Quantum Evolution from Atoms to Adam

Journal of Unification Studies Vol. 7, 2006 - Pages 69-110

Reverend Moon’s vision of a sophisticated Unified Science that can fully describe God’s creation is being realized, albeit slowly. The foundations of this Unified Science were laid one hundred years ago with a profound conceptual revolution. This change in fundamental concepts occurred when physicists peered beneath classical appearances and discov­ered the way the universe really functions and then, with much struggle, how to mathematically describe the actual workings of the real world with quantum mechanics.

The revolutionary insights introduced by quantum science have currently percolated up the science hierarchy as far as simple biochemistry, but they have yet to influence the concepts used in the still-classical higher sciences such genetics, evolution and neurobiology, etc. It is the eventual, and inevitable, introduction of these remarkable new quantum concepts into all of the sciences that will create a unified science of quantum probability Such a science can fulfill Reverend Moon’s vision in founding ICUS.

The radically new concept introduced into the scientific canon by quantum physics is an aspect of objective reality that goes by many names: probability amplitude, wavefunction, orbital, wave-particle, matter-wave, etc. We will generically refer to it as a quantum probability form (or field) [QPF].

The concept of quantum probability involves introducing an internal extension to the description of reality, complementing the more familiar external extensions in spacetime. This exactly mirrors the Unification Thought division of reality into sungsang and hyungsang aspects. The unified quantum probability forms of the new science are what Unification Thought refers to as the inherent directive nature of simple things and, when conceptually developed, the mind of living things.

Classical science—unlike quantum science—has no concept of this internal aspect that runs the external world; and evolutionary science at present is strictly classical. Current theories of ‘atoms to Adam’ evolution ignore entirely this aspect of how the real world works, which is why they are, at best, only glimpses of a larger, and more accurate, description.

Quantum probability has little in common with either the concept of classical probability taught in high-school physics or the random-chance-and-accident variation biologists invoke to describe evolution. Quantum probability is so radically different, indeed, that it is often called “quantum weirdness” as it does involve such a radical change in worldview that fundamental ‘beliefs’ about reality are confronted.

This discussion will start with probability amplitudes—the elemental quantum probability forms of fundamental physics—and atomic orbitals. Proteins and RNA-encoded programs will be discussed using the quantum probability forms perspective. The concepts of quantum probability form will then be applied to describe the internal Inherent Directive Nature that entrains external matter in the genetics of bacteria, micro-and macro-evolution, growth & development and the hierarchy of the physical mind.


Multiple Descriptions of One World

A basic tenet of both science and religion is that there is an objective reality “out there” to rationally understand and, furthermore, that it is the same one for all of us: there is just one Cosmos to comprehend. Theology and science are both attempts to understand this reality—religion and technology being the practical applications, respectively, of these insights into the world. Both approaches assert that a more accurate description of reality result in better success in life when applied; and that nonsense and ignorance lead to chaos or, at best, nowhere.

Religion is the top-down approach to this quest for understanding the objective reality; science is the bottom-up approach. As there is just one reality to describe, however, theology and science are destined to eventually agree with one another. There is currently bitter discord between classical science and traditional religions, however, as illustrated by the current furor in the USA over the teaching of evolution and the politics of Intelligent Design debated by school boards.

This centuries-old discord can be ascribed to a lack, on both sides, of the hubris avoided by St. Paul: “For now we see through a glass darkly... now I know in part.” Failure to heed this is as true for classical science as it is for old-time religions. We are fortunate, indeed, to be entering the age of Paul’s “…but then shall I know fully.”

Reverend Moon has stated that the discord between science and religion will dissipate when both are brought up to date. He has taken care of the ‘top-down’ aspect of this convergence with the Principle of Creation, the Fall, and the Principle of Restoration. (While it would take us too far from the main thread to discuss it here, the basic mathematical insights of the new quantum science open up the possibility that such theological concepts as “the crooked shall be made straight” will one day be a “hard” science; one with a precise, mathematical description, not imprecise words.)

The ‘bottom-up’ development of science, on the other hand, has been slow and stepwise, the work of many men and women. It started a century ago with the advent of quantum mechanics. Step by generational step—each one difficult to digest—this new view of the universe has now matured into the world-altering quantum-based technologies such as computers and the Internet. Classical concepts, on the other hand, can explain neither hydrogen atoms nor the simple laser in a DVD player, to name just a few outstanding failures. As the quantum per­spective is developed, we can confidently predict that to this list will be added the “random chance and accident variation” aspect of 20th century Darwinism.

The task before us is to introduce these hard-won quantum concepts to the rest of the sciences—not just physics and chemistry—and to eventually construct a unified science of quantum probability. The good news is that most of the hard work has already been done by the pioneers; the bad news is that a grasp of an unfamiliar branch of mathematics is required, and quite essential, for its comprehension.

Science and Mathematics

The conceptual framework with which physics started out, and the one that is still in use in the biological sciences, is described by many adjectives: Newtonian, classical, nineteenth-century, old-fashioned, orthodox, conven­tional, etc. This perspective can be aphorized as: “Matter moved by forces.”

Just like mathematics, science is a hierarchical construct. The autonomy of each discipline to develop its own conceptual framework is con­strained by the pecking order in science. The rule is simple: a scientist is free to construct any theory so long as it does not contradict what has been established as an accurate description at a lower level in the hierarchy.

All scientists aspire to put their disciplines on a firm mathematical foundation—they want a “hard” science. The alternative, and the state that all science starts in, is to be limited to vague and suggestive words—to be a second-class “soft” science. Just why mathematics—which some consider just a construct of human minds over many centuries—should have this uncanny ability to describe the natural world so accurately is not at all clear in classical science. Professor Eugene Wigner, recipient of the ICUS Founder's Award and a Nobel Laureate, explored this topic in his Plenary Address to an early ICUS: “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences.”

The role of mathematics is built right into the very foundations of the quantum description of reality. The quantum probability form is properly understood as an abstract mathematical construct. As we shall establish, the current view is that all reality—humans included—consists of electrons and quarks (the external aspect) entrained by extra­ordin­arily intricate (consider complex numbers and Mandelbrot) hierarchical quantum probability forms (the internal aspect). Moreover, modern science describes electrons and quarks as topological knots in an abstract polydimen­sional spacetime, so electrons and quarks are more mathematical than ‘solid’. This mathematics is solid, yet the plethora of books attempting to translate the elegant math of science into ordinary prose hardly agree on exactly what it all means in ordinary conceptual terms. That may be because we are so used to thinking in terms of the classical picture of matter.

The Quantum Revolution

The familiar picture of matter as described by classical physics is regarded by the new physics as outdated, yet it is still persists in the biological sciences. Physics in the meantime was totally transformed by the quantum revolution, as the classical worldview was found to be utterly inadequate to explain the real world that lay beneath classical appearances.

In a sense, the difference between classical and quantum mechanics can be seen to be due to the fact that classical mechanics took too superficial a view of the world: it dealt with appearances. However, quantum mechanics accepts that appearances are the manifestation of a deeper structure… and that all calculations must be carried out on this substructure.[1]

The new physics successfully explained a wide variety of phenomena that the old physics was utterly incapable of dealing with. This quantum perspective now pervades all of the basic sciences and it has been remarkably successful in dealing with things as different as the first moments of the Big Bang and the workings of lasers and electronic devices.

The remarkable success of the new physics makes it unlikely that its concepts will be completely replaced by future theoretical developments. It is, of course, possible that one day it will suffer the same fate as the Newtonian physics and turn out to be an incomplete picture of a much deeper and sophisticated reality.


Perhaps, someday, an experiment will be performed that contradicts quantum mechanics, launching physics into a new era, but it is highly unlikely that such an event would restore our classical version of reality. Remember that nobody, not even Einstein, could come up with a version of reality less strange than quantum mechanics, yet one, which still explained all the existing data. If quantum mechanics is ever superseded, then it seems likely we would discover the world to be even stranger.[2]

The Split among the Sciences

Science at the commencement of the third millennium is not just fractured into many specialties; it is a discipline with something of a split personality. In the hierarchy of physics, chemistry, biochemistry, biology and evolution, the switchover from the quantum worldview to the classical is to be found somewhere between physical and biological chemistry. While the biology of our era is proud of its firm foundations in physics, the concepts still invoked are those of the physics of Darwin’s day.

It is most ironic that today’s perceived conjunction between physics and biology, so fervidly embraced by biology in the name of unification, so deeply entrenched in a philosophy of naive reductionism, should have come long past the time when the physical hypotheses on which it rests have been abandoned by the physicists.[3]

We can suggest at least three reasons why quantum concepts have remained the domain of the quantum specialist:

First, Quantum theory is so different to the classical worldview that the physicists are still arguing about what it all really means. The new physics is, indeed, so radically weird to the classically-trained mind that it is very difficult to accept its basic concepts at face value. As one wit put it: Not only is reality stranger than you think; it is stranger than you can think.

Second, Quantum weirdness disappears for regular-sized things; it is hidden when huge quantities of things interacting over long periods of time are taken into consideration. This is called the ‘principle of correspondence’ between classical appearances and quantum reality. The fundamental sciences use quantum concepts of probability to describe the very small and the very few; the upper sciences use the approximate classical concepts of probability to study zillions over long periods. Note that on the natural Planck scale of space and time established by science, we humans are a vast, immense assemblage of zillions of components and the proverbial wink of an eye takes a zillion time ticks. Vast and sluggish is not a flattering descriptions of our physical bodies; but that’s the reality.

Third, the classical worldview is much simpler to apply than the quantum perspective. Scientists, of course, tend to take the path of least action. For example, Einstein's accurate equations of twisted space-time have completely replaced those of Newton for describing the force of gravity. Nevertheless, it was Newton's ‘good-enough’ equations that were used to plot the return trips to the moon, not Einstein's. The extra accuracy was not needed, just as you would not tell a carpenter to build a bookcase 6.500012701 feet high.

The mathematical subtlety of quantum concepts means there is pressure in the scientific community to have one’s peers decide that the simple, familiar, good-enough classical views of probability are adequate for a particular science. Mixing quantum and classical concepts is not possible—they are utterly incompatible—so a discipline has to decide on one or the other.

If you are studying systems involving small groups of electrons, atoms, or molecules, etc. over short periods of time, you have to get up-to-speed on quantum probability theory. On the other hand, if your chosen discipline is dealing with huge aggregates over long periods of time, you get to relax and get along with the classical concepts of probability. Lasers, superfluids and superconductors are just a few of the exceptions to this guideline, so discretion is required.

The obvious question is, “How small is small, just how huge is huge?” Just one or two is clearly small, and zillions is clearly huge. So where to draw the line? Just when is it appropriate for scientists to use the easy, if superficially approximate, classical viewpoint? “It depends…” is the best answer you are going to get—only experimental evidence can provide good guidance—the default choice being the quantum view, unless proved otherwise.

This bifurcation can hardly satisfy, for still scientists long to describe all of science as a unified structure:

How does nature encompass and mold a billion galaxies, a billion, billion stars—and also the earth, teeming with exuberant life? New insights into how nature operates come from parallel advances in particle physics and in molecular biology; advances that make it possible to examine fundamental physical and biological processes side by side. The resulting stereoscopic view deep into the past reveals a previously hidden, unifying logic in nature: its paradigm for construction.[4]

To say that classical scientists were content with their worldview is an understatement. Scientists were dragged kicking and screaming into accepting the quantum worldview because the only deity in science— experiment—insisted upon it. For no matter how elegant, mathematically sound, politically correct, etc. a theory might be, if it contra­dicts experiment, it must be crumpled up and thrown regretfully into the wastebasket.

Towards a Quantum Description of the World

The new physics reached its apotheosis in the quantum electro-dynamics perfected by Richard Feynman. This quantum description of the way the world actually works is extraordinarily successful and accurate. Feynman has modestly stated:

The theory of quantum electrodynamics has now lasted more than fifty years and has been tested more and more accurately over a wider and wider range of conditions. At the present time, I can proudly say that there is no significant difference between experiment and theory! …To give you a feeling for the accuracy [of the quantum description of the electron]: if you were to measure the distance from Los Angeles to New York to this accuracy, it would be exact to the thickness of a human hair. That’s how delicately quantum electrodynamics has, in the last fifty years, been checked—both theoretically and experimentally.[5]

The concepts and theories of quantum physics are so exquisitely successful in dealing with such a wide range of phenomena—including the furnace of the Big Bang, the graceful aging of our sun, the nature of the elements, and the workings of DVDs—that they have no serious contender. They provide the best description we have of the world that God created.

Hence, while it is the Origin of Man that holds center stage in the cultural debate, as we will be starting at the very bottom of the science hierarchy it will take a while to get to the main event. In order to understand how God created a human being, we must first understand how God created a hydrogen atom. This is the hard part—it will take pages just to get to atoms—where the clingingly-familiar concepts of classical science will have to be jettisoned and utterly abandoned.


Quantum Natural law

We will start at the very bottom with a little fundamental physics and the concepts of “natural law” and the measure of existence called “the action.” The concepts of action and the affiliated “principle of least action,” were developed in the eighteenth century as an alternative formulation to Newton’s equations of motion. This is simply a matter of translating from one math (differential equations) into another (path integrals)—the content is the same.

The action equations are more cumbersome than Newton’s in simple situations and, consequently, never caught on in classical physics. The action equation that describes the motion of a pendulum, for instance, is much more mathematically challenging than its simple equation of motion. In complicated classical situations as well as all of quantum physics, however, the superiority of the action formulation is overwhelmingly apparent.

The action is such a fundamental measure of the state of systems that, in a sense, the task of science is to discover all the factors that contribute to the action of a system and the “action equation” that describes how much action is generated:

Physics can be formulated with the action principle. A given body of physics is mastered if we can find a formula that empowers us to determine the action for any history… The action principle turns out to be universally applicable in physics. All physical theories established since the time of Newton may be formulated in terms of action… Our search for physical understanding boils down to determining one formula. When physicists dream of writing down the entire theory of the physical universe on a cocktail napkin, they mean to write down the action of the universe. It would take a lot more room to write down all the equations of motion… The action, in short, embodies the structure of physical reality.[6]

The action equation describes the combined influences of all the many interactions that influence the history of a system. This is as true for quantum physics as it is for classical physics.

Path of Least Action and Universal Prime Force

Both classical and quantum science use a concept called the Path of Least Action. This universal compulsion to tend to follow the path of least action—a compulsion that ‘drives’ all of creation—we can liken to Universal Prime Force in Unification Thought. Quantum physics has only this natural law; everything else that follows is a consequence of it. Likewise, in Unification Thought, UPF-driven Origin-Division-Union Action is the only creative power ascribed to God; there is no other way by which God creates.[7] In this the quantum view and Unification Thought are in complete accord.

Collapse of the Wavefunction

The integral-of-action along a path determines what quantum physics calls a probability amplitude—the quantum probability of something happening. This is an “internal” quantum probability, yet it determines the probability of a real history. The probability amplitude is measured by a complex number with a ‘size’ and ‘direction’ in an internal space. The size of a probability amplitude ranges from zero through 1, and its direction from 0 through 360°. Eventually, for a measurement of that history to be made in the external world, there will be a ‘collapse of the wavefunction,’ as this internal quantum probability is converted into an external probability. Probability in the external world does not have a direction; it just has a size that ranges from 0 to 1—from impossible to inevitable.

The mathematical connection between the internal and the external is that the probability is the square of the size of the probability amplitude (the direction aspect drops out of consideration). This ‘squared projection’ of the internal onto the external gives the external probability, and the history actually followed will reflect this probability in the long run. This is the scientific description of the connection between the sungsang and the hyungsang: by the projection of internal quantum probability as external probability.

Probability only holds sway in the long run, a caveat that is a cause of much of the confusion when translating the precise quantum math into fuzzy natural language. In the short run, what actually happens is indeterminate, the choice of histories is random (within the constraints of the probabilities) and not determined by anything. In the quantum view, natural law does not force matter externally; rather it can be said to make ‘internal suggestions.’

To illustrate: Consider a slit experiment in which an approaching electron has a 50% external probability of being detected passing through either slit. Modern science has proved that there is no way—no law, no equation, no algorithm, no program, not even for God Himself—to predict which slit the electron chooses.[8]Autonomy of choice (within the probability guidelines—the electron has to pick one or the other) is built into even the simple electron in the quantum view of the world. This could be predicted by the UT requirement that the physical universe be autonomous as home for God’s children to create themselves in.

We can pay no further heed to this classically-unexpected aspect of creation, however, as our main interest will be in quantum probability forms that are ‘fleshed out’ by lots of interactions over long quantum periods of time. In this case, the probability is fully expressed in what externally happens—the Law of Large Numbers of probability theory.

It was this movement in quantum probability gradients that classical science ascribed to the action of forces. The concept of ‘force’ is absent from quantum science. In brief, the new science describes interaction as systems leaking and exchanging bits of themselves. For instance, the electromagnetic force of classical science is now described as the quantum probability of emitting, absorbing and exchanging virtual photons. The magnetic pattern made visible with iron filings reflects the form of an internal quantum probability field [QPF], not that of an external electromagnetic force field.

Quantum Principle

This exchange of bits of self between systems has consequences: it alters and generates the action, quantum probabilities alter, and things move, eventually, from low to high probability. No classical forces are involved. It is, quite simply, the operation of give and take action of Unification Thought. The new physics affirms that interaction is more fundamental than force, just as Unification Thought holds that the give-and-take action motivated by UPF is the basis for all things to exist and move.

Summarizing the discussion so far: a path of history with a small action is highly probable, while a path with a large action is highly improbable. This is the Universal Prime Force that ‘drives’ the universe. We can translate all the precise mathematics of this connection between natural law and quantum probability into a simple statement in fuzzy English that is remarkably common sense: Things have a universal tendency to move from low-probability to high-probability quantum states. Over time and many interactions, this quantum probability is expressed externally.


Quantum Probability

Experiment forced the quantum pioneers to allow into their description of reality an internal extension with a central, causal role. It contrasts with classical science, which placed at center stage the external extensions in space-time. The second quantum concept involves how modern science describes—measures, calculates and predicts—this internal quantum probability that, in the long run, governs the behavior of all things in the physical world.[9] This ‘internal impulse to follow the path of least action’ is called a probability amplitude, an aspect of objective reality that can only be measured with complex numbers—not the real numbers we use in classical physics describe the external world.

I shall try to keep the mathematics as simple as possible—a plethora of arcane symbols would just intimidate—but to avoid it completely is impossible, as it plays an essential role in the quantum worldview. We will shortly deal, for instance, with a class of numbers that many will find unfamiliar. Unfortunately, without these unfamiliar numbers it is impossible to understand how scientists precisely measure the sungsang aspects of reality. Fortunately, while this new math is unfamiliar, the elements we need for the discussion are simple enough to be taught in third grade—they just take a bit of getting used to. As all of what is called ‘quantum weirdness’ is encapsulated in this new math, however, getting comfortable with it is essential.

Complex numbers

Complex numbers, though not taught in most schools, have many useful properties. Despite their name, the complex numbers are actually simple. When you can connect the grade school mnemonic: “Minus times minus is a plus /For reasons we need not discuss” with the fact that 180° + 180° = 360° = 0°, you will know almost all the generalist need know about numbers with size and direction, which is what complex numbers are.

In essence, while the familiar ‘real numbers’ have only a size, or magnitude (such as 2), complex numbers have both a size and a direction (such as 2 @ 90°). In diagrams, complex numbers are often drawn as little arrows residing on the complex plane.

The properties of the complex numbers exactly describe the workings of the real world as uncovered by the quantum pioneers. Only two properties are needed to explain all the ‘quantum weirdness’:

To add arrows, put them head to tail. In the diagram, for example, the complex numbers X and Y are equal in size but at opposite directions—X = 6 @ 45° and Y = 6 @ 135° so when added together, they cancel out giving X + Y = 0. When two probability amplitudes cancel each other in this way it is called ‘destructive interference’ and underlies the ‘power of nothing’ oddity first encountered experimentally in the slit experiments we will shortly describe.

To multiply arrows, add the angles and multiply the sizes. In the diagram, Z is the same size as X but at the negative of the angle: X = 6 @ +45° and Z = 6 @ -45°, so when multiplied together, the angles cancel and the size is squared, giving XZ = 36, a real, positive number. It is this ‘absolute square’ property of such ‘conjugate’ complex numbers that describes the projection of an internal probability amplitude as an external probability, which is always positive and real.

This is all the math needed to understand the quantum description of the world, at least in outline. Before continuing, you should be able to see: that minus times minus is a plus because 180° + 180° brings you back to 0°; and that the square roots of minus numbers must involve arrows pointing along the ‘imaginary axis’ at ±90° because 90° + 90° = 180°.

Complex numbers are notorious for the sophisticated patterns they are capable of generating. A simple example of this property is the boundary of the Mandelbrot Set, a mathematical construct that emerges when complex numbers are added and multiplied together repeatedly. The first pane of the diagram shows the entire set sitting on the complex plane; each successive pane is a enlargement of the previous one. The final pane is at a magnification of 36,000,000—the entire set is now solar system-sized and there is no end to intricate boundary forms in sight![10] It is such intricate and ‘fractal’ forms that are found in the concatenated probability amplitudes of complex living systems, not the smooth Euclidean circles and triangles that can be constructed with the real numbers.

The Slit Experiment

The key insight in the new physics is that it is internal quantum probability—described by complex numbers—that rules the way the physical world behaves. Do not confuse quantum probability with classical concepts of probability; they are utterly different.

Zooming in on the Mandelbrot Set


One of the first experiments to reveal this new truth about creation was the Slit Experiment. It is not necessary to describe the actual experiments that so utterly confounded the physicists of a century ago—results that insisted that all their Newtonian classical theories about reality had to be thrown into the wastebasket. To give a feel for the shock and confusion these pioneering scientists felt when they saw these extraordinary experimental results, we can tell a short story where the effects are magnified up to an everyday scale:

One day in the Big House, four executions were scheduled using the warden’s brand-new automated machinegun execution facility. By the end of the day, however, even though all four criminals were satisfactorily dead, the warden ordered the facility demolished and would utter, in frustration, only “No Comment” to questions.

The procedure was simple: the first condemned was taken into the total-isolation room, with a machine gun being hidden behind two steel shutters in consideration of his feelings. After his last cigarette, he was blindfolded and tied to the post, the guards left and the door sealed. The warden was supposed to press the two ‘Open’ buttons at this point to silently open the shutters inside, unseen by any witness, and then the ‘Fire” button to trigger the gun to carry out the execution.

On a whim to test things, however, he decided that the first execution would be carried out with just Shutter 1 open. The warden pressed the ‘Open 1’, then the “Fire’ buttons. After a decent pause, he opened the door and certified the sentence carried out, the prisoner was decidedly dead and shredded. After the auto-clean cycle, the next execution was carried out with just Shutter 2 open. As expected, the second was just as gone as the first. So far, the facility was behaving as planned, to the warden’s great satisfaction.

It was the third execution with both Shutter 1 and Shutter 2 open that boggled everyone’s concepts. Although the machine gun fired its lethal burst, the convict was unharmed and decidedly alive when the door was opened. He had not even a scratch on him, though there were plenty of bullets all around. This was quite difficult to understand. With both shutters open, no bullets had reached the prisoner, not a one of that mighty hail. Yet when either shutter was open, a hail of bullets reached their mark. But when both were open, not a single bullet made it though the open void. Round and round it went in his mind, it violated all the warden’s cherished concepts of the proper way that speeding bullets and wide-open ‘double nothing’ should behave.

He carefully checked the gun, and relocked the door and pressed the Fire button for a good long while. Again, when the door was opened, the condemned was clearly observed to be still unsatisfactorily dead. He asked for another cigarette.

In order to see what was going on, the warden ordered a small hole knocked in the wall so he could observe just how ‘double nothing’ stopped bullets from reaching the prisoner like solid steel. He ordered the execution to proceed and watched as both shutters opened and the gun fired its mighty burst. Ratcheting up the warden’s total stupefaction, this time everything behaved normally. The bullets poured through the two open voids and the condemned dispatched to explain things to his Maker.

Giving up on any rational explanation, the Warden decided the ‘design problem’ had corrected itself. He ordered the peephole closed and to proceed with the fourth execution with both shutters open. His despair, and subsequent behavior, can be understood when opening the door, he found that the quantum weirdness had reasserted itself just because he wasn’t looking: the prisoner was alive and well; unobserved ‘double nothing’ had again behaved as solid steel.

The astonishment of the warden at this unexpected result and the mental gymnastics he went through trying to digest this result gives you a sense of the state of physics when confronted by such slit-experiment results at the start of the twentieth century. To be true, the experiments that they had to explain did not involve bullets and criminals, but to the scientists shooting electrons and atoms at detectors through slits, they might just as well have been.

This, in essence, is what was observed in the slit experiments performed by the pioneers. Can you feel how horribly perplexed they were trying to digest such a phenomenon? The experiment violated all expectations on the most fundamental level. To put it bluntly, their classical concepts were utterly incapable of explaining how an apparent void—an absolutely nothing—could be as bullet-proof as the best steel.

Quantum physics, however, using complex numbers, can explain such an oddity simply: The probability amplitude for a bullet to go through either window is exactly the same size, but they point in exactly opposite directions. When both windows are open, the two quantum probabilities combine and cancel each other, and the resultant quantum probability—the final wavefunction—is exactly zero. The external probability of a bullet passing through the two open windows is now zero, and that zero probability is all-powerful in the new physics.

The Power of Probability

Never underestimate the power of quantum probability! The absolute power of quantum probability is well established in the new physics. For instance, a result almost as simple as 1 – 1 = 0 states that the quantum probability of two electrons being in the same state is exactly zero (This is the Exclusion Principle). We will mention just two consequences of this aspect of God’s Principle; one huge, one tiny.

The cosmic example of the all-powerful quantum probability is what happens to stars when they run out of fuel. In 5 billion years or so, when our sun runs out of fuel, the inexorable tug of gravity will collapse the sun a million-fold until it is about the size of the earth. At this point in the collapse, however, the electrons will be on the verge of being on top of each other and forced to share the same state. As this has a zero probability of happening, however, the sun will abruptly stop shrinking and become a stable white dwarf. All that will be holding it up against the lash of a billion gravities will be the power of quantum probability. That is the quantum probability that can support an entire star, an exhibition of Power that even Superman might marvel at.

The tiny example is the existence of the atoms. The only reason why sodium and chlorine, for instance, are so different is that the Exclusion Principle forces their electrons to occupy different orbitals. If God had not included this aspect in His Principle of Creation there would be no different elements; no life; no people. The ‘power of quantum zero’ clearly plays an essential and fundamental role in God’s plan of creation!

The converse of the power of quantum zero probability also holds true: something that has a non-zero quantum probability will eventually happen. Some physicists call this the Totalitarian Principle: That which is not forbidden is compulsory. Many advances in physics have been empowered by this principle: when something never happens, but current theories do not forbid it, then the search is on immediately for a deeper understanding.

From the Many, One

The sophisticated way in which these probability amplitudes combine explains all of those who still cling to classical concepts call ‘quantum weirdness.’ At its very foundations, the quantum description of reality involves lots of probability amplitudes (complex numbers mathematically described as little arrows in the complex plane) combining into a final probability amplitude, the ‘wavefunction.’ (Here quantum mechanics can get complicated, for in even simple situations there are usually multitudes of arrows involved.) This internally-unified aspect projects into the external world as a regular probability that, over time, determines what happens.

The wavefunction is the scientific description of the Inherent Directive Nature, the sungsang aspect that guides the hyungsang aspect through the power of quantum probability.

This internal combining is, of course, absent from classical physics. As a result, it has a very hard time explaining how the many can become one. In neurobiology, for instance, this inability called the ‘binding problem.’ It is only a problem because those scientists are still using classical concepts. Instead they should utilize the concept of the many combining internally into a single whole as is built into the very foundations of quantum science.

Remembering the Yoda-like admonition—to understand how God created a Man, first fully understand how God created an atom—we shall take our time getting to such heights of sophistication and move up a step from isolated electrons and simple probability amplitudes to the atom and the atomic wavefunction that, over time, determines what the entrained electron does.


The Quantum Atom

Our exemplar for this internal combining of the internal many-into-one is the atom, which in the new physics is decidedly not a ball of matter. Only quantum concepts are capable of explaining the extended structure of the atom, as classical concepts suggest that the electron should just sit right on the atomic nucleus.

No new principles are involved. The electron is a little knot in space-time which, like moving an air bubble under wet wallpaper, stays in one piece as it moves around. Its freedom to move about, however, is entrained by its probability amplitude and how this ‘develops’ over time. For simplicity, let the complex number that describes the probability amplitude of a freely moving electron be pa, with size p and direction a.

Combining Probabilities

In the slit experiment, for instance, the probability amplitude of the electron combines, as complex numbers, with the probability amplitude field provided by the two slits that are open between it and the detector. The development with time of this probability amplitude combination—often called a ‘wavefunction’ for historical reasons—passes through both slits. The electron continues to jump around in this wavefunction; sometimes it lands in one slit, sometimes in the other quite ignoring the irrelevant physical separation. (This is called teleportation when solids are concerned; for knots in space-time it is basic behavior.) The electron does this jumping about so rapidly that it appears to pass through both slits at the same time as an electron density, but it does not really, just the internal aspect does that and the electron teleports around the quantum probability form as usual.

Assuming the electron does not interact while in one slit or the other—no observer for instance—the wavefunction passes on through and, leaving all the complexity of the slit experience behind it, continues on as a simple pa that, when both slits are open, has a zero probability of ending up in the detector.

While I will keep it simple, we will now glance at the math description. For the free electron we have a simple internal probability amplitude, pa, and its external probability projection, p2. For the electron passing through the slits we have the sum of a set of internal probability amplitudes and its extension projection as probability.

The internal wavefunction passing through the two open slits is the sum of a set of probability amplitudes, the external probability being the square. This is succinctly expressed in simple quantum math symbolism that is as complicated as I shall let things get. The Greek letter Y (psi) stands for the probability amplitude, S is instructs us to add up everything following it, and P is the external probability:

Slit experiment electron: Y = Spa P = | S pa | 2

Note that all the combining—all the interesting and ‘weird’ stuff—is happening on the internal level before the final, simple step of providing an external probability as probability for the electron twist to bop around in.

Just to illustrate how simple quantum math is, we can apply it to the slit experiment. We noted earlier that the probability amplitude to go through one slit has the same size to go through the other slit, just at exactly the opposite angle. With either slit open we get—recalling that when we square the internal extension to get the external probability the angle disappears—the same probability of hitting the detector:

Slit 1 open: Y = p@a° P = | p@ | 2 = p2

Slit 2 open: Y = p@ P = | p@(a°+180°) | 2 = p2

When both slits are open we have to add the probability amplitudes to get the final wavefunction. The two little arrows, being equal and opposite, one is the negative of the other so when placed head to tail to add them up they cancel each other exactly. A zero internal extension has a zero external extension, the probability of hitting the detector is exactly zero, which you may recall is a situation capable of holding up the weight of the entire Sun, let alone stop a few projectiles.

Both open: Y = Spa ={p@a°} +{p@(a+180°)} = (+pa) + (–pa) = 0

P = | 0 | 2 = 0

While not that more complicated than (+2) + (–2) = 0, the math is capable of fully describing all the ‘weirdness’ of the slit experiment (and the warden’s confusion). It is a useful exercise in quantum logic, at this point, to explain why “two many cooks spoil the broth.” (Hint: when either is in the kitchen, soup gets successfully made, but when both are present, they cancel out and gourmets go hungry.)

Atomic Wavefunctions and Orbitals

The situation in an atom is almost as simple. For any place in the atom, calculate the quantum probability of jumping to any other spot and add them all up. Now do this for every place; add these all up. This is the final wavefunction that entrains the electron within an atom, while all the probabilities to jump outside the atom’s confines cancel out to zero.

There are a lot of little arrows to add but the end result is the same, a hierarchical set of ‘atomic orbitals’ of which the electron usually inhabits the lowest, or ‘1s orbital.’ The math stays the same, just another internal level to deal with. Again all the action, so to speak, happens on the internal level before the final, external step. The electron jumps about this orbital wavefunction, quite unaware that its probability density over time about the nucleus is what some call a solid atom.

Atomic electron: Y (1s, 2s …) = SSpa P = | Y | 2

This is how modern science describes the sungsang and hyungsang of an atom, not in fuzzy words but with precise mathematics. Including the aspect of time (represented by t) needed for the electron to externally flesh out the body of the atom, we have a precise mathematical description of the Principle of Creation as applicable to atoms:

The internal, sungsang IDN ‘mind’ = Y

The external hyungsang ‘body’ = P(t)

As can be imagined, there are a tremendous number of little arrows that quantum scientists add up to get the correct answer. Luckily for their sanity, Schrödinger came up with a brilliant equation (involving the calculus) that does all the heavy lifting as its distinct solutions (the ‘eigenfunctions’) give the shapes of the internal orbitals directly. This is an illustration of what an ‘excited’ orbital—the 4f— looks like, the two shadings indicating equal size wavefunctions that are (internally) pointing in opposite directions:

To get an idea of the scale of an atom, were we to magnify a ‘ground state’ hydrogen atom up to the size of the Earth, the proton that is its nucleus would be the size of Yankee Stadium and the 1s orbital is the size of the planet. The quarks that compose the proton are motes whose quantum jumping is entrained by a stadium-sized proton QPF. The electron is also mote sized—it is a testimony to how quickly it jumps from place to place within the earth-sized QPF orbital that it gives the impression on our timescale that the atom is solid. Thus, underlying its solid appearance, the atom is actually a few tiny external motes entrained by a huge internal quantum probability form. It is the 1s orbital—the internal, invisible, insubstantial aspect—that gives regular atoms their external size, not the particles that are entrained in it. (Note also that in chemistry, empty and half-empty orbitals are just as significant as fully occupied ones.)

While the electron is usually in this lowest orbital close about the nucleus—giving the atom a size of about one ten millionth of a centimeter— experimenters can kick the electron into one of the really high orbitals—e.g. the 200f—in which case the size of the atom would be measured in centimeters. Such ‘Rydberg atoms,’ as they are called—one would be the size of the solar system in our scaled up version—illustrate how spatial separation can be irrelevant when dealing with quantum probability forms. The phenomenon of quantum effects instantaneously spanning light-years of space, a phenomenon often discussed in popularizations of quantum physics, impressively demonstrates this indifference to external space considerations.

Quantum Molecules

Molecules and macromolecules involve no new concepts, just extra levels of internal concatenation to the QPF by which the electrons are externally entrained (the quarks are also moving about in quantum probability forms but we will ignore this aspect here as the principle is the same).

Molecular electron: Y = SSS pa P = | Y | 2

Macromolecular electron: Y = SSSS pa P = | Y | 2

If you suspect at this point that an electron in the human body is entrained by an intricate quantum probability form whose description is going to look something like


then you have successfully adopted the quantum way of looking at things. No matter how many levels are involved, all the interesting stuff still happens on the internal dimension; the external only gets involved in the very last, simple step.

The Evolution of Atoms

With this quantum description of the atom we can see, in outline, how God created them: the math aspect was designed before creation (the Principle of Creation) and the electrons and quarks during the moment of creation. The universe then developed, according to plan, until the conditions were right for the particles to be entrained in the pre-existing QPFs.

At the first moment of creation, the light was so hot and energetic—as gamma rays, whose photons that outnumbered the particles 100 billion to one—that any particle clumps were impossible. As the universe expanded it stretched and cooled these rampaging photons, first to X rays, then to ultraviolet, visible light, infrared, and so on, until in our present era they all became microwaves. (Yes, the universe is chock-a-block with microwaves, but they are now so low-energy they cannot warm an egg, let alone kick an electron away from a proton.)

A milli-microsecond after creation (10-9 seconds A.C.), the universe was cool enough for the quarks to be entrained, in triplets, by the proton/neutron quantum probability form. That is when protons and neutrons first appeared. Most of these have remained intact and unchanged to the present day (15 billion years A.C.)

About 100,000 years A.C., the photons of the primordial light calmed down sufficiently for the first hydrogen atoms to form in the universe. Even though the 1s orbital had existed from the very beginning, it remained empty for the first 100,000 years. When according to plan the conditions were right, the external took up the form of an internal quantum probability that had existed on empty since the moment of creation. We can refer to such a planned confluence of conditions in the universe as an ‘Eden’ where internal and external come together for the first time. Thus the proton Eden occurred at 10-9 seconds A.C. and the hydrogen atom Eden at 100,000 A.C. [11]

Some of the vast quantities of hydrogen and helium that filled the early cooling universe eventually collapsed under the tug of gravity into the first generation of stars. The conditions at the center of stars permitted the formation of the other elements. It is here that the quarks took center stage as they joined together—shedding energy in the process—entrained in the QPFs of what we call atomic nuclei. In the sun, for instance, hydrogen is changing into helium while the liberated energy warms our grateful bodies. When the hydrogen runs out, things heat up step by step as helium converts sequentially into carbon, oxygen, etc. all the way up to iron in the most massive of stars (our sun will only get about as far as carbon before settling down to the white dwarf old age supported by the power of quantum nothing.) Aging massive stars are like onions, remnant hydrogen at the surface above a helium layer above a carbon layer etc. as one descends towards the core.

For the very massive stars of the first generation, this iron stage was the end of the road as there is no more energy to be gained by rearranging quarks. Gravity at this point is so intense that the electrons, rather that being forced into the same state (which is impossible) combined with the quarks in the protons, converting them into neutrons. The release of energy in this process was so immense that the stars exploded as supernovae, scattering vast quantities of the heavier elements into the cosmos. The next generations of stars—ours is third generation—formed out of such ‘dirty’ hydrogen and thus have the possibility of having rock planets such as our earth.

The first generation ran through this cycle quite rapidly, creating the Eden in which molecules could appear. The joining of the first oxygen atom and two hydrogen atoms to form water in their outer space Eden probably occurred many millions of years A.C.

In this view, each evolutionary development in the universe from simple to complex matter is the hierarchical filling in of the initially empty Original Quantum Probability Form—the Principle or Logos that guides, as quantum probability, the development of the physical universe. We thus have a sequence of Edens in which the conditions are all present for a new level of the empty internal QPF to get filled in by the external electrons and quarks.

Evolution as Sequential Edens and Entrainment in the Created
Quantum Probability Form

Note that neither God nor natural law forces ‘matter’ to do anything, it rather gets entrained in increasingly sophisticated and intricate—complex numbers—levels of the Original Quantum Probability Form designed by God using mathematics that we will, no doubt, one day come to fully understand. This empty hierarchal quantum probability has been progressively filled since Big Bang, which was the starting point of God’s mathematical plan to eventually guide electrons and quarks to the state of being entrained in the quantum probability form we call the human body.

Unification Thought states that this intricate human QPF reflects the structure of God; it is as sophisticated as a QPF can get. We would be there now if the final step in the origin of man had not involved human responsibility and its failure. In this sense, restoration involves filling in correctly the topmost level of the Original QPF.


Quantum Bacteria

With this view of the quantum atom we are now ready for the next step on the conceptual ascent to quantum Man. The most basic living systems are the bacteria. Bacteria take up simple molecules—such as sugar, oxygen and a few salts—and convert them into bacterial growth and division. This natural miracle of engineering involves catalysis, the phenomenon where one molecule provides an environment within which another molecule can undergo chemical rearrangements.

Therefore, to understand bacteria we need to start with the nature of catalysis.

Quantum Catalysis

A familiar example of catalysis is the platinum in a car catalytic converter that acts upon the noxious gases in the engine exhaust. In the environment provided by the platinum, these gases ‘flip’ to less noxious forms. A typical catalytic molecule can alter millions of substrate molecules a second.

The classical description of catalysis is that of ‘lock and key,’ two solid surfaces meshing together like two jigsaw puzzle pieces. This is the view still in use in describing bacterial catalysis; billions of little substrate ‘keys’ all zipping around hoping to bump into the matching enzyme ‘lock.’ We have established, however, that atoms are not solids; hence this view is at best an occasionally useful approximation, which if misapplied can lead us seriously astray. It is, for instance, incapable of dealing with platinum catalysis. Inorganic chemists long ago abandoned the classical view, and now recognize that platinum provides empty orbitals (not the filled ‘solid’ ones) where catalysis occurs.[12] Classical concepts are quite incapable of dealing with the influence of ‘empty abstract nothing’ where quantum concepts are quite at home.

The classical ‘lock and key’ concept is as useless in describing bacteria as it is in describing platinum. The catalytic manipulations of all life are mostly performed by proteins with “active sites” in their structure. In the lock-and-key classical view, the substrate molecule moves randomly and rapidly about by thermal motion, bumping into all sorts of molecules until it hits the active site and fits like a key into a lock. In the quantum view, the actual protein presenting the active site is irrelevant; what is important is the empty QPF it is providing for the substrate.

Spatial separation is also irrelevant. From the Rydberg atom example discussed previously, we have seen that quantum effects can extend over centimeters, so there is no reason why the ‘Come to me!’ call of an enzyme for a substrate should not also. In the quantum view, the free substrate acts like an electron in an excited state of the active site QPF. Like the electron in a Rydberg atom, it jumps down the probability steps until it reaches the ground state snuggly within the active site.

Classical and Quantum Views of Catalysis

When trillions of molecules are involved, as they usually are, the two views are indistinguishable. When single molecules are involved, however, the expectations are quite different.

A hypothetical experiment

Consider a liter of water in which there is one molecule of an enzyme called, I kid you theologians not, luciferase. When a molecule of ATP enters its active site it falls apart and the energy released is emitted as a photon of green light. This is what fireflies do to make light, as well as do those glow sticks cracked (to mix the ATP with the enzyme) at nighttime celebrations. This photon is quite distinctive and is easily picked up a single-photon detector.

To this liter of water containing one molecule of luciferase we add a drop containing just one molecule of ATP. We then measure the time it takes for the distinctive photon to be released, for ATP to enter the active site and be catalytically transformed.

First the classical expectation: Compared to the liter of water that has to be explored by the ATP, the luciferase molecule is very small, about one million billion billionth the volume. This is a lot of places to check out so the classical probability that the ATP will bump into the luciferase on its travels is very small. Then again, the ATP is moving at about 100 meters a second so it explores a lot of places in a second (about ten billion luciferase-sized volumes a second. A back-of-an-envelope calculation of the odds of a successful encounter suggest that it should, on average, take a billion seconds—about thirty years—before that distinctive photon triggers the single photon detector.

Now for the quantum expectation: If the QPF influence of the active site embraces the whole volume, then the expectation is fractions of a second. If the QPF, like the Rydberg orbital, casts its influence over cubic centimeters, then minutes at most will suffice before the detector signals.

Here we have quite divergent predictions: years in the classical view of solid lock and key, seconds in the viewpoint of quantum “come hither.” Both ATP and luciferase as easily obtainable, and so all that is required is a single-photon detector. In the following discussion I will assume that the quantum view will prevail and that the photon takes just seconds to appear, that the influence of a QPF spreads widely and is spatially insensitive. This is essential, as we are now going to describe bacteria in terms of spatially-extended and unified quantum probability forms. (If the experiment has been performed since the writing and it upheld the classical view, there is no point in reading any further).

Protein Folding

The clay macromolecules made of inorganic monomers are the most sophisticated non-life catalysts—they are widely used in industry—and it has been proposed that they made up the proto-metabolic Eden in which simple triplet-code life developed on the early earth.[13]

The most proficient and talented providers of catalytic quantum probability forms in living systems are the proteins. They do all the actual work of manipulating molecules in cells. In the discussion of molecules we dealt with the QPF provided by nature. The boundary between life and non-life, where genetics takes over from biochemistry, is where the assembly of macromolecules is directed by linear programs stored on DNA and running as RNA on an operating system provided by a ribosome.

At the basis of all life is the transcription of a linear DNA gene into messenger RNA and its translation by triplet code into amino acids linked into long, linear chains. The chain then folds into a precise shape—the active state—and starts providing QPF for its substrate molecule. This gene-to-active-protein sequence is at the very foundations of the currently burgeoning science of genetics, so it is embarrassing that the science is unable to specify just how the amino acid chain folds into the specific form of the active protein. It is currently an open question—the problem of “protein folding.”

Proteins are linear polymers of amino acids. Each one of these twenty-odd amino acids has “chemical desires”—certain demands that must be met if it is to follow a path of low action. Unlike the specialist nucleotide mono­mers of RNA, which demand their specific complementary base for satisfac­tion in a low action state, the amino acids are omnivorous generalists. They can slake their desire for a low action state with many of the 20 amino acids as well as a host of other molecules. DNA and RNA (mainly) provide QPF for other nucleotides; proteins provide QPF for a wide variety of molecules.

Some of the amino acid monomers—like the strong acid and alkali ones who like to pair up together—make powerful demands; while simple glycine makes no demands at all. Some are hydrophobics which demand to be inside with their kin, while the surrounding and ubiquitous water molecules make enormous demands about the final configuration. Each water molecule’s QPF demand to be in an ice-like state of least action state is small, but there are so many of them that their overall QPF demand is huge. The backbone of the protein chain also has preferred ways of coiling, and there are sulfur bonds and proline kinks, etc. to take into account.

All of these configuration demands are elemental QPF that internally amplify and combine into a unified QPF—an eigenfunction wavefunction. This internally folded QPF maximizes the host of demands for a path of least action. Folding occurs when the external—the chain of amino acids—quantum jumps to fill in the external QPF, its folded state reflecting the internal quantum form. The little bit of the chain that is left unsatisfied and in a high action state by this configuration of minimum action is the active site. This is where transitory outsiders are provided an intricate internal QPF to jump in and out of, and thus get manipulated. This is just the quantum picture of the atom writ large.

Classical probability concepts, on the other hand, suggest that it should take trillions of years of random folding for a single amino acid chain to find the precise configuration of least action. The technical name for the classical treatment of combinatorial possibilities is the Traveling Salesman Problem, which sounds like a joke but is a serious field of study. Imagine shaking a jigsaw in its box and waiting for the puzzle to spontaneously assemble. This, in essence, is the best prediction that classical science can come up with: protein folding should take eons. Unfortunately for classical theory, zillions of proteins are folding correctly every moment in living things, and do it quick as a flash.

Classical theory has equal difficulty explaining the ‘calcium effect.’ Muscle proteins are in the relaxed configuration incorporating an ATP molecule when calcium ions are absent. When calcium ions flood into a cell—as they do when a nerve opens a pore for them—the protein chains immediately jump to the contracted state and expel the ATP in fragments. The system takes a path of very low action, which drives the contraction. When the cell expels the calcium, the muscle proteins jump back to the relaxed state with a new ATP. Proteins that make such sudden changes in form when an outsider binds to it are called allosteric.

Quantum science would explain that the calcium ion has added its powerful QPF to the protein’s QPF, radically changing the overall internal QPF. Therefore, the chain jumps to the altered external quantum probability, to the contracted state (ejecting a ‘burnt’ ATP). When the calcium departs, the chain jumps back to the old, relaxed form including a fresh ATP, in accordance with its former internal QPF. The unified science of quantum probability has no problem explaining protein folding, but, as noted, it is considered an open question needing experimental verification.[14]

Bacterial Life

The triplet code method of determining the sequence of amino acids in proteins is at the foundation of life. This code, written on mRNA, determines the sequence of amino acids in a protein chain, and hence the folding and active site. In biological terms, a linear sequence of triplet codons on mRNA is translated by the ribosome into a linear sequence of amino acids. This chain folds into an active protein with metabolic activity.

The protein’s active site is a QPF, and this is contributed to the cell milieu. This QPF is a probability amplitude that combines internally with the host of probability amplitudes from all the billions of proteins. They combine, as complex numbers, into a unified internal QPF. This can be also be couched in the general language of computer programming—as a linear program runs on an operating system and generates internal instructions (the QPF) that make things externally happen over time.

This is how a unified science of quantum probability would describe a bacterium: RNA programs run on the basic Operating System of life and generate simple QPFs. A host of these QPFs combine internally, as complex numbers, into a unified QPF with an internal form. This is the Inherent Directive Nature, or “mind,” of a bacterium. Molecules, including the water that makes up 60% of the organism, move to take up the form of the external quantum probability and, over time, flesh out characteristic external form of the bacteria, its body. (Compare this highly-structured quantum form with the classical view of the cytoplasm as a ‘soup’ of random molecules.)

Life is dynamic. The metabolism of the bacterium is the flow of molecules through this QPF, from ingested food to ejected waste. If this internal QPF is maintained, healing of external damage is as simple as molecules filling in the now-empty regions of the QPF. When the QPF fades, however, the organism dies and the molecules dissipate.

We can even assign proto-feelings to the bacterial QPF/Inherent Directive Nature/mind: Lack of glucose will result in millions of glucose shaped QPFs being empty, each one longing to have a path of least action with a glucose molecule. This empty composite QPF can be considered as a proto-sense of hunger in the proto-mind of the bacterium.

If this state of hunger persists in an anthrax bacterium, for example, a “make spore” RNA program is called from DNA storage. When this program runs, the QPF it generates radically alters, by the calcium effect, the internal bacterial QPF. The molecules of the cytoplasm jump into the new external probability form and a highly-resistant spore quickly forms. A similar, if more sophisticated, spore-like transformation by an RNA program underlies the differentiation of cells from the human zygote into a hundred-or-so different cell types as we develop into an adult.

In the discussion so far we have not mentioned DNA. This is because DNA plays a role in life akin to programs stored in code on a hard drive. Only when called onto RNA by other running programs do they get to run and generate a tiny QPF to add, as complex numbers, to the internally unified QPF/Inherent Directive Nature of the bacterium. All RNA programs, not just triplet coded ones, are called from a DNA store. DNA plays the passive, hard drive role to the RNA as active programs running on the CPU of the computer. Only when an RNA program runs does it generate a QPF to contribute to the unified QPF. These roles are converse of the classically-inspired perspective where DNA plays the staring role.

Quantum Principles of Life

Translating the detailed science into general statements, we have the principle of life in a unified science of quantum probability:

  • An RNA program generates a simple internal QPF when running on an operating system. Multitudes of copies of these programs run in massive parallelism on a multitude of Operating System copies.
  • This host of simple internal QPFs combine (as complex numbers) to form a unified QPF with a sophisticated internal form (the mind-aspect of life).
  • This internal form projects onto external space-time as an external probability field (regular numbers) reflecting the internal form. The external moves from low-probability to high-probability and takes up the external probability form over time (the flesh-aspect of life).


The perspective opened up by the unified science of quantum probability shifts the focus from the external happenings to the internal cause, the realm of programs and the operating systems where it is the logical content that is important. As this is an internal construct in a mathematical space, and the running program generates an internal QPF when run, we can consider this a new layer of internal space that is two internal steps away from the external quantum probability form and the stuff that inhabits it over time.

The basic programs of life are doubly internal, so to speak, while the generated QPF and internally unified Inherent Directive Nature are just internal. Each level in the hierarchy of life’s programming languages is a step internal again to the one beneath it in the hierarchy.

This internal aspect is significant; not so important is the code used—BASIC or FORTRAN—or the external expression—be it paper, hard drive, CD, Internet packet or WAN radio wave— that ‘expresses’ the internal logic. This is the same relationship as that between the 1s orbital QPF and the two self-satisfied electrons that ‘express it’ in a helium atom.

There are plausible explanations for the steps that must have occurred during the first 100 million years of Earth’s aqueous history for triplet code life to emerge about four billion years ago. The most elegant involve sophisticated catalysis in massive China clay deposits in the depths of the oceans chemically energized by black smokers and complex molecules created in surface waters by iron/UV organic chemistry. All such suggestions about the proto-metabolic period of the Great Design end with what classical scientists call the RNA world, the simple life before DNA appeared on the scene. In the quantum perspective, to the contrary, we are still living in an RNA world; just a much more sophisticated one.


Quantum Evolution

If programs and operating systems are the keys to understanding bacteria, we can expect that these programs and operating systems are what must have changed as bacteria evolved into humans. Evolution, in the viewpoint of a unified science of quantum probability, is all about the internal world of programs, operating systems and QPFs; the external stuff just follows passively along. Internal evolution can be divided into two aspects:

  • Microevolution: quantum variation, testing and increasing sophistication of programs running on an Operating System.
  • Macroevolution: The emergence by microevolution of a program that generates a new level of operating system—another step into the internal realm of complex numbers and hierarchical program logic.

Microevolution is the variation of RNA programs running on an Operating System. We need to mention just two facts about the evolution of all the proteins—and by implication the RNA programs that generate them—that are found in living organisms from bacteria to man:

First, proteins are modular. Recent advances in the science have shown that there are only a few thousand basic modules that are mixed and matched to create the huge variety of proteins that generate the astonishing variety of living things. This must be the result of a mixing and matching of RNA subprograms into more sophisticated programming structures.

Second, the active sites in protein modules are invariant; they show essentially zero variation over vast periods of time. Mistakes in passing down the generations are forbidden. The active sites in many human brain enzymes, for example, are exactly the same as those in the humble E. coli bacterium. The structural aspects of modules, on the other hand, are variable and ‘mistakes’ in copying this aspect of the programs —the famous mutations extolled in the classical perspective—are tolerated, even encouraged.

How did God, in his plan of creation, direct this evolution of stored DNA programs to its desired ends? This is an open question, but a clue can be found in our immune system and the host of antibody-DNA programs it generates.

It starts with an immature lymphocyte being formed in the bone marrow. Each lymphocyte is programmed with DNA that, when called and translated, generates an antibody that provides a QPF specific for just one type of molecule. This DNA antibody program is generated by an RNA program that, when run, generates a sophisticated QPF that mixes and matches a small set of DNA modules, drawn from a large, stored library of them, into the ‘variable region’ of the antibody DNA gene. Trillions upon trillions of correctly-assembled permutations of these modular ‘words’ of programming instruction are generated, one for each lymphocyte. Every possible proper permutation of modules is expressed, sooner or later, in one or more of the trillions of lymphocytes. This host of immature cells is a complete external expression of the internal, abstract permutation space of a finite set of subprograms.

A properly programmed but still inactive lymphocyte then migrates to the thymus gland where the program stored on the lymphocyte is tested. The thymus runs a program that can be likened to a virtual reality; it is a virtual Operating System on which the DNA-stored program can be called and run. Copies of this virtual Operating System run all of the millions of programs stored on our DNA genetic heritage at the same time, each generating a virtual QPF. If any one of this host of auto-QPF complements, as complex numbers, matches the QPF generated by the lymphocyte’s antibody-DNA, the immature lymphocyte is instructed to run apoptosis—programmed cell death. The cell deliquesces and the self-recognizing antibody program is destroyed. If the DNA program passes this test when running on the virtual Operating System, the not-self-recognizing lymphocyte is instructed to run the antibody program and mature into an active T-cell. Then the thymus releases it into the blood stream to patrol the body for non-self molecules.

In programming terms, this involves three steps:

1. Syntactically and grammatically correct programs are assembled from modular subprograms. Programming nonsense such as “GOTO GOTO,” the calling of non-existent subprograms, or division by zero are not to be found in this permutation space designed by our Creator God, just as a 3.5f orbital is not an eigenfunction of Schrödinger’s elegant description of the atom. We can refer to it as the internal T-exploration of a finite permutation space.

2. The programs are then run in a virtual reality on a virtual Operating System and what it generates is tested for certain criteria. (Windows running on PowerPC running on my Mac is an example of this; Windows ‘thinks’ it is running on a physical Intel chip, but it is actually running on a virtual chip generated by the VirtualPC program running on Mac OSX running on Unix, etc.) If the VR run is successful, the program is released to run on a real Operating System. We can refer to it as the internal VR-testing of program permutations.

3. Running in the real world on a real Operating System, the program generates an elemental QPF to contribute, as complex numbers, to the internal unified QPF/Inherent Directive Nature/mind, and the organism that results when the external probability gets filled in is subject to Darwinian survival of the fittest (best-programmed). This is where the external environment makes its mark. We shall refer to this as the external D-survival of the fittest, as posited by classical science.

The evolution of proteins is still an open question, but the above suggests that the process would be highly accelerated by the emergence of just two programs: an permutation explorer and a virtual Operating System generator. It is quite possible that the fits and starts of evolutionary advance—such as the Cambrian explosion—involved the emergence of such sophisticated programs.

The notion of limited quantum configuration spaces is exemplified by thousand-year-old artificial selection of dogs and cats. Dogs range from Great Danes to Pekinese; the permutation space of the Dog Program is large. Cats, on the other hand, are all basically the same after all these millennia; the permutation space of the Cat Program is very small. The Beetle Program has an enormous permutation space; there are millions of species of them! All such proper permutations spaces—both great and small— are as designed by God as are the 1s orbitals of the atom.

Note that microevolution occurs only in the very top levels of the programming. In our bodies, for instance, we depend utterly on the evolutionary stability of the lowest levels of programming—the triplet code and ribosome Operating System, for instance. Thus fungi, plants and animals; we all use identical copies of both the eukaryote ribosomal Operating System and the universal triplet encoded RNA programs it runs. God released just version 1.0; there is no version 1.1 in the designed quantum configuration space of the Plan.

Operating System Macroevolution

As microevolution explores the permutation space, it eventually stumbles upon a sophisticated program planted there, in the mathematics of the Plan, by God. For example, a calcium effect jump appears as a new subprogram in the genetic milieu. When run on the Operating System, this program generates a unified QPF that, when filled in by molecules, helps constitute new, more sophisticated level of operating system, an Operating System 2 running on Operating System 1 (as Windows used to run on top of DOS).

The emergence of the triplet code and ribosome-complex assemblages of many components in the proto-metabolic Eden involved such quantum-jump events. They were macro-evolutionary events, opening up new realms of programming possibilities.

The RNA programs that can run on this newly-emerged Operating System are simple at first. The process of microevolution again takes over and the process repeats until Operating System 3 in the Plan of God is stumbled upon by microevolution.

Note that, as required by both science and Unification Thought, God is not directly involved in either micro- or macro- evolution; He just sets up the quantum probabilities and then waits for them to get filled in. There is considerable leeway as to exactly when each step in the Plan is accomplished.[15]

Summarizing, we hold that evolution the unified science of quantum probability requires that evolution have an internal aspect—where all the sophisticated and interesting stuff happens—as well as an external aspect—the well-characterized necessity of things surviving over time in the external world. Using the lymphocyte-thymus system as a model, we speculate that the evolution of any level speeds up when RNA programs—as a consequence of exploration of a quantized, modular configuration space—develop the ability of programmed T-variation followed by T-testing in a virtual reality before release to run in the real world.


Quantum Genetics

The following is a brief overview of what known about the hierarchy of operating systems in living systems. The only RNA programming language well-characterized is the triplet code used by the Basic Operating System.

Triplet code Operating System

The basic Operating System of life involves ribosomes running RNA programs written in triplet code. This Operating System comes in just two versions: the prokaryote ribosome and the more sophisticated eukaryote ribosome; both use the universal triplet code. The human body has trillions of copies of both kinds of Operating System running in massive parallelism at the base of the genetic hierarchy.

Spindle code Operating System

The next level of Operating System sophistication involves the structure of the eukaryote cell. These comparatively huge cells are organized by the incessant activities of a relatively-small number of modular structural proteins—such as actin—which “self-assemble” into intricate supports, rails, highways, carriages and motors to move them, etc. In a unified science of quantum probability this is the external filling-in of an internal quantum probability and its intricate changes.

These QPF are generated by RNA programs not written triplet code. The most intricate QPF construct of such RNA programs running on this Operating System is the huge and highly-active mitotic spindle that apportions the DNA down the generations; a marvel that has mesmerized microscopists for generations. Such non-triplet coded programs are written in spindle code. When such spindle RNA programs are running they generate a unified internal QPF. The structural proteins move to take up the form of the external quantum probability and so organize the eukaryote cell into its characteristic form and function.

The non-triplet code DNA from whence all such ‘higher’ RNA programs are stored has been called both junk and selfish. This can only be dismissed as an Englishman looking at a Chinese newspaper and declaring it meaningless and devoid of content.

The centriole plays a key role in organizing the spindle and contains non triplet-code RNA. It is here that spindle RNA programs run and organize the entire cell. The RNA in the centrioles, called ribozymes, catalytically process immature mRNA before it gets to be translated into structural protein monomers on the ribosomes (and get to massively add their QPF, as complex numbers, to the unified Inherent Directive Nature.) RNA programs running in the centriole, in this way, control the structure and function of the cell and, on occasion, orchestrate the intricate ballet of mitotic cell division.

The Ribosome and Restoration

While DNA that stores the generate ribosome program, it needs a ribosome to run on: neither bacteria nor human can create ribosomes without ribosomes. In the same fashion, the create centriole program needs a centriole to run on. Both ribosome and centriole creates copies of themselves to hand on to daughter cells.

This principle of unitary descent holds true throughout the hierarchy of life’s Operating System. Each of the Life Operating Systems running in massive parallel in our bodies is a direct descendant of an Operating System that assembled in a macroevolutionary Origin event—externally filling in a previously empty internal QPF in God’s Plan. This is in accord with Unification Thought, which holds that everyone’s copy of the Human Operating System is a direct descendant of the Human Operating System-generating programs that appeared with the physical birth of Adam and Eve.

As revealed by Reverend Moon, this original Human Operating System did not get put together correctly; the external form did not reflect the internal quantum form of God’s Plan. Instead, during its external assembly, it was damaged by the Fall and Cain’s murder of Abel. As a distorted QPF, it specifies states of least action and high probability that manifest the original sin. Like the QPF of a cancer cell, the fallen Human Operating System and the malignant programs that run on it have generating endless evil and suffering.

Through the course of restoration God has been guiding history along the reverse path need to assemble a correctly functioning Human Operating System. Yet lacking even one copy of the true Human Operating System, it has been like trying to make a centriole without a centriole. Only the underlying level, the animal Operating System, works just fine. This is the purpose for the coming of the Messiah, to establish the true Human Operating System, out of which endless copies can be generated for all the descendants.


Quantum Mind

Genetic Memory

The simple programming analogy that we have been using so far is that of calling up programs from storage and having them run on an operating system. The second concept basic concept we will need from computer involves writing to two types of memory: active/volatile and passive/storage.

The CPU that runs the programs uses active memory; this is the “256MB of memory” in computer ads. The CPU it is constantly updating these memory registers and variables with constantly-changing values. These values are then called upon by the running programs, modified appropriately, and written back into active memory. This is short-term memory, as it disappears when the computer is turned off.

By analogy, running RNA programs must be able to read and write to a type of ‘active memory RNA.’ Such RNA manipulation by RNA is already well characterized. When a linear RNA chain folds into an active form that mimics a protein—manipulating RNA molecules by providing QPF paths of least action for them—it is called a RNA enzyme, or ribozyme—a full discussion of which is beyond the scope of this paper. Ribozyme activity is often viewed as a holdover from a proto-metabolic “RNA World,” before proteins came along to do things much more efficiently. Nevertheless, far from being a primitive holdover, the limited repertoire of ribozymal manipulations of RNA may actually be very useful in the memory used in quantum programming. Short-term memory is carried in the mechanisms of this RNA World, which deserves to be better understood.

In our computer, if we forget to tell the running programs to “save to disk” before pulling the plug, all is lost, it was not saved to long-term memory. In living things, if RNA is active memory, then such ‘saving to disk’ should involve copying it back onto DNA. This writing-to-disc in living things involves calling up a machine-level program—an enzyme called reverse transcriptase—that writes RNA back onto DNA.

It is fascinating that the human genome contains millions of copies—in thousands of different variants—of this reverse transcriptase. Nevertheless, classical genetics assumes it plays no useful role, and all these DNA-stored programs are just junk. Still, we expect that all of life’s programs should have an automatic save feature. By the action of reverse transcriptase, the ‘active memory’ carried by the RNA is constantly being written to disk—to DNA—for long-term storage. When we go to sleep, for instance, the intricate internal QPF that the RNA generated ceases to exist. The organism requires the ability to restore this QPF when we wake up in the morning. If it has been written into the DNA the night before, then in the morning, when the programs stored in the DNA are copied onto RNA, the programs start running and we wake up. If this is correct—and only experiment can prove it—then all those millions of reverse transcriptase “relics” in the human genetic heritage have a very important role to play, and are most certainly not junk.

Sensory Perception

All programs involve an input. The senses, from bacteria to human, involve the massive concatenations of simple inputs on the cellular level. Light-sensitive cells in the retina, for instance, operate by the simple logic such as is performed by pores that open and close as do those in muscle cells that admit and expel calcium ions to regulate muscle contraction. When a lower levels of programming sets the photon register to “true,” an activate program is called, and the cell sends a ripple along the internal QPF of its external axon as input to the next level of processing.

This tiny bit of information is combined by neural net programming into bytes of information about transitions in luminosity and color. All this information ends up, via the optic nerve, as an optical map spread over trillions of hierarchically-organized cells in the optic cortex. Spread out over this vast expanse is myriads of information pixels from the eye about the current look of the outside world.

The next step of combining all these pixels of information spread over neural nets into the unified whole that we seem to perceive when we look outside ourselves. Information about each pixel is kept in separate maps in different areas of the cortex; there are maps for hue, intensity, gradients, lines, etc. The color information about an item, for instance, is registered on cells that are billions of cells away from where its shape is stored.[16] How do all theses disparate bytes of information about the external world get ‘bound’ into the unified vision of reality we actually perceive? As mentioned earlier, this is called the ‘binding problem’ in classical neurology. Without elaborating, it should be clear that a unified science of quantum probability does not have a binding problem (or a protein folding problem). ‘Binding’ involves a massive combining, as complex numbers, into a unified QPF internal representation of the outside world, the unified entity that we perceive.

Embryonic Development

The ‘binding’ of individual cells into organs and the whole organism operates on the same principle as the binding of sensory data into a unified sense perception. Countless simple QPF-generating RNA programs in massive parallel combine internally, as complex numbers, into the Inherent Directive Nature of an animal organ.

Every cell in our body has a copy of the Organ Operating System, although depending on cell type they run different programs. The Organ Operating System runs simple RNA programs in massive parallelism. These elemental QPF combine, as complex numbers—an Organ Inherent Directive Nature—and the externals move to this high probability, low action state and take up the characteristic form of an organ such as the liver. Development is the sequential calling of programs to generate this QPF; healing is the filling in of empty, externally-damaged probability forms.

The evolution of animals—phylogeny—involves the sequential emer­gence of programs by quantum microevolution. Development the single-cell zygote to the adult form—ontology—involves calling these stored programs in the same sequence.

Passing rapidly over this fascinating subject—which includes sex as a mechanism for the efficient micro-evolutionary exploration of quantum combination spaces—I shall just note two things that happened along the way to the programs that can generate humans:

1. The very earliest of organisms in our lineage had programs that generated the QPF of a simple sphere, organizing a hollow sphere of cells with a hole at one end acting as both mouth and anus. A second hole was programmed in later, and the excretory functions are assigned it. Only the simplest of organisms retain this pattern of mouth-first, anus second—these proteosomes are all simple worms (a limited permutation space to explore by microevolution). At some point along the lineage to animals, however, this pattern suddenly flipped from front and back: the first hole became the anus and the second hole became the mouth—the deuterosomes (with a vast permutation space to explore).

2. Later—along the second lineage that diverged to animals and insects—there was another flip, this time from top to bottom: What: what lies along the back of an animal—such as the spinal cord—lies along the abdomen of an insect; what is below in one is above in the other.

We recapitulate both stages in the womb. Such flips in development are difficult to explain in classical terms of local molecular communication between cells. The quantum perspective can easily accommodate such phenomena. The orbitals of atoms each hold two electrons because, if a QPF can fit internally by waving in one direction it will always be able to fit by waving in the opposite direction—standing waves in an organ pipes are a simple example.

The very different histories followed by these diverging, flipped lineages suggest that the two ways of waving are not entirely symmetrical. God has placed such interesting, and very important, asymmetries in His Laws. It is one such a one-in-a-trillion asymmetry in the Law, for instance, that accounts for all the matter in our universe.


So far, we have been discussing RNA writing to DNA disk in the somatic cells. Such cells do not get to pass their DNA down the generations. The DNA of the germ cells—which do—is currently considered inviolate to generational imprinting—writing data from RNA to DNA is considered forbidden and the scientific heresy of Lamarckism.

A hint that such ‘passing data down the generations’ might occur is the ‘imprinting’ of each of our paired chromosomes: one is labeled with a DNA methylation pattern that translates as “From Dad,” the other coded “From Mom”. The calling of programs to run during development often takes note of this distinction, calling a program only from the Dad-labeled library, but not Mom’s, for example.

The task that faces the quantum geneticist is to deconstruct the coded programs that are running in the many programming languages of life. Encouraging such a science would be a worthy long term project.

Quantum Brain Function

We will now touch on the topic of brain function and apply the basic principles of a unified science of quantum probability. These are:

1. An RNA program, written in a high-level code, runs on an Operating System, generating an elemental internal QPF.

2. Running in massive parallelism, these combine as complex numbers into a unified internal QPF, or sophisticated Inherent Directive Nature or simple mind.

3. The externals move to fill in the form of the external quantum probability.

Neurons are very active externally, firing and oscillating in their nets and complex circuits. Neurons, like proteins in cell metabolism, generate very sophisticated QPF that manipulate other cells. Their activity is the focus of most neuroscience. Yet the majority of cells in the brain are not neurons; they are the glial-class cells that drape and envelope the neurons and their connections. These glial cells have been assigned the lowly task of housekeepers, feeding and cleaning up after the busy, busy neurons. It has only recently become apparent that these cells also have sophisticated, if local and quiet, networks of communication.

Like all cells, glial cells indulge in the incessant exchange of suitably-modified and labeled RNA sub-programs. These inputs are combined, following T-cell like programming rules, and an RNA program is output to run on the neurons. These are the roles of mRNA and proteins at the foundations of genetics. The evolution of the glial cells and neurons into the human mind is just a reprise, at a higher level of life, of the evolution of RNA and proteins into our bodies. Yet the full significance of glial cells is far from being understood.

Just as proteins generate the simple QPFs that massively combine, as complex numbers, into the unified QPF of the cell, in the same way, but on a much more mathematically internal level, the neurons generate simple QPF that massively combine, as complex numbers, into the unified QPF that is the mind of an animal. Our waking, physical mind is the most sophisticated example of this.

Animal Mind and Human Mind

As you might expect by now, the brain can be viewed as a hierarchy of different operating systems that emerged during modular evolutionary exploration of quantum configuration space. (All these, of course, run on lower operating systems such as the cell and the ribosome.) We can only glance at an outline of neural organization. Implied at each level is the usual running of RNA programs generating internal QPFs, which combine, etc., at several levels:

Simple Organism Operating System: This is the most basic level at which the nervous system functions. The unified QPF generated organizes very simple functions.

Segmented Organism Operating System: Our ancestors, and our embryos, are divided into segments, the QPF generated organizes this level. This can be called the “segmented worm mind.”[17]

Fish Mind Operating System: In our brains, this level mainly resides in the brainstem, the swelling connecting our spinal cord and brain, and includes the ‘gut-brain’ that is spread out all over the viscera.

Amphibian, Reptile and Mammal Operating Systems all function in a similar way. They are capable User-level programs in the lower animals, and run on the lower lobes and nuclei in the human brain. The most sophisticated animal mind is that generated by the social brain, an Operating System sophisticated enough to run programs that enable groups to work together as one—dogs have this level of sophistication in delightful abundance. Pre-human hominid microevolution developed this to the level of using pidgin to exchange information about who was cheating on whom. [18]

The microevolutionary “speciation event” that was the birth of the first human ancestors was not externally remarkable; it involved the usual exploration of quantum programming permutation space and was similar to all primate speciation events. What was utterly remarkable internally, was that this was also a macroevolutionary event, the emergence of new operating system—the human mind and the eternal spirit. As this is a major topic in itself, we shall stop the discussion here.

The new science, to summarize, is not hostile to the theistic view of the universe. It has introduced a quantum internal extension into the lexicon of science that is the Inherent Directive Nature of Unification Thought—just with a different name. As prophesied by Reverend Moon, the scientific description of the cosmos is converging with the theological description.



[1] P. W. Atkins, Quanta, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), p. 348.

[2] Johnjoe McFadden, Quantum Evolution (New York: W. W. Norton, 2000), p. 219.

[3] Robert Rosen, Life Itself (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), p. 18.

[4] Edward Rubenstein, “Stages of Evolution and their Messengers,” Scientific American (June 1989): 132.

[5] Richard. P. Feynman, QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985), p. 7.

[6] A. Zee, Fearful Symmetry (New York: Macmillan, 1986), pp. 106-111.

[7] This is why the “intelligent design” perspective is rejected as science; it fails to recognize this simple fact built into the foundations of Unification Thought.

[8] In computer science, this is akin to the logical impossibility of programming a true random number generator.

[9] It would take us too far off the central discussion to explore here the concept of the same internal quantum probability governing the history of external spiritual fundamental elements.

[10] The horizontal (real) axis of the initial view is from –1.5 to +0.5, the vertical (imaginary) axis from – i to +i. The final view is centered on the complex number ‑0.08378791+0.65584142i . Created with Super MANDELZOOM 1.06.

[11] I am emphasizing the emergence of the first of a kind here, as it remains the universal principle of evolution. In sophisticated systems, such as life, the appearance of the second, third, etc. entities on the scene is qualitatively different to the first event. For simple systems such as protons, atoms, water molecules, etc. the many appear in the same way as the first—origin and multiplication, so to speak are identical, while in organisms they are not.

[12] These empty catalytic orbitals are similar to the 4f orbitals of hydrogen illustrated above.

[13] A. G. Cairns-Smith, Genetic Takeover and the Mineral Origin of Life (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982)

[14] I suggest a simple experimental test in my book, Do Proteins Teleport in an RNA World? (Mount Kisco, NY: Institute for Quantum deProgramming, 2005).

[15] This is comparable to the human portion of responsibility in the history of restoration.

[16] The odd looking A and B layers in the LAB color space of Photoshop hint at what color looks like without luminosity.

[17] The HOX-gene DNA seems to play a central counting role in generating this level of QPF throughout the body and the brain. The segmentation in our hindbrain apparently uses the same HOX counting method that caterpillars use to segment themselves.

[18] A pidgin involves just nouns and verbs; it is not a language.