/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9966659
aaaawww shit good question OP, I look forward to the responses.

>>9966659
because it's not needed for their survival and success

the same reason applies to you and your family, OP

>>9966659
different source of energy, therefore different strategies to capitalize on it efficiently. Also plants do move, a lot actually. You just never see them move because it only fast relative to other plants. And as a last throw away things carnivorous plants exist.

>>9966667
lolwut

>>9966659
Because that mutation never occured, and if it did, it wasn't passed on. - That's how evolution works. It isn't a need-by-need basis, it is random and only gets passed on if that randomness doesn't turn them into invalids, or hamper reproduction in some way.

>>9966682
But certainly it would be useful for a plant to be able to move to sources of water and places with better sunlight no?

There's already some mechanical elements in plants like opening/closing at times of the day, or rotating vines until they find something to latch onto

>>9966692
>But certainly it would be useful for a plant to be able to move to sources of water and places with better sunlight no?
Apparently not useful enough.

>>9966692
this is why seeds and wind and birdshit exist, piggot

>>9966711
>piggot
You're back!

>>9966676
>lolwut
why are you still spewing 10-year old meems, son?

>>9966699
If they did ever started to exist maybe animal predator herbivores wiped them out?

How might we breed mobile plants? do we need to start with some type of vine plant?

>>9966711
Good idea, a mobile plant could just shit it's seeds onto the ground anywhere

>>9966714
>If they did ever started to exist maybe animal predator herbivores wiped them out?
Animals have been moving efficiently way before plants, they have the genetic advantage. As such, if plants started moving it would require MASSIVE AMOUNTS of their energy, and they wouldn't do it very efficiently. So probably.
>How might we breed mobile plants? do we need to start with some type of vine plant?
What sort of movement do you mean? A creeper does have a form of locomotion, and roots as it travels.
>Good idea, a mobile plant could just shit it's seeds onto the ground anywhere
Plants are hyperefficient and hyperlazy, evolution seems to love that shit. Think about it, they just sit there either storing energy, or hibernating using it. Then they get other retarded life forms, like animals to each their seeds and shit them out for them elsewhere without having to do any leg work, or expending much energy at all. It's way more efficient than moving around.

>>9966659
They did.

>>9966714
>predator herbivores
Sounds like a great idea for a sci-fi novel set on a planet were plants evolved locomotion and sentience, but live in fear of predatory herbivores.

>>9966714
in the end, your question becomes similar to "why do we still have small convenience stores when supermarkets exist?"

Well, it's because even though supermarkets are more profitable, there still exist this niche which is easy to go into and you don't need to have a budget of millions or billions in order to start a small business. Maybe property is expensive, maybe there aren't enough people in your area to justify a huge-ass supermarket, etc.
Plants are like this in a way, because they exploit a niche (stationary retarded fuck-face that sucks up filth and water from the ground and takes advantage of solar energy) and it's pretty profitable. There's no pressure and I guess no easy way to go from operating a small store to starting a supermarket chain.

Sometimes there is some pressure into becoming more "like" animals, e.g. sunflower, carnivorous plant, mimosa pudica, creeping vine. But still, the ol' "shit out a million seeds and let nature take care of spreading them" works very well.

>>9966659
your fundamental mistake is the implicit assumption that evolution is a completed optimization process, when really it is just a history of random mutations. you might as well ask why humans never evolved wheels, since they're a much more efficient form of transportation

>>9966805
That's a question of versatility. You can't climb stairs with wheels, or move through a jungle.

>>9966805
are you shit-tarded? there's no asphalt in nature, piggot

>>9966805
>they're a much more efficient form of transportation
Transportation was not important enough for reproduction

>>9966808
>You can't climb stairs with wheels
If we had wheels, we wouldn't have invented stairs

>>9966815
>>9966813
>>9966808
I fucking love "board culture"

>>9966816
You'd need a powerful motor/engine to get up those steep ass slopes. Or would we elongate our houses?

>>9966824
take a look at how mountain roads work and come back to us, wasteman

>>9966829
We wouldn't be able to fit an engine/motor that size in our bodies, dickhead. Also, we'd have to eat so much more food, or have to evolve to consume fossil fuels. At which point, we are still even human? Wouldn't we be Blaze And The Monster Machines?

>>9966666
>I look forward to the responses.
Here's your first one, lucky boi. :^)

>>9966850
:D:D:D

>>9966713
good memes are timeless /b/ro

>>9966723
>Then they get other retarded life forms, like animals
I lol'd

I lol'd at
>Good idea, a mobile plant could just shit it's seeds onto the ground anywhere

as well

>>9966858
i was just being smart :DDDDD

>>9966659
" Why " is not a question for science

>>9966860
well, you're right

>>9966880
Sure it is, if we don't prepare for all forms of alien life we may be weak to certain invasions when the space force takes off.

>>9966692
water and sun doesnt change much over the years if you have a good spot now, its probably good in 5, 10, 50 years
moving to spread seeds would be useful and plants have put a lot of effort into seed distribution which seems to have worked out for them without needing to move
plants also dont have access to a whole lot of energy due to their solar diet

>>9966659
Because evolution only works within the confines genome of a species. Macroevolution is not possible.

>>9967482
So it's just not possible for a Vine type plant to evolve into some kind of Snake?

>>9967518
It's not but not because of >>9967482's retardation.
It's beyond me to explain why that can't happen, but no

>>9967518
plants don't have muscles, they move by water pressure
>but so do spiders

>>9966659
Plants developed animals instead to do it for them

>>9966659
Because you're retarded

>>9966733
that would just make them animals with photosynthesis

Because hox genes are highly complex and specific to animal genomes. For a plant to develop a convergent genome to hox genes you'd basically need to completely restructure it. It would be impossible to do that when the characteristics that make a plant a "plant" are already highly efficient for resource gathering.

Considering fungi are closer to animals and also highly intelligent, I'd say it would be more realistic for fungi to develop convergent genes of mobility.

>>9966659

Maybe they did exist, how would we know? It´s not like they leave bones behind.

>>9968637
>he thinks plants don't have homeobox genes

>>9968506
That's a good point. Why didn't animals ever develop photosynthesis?

>>9966659
cuz then they'd be gay, and that makes god angry

>>9968661

But they did, didn´t you know there´s people out there who can live off light alone?

>>9968661
you only get enough energy out of it in quite ideal conditions. this person did the math: https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-incorporate-photosynthesis-into-humans

and that's like. not even counting all the adaptations necessary for effective photosynthesis. photosynthetic structures, especially in C4 plants, have a complex anatomy specialized for the activity.

>>9966692
>>9966673
>>9966682
>>9966723


yes the answer is they dont need to. plant reproduction is more efficient than animals. they dont need this type of thing to survive and if you think about it alot of plants dont actually have natural predators. herbivores eat plants but more often than not they dont kill them. one example is of sheep that destroy saplings and have turned england bare. also remember that majority of life forms on earth dont move or arent intelligent like animals. the need for intelligence and movements is an energetic thing as you rise up the foodchain and reproduction becomes less efficient, consumption is less efficient. you need to be more mobile and navigate more complex niches. another result of complex niches is the necessary need to rely on behaviours which have to be learnt, requiring more intelligence and also perhaps, sociality - observational learning, possibly one of the many benefits of sociality.

Checkmate atheists

I forgot plankton exist...

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/artful-amoeba/how-zooplankton-bust-a-move/

>>9968658
> He's a dumbass that doesn't know the difference between hox genes and homeobox genes

>>9968640
Please no, fungi are already fucking terrifying enough without having them walking around.

>>9966733
Shake yer roots motherfucker!

>>9969194
Hox genes are a subset of homeobox genes

>>9968640
Aren't fungi treating sporing like moving someplace new when resources run out? They're carried by the wind and animals but I'd call that migration. They're not intelligent in any way though, and we should be glad for that.

Plant life is literally everywhere. We even want them in our homes because reasons. Do you think they need intelligence or mobility?
They're literally our overlords and they don't even fucking think. What does that say about us?

>>9966667
keked