[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004, Eric Martichuski wrote:
> >From : frank bliss <email@example.com>
> >Why invoke the head butting hypothesis for the investment in bone mass.
> >Heat transfer is an excellent reason. Additionally, such "decorations"
> >(excessive body growth) are used widely in the modern animal kingdom as
> >sexual markers.
> It's a good thing the bone is solid too: if it were as blood-vessel rich as
> you posit, the brain would likely cook itself. All that heat carried into
> the head, and then kept insulated from the surface by the thick, heat-laden
> honeycomb above it...all of which is radiating in both directions, towards
> the air and inwards toward the brain. It'd be like putting a live coal in a
> thermos bottle, or a fevered person under several thick quilts. Efficient
> heat-transfer requires _thinness_, like the sails and fins you see in other
A live coal would be larger than the brain this creature likely
would've had. No doubt small size would not affect this, tho.