A Unified Theory of Animal Locomotion 229
Roland Piquepaille writes "You probably already know that there is a master equation for all life processes based on metabolism. Now, physicists from Duke University have applied the so-called 'constructal theory' to explain how running, flying and swimming modes of locomotion are similar even if they're apparently unrelated. This single unifying physics theory explains how fast animals get from one place to another and how rapidly and forcefully they step, flap or paddle in relation to their mass. In other words, these scientists argue that the characteristics of animal shape and locomotion are predictable from physics."
Re:Swimming Fish = Flying Bird? (Score:4, Informative)
And heck, if you're going to define our atmosphere and our ocean as a fluid medium, then you're saying that ALL animals are the same - name a single animal that travels through a completely SOLID medium.
Re:Roland Piquepaille (Score:2, Informative)
All fish are donuts but not all donuts are fish (Score:4, Informative)
I hate to break this to you but most animals (including fish and humans) are shaped like donuts (tube surrounded by the organisim). This is not the only "body plan", there are ~30 others still around today, (eg: Jellyfish have only one orifice). All body plans that have ever existed hail back to (or before) the Cambrian explosion [wikipedia.org]
Re:Swimming Fish = Flying Bird? (Score:3, Informative)
That's not to say that fish and birds aren't similar in how they move through fluids, but to say they're the same is a vast misunderstanding of fish and birds.
Re:Swimming Fish = Flying Bird? (Score:4, Informative)
Penguin FAQ [penguin.net.nz]
"Penguin feathers are short, overlapping and densely packed. The outer part of the feather is waterproof while the inner down section traps an insulating layer of air, keeping the penguin warm in the sometimes freezing water."
Re:Bumbling Theories ??? (Score:3, Informative)
really should have been explained with the qualifier that (at the time) scientists' understanding of the Bumble-Bee's flight mechanics were not complete.
Time passed and someone sat down with a highspeed camera + some smoke and figured things out. I can't find a link to the explanation, but it has to do with vortices.
Re:Swimming Fish = Flying Bird? (Score:3, Informative)
[Ahem]
I have to type in some non cap letters here, otherwise the server won't let my quote pass. It is not my fault it's all in caps. That's the way it was written the first time!
So, without further ado, the quote, courtesy of that haven of IRC gems, bash.org:
YES IS NOT AN ANSWER TO "A OR B?" [bash.org]
Re:Swimming Fish = Flying Bird? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Swimming Fish = Flying Bird? (Score:1, Informative)
But that's not the definition [yahoo.com] of buoyant [yahoo.com], so quit being "clever": Birds are not buoyant in air. Not even one little bit. It's an absolute definition: "remain afloat", "upward force