Symmetry strikeme143: This is not a war question, though, nor is it a comedy forum. I think you have been misdirected somewhere. Goran: One side is often stronger then the other. Why? Perhaps it's more efficient for an organism to spend energy in maintaining more strength in one side (for defense) rather then both? If you look at crabs for example, one of their claws is usually huge and is used for defense. Their lesser claw is used for feeding. That's the best I can deduct. It's a good question so hopefully someone with more information can contribute. jjasmine: left and right sound pretty clear to me - the confusing part seems to be the opposite from right - it is not just the left, but too often the wrong. Goran: jjasmine, now that's a loaded statement at least in English. I prefer conservative and liberal LOL Fred: How about this idea? There is no left and right in the Universe,... only in our perceptions of it? jjasmine: do forgive me, please - I was kind of too-deep-into-it we do have elections today now seriously - I guess it is no symmetry without a purpose, the purpose being balance. Does that make any sense? Goran: I can't think of examples in nature observable by naked eye where there is perfect symmetry. Are snowflakes perfectly symmetric? jjasmine: no way - I think the law of entropy says little something on balancing and equalizing things. As long as there is any difference there is action, motion or however we call it. Total order means death (= no action whatsoever). mhm - maybe my kitchen is a bit too vivid from that point of view... Fred: Sorry Jazzercision, but snowflakes are perfectly symmetry in crystal! And Nature loves symmetry, look at a flower bud. Entropy: things with perfect symmetry... read about the golden ratio (the number phi). There are some interesting creatures that display it. even orbitals of an atom are symmetric in concordance with the golden ratio. Entropy: And, in order to know left from right, you have to be in an environment with gravity. If there is no gravity, then you will have no natural concept of what direction is, because you have nothing to relate it to (direction down, gravity). I'm not saying that if you were to go into space, you couldn't tell your left from right anymore, but if you were born in space, you'd have no equilibrium and therefore, no sense of direction. Goran: Since our brain naturally functions in three dimensions, I think even those born in space would seek reference points that would result in left, right, up, down, forward, and backward. Entropy: They've brought mammals to space that were pregnant, they were birthed in space and then brought back to Earth. None of the animals could walk because they had developed in an environment without gravity. They couldn't get used to gravity... I believe that all of the animals died soon after returning to Earth. I saw it on a news report a long time ago... I'll look for a formal write up about it. Goran: They couldn't walk since their muscles and bones did not develop or atrophied. I think mammal bodies have the ability to adapt to their environment more rapidly then is possible through natural selection. Entropy: No, the headline specifically said they could not walk because they didn't have any equilibrium. Their muscles hadn't atrophied because they were developing in the womb... they weren't using their muscles yet. I watched the on the report trying to move around, and they were just flayling all over the place. They were completely disoriented, because they never had any orientation to begin with. It was part of a study on space colonies. | Science Chat Room 1 Person Chatting Similar Conversations |