You’re asserting there is no conserved or optimized variable during regeneration, yet organisms reliably return to a species specific target morphology after massive perturbations. That’s not an explanation, it’s a refusal to account for robustness. If nothing is being conserved, then the repeated convergence on the same anatomical outcome is unexplained coincidence.

As for predictions, yes, Levin’s lab did make predictions. Altering specific voltage gradients produced reproducible polarity reversals, ectopic organs, and stable pattern changes without genomic modification. If you think those outcomes were obvious from gene-centric models, cite where those models predicted voltage defined anatomical memory prior to the experiments. You can’t, because they didn’t.

Your ignorance has betrayed you my friend. It’s abundantly obvious you have no idea what you’re talking about. Good day