Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Yhat's where the Theoretical and Hard Sciences meet. Quantum Central.What of plasma , magnetic fields ,
Yhat's where the Theoretical and Hard Sciences meet. Quantum Central.What of plasma , magnetic fields ,
The suggestion was that all living things respond to certain mathematical universal functions. As these functions are themselves not complicated, it is quite possible that we share this mathematical potential with the fundamental fabric of the universe. After all, we are part of it.Mathematics is profound, universal, fun and beautiful. I get that.
What does it tell me about insect intelligence?
IOW - what's the relevance?
Their abilities are only extraordinary when compared to humans.It's been tested., Some animals can observe the world from an infrared perspective. Others by sonar, still others by the earth's magnetic fields, and sharks from electrical fields.. These surviving (extant) species have had the same or longer time to evolve than humans; why should they not have developed extraordinary abilities , beyond human perception, abilities which are beyond hominid capabilities. Its a matter of specialization to one's environment., whereas humans can specialize in a variety of survival skills, such as altering the environment, but have a low birthrate compared to the insect.
Agreed. Still explains nothing.The suggestion was that all living things respond to certain mathematical universal functions. As these functions are themselves not complicated, it is quite possible that we share this mathematical potential with the fundamental fabric of the universe. After all, we are part of it.
True, each species necessarily has certain advantages as well as disadvantage. Cats and dogs may not see certain colors, but the sense of smell of say, a blood-hound is 1000 x more sensitive than humans. A cat's whiskers can detect the most subtle air disturbance of the slightest movement in total dark. Not surprisingly.Their abilities are only extraordinary when compared to humans.
Then again, humans' perceptive range is extraordinary when compared to other mammals. Dogs and cats cannot distinguish reds from greens.
You mean, it does not explain why? Does there have to be a why?Agreed. Still explains nothing.
Motive,
As I suggested before, IMO, the *why* is a Csmoc Mathematical Imperative.a reason for doing something, especially one that is hidden or not obvious
(It may be moot, but why would you change the question?)You mean, it does not explain why? Does there have to be a why?
What do you want...an IQ number? Most insects have no brains or at best a rudimentary central processor, but they have lots of extremely evolved sensory abilities, such as seeing infra-red and sensitivity to chemical stimulus, such as pheromones.(It may be moot, but why would you change the question?)
No. The question was: How intelligent are insects?
I did not see the relevance of all the fancy couldn't-be-any-other-way mathematical patterns to the intelligence of insects -
or to the response - instinct - genetic memory - problem solving continuum in the evolution of thought.
Still can't, but that's all right.
What do you want...an IQ number?
Compared to what? But within the hive and for its ability to cope with its environment, that standard could be applied.Isn't the average IQ of an insect 100 by definition?
Okay, that might work. But, no.What do you want...an IQ number?
It's quite a sophisticated processor of sensory input - and not the same type in all insects, but different processes or different inputs, with different responses.Most insects have no brains or at best a rudimentary central processor,
The couldn't be any other way referred to the mathematical patterns.As to "couldn't-be-any-other-way" is true, insects can only do what they are hardwired to do.
Until conditions change to make the responses invalid. Then this is what makes them extinct.This is what makes them so successful.
The question was: How intelligent are insects?
I suspect every living things is. (Okay, maybe not algae and viruses....)I think that they are probably smarter than people once gave them credit for being.
I think you're making the opposite error of that which you cautioned me. I think you are equating intelligence with complexity.I suspect every living things is. (Okay, maybe not algae and viruses....)
Ants, in particular are interesting in their variety of adaptations. If they were so simple and stupid as we've assumed,
how did the leaf-cutting and aphid farming ever get started?
Why are some species war-like; why do some migrate? Why does one colonize the bark of a particular tree, while another builds bivouacs of its own bodies?
Somehow, complexity evolved. Sometime, an adaptation must have been unsuccessful, or insufficient, and something changed.
I suspect that the hard-wiring metaphor limits our thinking. It conjures a mental image of a mechanical circuitry: useful, up to a point,
but we find it difficult to see past such a graphic image to what is - even if it changes rarely and slowly - a life story.
Not equating. Not saying that non-intelligence cannot be complex, but that intelligence cannot simple; it won't arise from functional simplicity.I think you're making the opposite error of that which you cautioned me. I think you are equating intelligence with complexity.
That would still only be the start of a definition. And it wouldn't allow you to give a satisfactory account of instinct.Then again, this may descend into semantics - eg. if I were to define intelligence as that form of adaptation beyond instinct.
Ah, yes, at what point does abstract thought evolve. Simply put; Complexity. The cuttlefish is a master at mirroring its environment.Okay, that might work. But, no.
What I'm looking for is a threshold or an overlap zone, where one kind of processing turns into another kind.
Yes, even in such a small body (a restriction) the neural network and nodal points can still be complex at that scale, allowing for a variety of instinctive behaviors.It's quite a sophisticated processor of sensory input - and not the same type in all insects, but different processes or different inputs, with different responses.
True, but there is an enormous variety of insects which, due to their simplicity are able to establish a territory almost everywhere and gradually specialize. Their exo-skeleton provides several natural advantages; it is a natural armor and allows maximum interior space for development of physical structural changes. The insect is one of the first mobile surface dweller and as an insect has been evolving in variety and specialization, such as horti-culture or husbandry and other forms of use of resource, including all out war (driver ants)The couldn't be any other way referred to the mathematical patterns.
No...the hardwired pattern itself increases fractally.So, are you saying that no biological machine can act in any way other than the hard-wired pattern?
Along with size comes the need and development of additional neural networks. Unlike manufactured computers, the natural fractal neural system are subject to change and creates a more "characteristic" individual response to similar situations. Moreover, skull size is extremely important in housing the growing neuron networks to be able process complex information.In that case, how could the big complex processors and elaborate wiring of dolphins and apes come about?
The great variety protects them from extinction. 95% of all species that ever existed are now extinct. The ant survived them all.Until conditions change to make the responses invalid. Then this is what makes them extinct.
Yes, what you see around you is the result of hundreds of million years of evolution. The insect was the first and , as Hellstrom said, will probably be the last to survive. It can breed whole new generations in just weeks or even days. The numbers are overwhelming and insects can be found world wide. It's truly astounding.At some junctures in its history every species had to make a significant change, an adaptation, relatively fast (by evolutionary measure),
in order to have survived to the present. Sometimes that change was a physical attribute, sometimes a change of diet or habitat, sometimes an idea.
But it is the variety and mixtures (configurations) of the hardwiring which must be present to allow intelligence to emerge as the most sophisticated forms of information processing, such as self-awareness.I go along with insects being generally quite short of intellect. But I'm skeptical about the blanket analogy of hard-wiring.
I'm no expert on the actual physical functions but in an evolutionary sense, IMO, the fundamental fractality of the brain allows for infinite networks and connections, allowing us to perceive a form of holographic mirror image of what we observe or detect. Memory.Wiring is made by an intelligent craftsman, but living things were not designed and made. They developed organically -
at some point the very simple branched off into the not-so-simple, etc.
I'm interested in the interfaces, the alterations, the junctions.
And as Hellstrom said that ultimately the insect is best equipped to survive any condition which is uninhabitable for more complex life.The only animals that adapt readily to human habitation are raccoons, rats and cockroaches.