See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/44658848

Corrections to chance fluctuations: Quantum mind in biological evolution?

Article  in  Rivista di biologia · September 2009

Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

5 167

1 author:

Giuseppe Damiani
Italian National Research Council
61 PUBLICATIONS   1,507 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Relationships between chronic emotions, states of consciousness and cancer View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Giuseppe Damiani on 23 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

419

Rivista di Biologia / Biology Forum 102 (2009), pp. 419-446.

Giuseppe Damiani

Corrections to chance fluctuations: quantum mind in biological evolution?

_________________________________________________________________

1. Do we need an extended evolutionary synthesis?

2. Syntropy (order) vs. entropy (disorder), and how they are related
3. As above, so below
4. Physis and psyche
5. The Yin-Yang of entropic-syntropic evolution

Keywords. Evolution, Darwin, Lamarck,Wallace, metabolism, epigenetic, natural genetic

engineering, information, entropy, syntropy, fractals, quantum physics.

Abstract. According to neo-Darwinian theory, biological evolution is pro-duced

by natural selection of random hereditary variations. This assumption stems from
the idea of a mechanical and deterministic world based on the laws of classic
physics. However, the increased knowledge of relationships between metabolism,
epigenetic systems, and editing of nucleic acids suggests the existence of self-
organized processes of adaptive evolution in response to environmental stresses.
Living organisms are open thermodynamic systems which use entropic decay of
external source of electromagnetic energy to increase their internal dynamic
order and to generate new genetic and epigenetic information with an high degree
of coherency and teleonomic creativity. Sensing, information processing, and
decision making of biological systems might be mainly quantum phenomena.
Amplification of microscopic quantum events using the long-range correlation of
fractal structures, at the borderline between deterministic order and unpredictable
420

chaos, may be used to direct a reproducible transition of the biological systems

towards a defined macroscopic state. The discoveries of many natural genetic
engineering systems, the ability to choose the most effective solutions, and the
emergence of complex forms of consciousness at different levels confirm the
importance of mind-action directed processes in biological evolution, as
suggested by Alfred Russel Wallace. Although the main Darwinian principles will
remain a crucial component of our understanding of evolution, a radical
rethinking of the conceptual structure of the neo-Darwinian theory is needed.

1. DO WE NEED AN EXTENDED EVOLUTIONARY SYNTHESIS?

Evolution thus is merely contingent on certain processes articulated by

Darwin: variation and selection (Ernst Mayr).

Jean Baptiste Lamarck was one of the first scientists of modern time to
propose, in 1809, an evolutionary theory based on the relationships between
environment and organisms and on the inheritance of acquired characters. Darwin
and Wallace, in 1858, presented simultaneously the same theory of evolution,
discovered independently, based on the natural selection of random hereditary
variations. The mechanic and reductive approach of classic physics played a
central role in the development of neo-Darwinian theory of evolution which
emphasized the genetic determinism of the phenotypic variations and exclude all
evolutionary mechanisms except natural selection. This new version was called
the “Modern Synthesis” after the title of a 1942 book by Julian Huxley. In 1953,
the discovery of the structure of DNA by Watson and Crick leads to the
formulation of the “Central Dogma of molecular biology”: genetic information
flows only from DNA to RNA to protein, and never in the opposite direction.
Mutations have been ascribed to random changes of the DNA which, according to
the Central Dogma and the neo-Darwinian theory, cannot be influenced by the
environment. Therefore, all phenotypic characters are encoded in the genes and
evolution is only a story about competition among selfish genes.

We are survival machines - robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the

selfish molecules known as genes (Dawkins [1976]).
421

Today, the Central Dogma and the neo-Darwinian theory of biological

evolution are accepted by nearly all working biologists. However, a 2006 poll
showed that about 55 % of all Americans of United States believe that God
created humans in their present form, 27 % says that even if they evolved, God
guided the process, and just 13 % say that God was not involved in human
evolution. By the mid-1990s, a group of creationists formulated the theory of
Intelligent Design: life evolution is best explained by an intelligent supernatural
cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Intelligent design's
proponents avoid to specify the nature or identity of the designer to circumvent
Supreme Court rulings that prohibit the teaching of religious belief as creationism.
The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism, intelligent
design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of
species are not science because they are not testable by the methods of science".
Most of the scientists reject the creationist viewpoint, since an impressive amount
of evidences of evolutionary processes is furnished by paleontology, comparative
anatomy, embryology, genetics, biochemistry and molecular biology. Evolution is
a fact. As Dobzhansky said, “nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of
evolution”. The unequivocal consensus in the scientific community is that
intelligent design is not science, but the non-intelligent design of neo-Darwinian
theory is the end of the story?

Nowadays the data obtained with the powerful analytical machinery of the
third millennium have shown that the mechanistic theories of the twentieth
century are not anymore sufficient to understand the structure and dynamics
of biological complex systems… (Buiatti [2008]).

Modern neo-Darwinian Synthesis (MS), despite its great success, may be an

incomplete explanation of the most simple aspects of reality. Today a number of
biologists argue that it‟s time for a new understanding of evolution (Damiani et al.
[1997], Damiani [2007], Rose et al. [2007], Müller [2007], Koonin [2009]), one
that Pigliucci ([2007], [2009]) has called the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
(EES).

As philosopher Karl Popper has noticed, the current evolutionary theory

422

is a theory of genes, and we still lack a theory of forms. The field began, in
fact, as a theory of forms in Darwin’s days, and the major goal that an EES
will aim for is a unification of our theories of genes and of forms. This may be
achieved through an organic grafting of novel concepts onto the foundational
structure of the MS, particularly evolvability, phenotypic plasticity, epigenetic
inheritance, complexity theory, and the theory of evolution in highly
dimensional adaptive landscapes (Pigliucci [2007]).

The development of molecular biology has produced an impressive amount of

information but the meaning of the mass of accumulated data is only beginning to
be unravelled. For example, the Human Genome Project was completed in 2003.
More than 1000 genes that cause simple Mendelian disorders have been identified
but these diseases account for less than 2% of the total diseases in the
economically advanced world. Complex diseases like most cancer and
cardiovascular diseases are not genetic in the strict Mendelian sense and are
mainly due to epigenetic processes driven by environmental factors. The main
conclusion is that we do not understand all the meaning of genomic DNA
sequences and that other informational systems are important for the control of
complex organisms (Strohman [2002]). To get the most from sequence data we
need to take account of the interrelated network of signalling cascades, gene
expression, and metabolic pathways. An increasing number of experimental
evidences suggests that epigenetic factors such as DNA methylation and histone
modifications are involved both in gene regulation and in the generation of new
genetic information.

The idea that there are algorithmic processes governing transcription is

relatively uncontroversial, but there will be resistance to applying the same
concept to natural genetic engineering. The problem comes from the pre-DNA
philosophical concept of genetic change as a random process. In fact, we possess
counter-examples to randomness in those cases where DNA change has evolved to
be a part of the normal life cycle, as in yeast mating-type switching, postzygotic
macronuclear development in ciliated protozoa, and immune system development
in vertebrates. In those cases, we have even identified some of the molecular
mechanisms involved in making the algorithmic searches that ensure reliability in
the DNA changes. (Shapiro [2009]).
423

DNA mutations are not entirely random, but constrained to favour specific
changes. Living organisms have several tricks to alter the genome when and
where it is advantageous. For example, the recent analysis of complete genomic
sequences in a human family (Roach et al. [2010]), in malignant cell lines from
the same person (Pleasance et al. [2010]), in five Arabidopsis lines that had been
maintained by single-seed descent for 30 generations (Ossowski et al. [2010]),
demonstrated that the majority of mutations are G:C→A:T transitions. In
particular CpG sites are reported to mutate at a rate several times higher than other
sites. This very biased spectrum of base substitution mutations is the result of two
main environmental induced processes: deamination of methylated cytosines and
ultraviolet light mutagenesis. These data confirm the important role of Activation
Induced cytidine Deaminases (AIDs), in the transformation of acquired epigenetic
changes in stable DNA mutations (Damiani [2007]). AIDs and others mutagenic
enzymes as the APOBECs, ADARs, X family polymerases and Reverse
Transcriptases are involved not only in the generation of new point mutations but
also in environmental induced DNA rearrangements, as mobilization of
retroelements, virus immunity and micro-recombination (Damiani [2007], Malim
[2009], MacDuff et al. [2009], Specchia et al. [2010]). According to a reverse flow
of information, from enviroment to DNA (Figure 1), more than ninety percent of
the human genome is found to be the product of Reverse Transcriptase, the protein
that synthesizes DNA from an RNA template. The central dogma of molecular
biology is defunct.

The idea of a “dogma” in science has always struck me as inherently self-

contradictory. The scientific method is based upon continual challenges to
accepted ideas and the recognition that new information inevitably leads to new
conceptual formulations. So it seems appropriate to revisit Crick’s dictum and ask
how it stands up in the light of ongoing discoveries in molecular biology and
genomics (Shapiro [2009]).

The analysis of the available genomic sequences demonstrated that genomes

are formatted by regulative elements which are able to interact with complex
epigenetic machinery. Sophisticated cellular natural genetic engineering systems
424

promotes environmental induced DNA mutations in certain directions. The most

important evolutionary changes occur by rearrangements of the DNA formatting
elements with only few changes in the coding sequences. Some coding sequences
have survived unchanged for hundreds of millions of years, while the formatting
sequences evolved at a very fast rate. Several systems, as the viral vectors, enables
the horizontal transfer of DNA segments between cells of the same organism, or
between different organisms. The uptake of foreign DNA sequences is tightly
regulated. Cellular apparatus are able to distinguish between self and non-self
DNA, for example by means of the restriction and modification systems. A
recently discovered antivirus immunity in prokaryotes seems to function via a
straightforward Lamarckian mechanism (Koonin et al. [2009]). The system is
known as CRISPR system, where CRISPR stands for Clustered Regularly
Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats. Several features of the CRISPR system
are functionally analogous to those of eukaryotic immune systems and RNA
interference (RNAi) and, more specifically, siRNA and piRNA.

Figure 1 - On your left, a graphic representation of the “Central Dogma of molecular biology”
with the flow of information from DNA to RNA to proteins (P). On your right, the reverse flow of
information from proteins (P) to RNA and DNA. Most of this process occurs by means of error-
prone Reverse Transcriptase, but there is mutagenic activity directly on DNA (not shown in this
figure). The two major families of editing enzymes are the AID/APOBEC cytidine deaminases
(which catalyze the deamination of cytidine to uridine) and the ADAR adenosine deaminases
acting on RNA (which catalyze the deamination of adenosine to inosine). Moreover, four types of
error-prone DNA polymerase (Pol beta, Pol lambda, Pol mu and TdT) have been identified in
eukaryotes as members of the polymerase X-family.
425

Depending on the particular cell, altering protein coding can involve targeted
mutagenesis, reverse transcription, homologous and site-specific
recombination, rearrangement of exon segments and insertion of untemplated
DNA sequences. In some cases, the control of these DNA alterations is tightly
controlled, while other examples have the appearance of occurring
stochastically (Shapiro [2009]).

It is intriguing that the DNA and RNA methyltransferases and deaminases not
only are able to editing the DNA and RNA in the epigenetic processes but have
evolved to take on additional roles in the uptake of foreign DNA sequences
(Malim [2009]), in the regulation of the RNAi (Nishikura [2009]), in the stress
induced mobilization of the formatting elements (MacDuff et al. [2009]), in the
cellular differentiation mechanisms (Bhutani et al. [2010]), and in the acquired
immunity, both for somatic hypermutation and for class switch recombination of
immunoglobulin genes (Delker et al. [2009]). With the discovery of important
molecular machinery that promotes directional genomic changes in response to
environmental stresses, a rethinking of evolutionary processes is needed. As
suggested by Shapiro [2009] we can recognize that information processing is the
fundamental driving force that provides hereditary changes in biological systems.

In place of the earlier mechanistic understanding of genomics, molecular

biology has led us to an informatic perspective on the role of the genome. The
informatic viewpoint points towards the development of novel concepts about
cellular cognition, molecular representations of physiological states, genome
system architecture, and the algorithmic nature of genome expression and
genome restructuring in evolution (Shapiro [2009]).

Most of the mutations in the genomic sequences are caused by complex

interactions among cellular macromolecules. The physical forces involved in these
processes are mainly electromagnetic forces. Simple recursive rules based on
repulsive and attractive forces lead to the formation of fractal, branching, vascular
and global networks (Damaini [1984]). Many cellular structures and processes
display oscillating behaviour and hierarchical fractal clustering (Ueda et al.
[2004], Barbasi et al. [2004], Damiani [2005, 2007], Losa [2009]). These fractal
systems work near their critical and instable equilibrium points, the percolation
threshold, which define the fractal borderline between order and chaos (Yates
[1992], Traverso [2005]). The dynamics of these complex systems is very
426

sensitive to very small variations of the initial conditions. Therefore, the

reductionist approach of traditional genetic and the linear mathematical modelling
of classic physics are often unable to predict the non-linear behaviour of complex
fractal systems, such as the biological ones. Both Neo-Darwinism and classic
physics are based on the 19th century view of a mechanicistic and reductionistic
world which was outmoded by the development of quantum physics in the 20th
century. The understanding of the most complex aspects of nature requires new
approaches based on contemporary physics. Quantum mechanics allows
predictions of phenomena at small scales that match experimental observations to
a very high level of accuracy. The behaviour of microscopic entities is very
different from that of everyday macroscopic objects. The quantum world was a
great deal more complicated than the mechanic world of classic physics.

2. SYNTROPY (ORDER) VS. ENTROPY (DISORDER), AND HOW THEY

ARE RELATED

If quantum mechanics hasn't profoundly shocked you, you haven't understood

it yet (Niels Bohr).

Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg, while collaborating in Copenhagen

around 1927, proposed that science is concerned only with mathematical
predictions of the outcomes of experiments, and that any additional propositions
are not scientific but rather meta-physical. The so called Copenhagen
interpretation is the most widely-accepted interpretation of quantum mechanics,
and the majority of physicists make no attempt to develop comprensible models of
quantum reality. The interpretation of what quantum theory tells us about the
physical world raises a lively debate, which has continued, from the early days of
the theory in the late twenties, to nowadays. One of the most original approach to
understand the relationships between quantum physics and life evolution has been
that of Luigi Fantappié, a collaborator of Vito Volterra. Fantappié analysed
427

the fundamental mathematical symmetries underlying the most important physical

theories. In 1942, he showed that propagation of quantum entities is described by
two types of equations: retarded potentials of diverging waves and anticipated
potentials of converging waves. Fantappié introduced a measure of the order of
converging phenomema, the syntropy, complementary to the entropy which is a
measure of the disorder of diverging phenomena. Fantappié discovered that living
systems evolve towards an increase of internal syntropy in the anabolic processes
complementary to the increase of external entropy produced by the catabolic
processes. These findings were published in “The Unitary Theory of the Physical
and Biological World” (Fantappié[1944]).

… syntropic processes of conservation and construction … likely coincide

with those indicated in biology as anabolic processes, as opposed to
complementary entropic processes of dissipation and dispersion which are
called catabolic processes (Fantappié [1944]).

In the following years Fantappiè developed a cosmological model starting

from the integration of mathematical symmetries of special relativity with
quantum mechanics. The “Final Relativity”, initially proposed by Fantappié
[1954], was subsequently developed by Giuseppe Arcidiacono [1955], Caldirola et
al. [1978], and Recami [1979], Licata [2007], Chiatti [2007], Benedetto [2009]).
The Fantappié-Arcidiacono approach seems to be an interesting starting point to
resolve the problem of the foundation of a unified theory linking physical and
biological worlds. The main problem of Fantappiè‟s model is the wrong and
confused interpretation of syntropic phenomena as non-reproducible phenomena
produced by finalistic causes (anticipated potentials) moving from the future to the
past. Consequently, the Fantappiè‟s Unitary Theory has been criticized as being
little more than a variation of vitalism, outside the gates of science. Salvatore
Arcidiacono tried to modify the Fantappiè‟s Unitary Theory but the main problem
of a finalistic-vitalistic interpretation was not removed.

Gene and chromosomal mutations are of entropic type if randomly caused by

external agents or by errors in DNA transcription; become of syntropic type
428

if they are genome rearrangements determined by internal causes or

structural needs and aimed at achieving certain goals (Arcidiacono [1993]).

A new interpretation of the mathematical formalism of both the “Unitary

Theory” and the “Final Relativity” was proposed in the “Binary Theory” (Damiani
[1984], [1998], [2003]). According to this theory our Universe is a closed system
born from a macroscopic quantum fluctuation of a fractal vacuum that is
counterbalanced by a complementary microscopic fluctuation. The
reestablishment of the isotropic symmetries broken by these fluctuations results in
two opposite processes: the entropic binary dissociation and the complementary
syntropic binary association. The feedback relation between the opposite
autocatalitic binary processes, named metabolic hypercycles, can be described by
a simplified version of the prey-predator Lotka-Volterra equation. At the
macroscopic level, these two opposite binary processes are related respectively to
the entropic diffusion of electromagnetic energy and to the syntropic gravitational
contraction of matter. All attractive forces, as gravitation, cause syntropic
phenomena which are reproducible and evolve from the past to the future.
Therefore the “Binary Theory” is a scientific theory with new predictions on the
nature of physical forces and particles which may be experimentally verified.
Moreover, the “Binary Theory” may be useful to clarify the confusing situation
about the relationships among entropy, syntropy, information and energy.

The fundamental elements are continuously interacting with each other,

sometimes they are all gathered into a single entity by an attractive force,
sometimes they are all dispersed along different routes by a repulsive force
(Empedocles).

In the physical conditions on the earth surface the matter-energy interactions

are driven mainly by the electromagnetic energy involved in chemical reactions.
At constant pressure and temperature T the variation of Gibbs free energy G,
enthalpy H, and entropy S of a chemical reaction always occur spontaneously in a
direction that results in a decrease of free energy ( G < 0) according to the
equation:

G=H-TS
429

A negative  G may be the result of a negative  H (an exothermic reaction)

and/or a positive T  S indicative of an increase in entropy (or disorder) of the
system. A minimum of free energy ( G = 0) and a maximum of entropy are
reached at the thermodynamic equilibrium when the system remains unchanged in
a stable and disordered state of thermal death. According to the thermodynamic
laws, many inanimate systems, as for example the room of our children, become
spontaneously disordered. To counteract this evolutionary trend, to work against
the disorder, we need a flow of energy. Therefore many scientists, as for example
the Austrian physicist Ludwig Boltzmann, suggested that the evolution of life on
the earth, is an exception with a limited existence in the universe evolving towards
disorder and thermal death. Although living organisms conform to the same
thermodynamic laws as do machines, their modes of functioning are very
different. Instead of releasing energy through rapidly combusting compounds,
living organisms release energy gradually in step-by-step chemical reactions.
Spontaneous chemical reactions ( G < 0) drive other non-spontaneous reactions
( G > 0), enabling the generation of molecules containing an high amount of
“useful” energy and information. Living cells are able to store the energy and
information in many different ways. The original seed of speculation between
information and thermodynamics was made in 1894 by Boltzmann who mentioned
that entropy is related to “missing information”. Boltzmann defined the entropy S
by:

Entropy = S = k ln W = k ln (Disorder)

where k is the Boltzmann constant, and W is the total number of microscopic

states of the system. Boltzmann entropy provides a measure of the disorder of the
distribution of the microstates of the system over permissible microstates. In his
famous book What is Life?, Schrödinger [1944] reasoned that “if D is a measure
of disorder, its reciprocal, 1/D, can be regarded as a direct measure of order” and
therefore the negative entropy is a measure of the order of the state of a system
corresponding to the Fantappié‟s syntropy:
430

Syntropy = Negative Entropy = - Entropy =

k log (1/Disorder) = k log (Order)

On this basis, he suggests that living beings needs negative entropy to survive.

The device by which an organism maintains itself stationary at a fairly high

level of orderliness … consists in sucking orderliness from its environment
(Schrödinger [1944]).

In 1953, Schrödinger's negative entropy was shortened into the term

"negentropy" by French physicist Léon Brillouin. According to Brillouin [1953],
“the thermodynamic entropy measures the lack of information about a physical
system” and therefore, the Hartley [1928] and Shannon [1948] definition of
Information corresponds to the Fantappié‟s syntropy and Schrodinger‟s negative
entropy

Syntropy = Negative Entropy =Negentropy = Information = I

The statistical definition of information is compared with Boltzmann's formula

for entropy. The immediate result is that information I corresponds to a
negative term in the total entropy S of a system (Brillouin [1953]).

In 1974, Albert Szent-Györgyi proposed replacing the term negentropy with

syntropy. Szent-György suggested that syntropy is the “innate drive in living
matter to perfect itself” evolving towards forms of increasingly complexity.

Inanimate nature stops at the low level organization of simple molecules. But
living systems go on and combine molecules to form macromolecules,
macromolecules to form organelles (such as nuclei, mitochondria,
chloropasts, ribosomes, and membranes) and eventually put these all together
to form the greatest wonder of creation, a cell, with its astounding inner
regulations. Then it goes on putting cells together to form "higher organisms"
and increasingly more complex individuals ... at every step, new, more
complex individuals...at every step, new, more complex and subtle qualities
are created, and so in the end we are faced with properties which have no
parallel in the inanimate world ... (Szent-Györgyi [1977]).
431

According to the Binary theory, there is an equivalence between the definition

of entropy in the theory of information and the thermodynamic entropy and
between the informational content of a message and the energy needed for its
transmission. For N different equally likely messages composed by a sequence of
n binary symbols, the information of a single message I is equivalent to the
negative Boltzmann‟s entropy S

Syntropy = I = - n = - log2 N  - S / 0.693 · k

where k is the Boltzmann‟s constant and 0.693  loge2 is a numeric factor

converting the natural logarithms into binary logarithms. The entropy S is a
measure of the system disorder while the information I is a measure of the order
and is equivalent to the Fantappiè‟s syntropy, Schrodinger‟s negative entropy, and
Brillouin‟s negentropy.

3. AS ABOVE, SO BELOW

A simple Ising model of a two-dimensional “toy Universe” may be useful to

illustrate the evolution of the Universe in the Binary theory (Figure 2) (Damiani
[1998]). A large cell, representing a macroscopic fluctuation, is divided into z2
small microscopic cells, representing the microscopic fluctuations. After n cycles
of binary dissociation the degree of expansion of our toy Universe, can be
measured by the entropy S = n, or by the configurational information, or
syntropy, I = z - n. They are coupled by a simple conservation laws (Damiani
[1998], Ludovico [2008]):

S+I =z.

At each microscopic bifurcation, a bit of entropy is created and a bit of

information is destroyed. The system starts with a minimum of entropy and a
maximum of information, then it goes through an intermediate stage of fractal-
chaos, and it ends with a maximum of entropy and a minimum of information
(Figure 2). For the description of a syntropic contraction is sufficient to revert the
temporal order.
432

Figure 2 - An Ising model of a “toy universe”. The larger circles in the middle are the macro-cell
formed by small micro-cells which are formed by smaller hypermicro-cells. The cells can be either
empty (open circles) or occupied by binary entities (dark circles). The temporal evolution of a
diffusive process is from left to right: the starting, the intermediate and the final steps of a diffusive
process of binary dissociation are shown. When all the binary entities are concentrated inside a
single cell (initial step) a maximum amount of macroscopic information is required to specify the
state of the system. When all the cells are occupied (final step) a minimum amount of macroscopic
information is required to specify the state of the system. The macroscopic information of the
initial condition about the state of the macro-cell (see renormalized circles on the bottom) is
converted into microscopic information about the state of the micro-cells (see circles on the top).
For the description of a contractive process is sufficient to revert the order from right to left.

Now the smallest of particles of matter may cohere by the strongest

attractions, and compose bigger particles of weaker virtue; and many of these
may cohere and compose bigger particles whose virtue is still weaker and so
on for diverse successions... (Isaac Newton).

In the closed toy Universe, the variations of entropy and information at the
macroscopic level are complementary and these variations are balanced by an
inverse variation at the microscopic level (Layzer [1975]). The borders of the
expansive and contractive binary processes are the horizons of events of particular
expanding and contracting black and white holes (Damiani [1998]).
433

As suggested by J. Bekenstein [1973] and S.W. Hawking [1975], in the real

Universe a simple linear relationship exists between the entropy of a hole S x, the
related force FX and the value of the radius of its horizon of events rX:

Sx k · FX  k · re / rX

but there is a decrease (and not an increase) of the entropy and size of
gravitational black holes during their fusion process. As proposed by Weyl [1919],
-13
the Compton radius of an electron re 3.86·10 [m] is the fundamental spatial
unit of the microscopic entities. According to the Fantappiè‟s group [1954] and the
geometrodynamycal description of the Binary Theory (Damiani [2003]), the
fluctuations of a four-dimensional space-time generated the gravitational G,
electric E, strong C and weak H charges (Figure 3) which are the fundamental
components of the elementary particles (Figure 4). The values of the forces and
charges increase or decrease according to the number n of cyclic iterations of the
binary processes. The strengths of the forces are correlated, in a complementary
way, to the radii of the horizons of events which are the borders of expanding or
contracting black and white holes produced by the binary processes

FG · rG = FE · rE = FC · rC = FH · rH = re

The values of rG, rE, rH, and rC are described in the legend of Figure 3.
Starting from experimental data, it is possible to calculate the approximate values
39 41
of n 1·10 and z 1·10 where n/z 1/137 is the fine structure constant and
the ratio between the present age of our Universe and its total length of life. All
the fundamental mathematical relations and numerical coincidences of classic and
quantum physics and of the Harari [1979] - Shupe [1979] model of the elementary
particles can be deduced from the geometric structure of Figure 3 and 4, the length
units of the microscopic and macroscopic fluctuations (re and re· z), and the
present status (n) of the binary processes. A microscopic particle is a small
universe oscillating between alternating collapsed and diffused phases.
434

Figure 3 - A deformed hypercube shows the relations between the rotational self-movements of the
Fantappiè group, the horizons of events, and the charges. The four largest horizontal lines
correspond to the four dimension of the De Sitter macroscopic space-time while all the other
microscopic dimensions are of the Kaluza-Klein type. The oblique lines represent the contraction
and expansion binary processes between the different levels. The G, E, C and H letters indicates
the gravitational, electric, colour, and hypercolour charges and force fields. On the side of the
hypercube the different levels and their characteristic distances are shown: rMAX = re · z is the
radius of the maximum expansion of our Universe, rG = r e · n is the radius of the visible part of the
Universe corresponding to about 137 times its present Schwarzschild radius, rE = r e · z / n is the
radius of the hydrogen atom, re is the Compton radius of the electron, rC = r e · n / z is about the
Compton radius of the nucleon, rH = re / n is approximately 137 times the Schwarzschild radius of
the nucleon, and rMIN = re / z is the smallest possible radius of the microscopic particles.

This explains the complementary corpuscular and wave like nature of

elementary particles, the nature of the Schrodinger equations describing both
retarded diffusing waves and anticipated contracting waves, and the numerical and
behavioural coincidences between the quantum world of elementary particles and
cosmology, discovered by Weyl, Eddington, Dirac, and many others (see
Caldirola et al. [1978] and references therein).

Contraction and expansion interact with each other, so they generate

conditions which are propitious to life ( I Ching).

The transformation of information and entropy can happen only during the
interaction between matter and energy since the binary processes are coupled.
As L. Szilard [1929] and L. Brillouin [1951] thought, a "Maxwell demon" can
435

Figure 4- Model for the composition of the most common microscopic particles based on the
relations described in Figure 3. The G, E, C and H charges and the values of rG, rE, rC, and rH are
described in the legend of Figure 3.

produce order if it has the information about the particles localization. A physical
way to determine the position of a particle is to use a photon, with an energy
which is higher than the one obtainable by the useful work available from the
knowledge about the particles positions. Therefore, the transmission of useful
information requires an energetic cost. For a single binary property of the
elementary electromagnetic quantum Ee the number N is equal to 2 and, therefore,
at least 0.693 ·k ·Te of energy is needed for the transmission of one bit of
information

Ee Se · Te  0.693 · k ·Te = re 3.86·10-13 [kg m2 sec-2]

where Se and Te are the basic quantum values of entropy and temperature. The
"Maxwell demon" can work in each interaction between matter and energy,
without any violation of the thermodynamic laws. The expenditure of energy to
read the information cause an increase in the entropy of the demon, which will be
larger than the lowering of the entropy of the system. Many complex systems and
the entire Universe are dissipative structures degrading energy and increasing the
configurational order of matter. Complex systems composed by many interacting
subunits, and in particular living systems, exhibit ordered space-time patterns of
436

increasing complexity during their evolution. These systems, called “dissipative

systems” by Prigogine, use the flow of energy decay to generate “order out of
chaos”. The development of a complex organism from a small egg is an
impressive example of an “anti-entropic” dissipative phenomena. At the
molecular level, the dynamics of living systems are the result of the competition
between entropic catabolic reactions, which degrade energy and chemical
compounds, and syntropic anabolic reactions, which increase the complexity and
the configurational order of material structures (Fantappié [1942], Land [1973],
Damiani [1984]). In this scenario, the evolution of life on earth is the unavoidable
result of the constant flux of solar energy in a large system of molecules which are
able to perform cyclic reactions. The emergence of universal behaviours and of
complex fractal structures near the critical points in different physical and
biological systems is the consequence of the same basic mechanism, the metabolic
hypercycle, an auto-regulatory feedback loop between opposite autocatalitic
activities of catabolic and anabolic type (Damiani [2002]). Spatial and temporal
developmental pathways of living organisms might be the results of maps and
clocks based on metabolic hypercycles organized in scale-free networks.
According to this hypothesis, it is possible the development of a functional
classification of metabolic processes, genes and proteins in the catabolic and
anabolic type. The genetic apparatus evolved for the conservation and
reproduction of biological macromolecules in the anabolic phase, while the
epigenetic apparatus is responsible for the adaptation to variable environmental
stresses in the catabolic phase (Damiani [2007]). On reproducing, each living
organism passes specific genetic and epigenetic information on how to intercept,
transform, and finally release back into the environment energy and matter.

4. PHYSIS AND PSYCHE

It would be most satisfactory of all if physis and psyche could be seen as

complementary aspects of the same reality (Wolfgang Ernst Pauli).

You are at the starting point of a binary labyrinth and you need to make a
437

decision between two different alternatives. One choice is wrong, the other is
correct. To make the right choice you need at least one bit of information, the
energy to read the information, and the code to translate the information.
According to the “Semantic theory of evolution” of Barbieri [1985], it is important
to distinguish between the informational content and the meaning of a message.
The decoded meaning of the message must be corresponding to the reality of the
labyrinth. Only if our internal representation of the labyrinth is equivalent to the
external reality we are able to meet our goal. Therefore, the effectiveness of our
behavior depends by our ability of sensing and understanding the external
environment. But if the environment is changing we need to change our internal
representation of the world, our translational apparatus, and the meaning of our
informational system. When environmental conditions change, organisms require
new properties to maintain their fitness. Evolution of living systems is determined
by competition between mutagenic processes, leading to genetic increase of the
genetic variability which is useful for adaptation to many different environments,
and selective processes, which leads to elimination of the less adaptive mutations
and to specialized adaptation. In the presence of cyclic and irregular fluctuations
of environmental conditions, the more adapted organism is the one able to
foresees the future problems and to optimize the equilibrium between mutagenesis
and selection, between plasticity and specialization. This step requires an high
degree of teleonomic creativity. Living systems are constantly forced to operate
choices in order to survive, at all levels of their organization. The constant use of
“freewill” would gradually lead towards evolution of complex neuronal systems,
which are able to be conscious of themselves. Sensing abilities, information
processing, evolution of intelligent decision making systems at molecular, cellular
and organismic level, and emergence of self-consciousness are mysterious
phenomena with very weak explanations in the present stage of scientific
development.

We have good reason to believe that consciousness arises from physical

systems such as brains, but we have little idea how it arises, or why it exists at
all. How could a physical systems such as a brain also be an experiencer?
Why should there be something it is like to be such a system? Present-day
438

scientific theories hardly touch the really difficult questions about

consciousness. We do not just lack a detailed theory; we are entirely in the
dark about how consciousness fits into the natural order (Chalmers [1996]).

Many biologists consider the quantum physics to be irrelevant to their

researches. But the most mysterious properties of living systems might be
explained only by quantum phenomena (Penrose [2008]). The hypotesis that
quantum phenomena are involved in evolution of mental processes and brain
functioning was proposed by many authors (see Licata [2008],Vannini [2009] and
references therein). Infact the behavior of many complex system, as the human
brain, is best descrbed by quantum physics rather than classic physics. The
evolution of quantum system may be due to the same deterministic laws of classic
physics.

I find the idea quite intolerable that an electron exposed to radiation should
choose of its own free will, not only its moment to jump off, but also its
direction. In that case, I would rather be a cobbler, or even an employee in a
gaming house, than a physicist (Albert Einstein).

Despite the Einstein‟s disappointment the experimental evidences contradict

the older idea that local deterministic processes alone can account for the
properties of our universe. The behavior of a macroscopic system near the
conditions of thermodynamic equilibrium is generally deterministic with good
approximation. On the contrary a microscopic particle is a small universe
oscillating between alternating collapsed and diffused phases with probabilistic
and unpredictable trajectories. According to the Heisenberg‟s principle, it is not
possible “to see” inside a single microscopic quantum particle. We can observe
only the interactions between quantum particles in the collapsed phase. Therefore,
we cannot know if the laws of physics are deterministic. Moreover, there is some
unavoidable chaotic behavior in the vacuum fluctuations which influence the
collapsed particles during each binary cycle. The main question concerns the role
of these chaotic variations in the Big-Bang instant and in every quantum
phenomena: are they produced by a “blind chance” or by a “mental will”?

The only watchmaker in nature is the blind forces of physics, albeit deployed
439

in a very special way...it is the blind watchmaker (Dawkins [1986]).

If quantum phenomena are driven by mechanical deterministic processes and

by blind chance there is no simple explanation for the emergence of mental and
conscious processes. Conscious actions could be merely parallel, or
epiphenomenal, to automatic physiological actions. In this case, there is any
biological utility selected by natural selection for evolution of consciousness.

If it is said, 'those changes are automatic, and are set in motion by external
causes', then one essential part of our consciousness, a certain amount of
freedom in willing, is annihilated; and it is inconceivable how or why there
should have arisen any consciousness or any apparent will, in such purely
automatic organisms (Wallace [1870]).

The scenario revealed by the Binary Theory is astonishing: each quantum

-22
particle is a complex microuniverse that at each binary cycle of about 2.73 · 10
second is istantaneously connected with all the particles of the macrouniverse!
This entangled network of input and output of microscopic information cannot be
used to exchange macroscopic information between macroscopic systems but
suggests the possible existence of a sophisticated quantum-mind, with incredible
computational capacity, in each quantum particle. From the researches on the
physiology of our brain, we know that cyclic information input (sensing),
processing (computation, memorization, etc.), and output (functional response) are
fundamental processes of human mind (Figure 5). The basic aspects of these
processes are also present in the behavior of a elementary particle. If we assume
the existence of basic mental properties in each quantum particle, than the
evolution of the living systems with different levels of consciousness may be
explained as a simple increase of complexity of the structures for the information
processing. During evolution of nervous system, there is a scaling increase in
brain complexity, with increasing selection, amplification, elaboration and
centralization of information. Therefore, it is possible that the basic mental and
computational processes are fundamental properties of our Universe, both at a
microscopic level to a macroscopic level. Could an electron have a sophisticated
440

quantum computation and a “free will”?

So I hope to leave you with the impression that a new dimension is opening up
for biochemistry - that of the electrons, a dimension in which a molecule
assumes a new importance as a quantum mechanical framework. Every single
atom with its electronic profile acquires a new and subtle personality (Szent-
Gyorgyi [1961]).

Figure 5 -The hierarchical fractal organization of interacting macromolecules, cells, organs and
organisms underlies some of the most fundamental aspects of life. The fractal neuronal network
shows synchronized firing of electromagnetic activity associated with different states of brain
functioning. This activity controls the cyclic input and output of conscious information between
the nucleus basalis and the cortical areas.

Until now, the understanding that there might be a mental world wider than
the limited experience of personal consciousness has been limited to altered states
of consciousness induced by drugs, mystical experiences, and psychiatric
disorders. Various religious traditions refer to a Primordial Consciousness called
by Wallace “the Great Mind of the universe”: this is God-the-Father, Allah,
Jehovah, Atum, Ishvara, Tao, Adibuddha, etc..

All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force... We must assume
behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent
441

Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter (Max Planck).

The physical laws are not incompatible with the existence of a partially free
choice of God or of our consciousness. God and our consciousness might play
dice: a single result can be chosen even if the sum of the results must be in
accordance with the probabilistic laws produced by the binary processes.

I cannot believe that God plays dice with the cosmos (Albert Einstein).

Stop telling God what to do with his dice (Niels Bohr).

Not only does God play dice, but... he sometimes throws them where they
cannot be seen (Stephen Hawking).

Chance is perhaps the pseudonym of God when he does not wish to sign his
work (Anatole France).

The "conscious" microphysical events may be amplified to macroscopic level

by the Lorenz‟s "butterfly effect". This scenario is supported by our knowledge of
biological systems. Most of the chemical reactions and physiological processes of
living organisms work near their critical and unstable equilibrium points, which
define the borderline between "deterministic" order and "unpredictable" chaos
(Yates [1992], Damiani et al. [1997], Damiani [2007]). The fractal-chaotic state is
characterized by a long-range correlation between the different elements of the
system and by very high sensitivity to small perturbations. Amplification of a
small pulse at a critical time or place can direct a reproducible transition of the
system towards a defined macroscopic state. The quantum “corrections to chance
fluctuations” may have played an important role in biological evolution.

5. THE YIN-YANG OF ENTROPIC-SYNTROPIC EVOLUTION

According with this hypotesis, which differs from both the Darwinian and the
Lamarckian conception, we encounter here a third type of laws of nature
which consists in corrections to chance fluctuations due to meaningful or
purposeful coincidences of causally unconnected events (Wolfgang Ernst
Pauli).
442

The principles described in this paper contradict the older idea that local
mechanical processes of neo-Darwinian synthesis can account for the structure of
all observed empirical data. A new understanding of the dynamics of complex
physical and biological systems is very important to show the limits of the neo-
Darwinian synthesis which leads to the development of some pseudo-scientific
and dangerous ideas as Spencer‟s Social Darwinism. Both Darwin and Lamarck,
two of the founders of evolutionary theory, predicted that evolution itself may
favor the development of self-guiding mechanisms, maximizing variability when
and where it is most likely to yield positive changes while minimizing phenotypic
variability when and where it is not needed.

I have hitherto sometimes spoken as if the variations were due to chance.

This, of course, is a wholly incorrect expression, but it serves to acknowledge
plainly our ignorance of the cause of each particular variation. [The facts]
lead to the conclusion that variability is generally related to the conditions of
life to which each species has been exposed during several successive
generations (Darwin [1859]).

Alfred Russel Wallace, the co-discoverer of Darwinian theory of evolution,

suggested the importance of mind-action directed processes, in addition to the
classical Darwinian processes, to explain life evolution:

If then, as I am endeavoring to show, all life development - all organic life

forces - are due to mind-action, we must postulate not forces, but guidance;
not only self-acting agencies as are involved in natural selection and
adaptation through survival of the fittest, but that far higher mentality which
foresees all possible results of our cosmos (Wallace [1870]).

The recent discovery of many natural genetic engineering systems, and the
emergence of complex forms of consciousness at different levels confirm the
importance of syntropic processes in biological evolution and the existence of
sensitive and computational mental properties of the “unseen universe of Spirit”:

We thus find that the Darwinian theory, even when carried out to its extreme
logical conclusion, not only does not oppose, but lends a decided support to, a
belief in the spiritual nature of man. It shows us how man's body may have
443

been developed from that of a lower animal form under the law of natural
selection; but it also teaches us that we possess intellectual and moral
faculties which could not have been so developed, but must have had another
origin; and for this origin we can only find an adequate cause in the unseen
universe of Spirit (Wallace [1910]).

Despite the suggestions of the founders of the theories of biological evolution

and quantum mechanics, the traditional development of science has careful
avoided the investigation on syntropic-psychic phenomena. This is due to the
confused interpretation of syntropic phenomena as non-reproducible processes
produced by finalistic causes moving from the future. I hope to have shown that
syntropy and information are the same thing, and that normal attractive forces (in
particular the electromagnetic force between opposite charges) are the cause of the
syntropic phenomena. The retrocausal processes are possible only in the quantum
world while at macroscopic level there is an unidirectional flow of time from the
past to the future with an irreversible growth of electromagnetic entropy and
gravitational syntropy. This new conceptual framework is applicable to biological
science, and it provides an alternative view for describing evolutionary processes
(Damiani [2007]). The new viewpoint is particularly useful for the development of
bioinformatics, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence. The debate about the
nature of the mind is very important to recreate the functioning of the brain within
a machine.
The idea of a complex and sensitive universe made up of a single network of
cyclic relations between complementary entities could be useful in the
development of a cooperative and responsible men's behaviour towards ourself,
our fellow creatures and our environment.

Istituto di Genetica Molecolare / Evolutionary Genetics, CNR, via Abbiategrasso

207, 27100 Pavia (Italy)
E-mail: damiani@igm.cnr.it
444

REFERENCES

Arcidiacono, G. [1955], Rend.Accad. Naz. Lincei 18 (4).

Arcidiacono, S. [1993]. L’evoluzione dopo Darwin. La teoria sintropica
dell'evoluzione. Di Renzo editore, Roma.
Barbasi, A.L. and Z.N. Oltvai [2004], Network biology: understanding the cell's
functional organization. Nat. Rev. Genet. 52: 101-113.
Barbieri, M. [1985], The Semantic Theory of Evolution. Harwood Academic
Publishers, London.
Bekenstein, J. D. [1973], Black Holes and Entropy. Phys. Rev. D 7:2333-2346.
Benedetto, E. [2009], Fantappié-Arcidiacono Spacetime and Its Consequences in
Quantum Cosmology. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 48:1603-1621.
Bhutani, N., J.J. Brady, M. Damian, A. Sacco, S.Y. Corbel, H.M. Blau [2010],
Reprogramming towards pluripotency requires AID-dependent DNA
demethylation. Nature 463:1042-1047
Brillouin, L. [1951], Maxwell's daemon cannot operate: information and entropy.
J. of Applied Physics 22:334-337.
Brillouin, L. [1953], Negentropy Principle of Information. J. of Applied Physics
24:1152-1163.
Buiatti, M. [2008], Darwin and Lamarck Are Back. Riv. Biol. /B. Forum 101: 323-
30.
Caldirola, P., M. Pavsic, and E. Recami [1978], Explaining the Large Numbers by
a Hierarchy of „Universes‟: A Unified Theory of Strong and Gravitational
Interactions. Nuovo Cimento B48:205-271.
Chalmers, D. [1996], The Conscious Mind, In Search of a Fundamental Theory.
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Chiatti, L. [2007], Fantappié-Arcidiacono theory of relativity versus recent
cosmological evidences: a preliminary comparison. Electron. J. Theor. Phys.
4:17-36.
Damiani, G. [1984], Il gioco della vita, la teoria binaria dell’Universo fisico.
Editrice Italiana Audiovisivi, Roma.
Damiani, G. [1998], Evolution of life in a fractal universe. Fractals in biology and
medicine 2: 169-187. Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel.
Damiani, G. [2002], Metabolic hypercycles, universality and fractals in biological
evolution. Fractals in biology and medicine 3: 259-269. Birkhauser-Verlag,
Basel.
445

Damiani, G. [2003], The Fractal Borderland between the deterministic order and
the unpredictable chaos. Determism,Olism and Complexity. pp. 191-198.
Kluwer Academic, NewYork.
Damiani, G. [2005], Evolution and regulation of metabolic networks. Fractals in
biology and medicine 4: 257-268. Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel.
Damiani, G. [2007], The Yin and Yang of Anti-Darwinian Epigenetics and
Darwinian Genetics. Riv. Biol. /B. Forum 100: 361-402.
Damiani, G. and P. Della Franca [1997], Morphé and Evolution. Riv. Biol. /B.
Forum 90: 227-66.
Darwin, C. [1859], On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection. John
Murray, London.
Dawkins, R. [1976], The selfish gene. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Dawkins, R. [1986], The Blind Watchmaker. W. W. Norton & Co., New York.
Delker, R.K., S.D. Fugmann, F.N. Papavasiliou [2009], A coming-of-age story:
activation-induced cytidine deaminase turns 10. Nat. Immunol. 10:1147-1153.
Fantappiè, L. [1942], Sull‟interpretazione dei potenziali anticipati della meccanica
ondulatoria e su un principio di finalità che ne discende. Rend. Acc. D’Italia 7
(4).
Fantappiè, L. [1944], Principi di una teoria unitaria del mondo fisico e biologico.
Humanitas Nova, Roma.
Fantappiè, L. [1954], Su una nuova teoria di relatività finale. Rend.Accad. Naz.
Lincei 17 (5).
Harari, H. [1979], A schematic model of quarks and leptons. Phys. Lett. B 86:83-
86.
Hartley, R.V.L. [1928], Transmission of Information. Bell System Technical
Journal, 7:535-563.
Hawking, S.W. [1975], Particle Creation by Black Holes. Commun. math. Phys.
43:199-220.
Koonin, E.V. [2009],The Origin at 150: is a new evolutionary synthesis in sight?
Trends Genet. 25:473-475.
Land, G. [1973], Grow or Die: The Unifying Principle of Transformation. John
Wiley & sons, New York.
Layzer, D. [1975], The arrow of time, Sci. Am. 233:56-69.
Licata, I. [2007], Universe without singularities. A group approach to De Sitter
cosmology. Electron. J. Theor. Phys. 3: 211-224.
Licata, I. [2008], La logica aperta della mente. Codice edizioni, Torino.
Losa, G.A. [2009], The fractal geometry of life. Riv. Biol. /B. Forum 102:29-59.
446

Ludovico, M. [2008], Syntropy: definition and use. Syntropy 1:139-201.

MacDuff, D.A., Z.L. Demorest, and R.S. Harris [2009], AID can restrict L1
retrotransposition suggesting a dual role in innate and adaptive immunity.
Nucleic Acids Res. 37:1854-1867.
Malim, M.H. [2009], APOBEC proteins and intrinsic resistance to HIV-1
infection. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 364:675-687.
Müller, G.B. [2007], EvoDevo: extending the evolutionary synthesis. Nature
Reviews Genetics 8: 943-949.
Nishikura, K. [2009], Functions and Regulation of RNA Editing by ADAR
Deaminases. Annu. Rev. Biochem. Published Online December 8.
Ossowski, S., K. Schneeberger, J.I. Lucas-Lledó, N. Warthmann, R.M. Clark,
R.G. Shaw, D. Weigel, M. Lynch [2010], The rate and molecular spectrum of
spontaneous mutations in Arabidopsis thaliana. Science 327:92-94.
Penrose, R. [2008], Foreward in Quantum aspect of life. Imperial College Press,
London.
Pigliucci, M. [2007], Do we need an extended evolutionary synthesis? Evolution
61: 2743-2749.
Pigliucci, M. [2009], An extended synthesis for evolutionary biology. Ann .N Y
Acad. Sci. 1168:218-228.
Pleasance, E.D. et al. [2010], A comprehensive catalogue of somatic mutations
from a human cancer genome. Nature 463:191-196.
Recami, E. [1979], Explaining the „Large Numbers‟ via a Unified (Classical)
Theory of Strong and Gravitational Interactions. Int. Journ. Quantum Chem.
17:37-40.
Roach, J.C., et al. [2010] Analysis of Genetic Inheritance in a Family Quartet by
Whole-Genome Sequencing. Science Published Online March 10.
Rose, M.R. and T.H. Oakley [2007], The new biology: Beyond the Modern
Synthesis. Biol. Direct. 2:30.
Schrödinger, E. [1944], What is Life? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Shannon, C.E. [1948], A Mathematical Theory of Communication, Bell System
Technical Journal, 27:379-423, 623-656.
Shapiro, J.A. [2009], Revisiting the central dogma in the 21st century. Ann. N. Y.
Acad. Sci. 1178:6-28.
Shupe, M.A. [1979], A composite model of leptons and quarks. Phys. Lett. B
86:87-92.
 447

Specchia V., Piacentini L., Tritto P., Fanti L., D'Alessandro R., Palumbo G.,
Pimpinelli S., Bozzetti M.P. [2010], Hsp90 prevents phenotypic variation by
suppressing the mutagenic activity of transposons. Nature 463:662-665.
Strohman, R. [2002], Maneuvering in the complex path from genotype to
phenotype. Science 296: 701-703.
Szent-Gyorgyi, A. [1961], In Search of New Biological Dimensions. Perspectives
in Biology and Medicine 4:393-402.
Szent-Gyorgyi, A. [1977], Drive in Living Matter to Perfect Itself. Synthesis 1:14-
26.
Szilard, L. [1929], Uber die entropieverminderung in einem thermodynamischen
system bei eingriffen intelligenter wesen. Z. Phys. 53:840-856.
Traverso, S. [2005], Cytoskeleton as a fractal percolation cluster: some biological
remarks. Fractals in biology and medicine. 4: 269-276. Birkhauser-Verlag,
Basel.
Ueda, H.R., S. Hayashi, S. Matsuyama, T. Yomo, S. Hashimoto, S.A. Kay, J.B.
Hogenesch and M. Iino [2004], Universality and flexibility in gene expression
from bacteria to human. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101: 3765-3769.
Vannini, A. [2009], A Syntropic Model of Consciousness. Syntropy 1:109-138.
Wallace, A.R. [1870], Contributions to the theory of natural selection. A series of
essays. Macmillan & Co., London & New York.
Wallace, A.R. [1910], The world of life; a manifestation of creative power,
directive mind and ultimate purpose. Chapman & Hall, London.
Weyl, H. [1919], Eine neue Erweiterung der Relativitatstheorie. Ann. der Phys.
59:101-133.
Yates, F.E. [1992], Fractal Applications in Biology: Scaling Time in Biochemical
Networks. Methods in Enzymology 210: 636-675.

View publication stats