Talk:Bergmann's Rule
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Low | This article is on a subject of low importance within physics. | |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
||
[edit] inconsistencies in assertions and logic
There's a failure in the logical thread of this article that ought to be cleaned up. I don't know if it's a failure of the theory, or of the description. If it's the former, it should be explained as such. If it's the latter, the theory needs to be described better.
I'd like to see citations matched to assertions in this article. Or a rewrite by an author with some authority on the topic. As it is now, the logic of the theory doesn't carry through in all examples given.
"...the body mass increases with latitude and colder climate." That's the meat of the matter.
"For example, northern Asians are on average larger than their Southeast Asian counterparts." That follows the logic.
"Southern Europeans, such as Italians, tend to be shorter on average than Northern Europeans, such as Swedes, which contradicts Bergmann's rule..." That on the other hand, doesn't. All other things being equal (e.g., girth, density), taller equates to more mass. It doesn't state that Italians are butterballs or that Swedes are beanpoles, and even then this doesn't directly address mass, but area/mass.
"...(taller frames yield a higher surface area-to-mass ratio, which would be expected to occur with greater frequency in warmer climates according to Bergmann's rule)." But the theory in the first paragraph mentions NOTHING about area-to-mass ratio! It simply states MASS.
Simply put, the area-to-mass ratio makes a lot of common sense, but it's not the definition of the theory this article describes.
--Erielhonan 05:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sa/Vol ratio corresponding to an increase in mass/volume.
I think the main problem that Erielhonan encounters is that the article doesn't mention the intrinsic relationship between increased volume and a decreased surface area to volume ratio (Sa/Vol). The article somewhat mistakenly uses the term 'mass', when it is in fact 'volume' that is important (even though, with animals, one could argue that an increase in mass accompanies an increase in volume, physically speaking, this isn't always true). The example that I find most useful is that of a simple sphere. In calculating the volume of a sphere, one must cube the radius, but the surface area uses the square. Thus, a larger sphere will mathematically yield a lower Sa/Vol ratio than a smaller sphere. Hope this helps!
[edit] Volume and Mass
Around sixth grade, most of us learned that volume and mass are two separate concepts. This article uses them interchangably. Please choose one and stick with it, or explain why one is used in place of the other.
