Another tree. Younger than your average tree. [daily log: walking, 3km]
2 Comments
David
Knowing you’re a stickler for math and accurate language, I can’t help but question whether that young tree in the picture is indeed “younger than your average tree”. As we know, true averages often differ from the perceived average.
Despite an utter lack of desire to stir up partisan politics through parallels, I ask: when does the life of a tree begin? When the seed is ripe enough to someday germinate? When the seed actually begins to germinate? When the sprout grows its first leaf?
In any case, I see plenty of reason to suspect the tree in the picture might be older than your __average__ tree. There are a lot of seeds in this world.
David – I thought that even as I wrote it. Yet… I wrote it, anyway. Because I knew someone would enjoy pondering its veracity. And, lo, someone did!
I think your analysis is correct. And even subtracting mere “seeds” and allowing only seedlings to be counted as trees, as I might be inclined to do (pace the debate on abortion), I’d still speculate that you’re correct – there a many, many seedlings scattered in forests, but because they are so small, they are taken for ground cover and not thought of as “trees.” The “weeds” in the gravel roads around here are almost entirely seedlings, for example.
Knowing you’re a stickler for math and accurate language, I can’t help but question whether that young tree in the picture is indeed “younger than your average tree”. As we know, true averages often differ from the perceived average.
Despite an utter lack of desire to stir up partisan politics through parallels, I ask: when does the life of a tree begin? When the seed is ripe enough to someday germinate? When the seed actually begins to germinate? When the sprout grows its first leaf?
In any case, I see plenty of reason to suspect the tree in the picture might be older than your __average__ tree. There are a lot of seeds in this world.
David – I thought that even as I wrote it. Yet… I wrote it, anyway. Because I knew someone would enjoy pondering its veracity. And, lo, someone did!
I think your analysis is correct. And even subtracting mere “seeds” and allowing only seedlings to be counted as trees, as I might be inclined to do (pace the debate on abortion), I’d still speculate that you’re correct – there a many, many seedlings scattered in forests, but because they are so small, they are taken for ground cover and not thought of as “trees.” The “weeds” in the gravel roads around here are almost entirely seedlings, for example.