Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (23737)	10/9/2007 3:14:59 PM
From: energyplay	Respond to of 217801

>>>"As it is, I detest the prevailing US attitudes towards immigrants."<<< You dislike the acceptance that immigrants have in the US ? Lots of people in California don't like Arnold, either. Should the US be more like Japan, or France ? ;-)

To: carranza2 who wrote (23737)	10/10/2007 12:42:18 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217801

C2, nice try. But you completely ignore the tension between earlier maturity for the advantages that gives, as you described, inter alia, and later maturity and the advantages that gives, which you didn't. Nature is always on the horns of a dilemma, with things being both good and bad, depending on the situation. Being tall is great for reaching high apples, but bad for ducking under branches to escape. Being fat is great for resisting cold, but terrible for running from polar bears. Being brown is great for surviving bright sunshine, but bad for keeping good supplies of vitamin D flowing [so they say] and keeping heat in when it's cold. Being hugely muscular is great for fighting off other blokes, but not so good for minimal energy consumption. Early maturity is the same. It's great for having babies, but long development times are an intellectual essential. It's not for bone growth that development in humans is delayed. Deer grow bones really fast - they can get to a gallop on the first day. The reason for the long development time is brain development. But nature can't have both early development and late development simultaneously. I'm sure TJ is largely a nice chap, but he does need taunting for his wayward ways. His slavish devotion to the dog eat dog world of the PRC. You are quite right that smarter women and smarter men are both good. Nature can't have it all ways though. Nature compromises with women maturing 3 years earlier than men. The cognitive limitations that puts on women is worth it in the interests of having them succeed. The males do the warring and heavy thinking. It's specialisation. Women and men work together for mutual benefit. Men have the Y chromosome for the functions it performs. Women have the babies and breasts which are food supplies. Men have the muscles and the long-term brain development. You still haven't mentioned, for either males or females, why humans have such a long time to maturity. It is of course best to mature really quickly, unless countervailing advantages mean longer development is better. Among mammals, humans are about the slowest to reach maturity if not the slowest [especially for males - I just made that up without checking data [I asked Google but couldn't find it easily]]. Why do you think that is if not for cognitive purposes? Longevity is also explained by cognitive selection pressure. Having gone to all the trouble of developing huge cognitive functions, it's a waste to have them die off at age 40 or so. Both males and females last for many decades. Longer than all other mammals. Males not so long because they are polluted with testosterone and the Y chromosome so do all sorts of high risk competitive things and that's okay with nature because if one dies, there are a dozen to take his place in looking after any attractive females he left behind. Older males of course take a lot fewer risks because their job is more to be sage and mind the grandchildren and show them the tricks of the trade. So, any ideas on how delayed puberty and maturity might be good for humans [both male and female]? I say it's for brain development. You think it's something else, unstated. What do you think it is. Mqurice

To: carranza2 who wrote (23737)	10/10/2007 4:03:45 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 217801

C2, here's some information on our cuzzies. It looks as though there's about 1 or 2 years difference between males and females. In humans it's about 3 years. janegoodall.org < When a female is in estrus and sexually attractive and receptive to the males, the skin around her rump swells considerably and is clear pink. Females show their first very small sexual swellings at age eight or nine, but are not sexually attractive to the older males until they reach age 10 or 11. There is usually a two-year period of adolescent sterility before the female finally conceives. Spacing between births, provided the previous infant lives, is about five years. Some females in estrus are more attractive to the males than others. A popular female may be accompanied by many or all the adult males of her community, with adolescents and juveniles tagging along. Or, the dominant male of the group may show possessive behavior toward her, trying to prevent other males from mating with her. A third observed mating pattern is the consortship, during which a male persuades a female to accompany him to some peripheral part of the community range. If he can keep her there, away from other males, until the time of ovulation, he has a good chance of siring her child. Even low-ranking males can become fathers if they have the skill to lead a female away at a time in her reproductive cycle when she is not interesting to the high-ranking males, and keep her there until her fertile period. At Gombe, chimpanzee males may be capable of reproduction at age 12 or 13, but are not socially mature until a few years later. > It's obvious that the males are not maturing later to enable them to do high-end maths and physics. Whatever the motivation is for the later human male maturity, it probably applies in chimpland too. Note that the males [contrary to your supposition in humans] prefer the older females. Human timetables are stretched out by about 15%, with longer gestation, longer childhood and longer adulthood. I say it's because the vast learning is too valuable to have thrown away after a decade or two of life - we don't even learn enough to look after ourselves in a decade and are barely up to speed after 2 decades and getting revved up after 3 decades, so for return on investment, nature obviously needs us to hang around for a few more decades to pay the bills and get a return on investment. The main difference between chimps and humans that requires more time is intellectual development. Male chimps also need more time for nature to get more bang for its buck. Female chimps are fully grown younger. But only 2 years younger. Mqurice