| QUOTE (Disgustedorite @ Jan 31 2023, 03:56 AM) |
| Usually, organisms don't change joint directions when they change their locomotion, and instead work within their limits. |
If the same would have being true of the biats ancestor's shoulder joint then the entire biat lineage would have died, its not true IRL either but you'd think that at some point within the process of typing that using the toes on the end of brachiated forelimbs you could have had a "wait a second" moment of enlightenment.
Even your dad's well spent money goes against the argument for which you spent it in the first place, as the statement is that much more absurd to maintain when you see the ankle has such a tarsal or "2nd knee cap" that provides a complete divider between the two bones and is almost large enough to be a phalanx on its own right. That's two connection points which can gain flexibility but magically can't? How can you possible rationalize this in your head?
Would the size difference between a metacarpal and metatarsal bone be favoring of shortening regarding adding mobility?
(Maybe the grammar of this question is nonfunctional)
As I suppose the human foot is actually the more specialized of the two ends, although the hand of course is further specialized than that of other primates due to no longer having to perform any walking action...
Mm. The talking choices between both main conversationalists is rather escalated.
This post has been edited by colddigger: Jan 30 2023, 08:31 PM
(Maybe the grammar of this question is nonfunctional)
As I suppose the human foot is actually the more specialized of the two ends, although the hand of course is further specialized than that of other primates due to no longer having to perform any walking action...
Mm. The talking choices between both main conversationalists is rather escalated.
This post has been edited by colddigger: Jan 30 2023, 08:31 PM
| QUOTE (colddigger @ Jan 31 2023, 04:27 AM) |
| Would the size difference between a metacarpal and metatarsal bone be favoring of shortening regarding adding mobility? (Maybe the grammar of this question is nonfunctional) As I suppose the human foot is actually the more specialized of the two ends, although the hand of course is further specialized than that of other primates due to no longer having to perform any walking action.. |
I'm thinking that simply fattening up and increasing the side curves of the Albert joint would allow it to gain ball joint functionality. Given the main muscles providing the ciruclar motion as a whole are the hip muscles, the local muscles could have evolved into fine tuned muscles and muscles that compensate for the freedom of motion during walking.
This post has been edited by Jarlaxle: Jan 30 2023, 08:40 PM
At least the hip was already a ball socket. You're talking about changes that fundamentally change how the joints behave, which requires new muscles and constraints entirely to make them not instantly crumple. If "Albert" as we're apparently calling it now just gains new side-side movement one day with no support, even if it's just slight, suddenly your sauceback has wobbly feet and can't keep its balance because it's physically unable to compensate for the shifting.
One thing that I wonder about regarding the Albert joint, is what is that little bone sitting there right on top?
It strikes me as the perfect thing to take and then shift in order to create a proper forearm concept.
I understand what you're saying in regard to making the "ankle" broader, and more supportive, and allowing for greater mobility, and how if the piper were a transitional form in the development of this joint that it could potentially be something that was developed for the visor bill.
Though looking at the wing of a bird, and how the rest of the hand Bones have somewhat fused in order to give a strong support for the tip of the wing it does make me wonder if such an approach would result in the mobile joint at the base of the wing toe leaning toward fusing to the foot bone in order to provide a more rigid support if focus were paid toward the ankle or Albert joint for the main source of rotational mobility.
It also comes to mind that this would force the walking toe to become permanently associated with the weight of the wing toe during fluttering, whether the bones of the foot and wing toe were fused or not. While if the foot bone were shrunk and the joint focused on for mobility in the wing was the base of the wing toe then this would completely disjoint the walking toe from the actual moving wing if wanted.
This would be a nice divergence from other biats as well since their entire wing, from shoulder to Wing toe seems to be playing more significant part, with soaring and such and means that the walking toe is going to be forever joined into that structure.
This post has been edited by colddigger: Jan 30 2023, 09:30 PM
It strikes me as the perfect thing to take and then shift in order to create a proper forearm concept.
I understand what you're saying in regard to making the "ankle" broader, and more supportive, and allowing for greater mobility, and how if the piper were a transitional form in the development of this joint that it could potentially be something that was developed for the visor bill.
Though looking at the wing of a bird, and how the rest of the hand Bones have somewhat fused in order to give a strong support for the tip of the wing it does make me wonder if such an approach would result in the mobile joint at the base of the wing toe leaning toward fusing to the foot bone in order to provide a more rigid support if focus were paid toward the ankle or Albert joint for the main source of rotational mobility.
It also comes to mind that this would force the walking toe to become permanently associated with the weight of the wing toe during fluttering, whether the bones of the foot and wing toe were fused or not. While if the foot bone were shrunk and the joint focused on for mobility in the wing was the base of the wing toe then this would completely disjoint the walking toe from the actual moving wing if wanted.
This would be a nice divergence from other biats as well since their entire wing, from shoulder to Wing toe seems to be playing more significant part, with soaring and such and means that the walking toe is going to be forever joined into that structure.
This post has been edited by colddigger: Jan 30 2023, 09:30 PM
Regarding the muscles, for the joint to be a hinge joint in the first place you'd need to augment the shape of the joint with muscles restraining the side of side motion in the first place, adapting to tighten and loosen those muscles is a non-issue, and probably why all our Alberts were able to adapt well enough to type the text in this thread.
Regarding bone fusion, I agree that would be an advantageous trajectory over time, though for a counter-example we can look at bats, which have expanded their wings along their fingers and grown longer fingers, much like the song sauce lineage has done with its feathers. The biat being a first-generation flyer provides a pretty good branching point between the opposite strategies.
This post has been edited by Jarlaxle: Jan 30 2023, 09:59 PM
Regarding bone fusion, I agree that would be an advantageous trajectory over time, though for a counter-example we can look at bats, which have expanded their wings along their fingers and grown longer fingers, much like the song sauce lineage has done with its feathers. The biat being a first-generation flyer provides a pretty good branching point between the opposite strategies.
This post has been edited by Jarlaxle: Jan 30 2023, 09:59 PM
Are you implying that you think if you relaxed all your muscles, your elbows could bend perpendicular to the joint without breaking something such as the connective tissue that keeps it within the solid bone tracks that make it roll as a hinge in the first place?
The mobile nature of our wrists and ankles are actually due to the clumping and attaching of multiple short bones that were originally in a long line as far as I know, as opposed to the direct change of a hinge into the condyloid form they have today...
Though I am not that familiar with it.
This is an okay image but I've seen better ones in the past.
It actually makes me wonder if the first segment in the walking toe could be used in order to give greater rotation to the wing toe.
Though I am not that familiar with it.
This is an okay image but I've seen better ones in the past.
It actually makes me wonder if the first segment in the walking toe could be used in order to give greater rotation to the wing toe.
| QUOTE (Disgustedorite @ Jan 30 2023, 10:10 PM) |
| Are you implying that you think if you relaxed all your muscles, your elbows could bend perpendicular to the joint without breaking something such as the connective tissue that keeps it within the solid bone tracks that make it roll as a hinge in the first place? |
I think it's in reference to our wrists not our elbows...
But I guess the "muscles restraining side to side motion" need clarifying... Since it still doesn't quite make sense in that context either.
This post has been edited by colddigger: Jan 30 2023, 10:15 PM
Going back to encouraging people to play with their food, you can pretty much turn the wing joints around. Unlike a mechanical joint, the shape of the joint isn't sufficient to restrain the direction of motion without the added layer of living muscles to stop you.
While I was talking about the wrist, it can be applied to the elbow: without the muscle attachments, the shape of the elbow wouldn't be enough to restrain the motion, likely resulting in permanent damage.
If our elbows were under evolutionary pressure to increase their range of motion the way our Alberts have done in the past, in what I can only assume must be a survival of the contortionists situation. Wed be increasing the connection area between the bones through curving it out increasing the length of the ligaments to avoid damage and spreading the muscle connections area so that they can tighten and loosen to avoid flailing about.
While I was talking about the wrist, it can be applied to the elbow: without the muscle attachments, the shape of the elbow wouldn't be enough to restrain the motion, likely resulting in permanent damage.
If our elbows were under evolutionary pressure to increase their range of motion the way our Alberts have done in the past, in what I can only assume must be a survival of the contortionists situation. Wed be increasing the connection area between the bones through curving it out increasing the length of the ligaments to avoid damage and spreading the muscle connections area so that they can tighten and loosen to avoid flailing about.
As for the image, I'm fascinated by that, is that growing additional bones? I'm still not sure I grok how that process works.
Still, I don't think that means we didn't have to adapt and readapt our joint's range of motion. The differences between climbing a tree as a small mammal and brachiating between branches as an ape alone would be huge, not to mention all the. Many steps in between since stepping out of the water.
Still, I don't think that means we didn't have to adapt and readapt our joint's range of motion. The differences between climbing a tree as a small mammal and brachiating between branches as an ape alone would be huge, not to mention all the. Many steps in between since stepping out of the water.
Ligaments are playing a pretty significant role in maintaining the stability and functionality of joints, I'd say that that actually plays a larger role than the muscles that are attached to any of it.
That's a major player in why, to get back to food, it takes such as significant (relatively speaking) amount of force alongside a tactile pop in order for me to pull apart the limbs of birds after I've already severed all the muscles from their attachment points.
The muscles certainly do play their role in holding things together, though.
Regarding the picture on the evolution of the wrist, I think the first two are better equivalent as opposed to that third one at the bottom, I think that the other images that I've seen seem to relate to those a lot better. I don't think it necessarily is supposed to represent the addition of new bones, but I would not be surprised if it was found that more toe bones had occurred or something of that nature in the later fossils. The main focus would be on the interactions of the colored bones to display how the development of the forearm and upper arm occurred out of bones that were previously not fused and also to indicate how the base of the wrist would have come about.
I wish I could find the other images, because it really illustrated well the many steps that were possibly taken in order to achieve it and how the wrist itself came together to form its shape from what was previously a rather stretched out length the bones.
This post has been edited by colddigger: Jan 31 2023, 12:12 AM
That's a major player in why, to get back to food, it takes such as significant (relatively speaking) amount of force alongside a tactile pop in order for me to pull apart the limbs of birds after I've already severed all the muscles from their attachment points.
The muscles certainly do play their role in holding things together, though.
Regarding the picture on the evolution of the wrist, I think the first two are better equivalent as opposed to that third one at the bottom, I think that the other images that I've seen seem to relate to those a lot better. I don't think it necessarily is supposed to represent the addition of new bones, but I would not be surprised if it was found that more toe bones had occurred or something of that nature in the later fossils. The main focus would be on the interactions of the colored bones to display how the development of the forearm and upper arm occurred out of bones that were previously not fused and also to indicate how the base of the wrist would have come about.
I wish I could find the other images, because it really illustrated well the many steps that were possibly taken in order to achieve it and how the wrist itself came together to form its shape from what was previously a rather stretched out length the bones.
This post has been edited by colddigger: Jan 31 2023, 12:12 AM
So I am currently highly sleep deprived, but I just had a thought regarding the grasshof loop since there was a hullabaloo regarding that.
What if it was an extreme fasciation of a patagium behind the first knee, I guess there's only really one knee on these limbs, and that fasciation led to either one or two of the glutes on the torso. So if these muscles were to hypercontract in a twitching form as muscles are capable of doing if anyone were to attempt simply twitching a muscle without particularly moving a limb, this rapid twitching would be able to pull along that length and cause motion, perhaps.
Since the glutes are in some way related to regular flight motion in the ancestors, simply because they are muscles attached to the limb, it's the only limb that's being used, then there movement and use would happen during regular attempts at flight. And maybe even this twitching motion triggering movement in the wing in possibly a fluttering manner or just what have you without the use of other muscles, or simply keeping the other muscles in a springy form, could allow for the development of a more significant system. Maybe not true muscle, but possibly some other form of tissue that allows the application of force.
That's really comprehendible, I don't really know.
Oh drat I think I got something backwards here
This post has been edited by colddigger: Jan 31 2023, 01:57 AM
What if it was an extreme fasciation of a patagium behind the first knee, I guess there's only really one knee on these limbs, and that fasciation led to either one or two of the glutes on the torso. So if these muscles were to hypercontract in a twitching form as muscles are capable of doing if anyone were to attempt simply twitching a muscle without particularly moving a limb, this rapid twitching would be able to pull along that length and cause motion, perhaps.
Since the glutes are in some way related to regular flight motion in the ancestors, simply because they are muscles attached to the limb, it's the only limb that's being used, then there movement and use would happen during regular attempts at flight. And maybe even this twitching motion triggering movement in the wing in possibly a fluttering manner or just what have you without the use of other muscles, or simply keeping the other muscles in a springy form, could allow for the development of a more significant system. Maybe not true muscle, but possibly some other form of tissue that allows the application of force.
That's really comprehendible, I don't really know.
Oh drat I think I got something backwards here
This post has been edited by colddigger: Jan 31 2023, 01:57 AM
| QUOTE (colddigger @ Jan 31 2023, 08:02 AM) |
| Ligaments are playing a pretty significant role in maintaining the stability and functionality of joints, I'd say that that actually plays a larger role than the muscles that are attached to any of it. That's a major player in why, to get back to food, it takes such as significant (relatively speaking) amount of force alongside a tactile pop in order for me to pull apart the limbs of birds after I've already severed all the muscles from their attachment points. The muscles certainly do play their role in holding things together, though. |
...That might be a potential alternative solution in itself. In mechanics an alternative to a ball joint is a classic U joint, using a connector between two perpendicular hinges:
By gradually turning the existing hinge connections on one side of the Albert disc-shaped tarsal, both sides can maintain a hinge joint shape and ligaments and existing attachment points but have one side act as a Y joint and the other as an X joint, resulting in a circular range of motion for flying.
This way you don't need to loosen the muscles, but rather the reverse: to use only one side of the hinge you tighten the muscles of the opposite side, locking it into place so that the Albert connector won't have the headway to rotate along the locked hinge.
So I understand U-joints but I'm in no mental state to be able to visualize what you are describing in a biological manner, when you have time would you be able to draw this out in a simple way showing how it all fits together?
I looked back to read the initial description and I think that I got something backwards when I was describing my sudden thoughts on the grashof loop, from the description it sounds like it's the femur moving forward and back while there is a tie attached to the Albert joint holding it in place in some way. Which I suppose rather than just having a twitch action it would be kind of a contract and hold, or cramping of the glute muscle in order to perform that.
I looked back to read the initial description and I think that I got something backwards when I was describing my sudden thoughts on the grashof loop, from the description it sounds like it's the femur moving forward and back while there is a tie attached to the Albert joint holding it in place in some way. Which I suppose rather than just having a twitch action it would be kind of a contract and hold, or cramping of the glute muscle in order to perform that.
View Desktop Version | Disable Images in Posts
Powered by Invision Power Board (Jcink) © 2023 IPS, Inc.
Powered by Invision Power Board (Jcink) © 2023 IPS, Inc.