Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI
SpaceKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Space Forum / SETI / October 2005



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

A suggestion for dolphin communication.

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
rgregoryclark@yahoo.com - 31 Aug 2005 11:50 GMT
I was doing some digitizing of voice recordings when I found a
surprising effect. The first zip file linked below is of a voice
recording in MP3 format. The digital sampling rate was at the default
44khz. The second zipped file is the result when I applied the slower
sampling rate of 8khz to the first file.
I was surprised to note the effect of using the slower sampling rate
was to give the recording the sound of whale song or dolphin speech.
(Note: I copied below discussion of experimental evidence that dolphins
do use a form of "speech".)
This effect is more pronounced with longer recordings. I had to shorten
these to upload them to the forum. To observe this, use a program for
digitally recording audio, then sample a saved voice recording at a
slower rate than it was originally saved at. There are several free
programs available on the net that have this capability.
I thought then perhaps the difficulty in interpreting dolphin speech
was that we record them at a slower sampling rate than what they are
actually produced at. However, it is known that dolphin speech extends
into higher frequencies:

Oceanwide Science Institute's Research Page.
"One of the main problems is the high frequency content of dolphin
signals. Most dolphin species produce three types of signals:
echolocation clicks, the faster paced burst pulse clicks, and whistles.
Echolocation clicks are used by dolphins to detect and recognize
objects in the water from the returning echoes. Burst pulse clicks and
whistles on the other hand are thought to be used mainly for
communication. Click signals are extremely short (50 microseconds) and
broadband high frequency signals, ranging from 0 to over 200 kilohertz.
Whistles are generally within human hearing range, but also have
ultrasonic components called harmonics which can go up to over 100 kHz.
However, conventional audio recording systems only go up to about 20
kHz (also the upper limit of human hearing), and therefore miss the
major part of these signals."
http://oceanwidescience.org/docs/4ch-UDDAS.html

The higher frequencies necessitate higher sampling rates to accurately
record the analog signal. This is a result of the Nyquist theorem:

Nyquist's Sampling Theorem.
http://www.cs.cf.ac.uk/Dave/Multimedia/node149.html

So I presume that when we hear recordings of dolphin speech, they are
recorded at these higher sampling rates, or certainly for purposes of
scientific study they are.
Then perhaps the problem is that our human hearing can not adapt to the
amount of date contained in the audio at these high sampling rates, or
their rate of modulation.
So instead of using our audio sense to interpret dolphin speech why not
use a sense that operates at (much) higher frequencies? I'm thinking of
our visual sense. I suggest associating the sounds in dolphin speech
with colors. To represent intensity of the sound you could use the
brightness of the color but I think this would be better represented by
elevation, that is louder sounds would be projected higher on a screen.

The idea is to use our ability to detect recurring patterns visually in
color and form as the means to interpret dolphin speech. There are many
different ways this could be implemented. In fact visual artists might
be the best people to ask about the best ways to implement this and to
be able to "read" the messages produced.

Bob Clark

Test6.zip (89.9 KB)
http://physicsforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4619

test6-8khza.zip (86.7 KB)
http://physicsforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4620

******************************************
Newsgroups: alt.animals.dolphins, rec.arts.sf.science,
sci.anthropology, sci.cognitive, sci.astro.seti
From: rgcl...@my-deja.com (Robert Clark)
Date: 20 Jul 2001 21:46:15 -0700
Local: Sat, Jul 21 2001 12:46 am
Subject: Communicating with dolphins.

The recent news of dolphins having the ability of self-recognition in
mirrors previously believed to be restricted to humans and the great
apes reminded me of a suggestion of Carl Sagan to demonstrate the
communication abilities of dolphins.

Dolphins recognize themselves in mirror
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/biology/2001-05-01-dolphin-mirror.htm

Mirror self-recognition in the bottlenose dolphin: A case of cognitive
convergence
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol. 98, Issue 10, 5937-5942, May 8, 2001
"The ability to recognize oneself in a mirror is an exceedingly rare
capacity in the animal kingdom. To date, only humans and great apes
have shown convincing evidence of mirror self-recognition. Two
dolphins were exposed to reflective surfaces, and both demonstrated
responses consistent with the use of the mirror to investigate marked
parts of the body. This ability to use a mirror to inspect parts of
the body is a striking example of evolutionary convergence with great
apes and humans."
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/98/10/5937 [full text]

An earlier similar experiment is also available online:

Evidence of self-awareness in the bottlenose dolphin
(Tursiops truncatus)
"Conclusion
"No single test presented here proves self-recognition in bottlenose
dolphins. The tests were developed mainly from primate research
paradigms, and their limitations for interpretations of dolphin
behavior are apparent. Nevertheless, the data taken together make a
compelling case for self-recognition in this species. Four of five
dolphins apparently examined their marks in a mirror; most brought
objects to the mirror and played with them in front of it, even moving
the object back when it drifted out of view; and most of the
mirror-mode television tests designed to distinguish self-examination
from social behavior suggested self-examination. Not only did dolphins
attend to their mirror (or television) images less than 1% of the time
as compared to 100% for real dolphins, but they engaged in different
behavior with mirrors than they did with other dolphins. The results
obtained in the experiments presented here are consistent with the
hypothesis that these animals are using the mirror to examine
themselves. More definitive results, however, will have to come from
methodologies developed specifically for dolphins."
http://planet-hawaii.com/earthtrust/delbook.html [full text]

Sagan wrote about having visited a dolphin research center as part of
his research in SETI communication. In his book, _The Cosmic
Connection_, first published 1973, he suggested a means to test the
idea that dolphins can communicate complex information among
themselves:

"Dolphin anecdotes make marvelous cocktail party accounts, an
unending source of casual conversation. One of the difficulties that I
discovered with research into dolphin language and intelligence was
precisely this fascination with anecdote; the really critical
scientific tests were somehow never performed.
"For example, I repeatedly urged that the following experiment be
done: Dolphin A is introduced into a tank that is eqipped with two
underwater audio speakers. Each hydrophone is attached to an automatic
fish dispenser catering tasty dolphin fare. One speaker plays Bach,
the other plays Beatles. Which speaker is playing Bach or Beatles (a
different composition each time) at any given moment is determined
randomly. Whenever Dolphin A goes to the appropriate speaker - let us
say the one playing Beatles - he is rewarded with a fish. I think
there is no doubt that any dolphin will - because of his great
interest in, and facility with, the audio spectrum - be able soon to
distinguish between Bach and Beatles. But that is not the significant
part of the experiment. What is significant is the number of trials
before Dolphin A becomes sophisticated - that is, always know that if
he wishes a fish he should go to the speaker playing Beatles.
"Now Dolphin A is separated from the speakers by a barrier of plastic
broad-gauge mesh. He can see through the barrier, he can smell and
taste through it, and most important, he can hear and "speak" through
it. But he cannot swim through it. Dolphin B is then introduced into
the area of the speakers. Dolphin B is naive; that is he has had no
prior experience with underwater fish dispensers, Bach, or Beatles.
Unlike the well-known difficulty in finding
"naive" college students with whom to perform experiments on cannibis
sativa [ahem], there will be no difficulty finding dolphins lacking
extensive experience with Bach and Beatles. Dolphin B must go through
the same learning procedure as did Dolphin A. But now each time that
Dolphin B (at first randomly) succeeds, not only does the dispenser
provide him with a fish, but a fish is thrown to Dolphin A, who is
able to witness the learning experience of Dolphin B. If Dolphin A is
hungry, it is distinctly to his advantage to communicate what he knows
about Bach and Beatles to Dolphin B. If Dolphin B is hungry, it is to
his advantage to pay attention to the information that Dolphin A may
have. The question, therefore is: Does Dolphin B have a steeper
learning curve than Dolphin A? Does he reach the plateau of
sophistication in fewer trials or less time?
"If such experiments were repeated many times and it were found that
the learning curves for Dolphin B were in a statistically significant
sense always steeper than those of Dolphin A, communication of
moderately interesting information between two dolphins would have
been established. It might be a verbal description of the difference
between Bach and the Beatles - to my mind, a difficult but not
impossible task - or it might simply be the distinction between right
and left in each trial, until Dolphin B catches on. This is not the
best experimental design to test dolphin-to-dolphin communication, but
it is typical of a large category of experiments that could be
performed. To my knowledge and regret, no such experiments have been
performed with dolphins to date."
_The Cosmic Connection_
Ch. 24., "Some of my best friends are dolphins", pp. 177-178, 2000
edition.

Sagan wrote this in 1973. Anyone know if such experiments have been
performed since then?

Bob Clark

*******************************************

Newsgroups: alt.animals.dolphins, rec.arts.sf.science,
sci.anthropology, sci.cognitive, sci.astro.seti
From: rgcl...@my-deja.com (Robert Clark)
Date: 24 Jul 2001 16:51:36 -0700
Local: Tues, Jul 24 2001 7:51 pm
Subject: Re: Communicating with dolphins.

I was informed via email of research by Bastian and by Markov
on the question of dolphin communication:

J. Bastian (1967)
The transmission of arbitrary environmental information between
bottlenosed dolphins.
in: R.G. Busnel (ed): Animal sonar systems - Biology and bionics,
vol 2, pp. 807-873
NATO Advanced Study Institute / Lab. de Physiologie Acoustique,
France

A.V. Zanin, V.I. Markov and I.E. Sidorova (1990)
The ability of bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, to report
arbitrary information
in: J.A. Thomas and R.A. Kastelein (eds): Sensory Abilities of
Cetaceans - Laboratory and Field Evidence, pp. 685-697
NATO ASI Series, Series A: Life Sciences, vol 196, Plenum Press,
London and New York

After a web search I found a site by Kenneth W. LeVasseur that
describes this research:

Dolphin Intelligence and the Captivity Issue
http://whales.magna.com.au/POLICIES/levasseur/

To implement an experiment of the type Sagan proposes it would
probably be better to test for simpler discrimination tasks at
first than the one he mentions. However, I did find on the Dolphin
Research Institute site an experiment that suggests dolphins
might be able to make the complex melody form discrimination
described by Sagan. I discuss it below.
In the email I received, it was suggested that in the experiments
of Bastain and Markov there was simple "binary information"
exchange. I presume this means communicating something like a "yes"
or a "no" to the other dolphin. Say for example when Dolphin B
swims by the correct speaker, Dolphin A lets out an enthusiastic
squeak but gives a muted response or no response when it swims by
the other speaker. Another way to signal in a simple way would be
for Dolphin A to position itself in front of the correct speaker
if the speakers were aligned in front of the mesh screen.
I think there should be ways to overcome these objections. One
possibility would make a success a little more difficult by not
releasing a fish unless a dolphin goes first to the correct speaker
and does not visit the incorrect speaker. This would take a longer
time to train but I think it should be doable.
Also the speakers should not be placed so that Dolphin A can
signal which is the right one by positioning itself. You should
also increase the number of speakers the dolphin has to decide
from rather than two. Also to increase the dolphins desire to
visit a speaker you could have a fish visible and with its scent
detectable attached to each speaker, only the fish is not released
unless the dolphin visits the correct speaker.
Then you could observe whether Dolphin B is able to directly go
to the correct speaker. If it swims around but does eventually get
to the right speaker and in a faster time than Dolphin A that might
suggest it was yes/no information being communicated. Note that
Dolphin A remembering how long it took for its own accomplishment
of the task would have motivation for communicating directly which
speaker to go to.
Note that a success in fast learning for Dolphin B could mean
the required discrimination was communicated or it could mean
the number of the speaker to go to was communicated. However,
even if it was number communicated I think that in itself would
be significant.
You would also want to do the experiment where some other specific
behaviors need to be performed to receive the fish. One example
might be: "bite the ball on top of the correct speaker." You would
want the behavior to be something that dolphins would naturally be
able to communicate if they did indeed have a natural language.
If dolphins communicate naturally then you would expect the correct
response would be communicated immediately. But in the Bastian
experiment, it took several trials to get the correct response.
LeVasseur makes the argument this was because they were quite young
when captured. In the Markov experiments they did use older dolphins,
but from the description it does not appear the communication was
immediate here either. It's not made clear here whether the dolphins
used were from a common group that would be expected to communicate
if they indeed did have a natural language. The situation may be
analogous to that of human beings where separate groups develop
different languages. In future experiments it may be best to
insure the dolphins are from a common group. Nevertheless, Markov
et.al. did conclude that dolphins do have a complex language.
Also, the research by Markov seems to show there is less
communication under stressful conditions. Perhaps the experiments
should be performed in the wild as well as ensuring that the dolphins
are from a common group. You could probably train one dolphin in the
discrimination task when it temporarily, voluntarily separates from
one or more members of the group, suspending training when the second
dolphin you want to train comes within view of the training. However,
the strategy of training another dolphin while the first dolphin
observes would be more difficult to implement without keeping the
first dolphin in an enclosure. Perhaps one possibility in the wild
would be like if there is an area separated from the open sea by a
rocky crag. It takes some minutes to swim around the crag, but the
dolphins are familiar with it and do it commonly. You carve an
opening in the crag and place a screen across the opening so that
a dolphin that happened to swim to the separated area would now be
able to view his companions in the open sea.
In some experiments, you might want it that when Dolphin B is
being trained, Dolphin A is not able to see the position of the
speakers so that the information communicated has to be of a more
complex character to identify the correct speaker to Dolphin B.
However, I recall reading that a dolphin can "read" the echolocation
signals of another dolphin. So you might need to insure this
information also can not be communicated.

The page from the Dolphin Research Institute that suggests dolphins
might be able to distinguish melodic form is at:

Hearing Capabilities
"Recognizing Different Melodies
"Dolphins can recognize different melodies (Ralston & Herman, 1995).
They possess an apparently unique ability among non-human animals to
recognize familiar melodies across octave changes.
"In contrast, songbirds appear to regard such changes as different
melodies, focusing on the absolute pitch of the various notes rather
than the relative changes in pitch."
http://www.dolphin-institute.org/research/dolphinres.html#Dolphin
Hearing Capabilities

This is discussed in:

Ralston, J. V. & Herman, L. M. (1995). Perception and generalization
of frequency contours by a bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus).
Journal of Comparative Psychology, 109, 268-277.

A nice review of the research on the dolphin communication question
is on the page:

EARTHTRUST & SEA LIFE PARK HAWAII'S HUMAN-DOLPHIN COMMUNICATION
PROJECT
http://neoteny.eccosys.com/~bigtwin/MOON/moon02.html

On his page, Kenneth LeVasseur also suggests using other methods
than operant conditioning with fish rewards to train the dolphins:

A THIRD PHASE ALTERNATIVE TO DOLPHIN CAPTIVITY
http://whales.magna.com.au/POLICIES/levasseur/levass3b.html

Bob Clark

**************************************************
Dolphin - 31 Aug 2005 15:12 GMT
Followup set.

#begin  rgregoryclark@yahoo.com.exe (or was it rgregoryclark@yahoo.com.com)
message <1125485454.250024.326950@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> reply:
>  I was doing some digitizing of voice recordings when I found a
> surprising effect. The first zip file linked below is of a voice
> recording in MP3 format. The digital sampling rate was at the default
> 44khz.
<SNIP>
> Click signals are extremely short (50 microseconds) and
> broadband high frequency signals, ranging from 0 to over 200 kilohertz.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> major part of these signals."
> http://oceanwidescience.org/docs/4ch-UDDAS.html
<SNIP>

Keep in mind that the sampling rate of audio cards, like 44kHz in your
case, only represents the half-wave sampling, and the whole wave requires
two samples to be recorded. Means the real recording frequency of that
audio card is 44kHz / 2 = 22kHz. Enough for the generic human hearing
range (20Hz-20kHz), but not enough to record high frequency signals of
dolphins' whistles and clicks. For that task you will need a better than
the average consumer-grade audio card. The later Creative Audigy cards
can give 24bit/96kHz (48kHz wave) resolutions and might be ok for home
use. For more serious works you might want to look for specialised cards.
I am very pleased with the quality of "Audiophile 192" cards by M-AUDIO:
http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/Audiophile192-focus.html
24bit/192kHz (96kHz wave), extremely low-noise (-113dB on record).

Dolphin.

Signature

URL: http://www.DolphinWave.org
Mail: on the web page (no spam)
ICQ: 6615461

rgregoryclark@yahoo.com - 31 Aug 2005 17:16 GMT
This phenomenon might obtain as well in the realm of SETI
communication, that is the sampling rate might be too high to detect
any pattern in audio, but could be detected when translated into a
search for visual patterns.
Then an extension of the SETI@Home project might be to send out to the
participants the translation of the received signals into visual color
arrangements, with the participants actively analyzing the results for
patterns. This is different than for SETI@Home currently in that this
is only done by the participants computers and only looks for pulses.

  Bob Clark

> I was doing some digitizing of voice recordings when I found a
> surprising effect. The first zip file linked below is of a voice
[quoted text clipped - 334 lines]
>
> **************************************************
imipak - 27 Sep 2005 04:27 GMT
This is not dissimilar to the Optical SETI theories, and I don't see
anything obviously wrong with it. Personally, I think that there may be
easier ways to do the basic studies, but the idea of trying alternative
methods of data presentation to make better uses of our senses would
seem a logical enough approach.

I would offer some other thoughts, though:

1) The best analog-to-digital converters out there (that I know of) are
8-channel, 192 KHz, 26 bit. This is getting to the stage where we can
accurately capture and process live data electronically.

You notice that I pointed out that the chips are 8 channel. This is
because dolphins exist in an unrestricted 3D space. You only need 4
points to define something in 3D space, but processing data from a
tetrahedral arrangement of sensors in a variable medium can get
complicated. Having the sensors in the eight corners of a cube would
make processing the data much easier.

Now, we would have not only the sound but the direction that sound was
going at each point, in 3D space, over the time of the vocalization.
This allows us to plot vocalization against motion. Most animals have
some concept of body language, but dolphins have only a very limited
way to exhibit this. This would suggest motion is a major part of their
communication, so it should not be ignored in the processing of it.

2) There may be other non-vocalized communication. I've listed a few
here. The first two are "maybes", the third is pretty certain.

2a) Bubbles

It is known that dolphins have amazing control over the muscle for
their blow-hole. There are many photographs of young dolphins blowing
bubble rings, then swimming through them. It is possible to imagine
situations where vocalizations or "loud" movements would be
counter-productive, so a stealthy means of communication certainly
exists. Would bubbles serve? I don't know and I don't know if anyone
has really done much research on the subject. I have seen nothing on
covert communication between cetaceans, and the only references to the
bubble rings come from aquariums.

When Orcas are hunting Porpoises, covert communication would seem to be
essential. The Porpoise is in the same family, so presumably hears at a
similar frequency. The Orcas would need some means of communicating
that is stealthy enough to not give them away but be unmistakable to
other Orcas. Of course, it's possible they just rely on surrounding an
area and superior speed, but in the natural world, it's not unusual for
hunters to exploit any capability that'll give them an edge.

2b) Sonar

This could be used in a number of ways. The most obvious is a simple
application of the "angle of incidence = angle of reflection". If you
have two dolphins at two distinct points, both facing a third point
such that the three points make an isosceles triangle, then if one
dolphin uses echolocation, the reflected sound would travel to the
other dolphin. If a mother dolphin wanted to train a baby dolphin in
echolocation, then this would be one possible way it could be done.
(It's not the only way, but given that dolphins work in poor lighting
and often forrage for food under sand, it would be safer than
trial-and-error.)

2c) Surface Activity

Spy-hopping is good for observation, but there's always the possibility
it communicates something too. After all, dolphins aren't likely to do
much spy-hopping if they think the surface dangerous. It may,
therefore, also communicate that it's safe up top. A useful thing to
signal, if you need to surface to breath.

Breaching seems to be emphasis of some point made by other methods - it
doesn't seem to signify anything in itself. A bit like an accent, or an
exclamation mark.

All in all, I believe communication will remain impossible whilst we
focus too much on one single dimension or one single aspect. People
have tried specific areas and turned up little or nothing. Ergo, that
must be the wrong approach, so something else must be necessary.
Clyde Spencer - 27 Sep 2005 23:58 GMT
   Speaking of optical SETI, how about trying to decipher cephalopod
messages encoded in colors and patterns in the likes of cuttlefish and
squid?  Would we have a clue as to what an extraterrestrial intelligent
being were trying to tell us if they 'spoke' with light?
Clyde Spencer

> This is not dissimilar to the Optical SETI theories, and I don't see
> anything obviously wrong with it. Personally, I think that there may be
[quoted text clipped - 74 lines]
> have tried specific areas and turned up little or nothing. Ergo, that
> must be the wrong approach, so something else must be necessary.
imipak - 28 Sep 2005 23:10 GMT
There has been some research in that area, but as far as I know, it's
only really got as far as proving that the colour changes have
information content. Research on the intelligence of cephalopods has
demonstrated that cephalopods have some ability to reason (how much is
unknown), have long-term memories (how long-term is unknown), are
capable of learning skills (how complex is unknown) and comprehend
long-term strategies that may involve short-term risks (such as
climbing from one tank to another to get food).

This isn't really enough to get a useful idea of intelligence. It's
enough to know that something that could be defined as intelligence is
present, but to what degree or in what form?

To the best of my knowledge, Optical SETI is following a similar sort
of approach - not bothering with actual interpretation or relation, but
concentrating all efforts on a simple binary question of whether a
given recording of an optical signal shows the presence of actual
information (as opposed to being a carrier wave, a natural random
signal, etc).

It reduces the complexity of the problem they're trying to solve, at
the penalty of not really solving very much if they do ever find
something. I guess it's assumed that it would then become Somebody
Else's Problem. (As the late Douglas Adams noted, though, SEPs are
effectively invisible.)
Robin Bruce - 05 Oct 2005 11:52 GMT
If we found out Dolphins were really intelligent and had an enormous
capacity for communication, would they really have anything to say?

I reckon it would just be fish, fish, fish, interspersed with the
occasional discussion about who had dolphin sex with whom...

Robin
jillh10 - 05 Oct 2005 15:27 GMT
I suppose the dolphins that the Americans trained to carry detonators
and stick them on ships would be out thelling a few war tales
too....can you imagine it?
Michael Ash - 05 Oct 2005 16:44 GMT
In rec.arts.sf.science Robin Bruce <robin.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:
> If we found out Dolphins were really intelligent and had an enormous
> capacity for communication, would they really have anything to say?
>
> I reckon it would just be fish, fish, fish, interspersed with the
> occasional discussion about who had dolphin sex with whom...

Sounds a lot like human conversation to me.

Signature

Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

Joann Evans - 07 Oct 2005 03:53 GMT
> If we found out Dolphins were really intelligent and had an enormous
> capacity for communication, would they really have anything to say?
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Robin

  If those were all the communicative demands their environment imposes
on them, they'd not likely be highly intelligent to begin with. Large
brains are also large metabolic sinks. You don't have them unless you're
doing something highly survival-related with them.

  Also, I suspect a failure of imagination here, as to what they might
communicate about. (Not that humans don't devote signifigant
communication time to eating, sex and other social information. Skim
through cable channels, or a magazine stand, sometime...)

Signature

  You know what to remove, to reply....

  http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm

robin.bruce@gmail.com - 07 Oct 2005 14:18 GMT
> > If we found out Dolphins were really intelligent and had an enormous
> > capacity for communication, would they really have anything to say?
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> communication time to eating, sex and other social information. Skim
> through cable channels, or a magazine stand, sometime...)

Yeah, I get the point about big brains being costly to run, and their
having to be a real need for them to justify the large size. Maybe the
core of it is that they've developed great reasoning abilities to
understand and follow fish shoals. If we could understand them, maybe
they have the most complex und in-depth understanding and experience of
where and when to catch fish. I suppose with this brain they could turn
their reasoning abilities to other things. Even If they were
intelligent though, they'd still be appallingly ignorant about the
world. You certainly couldn't introduce them to polite company and not
expect them to make damn fools of themselves...
> --
>
>    You know what to remove, to reply....
>
>    http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm
Clyde Spencer - 07 Oct 2005 23:26 GMT
   Besides being eminently trainable in captivity, which requires
considerable intelligence, dolphins also demonstrate the ability to form
alliances and work towards common goals.  That is, they demonstrate
political behavior.  From our viewpoint they may have a parochial view of
the universe, but on the other hand they could probably tell us a lot about
the oceans that we don't know. Those of us who consider ourselves urbane,
are quite incompetent when it comes to fundamental survival skills such as
tracking and killing an animal for food, or knowing which wild plants are
edible.  It is a very different knowledge base that those living close to
nature have compared to those of us who depend on a complex infrastructure
to supply us with our necessities.  That doesn't mean we would find what
dolphins have to tell us any less interesting than what the last wild Indian
in California, Ishi, had to say.  What Ishi knew was probably not very
germane to surviving in San Francisco of the early-1900's, but it was still
of great interest to many people.
Thanks for all the fish!

> > > If we found out Dolphins were really intelligent and had an enormous
> > > capacity for communication, would they really have anything to say?
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> >
> >    http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm
Joann Evans - 10 Oct 2005 02:17 GMT
> > > If we found out Dolphins were really intelligent and had an enormous
> > > capacity for communication, would they really have anything to say?
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> world. You certainly couldn't introduce them to polite company and not
> expect them to make damn fools of themselves...

  Perhaps so, but that's just a matter of being ignorant of human
social conventions. Something *all* of us are born not knowing. (And
then you may travel to a place where they're different, and learn. 'Wnen
in Rome...' and so forth.) As Mark Twain once said:

 "It is better to be ignorant than to be stupid, because ignorance can
be fixed."

Signature

  You know what to remove, to reply....

  http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm

feedbackdroids@yahoo.com - 17 Oct 2005 02:48 GMT
>   "It is better to be ignorant than to be stupid, because ignorance can
> be fixed."

This came up on another forum, so thought I'd pass it along. Infolding
in dolphin neocortex is almost on a par with humans, and far more than
in most other species, including chimps+apes.

http://brainmuseum.org/Specimens/carnivora/cat/index.html
http://brainmuseum.org/Specimens/primates/squirrelmonk/index.html
http://brainmuseum.org/Specimens/primates/chimp/index.html
http://brainmuseum.org/Specimens/cetacea/dolphin/index.html
http://brainmuseum.org/Specimens/primates/human/index.html

Also, according to the following site, dolphin c.cortex is (a) 40%
larger
than humans, and (b) relatively much more is devoted to sensory
function than motor ... "the cetaceans greatly favor the sensory region
(and are not very balanced at all between the two)". Dolphin sensory
systems may be very highly refined. They don't have to balance, walk,
learn to work 10 separate fingers, etc, so more of the brain can be
devoted to other things. Interesting.

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro98/202s98-paper3/Ball3.html

A Comparison of Primate and Dolphin Intelligence as a Metaphor for the
Validity of Comparative Studies of Intelligence

By many of the physical methods of comparing intelligence, such as
measuring the brain size to body size ratio, cetacean surpass non-human

primates and even rival human beings. For example dolphins have a
cerebral cortex which is about 40% larger a human being's. Their cortex

is also stratified in much the same way as a humans(1). The frontal
lobe of dolphins is also developed to a level comparable to humans. In
addition the parietal lobe of dolphins which "makes sense of the
senses" is larger than the human parietal and frontal lobes combined
(1). The similarities do not end there, most cetaceans have large and
well developed temporal lobes which contain sections equivalent to
Broca's and Wernicke's areas in humans (1).

Another major difference between primate and cetacean brains is that
the primate brain favors the motor cortex, while "the cetaceans greatly

favor the sensory region (and are not very balanced at all between the
two)" (1). In the final measure of brain complexity, neural density
dolphins also measure up quite favorable to humans. In certain areas of

the brain concerned with "emotional control, objectivity, reality
orientation, humor, logically consistent abstract thought and higher
creativity" dolphins have an higher ratio of neural density(1). This
seems to be correlated with dolphins ability to maintain a healthy
emotional state while in captivity; humans in analogous situations
often don't fair as well emotionally.
Martin Leese - 17 Oct 2005 03:22 GMT
...
> Also, according to the following site, dolphin c.cortex is (a) 40%
> larger
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> learn to work 10 separate fingers, etc, so more of the brain can be
> devoted to other things. Interesting.

Not really.  Dolphins use sonar.  This requires
a lot of processing, so a lot of their brain is
devoted to sensory processing.  Yes, they don't
have to balance, walk, learn to work 10 separate
fingers, etc, but then humans just have look at
the world through eyes.  Your logic is flawed,
here.

Signature

Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please@see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/

feedbackdroids@yahoo.com - 17 Oct 2005 03:54 GMT
> ...
> > Also, according to the following site, dolphin c.cortex is (a) 40%
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> the world through eyes.  Your logic is flawed,
> here.

Huh? What logic is flawed? That they have relatively more brain to
devote to other things? That their neocortex is folded more on a par
with humans, as compared to any other animals? And you know, bats have
excellent sonar, can fly at high rates through a room full of fine
filament wires, and guide themselves in the presence of literally
*millions* of other bats .... and they have tiny little pea-sized
brains, and they catch tiny little flying bugs like mosquitos. Quite a
trick. When's the last time you saw a dolphin using his sonar in a
school of a million dolphins?

http://www.texasmosquito.org/Bats.html

http://www.ponddoc.com/WhatsUpDoc/WildLife/BuzzMosquitoes.htm

Mosquitoes are a favorite food of bats and dragonflies. A single
dragonfly can eat up to 600 insects a day. That number is dwarfed by
the brown bat who can eat 1200 mosquitoes in an hour!

http://images.google.com/images?q=bats+flock&hl=en&btnG=Search+Images

===========

And what the heck does this mean? Oy???
...........
but then humans just have look at
> the world through eyes.
Martin Leese - 17 Oct 2005 06:15 GMT
>>...
>>>Also, according to the following site, dolphin c.cortex is (a) 40%
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> Huh? What logic is flawed? That they have relatively more brain to
> devote to other things?

Yes.

...
> And you know, bats have
> excellent sonar, can fly at high rates through a room full of fine
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> trick. When's the last time you saw a dolphin using his sonar in a
> school of a million dolphins?

Bats and dolphins are not comparable.  Water is
a dirty medium, air is clean.  By that I mean
that a coherent sonar pulse (called a ping) will
have its coherence disrupted simply by passing
through the water column.  In contrast, bats use
high frequency echo location, the coherence of
which is not disrupted by passage through the
air.

Also, bats home in on the wing vibration of their
prey.  Picking this out from the background noise
is relatively straight forward.

Finally, human tissue (and fish tissue) is mostly
water, and is transparent to sonar.  When a
dolphin "sees" you using sonar, it see your lungs
and your skeleton.  When "seeing" fish it sees
their swim bladders, millions of them when the
shoal is large.

This all makes sonar processing a difficult
problem.  I used to write software to process
sidescan sonar images of the sea floor.  Sonar
processing is tough.

> And what the heck does this mean? Oy???
> ...........
> but then humans just have look at
>>the world through eyes.

Processing eye data is simple compared with
processing sonar data.  So less brain needs to
be devoted to it.  That's all.  Dolphins are
still smart when compared with other animals.
The important questions are how smart, and
smart in what ways?

Signature

Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please@see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/

feedbackdroids@yahoo.com - 17 Oct 2005 16:42 GMT
> >>...
> >>>Also, according to the following site, dolphin c.cortex is (a) 40%
[quoted text clipped - 52 lines]
> sidescan sonar images of the sea floor.  Sonar
> processing is tough.

Of course, no one has yet solved the general computer vision problem,
either, despite maybe 20-30 years of work on it.

> > And what the heck does this mean? Oy???
> > ...........
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> The important questions are how smart, and
> smart in what ways?

This is an interesting statement if true. General vision procesiing
appears to be extremely difficult to accomplish. If you look at the
visual cortex in higher mammals, you find something like 30 different
visual areas, each preforming more or less speicifc computations on the
visual input, plus something like 13-14 hierarchical levels, according
to the neuroscientists doing the work. So, if dolphin vision processing
truly is much simpler than dolphin sonar, its brain must have some
incredible adaptations. Got any actual evidence of this? IE, research
citations would be nice.

Regards, the last question, the implication of my original post was
that the with the size of the neocortex, along with the degree of
infolding, is the first anatomical indication of intelligence. There is
a reason for the infolding.
feedbackdroids@yahoo.com - 22 Oct 2005 19:36 GMT
> > >>...
> > >>>Also, according to the following site, dolphin c.cortex is (a) 40%
[quoted text clipped - 82 lines]
> infolding, is the first anatomical indication of intelligence. There is
> a reason for the infolding.

I see this thread pooped out fast, but I did find an interesting
picture. Look at the "size" of the dolphin brain, as compared to Lori's
hat-size.

http://www.seti.org/site/pp.asp?c=ktJ2J9MMIsE&b=178963

And, as noted earlier, in fact it seems the amount of cortical
infolding in dolphins is somewhat "higher" than even in humans.
Interesting.

http://www.seti.org/site/pp.asp?c=ktJ2J9MMIsE&b=178963
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2010 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.