ON THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Darwinism conceives evolution as a consequence of random variation and natural selection, hence it is based on a materialistic, i.e. matter-based, view of science inspired by classical physics. But matter in itself is considered a very complex notion in modern physics. More specifically, at a microscopic level, matter and energy are no longer retained within their simple form, and quantum mechanical models are proposed wherein potential form is considered in addition to actual form. In this paper we propose an alternative to standard Neodarwinian evolution theory. We suggest that the starting point of evolution theory cannot be limited to actual variation whereupon is selected, but to variation in the potential of entities according to the context. We therefore develop a formalism, referred to as Context driven Actualization of Potential (CAP), which handles potentiality and describes the evolution of entities as an actualization of potential through a reiterated interaction with the context. As in quantum mechanics, lack of knowledge of the entity, its context, or the interaction between context and entity leads to different forms of indeterminism in relation to the state of the entity. This indeterminism generates a non-Kolmogorovian distribution of probabilities that is different from the classical distribution of chance described by Darwinian evolution theory, which stems from a 'actuality focused', i.e. materialistic, view of nature. We also present a quantum evolution game that highlights the main differences arising from our new perspective and shows that it is more fundamental to consider evolution in general, and biological evolution in specific, as a process of actualization of potential induced by context, for which its material reduction is only a special case.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".