Customer Reviews

'Mathematics of Evolution'

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I thoroughly enjoyed it. This aptly titled book is indeed on the mathematics of evolution. Hard hitting material that places constraints on evolutionary arguments.

First, it is explicit, it takes nothing for granted. Every (or virtually every) assumption, model, and math step is explained. He explains it clearly and completely, rather than just stating his say-so as so many other evolution books do. Based on the text, I was able to re-derive virtually all its math and verify that it is based on his stated models and assumptions. The math techniques are especially valuable for researchers in this field. He gives the clearest explanation of the use of diffusion equations I have found anywhere. Kimura, for example, throws diffusion equations around a lot, but does not explain them nearly as clearly, even in his detailed published papers, which I have read.

Also, Hoyle deals with some highly relevant issues, which other evolution books tend not to do. Evolution books ordinarily try to sell evolution to the public, and to accomplish that they tend to under-discuss the touchy issues. Hoyle's book goes after the touchy central issues unflinchingly. I wish more evolution books were like it. For example, the cost of harmful mutation, and issues like error catastrophe, are almost always avoided or under-discussed in evolutionary genetics books - they assume away this issue, often without even acknowledging it. But it is a key issue and ought be a regular participant in evolutionary discussions. Hoyle approaches it boldly as a centerpiece of his book. Bravo!

Armed with a clear mathematical analysis, Hoyle enters the contentious issue of sexual reproduction, to argue, with compelling strength, that asexual populations have difficulty evolving because they are overwhelmed by harmful mutation. Sexual reproduction provides a way to more readily shed harmful mutations. This argument elsewhere goes by the name of Muller's Ratchet, but Hoyle gives it clear, mathematical armament.

Maynard-Smith (in his Feb. 10 review in Nature) had to press to the very fringes of the book to find much to disagree with. This is noteworthy because he is a leading expert on these very issues of sexual reproduction and the cost of harmful mutation. His review instead faulted the book for not being "new". He missed the point: The book is good because it is clear, correct, and important - more-so than comparable evolution books.

Hoyle discusses his mathematical results in readily understandable terms. The book has many juicy statements that are sure to be quoted in the origins debate. The book's posture is doubtful of Darwinian macroevolution, and for this reason I suspect the book might not be read widely (or promoted) by avid Darwinians. That is unfortunate, because the book has so much to offer, no matter which side of the origins debate one is on.

On the flip-side, Hoyle is mistaken about Haldane's Dilemma. I can (and will in future publications) explain in detail just where his errors occur (there are several, as he takes several lines of argument on this issue - which I admire). Maynard-Smith's review, to his credit, acknowledges that Hoyle's dismissal of this famous evolutionary problem is unconvincing. This is not a serious failing of Hoyle's book however, as the mistakes he made are not uncommon, and there is much confusion about this issue, even in Haldane's original papers. So, I do not fault Hoyle badly on this point.

Hoyle's book touches on eugenics some (which may perhaps raise eyebrows). The book also briefly ties in with his ideas of panspermia. Yet I do not find it improper for him to include such discussion. I would merely say the strength of the book lay in the material I mentioned earlier.

Sir Fred Hoyle, credited with coining the term 'Big Bang', turns his extraordinary mathematical prowess to consideration of the claims of neo-Darwinism.

His results support the Darwinian findings that 'explain the fine details of the matching of many species to their environment', and undermine the extrapolation of those findings 'to broader taxonomic categories, to kingdoms, divisions, classes, and orders'.

Professor Hoyle states explicitly that he has no theistic faith, but forthrightly (attention, please, all sides of the creationist debate) challenges that the Darwinian theory 'is wrong, and that continued adherence to it is an impediment to discovering the correct evolutionary theory'. He continues: 'To the extent that one is deflected by socioreligious considerations from correcting what is wrong, one hands a victory to opponents'.

Advanced mathematical capability is necessary to follow the book's argument closely, but the text is written in lucid and engaging language which will carry any interested reader along.

This vital work was available only in a few manuscript copies for many years, and the publication by Acorn Enterprises in Memphis Tennessee is a service to the future. I recommend the book for its argument, its nobility, and its value to your great-grandchildren.

Hoyle, one of the most brilliant people to go through Cambridge, may have the delightful range of English character that reaches toward eccentricity in its freedom of thought, but he has never failed to be interesting and deep. I admit it is much easier to fall asleep in one's assumptions than to be genuinely and deservedly puzzled by problems not yet solved or situations that promote embarrassment for the casualness of their treatment by the common imitative herd.

This book is very much in character for Hoyle, and I highly recommend it. Few minds in the twentieth century have provided such a constant challenge to the intelligent as has Hoyle throughout his many books and papers in a long career.

It is often a person outside a great field who sees it the most clear-eyed way and knows where it needs to blush because it has cheated.

- Patrick Gunkel

I thoroughly enjoyed it. This aptly titled book is indeed on the mathematics of evolution. Hard hitting material that places constraints on evolutionary arguments.

First, it is explicit, it takes nothing for granted. Every (or virtually every) assumption, model, and math step is explained. He explains it clearly and completely, rather than just stating his say-so as so many other evolution books do. Based on the text, I was able to re-derive virtually all its math and verify that it is based on his stated models and assumptions. The math techniques are especially valuable for researchers in this field. He gives the clearest explanation of the use of diffusion equations I have found anywhere. Kimura, for example, throws diffusion equations around a lot, but does not explain them nearly as clearly, even in his detailed published papers, which I have read.

Also, Hoyle deals with some highly relevant issues, which other evolution books tend not to do. Evolution books ordinarily try to sell evolution to the public, and to accomplish that they tend to under-discuss the touchy issues. Hoyle's book goes after the touchy central issues unflinchingly. I wish more evolution books were like it. For example, the cost of harmful mutation, and issues like error catastrophe, are almost always avoided or under-discussed in evolutionary genetics books - they assume away this issue, often without even acknowledging it. But it is a key issue and ought be a regular participant in evolutionary discussions. Hoyle approaches it boldly as a centerpiece of his book. Bravo!

Armed with a clear mathematical analysis, Hoyle enters the contentious issue of sexual reproduction, to argue, with compelling strength, that asexual populations have difficulty evolving because they are overwhelmed by harmful mutation. Sexual reproduction provides a way to more readily shed harmful mutations. This argument elsewhere goes by the name of Muller's Ratchet, but Hoyle gives it clear, mathematical armament.

Maynard-Smith (in his Feb. 10 review in Nature) had to press to the very fringes of the book to find much to disagree with. This is noteworthy because he is a leading expert on these very issues of sexual reproduction and the cost of harmful mutation. His review instead faulted the book for not being "new". He missed the point: The book is good because it is clear, correct, and important - more-so than comparable evolution books.

Hoyle discusses his mathematical results in readily understandable terms. The book has many juicy statements that are sure to be quoted in the origins debate. The book's posture is doubtful of Darwinian macroevolution, and for this reason I suspect the book might not be read widely (or promoted) by avid Darwinians. That is unfortunate, because the book has so much to offer, no matter which side of the origins debate one is on.

On the flip-side, Hoyle is mistaken about Haldane's Dilemma. I can (and will in future publications) explain in detail just where his errors occur (there are several, as he takes several lines of argument on this issue - which I admire). Maynard-Smith's review, to his credit, acknowledges that Hoyle's dismissal of this famous evolutionary problem is unconvincing. This is not a serious failing of Hoyle's book however, as the mistakes he made are not uncommon, and there is much confusion about this issue, even in Haldane's original papers. So, I do not fault Hoyle badly on this point.

Hoyle's book touches on eugenics some (which may perhaps raise eyebrows). The book also briefly ties in with his ideas of panspermia. Yet I do not find it improper for him to include such discussion. I would merely say the strength of the book lay in the material I mentioned earlier.

Sir Fred Hoyle was a professor at Cambridge for much of his career. He is a best selling author who has also widely published in the peer reviewed literature, and a recipient of numerous honors, including knighthood in 1792. He has produced an excellent work on, in his words, why Darwinian theory is wrong. Hoyle stresses his motive to reject Darwinism is not religious (he became an atheist as a young man and explains why in some detail on page XV), but rather because he concluded that Darwinism is an impediment to discovering the correct theory of our origins. He does not deny the paleontological evidence, but rather the core Darwinism theory, the idea that all life evolved from organic molecules by the selection of, ultimately, favorable mutations; the goo to you by way of the zoo theory. In this work he explains in mathematical detail why he rejects Darwinism for scientific reasons, and discuses briefly other theories of origins, such as the conclusion that all, or most, genes in present day organisms already existed in metazoans in the Cambrian. The problem is the alternative theories proposed by Hoyle and others are even more problematic than Neo-Darwinism. This is why they have been rejected by most scientists. The alternative theories are not the focus of the book, though, but the lethal problems of Darwinism are, and Hoyle does a masterful job of documenting them. Much of the work in this book is on mutations and why this event is not a viable source of significant new genetic information. One must have some understanding of math to follow the arguments, but it is well worth it to wade through the math to understand Hoyle's arguments. He adds a bit of humor in places which, for those whose math background stopped at undergraduate calculus, helps to get through the book. My only problem with the book was I noticed about two dozen typo errors, but as I have a copy of the first printing, they may have been corrected in the later printings.

The importance of strong panspermia is earth shattering. If there is further evidence for it, it will unseat modern synthesis quickly. Hoyle knows that the evidence is incomplete, but the current evidence is mostly undisputable. It is still being attacked on regular basis as it _shouldn't make sense_ and hence people stuck in their current paradigms just can't understand that we have evidence for it, strong evidence obtained via physics.

As to the mathematics, he understands the problem. Unlike one of the readers has noted, the math and the criticism as well as the new proposals do not shatter under Kimuta or Fisher, for example. Fisher is especially important for so much is based on foundations that simply do not hold up. Accepted models are not the same thing as evidence, and we shouldn't forget it. Current synthesis fails, and instead of dogmatically defending it, its time to open our minds. More research is warranted in this field.

Is the cosmos eternal? Was the Big Bang only a small burp in a much larger unseen structure that is continually being recycled thoughout eternity? If so, this leads us to the more profound questions of: Has life always co-existed with inanimate matter? Is the universe filled with the seeds of life which literally rain down upon newly formed planets in all of the solar systems of the observable universe? Does Darwinian evolution explain how life on the Precambrian Earth seemingly was already well evolved even before the end of the late bombardment period?

These and other interesting questions have been the life work of Sir Fred Hoyle. In his book "Mathematics of Evolution" Hoyle attempts to explain through the use of mathematical formulas the complexities within the Darwinian theory of evolution and why it cannot be correct.

While the "Mathematics of Evolution" contains an astrophysicist look at the equations of living systems, there is a good deal of text throughout, allowing the reader not familiar with such complex equations to follow along.

Hoyle presents a convincing scientific case against Darwinian evolution that demands peer review.

Brig Klyce, of the now famous COSMIC ANCESTRY internet web site, has done evolutionary science a grand service by publishing "Mathematics of Evolution" the first in a new series of books that will examine in detail the origins of life in the universe. Brig Klyce's Acorn Enterprises is a publishing house to watch for in the years ahead.

Hoyle's most recent book, the Mathematics of Evolution, is his best Science Fiction novel since the Black Cloud. Alas, it was meant as a thoughtful mathematical exploration of whether evolution (which Hoyle accepts) can be accounted for by strictly natural selection. Hoyle ignores much of basic population genetics theory (see Principles of Population Genetics by Daniel L. Hartl and Andrew G. Clark), instead choosing to develop a number of standard results from Kimura and others on his own. He then claims that his mathematical treatment demonstrates that the neoDarwinian mechanism (natural selection) is insufficient to account for evolutionary change. Hoyle is dead wrong on a number of basic assumptions, and this book does the reader two disservices. First, it will be used as support that Creationism, rather than Evolution, accounts for the diversity of life, while Hoyle himself strongly rejects creationism (see the Book's preface). Second, all the mathematics (basically applied stochastic processes use the notation of physicists, rather than biologists) may fool the reader not paying attention to details that something important is being stated. Hoyle's bold statements in the "laypersons" summaries are certainly not supported by either his analysis or the last 100 years of work in genetics, mathematical biology, and evolution. Perhaps the reader will enjoy Hoyle's Andromeda Breakthrough SF novel better, as it is at least logically consistent.

Hoyle did a wonderful job in this book using mathematics. Unfortunately his initial assumptions are flawed, thus no matter how good the math, the answer is wrong. He seems only vaguely aware that authors such as Fisher, Wright, Haldane, and Kimura have already laid the foundation for this topic and that their conclusions are in complete opposition to his. Hoyle suggests that the real explanation for macroevolution is found in what he calls "genetic storms". In the book he presents two arguments (1) the inadequacy of mutations in natural selection and (2) the necessity of imported material. In both cases he is dead wrong. Biologists have known for decades that most mutations are neutral. This gives natural selection much more room maneuver. Hoyle is also ignorant of the fact that organisms are not designed according to some stringent engineering principles. They carry a lot of extra "genetic baggage" put together with a lot of redundancy and inefficient systems. Exactly what one would expect if they evolved. His second point is that some how genetic material, compatible with life on Earth, comes from space! There is no scientific support for this idea. If we took someone's DNA and sprinkled millions of tons of it over the entire earth, there is no mechanism by which we would expect to see any of it incorporated into our genome. In addition Eldredge and Gould's punctuated equilibrium model fits well with the observations in the fossil record. Reading this book has reminded me of that old adage that being an expert in one field does not make you one in another. Hoyle would have done better to label this book as one of his science fiction works.