




































DNA Decipher Journal | July 2020 | Volume 10 | Issue 1 | pp. 01-06 1

Pitkänen, M., Darwinian or Neutral Theory of Evolution or Something Else?

Article

Darwinian or Neutral Theory of Evolution or Something Else?

Matti Pitkänen 1

Abstract

Darwinian and neutral theories of evolution represent too competing views about evolution - Dar-
winian theory seems to be the winner in the competition. TGD view about evolution represents that
the third view in which the random changes correspond to quantum jumps according to zero energy
ontology (ZEO). The number theoretical vision about TGD predicts that state function reductions
tend to increase in statistical sense the number theoretical complexity of the system characterized
by the dimension n for an extension of rationals coded by the value of effective Planck constant
heff/h0 = n serving also as a kind of IQ. Magnetic body (MB) is the carrier of dark matter in TGD
sense and the controlling agent - master - using biological body as slave. In particular, genome has
dark analog realized as dark proton sequences - dark nuclei. Ordinary genome is its secondary repre-
sentation and its dynamics is induced from that of dark genome: this view is inspired by the TGD
based model for Pollack effect. In the sequel I will explain briefly these three views about evolution,
and propose a concrete model for how evolution at the gene level could be induced from the recon-
nections of the flux tubes at the level of dark MB. Species preserving mutations would correspond
to recombinations of maternal and paternal genomes occurring in meiosis, and evolutionary leaps to
addition of new portions to genome realized at the level of dark genome as reconnections and inducing
corresponding change at the level of ordinary genome.

1 Introduction

I learned recently that the so called neutral theory of evolution has been challenged by evidence for DNA
selection (see http://tinyurl.com/ybhyh6rc). I must admit that I had no idea what neutral theory of
evolution means. I had thought that Darwinian view based on random mutations and selection of the
most adaptive ones is the dominating view. The debate has been about whether Darwinian or neutral
theory of evolution is correct or is some new vision needed.

1.1 Darwinian and neutral theories of evolution

Darwinian and neutral theories of evolution and their variants represent two different views about evolu-
tion.

1. Adaptive evolution is the Darwinian view. Random mutations are generated and organisms with
the most adaptive genome survive. One can of course argue that also recombination occurring
during mitosis creating germ cells creates new genetic combinations and must be important for
the evolution. Selection can be either negative (purifying) and eliminate the non-adaptive ones or
positive favoring the reproduction of the adaptive ones.

One can argue that notions like ”fight for survival” and selection do not fit with the idea about
organisms as basically inanimate matter having no goals. Also second law poses problems: no
evolution should take place, just the opposite. Metabolic energy feed induces self-organization but
by second law all gradients about which metabolic energy feed is an example, disappear.

1Correspondence: Matti Pitkänen http://tgdtheory.com/. Address: Rinnekatu 2-4 A8, 03620, Karkkila, Finland. Email:
matpitka6@gamail.com.

ISSN: 2159-046X DNA Decipher Journal www.www.dnadecipher.com

Published by QuantumDream, Inc.

http://tinyurl.com/ybhyh6rc
http://tgdtheory.com/
mailto:matpitka6@gmail.com


DNA Decipher Journal | July 2020 | Volume 10 | Issue 1 | pp. 01-06 2

Pitkänen, M., Darwinian or Neutral Theory of Evolution or Something Else?

2. Neutral evolution theory was proposed by Morita 50 years ago and gained a lot of support because
of its simplicity. Point mutations for the codons of DNA would create alleles. Already in Darwinian
evolution one knows that large fraction of mutations are neutral having not positive or negative
effect of survival. Morita claims that all mutations are of this kind. There would be no ”fight for
survival” or selection.

The so called genetic drift, which is completely random process is possible in small populations and
can lead to counterpart of selection: it can happen that only single allele remains and is counterpart
for the winner in selection. This is purely random and combinatorial effect and in physics one would
not call it drift.

The first objection is that if one has several isolated small populations, the outcomes are completely
random so that in this sense there is no genetic drift. Furthermore, there is no reason why further
mutations would not bring the disappeared alleles back. Second objection is that there would not
be no genuine evolution - how one can speak about theory of evolution?

Now the feed of experimental and empirical data is huge as compared to what it was 5 decades
ago and it is now known that the neutral theory fails: for instance, varying patterns of evolution
among species with different population sizes cannot be understood. It is also clear that selection
and adaptions really occur so that Darwin was right.

3. The shortcomings of the neutral theory led Ohta to propose nearly neutral theory of evolution.
Mutations can be slightly deleterious. For large populations this leads to a purging of slightly
deleterious mutations. For small populations deleterious mutations are effectively neutral and lead
to the genetic drift.

There is however a further problem: why the rate of evolution varies as observed between different
lineages of organisms.

4. One reason for fashionability was that the model was very simple and allowed to compute and
predict. Only the size of the population and rate for the mutations is enough to predict the future
in small populations. The predictions have been poor but this has not bothered the proponents of
the neutral evolution theory.

As an outsider I see this as a typical example of a fashionable idea: these have plagued theoretical
particle physics for four decades now and led to a practically complete stagnation of the field via
hegemony formation. Simple arguments show that the idea cannot be correct but have no effect.

Article explains several related notions.

1. It has been possible to determine the mutation rates at the level of individual sites of genome since
2005. Only subset of mutations of say cancer cells are functionally important to cancer and they
can be identified. This leads to a selection intensity as basic notion. This notion is expected to be
very valuable for the attempts to find targeted cure of cancer.

2. Neutral theory of evolution assumes that only point mutations matter. Theory was therefore com-
pletely local at the level of genome - and certainly simple! Innocent outsider knowing a little bit
about biology wonders why the recombination of maternal and paternal chromosomes in meiosis
creating the chromosomes associated with germ cells are not regarded as important. This mech-
anism is non-local at the level of genome and would naturally lead to a selection at the level of
individuals of the species. It has been indeed learned that the genetic variation and the rate of
recombination in meiosis correlate in given region of genome. This sounds almost obvious to the
innocent novice but had to be discovered experimentally.

One can however still try to keep the neutral theory of evolution by assuming that recombination
is completely random process and there is no selection and adaption - contrary to the experimen-
tal facts and the basic idea behind the notion of evolution. Recombination would bring only an
additional complication.

ISSN: 2159-046X DNA Decipher Journal www.www.dnadecipher.com

Published by QuantumDream, Inc.



DNA Decipher Journal | July 2020 | Volume 10 | Issue 1 | pp. 01-06 3

Pitkänen, M., Darwinian or Neutral Theory of Evolution or Something Else?

Besides the direct purifying selection and neutral drift there would be recombination creating dif-
ferences in the levels of variation across the genomic landscape. This leads to the notion of genetic
hitchiking. When beneficial alleles are closely linked to neighboring neutral mutations, selection acts
as a unit on them. One speaks about linked selection. Frequencies of neutral alleles are determined
by more than genetic drift but one can speak of neutrality still. Linkage of hitchiker to allele -
beneficial or not - is however random. Does genuine evolution takes place at all?

3. Most of the DNA is not expressed as proteins. It would not be surprising if this part of DNA could
have important indirect role in gene expression or perhaps be expressed in some other manner -
say electromagnetically. How important role this part of DNA has in evolution? There are also
transposons inducing non-point like mutations of this part of DNA: what is their role. There also
proposals that viruses, usually though to be a mere nuisance, could play decisive role in evolution
by modifying the DNA of host cells.

4. It is now known that up to 80-85 per cent of human genome is probably affected by background
selection. Moreover, height, skin color blood pressure are polygenic properties in the sense that
hundreds or thousands of genes are acting in concert to determine these properties. This strongly
suggests that point-like mutations cannot be responsible for evolution and not even recombinations
are enough if random. A control of evolution in longer scales seems to be required. This of course
relates to the basic problem of molecular biology: what gives rise to the coherence of living matter.
Mere bio-chemistry cannot explain this. Something else perhaps controlling the bio-chemistry is
needed.

1.2 Criticism of the standard view

One can start by criticizing the standard view.

1. Is the standard view (to the existent that such exists) about evolution consistent with second law?
One can even ask whether standard view about thermodynamics assuming a fixed arrow of time is
correct.

2. If mutations and more general changes of genome occur by pure change, can they really lead to a
genuine evolution. The notions of selection and survival of fittest are notion, which do not conform
with the view about evolution as mere standard physics. A probable motivation for neutral evolution
theory has been the attempt to get rid of these notions: physicalism taken to extreme.

3. The reduction of life to bio-chemistry does not allow to understand the coherence of organisms.

4. One can also criticize the reduction of life to mere genetics.

(a) Genetic dogma does not tell much about morphogenesis.

(b) Is genetic determinism a realistic assumption? Clones of bacterium are know know to have
personalities behaving differently under given conditions (see http://tinyurl.com/us7fxlh).

(c) Most of the genome of the higher organisms consists of DNA not transcribed to RNA still
interpreted as junk by some biologists. What about introns? Could there exists other forms
of gene expression - say electromagnetic.

TGD view about evolution represents that the third view in which the random changes correspond
to quantum jumps according to zero energy ontology (ZEO). The number theoretical vision about TGD
predicts that state function reductions tend to increase in statistical sense the number theoretical com-
plexity of the system characterized by the dimension n for an extension of rationals coded by the value
of effective Planck constant heff/h0 = n serving also as a kind of IQ. Magnetic body (MB) is the carrier
of dark matter in TGD sense and the controlling agent - master - using biological body as slave. In

ISSN: 2159-046X DNA Decipher Journal www.www.dnadecipher.com

Published by QuantumDream, Inc.

http://tinyurl.com/us7fxlh


DNA Decipher Journal | July 2020 | Volume 10 | Issue 1 | pp. 01-06 4

Pitkänen, M., Darwinian or Neutral Theory of Evolution or Something Else?

particular, genome has dark analog realized as dark proton sequences - dark nuclei. Ordinary genome is
its secondary representation and its dynamics is induced from that of dark genome: this view is inspired
by the TGD based model for Pollack effect.

In the sequel I will explain briefly the three views about evolution, and propose a concrete model for
how evolution at the gene level could be induced from the reconnections of the flux tubes at the level
of dark MB. Species preserving mutations would correspond to recombinations of maternal and paternal
genomes occurring in meiosis, and evolutionary leaps to addition of new portions to genome realized at
the level of dark genome as reconnections and inducing corresponding change at the level of ordinary
genome.

2 TGD inspired vision about evolution

TGD based view about evolution can be seen as a response to these criticisms but actually developed
from a proposal for a unification for fundamental interactions and from the generalization of quantum
measurement theory leading to a theory of consciousness and generalization of quantum theory itself.

2.1 Basic conceptual building bricks

The basic assumptions of TGD based view about evolution are following.

1. TGD leads to a new view about space-time and classical fields. In particular, many-sheeted space-
time and magnetic body bring in new element changing dramatically the views about biology.

The notion of Maxwellian fields is modified. Unlike in Maxwellian theory any system has field
identity, field body, in particular magnetic body (MB) carrying dark matter n TGD sense and in
well-define sense at higher evolutionary level as compared to ordinary bio-matter. This expands the
standard pairing organism-environment to a triple MB-organism-environment.

MB can be seen as the controlling intentional agent and its evolution would induce also the evolution
of the ordinary bio-matter. MB carries dark matter as heff/h0 = n phases giving rise to macroscopic
quantum coherence at level of MB. MB forces the ordinary bio-matter to behave coherently (not
quantum coherently).

TGD leads also to a realization of genetic code at the level of dark analog of DNA represented
as dark proton sequences [4] - dark nuclei, which are now essential element of TGD based view
about nuclear physics [5]. Dark photons are essential for the communications between MB and
ordinary bio-matter. Also dark photons would realize genetic code with codon represented as 3-
chord consisting of 3 dark photons.

Genetic modification would take place at the level of magnetic flux tubes containing dark analog of
DNA and induce changes of the ordinary genome, which would do its best to mimic dark genome.
In particular, the recombination occurring during the meiosis would be induced by the reconnection
of the flux tubes of dark genome.

2. Number theoretical vision about evolution deriving from the proposal that p-adic physics for various
primes combining to what I call adelic physics is second needed element [3]. Any system can be
characterized by a extension of rationals defining its algebraic complexity. The dimension of exten-
sion identifiable in terms of the effective Planck constant heff/h0 = n defines evolutionary level as
a kind of IQ. What is remarkable that n increases in statistical sense since the number extensions
with n larger than that for given extension is infinitely larger than that of lower-dimensional ex-
tensions. Intelligent ones have larger scale of quantum coherence and thus coherence of bio-matter
and survive. Evolution is directed process forced by number theory alone.

ISSN: 2159-046X DNA Decipher Journal www.www.dnadecipher.com

Published by QuantumDream, Inc.



DNA Decipher Journal | July 2020 | Volume 10 | Issue 1 | pp. 01-06 5

Pitkänen, M., Darwinian or Neutral Theory of Evolution or Something Else?

Quantum jumps in the sense of ZEO tending to increase n occurring naturally in mitosis generat-
ing germ cells lead also to a more intelligent genomes. Point mutations could be seen something
occurring at the level of ordinary matter rather than being induced by dark matter.

3. Zero energy ontology (ZEO) is behind the generalization of quantum measurement theory solving
the basic problem of standard quantum measurement theory. There are two kinds of state function
reductions. ”Small” state function reductions (SSFRs) as analogs of weak measurements give rise
to the the life cycle of conscious entity self having so called causal diamond (CD) as a correlate.
Under SSFRs the passive boundary of CD is unaffected as also members of state pairs at it: this
gives rise to the ”soul” as unchanging part of self.

”Big” state function reductions (BSFRs) correspond to ordinary state function reductions. They
change the arrow of time and one can say that self dies and re-incarnates with a reversed arrow
of time. This applies in all scales since consciousness and cognition predicted to be universal. In
BSFRs the value of heff increases in statistical sense and this gives rise to evolution also at the
level of genome. The reversal of the arrow of time allows to see self-organization and metabolism as
dissipation in non-standard time direction so that generalization of thermodynamics to allow both
arrows of time allows to understand both self-organization and evolution.

2.2 Evolution at DNA level

A possible application would be TGD based model for meiosis and fertilization. The starting point is that
recombinations occurring in meiosis represent a fundamental step in evolution preserving the species and
point mutations are mostly noise having also negative effects. There are also modification which produce
a new species. Consider first recombinations.

1. In meiosis BSFR for the dark proton sequences defining dark DNA could induce reconnections of
parallel maternal and paternal dark proton flux tubes inducing recombination at the level of the
ordinary genome.

2. The resulting germ chromosomes - or rather their dark variants realized in terms of dark proton
sequences would have arrow of time opposite that of chromosomes. They would be in a dormant
state analogous to sleep.

3. Fertilization involves the pairing of paternal and maternal germ chromosomes and looks almost like
time reversal of meiosis. In the proposed picture it would indeed change the arrow of time for the
germ chromosomes - wake up them. The sequence meiosis replication-meiosisI-division - meiosisII
would correspond to 4 BSFRs leading to germ cells having dark genome as as time reversal of
ordinary genome.

Remark: One can ask whether also the passive strand of ordinary DNA has arrow of time opposite
to that of the active strand.

Recombinations do not change the genome dramatically and can be said to be species preserving. Big
leaps in evolution change genome more drastically - say by adding new genes - to yield what might be
regarded as a new species. They represent a challenge also for the TGD based view.

The big changes should occur at the level of the magnetic body inducing in turn modifications at the
level of ordinary genome. The addition of a portion of DNA double strand of same length to the end of
DNA double strand could be a species changing modification. This would not change the earlier genome
and could add a new gene for instance. How this change could occur?

1. In TGD dark genome acts as master controlling the ordinary genome playing the role of slave. Dark
genes correspond to dark proton sequences with possibly subset of protons behaving like neutrons
due to the presence of negatively charged bonds between two neighboring protons of the sequence.

ISSN: 2159-046X DNA Decipher Journal www.www.dnadecipher.com

Published by QuantumDream, Inc.



DNA Decipher Journal | July 2020 | Volume 10 | Issue 1 | pp. 01-06 6

Pitkänen, M., Darwinian or Neutral Theory of Evolution or Something Else?

Large modification would add to this sequence new dark protons: dark counterpart of nuclear fusion
would take place.

In water Pollack effect [1] [2] would correspond to this process this process and would give rise
to charge separation creating negatively charged regions called exclusion zones (EZs) by Pollack.
There is no reason why this process could not occur also inside cells containing pairs maternal and
paternal chromosomes.

2. At the level of dark magnetic body the modification of dark double strand could be realized if it
corresponds to a closed monopole flux loop having double helical structure: the conjugate strand
would carry the return flux. The addition of a piece of DNA would be induced by a reconnection
gluing shorter helical flux loop to the end of the helical loop. The chemical counterpart of dark DNA
would be formed by the pairing of dark codons with the ordinary codons - kind of transcription
process.

3. The modifications of paternal and maternal dark genomes are expected to occur independently and
typically lead to different lengths of paternal and maternal DNAs. Hence the condition that the
paternal and maternal modifications of germ cells are identical (same length) is too strong.

Can the maternal and paternal DNA double strands have different lengths? This seems to be
possible. The reconnection process in meiosis does not require same lengths for maternal and
paternal genomes. In fertilization the chromosomes of paternal and maternal gametes form pairs
and also this allows different lengths. Therefore the big leaps in the evolution could correspond to
additions of new pieces to maternal an/or paternal dark genome.

This picture is of course over-simplified. Also addition of DNA portions in the middle of genome -
say adding a new gene or par of gene - should be possible at the level of dark matter. Also this process
should occur by reconnection process at the level of dark matter. Also now it seems that the process can
occur independently for maternal and paternal chromosomes.

References

[1] The Fourth Phase of Water : Dr. Gerald Pollack at TEDxGuelphU. Available at: https://www.

youtube.com/watch?v=i-T7tCMUDXU, 2014.

[2] Pitkänen M. Pollack’s Findings about Fourth phase of Water : TGD View. Available at: http:

//tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/PollackYoutube.pdf, 2014.

[3] Pitkänen M. Philosophy of Adelic Physics. Available at: http://tgdtheory.fi/public_html/

articles/adelephysics.pdf, 2017.

[4] Pitkänen M. An overall view about models of genetic code and bio-harmony. Available at: http:

//tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/gcharm.pdf, 2019.

[5] Pitkänen M. Solar Metallicity Problem from TGD Perspective. Available at: http://tgdtheory.

fi/public_html/articles/darkcore.pdf, 2019.

ISSN: 2159-046X DNA Decipher Journal www.www.dnadecipher.com

Published by QuantumDream, Inc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-T7tCMUDXU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-T7tCMUDXU
http://tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/PollackYoutube.pdf
http://tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/PollackYoutube.pdf
http://tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/adelephysics.pdf
http://tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/adelephysics.pdf
http://tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/gcharm.pdf
http://tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/gcharm.pdf
http://tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/darkcore.pdf
http://tgdtheory.fi/public_html/articles/darkcore.pdf

	Introduction
	Darwinian and neutral theories of evolution
	Criticism of the standard view

	TGD inspired vision about evolution
	Basic conceptual building bricks
	Evolution at DNA level


