
Honeybees are found to interact with Quantum fields - ihodes
http://www.neuroquantology.com/repository/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=65:honeybees-are-found-to-interact-with-quantum-fields&catid=59:quantum-field-theory-in-brain&Itemid=70
======
yummyfajitas
I'll repost my comment from the last version of this article, since I don't
think any new developments have invalidated it.

 _This connection to QFT is almost surely nonsense. The flag manifold in
question comes from matrix groups; basically, consider some subset of 3x3
matrices which satisfy a certain property. I.e., certain types of
transformations of a 3d space. While the space of 3x3 matrices has 3x3=9
dimensions, subsets can have fewer dimensions (in this case, 6).

The two-dimensional projections she discovered are functions of the 6
dimensional matrices. So here is the occams razor explanation for what is
happening. Inside the bee's head is an ODE (ordinary differential equation)
solver, basically an analog computer. Just think of the ODE solver as a
complicated timer, but with output depending on both time and some hidden
variable. These are common objects in biology, and don't require many neurons.

The output of the ODE solver is wired to some neurons which reduce 6 variables
to 2, according to the formula she discovered.

This is a fantastic discovery, a triumph of applied math. But the connection
to QFT is almost surely coincidence: QFT uses symmetries of matrix groups over
3 dimensions, and the bee (which lives in 3 dimensions) also does. This
phenomenon is called universality. Certain objects repeat across diverse areas
simply because it is the only logical way (or the most common logical way)
that things could happen._

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=391396>

~~~
swannodette
Are you a biologist?

    
    
      > Inside the bee's head is an ODE (ordinary differential equation) solver
      > basically an analog computer. Just think of the ODE solver as a complicated
      > timer, but with output depending on both time and some hidden variable. 
      > These are common objects in biology, and don't require many neurons.
    

Do you have any sources to back any of this up at all?

EDIT: Here's a very long list of papers on Honeybee navigation.
<http://www.sciencemag.org/content/287/5454/851.abstract>. From the looks of
no one really knows how it works. That includes the OP.

~~~
yummyfajitas
No, I'm a (former) mathematical physicist. My main source for that particular
paragraph is a math bio textbook I used in grad school (standard yellow book),
combined with attendance at a huge number of math bio seminars [1].

However, if you want a source for the general statement that a lot of systems
biology works out to ODEs, I'll point you to some general models which form
the basis for most work in mathematical neuroscience:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_neuron_models>

[1] If you are in quantitative grad school, I highly recommend you to do the
same even if you are studying something completely different (e.g., quantum
physics or abstract algebra). The math and biology are usually simple and
explained very well, and you wind up learning a lot about both.

~~~
swannodette
Sure. But the point here is that your simply presenting _another theory_ ,
possibly as far-fetched as the one presented in the original article.

~~~
antipaganda
ahahaha. The idea that bee brains contain a structure known to exist already
in many other types of brain is equivalent to bees being able to use virtual
particles for computation?

That's crazy talk, and you know it.

------
nickpinkston
Yes, she has probably been reading too much Deepak Chopra - but the comments
saying things like "scientists should keep that kind of sloppy thinking to
themselves" seem to be off the mark in the other direction.

If a serious researcher, like she's trying to be, has an idea that there may
be even a slight chance something amazing might be happening, they should talk
to everyone she knows in the field - not keep it to herself.

If a journal is willing to publish - it must have past some muster. It's not
like this is going to clutter the field.

Most of the amazing ideas in science where heretical in their time (even to
other scientists) - we should encourage this type of thinking in science
instead of encouraging only those unwilling to take any risks.

------
CodeMage
Based on the content of the article, it would be more accurate to say that
"honeybees are speculated to interact with quantum fields".

------
aristidb
According only to that linked article, there are two separate claims:

1\. Bee dances are based on 2-dimensional projections of 6-dimensional flag
manifolds.

2\. Bees detect quark quantum fields, hypothesized because they can also be
described as flag manifolds.

The first claim seems to be much more plausible and interesting to me.

I do not really understand flag manifolds, but are they computationally
difficult to project to 2D?

~~~
yummyfajitas
_I do not really understand flag manifolds, but are they computationally
difficult to project to 2D?_

Not for the purposes of this article. It might be computationally difficult to
predict the progress of a dance as t -> infinity (to answer this question, I'd
need to know more about flag manifolds), but it's unlikely that bees solve
that problem.

------
lt
Susprisingly well explained for something that involves math, biology and
physics.

Made me laugh:

The flag manifold, she notes, in addition to providing mathematicians with
pure joy, also happens to be useful to physicists (...)

------
CallMeV
Thank you for this article. Just the thing to get my brain going after the
indulgences of the weekend.

It also knocks me flat to contemplate the ideas this intriguing article
generates. It does good to be staggered by something new once in a while: it
keeps complacency at bay.

------
Sukotto
This:

    
    
       I wasn't looking for a connection between bees and the
       flag manifold," she says. "I was just doing my research.
       The curves were nothing special in themselves, except
       that the dance patterns kept emerging.
    

reminds me of that great quote from Issac Asimov:

    
    
      The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
      the one that heralds new discoveries,
      is not 'Eureka!' I found it!
      but '... That's funny ...

------
boneheadmed
Having a background in biology with an interest in physics and extra-
dimensionality, I found this article very intriguing. I immediately thought of
the mathematicians who developed the theory of prions (the likely causative
agent of Creutzfeldt_Jakob Disease otherwise know as Mad Cow Disease) being a
protein only transmissible infection even before it was though to be
biologically plausible.

------
varjag
I smell Penrose pixie dust.

------
chanux
Overheard - "Code red. Humans know our secret."

~~~
CallMeV
I am biting my tongue here to keep myself from making references to recent
episodes of Doctor Who.

------
suprafly
Quite interesting. Thank you.

