Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #897059 > unrolled thread

97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-02 15:13 +0000
    Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-02 23:34 +0800
      Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-02 16:57 +0000
      Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-10-03 10:33 +0000
        Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-10-03 15:36 +0200
          Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-03 16:07 +0000
            Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-10-03 18:23 +0200
              Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-04 07:24 +0000
              Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Old McDonald <eieio@patch.corn> - 2026-10-04 11:37 -0700
            Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-10-03 19:03 +0200
              Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-04 07:24 +0000
          Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" athel.cb@gmail.com <user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-03 17:16 +0000
            Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 02:17 +0800
              Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-10-04 05:24 +1100
                Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 02:29 +0800
                  Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 02:30 +0800
                    Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-10-04 16:39 +1100
              Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2026-10-03 16:15 -0500
              Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-04 07:28 +0000
      Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jeremiah Jones <jj@j.j> - 2026-10-04 02:10 -0700
        Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-04 11:38 +0000
          Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-05 01:51 +0800
            Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-10-04 18:02 +0000
              Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-05 02:10 +0800
                Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-10-04 18:27 +0000
              Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-10-04 11:18 -0700
                Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-05 02:29 +0800
                  Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-10-04 18:43 +0000
            Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jeremiah Jones <jj@j.j> - 2026-10-04 13:13 -0700
    Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-10-03 01:46 +1000
      Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Old McDonald <eieio@patch.corn> - 2026-10-02 10:37 -0700
        Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-10-03 16:03 +1000
          Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Old McDonald <eieio@patch.corn> - 2026-10-03 00:08 -0700
            Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-10-04 03:51 +1100
    Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-10-02 19:31 +0200
      Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-03 06:50 +0000
        Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-10-04 05:15 +1100
          Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 02:25 +0800
            Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jeremiah Jones <jj@j.j> - 2026-10-04 02:46 -0700
              Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 19:56 +0800
                Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Jeremiah Jones <jj@j.j> - 2026-10-04 13:22 -0700
    Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Someone <864c855e3d64399dc06fa30ebb75526c2c2e73db7216b16a3d4cf03e8a52ec3b@example.com> - 2026-10-02 18:45 +0000
    Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" athel.cb@gmail.com <user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-03 08:56 +0000
      Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-10-04 03:57 +1100
        Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-10-03 10:21 -0700
          Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-10-04 05:00 +1100
            Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" john larkin <jl@htigct.com> - 2026-10-03 14:02 -0700
              Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-10-04 16:25 +1100
                Re: 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS" john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-10-04 10:13 -0700

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#897109

>Jeremiah Jones <jj@j.j>wrote:
>>Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>> On 10/2/2026 11:13 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> > From:
>> >   https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
>> > 
>> > 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
>> > Date:
>> > October 2, 2026
>> >   Source:
>> > University of Cambridge
>> > Summary:
>> >   Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest evidence of
>> >   an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
>> >   Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an unknown ocean
>> >   creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.
>> 
>> Please forgive me for not knowing enough about the construction of an-
>> tennae, but I thought Tupandactylus was an obvious and probably older
>> example.
>> 
>> See picture at
>> 
>>    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupandactylus
>> 
>> and the top of the head, filled in, was used to detect electromagnetic
>> fields, presumably the one belonging to the planet Earth, and fly with
>> precision over long distances.
>> 
>> You are perfectly validated if you feel like correcting me on this in-
>> terpretation of the evidence, and when you do, please feel free to sug-
>> gest a book on antennae construction, both electromechanical, and bio-
>> logical.
>
>Earth has a magnetic field.  Light is an electromagnetic
>wave.  There is no such thing as an "electromagnetic
>field".
>
>You don't use an antenna to detect a magnetic field.
>Something like a compass needle made of iron will do.
>Birds use magnetite in their brains.  There are more
>complicated 3-axis magnetometers that work
>electronically.
>
>I'm not sure from whence the idea that the Tupa's crest
>has anything to do with magnetic field detection.  I will
>only observe that sciencedaily.com seems to thrive on the
>woo-woo side of human thought.  Better clickbait, you
>know.
>
>But here's my point:  You can detect the geomagnetic
>field in 3 dimensions, sure.  And let's say Tupa and
>modern birds both do.  The only information that gives
>you is, what direction is the magnetic north/south pole
>from here.  It doesn't tell you where you are.  It's not
>like a GPS at all, as has been pointed out.

No, look at he magnetioc curve around earth
 https://duckduckgo.com/?q=magnetic+field+around+earth+picture

The curvature is different when going from the equator towards the poles.
That gives both altitude and position and of course the north south sngle
for a moving 'bird'.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897112

On 10/4/2026 7:38 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> Jeremiah Jones <jj@j.j>wrote:
>>> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>> On 10/2/2026 11:13 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>>> From:
>>>>    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
>>>>
>>>> 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
>>>> Date:
>>>> October 2, 2026
>>>>    Source:
>>>> University of Cambridge
>>>> Summary:
>>>>    Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest evidence of
>>>>    an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
>>>>    Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an unknown ocean
>>>>    creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.
>>>
>>> Please forgive me for not knowing enough about the construction of an-
>>> tennae, but I thought Tupandactylus was an obvious and probably older
>>> example.
>>>
>>> See picture at
>>>
>>>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupandactylus
>>>
>>> and the top of the head, filled in, was used to detect electromagnetic
>>> fields, presumably the one belonging to the planet Earth, and fly with
>>> precision over long distances.
>>>
>>> You are perfectly validated if you feel like correcting me on this in-
>>> terpretation of the evidence, and when you do, please feel free to sug-
>>> gest a book on antennae construction, both electromechanical, and bio-
>>> logical.
>>
>> Earth has a magnetic field.  Light is an electromagnetic
>> wave.  There is no such thing as an "electromagnetic
>> field".

Forgive me for this historical ignorance, but wasn't the term /electro-
magnetic/ coined to underline the fact that electronics and magnetism
was the same thing?

How can you have a "field" of one, and not the other?  Please explain
that like I was five hundred years old.
>>
>> You don't use an antenna to detect a magnetic field.
>> Something like a compass needle made of iron will do.
>> Birds use magnetite in their brains.  There are more
>> complicated 3-axis magnetometers that work
>> electronically.
>>
>> I'm not sure from whence the idea that the Tupa's crest
>> has anything to do with magnetic field detection.  I will
>> only observe that sciencedaily.com seems to thrive on the
>> woo-woo side of human thought.  Better clickbait, you
>> know.
>>
>> But here's my point:  You can detect the geomagnetic
>> field in 3 dimensions, sure.  And let's say Tupa and
>> modern birds both do.  The only information that gives
>> you is, what direction is the magnetic north/south pole
>>from here.  It doesn't tell you where you are.  It's not
>> like a GPS at all, as has been pointed out.
> 
> No, look at he magnetioc curve around earth
>   https://duckduckgo.com/?q=magnetic+field+around+earth+picture
> 
> The curvature is different when going from the equator towards the poles.
> That gives both altitude and position and of course the north south sngle
> for a moving 'bird'.

Thank you.  I was under the -- perhaps mistaken -- apprehension that the 
Tupandactylus -- Tupa for short [1] -- used the larger flat surface for
greater accuracy when measuring these things.  Geomagnetic, electronic,
it doesn't matter to me.

Because otherwise, I see no point in the rather large flat /sail/ that
cannot be solely for sexual selection of reproductive usability.  It
would create too much of a hazard during a windy storm.

Unless you believe the storms have changed in the last five hundred
million years or so?  Can that be?  I don't know, I'm not that old.

Now, somewhat theoretical question, and one that should be answered at
some point, even if the question is stupid [2], can greater accuracy of
geomagnetic sensory organs detect the same thing from the moon?  Does
that help in navigation?


Best wishes, and happy navigation by solar radiation,
   otherwise known as /daylight/.


[1] Not to be confused with a "tuba," -- that's a musical instrument.

[2] Because if we don't answer the stupid questions, we don't advance
the sciences, and allow people to consider completely useless avenues of
knowledge, just because we don't want to publish scientific papers in
the negative.
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897113

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>Forgive me for this historical ignorance, but wasn't the term /electro-
>magnetic/ coined to underline the fact that electronics and magnetism
>was the same thing?
>How can you have a "field" of one, and not the other?

  In a given inertial frame, the field of an electric charge at
  rest is a pure electric field with no magnetic field.

  In a given inertial frame, the field of a current in an electrically
  neutral perfect conductor is purely magnetic with no electric field. 

  (A superconductor may be used as a perfect conductor.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897114

On 10/5/2026 2:02 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>> Forgive me for this historical ignorance, but wasn't the term /electro-
>> magnetic/ coined to underline the fact that electronics and magnetism
>> was the same thing?
>> How can you have a "field" of one, and not the other?
> 
>    In a given inertial frame, the field of an electric charge at
>    rest is a pure electric field with no magnetic field.
> 
>    In a given inertial frame, the field of a current in an electrically
>    neutral perfect conductor is purely magnetic with no electric field.
> 
>    (A superconductor may be used as a perfect conductor.)

Now I recall reading something about that.  Superconductors have no mea-
sureable magnetic field, right?

But how do we go in the other direction?  Where do we find examples of
measurable magnetic fields without electricity?  Do lodestones qualify?
I mean, don't they have electrons surrounding the nucleus of the atoms?


So what else is out there?
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897116

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>Now I recall reading something about that.  Superconductors have no mea-
>sureable magnetic field, right?

  I meant to say instead that a current in a neutral wire with
  no resistance (as in a superconductor) does create a magnetic
  field, without an electric field.

  What you remember might be based on the fact that a charged
  superconductor has an electric field on the outside, but not
  in its interior (inside).

  So, to summarize, in a given inertial frame (for an observer 
  at rest and not being accelerated) it's possible to have both
  an electric field without a magnetic field and a magnetic field
  without an electric field. So you can have a purely electric 
  field and a purely magnetic field.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897115

On 4 Oct 2026 18:02:46 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:

>Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>>Forgive me for this historical ignorance, but wasn't the term /electro-
>>magnetic/ coined to underline the fact that electronics and magnetism
>>was the same thing?
>>How can you have a "field" of one, and not the other?
>
>  In a given inertial frame, the field of an electric charge at
>  rest is a pure electric field with no magnetic field.
>
>  In a given inertial frame, the field of a current in an electrically
>  neutral perfect conductor is purely magnetic with no electric field. 
>
>  (A superconductor may be used as a perfect conductor.)
>

People can play with words, if they want.

I could wave a probe around inside my microwave oven and make a 3D map
of what I measure. I'd call that a "field."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_field


John Larkin
Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center
Lunatic Fringe Electronics

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897117

On 10/5/2026 2:18 AM, john larkin wrote:
> On 4 Oct 2026 18:02:46 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:
> 
>> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>>> Forgive me for this historical ignorance, but wasn't the term /electro-
>>> magnetic/ coined to underline the fact that electronics and magnetism
>>> was the same thing?
>>> How can you have a "field" of one, and not the other?
>>
>>   In a given inertial frame, the field of an electric charge at
>>   rest is a pure electric field with no magnetic field.
>>
>>   In a given inertial frame, the field of a current in an electrically
>>   neutral perfect conductor is purely magnetic with no electric field.
>>
>>   (A superconductor may be used as a perfect conductor.)
>>
> 
> People can play with words, if they want.
> 
> I could wave a probe around inside my microwave oven and make a 3D map
> of what I measure. I'd call that a "field."
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_field
> 
Dear John,

I recommend you do not do that with your own bare hands.  I have a
rather sad anecdata of unknown veracity from Iceland, of a convenience
store owner who got tired of always opening and closing of the microwave
oven, with the side effect the disk would stop spinning.

So he disconnected the security valve that stops the electronics of the
microwaves once the door is opened.  He presumably could feed hungry
students faster with this stunt.

Alas, woe!  Some time later, days, months, years, I do not know; it
wasn't part of the story when I heard it.

He went to the medical doctor with his hands hurting.  But the doctor
could do nothing.  The innermost meat on his hands was cooked.


I presume you knew all that already, but thought to share with the rest
of sci.electronics.design, in case someone else had that folly of an
idea.  Best wishes, and happy microwaves!
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897119

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>He went to the medical doctor with his hands hurting.  But the doctor
>could do nothing.  The innermost meat on his hands was cooked.

  Robert V. Pound suggested to use low-dose microwave radiation
  to keep people warm in winter, heating them directly in an 
  energy-efficient manner. (Physicists know his name from the
  Pound-Rebka experiment.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897121

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid>
wrote:

> On 10/4/2026 7:38 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> >> Jeremiah Jones <jj@j.j>wrote:
> >>> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> >>> On 10/2/2026 11:13 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> >>>> From:
> >>>>    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
> >>>>
> >>>> 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
> >>>> Date:
> >>>> October 2, 2026
> >>>>    Source:
> >>>> University of Cambridge
> >>>> Summary:
> >>>>    Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest evidence of
> >>>>    an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
> >>>>    Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an unknown ocean
> >>>>    creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.
> >>>
> >>> Please forgive me for not knowing enough about the construction of an-
> >>> tennae, but I thought Tupandactylus was an obvious and probably older
> >>> example.
> >>>
> >>> See picture at
> >>>
> >>>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupandactylus
> >>>
> >>> and the top of the head, filled in, was used to detect electromagnetic
> >>> fields, presumably the one belonging to the planet Earth, and fly with
> >>> precision over long distances.
> >>>
> >>> You are perfectly validated if you feel like correcting me on this in-
> >>> terpretation of the evidence, and when you do, please feel free to sug-
> >>> gest a book on antennae construction, both electromechanical, and bio-
> >>> logical.
> >>
> >> Earth has a magnetic field.  Light is an electromagnetic
> >> wave.  There is no such thing as an "electromagnetic
> >> field".
> 
> Forgive me for this historical ignorance, but wasn't the term /electro-
> magnetic/ coined to underline the fact that electronics and magnetism
> was the same thing?
> 
> How can you have a "field" of one, and not the other?  Please explain
> that like I was five hundred years old.

Electricity and magnetism are different but closely
related.  An electric field can be created by positive
and negative charges (eg proton/electron) separated by a
distance.  A magnetic field is created by moving charge.

If you have oscillating electric and magnetic fields in
sync, they form an electromagnetic *wave* which has
additional properties, carries energy, and propagates in
a certain direction, and is quantized into individual
photons.  Light, for example.  Fields in a wave exist
without the presence of charge or motion.

If you have separated charge without motion, you have an
electric field without magnetic field.  If you have a
charged particle moving alone, magnetic field without
electric.

A permanent magnet has a field caused by the unpaired
spin of one of the electrons in an iron atom.  The "spin"
is moving charge that creates a magnetic field, and it
isn't cancelled out by adjacent electrons as it is in
other atoms.

HTH.

> >> You don't use an antenna to detect a magnetic field.
> >> Something like a compass needle made of iron will do.
> >> Birds use magnetite in their brains.  There are more
> >> complicated 3-axis magnetometers that work
> >> electronically.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure from whence the idea that the Tupa's crest
> >> has anything to do with magnetic field detection.  I will
> >> only observe that sciencedaily.com seems to thrive on the
> >> woo-woo side of human thought.  Better clickbait, you
> >> know.
> >>
> >> But here's my point:  You can detect the geomagnetic
> >> field in 3 dimensions, sure.  And let's say Tupa and
> >> modern birds both do.  The only information that gives
> >> you is, what direction is the magnetic north/south pole
> >>from here.  It doesn't tell you where you are.  It's not
> >> like a GPS at all, as has been pointed out.
> > 
> > No, look at he magnetioc curve around earth
> >   https://duckduckgo.com/?q=magnetic+field+around+earth+picture
> > 
> > The curvature is different when going from the equator towards the poles.
> > That gives both altitude and position and of course the north south sngle
> > for a moving 'bird'.

How does the bird detect curvature at one point?  It
requires accurately measuring a field change at multiple
points a known distance apart.

Even then, how does it find position from that, and how
accurately does it have to measure?

> Thank you.  I was under the -- perhaps mistaken -- apprehension that the 
> Tupandactylus -- Tupa for short [1] -- used the larger flat surface for
> greater accuracy when measuring these things.  Geomagnetic, electronic,
> it doesn't matter to me.
> 
> Because otherwise, I see no point in the rather large flat /sail/ that
> cannot be solely for sexual selection of reproductive usability.  It
> would create too much of a hazard during a windy storm.

I think the function of the crest is unknown.  If it
could be used for navigation, I don't see how.  These
reptiles look heavy, not like they are made for
long-distance flight.

> Unless you believe the storms have changed in the last five hundred
> million years or so?  Can that be?  I don't know, I'm not that old.
> 
> Now, somewhat theoretical question, and one that should be answered at
> some point, even if the question is stupid [2], can greater accuracy of
> geomagnetic sensory organs detect the same thing from the moon?  Does
> that help in navigation?

I don't understand the question.  The moon has no
significant magnetic field of its own, so probably not.
If you're on the moon, you can only detect the local
magnetic field, not the field down on the earth's
surface.


> Best wishes, and happy navigation by solar radiation,
>    otherwise known as /daylight/.

Yes, better to fly VFR.


> [1] Not to be confused with a "tuba," -- that's a musical instrument.
> 
> [2] Because if we don't answer the stupid questions, we don't advance
> the sciences, and allow people to consider completely useless avenues of
> knowledge, just because we don't want to publish scientific papers in
> the negative.

They are good questions, thanks.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897062

On 3/10/2026 1:13 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> From:
>   https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
> 
> 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
> Date:
> October 2, 2026
>   Source:
> University of Cambridge
> Summary:
>   Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest evidence of
>   an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
>   Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an unknown ocean
>   creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.

We've known about animals sensing the earth's magnetic field and using 
it for navigation for many years now. but the one thing we do know for 
sure is that this hasn't got anything to do with our global position 
system, which relies on remarkably precises clocks in orbit around the 
earth which transmit very precise time signals at microwave frequencies.

You've got to be able to receive signals from at least four satellites 
at the same time to be able to work out where you (and you can do it 
pretty precisely).

The earth's magnetic field drifts around quite a bit, and reverses from 
time to time, more of less randomly - there have been at least 183 
reversals over the last 83 million years (which averages out to one 
every 450,000 years, but the most recent one was 780.000 years ago).

Sensing the earth's magnetic field is a useful trick, but it's a lot 
less than a navigation system. Ships have had compasses for quite while 
now, but nobody call them a "global positioning system".

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897067

On 10/2/26 08:46, Bill Sloman wrote:
> On 3/10/2026 1:13 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> From:
>>   https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
>>
>> 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
>> Date:
>> October 2, 2026
>>   Source:
>> University of Cambridge
>> Summary:
>>   Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest 
>> evidence of
>>   an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
>>   Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an unknown 
>> ocean
>>   creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.
> 
> We've known about animals sensing the earth's magnetic field and using 
> it for navigation for many years now. but the one thing we do know for 
> sure is that this hasn't got anything to do with our global position 
> system, which relies on remarkably precises clocks in orbit around the 
> earth which transmit very precise time signals at microwave frequencies.
> 
> You've got to be able to receive signals from at least four satellites 
> at the same time to be able to work out where you (and you can do it 
> pretty precisely).

Well, you gave us an incomplete sentence, "...to be able to work out 
where you..." so nobody can be sure what you're talking about.

Four satellites needed for navigation, three satellites for position.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System

GPS requires four or more satellites to be visible for accurate navigation.

There are marked performance benefits to the user carrying a clock 
synchronized with the satellites. Foremost is that only three satellites 
are needed to compute a position solution.

Although four satellites are required for normal operation, fewer apply 
in special cases. If one variable is already known, a receiver can 
determine its position using only three satellites. For example, a ship 
on the open ocean usually has a known elevation close to 0 m, and the 
elevation of an aircraft may be known.
> 
> The earth's magnetic field drifts around quite a bit, and reverses from 
> time to time, more of less randomly - there have been at least 183 
> reversals over the last 83 million years (which averages out to one 
> every 450,000 years, but the most recent one was 780.000 years ago).
> 
> Sensing the earth's magnetic field is a useful trick, but it's a lot 
> less than a navigation system. Ships have had compasses for quite while 
> now, but nobody call them a "global positioning system".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897072

On 3/10/2026 3:37 am, Old McDonald wrote:
> On 10/2/26 08:46, Bill Sloman wrote:
>> On 3/10/2026 1:13 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>> From:
>>>   https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
>>>
>>> 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
>>> Date:
>>> October 2, 2026
>>>   Source:
>>> University of Cambridge
>>> Summary:
>>>   Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest 
>>> evidence of
>>>   an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
>>>   Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an unknown 
>>> ocean
>>>   creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.
>>
>> We've known about animals sensing the earth's magnetic field and using 
>> it for navigation for many years now. but the one thing we do know for 
>> sure is that this hasn't got anything to do with our global position 
>> system, which relies on remarkably precises clocks in orbit around the 
>> earth which transmit very precise time signals at microwave frequencies.
>>
>> You've got to be able to receive signals from at least four satellites 
>> at the same time to be able to work out where you are (and you can do it 
>> pretty precisely).
> 
> Well, you gave us an incomplete sentence, "...to be able to work out 
> where you..." so nobody can be sure what you're talking about.

It's called a "typo". Somebody as stupid as you seem to be might have 
been left in some doubt about what I meant.

> Four satellites needed for navigation, three satellites for position.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System
> 
> GPS requires four or more satellites to be visible for accurate navigation.
> 
> There are marked performance benefits to the user carrying a clock 
> synchronized with the satellites. Foremost is that only three satellites 
> are needed to compute a position solution.
> 
> Although four satellites are required for normal operation, fewer apply 
> in special cases. If one variable is already known, a receiver can 
> determine its position using only three satellites. For example, a ship 
> on the open ocean usually has a known elevation close to 0 m, and the 
> elevation of an aircraft may be known.

So what.

>> The earth's magnetic field drifts around quite a bit, and reverses 
>> from time to time, more of less randomly - there have been at least 
>> 183 reversals over the last 83 million years (which averages out to 
>> one every 450,000 years, but the most recent one was 780.000 years ago).
>>
>> Sensing the earth's magnetic field is a useful trick, but it's a lot 
>> less than a navigation system. Ships have had compasses for quite 
>> while now, but nobody call them a "global positioning system".

-- 
Bill Sloman. Sydney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897074

On 10/2/26 23:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
> On 3/10/2026 3:37 am, Old McDonald wrote:
>> On 10/2/26 08:46, Bill Sloman wrote:
>>> On 3/10/2026 1:13 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>>> From:
>>>>   https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
>>>>
>>>> 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
>>>> Date:
>>>> October 2, 2026
>>>>   Source:
>>>> University of Cambridge
>>>> Summary:
>>>>   Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest 
>>>> evidence of
>>>>   an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
>>>>   Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an 
>>>> unknown ocean
>>>>   creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.
>>>
>>> We've known about animals sensing the earth's magnetic field and 
>>> using it for navigation for many years now. but the one thing we do 
>>> know for sure is that this hasn't got anything to do with our global 
>>> position system, which relies on remarkably precises clocks in orbit 
>>> around the earth which transmit very precise time signals at 
>>> microwave frequencies.
>>>
>>> You've got to be able to receive signals from at least four 
>>> satellites at the same time 
>>> to be able to work out where you are
                                              ^^^
>> (and you can do it pretty precisely).
>> Well, you gave us an incomplete sentence, "...to be able to work out 
>> where you..." so nobody can be sure what you're talking about.
> 
> It's called a "typo". Somebody as stupid as you seem to be might have 
> been left in some doubt about what I meant.

Oh look, you went back and snuck "are" into the already quoted material!

>> Four satellites needed for navigation, three satellites for position.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System
>>
>> GPS requires four or more satellites to be visible for accurate 
>> navigation.
>>
>> There are marked performance benefits to the user carrying a clock 
>> synchronized with the satellites. Foremost is that only three 
>> satellites are needed to compute a position solution.
>>
>> Although four satellites are required for normal operation, fewer 
>> apply in special cases. If one variable is already known, a receiver 
>> can determine its position using only three satellites. For example, a 
>> ship on the open ocean usually has a known elevation close to 0 m, and 
>> the elevation of an aircraft may be known.
> 
> So what.

It's a major difference. That's so what.

Each satellite puts you somewhere on the surface of a sphere.
Adding satellites whittles that down to a circle, two points, one point. 
Earth is a sphere, and when you're pretty sure you're on it, you can 
lose the fourth satellite.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897085

On 3/10/2026 5:08 pm, Old McDonald wrote:
> On 10/2/26 23:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
>> On 3/10/2026 3:37 am, Old McDonald wrote:
>>> On 10/2/26 08:46, Bill Sloman wrote:
>>>> On 3/10/2026 1:13 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>>>> From:
>>>>>   https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
>>>>> Date:
>>>>> October 2, 2026
>>>>>   Source:
>>>>> University of Cambridge
>>>>> Summary:
>>>>>   Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest 
>>>>> evidence of
>>>>>   an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
>>>>>   Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an 
>>>>> unknown ocean
>>>>>   creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.
>>>>
>>>> We've known about animals sensing the earth's magnetic field and 
>>>> using it for navigation for many years now. but the one thing we do 
>>>> know for sure is that this hasn't got anything to do with our global 
>>>> position system, which relies on remarkably precises clocks in orbit 
>>>> around the earth which transmit very precise time signals at 
>>>> microwave frequencies.
>>>>
>>>> You've got to be able to receive signals from at least four 
>>>> satellites at the same time to be able to work out where you are
>                                               ^^^
>>> (and you can do it pretty precisely).
>>> Well, you gave us an incomplete sentence, "...to be able to work out 
>>> where you..." so nobody can be sure what you're talking about.
>>
>> It's called a "typo". Somebody as stupid as you seem to be might have 
>> been left in some doubt about what I meant.
> 
> Oh look, you went back and snuck "are" into the already quoted material!

I'm supposed to leave a typo uncorrected?

>>> Four satellites needed for navigation, three satellites for position.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System
>>>
>>> GPS requires four or more satellites to be visible for accurate 
>>> navigation.
>>>
>>> There are marked performance benefits to the user carrying a clock 
>>> synchronized with the satellites. Foremost is that only three 
>>> satellites are needed to compute a position solution.
>>>
>>> Although four satellites are required for normal operation, fewer 
>>> apply in special cases. If one variable is already known, a receiver 
>>> can determine its position using only three satellites. For example, 
>>> a ship on the open ocean usually has a known elevation close to 0 m, 
>>> and the elevation of an aircraft may be known.
>>
>> So what.
> 
> It's a major difference. That's so what.

Your idea of a major difference is anything you can carp about.

In reality you GPS (and mine) looks for as many satellite as it can see, 
and picks the four best to calculate your position.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897066

On 10/2/26 17:13, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> From:
>   https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
> 
> 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
> Date:
> October 2, 2026
>   Source:
> University of Cambridge
> Summary:
>   Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest evidence of
>   an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
>   Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an unknown ocean
>   creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.
> 
> 

A bit of magnetite in an appropriate place in a fossil /may/ be
indicative of a magnetically sensitive organ, true. The remainder
is pure conjecture. "Built-in GPS" and "Surprising precision",
sheesh, talk about hyperbole.

Jeroen Belleman

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897073

>Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please>wrote:
>>On 10/2/26 17:13, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> From:
>>   https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
>> 
>> 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
>> Date:
>> October 2, 2026
>>   Source:
>> University of Cambridge
>> Summary:
>>   Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest evidence of
>>   an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
>>   Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an unknown ocean
>>   creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.
>> 
>> 
>
>A bit of magnetite in an appropriate place in a fossil /may/ be
>indicative of a magnetically sensitive organ, true. The remainder
>is pure conjecture. "Built-in GPS" and "Surprising precision",
>sheesh, talk about hyperbole.

You mean like AI?

Do not underestimate what nature already 'designed' 
maybe nature has us using your (CERN's) undiscovered particles and physics too.
Very likely it does, as it is what creates us.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897091

On 3/10/2026 4:50 pm, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please>wrote:
>>> On 10/2/26 17:13, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>> From:
>>>    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260930020329.htm
>>>
>>> 97-million-year-old fossils reveal the earliest known animal "GPS"
>>> Date:
>>> October 2, 2026
>>>    Source:
>>> University of Cambridge
>>> Summary:
>>>    Mysterious 97-million-year-old magnetic fossils may be the oldest evidence of
>>>    an animal using Earth's magnetic field like a built-in GPS.
>>>    Their sophisticated magnetic structure could have helped an unknown ocean
>>>    creature navigate thousands of kilometers with surprising precision.
>>
>> A bit of magnetite in an appropriate place in a fossil /may/ be
>> indicative of a magnetically sensitive organ, true. The remainder
>> is pure conjecture. "Built-in GPS" and "Surprising precision",
>> sheesh, talk about hyperbole.
> 
> You mean like AI?

Probably not - artificial intelligence isn't hyperbolic.

> Do not underestimate what nature already 'designed'
> maybe nature has us using your (CERN's) undiscovered particles and physics too.

Nature evolves stuff. It doesn't design it

> Very likely it does, as it is what creates us.

Nature may well have created us - it would be rude to any imagined 
creator to blame them for the design flaws that you get when you evolve 
a design without thinking about what you are doing.

At the moment Darwinian evolution is the best explanation we've got for 
the state of the natural world. Creationism is a incomplete - you've got 
to explain where the creator came from.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897094

On 10/4/2026 2:15 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:
> Nature may well have created us - it would be rude to any imagined 
> creator to blame them for the design flaws that you get when you evolve 
> a design without thinking about what you are doing.
> 
> At the moment Darwinian evolution is the best explanation we've got for 
> the state of the natural world. Creationism is a incomplete - you've got 
> to explain where the creator came from.

Well, so is Darwinism.  We don't have to explain where Darwin comes
from -- or do we? -- but we don't have an origin point for the /seed of
life/ on this planet.

And for that matter, it seems to me we are looking at two or three,
maybe more, independent origin of some of the single cell organisms.
But that's just me thinking independently, it's not like I'm writing
a scientific paper on the subject, so you can dismiss that idea and
thump some paper if you prefer.

And while on the subject of life forms, what's with bipedal humanoids?
Shouldn't there be more?  I mean, convergent evolution is a thing,
right?  We have all these various branches of animals with four legs.


So why don't we have more with two?  What's up with that?  Do you have
an explanation for that in Darwinism?
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897108

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid>
wrote:

> On 10/4/2026 2:15 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:
> > Nature may well have created us - it would be rude to any imagined 
> > creator to blame them for the design flaws that you get when you evolve 
> > a design without thinking about what you are doing.
> > 
> > At the moment Darwinian evolution is the best explanation we've got for 
> > the state of the natural world. Creationism is a incomplete - you've got 
> > to explain where the creator came from.
> 
> Well, so is Darwinism.  We don't have to explain where Darwin comes
> from -- or do we? -- but we don't have an origin point for the /seed of
> life/ on this planet.
> 
> And for that matter, it seems to me we are looking at two or three,
> maybe more, independent origin of some of the single cell organisms.
> But that's just me thinking independently, it's not like I'm writing
> a scientific paper on the subject, so you can dismiss that idea and
> thump some paper if you prefer.
> 
> And while on the subject of life forms, what's with bipedal humanoids?
> Shouldn't there be more?  I mean, convergent evolution is a thing,
> right?  We have all these various branches of animals with four legs.
> 
> 
> So why don't we have more with two?  What's up with that?  Do you have
> an explanation for that in Darwinism?


All birds, T. Rex, velociraptors, kangaroos, Bigfoot...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#897110

On 10/4/2026 5:46 PM, Jeremiah Jones wrote:
> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/4/2026 2:15 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:
>>> Nature may well have created us - it would be rude to any imagined
>>> creator to blame them for the design flaws that you get when you evolve
>>> a design without thinking about what you are doing.
>>>
>>> At the moment Darwinian evolution is the best explanation we've got for
>>> the state of the natural world. Creationism is a incomplete - you've got
>>> to explain where the creator came from.
>>
>> Well, so is Darwinism.  We don't have to explain where Darwin comes
>> from -- or do we? -- but we don't have an origin point for the /seed of
>> life/ on this planet.
>>
>> And for that matter, it seems to me we are looking at two or three,
>> maybe more, independent origin of some of the single cell organisms.
>> But that's just me thinking independently, it's not like I'm writing
>> a scientific paper on the subject, so you can dismiss that idea and
>> thump some paper if you prefer.
>>
>> And while on the subject of life forms, what's with bipedal humanoids?
>> Shouldn't there be more?  I mean, convergent evolution is a thing,
>> right?  We have all these various branches of animals with four legs.
>>
>>
>> So why don't we have more with two?  What's up with that?  Do you have
>> an explanation for that in Darwinism?
> 
> 
> All birds, T. Rex, velociraptors, kangaroos, Bigfoot...

Well, T. Rex is famous for -- relatively -- small hands, I'm not sure
about velociraptors as I've never met one, and I don't know if we call
them hands on kangaroos.  Bigfoot I've also never met so cannot comment.

Still, this seems rather few, in terms of all the species this planet
has to offer.  Consider the multitude of birds, none of which have
hands, and all the various quadrupeds [1].


Really, shouldn't there be more bipedal humanoids if that's the pinnacle
of evolution?  I mean, life forms are /meant/ -- according to Darwinism
-- to converge on the most efficient form for survival, and if we are
the pinnacle of evolution, why aren't there more humanoids?  Where is
the competition?


[1] I did have to look up the speling of this word; I hope you'll for-
give me.
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web