Trees Are Freaking Awesome!

Submitted by: uatme 5 years ago in Science

You ready to have your mind blown, science and nature nerds?
There are 29 comments:
Male 41,069
@Kaagan: Part one of your post: True, trees get food from their roots too, and can drown if there`s too much water, but I think that was covered in the video...
And I don`t think any of the water is "wasted" eh? It served it`s purpose: Moving nutrients up and down the tree!

Part two: Close! It was farming practices, (including over-farming) combined with abnormal weather patterns, that caused the dustbowl.
It took a law passed in Washington to force western farmers to STOP DOING THOSE DUMB THINGS! One of the rare occasions where The Gov`t actually DID know better!
0
Reply
Male 700
Yeah that just made my head hurt...
0
Reply
Male 1,627
that’s not all that correct. trees and plants draw nutrients from the soil. just like we need zinc, iron, calcium, etc to build tissues, muscle, bone. Trees need minerals for growth as well. so if what they say is true, that the tree only uses 5-6% of the water and the rest is wasted. well the more water the tree/plant takes in, the more minerals in the soil it will collect (trees can drown however if the ratio of water the minerals is too high). This is also why if you farm, harvest, and farm again without fertilizing the ground, you will over farm the soil. Over farming means, the soil is drained of required minerals for plant growth. A great example of over farming is the dust bowl of 1934. A once excellent, flat, beautiful plane became a hellhole from over farming. The dried up soil does not stick together and weighed less than traditional soil. Because of this, the soil was easily picked up by winds and created dust storms often.
0
Reply
Female 2,026
no way. a periodic table tie. LOVE. IT.
0
Reply
Female 72
what a hot man! I turned off the sound and just watched him.. mmm
0
Reply
Male 41,069
@CrakrJak: True that! I`ve made the case that without trees humans would never have achieved civilization - they`re SO USEFUL! Building material, fuel; there`s just no replacement for them.

@Canoas: True, but tree heights vary according to their location. No 100 metre trees on the prairies! Tree species fit their environment amazingly well.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]The most beautiful thing about a tree is what you can do with it after it`s cut down.[/quote]

Seriously? You HAD to bring that up?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Hmm, interesting. Liquids are incompressible after all.
0
Reply
Male 1,059
"Metres"? That spelling clearly indicates that this guy is a terrorist. Other than that, fun video!
0
Reply
Male 14,331
Vi Hart looks like she needs a cheesburger!!
0
Reply
Male 5,413
Awesome stuff.
The professor from PeriodicVideos!
0
Reply
Male 427
It does seem inefficient and "stupid" to have tall trees, but that`s all due to the evolution process. In a forest only the taller trees get sunlight so a small and efficient tree would just die.
0
Reply
Male 2,225
A+.you get a cookie.
0
Reply
Male 7,774
Nature haz a clever. So the easy thing would have been to just have 10m tall trees but nature shows why she is the boss once again.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Still, The most beautiful thing about a tree is what you can do with it after it`s cut down.

Case in point.

0
Reply
Male 13,630
@uatme

excellent post - never even thought about how trees drag water up so high, more of this please!!
0
Reply
Male 169
You get to see Vihart at the end too :)
0
Reply
Male 150
So first you tell me it isn`t transpiration. Then you go into the physics of transpiration as your argument. Good try, but it is transpiration while noting it is not due to solutes or the capillary affect.
And we already knew that most of the water used by trees (and other plants) isn`t for any metabolism or growth but for continuing the flow of water.
0
Reply
Male 41,069
First minute: I did not know that! Must have skipped school that day...

Woah! Super cool! Now I know how it works!

AND trees take carbon into their leaves, shoot it down their roots and give it to underground fungi, who then take the carbon and transort it to OTHER TREES (of the same kind) who are too shaded to photosynthesise!! Saw it on TV last week - blew my mind too!

@klaxor: It does seem inefficient, but consider oceanic filter-feeders: they sift through TONS of water or sand to find tiny bits of food. It doesn`t need to be efficient, it just needs to work!

7:00 VI HART!!! That`s Vi Hart on the left, in her trademark arm-warmers! VIIII! Marry meeeee!

0
Reply
Male 1,048
Wow. I didn`t think the trees innards were so advanced
0
Reply
Female 6,381
Gee! Cute AND smart.... and half my age.
0
Reply
Male 13
well. now I have all of these questions about some of the other parts of trees and now I`m going to spend all night looking up the answers rather then sleeping or homework. Just great.
0
Reply
Male 646
that seems horribly inefficient
0
Reply
Female 2,549
It learned me!
0
Reply
Male 2,703
Age of the geek baby.
0
Reply
Male 423
Holy crap. That`s amazing! No one I know could explain something as complex as a tree as clear as this man just did. Simply surreal.

0
Reply
Male 600
He`s like the new Bill Nye
0
Reply
Male 4,891

Great post!
0
Reply
Male 1,084
Link: Trees Are Freaking Awesome! [Rate Link] - You ready to have your mind blown, science and nature nerds?
0
Reply