# What animals' capabilities don't have a technological counterpart? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 16, 2006, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684 "2006-11-16T15:25:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Puzzler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d07c76/32.png) [@Puzzler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Puzzler)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/1 "2006-11-16T15:25:51Z")
Animals have a lot of possibilities not available to us humans. But, through technology, we managed to get these possibilities (and then some). For example, we can’t fly – but plains and gliders do a really good work. Many animals have various sensory inputs we don’t (infrared vision, field perception) – but modern sensors can cover many of these. OTOH, AFAIK we still can’t reproduce dogs’ smell sense, for example. So, what other animals’ capabilities are not reproducible with our current technology? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/2 "2006-11-16T15:34:02Z")
[QUOTE=Puzzler] OTOH, AFAIK we still can’t reproduce dogs’ smell sense, for example. [/QUOTE] Actually there are electronic noses out there. Whether it rivals a dog’s nose I couldn’t say but I am guessing for reasons of cost, portability(?), reliability and so on dogs still have a job in this area. > [@](#): > > IT DOES the job of a nose, works like an ear and displays what it finds as a picture. And in just 10 seconds, the world’s fastest electronic sniffer can identify hundreds of scents in a mix, and tell you how much of each is there. > > Dubbed the zNose, the new sensor is the first electronic nose accurate enough to be approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the national pollution watchdog. Its manufacturer, Electronic Sensor Technology of Newbury Park, California, says it can be used to sniff out pollutants in everything from plastics and perfumes to foodstuffs. > > SOURCE: [http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2000/C/200002842.html](http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2000/C/200002842.html) Off hand I’d say we have not come up with anything that improves our agility. Planes can fly but are not as nimble as a sparrow. Submarines can travel underwater but can’t dart and weave like a dolphin. We can climb a tree on our own but will look pretty clumsy next to a cat running up a tree to catch a squirrel. ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/3 "2006-11-16T16:32:57Z")
Human intelligence is pretty far beyond any modern technology. ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/4 "2006-11-16T17:19:50Z")
The sonar imaging that allows dolphins to ‘see’ what is inside a closed vessel, all underwater, naturally. We can only scrape the surface of sonar imaging, despite the $$$ spent on highly complex systems in submarines. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/5 "2006-11-16T17:20:52Z")
[QUOTE=ultrafilter] Human intelligence is pretty far beyond any modern technology. [/QUOTE] Damn, you beat me to it! ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/6 "2006-11-16T17:25:21Z")
[QUOTE=ultrafilter] Human intelligence is pretty far beyond any modern technology. [/QUOTE] I wouldn’t even limit it to human intelligence. A mouse’s brain is more complex that the most sophisticated computer. ---
**Author:** ![lieu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c2a13f/32.png) [@lieu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lieu)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/7 "2006-11-16T17:28:28Z")
There’s some evidence to suggest several species can detect an as yet unknown physical stimulus that preceeds an earthquake event. Fish, rabbits, dogs and others have been known to act strangely in the days or hours before an earthquake, but our ability to deduce that one is imminent isn’t yet nearly as refined. ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/8 "2006-11-16T17:30:35Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] A mouse’s brain is more complex that the most sophisticated computer. [/QUOTE] But you can’t use it to surf porn. ---
**Author:** ![rabbit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/919ad9/32.png) [@rabbit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rabbit)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/9 "2006-11-16T18:44:27Z")
[QUOTE=casdave] The sonar imaging that allows dolphins to ‘see’ what is inside a closed vessel, all underwater, naturally. We can only scrape the surface of sonar imaging, despite the $$$ spent on highly complex systems in submarines. [/QUOTE] Actually, I saw something many years ago that could do just that, at the time it was pretty rough (in terms of detail) but the limiting factor for better resolution was money (it used a cluster of sensors placed in a hex pattern to “see,” sort of looked like a honeycomb. The more sensors the better the resolution). These sensors were pretty pricey to make, but well within military budgets and accordingly the US navy was looking pretty interested in the technology. The imagery they were showing with the prototype was pretty impressive and all this took place at least 10 years ago, so the tech should have advanced quite a bit since then. The demo had a guy “looking” through walls of plastic and metal and being able to “see” the shape of whatever was behind them. Quite neat actually. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/10 "2006-11-16T18:49:58Z")
Self replication. ---
**Author:** ![FatBaldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ecd19e/32.png) [@FatBaldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FatBaldGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/11 "2006-11-16T18:58:26Z")
[QUOTE=rabbit] Actually, I saw something many years ago that could do just that, at the time it was pretty rough (in terms of detail) but the limiting factor for better resolution was money (it used a cluster of sensors placed in a hex pattern to “see,” sort of looked like a honeycomb. The more sensors the better the resolution). These sensors were pretty pricey to make, but well within military budgets and accordingly the US navy was looking pretty interested in the technology. The imagery they were showing with the prototype was pretty impressive and all this took place at least 10 years ago, so the tech should have advanced quite a bit since then. The demo had a guy “looking” through walls of plastic and metal and being able to “see” the shape of whatever was behind them. Quite neat actually. [/QUOTE] Heck, they’ve had technology to do this for years. I remember back in the 50’s there were ads in the comic books for X-Ray Glasses. Of course I never bought any, but I’m positive they must have worked, or they couldn’t advertise them, right? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/12 "2006-11-16T22:03:00Z")
A lot of the mechanics that insects use can’t be replicated by machines yet. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/13 "2006-11-16T22:52:58Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] I wouldn’t even limit it to human intelligence. A mouse’s brain is more complex that the most sophisticated computer. [/QUOTE] I don’t think that’s accurate anymore. I believe I’ve seen cites that rate the current topf supercomputers at about the same level as the brain of a cat. Which is more than a mouse’s brain. (This is based only on a comparable count of the number of ‘interconnect points’, which seems to be the only current reasonable way to compare them. Because they are ‘wired’ for such different purposes, a direct comparison is impossible at present.) ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2006, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/14 "2006-11-16T23:11:41Z")
[QUOTE=t-bonham@scc.net] I don’t think that’s accurate anymore. I believe I’ve seen cites that rate the current topf supercomputers at about the same level as the brain of a cat. Which is more than a mouse’s brain. (This is based only on a comparable count of the number of ‘interconnect points’, which seems to be the only current reasonable way to compare them. Because they are ‘wired’ for such different purposes, a direct comparison is impossible at present.) [/QUOTE] I think the only real valuable way to compare is based on function, and on that measure our computers (AI in research) is probably not even up to ant level. Supercomputers are fast, but not very bright. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2006, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/15 "2006-11-17T00:03:57Z")
[QUOTE=RaftPeople] Supercomputers are fast, but not very bright. [/QUOTE] That’s a good summary. More generally, although we have many technologies that do things faster, stronger, more accurately, et cetera, than the biomechanical equivilent, these capabilities are highly specialized. An assembly robot may be able to weld a car chassis quickly and with more accuracy than a human, but it isn’t going to make dinner or give odds on the Phillies. Don’t be too hard on humanity, though; natural selection has been winnowing away at multicellular biomechanics for hundreds of millions of years, and we’ve only had about 10000 years since we were making tools out of stone. In the long run (or indeed, even in the not-too-distant future) I think we stand a good chance of getting the best of Nature. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2006, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/16 "2006-11-17T00:08:30Z")
The answers so far would suggest we’ve explored every avenue open to us. How right they are. Tell me how flocks of birds change direction, or how whales communicate (not just how they make noises), and we might be onto something. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2006, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/17 "2006-11-17T00:13:34Z")
Dogs (and maybe cats if they gave a fuck) can instantly identify their owner and other members of the family no matter what they are wearing, in dark or light, and out of large groups of people almost instantly and keep track of where they are with total ease. Show me a device that can do that. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2006, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/18 "2006-11-17T01:18:58Z")
[QUOTE=Stranger On A Train] (…in the not-too-distant future) [/QUOTE] Next Sunday, A.D.? ---
**Author:** ![Khampelf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Khampelf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khampelf)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2006, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/19 "2006-11-18T00:15:20Z")
[QUOTE=Puzzler] So, what other animals’ capabilities are not reproducible with our current technology? [/QUOTE] You can’t milk a tractor. Unless you like drinking crankcase oil, that is. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2006, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684/20 "2006-11-18T04:11:08Z")
The gecko’s ability to cling to any object is so far unparalleled. Though maybe not too long from now they’ll have a synthetic material that duplicates the pads of a gecko’s toes. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-animals-capabilities-dont-have-a-technological-counterpart/380684.md?page=2)