←back to thread

230 points mdp2021 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
avar ◴[] No.41868092[source]
This article doesn't even try to address what I feel is the deeper and more interesting question (but probably one that can't be answered): Why is it that horses, cows, giraffes and birds have all had to come up with a purely passive solution of "locking" themselves in place, either via their joints (for the four-legged), or via the tendon mechanism described here for birds?

I.e. why wasn't in simpler in evolutionary terms to come up with some mechanism where 1% of the brain was dedicated to the relatively simple task of "station keeping", while the rest of the brain could benefit from sleep?

replies(9): >>41868139 #>>41868150 #>>41868707 #>>41869047 #>>41869387 #>>41869517 #>>41870381 #>>41872718 #>>41879066 #
1. michael1999 ◴[] No.41872718[source]
Because movement isn't 1% of the brain. Movement is why we have brains. Balance and head-righting do sensor fusion between vision, the vestibular system, and proprioception. That's a whole-body problem, and I don't see how that can be a low-energy activity. Brains are expensive.

We do have an unconscious falling reflex, but that works by startling us awake! Actually doing movement planning requires a running brain.