Reading the introduction of the study (first link), they completely fail to explain why they call this language. Like, first they explain that fungi also have action potentials and that this seems to work like neurons and then they immediately jump to talk about how this could be a language. Am I missing something here? This seems like a legit paper, but why don’t they even attempt to explain or discuss this?
It just is establishing something is happening that needs further investigation. Language is used because it’s the closest possible parallel we have so far. Papers like this present ideas to legitimise further investigations. It’s a starting place.
Can I have a link to the actual article/paper?
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.211926
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/mushrooms-may-communicate-with-each-other-using-electrical-impulses-180979889/
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/apr/06/fungi-electrical-impulses-human-language-study
The “unconventional computing laboratory” was definitely founded in partnership with Miskatonic U.
Thanks!
Reading the introduction of the study (first link), they completely fail to explain why they call this language. Like, first they explain that fungi also have action potentials and that this seems to work like neurons and then they immediately jump to talk about how this could be a language. Am I missing something here? This seems like a legit paper, but why don’t they even attempt to explain or discuss this?
It just is establishing something is happening that needs further investigation. Language is used because it’s the closest possible parallel we have so far. Papers like this present ideas to legitimise further investigations. It’s a starting place.
This came from the New York Globe on April 1st, that’s all I know.