From: Keith Henson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat 25 Oct 2003 - 13:16:05 GMT
At 11:39 AM 25/10/03 +0200, Danny Iny wrote:
> > At 09:05 AM 10/24/2003 +0100, Derek wrote:
> > I've read over and over that brains are very energy expensive to operate.
> > think it is something like a ration of the brain being only 2% body weight
> > but consuming 20% of the calories. I can recall (but not find) an article
> > that hypothesized the calorie demands of a larger brain could not be met
> > until we became more carnivorous.
> > I think that the presumption has always been that tool use and greater
> > socialization required larger brains and that the fitness reward
> > compensated for the increased cost in calorie consumption.
> > Ray Recchia
>Guys, I'm pretty sure these references are made in 'How the Mind Works', by
Calvin argues that the final 2 fold expansion of the brain was largely
driven by the human line moving into areas where accurate projectile
hunting was the only way to get through the winter. Lots about "glacial
pumping" in _Ascent of Mind._
Others (http://www.ecotao.com/holism/url-links/bipedalism.html) have stated
that bipedal walking is significantly more efficient than the chimp's way
of getting around. (This would be adaption to patcher food since there was
little or no brain expansion over chimps in the earliest on the human
line.) It does seem that primitive humans harvested substantial areas for
high calorie food.
The article Ray mentions might have been in a fairly recent Scientific
American. It mentioned cooking (for sure a meme directed activity) as a
big factor in increasing available calories.
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat 25 Oct 2003 - 13:22:08 GMT