[migrated from livejournal]
When I was about to have my word epiphany, some of my thoughts veered toward sunflowers ... I was driving through UP around this time.
And, it got me thinking about how I heard somebody say that there are people who compute or - estimate? - when the sunflower seeds should be planted - so they will bloom the day before graduation (or during the day itself).
And, it struck me as weird to realize ... if instruments, like sensors etc, are characterized to get a feel / know of how they operate (e.g. response plotted over a temperature range) ... do scientists or botanists do a similar study?
I thought of the following.
There should of course be a control setup for the experiment. Let's say a seedling exposed constant light - and a constant trickle of water.
(For the whole of the experiment, the same grade of soil should be used for all experimental setups - the same amount, etc). Then, we already have two main variables - light and water. Or probably three - which includes time. Or four or five if we have varying frequency to light and water provided (e.g. 5 mins lights on 5 mins lights off) ... hmm ... but I digress. Let this "paragraph of thought" end with me thinking about how many equations c/o the variables are needed to form a matrix that would characterize the plant (Sunflower for this case).
What would have been a world bubble entry became thoughts on plant growth characterization - which was mixed with "Investigatory Project" ideas.
Concluding Question: "Can we apply the same principles and processes as to when we characterize machines and instruments to plants / nature? Or, as nature came first before technology - are the processes we employ in machine characterization derivative from the processes used to characterize nature?"
----perhaps I shouldn't have so easily named the thread as word bubble - as this may as well be a thread for wild ideas my mind brings out to keep itself active.
back to work!