4 ms·
>Trees exchange chemicals with fungus, and send seeds—essentially information packets—with wind, birds, bats, and other visitors for delivery around the world.
by swebs 8y ago
>Trees exchange chemicals with fungus, and send seeds—essentially information packets—with wind, birds, bats, and other visitors for delivery around the world. Simard specializes in the underground relationships of trees. Her research shows that below the earth are vast networks of roots working with fungi to move water, carbon, and nutrients among trees of all species. These complex, symbiotic networks mimic human neural and social networks. They even have mother trees at various centers, managing information flow, and the interconnectedness helps a slew of live things fight disease and survive together.
>Simard argues that this exchange is communication
That's pretty much the gist of the article without the fluff. I think the term "language" is an extreme hyperbole here, but it's interesting that rudimentary information can be passed between different trees.
- veddox 8y agoI think the article goes beyond hyperbole, this is approaching the realms of esoteric pseudoscience. The actual phenomenon of intra- and interspecies communications in the plant kingdom is absolutely fascinating - unfortunately, not much actual science shines through in this writeup.
- CuriouslyC 8y agoHow is a molecule different from a word? How is a spatial and temporal sequence of molecules different from a sentence? I think language, like consciousness, is one of those things that a lot of people have a chauvinistic definition for...
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- balt_s 8y agoThis has been posted here before, but your comment put me in mind of http://www.davidbrin.com/nonfiction/dogmaofotherness.html http://www.davidbrin.com/nonfiction/dogmaofotherness.html. Might be worth a quick read.
- mikro2nd 8y agoI think the term "language" is hyperbole in the context of computer algorithm notations. I'm willing to bet that tree communications far surpass computation notations in sophistication, complexity and subtlety.
- geophile 8y agoI keep coming across popular discussions of this research. Each time, I am struck with the emphasis on trees "speaking", scientists understanding their "language". It's gotten to the point that it seems unlikely this is a journalist getting it wrong, or trying too hard to communicate scientific ideas. It strikes me as clickbait. This looks like the creation of intentionally overwrought analogies to fool the rubes and garner attention. Trees emitting various molecules in reaction to environmental conditions? Sure, completely believable. Other trees picking up on those molecules, and reacting to them? Very interesting, and I can see why it makes sense from an evolutionary point of view. But to use terms like "speaking" and "language" is to conjure up ideas of consciousness, intelligence, and mental states that obviously don't apply.