Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#51207 02/18/14 06:06 PM
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Physics.org has put up a new article on expansion to Kleiber's Law

http://phys.org/news/2014-02-evolution-geometries-life-scientists-longstanding.html

Interesting if somewhat controversial

Last edited by Orac; 02/18/14 06:07 PM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
.
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
So far I have only skimmed through the article, so this comment may not be justified.

“To nourish its mass, an animal needs fuel. Burning that fuel generates heat. The animal has to find a way to get rid of excess body heat. The obvious way is surface cooling. But because the tiger's surface area is proportionally smaller than its mass, the surface is not up to the task. The creature's hide would get blazing hot, and its coat might burst into flames.”

Isn't the prevention of this part of the function of the respiratory system?


There never was nothing.
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
In a way this explanation sort of makes sense. I can see that Natural Selection would tend to direct life into forms that in one way or another are energy efficient. Being energy efficient means that the life form can live, and have children, with as little food intake as possible. So a life form that is less energy efficient would tend to have fewer offspring. Therefore low energy efficiency would tend to be selected out. The result would be that most life forms would evolve to be as energy efficient as possible. There would have to be a balance between energy efficiency and the activities that gather the energy. I could see that there might be a sort of a balance point there that would turn out to be the same for all life forms.

It does seem to me that if a life form develops some characteristic that is less energy efficient, but confers some other positive benefit it may still be selected. I'm not sure just what that would entail. It's possible that this would produce a brief surge in the species which would then be worked out to restore the 'normal' energy efficiency.

Bill, How the tiger loses the excess heat isn't really what they are talking about. They are addressing the overall energy balance of whatever life form they study.

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5