BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jerry J Bromenshenk <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:33:03 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
At 09:38 AM 1/30/01 -0700, you wrote:

I haven't disappeared into the ethers, but I have been finishing a 200+
page report that's due today.  Thanks for the input about bees and
diffusion theory.  I was deliberately vague about what was meant by
diffusion theory, as I suspect was our mathematician.

So as to not bias the discussion with my viewpoint, I tossed out his
assertation and waited to see if others picked up on anything that I
missed.  Our mathematician is used to modeling signals from radar, cell
phones, etc.  He contends that he can do the same for bees.  He also argues
that the probability of a bee detecting something (i.e., a flower, feeder,
etc.) is a function of the number of bees leaving and entering the hive
(corrected for those who linger at the hive entrance rather than foraging).

Again, I don't necessarily agree - and I have often repeated my bias with
respect to this probability of detection idea.


>
>Well, I am still waiting for Jerry to further illuminate what was meant by
the
>question he asked.
Jerry J. Bromenshenk, Ph.D.
Director, DOE/EPSCoR & Montana Organization for Research in Energy
The University of Montana-Missoula
Missoula, MT  59812-1002
E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
Tel:  406-243-5648
Fax:  406-243-4184
http://www.umt.edu/biology/more
http://www.umt.edu/biology/bees

ATOM RSS1 RSS2