| General > General Technical Chat |
| Why evolution by natural selection didn't make use of RF? |
| << < (11/16) > >> |
| coppercone2:
please stay on topic about spark snakes |
| BrianHG:
I thought that electric eels could make some signals which were detected from a pond to a pond after a flooded rain storm which may have isolated individuals. I don't remember how, (it was a National Geographic or David Attenborough docu) but a particular signal they sent was designed to attract mates and one pond within the right size could trigger a sexual response of an electric eel of opposite sex in the next pond of similar size. This means the charge they sent out had a tuned amplitude and frequency and the mate was attuned to that pattern for searching for sexual mates. It was also said that other signals, like defensive electrical attacks would not trigger the sexual response in other eels. So, by close definition, we have a signal with selective amplitude and frequency characteristics developed by natural selection. Perhaps with a few million years of guided evolution, this effect can be further attuned to something like a radio transceiver we are accustomed to. Maybe the OP's title is wrong... |
| TimFox:
Since the electric eel's discharges are pulsed, it is more likely that pulse patterns and rates form the code, rather than carrier frequency. |
| T3sl4co1l:
Yeah, nothing wrong with signaling at low frequencies, likely well under 1kHz given the depolarization rate of neurons. Also well serves predators, like sharks sensitive to myoelectric fields. E-fields don't go far in water (sea or otherwise), but that's enough when it's very dark (abyssal) or murky (several river species) -- eyes offer no improvement! Tim |
| Tomorokoshi:
And then there are these things. Keywords: quarter-wave plates, Stokes parameters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mantis_shrimp |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |