Entirely new form of plant communication discovered

Its my perspective that we have a truly limited understanding/ perspective on life form consciousness and intelligence in the universe. We limit our understanding of said things to how we communicate/ experience life in this vastly misunderstood universe.

Science Alert

More recently, Westwood looked into the possibility that a special type of RNA molecules - mRNA, or messenger RNA - were also being transported between the parasitic and host plants. Messenger RNA molecules send messages within cells, instructing them on which actions to take and when.

"The discovery of this novel form of inter-organism communication shows that this is happening a lot more than any one has previously realised," said Westwood in a press release. "Now that we have found that they are sharing all this information, the next question is, 'What exactly are they telling each other?’.”

I would like to point out that that he is referencing them as individual and conscious... i personally would like to see this trend continue.

'What exactly are they telling each other?’

Just what you would expect from a being that watched the horrific act of it's loved ones dismembered and eaten alive right before it's eyes. "Beware the vegetarians!!!"

This article is phrased in a way that the more whimsically minded might (want to) see plants as holding conversations. There is far more information being passed when a dog sniffs anothers turd than in this exchange of RNA material. Although this is a fascinating discovery and I can certainly see the potential of exploiting this com-link, I don't see this as an indication that plants are intelligent or capable of conversing.

a reply to: Kaiju

But they are exchanging information right?

originally posted by: Kaiju
'What exactly are they telling each other?’

Just what you would expect from a being that watched the horrific act of it's loved ones dismembered and eaten alive right before it's eyes. "Beware the vegetarians!!!"

This article is phrased in a way that the more whimsically minded might (want to) see plants as holding conversations. There is far more information being passed when a dog sniffs anothers turd than in this exchange of RNA material. Although this is a fascinating discovery and I can certainly see the potential of exploiting this com-link, I don't see this as an indication that plants are intelligent or capable of conversing.

Well, you write a TCP/IP base program to implement a protocol between two computers and say how difficult it is.

Messenger RNA (en.wikipedia.org...) doesn't seem any different from the multicast datagrams sent between two computer systems. It has a header block, a message block and a tail block.



If that were the case, then an infinite set of messages could be sent and received. mRNA even seems to contain hints about where the RNA should be spliced if it has to be cut up.

a reply to: onequestion

I would really like to know how distinct and sentient they are.

Take a running plant or a grass or something, for example. Is each spout a new awareness or is it the same one? When you transplant a tubular or root are you creating a new awareness?

What about HeLa?

Do plants actually have nephesh as we do? Any Jews in the house?

a reply to: Bleeeeep

Apparently they adapt according to the information they receive right?

Isn't that a sign of awareness and intelligence?

a reply to: onequestion

Absolutely, but what type of awareness is it?

What I'm asking is the difference in your mind's eye and the sense of sight. What do your eyes actually see compared to what your mind sees.

That sort of thing.

a reply to: Bleeeeep

Well, our lack of ability to perceive outside of our own sense of awareness may or may not limit our ability to offer creative insight into this.

I am far to limited in understanding and knowledge to even come to a sensible alternative.

There is no possible way for me however "intelligent" or researched i could ever become to make an assumption about the way that plants experience this universe that we think we see.

That would be completely ignorant.

Hell, the form of the plant may not even be real it may be my perception of the entity once filtered through my subconscious.

It may truly exist on a more elemental level as something completely different.

a reply to: onequestion

Too philosophical... reel it back lol.

I think there is definitely something in them, but what and to what length, I don't know either... but I really want to know.

If you are interested you should check out this video:
In the Mind of Plants:


It talks about research around the "mind" of plants.

a reply to: Bleeeeep

Sorry for the off-topic but the thumbnail of that video, such a beautiful representation of the fibonacci spiral in nature!

On-Topic:

I talk talk to my cactus several times a week, much like a dog owner would lol. I hope it comprehends my love!

This article reminds me of that scene in Avatar with Sigourney Weaver's character:

Dr. Grace Augustine: What we think we know - is that there's some kind of electrochemical communication between the roots of the trees. Like the synapses between neurons. Each tree has ten to the fourth connections to the trees around it, and there are ten to the twelfth trees on Pandora... "

I hope a lot of serious work and study is put into this topic, I would call that GOOD science, and I hope a lot more confirmations are made in this field before we fully eradicate the amazon. I demand plant rights!
I wonder how vegitarians will justify eating possibly sentient plants. Kinda throws the moral side of it out the window .

EDIT: found an interesting article from the end of last year, it's a long but easy read.
www.newyorker.com...

Whatever we create...we leave a piece of ourselves inside...and whatever created us...left a piece of itself inside of us.

I'm sure someone will be along to misinterpret this to be a creationist "thing" but the fact of the matter is evolution IS a creative process...Having said that LANGUAGE is a creation of man...we "invented" it so to speak (pun intended). Communication is the art of using a "language" of some kind...which has always been "symbolic" in nature or of nature...

Having said that the "languages" we have developed over the years will have signatures of nature within them...the same processes that created us will seep into all that we create (including language). This is a fractal interpretation of nature and the universe and its really hard to "prove" because the aspects of nature that seep through into further evolution of itself aren't always "consistent" in form or function.

There is one thing I know for certain and that is "humanity" has a specific perspective on the universe from which much is "hidden" or out of sight and grasp. Conclusions made from this extremely limited perspective are likely to be a reflection of that...and also..."limited".

Without going too far into no no land...maybe plants can communicate things to us...some of them more profound and illegal than others lol...There is a significant portion of human history that understood this and developed "medicines" using extremely specific plants to help "humanity" see things outside of its normal limitations.

originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: onequestion

Absolutely, but what type of awareness is it?

What I'm asking is the difference in your mind's eye and the sense of sight. What do your eyes actually see compared to what your mind sees.

That sort of thing.

Each human eye has 10 million rods/cones, but only 1 million neural pathways in the optic nerves. Even then, those are arranged in 1000 bundles and use the color opposition model to encode color: red vs green, blue vs. yellow, darkness vs light. Some neurons are sensitive to edges in particular directions, others to dots of various sizes.

These allow the eyes to perform "segmentation" on a picture, which is basically to pick out shapes, then recognize that something is a zebra, a bluebottle fly or a crocodile, and figure out what orientation it has and what direction it is going.

So internally, we would have a list of objects, their orientation, location and direction. Then we have an idea of what behavior we should expect, and what they should look like when rotated or from the other side.

Vegetarians are just going to have to starve to death then.

a reply to: stormcell

Can we get deeper into that subject?