechanical resonance attraction

. Curiously, it also appears that if Pearson’s notion of homotypically correlatable undifferentiated organs of like kinds were applied to a physiological genetics of Jordan-like attractions and repulsions of like and unlike molecular interactivities, }biosteganopgraphy{ a very different population genetics can be constructed than is currently theoretically available. Stuart Kauffman et al. 201_ asserted, that so far, it appears that proteins fall into three distinct quantum conduction classes and proposed that cellular electronics involves motion of electrons following a different kind of kinematics than occurs in non-living engineered materials.

Jordan had suggested that not only was there an accompanying attraction but that this attractive force was responsible for the self-replication of “genes and virus molecules” as well as the formation of antibodies? Providing the idea that subatomic collision could release energy that moved from the genes to the place in which a molecular change happened. He asserted that “the electrons did not wander in the normal sense of the word but spread over a molecule like a wave ( Jordan 1940)” Biologists Under Hitler,page 225).

Penrose has recently introduced the notion of an objective reduction of superposable states gravitationally ( ref). It is possible that if one considers the dynamic imagined by Jordan to be an objective reduction of Penrose then there is a fully biophysical mechanism available to reconceptualize the meaning of variation in molecular evolution from. It is possible that Niels Bohr was completely mistaken about the relation of biology and physics and that Pearson was misguided when he attempted to categorize evolutionary time as being dependent on a differentiation of physical and biological time.

Because there is a dual symmetry between two purines and two pyrimidines in DNA and RNA, there is a heritable structure in which for any two like locations of potential action one may consider both attractions and repulsions for the same reference loci. One is now able to think out in detail the comment Newton made in his Opticks ( attraction vs attraction and repulsion at two points along a line) ADD either along with Kant or not.

It becomes possible to derive a series of allelomorphs at each loci through a specifically converging asymmetry of left and right (chirally correlated) effects. If these effects are (also) correlated to experimentally determinable dominance and recessive properties one is able to design a new population genetic theory that relates effects of alleleomorphic diversity onto speciation. In particular, one is able to show, that like kinds of allelomorphic variations differentiate difference of repulsive and attractive quantum resonances after being objectively reduced across generations of wildtypes. Furthermore if these actions are causal with neutral molecular evolutionary point mutational change, there is no reason to set the neutral theory over against the older classical/balance schools of thought.

This asymmetry becomes effective with the third sequential base. It is possible that it will be found that dominance and recessiveness depend on whether the purines or pyrimidines correlate attractions or repulsions. This will enable environmental developmental effects to coextensively connect differences in dominance and recessivenes of traits selected for.

Quantum Genetics: Biology Beyond Ideology

The basic idea underlying quantum genetics is that homozygotes possess more quantum exchange energy than heterozygotes and thus are more likely to interchange variables back of current genetic variance. It is a theory both on the origin and development of variation as one. It provides experimental grounds for believing that certain biophysical factors are direct causes of genetic variation as effects of a common heritable cause. There is a mathematical relationship of those biophysical variables due to an objective reduction of the difference in the interchange probability that affects the phenotype from genotype coextensions such that the consequences of quantum genetical effects constrain nucleotide and amino acid substitutions and thereby constitute significant dynamical trajectories zygotes move across when traversing empty taxonomic space intervals. The coefficient of correlation of this systematic quantum path analysis pertains to the description of a particular population but the method of analysis provides, by way of the knowledge that we can have in regard to the causal relations combined with the knowledge of the degree of relationship furnished by the coefficients of correlation, a neutral theory that possess directionality otherwise thought to be only within the province of the classical and balance schools of evolutionary change. It is a neutral-like theory which is kinematically constructed to enforce temporal constraints on neutral changes. It proposes that neutral changes may originate at one time but only then also develop over physiological genetic time before a new phenotypic change is fully realized. It is a physical theory on which selection operates. It is not that the environments principally change their selectively pressurized forces but instead the exogenous environments are made endogenous by hybridizing decent and interchanging encoded copies through coextensive separation more often in homozygotes than in heterozygotes. It is a new Mendelian theory based on physics capable of delimiting a cytoplasmic theory comparable to the gene theory united by a specific form of homotyposis in which quantum uncertainty provides the biochemical basis of like undifferentiated kinds of zygotic structuring throughout embryological transformation morphogenically. It provides a physical mechanism through which punctuated equilibrium can manifest itself by suggesting a specific means that a genetic revolution dynamically arises from the kinematics of recessive expressions? within a lineage. As such the theory is nonideological and does not support historiography that contends that neutral theories have extripated classical and balance theories. It resolves biological time without describing physical and biological time as different as Pearson had done but relies specifically on space-time rather than any form of space and time.

Eigen – “You can say a very rich chemistry came before a nucleic acid was among them.”

It is possible that Eigen was mistaken and that biology provided a regularity to chemistry auto-catalytically through a process that no matter how rich the chemistry was it was not able to operate with repulsions equally with attractions but that once processed pre-cellular biochemistry, whether considered alive or not, provided these regularities chemical biophysics of even faster reaction trajectories quantum mechanically which were not possible without a processing of cellular biochemistry during reproduction of the protocells ( ones in which the variation and the reproduction of the catalyses were indeterminate and uncertain to some extent). } Giant virus {

Previrulent viruses which operated on these processes could cause variation in which Darwinian selection through reproduction via negative concentrations effected an even richer non-biological chemistry which became cellularly formed in this pre-evolutionary process of quantum mechanical biophysical genetics.

The fact that Eigen discounted biological quantification of reaction structuring formatting of quantum mechanical tunneling suggests that this quotation of Wigner was out of place. Wigner had suggested how Pauling and Delbruck’s criticism of Jordan’s idea could be tested but Eigen elevates this suggestion to an a priori status that it never had. He got away with it because of the affect of ideology on biology not biology on ideology. The only way a feedback process can contain this is via a full feedback that connects the nucleic acid to genes and that can only work on Paulings idea not Eigen’s own. It is not compartmentalization that is basic but the difference of repulsions and attractions for true attractions vs repulsive cohesions. Pauling structure – function notion restricts the kinds of ways to realize biophysically auto catalytiadlly caused compartmentalizations. Once these logical differences obtain specific kinematics the dynamics can become dominated by compartmentalization of the products no matter how the nucleic acid is reproduced through exosomes etc.

It appears that there may be a natural selection of chemical reactions and that fast reactions of H+ and OH- such that water solvation kinematics around ions are encoded by the hydrogen bonds differentiatlly distributed between heterozygotes and homozygotes. Eigen’s small laughs may have held indeed the key to the physical problem of quantum mechanical natural selection of wildtypes of molecules.

JBS Haldane provided the basic notion of quantum genetics. In a classical declination one could think of it as effects of de Broglie waves across generations that eventually cause some mutations to change into other forms at different times.

This theory provides a balance of standing variation , most often neutral, from which evolution can proceed to move from one polymorphism to another because the standard deviation of the variance depends on symmetrical and nonsymmetrical cross generational relations. This variation is significant to the physiology of the organism because it unbinds coextensive trait genotypes randomly with respect to selection of the trait that otherwise arise by position effects and linkages whether caused by recombination or chromosomal inheritance, or draft. One can thus say that a population is in balanced polymorphic states and these states are the basis of evolution because the temporal establishment of polymorphic horizons of physiological genetic aspects are temporally deviant but variationally transversal to a Mendelian based transmission algebra. There is thus no inevitable resultant production of change from neutral origination of variation except via it’s general contribution to separating coextensive traits that are correlated but not causal with the selective events that gave rise to those traits themselves. There still remains an adaptive process but it is at the level of dissolving the tension between positively selected traits and those traits that are correlated with those selected but can be physiologically decoupled by neutral changes regardless of how those neutral mutational changes originated originally. The theory provides a new basis from which molecular clocks can possess different temporalities not by phylogenetic difference but by relative composition of DNA bases and protein amino acids in the gene trees within speciating clades. It completely removes the entire historical discussion about the origin and development of the neutral theory as dependent on a difference in the data from nucleic acids and proteins as it shows how both data are intertwined in causal ways for the establishment of an embryology of physiological genetic morphogenesis that demonstrate feedforwards from phylogeny to ontogeny by back variables connected with correlation coefficients that physiologically separate what genes were selected for.

The biophysics of the theory is subject to developments in physics generally as to when and if quantum mechanics and gravity can be integrated. The basic objective reduction of Penrose provides the material relationship between the number of alleomorphs per locus that can arise given that there is an objective reduction that switches to what ascent an alleomorph becomes deduced onto. It is the future alleomorphic projection directions which can establish a genetic revolution provided the feedback from ontogeny to phylogeny is not overbalanced by the feedforwards of phylogeny to ontogeny. Regardless this physical theory directly involves physics in classical molecular copying of biological reproductions and entails that evolution is dependent on gravity. It suggests that some forms of alien life that are not carbon based are not as likely a priori as others. This number of alleomorphs per locus provides the material from which balanced polymorphism may instate morphpogenic transfromations and also establishes how and when traits not selected for can be decoupled genetically from hitch hicking taits vehicualarly held by genes despite any and all quantum mechanical substitutions of otherwise neturalized and inherited bases.


What we have is a hierarchy of repulsive and attractive effects that arise from attractions and repulsions in the bases that form larger attractions than repulsion sums at the level of the gene.

This is what Delbruck and Pauling attempted to discount. But in so discounting this they have failed to understand that natural selection when coincident with specific attractions does not mean that the repulsive intermolecular forces that determine the minimal proximate distance between two atoms whether alike or not is not actually a true attraction at the horizon of the forces effect and is so originally.

Computation of quantum resonance attraction and repulsions in small length variable composition DNA and RNAs when a third base is added.A-G; A-T; G-C; G-T; etc. with third base.

This summation is affected by RNA as an intermediate dynamic between the gene and base caused relations of attractions and repulsions. This hierarchy of affect additionally provides biological chemical networks with possible functionality on negative concentrations of structured molecular species something never before considered to be realizable in any chemical reaction system. One may begin to think that proteins are often adaptations directed to establishing chemical bonds within molecules that existed in generations past but are no longer currently found in the present generation while these chemical bond structurings did exist in the evolutionary past.

1 view0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

©2020 by Brad Steven McFall. Proudly created with