3 ms·
Sure. But the point here is that your simply presenting another theory, possibly as far-fetched as the one presented in the original article.
by swannodette 16y ago
Sure. But the point here is that your simply presenting another theory, possibly as far-fetched as the one presented in the original article.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- yummyfajitas 16y agoOf course it's a theory. That's why I described as the "the occams razor explanation" rather than "a proven fact". Facts: BNN's are stochastic ODE solvers. Most biological behaviors like the honeybee dance are guided by a BNN interacting with bee hormones (also described by ODEs), etc. (Generally established fact.) A particularly simple and elegant ODE based on flag manifolds describes the honeybee dance to a good approximation (Shipman's contribution). My theory: The particular BNN (which is not yet mapped, AFAIK) guiding the honeybee dance reduces to a solver of Shipman's ODE, or some approximation thereof. Whether that is "as far-fetched" as bees detecting symmetries of wavefunctions, I leave that up to the reader.
- antipaganda 16y agoahahaha. The idea that bee brains contain a structure known to exist already in many other types of brain is equivalent to bees being able to use virtual particles for computation? That's crazy talk, and you know it.