Life always has surprises in store, biological or metaphysical.
There was this very interesting thread on dinosaur mailing list on sauropod breeding strategy. One person supposed that sauropods probably had the same breeding strategy as bamboos
A wild conjecture. Since sauropods were presumably very long-lived could
they have used the same breeding strategy as e. g. cicadas or bamboo, i e
synchronized breeding at long intervals thus "swamping" predators with a
vast number of young but leaving lean pickings inbetween breeding episodes?
To judge from the cicadas a prime number of years (11, 13, 17, 19) is best
since it cannot be tracked by any shorter periodicity.
That biological organisms follow a breeding strategy based on prime numbers stunned me. Was discussing this with my friend over lunch yesterday and were wondering how purely biological systems had tests for primality. The least they need is to have is a mechanism for subtraction and a counter, and a loop of course. Still beats me.
And I also realised that prime numbers are prime in all number systems, something that sounds so trivial now. My initial incredulity reminded me of this event. And yes, I was the pseudo-sceptic there :)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Didn't know that you've started blogging again. By the way, this pseudo-skepticism, practical hypocrisy etc., are a part of my own efforts to start "belonging" somewhere. So, in a sense, you were an incidental strawman (and might continue to be so). :-)
were wondering how purely biological systems had tests for primality. The least they need is to have is a mechanism for subtraction and a counter, and a loop of course. Still beats me.
Absolute BS. They don't need to do any of this. If breeding occuring at prime-number intervals is the most advantageous strategy in given conditions, it will be the one which selection favours over other intervals. Hence it survives and propagates.
Rest assured there would have been Cicadas with genes causing breeding every 10 years at some point. Just that those genes wouldn't have done too well.
crappy beyond comprehension... read your logic.
how would the successful plants propagate the interval to the next generation? through the goddamned genes. and the plants have to calculate the breeding cycle..
get a freaking brain, dude!
Ishwar, try to understand his point before dismissing. ;) He brings up the same point as I did the other day. There could've been different breeding cycles and the one with a favourable one would have been chosen by natural selection. The organism happily perpetuates the cycle without actually knowing that the frequency is a prime number. When I said this, you countered with a (IMO, weak) argument saying it would be a big coincidence to have 11, 13, 17, 19 across species.
P.S. I've indulged a bit with verbiage of teleological and anthropomorphic bent.
how would the successful plants propagate the interval to the next generation? through the goddamned genes. and the plants have to calculate the breeding cycle..
Whaaatt??? Calculate? Ishwar, are you sure you understand evolution and natural selection?
Post a Comment