?

Log in

Waste heat - Jackdaws love my big sphinx of quartz [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Scott

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Waste heat [Aug. 7th, 2012|11:25 pm]
Scott
[Tags|, ]

Not being a crackpot doesn't mean never having any poorly-researched crazy ideas that would explain everything. It just means if you do get such an idea, you treat it as a hypothesis to be disconfirmed, rather than as a revelation to be worshipped.

In that spirit, here's a poorly-researched crazy idea that would explain everything: the most important limit to cognition, both in terms of IQ and in terms of willpower, is waste heat from the brain.

The brain is metabolically active tissue that produces a disproportionate amount of the body's heat (about as much as all skeletal muscles combined). It's also the most heat-sensitive organ in the body. It only survives at all by a complicated system of veins that transfer brain heat to the skin and nose.

According to the academically mainstream "radiator hypothesis", the development of this venous system was what allowed us to evolve from apes into humans. Apes with ape-level brains were already kind of at the limit of their ability to eliminate waste heat, and so couldn't to evolve larger brains without frying themselves. When ape-men started walking upright and lost their fur, this changed the amount of the head exposed to the sun and changed facial circulation since all of a sudden gravity was draining all the blood down. This allowed more efficient venous waste heat removal, and suddenly there were no waste heat constraints on the size of brains. Brain size started ballooning over only a few million years.

Now recently there's been a lot of talk over people finally discovering a plausible reason for yawning: it cools the brain by pumping the venous system and heat exchange with the yawned air in the sinuses. Quite a few studies have found good evidence for this: people yawn more often when it's hot, people yawn less often when it's so hot that air temperature is above body temperature, and brain temperature goes down after yawning. So yawning, too, seems to be part of brain thermoregulation.

But as far as I know, the thermoregulatory theory of yawning doesn't bother to explain why we yawn more often when we're tired. However, it seems really interesting to me that the other things we do when we're tired to wake up - stretching and splashing cold water on our faces - are both thermoregulatory measures and particularly brain thermoregulatory measures. Stretching pumps the countercurrent systems in body veins, and splashing cold water on the face (or taking a cold shower) cools the face, which cools the facial veins which in turn cools the brain. So between the yawning, the stretching, and the cold water, everything we do to feel a little better when we're tired involves brain cooling. Why?

[EDIT: alicorn24 points out that mammalian diving reflex is at least as good an explanation for the invigorating effect of cold water.]

Well, here's another article: Head cooling cap eases insomnia, study finds. If it's true and not one of the Ten Million Promising Medical Findings That Disappear When You Investigate Them Closely, it shows that a lot of insomnia can be treated much more effectively than any existing methods just by effectively cooling the head (and therefore the brain). It further attributes this to the frontal lobe, which it says is the most metabolically active (and so most susceptible to waste heat) and which is most active in insomniacs.

The frontal lobe is responsible for executive control/willpower type tasks, so we can imagine a scenario where the insomniac isn't tired, but is trying to force herself to lie down and stop fidgeting and count some sheep. This takes a lot of work from the metabolically active frontal lobe, generates a bunch of waste heat, and there's a ceiling on how hard the insomniac can try this because the brain wants to avoid frying itself. Use the cooling cap to get more waste-heat-removal ability, and the frontal lobe can work harder at suppressing the rest of the brain and getting to sleep.

When you're tired, your brain really wants to go to sleep. When you tell it "Not now, brain! I've got to attend lecture!" you're using your frontal lobe's inhibitory/executive control/willpower functions in an equal but opposite way to how the insomniac uses hers. If you're really tired, you may be overclocking those functions and generating dangerous amounts of waste heat. Either one of two things will happen: your frontal lobe will give up and you will fall asleep, or your brain will overheat and you'll need to dissipate the heat through yawning, stretching, cold water, etc. Now we understand why you yawn more often when you're tired.

(this also explains, almost as an afterthought, why we yawn more often when we're bored. It takes willpower and conscious control to keep listening to the boring lecturer, and that generates waste heat. If you're both bored and tired, you end up like I did this morning: yawning so much it gets embarrassing.)

I predict - and I plan to test later when I have more free time - that cooling the brain in some other way, maybe like the cooling cap in the experiment, or running a constant stream of cold water over your face - would allow people to be less tired and have more willpower. It might even make them smarter.

Speaking of smarter, today I learned about the latitude-IQ correlation; that is, people on average have significantly higher IQs at latitudes nearer the poles (they also have physically larger brains). Kanazawa, continuing his trend of never saying anything I agree with, tries to explain this by positing that the difficulty of adapting to a cold climate forced people to evolve greater intelligence.

I have a few problems with this theory. For one, it's a bit group-selection-y. If I evolve a high IQ and, after years of dedicate research, discover the jacket, then this helps me survive in a cold climate, but once the jacket spreads to the rest of my tribe and culture, unless primitive Neanderthal tribes had some primitive form of copyright law I'm not going to benefit much from it.

For another, this suggests that all the people in warm climates were just hanging around going "Yeah, we could evolve more intelligence if we wanted, but there just aren't enough challenges to make it worth our while." But that totally flies in the face of the Machiavellian Intelligence Hypothesis, the idea that there's a runaway selection effect for intelligence because it helps gain status within the group; people should always want more intelligence if they can get it. It would be really strange to think there there's some high-IQ mutation simple enough that high-latitude-people could get it in the 30,000 or so years since they started living in high latitudes, but that low-latitude folks never bothered to pick this low-hanging fruit.

Unless they couldn't mutate, because the mutation only works in cold climates. If the first few million years of human evolution were driven by increased brain size as a reaction to bipedalism giving increased heat-dissipation opportunities, maybe the last few tens of thousands were driven by living in cold climates also giving increased heat-dissipation opportunities - that is, the brain, with access to cooler air and cooler venous blood, could work harder before it risked overheating.

Now since high-latitude people have only been in high latitudes for 30,000 or so years (you can gain a few tens of thousands by claiming the genes involved came from exchange with Neanderthals, I guess) this would imply some really fast mutation. But it's still much slower than what the selection for intelligence some people say occurred in Ashkenazi Jews over the past few centuries, and just making the brain a little bigger isn't exactly subtle. I think it's well within the sort of selection that goes on all the time if you believe The Ten Thousand Year Explosion (which I mostly do).

Now, we already know that we can do almost miraculous things to physical performance just by cooling the body. I hypothesize that it may be possible to do the same for mental performance. Not necessarily raise IQ directly: that might only operate on the level of generational mutation - but increase mental endurance, to the point where you don't need to keep taking breaks every few minutes when you're doing something cognitively demanding (I think one reason for those breaks might be to wait for waste heat to dissipate and your brain to cool back down).

I wish I had something advanced like the RTX in the article above or the cooling caps in the insomnia experiment that I could use to test this, but when I get some free time (realistically at least a month from now), I'd like to at least try to test it with something simple like icepacks to the head and neck (I recently ensured excellent access to the emissary veins of the scalp) and maybe seeing what kind of cheap cooling technology is available. In the meantime, I would say watch the development of body cooling technology as well as research into diseases like epilepsy and MS that might have a thermoregulation-related component.

There. That's my crackpot idea for the day. I'm curious to hear how it gets torn to pieces.
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: mme_n_b
2012-08-08 04:53 am (UTC)
If "the brain, with access to cooler air and cooler venous blood, could work harder before it risked overheating" than this brain, adapted to working in the cooler air, would break down in heat. So, people in cold climates should become measurably stupider once they move towards the equator, in fact, they should be stupider than the people evolved to deal with the heat. Should be possible to test. Are average IQ scores of Northern-ancestry people in Africa, for instance, lower, than average IQ scores of native people?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: squid314
2012-08-08 05:04 am (UTC)
I think that since they have a physically larger brain, they would keep the intelligence advantage, but that they would also be much more susceptible to heat related problems and exhaustion.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: mme_n_b
2012-08-08 06:08 am (UTC)
We can design a test to distinguish the results of having the wrong brain size for the climate from the results of having the wrong body type and skin color, but there'd be no practical way to run it :( So, let's try from another angle - if there's a mutation that produces a larger brain and one that produces dark skin and one that produces less body hair and fat the winners will be people with all three mutations. Can we find any?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: squid314
2012-08-09 02:30 am (UTC)
Why would the winners be people with all three mutations? In particular I don't know that skin color directly changes body temperature.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: mme_n_b
2012-08-09 06:19 am (UTC)
It doesn't. I wasn't thinking about just body temperature as much as living in the South in general. Melanoma incidence rates are 20 times higher for Caucasians than for African-Americans. So, a person with all 3 mutations would be smart, cool, and cancer-free. But we find two out of three at most - why?

Another (totally unrelated) point: larger head = more heat loss from the head. Especially in infants, who lose heat mostly from their heads, a large head in a cold climate is detrimental to survival. Adults, too, would have to make up for the heat loss by obtaining more calories. In fact, the ideal head for a cold climate would be a small one, covered in thick, kinky, wooly hair.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: marycatelli
2012-08-08 12:56 pm (UTC)
Hmm. IIRC, while there are a few years to adapt, once you have adapted, you are no more suspectible to the heat (or cold) that the natives of a climate.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: dudley_doright
2012-08-08 05:31 am (UTC)
> I will use the scientific method even if it makes me feel stupid.

Going to work and trying to program with a bag of peas on my head is probably not quite as bad as going out to my backyard and hollering "letter for Hogwarts" -- more opportunity for explanation, for one.

I'll try this tomorrow.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: xuenay
2012-08-08 06:08 am (UTC)
Gregory Cochran (of The 10,000 Year Explosion fame) has been speculating

(1) that there is variation in mutation rate dependent on temperature or something correlated with temperature, (2) higher mutation rates cause a higher genetic burden in human populations, (3) leading to IQ reduction and other minor dings

Some related blog posts of his: [1 2 3 4 5]

Edited at 2012-08-08 06:10 am (UTC)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: squid314
2012-08-09 02:48 am (UTC)
That was super super fascinating. I was going to say that can't be the whole story because of the difference in cranial capacity, but Cochran addresses that in your [5]. Thank you.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: xuenay
2012-08-09 07:55 am (UTC)
You're welcome, glad you enjoyed it. :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: avanti_90
2012-08-08 06:19 am (UTC)
Do you have evidence that the brain generates significantly more heat when one is exerting willpower and conscious control?
(Reply) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2012-08-08 07:45 am (UTC)
It should be easy enough to test that by looking at glucose consumption while people do various types of task. Heat's got to come from somewhere.

-- passing Firedrake
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2012-08-08 11:23 am (UTC)
My understanding is that the brain does not consume significantly more glucose when you're exerting yourself mentally compared to when you're idling. Visual processing, as well as sensory and motor stuff, takes up a lot more space than your puny capacity for conscious thought.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: reddragdiva
2012-08-08 12:34 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: andrewducker
2012-08-08 07:29 am (UTC)
Your example with the inventing of jackets requires intelligence to only be useful over the long term. Most smart people are generally better at day-to-day problem solving, which is probably incredibly useful in inhospitable environments.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nancylebov
2012-08-08 09:31 am (UTC)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: hentaikid
2012-08-08 11:17 am (UTC)
I prefer my* theory, which is that runaway sexual selection for neoteny gave us our big heads, and we lucked out in that this gave enough real estate for functional adaptations, unlike say a dirty big asymmetric claw or a bushy tail with colourful plumage.

* "My" in that I came up with it independently but I've seen it espoused by others since.

As someone with 50% Nordic/Mediterranean genes I have to wonder where your theory leaves me. I'm well adapted to the heat, so does that mean I lack the cool brain smarts? I know I *could* be smarter, I'm at the sweet spot of the Dunning-Kruger curve where I'm pretty much aware of how smart I'm not but lack the blessed obliviousness that would let me plow ahead (People assume the Dunning-Kruger effect is a handicap, but I'm not so sure)

I do notice performance differences between summer and winter, but I'd never considered them in terms of cognitive power availability, rather general exhaustion. I'll have to keep an eye out.
(Reply) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2012-08-08 05:16 pm (UTC)
I prefer my* theory, which is that runaway sexual selection for neoteny gave us our big heads, and we lucked out in that this gave enough real estate for functional adaptations, unlike say a dirty big asymmetric claw or a bushy tail with colourful plumage.

Given that homo floresiensis appears to have been doing the same stuff with a quarter the brain volume as contemporary sapiens, that's actually probably a better explanation than one that depends critically upon relating human intellectual performance to our big heads. (In general, while brain volume and intelligence seem to correlate in hominins, the relationship is not a smooth or simple one, and it utterly fails to account for why H. Neanderthalensis had bigger brain volume but didn't evidently outcompete us -- problematic for theories that link brain size, intelligence and exclusive evolutionary success for H. Sapiens.)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: squid314
2012-08-09 02:49 am (UTC)
As with pretty much all between-populations variation, even the slightest idea of your actual intelligence, eg that you do well in school, pretty much eliminates any information you could gain from tiny differences in between-groups intelligence.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: reddragdiva
2012-08-08 12:32 pm (UTC)
The heat in the brain notion also shows up in Reciprocality, an obscure bit of psychoceramics descended from the Programmer's Stone idea. It includes the notion that more fractally compressed ideas have higher information entropy and thus more compact thoughts lead to a measurable lowering of temperature in the brain. And this is how MDMA works to induce revelations in programmers who take it in nightclubs. Or something close to that. It's a bit special.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: marycatelli
2012-08-08 12:49 pm (UTC)
What? Was Aristotle onto something after all?

True, he thought the sole function of the brain was to cool the blood, and the reason he thought that made us smart was that it kept us in cool reason rather acting in a hot-blooded manner, so I wouldn't say he was right -- but still, it's kinda interesting.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: cousin_it
2012-08-08 12:56 pm (UTC)
Why isn't this entry titled "Stuff"?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: squid314
2012-08-10 03:11 am (UTC)
Every so often people link my articles on Facebook or something, and "Stuff" auto-shows-up as the title, and it's embarrassing. I try to make slightly better titles for any article that's substantive enough to possibly get linked to, when I remember, which I rarely do.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: amuchmoreexotic
2012-08-08 02:59 pm (UTC)
This theory explains the adaptive value of male-pattern baldness - once an older male has attained alpha male status in his tribe, the cognitive load of maintaining his status necessitates additional cooling.

Shaving people's heads should increase their cognitive performance, even without fancy cooling systems.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: squid314
2012-08-09 02:51 am (UTC)
That first paragraph sounds very sketchy...I would naively expect that younger people would be bald because it sounds harder to gain status in the first place than to maintain it.

It is a good point that why the heck does male-pattern baldness happen anyway, and I'd be interested to know if there were a known biological or evolutionary explanation.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: mme_n_b
2012-08-09 06:23 am (UTC)
It's a way to signal high testosterone levels to females.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2012-08-08 05:18 pm (UTC)
This is so very easy to test. Buy a cheap laser thermometer, target it at your forehead, and then perform demanding cognitive tasks.
(Reply) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2012-08-12 04:23 pm (UTC)
So, do people score higher on standardized tests when taken in colder rooms?
(Reply) (Thread)
From: dmytrylk
2012-08-13 08:29 pm (UTC)
As (somewhat) of an applied physicist, there's an issue... Brain gets power from flowing liquid that has very high heat capacity, which simultaneously with providing the power carries away the heat from whence its generated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_blood_flow

0.75 litres per minute, or 0.0125 litres per second. Heat capacity of water is about 4100 joules per litre per kelvin, and that requires 51 watt of heat output to make the out-flowing blood be warmer by 1 kelvin ( 51 / (0.0125 * 4100) = 1 ).

The power of brain is somewhere around 20 watts, so 0.4 Kelvin higher out-flow temperature than in-flow temperature. Not much, considering that some people can be full 1 degree colder than typical. I would expect increase in the power consumption to require increased cerebral blood flow. And at the body level some percentage on extra ~20 watts to shed is not much.

It is the case, though, that when you are cold, 'wasting' nutrients on brain costs nothing as you would have had to burn those nutrients anyway. Better to think harder before shivering, I guess.
(Reply) (Thread)