>>513545574 (OP)The reason women traditionally take the man's name is because the Y chromosome is always passed from father to son in a direct chain creating a male line, while X chromosomes are not passed down like this and consequently there is no such thing as a female line.
Imagine you are a woman.
You have XX, one X from your father and one X from your mother.
Your mother also has XX, one X from her father and one X from her mother.
If you got your father's X and your mother's father's X then there is no trace of your mother's mother in you, at least at the level of the sex chromosomes (obviously there will still be a lineage in the other chromosomes).
Consequently there is no guarantee of an unbroken female line that connects you to your mother to her mother etc at the level of the sex chromosomes.
This never happens with the Y. A man's Y is always his father's Y which is always his father's father's Y etc.
The reason patronymic surnames became the norm is because they help us keep track of real genetic phenomena while matronymic surnames are entirely superficial. Evolution acting on culture favored patronymic names because societies with this practice had more information at their disposal than societies that didn't. Remember that people knew about heritability and micro-evolution long before they knew about DNA and macro-evolution. We have been creating artificial species through genetic engineering for millennia, and many common foods today are examples of this. For example cabbage and broccoli have the same wild ancestor, it's just that the former was selectively bred for larger leaves while the latter was selectively bred for larger flowers.