Are mice smarter than Humans per cc brainsize?

[New Kereptica]

Not to question the efficiency of the mouse brain but If one is really interested in this question one needs to consider weather mouse brain architecture would scale well if they were larger.

This is what I'm thinking too. I suspect there is a reason that the mouse brain is the size it is and that attempts to change it in one direction or another would not go well.

That is, most probably, true for quite a lot of things.

[Natapoc]

...whereas a Cat, lacking in these forms of intelligence, can precisely calculate ... ...without the knowledge of advanced physics.

Source?

Do you want a source that cats lack knowledge of advanced physics or a source that cats can precisely calculate where to pounce?

[Lackadaisical2]

It annoys me went people try to belittle human intelligence like this. Even the smartest animals don't even come close to matching human intelligence.

Pure human arrogance. What measure of non human intelligence exists to provide a valid understanding and objective system of comparison of intelligence between species?

I doubt there is even an objective system for measuring human intelligence, let alone comparing it to animals.
who cares about intelligence anyway? We have guns and cooperation, therefore, we win.

True. And people who care about the meaning and applications of intelligence across species care. If you don't care about the subject why post in the thread?

I care about what people think about it, despite the fact that its all meaningless to me. Plus if I wasn't posting here, I'd have to find something else to waste my time with.

[H N Fiddlebottoms VIII]

It annoys me went people try to belittle human intelligence like this. Even the smartest animals don't even come close to matching human intelligence.

Pure human arrogance. What measure of non human intelligence exists to provide a valid understanding and objective system of comparison of intelligence between species?

I got one! I call it the NMIDS-index (it is short for Number of Measures of Intelligence Developed by Species).

Humans: 1 NMIDS
Mice: 0 NMIDS
Gorillas: 0 NMIDS
Parakeets: 0 NMIDS
....

Actually, it is pretty much just zeroes the rest of the way down. Except for dolphins. Dolphins get a -1 because I hate them.

Your so called NMIDS is untested and has no research to back it up. It is totally unscientific.

It is researched. I spent about five minutes nosing around Wikipedia, and a few months ago I went to the zoo and carefully looked at all the animals. Not one of them was taking an IQ test, and when I tried to ask a gorilla about whether it knew of any MENSA-type organizations for animals, the gorilla ate a piece of its own excrement. Than vomited it back up. Then ate the vomit.

[Barringtonia]

...whereas a Cat, lacking in these forms of intelligence, can precisely calculate ... ...without the knowledge of advanced physics.

Source?

Do you want a source that cats lack knowledge of advanced physics or a source that cats can precisely calculate where to pounce?

That they lack knowledge of advanced physics, it goes against all evidence.

[Natapoc]

Each species is 'intellignet' in a different aspect. For instance, Humans have the abilities of reason and advanced communication, whereas a Cat, lacking in these forms of intelligence, can precisely calculate where, when, and with how much force to pounce onto an incredibly small area, without the knowledge of advanced physics.

Very true. It would seem that any measure of intelligence should be from the perspective of a species adaptation to it's environment. This however, would change the intelligence to mean something like (evolutionary)fitness. So perhaps another measure would be needed to measure how a species thinks about it's environment from the perspective of how it adapted.

[Natapoc]

...whereas a Cat, lacking in these forms of intelligence, can precisely calculate ... ...without the knowledge of advanced physics.

Source?

Do you want a source that cats lack knowledge of advanced physics or a source that cats can precisely calculate where to pounce?

That they lack knowledge of advanced physics, it goes against all evidence.

I put: PHYSICS for scientists and Engineers with modern physics fifth edition open on my bed for my cat to read. The cat tried to play with it. Clearly advanced physics is so elementary to my cat that it is simply boring to her.

I think you are right.

[FreeSatania]

Not to question the efficiency of the mouse brain but If one is really interested in this question one needs to consider weather mouse brain architecture would scale well if they were larger.

This is what I'm thinking too. I suspect there is a reason that the mouse brain is the size it is and that attempts to change it in one direction or another would not go well.

That is, most probably, true for quite a lot of things.

Well it's certainly true for computer systems, and one can look at the as a type of computer. ...so why wouldn't normal software architecture concerns apply.

[Natapoc]

Not to question the efficiency of the mouse brain but If one is really interested in this question one needs to consider weather mouse brain architecture would scale well if they were larger.

This is what I'm thinking too. I suspect there is a reason that the mouse brain is the size it is and that attempts to change it in one direction or another would not go well.

That is, most probably, true for quite a lot of things.

Well it's certainly true for computer systems, and one can look at the as a type of computer. ...so why wouldn't normal software architecture concerns apply.

Nah your computer system should always be built so it is able to scale without any issue otherwise it is flawed

(just because most are flawed does not mean they should be

[FreeSatania]

Not to question the efficiency of the mouse brain but If one is really interested in this question one needs to consider weather mouse brain architecture would scale well if they were larger.

This is what I'm thinking too. I suspect there is a reason that the mouse brain is the size it is and that attempts to change it in one direction or another would not go well.

That is, most probably, true for quite a lot of things.

Well it's certainly true for computer systems, and one can look at the as a type of computer. ...so why wouldn't normal software architecture concerns apply.

Nah your computer system should always be built so it is able to scale without any issue otherwise it is flawed

Where did you get that idea? Some algorithms simply do not scale well... it's a fact. Algorithms need to fit the specific uses of the application. You can get bogged down in scalability vs. efficiency issues as soon as you try something as simple as sorting a list!

[FreeSatania]

Mice and men are also very similar in some ways. We both get depressed... I found this article googling.

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/200601 ... _sys.shtml

[Natapoc]

Not to question the efficiency of the mouse brain but If one is really interested in this question one needs to consider weather mouse brain architecture would scale well if they were larger.

This is what I'm thinking too. I suspect there is a reason that the mouse brain is the size it is and that attempts to change it in one direction or another would not go well.

That is, most probably, true for quite a lot of things.

Well it's certainly true for computer systems, and one can look at the as a type of computer. ...so why wouldn't normal software architecture concerns apply.

Nah your computer system should always be built so it is able to scale without any issue otherwise it is flawed

Where did you get that idea? Some algorithms simply do not scale well... it's a fact. Algorithms need to fit the specific uses of the application. You can get bogged down in scalability vs. efficiency issues as soon as you try something as simple as sorting a list!

Algorithms that do not scale well should be fixed so that they do. Quicksort is typically the best algorithm for sorting. It is also trivial to design your algorithms such that they test for the best sorting algorithm to use on your data before they run. So yes there is no reason to design systems that don't scale. It is simply bad design in most cases.

In other words your application can dynamically pick the best sorting algorithm based on it's knowledge of the data automatically.

edit: Your statement also only shows that some algorithms are non scalable not that they should be non scalable.

[Ryadn]

This is just crap. The reason Humans were so smart is because we were created that way, to tend to, and rule over all the other creatures. No animal reaches our level of intelligence because God made Mankind in his own light.

So God's not very good at parallel parking either?

[Ryadn]

Not to question the efficiency of the mouse brain but If one is really interested in this question one needs to consider weather mouse brain architecture would scale well if they were larger.

INDEED. And they wouldn't.

[Ryadn]

Not to question the efficiency of the mouse brain but If one is really interested in this question one needs to consider weather mouse brain architecture would scale well if they were larger.

This is what I'm thinking too. I suspect there is a reason that the mouse brain is the size it is and that attempts to change it in one direction or another would not go well.

That is, most probably, true for quite a lot of things.

Well it's certainly true for computer systems, and one can look at the as a type of computer. ...so why wouldn't normal software architecture concerns apply.

Heh. I remember a passage in Big Brain (a good resource for this discussion) that stated if a s programmer wrote software like genetic code, s/he'd be fired on the spot, because it's so faulty and redundant.

[Ryadn]

To everyone saying brain volume is not correlated with intelligence: that's not really true. It is true that brain volume differences among members of a species are not correlated with individual intelligence, but, in general---not accounting for brain-to-body ratio, just brain size itself---as brains get larger the neo-cortex begins to take up a larger percentage of space and become more wrinkled, and this is what allows us and other intelligent animals to reason, problem solve, plan for the future, etc.

A mouse brain scaled to the size of ours would not even come close to being as complex and capable of different tasks as a human brain. In fact, it would be largely redundant, because the majority of a mouse's brain is used processing stimuli (specifically olfactory).

[Apertior]

It annoys me went people try to belittle human intelligence like this. Even the smartest animals don't even come close to matching human intelligence.

Actually, it is pretty much just zeroes the rest of the way down. Except for dolphins. Dolphins get a -1 because I hate them.

Wrong. It's turtles all the way down.

You are instantly and permanently my favorite person.

[Mad hatters in jeans]

To everyone saying brain volume is not correlated with intelligence: that's not really true. It is true that brain volume differences among members of a species are not correlated with individual intelligence, but, in general---not accounting for brain-to-body ratio, just brain size itself---as brains get larger the neo-cortex begins to take up a larger percentage of space and become more wrinkled, and this is what allows us and other intelligent animals to reason, problem solve, plan for the future, etc.

A mouse brain scaled to the size of ours would not even come close to being as complex and capable of different tasks as a human brain. In fact, it would be largely redundant, because the majority of a mouse's brain is used processing stimuli (specifically olfactory).

So the mouse would have hyper-sensitivity to light, noise, touch etc?

[San Juanico]

Here is the big question: Do you think mice are smarter than humans on a cubic centimetre of brain scale?

Probably smarter then you.
But not smarter then me.

[Kalakda]

This is just crap. The reason Humans were so smart is because we were created that way, to tend to, and rule over all the other creatures. No animal reaches our level of intelligence because God made Mankind in his own light.

You have a source that's showing that god made mankind in his own light?

Yes, it is called the Bible.

[Anarcosyndiclic Peons]

This is just crap. The reason Humans were so smart is because we were created that way, to tend to, and rule over all the other creatures. No animal reaches our level of intelligence because God made Mankind in his own light.

You have a source that's showing that god made mankind in his own light?

Yes, it is called the Bible.

A source with questionable validity at best. Please provide two more independent and peer reviewed sources instead.

[Eofaerwic]

Have you heard that humans have only managed to use 5-7% of their brain capacity?

Maybe you, but not we. No, seriously we use 100% of its capacity. Most is for vision.

It's true. We may not use all of it at any one time and we may not know exactly what each bit is for, but all of it gets used.

[LOL ANARCHY NUBZ]

Wouldn't surprise me.