LETTERSTOPROGRESSINPHYSICS
IntroducingaTheoryofNeutrosophicEvolution:Degreesof Evolution,Indeterminacy,andInvolution
FlorentinSmarandache
UniversityofNewMexico,705GurleyAve.,Gallup,NM87301, USA.E-mail:smarand@unm.edu
Duringtheprocessofadaptationofabeing(plant,animal,orhuman),toanewenvironmentorconditions,thebeingpartiallyevolves,partiallydevolves(degenerates),and partiallyisindeterminatei.e.neitherevolvingnordevolving,thereforeunchanged(neutral),orthechangeisunclear,ambiguous,vague,asinneutrosophiclogic.Thankto adaptation,onethereforehas:evolution,involution,and indeterminacy(orneutrality), eachoneofthesethreeneutrosophiccomponentsinsomedegree.Thedegreesofevolution/indeterminacy/involutionarereferredtoboth:thestructureofthebeing(itsbody parts),andfunctionalityofthebeing(functionalityofeachpart,orinter-functionality ofthepartsamongeachother,orfunctionalityofthebeingasawhole).Wetherefore introducenowforthefirsttimetheNeutrosophicTheoryofEvolution,Involution,and Indeterminacy(orNeutrality).
1Introduction
Duringthe2016–2017winter,inDecember-January,Iwent toaculturalandscientifictriptoGal´apagosArchipelago, Ecuador,inthePacificOcean,andvisitedsevenislandsand islets:Mosquera,Isabela,Fernandina,Santiago,Sombrero Chino,SantaCruz,andRabida,inacruisewithGolondrina Ship.Ihadextensivediscussionswithourlikeableguide, se˜norMiltonUlloa,aboutnaturalhabitatsandtheirtransformations.
Afterseeingmanyanimalsandplants,thatevolveddifferentlyfromtheirancestorsthatcamefromthecontinental land,Iconsulted,returningbacktomyUniversityofNew Mexico,variousscientificliteratureaboutthelifeofanimals andplants,theirreproductions,andaboutmultipletheoriesof evolutions.IusedtheonlinescientificdatabasesthatUNM Libraryhassubscribedto,suchasMathSciNet,WebofScience,EBSCO,ThomsonGale(Cengage),ProQuest,IEEE/ IETElectronicLibrary,IEEEXploreDigitalLibraryetc.,and DOAJ,AmazonKindle,GooglePlayBooksaswell,doing searchesforkeywordsrelatedtooriginsoflife,species,evolution,controversialideasaboutevolution,adaptationandinadaptation,lifecuriosities,mutations,genetics,embryology, andsoon.
Mygeneralconclusionwasthateachevolutiontheory hadsomedegreeoftruth,somedegreeofindeterminacy,and somedegreeofuntruth(asinneutrosophiclogic),dependingonthetypesofspecies,environment,timespan,andother hiddenparametersthatmayexist.
Andallthesedegreesaredifferentfromaspeciestoanotherspecies,fromanenvironmenttoanotherenvironment, fromatimespantoanothertimespan,andingeneralfroma parametertoanotherparameter.
Byenvironment,oneunderstands:geography,climate, praysandpredatorsofthatspecies,i.e.thewholeecosystem.
Ihaveobservedthattheanimalsandplants(andeven humanbeings)notonlyevolve,butalso devolve (i.e.involveback,decline,atrophy,passdown,regress,degenerate) Sometreatsincrease,othertreatsdecrease,whileothersremainsunchanged(neutrality).
Onealsosees:adaptationbyphysicalorfunctionalevolutionofabodypart,andphysicalorfunctionalinvolution ofanotherbodypart,whileotherbodypartsandfunctions remainunchanged.Afterevolution,anewprocessstart,reevaluation,andsoon.
Inthesocietyitlooksthatthemostopportunistic(which isthefittest!)succeeds,notthesmartest.Andprofessional deformationsignifiesevolution(specializationinanarrow field),andinvolution(incapabilityofdoingthingsinanother field).
Thepaperisorganizedasfollows:someinformationon taxonomy,species,ashortlistoftheoriesoforiginoflife,anotherlistoftheoriesandideasaboutevolution.Afterwards themaincontributionofthispaper,the theoryofneutrosophicevolution,thedynamicityofspecies,severalexamplesof evolution,involution,andindeterminacy(neutrality),neutrosophicselection,refinedneutrosophictheoryofevolution, andthepaperendswithopenquestionsonevolution/neutrality/involution.
2Taxonomy
Let’srecallseveralnotionsfromclassicalbiology.
The taxonomy isaclassification,fromascientifically pointofview,ofthelivingthings,anditclassifiestheminto threecategories: species, genus,and family.
3Species
A species meansagroupoforganisms,livinginaspecific area,sharingmanycharacteristics,andabletoreproducewith
FlorentinSmarandache.IntroducingaTheoryofNeutrosophicEvolution
eachother.
Insomecases,thedistinctionbetweenapopulationsubgrouptobeadifferentspecies,ornot,isunclear,asinthe SoritesParadoxes intheframeof neutrosophy:thefrontier between <A> (where <A> canbeaspecies,agenus,orafamily),and <nonA> (whichmeansthatisnot <A>)isvague, incomplete,ambiguous.Similarly,forthedistinctionbetweenaseriesanditssubseries.
4Theoriesoforiginoflife
LouisPasteur(1822–1895)developedin1860thetheoryof precellular (prebiotic) evolution,whichsaysthatlifeevolved fromnon-livingchemicalcombinationsthat,overlongtime, arosespontaneously.
Inthelate19thcenturyatheory,called abiogenesis,promulgatedthatthelivingorganismsoriginatedfromlifeless matterspontaneously,withoutanylivingparents’action.
CarlR.Woese(b.1928)hasproposedin1970’sthatthe progenotes weretheveryfirstlivingcells,buttheirbiological specificitywassmall.Thegeneswereconsideredprobable (ratherthanidentical)proteins.
JohnBurdonSandersonHaldane(1872–1964)proposed in1929the theorythattheviruseswereprecursorstothelivingcells [1].
JohnBernalandA.G.Cairns-Smithstatedin1966the mineraltheory:thatlifeevolvedfrominorganiccrystalsfound intheclay,bynaturalselection[2].
Accordingtothe littlebagstheoryofevolution,thelife isconsideredashavingevolvedfromorganicchemicalsthat happenedtogettrappedinsometinyvesicles.
EigenandSchuster,adeptsofthe hypercycletheory,assertedin1977thattheprecursorsofsinglecellswerethese littlebags,andtheirchemicalreactionscycleswereequivalenttothelife’sfunctionality[3].
Othertheoriesabouttheoriginoflifehavebeenproposed inthebiologyliterature,suchas: primordialsoup, dynamic statetheory,and phenotypetheory,buttheywerelaterdismissedbyexperiments.
5Theoriesandideasaboutevolution
Thetheoryof fixism saysthatspeciesarefixed,theydonot evolveordevolve,andthereforethetoday’sspeciesareidenticaltothepastspecies.
Ofcourse,the creationism isafixismtheory,fromareligiouspointofview.Opposedtothefixismisthetheoryof transformism,antecedenttotheevolutionarydoctrine,inthe pre-Darwinianperiod,whichassertsthatplantsandanimals aremodifiedandtransformedgraduallyfromonespeciesinto anotherthroughmanygenerations[22].
JeanBaptistePierreAntoinedeMonetLamarck(1749–1829),in1801,aheadofCharlesDarwin,isassociatedwith the theoryofinheritanceofacquiredcharacteristics (or useinheritance),andeven ofacquiredhabits.Whichiscalled
Lamarckism or LamarckianEvolution.
Ifananimalrepeatedlystressesintheenvironment,its bodypartunderstresswillmodifyinordertoovercomethe environmentalstress,andthemodificationwillbetransmitted toitsoffspring.
Forexample:thegiraffehavingalongneckinorderto catchthetreeleaves[4].
HerbertSpencer(1820–1903)usedforthefirsttimethe termevolutioninbiology,showingthatapopulation’sgene poolchangesfromagenerationtoanothergeneration,producingnewspeciesafteratime[5].
CharlesDarwin(1809–1882)introducedthenaturalselection,meaningthatindividualsthataremoreendowedwith characteristicsforreproductionandsurvivalwillprevail(“selectionofthefittest”),whilethoselessendowedwouldperish [6].
Darwinhadalsoexplainedthestructuresimilaritiesof leavingthingsingeneraandfamilies,duetothecommondescentofrelatedspecies[7].
Inhis gradualism (or phyleticgradualism),Darwinsaid thatspeciesevolveslowly,ratherthansuddenly.
Theadaptationofanorganismmeansnervousresponse change,afterbeingexposedtoapermanentstimulus.
Inthe moderngradualism,fromthegeneticpointofview, thebeneficialgenesoftheindividualsbestadaptedtotheen vironment,willhaveahigherfrequencyintothepopulation overaperiodoftime,givingbirthtoanewspecies[8].
HerbertSpenceralsocoinedthephrasesurvivalofthe fittestin1864,thatthoseindividualsthebestadaptedtothe environmentarethemostlikelytosurviveandreproduce.Al fredRusselWallace(1823–1913)coinedin1888theterms Darwinism (individualsthemostadaptedtoenvironmentpass theircharacteristicstotheiroffspring),andDarwinianfitness (thebetteradapted,thebettersurvivingchance)[9].
Onehasupwardevolution(anagenesis,coinedbyAlpheusHyatt,1838–1902,in1889),astheprogressiveevolution ofthespeciesintoanother[10],anda branchingevolution (cladogenesis,coinedin1953bySirJulianSorellHuxley, 1887–1975),whenthepopulationdivergesandnewspecies evolve[11].
GeorgeJohnRomanes(1848–1894)coinedtheword neoDarwinism,relatedtonaturalselectionandthetheoryofgeneticsthatexplainsthe synthetictheoryofevolution.What countsforthenaturalselectionisthegenefrequencyinthe population[12].TheDarwinismisputtogetherwiththepaleontology,systematics,embryology,molecularbiology, and genetics.
Inthe19thcenturyGregorJohannMendel(1822–1884) setthebaseof genetics,togetherwithotherscientists,among themThomasHuntMorgan(1866–1945).
The Mendelism isthestudyofheredityaccordingtothe chromosometheory:thelivingthingreproductivecellscon tainfactorswhichtransmittotheiroffspringparticularcharacteristics[13].
AugustWeismann(1834-1914)inyear1892enounced thegermplasmtheory,sayingthattheoffspringdonotinherittheacquiredcharacteristicsoftheparents[14].
HugodeVries(1848–1935)publishedabookin1901 on mutationtheory,consideringthatrandomlygeneticmutationsmayproducenewformsoflivingthings.Therefore, newspeciesmayoccursuddenly[15].
LouisAntoineMarieJosephDollo(1857–1931)enunciatedthe Dollo’sprinciple (law or rule)thatevolutionisirreversible,i.e.thelostfunctionsandstructuresinspecies are notregainedbyfutureevolvingspecies.
Inthepresent,the synergetictheoryofevolution considers thatonehasanaturalorartificialmultipolarselection,which occursatalllifelevels,fromthemoleculetotheecosystem —notonlyatthepopulationlevel.
Butnowadaysithasbeendiscoveredorganismsthathave re-evolvedstructuredsimilartothoselostbytheirancestors[16].
Lifeis...complicated!
Thegeneticassimilation(for BaldwinEffect,afterJames MarkBaldwin,1861–1934)consideredthatanadvantageous trait(orphenotype)mayappearinseveralindividualsofa populationinresponsetotheenvironmentalcues,which woulddeterminethegeneresponsibleforthetraittospread throughthispopulation[17].
TheBritishgeneticistSirRonaldA.Fisher(1890–1962) elaboratedin1930the evolutionaryordirectionaldeterminism,whenatraitofindividualsispreferredforthenewgenerations(forexamplethelargestgrainstoreplant,chosen by farmers)[18].
The theoryofspeciation wasassociatedwithErnstMayr (b.1904)andassertsthatbecauseofgeographicisolationnew speciesarise,thatdivergegeneticallyfromthelargeroriginal populationofsexuallyreproducingorganisms.Asubgroup becomesnewspeciesifitsdistinctcharacteristicsallowitto surviveanditsgenesdonotmixwithotherspecies[19].
Inthe20thcentury,TrofimDenisovitchLysenko(1898–1976)revivedtheLamarckismtothe Lysenkoism schoolof genetics,proclaimingthatthenewcharacteristicsacquiredby parentswillbepassedontotheoffspring[20].
RichardGoldschmidt(1878–1958)in1940hascoinedthe termsofmacroevolution,whichmeansevolutionfromalong timespan(geological)perspective,andmicroevolution,which meansevolutionfromasmalltimespan(afewgenerations) perspectivewithobservablechanges[1].
SewallWright(1889–1988),inthemid20thcentury,developedthe founderseffectofprinciple,thatinisolatedplaces populationarrivedfromthecontinentorfromanotherisland, becomeslittlebylittledistinctfromitsoriginalplacepopulation.Thisisexplainedbecausethefoundersarefewin numberandthereforethegeneticpoolissmallerindiversity, whencetheiroffspringaremoresimilarincomparisontothe offspringoftheoriginalplacepopulation.
Thefounderseffectorprincipleisregardedasaparticularcaseofthe geneticdrift (authoredbythesamebiologist, SewallWright),whichtellsthatthechangeingeneoccursby chance[21].
ThemathematicianJohnMaynardSmithhasappliedthe gametheorytoanimalbehaviorandin1976hestatedthe evolutionarystablestrategy inapopulation.Itmeansthat, unlesstheenvironmentchanges,thebeststrategywillevolve, andpersistforsolvingproblems.
Othertheoriesrelatedtoevolutionsuchas: punctuated equilibrium (instantaneousevolution), hopefulmonsters,and saltation (quantum) speciation (thatnewspeciessuddenlyoccur;byErnstMayr)havebeencriticizedbythemajorityof biologists.
6Openresearch
Bygeneticengineeringitispossibletomakeanothercombinationofgenes,withinthesamenumberofchromosomes. Thus,itispossibletomatingaspecieswithanothercloser species,buttheiroffspringissterile(theoffspringcannotreproduce).
Despitethetremendousgeneticengineeringdevelopment inthelastdecades,therehasnotbeenpossibletoproveby experimentsinthelaboratorythat:fromaninorganicmatter onecanmakeorganicmatterthatmayreproduceandassimilateenergy;norwaspossibleinthelaboratorytotransform a speciesintoanewspeciesthathasanumberofchromosomes differentfromtheexistentspecies.
7Involution
Accordingtoseveralonlinedictionaries, involution means:
—Decay,retrogressionorshrinkageinsize;orreturn toaformerstate[CollinsDictionaryofMedicine,RobertM. Youngson,2005];
—Returningofanenlargedorgantonormalsize;or turninginwardoftheedgesofapart;mentaldeclineassociatedwithadvancedage(psychiatry)[MedicalDictionaryfor theHealthProfessionsandNursing,Farlex,2012];
—Havingrolled-upmargins(fortheplantorgans)[CollinsDictionaryofBiology,3rdedition,W.G.Hale,V.A. Saunders,J.P.Margham,2005];
—Aretrogradechangeofthebodyorofanorgan[Dorland’sMedicalDictionaryforHealthConsumers,Saunders, animprintofElsevier,Inc.,2007];
—Aprogressivedeclineordegenerationofnormalphysiologicalfunctioning[TheAmericanHeritage,Houghton MifflinCompany,2007].
8TheoryofNeutrosophicEvolution
Duringtheprocessofadaptationofabeing(plant,animal,or human) B,toanewenvironment η, B partially evolves;
B partially devolves (involves,regresses,degenerates);
—and B partiallyremains indeterminate whichmeans neutral (unchanged),orambigous—i.e.notsureifitisevolutionorinvolution.
Anyactionhasareaction.Wesee,thanktoadaptation: evolution,involution,andneutrality(indeterminacy),each oneofthesethree neutrosophiccomponents insomedegree.
Thedegreesofevolution/indeterminacy/involutionarereferredtoboth:the structure of B (itsbodyparts),and functionality of B (functionalityofeachpart,orinter-functionalityofthepartsamongeachother,orfunctionalityof B asa whole).
Adaptation tonewenvironmentconditionsmeans deadaptation fromtheoldenvironmentconditions.
Evolutioninonedirectionmeansinvolutionintheoppositedirection.
Loosinginonedirection,onehastogaininanotherdirectioninordertosurvive(forequilibrium).Andreciprocally.
Aspecies,withrespecttoanenvironment,canbe: —inequilibrium,disequilibrium,orindetermination; —stable,unstable,orindeterminate(ambiguousstate); —optimal,suboptimal,orindeterminate.
Onethereforehasa NeutrosophicTheoryofEvolution, Involution,andIndeterminacy (neutrality,orfluctuation betweenEvolutionandInvolution).Theevolution,theinvolution,andtheindeterminate-evolutiondependnotonly on naturalselection,butalsoonmanyotherfactorssuchas:ar tificialselection,friendsandenemies,badluckorgoodluck, weatherchange,environmentjunctureetc.
9Dynamicityofthespecies
Ifthespeciesisinindeterminate(unclear,vague,ambiguous) statewithrespecttoitsenvironment,ittendstoconvergetowardsoneextreme:
—eithertoequilibrium/stability/optimality,ortodisequilibrium/instability/suboptimalitywithrespecttoanenvironment;
—thereforethespecieseitherrisesupgraduallyorsuddenlybymutationtowardsequilibrium/stability/optimality;
—orthespeciesdeepsdowngraduallyorsuddenlyby mutationtodisequilibrium/instability/suboptimalityand perish.
The attractionpoint inthisneutrosophicdynamicsystemis,ofcourse,thestateofequilibrium/stability/optimality. Buteveninthisstate,thespeciesisnotfixed,itmayget, duetonewconditionsoraccidents,toadegreeofdisequilib rium/instability/suboptimality,andfromthisnewstateagain thestruggleonthelongwaybackofthespeciestoitsattractionpoint.
10Severalexamplesofevolution,involution,andindeterminacy(neutrality)
10.1Cormorantsexample
Let’staketheflightlesscormorants(Nannopterumharrisi)in Gal´apagosIslands,theirwingsandtailhaveatrophied(hence devolved)duetotheirnoneedtofly(fortheyhavingno predatorsontheland),andbecausetheirpermanentneedto diveonnear-shorebottomafterfish,octopi,eelsetc.
Theiravianbreastbonevanished(involution),sinceno flyingmusclestosupportwereneeded.
Buttheirneckgotlonger,theirlegsstronger,andtheir feetgothugewebbedisordertocatchfishunderwater(evolution).
Yet,theflightlesscormorantskeptseveraloftheirancestors’habits(functionalityasawhole):makenests,hatchthe eggsetc.(hence neutrality).
10.2Cosmosexample
Theastronauts,inspace,forextendedperiodoftimegetaccustomedtolowornogravity(evolution),buttheylosebone density(involution).Yetotherbodypartsdonotchange,or ithasnotbeenfindoutsofar(neutrality/indeterminacy).
10.3Exampleofevolutionandinvolution
Thewhales evolved withrespecttotheirteethfrompig-like teethtocuspedteeth.Afterwards,thewhales devolved from cuspedteethbacktoconicalteethwithoutcusps.
10.4Penguinexample
TheGal´apagosPenguin(Spheniscusmendiculus)evolved fromtheHumboldtPenguinbyshrinkingitssizeat35cm high(adaptationbyinvolution)inordertobeabletostaycool intheequatorialsun.
10.5Frigatebirdsexample
TheGal´apagosFrigatebirdsarebirdsthatlosttheirabilityto diveforfood,sincetheirfeathersarenotwaterproof(involution),buttheybecamemastersoffaster-and-maneuverable flyingbystealingfoodfromotherbirds,calledkleptoparasite feeding(evolution).
10.6ExampleofDarwin’sfinches
The13Gal´apagosspeciesofDarwin’sFinchesmanifestvariousdegreesofevolutionupontheirbeak,havingdifferent shapesandsizesforeachspeciesinordertogobbledifferent typesoffoods(hence evolution):
—forcrackinghardseeds,athickbeak(groundfinch); —forinsects,flowersandcacti,alongandslimbeak (anotherfinchspecies).
Besidestheirbeaks,thefincheslooksimilar,provingthey camefromacommonancestor(hence neutrality).
Ifoneexperiments,let’ssupposeonemovesthethickbeakgroundfinchesbacktoanenvironmentwithsoftseeds, whereitisnotneededathickbeak,thenthethickbeakwill atrophyand,intime,sinceitbecomeshardforthefinchesto usetheheavybeak,thethin-beakfincheswillprevail(hence involution).
10.7ElNi ˜ noexample
Professorofecology,ethology,andevolutionMartinWikel ski,fromtheUniversityofIllinoisatUrbana-Champaign,has publishedin Nature acuriousreport,regardingdataheand histeamcollectedaboutmarineiguanassince1987.During the1997–1998ElNi˜no,themarinealgaedied,andbecause thelackoffood,ononeoftheGal´apagosislandssomemarineiguanasshrankaquarteroftheirlengthandlosthalfof theirweight(adaptationby involution).
Afterplentifuloffoodbecameavailableagain,themarineiguanasgrewbacktotheiroriginallengthandweight (re-adaptationby evolution).
[J.Smith,J.Brown,TheIncredibleShrinkingIguanas,in Ecuador&TheGal´apagosIslands,MoonHandbook,Avalon Travel,p.325.]
10.8Batexample
Thebatsaretheonlymammalscapableofnaturallyflying, duetothefactthattheirforelimbshavedevelopedintowebb edwings(evolution bytransformation).Butnavigatingand foraginginthedarkness,havecausedtheireyes’functionalitytodiminish(involution),yetthebats“see”withtheir ears(evolution bytransformation)usingtheecholocation(or thebiosonar)inthefollowingway:thebatsemitsoundsby mouth(oneemitter),andtheirearsreceiveechoes(tworeceivers);thetimedelay(betweenemissionandreceptionof thesound)andtherelativeintensityofthereceivedsoundgive tothebatsinformationaboutthedistance,direction,size and typeofanimalinitsenvironment.
10.9Moleexample
Forthemoles,mammalsthatliveunderground,theireyes andearshavedegeneratedandbecomeminusculesincetheir functionsarenotmuchneeded(henceadaptationby involution),yettheirforelimbsbecamemorepowerfulandtheir pawslargerforbetterdigging(adaptationby evolution).
11Neutrosophicselection
Neutrosophicselectionwithrespecttoapopulationofaspe ciesmeansthatoveraspecifictimespanapercentageofitsin dividualsevolve,anotherpercentageofindividualsdevolve, andathirdcategoryofindividualsdonotchangeortheir changeisindeterminate(notknowingifitisevolutionorin volution).Wemayhaveanaturalorartificialneutrosophic selection.
12RefinedNeutrosophicTheoryofEvolution
RefinedNeutrosophicTheoryofEvolutionisanextension oftheneutrosophictheoryofevolution,whenthedegreesof evolution/indeterminacy/involutionareconsideredseparately withrespecttoeachbodypart,andwithrespecttoeachbody partfunctionality,andwithrespecttothewholeorganism functionality.
13Openquestionsonevolution/neutrality/involution
13.1.Howtomeasurethedegreeofevolution,degreeofinvolution,anddegreeofindeterminacy(neutrality)ofaspecies inagivenenvironmentandaspecifictimespan?
13.2.Howtocomputethedegreeofsimilaritytoancestors,degreeofdissimilaritytoancestors,anddegreeofindeterminatesimilarity-dissimilaritytoancestors?
13.3.ExperimentalQuestion.Let’ssupposethatapartialpopulationofspecies S 1 movesfromenvironment η1 to adifferentenvironment η2;afterawhile,anewspecies S 2 emergesbyadaptationto η2;thenapartialpopulation S 2 movesbackfrom η2 to η1;will S 2 evolveback(actuallydevolveto S 1)?
13.4.Areallspeciesneededbynature,ortheyarrivedby accident?
14Conclusion
Wehaveintroducedforthefirsttimetheconceptof NeutrosophicTheoryofEvolution,Indeterminacy (orNeutrality), andInvolution
Foreachbeing,duringalongtimespan,thereisaprocess ofpartialevolution,partialindeterminacyorneutrality,and partialinvolutionwithrespecttothebeingbodypartsand functionalities.
Thefunctioncreatestheorgan.Thelackoforganfunctioning,bringsatrophytotheorgan.
Inordertosurvive,thebeinghastoadapt.Onehasadaptationbyevolution,oradaptationbyinvolution—asmany exampleshavebeenprovidedinthispaper.Thebeingpartiallyevolves,partiallydevolves,andpartiallyremains unchanged(fixed)oritsprocessofevolution-involutionisindeterminate.Therearespeciespartiallyadaptedandpartially strugglingtoadapt.
References
1.BarbieriM.TheSemanticTheoryofEvolution.Chur,Switzerland, 1985.
2.Cairns-SmithA.G.TheOriginofLifeandtheNatureofPrimitiveGene. JournalofTheoreticalBiology,1966,v.X,53–88.
3.EigenM.andSchusterP.TheHypercycle.APrincipleofNaturalSelfOrganization. Naturwissenschaften,1977,v.LXIV,541–565.
4.LamarckJ.B.ZoologicalPhilosophy.1809.
5.ReaderJ.TheRiseofLife.NewYork,1988
6.SoberE.TheNatureofSelection.Cambridge,MA,1984.
7.KohnD.TheDarwinianHeritage.Princeton,NJ,1985.
FlorentinSmarandache.IntroducingaTheoryofNeutrosophicEvolution
8.EldredgeN.LifePulse:EpisodesfromtheStoryoftheFossilRecord. NewYork,1987.
9.WallaceA.R.Darwinism:AnExpositionoftheTheoryofNaturalSelectionwithSomeofitsApplicationsMacMillan,London,1889.
10.BrownJ.Biogeography.St.Louis,MO,1983.
11.DelsonE.Ancestors:TheHardEvidence.NewYork,1985.
12.BowlerP.Evolution:TheHistoryofanIdea.Berkeley,California, 1984.
13.OlbyR.TheOriginsofMendelism.London-Chicago,1985.
14.WeismannA.TheGermPlasm:ATheoryofHeredity.London, 1893.
15.deVriesH.Mutationstheorie[MutationTheory].Leipzig.VeitundCo. 1901&1903.
16.MilnerR.TheEncyclopediaofEvolution:Humanity’sSearchforits Origins.NewYork,1987.
17.HitchingF.TheNeckoftheGiraffe:WhereDarwinWentWrong.New Haven,Connecticut,1987.
18.EldredgeN.UnfinishedSynthesis.OxfrdUniv.Press,Oxford,1985.
19.EreshefskyM.TheUnitsofEvolution:EssaysontheNatureofSpecies. Cambridge,Massachusetts,1992.
20.JoravskyD.TheLysenkoAffair.Cambridge,Massachusetts,1970.
21.MagillF.Magill’sSurveyofScience:LifeScienceSeries.Englewood Cliffs,NJ,1991.
22.TheGreatSovietEncyclopedia.3rdEdition,TheGaleGroup,Inc., 2010.
23.LinfanMao.Biologicaln-SystemwithGlobalStability. International ConferenceonApplicationsofMathematicsinTopologicalDynamics, Section:“Physics,BiologicalandChemicalSystems”,Kolkata,India, December9–11,2016.
24.SmarandacheF.Gal´apagossauT , inutulBroas , telorT , estoaseGigantice: TeoriaNeutrosofic˘aaEvolutiei.EdituraAgora,Sibiu,2017.