eye brain

[Write4U]

gamelord said:
I dont think smell is that accurate of a sensor to use.

Don't tell that to a bloodhound. They can smell 3 day old scents at the molecular level from cells shed by the prey.

Often called a nose with a dog attached, the bloodhound is so adept at scent tracking its trailing results is admissible evidence in a court of law. Its outstanding ability to read terrain with its nose is primarily due to a large, ultrasensitive set of scent membranes that allows the dog to distinguish smells at least a thousand times better than humans.

https://www-tc.pbs.org/wnet/nature/files/2008/06/inline_underdogs_bloodhound.jpg

 

[gamelord]

Don't tell that to a bloodhound. They can smell 3 day old scents at the molecular level.
https://www-tc.pbs.org/wnet/nature/files/2008/06/inline_underdogs_bloodhound.jpg

I assumed all beings with olfactory sensors can sense things at a molecular level or am i mistaken?

The human sense of smell is very poor so saying something is 1000 times better is based on a bar set low.

If smell technology was so advanced then we should abandon typical methods of cartography and instead graph 3d images of terrain using this advanced smell technology.

 

[DaveC426913]

But in terms of clarity of picture, how could there be a "smell HD"?

Exactly. Which is why vision is only one facet of the world around us. And why, if one relies on it too heavily, one can be fooled.

They are fundamentally misty and foggy by nature.

Only to humans, who are almost smell-blind.

 

[Write4U]

I assumed all beings with olfactory sensors can sense things at a molecular level or am i mistaken?

The human sense of smell is very poor so saying something is 1000 times better is based on a bar set low.

If smell technology was so advanced then we should abandon typical methods of cartography and instead graph 3d images of terrain using this advanced smell technology.

Sorry, I edited my post to qualify that bloodhounds can smell the scent of single cells shed by the prey, even if the trail is days old.

 

[Write4U]

Taste and smell are separate senses with their own receptor organs, yet they are intimately entwined. Tastants, chemicals in foods, are detected by taste buds, which consist of special sensory cells. When stimulated, these cells send signals to specific areas of the brain, which make us conscious of the perception of taste. Similarly, specialized cells in the nose pick up odorants, airborne odor molecules. Odorants stimulate receptor proteins found on hairlike cilia at the tips of the sensory cells, a process that initiates a neural response. Ultimately, messages about taste and smell converge, allowing us to detect the flavors of food.

http://www.brainfacts.org/Thinking-Sensing-and-Behaving/Taste/2012/Taste-and-Smell

 

[gamelord]

Exactly. Which is why vision is only one facet of the world around us. And why, if one relies on it too heavily, one can be fooled.


Only to humans, who are almost smell-blind.

Sorry, I edited my post to qualify that bloodhounds can smell the scent of single cells shed by the prey, even if the trail is days old.

Okay, at this point the discussion is getting rather ridiculous and out of hand.

We don't "see" in smells because smell inherently lacks clarity.
Smell is essentially the Arrow sticker in GTA, but a bit randomized and jittery. Nothing more nothing less.

Dogs evolved eyes so obviously have need of eyes. Photons paint a direct picture of our physical surroundings. If one were to super impose smells you could not pain a direct picture of physical space, it would be blurry at best foggy at worst.

Watch as a dog tracks a foe, it scans frequently sniffing constantly. It has to pause and scan constantly. It does not have always a clear picture of where to go.

 

[billvon]

Watch as a dog tracks a foe, it scans frequently sniffing constantly. It has to pause and scan constantly. It does not have always a clear picture of where to go.

Watch a human try to track a foe. His eyes shift constantly. Does that mean he does not always have a clear picture of where to go?

Every sense out there excels at some things. Smell is one of the most useful to land animals, but one we denigrate because we don't have good senses of smell.

 

[gamelord]

Watch a human try to track a foe. His eyes shift constantly. Does that mean he does not always have a clear picture of where to go?

Every sense out there excels at some things. Smell is one of the most useful to land animals, but one we denigrate because we don't have good senses of smell.

Let me explain why smell works and how it is useful to animals.

Smell is useful because it allows animals to track prey. Tracking is not the same as visual awareness.

How smell works in dogs is they first memorize what their foe smells like. Then they scan their nose around and see what direction that smell is concentrated. They walk a few steps in that direction, then scan around again and alter their direction in whatever new direction.

This does not mean that smell gives them any accurate painting of reality. What it means is that they have a higher capacity for smell hedonism, ie. in terms of smell humans are limited to simply an america buffet of mashed potatoes and mac and cheese. But a dog has simply more options of smells, he has all foods of all restaurants to choose from to smell.

Similar how humans see in rainbows, but dogs see in black and white. Smell is the same thing, but in reverse. Similar to how computers can display in "16 million colors" which sounds impressive on paper, but is very much almost the same as displaying in 256 colors.

Here is a metaphor. Imaging you are playing Halo. But the graphics are not working, it is all a black screen. The only thing of the graphics that are working, is a waypoint. On your screen you see a waypoint. But that is all. Everything else is not loaded or displayed. Good luck navigating tunnels and getting to the wayponint without any kind of accurate picture of physical space.

 

[DaveC426913]

Vision is blocked by a vanishingly thin sheet of rice paper.
Your dinner is burning in the other room, vision is useless.

Vision only works when there is sufficient light.
There's no smell darkness.

Vision is directional; it only tells you what is in front of your face.
You can smell an angry beaver behind you.

Vision defines our reality because we have such good vision. For bats and dolphins, sound is way better, and can easily give them more information than vision - including 3D imaging. Dolphins can sonar inside objects that are opaque to vision.

 

[gamelord]

Vision is blocked by a vanishingly thin sheet of rice paper.
Your dinner is burning in the other room, vision is useless.

Vision only works when there is sufficient light.
There's no smell darkness.

Vision is directional; it only tells you what is in front of your face.
You can smell an angry beaver behind you.

Vision defines our reality because we have such good vision. For bats and dolphins, sound is way better, and can easily give them more information than vision - including 3D imaging. Dolphins can sonar inside objects that are opaque to vision.

Question: Are humans the dominant race or are dogs?
Question: Are dogs as well at vision as humans?
Question: Are dogs very skilled at smell?
Question: If so why are they not the dominant race of the planet.

Smell deals in probabilities. Can I smell an angry beaver behind me? How?
Not enough data, to discern the spatial origin of the molecules as they hit my nose.
Only by turning in a 360, analyzing from memory the degrees of intensity of smells, priority to my rotational positioning.

We smell an angry beaver. It is not in our field of vision. Thus we deduce that it is probably behind us.


Sound, sonar, works in the same principles as photons: Fast moving waves, unchanged by wind or fluid bernoulli distortions altering their trajectory.
The waves paint a clear picture of reality, as opposed to small light weight particulates, subjected to fluid dynamics, similar in nature to leaves falling from a tree, random, slow, and chaotic.
This is not to be confused with sonar, utilizing water fluids, in order to traverse the ocean space.
Sonar cannot return color information. Thus precise material identification is made more difficult using sonar. Underwater it is more useful, or in the dark, when there is no other option, as light has difficulty traversing ocean space.

 

[billvon]

Let me explain why smell works and how it is useful to animals.
Smell is useful because it allows animals to track prey. Tracking is not the same as visual awareness.

That's true. And eyes are often not as useful as smell. It all depends on your goals. If you are doing a crossword puzzle, vision is great. If you are looking for food in a forest, smell wins.

This does not mean that smell gives them any accurate painting of reality. What it means is that they have a higher capacity for smell hedonism, ie. in terms of smell humans are limited to simply an america buffet of mashed potatoes and mac and cheese. But a dog has simply more options of smells, he has all foods of all restaurants to choose from to smell.

And more sensitivity, and more range.

Here is a metaphor. Imaging you are playing Halo. But the graphics are not working, it is all a black screen. The only thing of the graphics that are working, is a waypoint. On your screen you see a waypoint. But that is all. Everything else is not loaded or displayed. Good luck navigating tunnels and getting to the wayponint without any kind of accurate picture of physical space.

Right.

Now here's another scenario. You are in a pitch black forest. A dog is tracking you by smell. You run but keep running into trees and plants; finally you break your leg falling into a hole. Are you going to be able to escape?

And which skill - tracking in a pitch black forest, or playing Halo - is really more important in the long run?

 

[gamelord]

That's true. And eyes are often not as useful as smell. It all depends on your goals. If you are doing a crossword puzzle, vision is great. If you are looking for food in a forest, smell wins.

And more sensitivity, and more range.

Right.

Now here's another scenario. You are in a pitch black forest. A dog is tracking you by smell. You run but keep running into trees and plants; finally you break your leg falling into a hole. Are you going to be able to escape?

And which skill - tracking in a pitch black forest, or playing Halo - is really more important in the long run?

Both are equally important as they teach combat tactics and navigational tactics.

I dont think any man can track in a pitch black forest.

Overall I think humans win because them falling into random holes didn't seem to make them extinct at all. Humans win, dogs lose. So I will take my full vision and myself as a dominant species at the small risk of accidentally crash landing a pitch black forest someday.

Second I dont think I have a choice to whether or not I can upgrade my nose but if I could I would. But would I choose to be colorblind as a trade no.

 

[Write4U]

Okay, at this point the discussion is getting rather ridiculous and out of hand.

Let me explain why smell works and how it is useful to animals.
Smell is useful because it allows animals to track prey. Tracking is not the same as visual awareness

No one is speaking of "seeing" scent, other than an abstract scent image. And obviously you did not read the link I provided re bloodhounds. So for your convenience, here is an excerpt;

Researchers have estimated that a bloodhound’s nose consists of approximately 230 million olfactory cells, or “scent receptors” — 40 times the number in humans. Whereas our olfactory center is about the size of a postage stamp, a dog’s can be as large as a handkerchief — according to Allen, it is among the largest in canines. “The physical size of their olfactory area far exceeds most other working scent dogs,” he says. “The larger capacity combined with the desire to work makes them a very good tool.”

When a bloodhound sniffs a scent article (a piece of clothing or item touched only by the subject), air rushes through its nasal cavity and chemical vapors — or odors — lodge in the mucus and bombard the dog’s scent receptors. Chemical signals are then sent to the olfactory bulb, the part of the brain that analyzes smells, and an “odor image” is created.

For the dog, this image is far more detailed than a photograph is for a human. Using the odor image as a reference, the bloodhound is able to locate a subject’s trail, which is made up of a chemical cocktail of scents including breath, sweat vapor, and skin rafts. Once the bloodhound identifies the trail, it will not divert its attention despite being assailed by a multitude of other odors. Only when the dog finds the source of the scent or reaches the end of the trail will it relent. So potent is the drive to track, bloodhounds have been known to stick to a trail for more than 130 miles.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/underdogs-the-bloodhounds-amazing-sense-of-smell/350/

Never underestimate the capabilities of animals with specific adaptive powers.
.

 

[billvon]

Both are equally important as they teach combat tactics and navigational tactics.

The ability to win a HALO game teaches you exactly nothing about surviving. It's a game, and if you think it teaches you anything about survival in reality, you are a fool. The ability to track in a forest will keep you alive in the real world.

I dont think any man can track in a pitch black forest.

Right; sense of smell isn't good enough.

Overall I think humans win because them falling into random holes didn't seem to make them extinct at all. Humans win, dogs lose.

Not in that case. Humans win overall because they discovered torches, not because "smell sucks." We use technology to overcome our weak senses.

 

[Write4U]

Not in that case. Humans win overall because they discovered torches, not because "smell sucks." We use technology to overcome our weak senses.

Humans are inferior in physical abilities to most other mammals which are adapted to their environment in the wild, except in the area of tool-making which allows man to create his own environment.

 

[gamelord]

No one is speaking of "seeing" scent, other than an abstract scent image. And obviously you did not read the link I provided re bloodhounds. So for your convenience, here is an excerpt;
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/underdogs-the-bloodhounds-amazing-sense-of-smell/350/

Never underestimate the capabilities of animals with specific adaptive powers.
.

In what way does any of that contradict anything I said?

The ability to win a HALO game teaches you exactly nothing about surviving. It's a game, and if you think it teaches you anything about survival in reality, you are a fool. The ability to track in a forest will keep you alive in the real world.

Right; sense of smell isn't good enough.

Not in that case. Humans win overall because they discovered torches, not because "smell sucks." We use technology to overcome our weak senses.

Humans vision is better than dog's.

Halo increases spatial logic and reason and combat abilities. Where did I say it helped you with tracking?

Humans are inferior in physical abilities to most other mammals which are adapted to their environment in the wild, except in the area of tool-making which allows man to create his own environment.

Humans are superior in physical abilities to most animals due to their limb structure. It allows them to weild weapons, swords shields and spears and throw rocks. Humans didnt need much intelligence to invent throwing rocks or weilding rocks at hostile animals.
Far as raw power some body builders can lift 1000 pounds, not sure if a tiger can do that, maybe it can but not sure.

 

[Dr_Toad]

Yet you seem so sure of everything that tries to contradict a previous poster's remark. Why aren't you sure of the one attempt at fact you present in this thread.

It's wield, by the way. As I said, you're so sure that you don't use a spell checker..

Move along. Get something right before you prove that you're a fool by opening your mouth?

 

[gamelord]

Yet you seem so sure of everything that tries to contradict a previous poster's remark. Why aren't you sure of the one attempt at fact you present in this thread.

It's wield, by the way. As I said, you're so sure that you don't use a spell checker..

Move along. Get something right before you prove that you're a fool by opening your mouth?

Nonsense. I have posted several facts, such as the fact human vision is better than a dog.

If your mind is closed to reason, so beit. But don't irritate me by your act of pretending that typos are some kind argument. Really take a look at your life and what you've become, you've resorted to an internet career of making arguments based on typos, what does that say really.

 

[Write4U]

In what way does any of that contradict anything I said?

Write4U said,
Sorry, I edited my post to qualify that bloodhounds can smell the scent of single cells shed by the prey, even if the trail is days old.

You,

Okay, at this point the discussion is getting rather ridiculous and out of hand.

....

 

[gamelord]

You, ....

The discussion is ridiculous, because you all keep going on about how "amazing" and incredible a dog's sense of smell is, when all it is is the equivalent of putting 1 gb harddrive on a 1995 machine.

And so its time to just admit I am right in that a dogs sense of smell is just the equivalent of the GTA arrow thing but worse. It is simply collecting of random data, memorizing the data, and using brute-force method to move to locations where the data is most concentrated. *Claps hands* amazing though amirite.