Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:57:35 GMT Sean Houtman wrote:

Archimedes Plutonium wrote in
:


Yes I understand plants and trees are adapted to their
environment.

But I need to know some genetic requirements. For in animals when
they hibernate over winter such as bears or opossum or woodchuck
that they seem to never need water.

So how much water does a bear need compared to say how much water
a strawberry or elm tree or maple tree need during winter.

Plants can get a very small amount of water from the soil during the
winter, hibernating animals metabolise the stored fat into water.


I guess a bigger question is how much water does a animal of
comparable size to a plant need during various times of the year
even summer.

Plants and animals are so very different in the means they aquire
water, the amount they actually need, and the reasons they need to
get quantities above the basic cellular metabolical requirements.
Because of this, the answer to your question is elusive.


My theory that animals are the inverse of plants in a
complimentary quantum dualism where the bone system of animals is
calcium versus carbon to plants and where plants intake and
utilize carbon-dioxide whereas animals oxygen. And many other
complimentary inverses.

You are a true natural philosopher. If there were no complements,
some things would start to pile up. Don't forget the utility of
microorganisms in nature.


But perhaps water intake is a variable that I have not considered
fully. Perhaps animals to plants need and utilize the same amount
of water per year given a comparable body size.

So let us look at say a ground squirrel which has about the same
surface area as a strawberry plant. Does the ground squirrel
during summer require a water intake that is about equal to the
requirements of that strawberry plant? And during winter is that
requirement equal in both in that they both hibernate and need no
water during those winter months?



A cursory examination makes that appear to be so, but... During the
winter the needs of both do go down, for the similar reason that
they are dormant. However, a fox continues to need the same amount
of water during the winter as summer, while an evergreen plant of
the same size does not.

Sean

Hello Sean. I need to find out some information about these creatures
that live underground and eat just rocks. Supposedly they are some of
the oldest life known on Earth and some have even conjectured that they
were the first life which evolved into all the other lifeforms.

But I believe the Quantum Physics of Life has both animal and plant
springing up simultaneously from cosmic rays that come to rest and
unfold as a living creature. Darwin Evolution would tend to say that one
form sprang up first such as the rock-eating creatures.

What I need to find out is whether these rock-eating creatures have
natural enemies. Animals depend on photosynthetic or rock-eaters. But
photosynthetic and rock-eaters according to Darwin do not need animal
creatures.

If I am correct about Quantum-Physics of life that the first lifeforms
on Earth were created by stopped-cosmic-rays that transformed into life
where one ray yields a plant microorganism and another ray produces a
animal microorganism, then those rock eaters would have had animal like
predators dating as far back as the first fossils ever found.

Sean, would you happen to know whether the biologists and
paleontologists that are finding the most primitive life forms whether
animal microorganisms are appearing in about equal numbers???

If Darwin was correct and I am wrong then there should be a period in
ancient fossils where animal like microorganisms no longer appear but
only plant like microorganisms that live either on the Sun energy or
rock-eating-energy.

So, Sean, I am curious at this moment to have that question somewhat
satisfied as to whether the fossil record of plant microorganisms and
animal microorganisms compliment one another all the way back to the
first forms of life on Earth or whether the animal like organisms stop
while the plant and rock eating microorganisms continue back in time.

The reason I bring up this water as per plant and animal is that if
first life on Earth began simultaneously with both plant and animal that
there should be something that is on equal amounts to both plant and
animal. And water would be such a molecule since it is essential to both
plant and animal. Viruses do not need water so they do not belong to a
plant or animal kingdom and they are merely "mobile genes or
transposons". Do rock eating microbes need water? I do not know. But I
wonder if there is a mathematical relationship between plants and
animals as to water requirements so that say a human life is equivalent
to a apple tree in the yearly average water amount needed.

So we divide the entire classification of Life into 2 categories of
Plant kingdom and Animal kingdom where their size ranges from
microscopic to macroscopic. Viruses are simple mobile genetics such as
transposons. And Animals differ from plants inversely by quantum
compliments and only in water does the plant kingdom and animal kingdom
match one another directly.


Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies