3 ms·
whynotboth.gif Seriously though, the existence of nocturnal animals kinda puts that argument to bed. While there might be selection pressure to specialise with
by polemic 9y ago
whynotboth.gif
Seriously though, the existence of nocturnal animals kinda puts that argument to bed. While there might be selection pressure to specialise within day or night cycles, it's simply not plausible that no animal, in the vastness of the biospehere, has not generalised to do both, without some critical and fundamental flaw.
- pitcharoad 9y agothere might be a differential equation that describes a small part of beings (not a "huge number") benefitting from the free energy that diurnal animals might be at night. There's an equilibrium that's clearly preferential to daylight animals. Point in case, bats as my primary example seem to be pretty archaic, with highly developed specializations, but nothing really highly developed. Which I see as an expression of the low entropy in the dark (the signal to noise ratio for sound is rather good at night though). Deep see animals are mostly outliers inhabiting a niche, as well. Whereas people as the highest developed species, if I may say so myself, don't even quite get along with crossing the day-night boundaries, I don't see your argument at all. You are rather proving the point.