Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA10226 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:50:22 +0100 Message-ID: <3B8BA0BC.9E20BD74@bioinf.man.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:46:36 +0100 From: Chris Taylor <Christopher.Taylor@man.ac.uk> Organization: University of Manchester X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: email@example.com Subject: Re: Coordinated behavior among birds, fish, and insects References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101746042@inchna.stir.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
> Loathed as I am to give to some help with this theory, but perhaps a
> better example than a flock of birds in flight for your arguments, might be
> a slime mold particularly when all those cells seem to conglomerate and move
> like a much larger single organism. Does Sheldrake have any views on slime
Slime moulds really are simple to explain (as someone has more or less
done in a recent post). Fish are easier than birds, because they have
the 'lateral line' organs either side of their body (practically all
fish - look halfway down the flank paralleling the body axis - line of
tiny dots - each a pit with a tiny sensory hair - and a fast nerve line
to fast twitch white muscle as well as upstairs). Mass movement in fish
is therefore piss easy to explain, because you're looking at a
combination of speed of sound in water (pretty fast) and very short
reaction times in the fish.
> >> Wouldn't all social insects disperse on the death of the central
> >> queen?
> <They lose their social behavior instantaneously, before the message
> has had
> > a chance to be transmitted chemically.>
> I doubt this very much indeed. What about the chemical messages
> exuded by the dead queen themself that would waft through the mound with
> some rapidity? There could be all sorts of highly subtle indicators that
> produce what appears to be an instantaneous cease of social behaviour. Did
> the experimenter genuinely observe every singly termite/ant (remember some
> species have up to 20 million individuals in a nest)?
Or air or solid sub/ultrasonics, or some sort of EM pulse (if you wanna
> <Ultimately, memetics will sink or swim with morphics.>
> Yeah, that's what's beginning to worry me...
My god I hope not, that's like linking astronomy to astrology.
Chris Taylor (firstname.lastname@example.org)
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 2b29 : Tue Aug 28 2001 - 14:55:20 BST