I often wonder about one perticular problem with evolution. I think that it might end up being a bit better when the brain is developed, but the only problem I have is before the brain there were only cells. And the cells were following chemical reactions because that is all they can follow. I wonder why these cells seemed to become intelligent and develop to better survive the conditions because cells don't become 'better' at surviving, only follow reactions. And that is what I wonder. Cells are only made of atoms, and these atoms are following reactions. Why do these reactions change for the better of the cell?

 

This was a hard one to phrase. If you get my meaning at all, please reply. If not, I'll try again to phrase it later.

Cells can "communicate" with each other using certain chemicals... is that what you meant?

I agree with ecoli, its through things like hormones that the cell knows what it is supposed to do and what its going too need to do.

 

You should also remember that intelligence seems to be an emergant property, one cell may not seem intelligent but then again when you combine trillions of them they become more than the sum of their parts so too speak

 

Cheers,

 

Ryan Jones

That is true but I always wondered why cells 'don't like to be hot' so to speak. Or for that matter, 'to be cold'. The reason is the fact that the sun doesn't hate being hot, same as a ice crystal doesn't hate being cold. But cells do. I wonder myself why I hate being cold or hot, when I know that hot and cold are just levels of energy as kinetic energy or heat. I suppose that is due to nerves, but the thing is they ONLY follow chemical reactions.

 

I still can't phrase it right. I guess the best thing to ask is how they communicate through hormones. If you have any links or could sum it up, I would appreciate it, since I googled related searches and found nothing. thanks for replying

cells don't like to be too hot or too old because some of the reactions can't take place if enzymes are deformed by temperature or lack thereof.

 

Example of cell communication:

pituary gland(or whatever it is that controls growth) floods the body with a hormone that basically tells all the cells in the body to divide/grow. another gland sends out a hormone to stop the growth at the right time.

This has always made me wonder, do bacteriae, being nothing more than cells, have any sort of intelligence?

I guess it would depend on what you called intelligence. As far as I know, with things as simple as cells, it's more of a cause-effect kind of thing. If something happens or changes, the cell responds in a certain way. It's like a simple robot I guess. Would you call that intelligent?

I guess it would depend on what you called intelligence. As far as I know, with things as simple as cells, it's more of a cause-effect kind of thing. If something happens or changes, the cell responds in a certain way. It's like a simple robot I guess. Would you call that intelligent?

 

 

I agree with xeluc, it's less "intelligence" and more "if-or". If it's good temperature do X, if not do Y (Y being neutral, i.e. not doing the reaction. It's like a computer in that a computer doesn't choose out of conscienceness to tell you your firewall is off (stupid analogy I know...), it tells you because of the "if-or" complex: if on, say nothing; if not, say X.

 

So, it's not so much intelligence per se (my least favorite phrase but stil), it's more along the lines of logic. The cell doesn't choose to undergo apopotosis, it happens because chemicals are released due to external (or internal) stimuli.