Why can't we have square trees?

Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

Surface area becomes increased in square shapes over round ones. Naturally, trees would have wished (or had selected for them) the most efficient arrangement. Conserving SA is one method to reduce the energy required to maintain homestasis.

We just can't conveniently use the round form due to our limited ability to stack balls.

While you are working on getting the trees to grow square, you may want to add a few other features...

Store the sugars as something I can directly eat.
Put a self destruct in the fiber, so I can consume the cellulose.
Increase CO2 fixation and photsynthetic capacity.
Devise H2O fixing ability - watering sucks.
Add beef flavoring.

Or...

Leave it the heck alone and learn from its efficiency.
 
Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

Trees will be round as long as the earth turns on it's axis. If we were alone in the universe just sitting still trees might stand a chance at being square. It's just the natural state of ions turning with the flow of the planet that the cells of trees use to grow up towards the sun (their energy source). It's the only way for them to overcome gravity. If we spun around all day and night we would probably become taller and leaner too. It's man's flaw, imo, that we don't take nature into consideration more. We run against the current till we are too old then we start to see. But by then we are to wise to spread the news because we understand that would be against "human" nature. Don't ask me how I know all this stuff, I just do.
 
Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

Let me suggest that this is a thought exercise, and that Bob is not trying to break the mold and create trees which more convieniently align to human's interests.

If I may be so bold, I think the point is exactly as fireaxe presents. That trees are optimised organisms. Yet man has certainly attempted to bend the rules of nature in many cases to suit his needs, whims and fancies.

So, perhaps the questions is this;

Why are trees the way they are?

And further, if I follow the line of Mr. Wulkowicz's previous posts and such, I would assume the following line of questioning might be why do we think we can make them better?

Orrrrrrr....

I could simply be reading too deep into it, too much coffee this morning.
 
Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

Fireaxe, Adkpk, Dylan, I like where you guys went with all that, but I want to let you in on something I discovered today...
 

Attachments

  • 306957-photo.webp
    306957-photo.webp
    76 KB · Views: 77
Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

[ QUOTE ]
Fireaxe, Adkpk, Dylan, I like where you guys went with all that, but I want to let you in on something I discovered today...

[/ QUOTE ]

Ha, ha wow that's great. The mill might pay some extra doe for that log.
 
Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

circumfernce pi r square, yes?

Defining tree shape as a patterned result of cellular surface tension takes away all the romance.
coolsun.gif
 
Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

Au contraire!

Understanding even just a little of the mechanism and underlying forces adds to the beauty and romance, to me anyway!
 
Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

[ QUOTE ]
If trees were grown on the side of a south facing vertical cliff and they were trained from seed to have their roots turned 1/4 turns I think you may have a squareish tree. Too easy.

[/ QUOTE ]

We probably could get a patent on a sequential 90 degree root turner, but the buyers would likely be limited to owners of vertical cliffs. Our marketing focus group wouldn't approve.

bob
grin.gif
 
Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

Oh I'm sure that patent would be available. I was thinking the market would be engineered wood. It would be all reaction wood for super strength.

Or..a normal tree could be turned into carbon fiber for a loose use of the engineered wood definition.

I'm not a metal worker so I have to ask is square tubing or round pipe stronger? How about triangual?
 
Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

[ QUOTE ]
Au contraire!

Understanding even just a little of the mechanism and underlying forces adds to the beauty and romance, to me anyway!

[/ QUOTE ]

Kevin, dude, trees are nothing more than earth hairs growing outta dirt follicles, man.

mega.gif
 
Re: Why can\'t we have square trees?

[ QUOTE ]
Surface area becomes increased in square shapes over round ones. Naturally, trees would have wished (or had selected for them) the most efficient arrangement. Conserving SA is one method to reduce the energy required to maintain homestasis.

We just can't conveniently use the round form due to our limited ability to stack balls.



[/ QUOTE ]

That's not factual from what I understand. If we have 2 foot wide square, it's whatever the surface area is. And a 2 foot wide circle is whatever the surface area is.

There may be one weakness in a square stem though, compared to a round one if the cross-sections have equal square inches. Suppose each one is 400 square inches.

The widest and narrowest diameter of a round bole will be wider than the narrow dimensions of the square stem. That means that when a wind is blowing, a round stem tree has more linear inches of wood both parallel to the wind direction and perpendicular to the wind direction. Assuming that a round stem tree and a square stem tree grow the same amount of tissue each year.

In other words, the square stem may be stronger from farthest corner to farthest corner, but it will be weaker the other way, in the same manner a 2x4 stud would break easier if we stand on it's wide side if bridged over a span of air.

So the round stem is virtually equal strength whichever direction wind comes from.

Now for MAN-HOLE, round is better merely because a round manhole cover cannon fall into a properly designed man-hole rim. But a square one can fall trough. Plus round lids can be rolled.

[ QUOTE ]
Why are trees the way they are?

[/ QUOTE ]

For stem shape, that's about the same difficulty, or ease, to explain as why "fairy ring" of fungus in open lawns are the way they are. They begin in the center, and move outward with fairly equal growth.

And in the tree's case, if it's already made wood in the center, open air on the outside is the only vacant space it can expand too.

Also, if a square trunk were possible, and capable of growing somewhat equal growth rings or squares, it would do so for most of it's perimeter, except the very corners. Then it would need a mechanism that would grow more tissue right at the very proximity of the corner, because the thickness of the ring would be different there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom