|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Evolution Of Sleep | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Larni writes: That's why we don't see any and organisms that would logically be better off without it (dolphins and swifts) not needing to sleep but have convoluted work arounds (sleeping one hemisphere at a time). Isn't this unihemspheric sleep a great idea? Imagine if humans did that! We'd be all emotional and unrestrained creativity half the time and logically minded pedants the rest
Larni writes: I would hazard that organisms probably could exist that do not need sleep but they would be out competed by ones that do sleep. In what way? Adapatability?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Interesting on the octopus. Given that even worms have been observed to sleep I was surprised to read that squid and octopus don't. But it seems they do after all.
Strags writes: Isn't most of the energy humans consume taken up by the brain? Caf writes: 20% of energy consumption seems to be the most commonly cited figure. Yes - That is what I have seen too. But I don't think it uses any less when we sleep.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
Well I 'reckon' that for brains to do the job that they do they need to be pushing themselves tonthe energetic limit.
I remember some study about brain activity inducing tiredness (there seemed to be no significant difference between doing book learning and going on many fair ground rides). My thoughts are that to operate at the levels brains do necessitates a refractory period. Hypothetically a type of brain that did not need to rest could exist but but this would not be able to work constantly.The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong. Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
It seems to me that if we think of the body as just a biological machine then all it would require is more fuel to keep going. Isn't it likely that it's our consciousness that needs the rest? If that is the case then I have to wonder what it is about our consciousness that needs recharging and just how does that happen.
Then I would wonder what part dreams play in all of this. I would think that dreams would be a drain on consciousness but that doesn't appear to be the case. Sadly, I only have questions and no answers. Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
But our consciousness resides in the biological substrate of our brain, which appears to need a refractory period to keep it going. This means that it the biology that needs to have a break.
Our consciousness is bound within our biology. Our brain is just as active when we sleep but it does a different kind of activity. The wave lengths of our brain waves change but it's still very active. Adenosine builds up in the body when we are awake and lowers when we sleep. From this we could conclude that this build up acts to signal sleep and that this evolved because sleep is very beneficial to the organism fitness. The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong. Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1
|
Larni writes: But our consciousness resides in the biological substrate of our brain, which appears to need a refractory period to keep it going. This means that it the biology that needs to have a break.Our consciousness is bound within our biology. I wonder. I have to admit that I’m of the school of thought that thinks our consciousness is responsible for our biology. I see the brain has having evolved but consciousness existing somehow apart. However even if that is correct, what you said about the brain needing a refractory period makes more sense than what I suggested in my previous post.
Larni writes: Our brain is just as active when we sleep but it does a different kind of activity. The wave lengths of our brain waves change but it's still very active.Adenosine builds up in the body when we are awake and lowers when we sleep. From this we could conclude that this build up acts to signal sleep and that this evolved because sleep is very beneficial to the organism fitness. I have a hunch you know a great deal more about this than I do and a quick look at wiki confirmed this. As I’ve said before, this is a great place to learn. Thanks
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 334 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
Well i googled and noone knows the exact answer but there are a few hypothesis.
The first is that sleeping allows the body to repair cells damaged by metabolic byproducts called free radicals. the second one Another idea is that sleep helps replenish fuel, which is burned while awake. One possible fuel is ATP, the all-purpose energy-carrying molecule, which creates an end product called adenosine when burned. So when ATP is low, adenosine is high, which tells the body that it’s time to sleep. While a postdoc at Harvard, Prober helped lead some experiments in which zebrafish were given drugs that prevented adenosine from latching onto receptor molecules, causing the fish to sleep less. But when given drugs with the opposite effect, they slept more. He has since expanded on these studies at Caltech. Then thers the theory that the brain does a little housekeeping during sleep and cleans out the superfluous synapses Or the brain is replying past events reinforcing memory and learning all of these ideas have some testing behind them Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand Jesus was a dead jew on a stick nothing more
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
I'm definitely with the learning theory: as I said, I've been stuck on computer games, slept on it, and then breezed past it next day.
It also seems to be true that protein synthesis and general anabolism takes place mostly in babies when they sleep. Maybe sleep is from growing to adulthood that has been co opted to improve the capacity of the nervous system. The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong. Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
I'll just add one thing that has always puzzled me. I can look directly at the face of someone I know well, close my eyes and try and picture that face. There is only a kind of vague recollection but no image.
However, when I dream I'm in some kind of semi-consciousness state with my eyes closed, yet, I still perceive recognizable faces. There is no external stimuli and yet I see things clearly in my mind in a way that I can't when I'm awake with my eyes closed. Where does that mental picture come from?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
When you sleep and dream your occipital lobe is buzzing away and the areas v1-v4 (this is from memory so I could be wrong) light up like the're on fire. These are the visual areas of the brain functioning and why we see images in our sleep. It's my understanding that these images are initially random but can for into a post hoc narrative that we call dreams.
For some this can turn into lucid dreaming or sometimes nightmares. I've always had nightmares and used to have lucid dreams sometimes (not anymore, though). I don't know what to say about your visualising someone from memory: my images are pretty clear (even though I have a terrible memory for faces). That could just be within the normal variation of imaginal visualisation acuity. One thing I do experience in dreams is that I can never read writing in a dream. The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong. Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Larni writes: I don't know what to say about your visualising someone from memory: my images are pretty clear (even though I have a terrible memory for faces). I agree that we can form a mental picture of sorts but it is a vague idea of what something looks like, although I agree that painters can draw from memory. The images that we have when we dream are much more clearly defined and more like what we visualize when we are awake with our eyes open. I have no idea what to make of it but I suspect that there is more significance in it than what we might think.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4396 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
It comes from your memory.
Dreaming is simply about imagining things and so our memory is completely involved. Dreaming is just a continuence of day dreaming. Actual day dreaming which means somewhat oblivious to whats happening around us. In day dreaming we control our imagination but in sleep dreaming we have less control but still it shows our soul is imagining things. Our soul is never knocked out.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4396 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
It didn't evolved but was created with us.
God made the world to be half the time in darkness. This great difference means there was a need to recharge ourselves. It seems its not really our bodies that need rest but our brain area. If we are stressed we need more sleep. so there is energy loss thinking. WE do need more sleep if we worked physically hard that hard but still it seems more about brain energy issues.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
Please keep your religious views out of a really interesting thread.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong. Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
CS writes: Well, it could be... If the circadian rhythm was already a part of their evolution before they got to the poles/caves. But that still wouldn't fully explain fish or deep sea dwellers would it?
CS writes: If we're going back that far, I'd prolly bet that sleep evolved independently between Protostomes and Deuterostomes. Protosomes splits into antropods, flat worms, and mollusks (etc) while Dueterostomes splits into urchins, round worms and vertebrates (etc). I think that there's some disparity between the sleep that these two groups exhibit, so that could suggests its unrelated. If that is correct - That sleep has evolved along two independent strands - It adds weight to the notion that it is something that most complex lifeforms will do. So - In the same way we might expect alien lifeforms to possess "eyes" of some sort (because they are bloody useful and have evolved independently in a number of forms) - It seems aliens might well sleep too. Bizzarre.
CS writes: I don't know, but there's also a lot of "rebuilding" that goes on during sleep, which would still count as 'activity' even though its helping. Its still gonna require energy, but you're not doing all that other activity as well. If you didn't sleep, then you'd have to be rebuilding while you're doing your normal activities, and then all that together would require that much more energy. OK. But let me put my question/line-of-thought another way. If we develop Artificial Intelligence would we expect to implement periods of sleep into our inventions? Kinda defrag time?
CS writes: I see it as more of a balancing act than an arms race. But isn't that like saying that if Cheetahs got too fast they'd all die out from over-eating? Whilst it might be logically true the incremental nature of change means that it doesn't happen like that. The Cheetah gets a bit faster and then the antelope does too (or vice versa) and the whole thing is kept in balance through graduality. But the ultimate result is escalation. So why not the same with regard to preying on sleepers?
CS writes: But sleep seems like a good idea to me. Everything degrades and nothing can run forever......, Well forever is a long time. But given the ability of organisms to repair themselves I don't see why the limit has to be tens of years rather than much longer. Trees live for centuries. Why, in theory, couldn't brains?
CS writes: ...it just makes sense to take a break every so often. Would you prefer to never have to sleep but then just have a lifespan that was 30% shorter? Would you sleep more for a longer life? But I'm not sure why those have to be the choices.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024