r/woahthatsinteresting • u/Embarrassed_Call9074 • 22d ago
The animal with the longest know lifespan, the immortal jellyfish, potentially has been alive for 66 million years.
107
u/No_Negotiation_4370 22d ago
No mind, no eyes, no hearing, no light, no future or past ?
NO THANKS. I'd rather be nothing at all.
84
u/gam8it 22d ago
The detect touch, temperature, smells, light levels and orient themselves in 3 dimensional space which we're not great at, they do have neurons but yeah they are super simple and mostly self contained.
So they may not have an inner monologue but we have no idea how they perceive the universe. Maybe they are running complex simulations over long periods of time and that's why they just float about.
32
u/Sea_Asparagus_526 22d ago
Most humans don’t have an inner monologue. They think that voice overs in movies are insane.
20
u/alex_sl92 22d ago
I think it's more common to have an inner monologue than having the ability to see images in your head (minds eye). I always thought people could do both myself. I can't imagine what it's like without this ability. Going to sleep is so enjoyable for me as I visualise ideas and concepts until I fall asleep. My inner voice is my voice but it can be any voice I have heard before if I want.
22
u/citrus_mystic 22d ago edited 22d ago
Most people have inner monologues and the ability to visualize with their imagination.
Lacking an inner monologue, called anauralia, and/or lacking a “mind’s eye”, called aphantasia, are both uncommon traits.
It’s more common to have an inner monologue and a mind’s eye than it is to be without, either, but people may favor or rely on one more than the other.
However, the degree to which we visualize things and the details we can add with our imaginations, or the propensity to have nuanced inner monologues, varies greatly and can be very different from person to person.
I find this topic to be quite fascinating, personally.
5
u/Available-Exam6278 22d ago
Is the absence of that inner monologue a genetic thing? Or is it something that not developed “correctly” in youth? And then, if you DON’T have it, can you ever develop it? I can’t fathom what it’s like NOT to have an inner monologue. Isn’t that how we make decisions? “Hmm, should I add more cheese to this sauce or not?” Or am I not understanding what this is?
1
u/citrus_mystic 21d ago
I do not believe it’s genetic, however, in this RadioLab episode they do discuss the ability to “teach” people how to visualize—If I recall correctly, they utilize electric stimulation of the brain in addition to visualization techniques. (But I haven’t listen to this episode in a while, so I may be mistaken about the process they’re using.)
1
u/Koil_ting 1d ago
I'm not sure, I know for me that before I have any inner monologue it is like there is a precursor that already knows what the inner monologue is going to be if that makes any sense, and therefore it would only ask that question rhetorically. There was a time when my inner monologue would rarely stop and even when I was breathing I would question if I was hearing my breathing or my inner monologue was "saying" the same noises as the breathing, but I learned to zen it out.
8
u/Reisooh812 22d ago
Aphantasia is a sliding scale and only 3% or so of the population has no ability to picture something in their head. I’m pretty sure more than 3% have an inner monologue from what I’ve read before.
I grew up thinking counting sheep was an expression lol.
It makes sense why I was always so bad in art class, everyone else is just copying stuff in their heads!!!
I have noticed I seem to have a more accurate memory of events compared to when others tell them. I imagine not being able to relive certain events in your head visually would be very advantageous to some people. It does bother me that I can’t see my wife’s face in my head though.
3
u/dingdong6699 22d ago
Counting sheep is a terrible way to try to get to sleep even with visuals. Best way is just to recap experiences of the day, especially trying ones.
0
6
u/AxelNotRose 22d ago
I think most humans do but some do not which freaked me out when I learned that.
6
u/geoelectric 22d ago edited 22d ago
So I thought too until I asked around amongst my friends after the original aphantasia articles came out. The ensuing discussion revealed to me that most other people think differently than I do, and I got curious as to how different.
Most people I asked did have an inner monologue, and thought it was really weird that I didn’t. Most told me it “sounds” like their own voice, too.
2
u/alex_sl92 22d ago
Do you read text really quickly? My inner voice makes me read text as fast as I could talk naturally.
4
u/geoelectric 22d ago
Yeah, I do. I don’t subvocalize it so I move very fast. But my reading comprehension tends to suffer.
4
u/alex_sl92 22d ago
interesting! My reading is slow because of my inner monologue. if i try to read fast it ends up a mess.
3
3
u/realitythreek 22d ago
Well that’s fascinating. I’m not even sure I could read without thinking of the sounds in my head.
2
u/citrus_mystic 22d ago edited 21d ago
I find this really interesting— so you do not have an inner monologue, anauralia. Do you have a “mind’s eye”? Or do you also have aphantasia, lacking the ability to visualize? I’ve heard that most people with these traits experience both.
Can I ask—if you are able to remember your dreams, or at least can remember a few dreams throughout your life~ how do you experience your dreams?
3
u/geoelectric 22d ago
I’m very aphantasic as well. I can come up with flickers but can’t hold them for enough time to resolve an image.
I do dream but I don’t remember them for very long if at all. Most mornings I just wake up with the sense I was dreaming but no idea of what.
But I do remember noting one morning that they registered as visual in some way (wondering the same thing). I remembered dreaming of something being in a particular hue or similar.
I think it might be two different pathways—perhaps the dream imagery skips a portion the more conscious version relies upon but doesn’t have.
2
1
u/PristineTarget2048 21d ago
if I ask you to think of an apple...what comes to mind?
an actual realistic apple? the word apple? the color red? or nothing at all?
2
u/geoelectric 21d ago edited 21d ago
I should correct anauralia btw, I can hear in my mind.
I recall music in multiple parts and I can intentionally subvocalize. I just don’t do so spontaneously or unconsciously.
But it’s not so much that my normal train of thought isn’t oral (or aural) as that it’s not verbal at all.
1
u/citrus_mystic 21d ago
How would you describe how different thoughts occur for you? (Edit- do you have a visual imagination/thought process?)
7
u/Lando_Lee 22d ago edited 22d ago
I be talking to myself like crazy in my head, everything in my mind is seen through words, can’t see pictures though.
2
2
u/BarryMDingle 22d ago
When I close my eyes it’s like a spherical IMAX theatre with Dolby Atmos surround blaring at volume. Great visuals. Can be intense like a Las Vegas casino in terms of brightness and detail. I can close my eyes and visualize in 3D my entire commute to work an hour away, twist it all around like in the movie Inception. I routinely build things with no plans cause I see the project in every step of its creation. Was great for putting together my kids Cmas presents, lol.
4
u/spacemoses 22d ago
When I close my eyes I just hear the THX sound and get the uncontrollable desire to kill. But it usually goes away quick lol.
2
2
2
2
u/shay-doe 22d ago
My husband doesn't think in words.and it makes it hard as fuck to talk to him. I don't understand what he thinks in but he gets an idea and has to spend time to put it into words and I just can't comprehend how his brain works because I don't know how else to think.
2
u/citrus_mystic 22d ago
Does your husband have a “mind’s eye” and visual imagination? Can he think in pictures? I’m just curious, these kinds of things are fascinating to me.
2
u/Historical_Tennis635 22d ago
I have a “high” verbal IQ and a strong internal monologue, but I have a low spacial IQ and aphantasia(which makes sense). 139 vs like 85 lol. Apparently a spread like that is fairly unusual as well.
I’m also god awful at faces, in college I was talking to a very cute girl for apparently the next hour and she came up to me the next day and said hi and I had no idea who she was.
I remember when it clicked for me that I had it, I was originally a geology major. In this particular class spacial ability was very important. He had us do a little exercise “First, imagine a block of cheese. Then take this block of cheese and slice it once down the middle…” and so on with various slices. At the end you were supposed to be able to say how many cheese squares or whatever were on each face or how many blocks of cheese there were(it's been a while). I remember going oh fuck I got stuck at "Imagine a block of cheese". I got an A- but struggled harder than I ever had to even after transferring to a notoriously difficult school(Berkeley). I sort of converted all the spacial data I could into words like "When several sedimentary layers are folded like x, it will look like y on side z of the block".
My hand writing has also not changed noticeably since 2nd grade. I found a piece of paper with my handwriting on it as an adult and was very confused about it until I saw the date and realized it was from when I was in 2nd grade. The quality of my handwriting didn't clue me in at all(but again low spacial IQ lol).
1
u/citrus_mystic 22d ago edited 22d ago
I appreciate you taking the time to comment with all of these details!!
Your professor asking the cheese question was actually very similar to what initially sparked my interest in this topic.
I was in a middle school home-economics class, where for some reason, they had us take a lot of career aptitude tests. One of the questions on one of these tests was: “Can you imagine, in your mind’s eye, a piece of paper being folded in half?” I remarked aloud, on how I thought that this was a strange question. Then I elaborated— of course I can imagine a piece of paper folding in half; I can do that in a million different ways— different perspectives/angles of viewing the paper, putting the paper on different surfaces or in different scenarios. I can imagine different kinds of colors, textures, thicknesses of paper, or different materials entirely: vinyl sheets, cardboard, burlap, origami paper, bubble wrap, those big uncut sheets of $100 bills. I can imagine my own hands performing this task in different ways, I can imagine different people’s hands, muppet hands, robotic claws, no hands at all. There are almost exponential options for such a simple prompt, but I can keep expanding upon it with varying degree of details, endlessly…
Then, Zack, who was sitting next to me, simply turned to me and said: “I can’t do that…” and it was a mind blowing revelation at 11 years old lmao. A profound illumination regarding people’s perspectives/perceptions and the differences in how we think.
1
-2
2
2
u/citrus_mystic 22d ago edited 22d ago
No… Some people do not possess these abilities; that is not the case for most people, though.
The lack of having an inner monologue is called anauralia And, ‘mind blindness’ or lacking a “mind’s eye” that allows folks to visualize things with their imagination is called aphantasia However, if what I’ve seen online is correct, for folks experiencing these traits, or lack of abilities, it seems that many of them are missing both— lacking an inner monologue and a mind’s eye. (Rather than possessing one without the other.)
But these are uncommon traits, not the norm…
((Edit—And they don’t think voice overs in movies are insane. I’ve heard that they do find it surprising, once they find out what most of us take for granted—having a constant stream of consciousness verbally occurring within our minds.
I’ve heard it’s more frustrating regarding aphantasia, not being able to visualize, when folks first find out what they’re missing compared to everyone else— I’ve heard someone with aphantasia interviewed, talking about the inability to imagine stories they read. Reading paragraphs with vivid descriptions over and over again, just trying to get a fraction of something out of it which everyone else experiences in technicolor detail within their mind’s eye. See also discussed how she did not have the same vividness of memories that most people have.
She and 2 other people, who did not have aphantasia, were asked to describe remembering someone they loved. Someone described remembering their grandmother who had passed away, with a lot of detail. The lady with aphantasia was almost in tears when other people described what they were able to imagine.))
(Edit #2, although there is a distinction between anauralia and aphantasia, most of the literature surrounding this topic will regard these traits regarding perception, generally, as aphantasia.)
0
2
2
u/TheFckinUnNow 21d ago
Most humans DO have one ffs
0
u/Sea_Asparagus_526 21d ago
Citation? You seem sure, have you discussed this internally?
1
u/citrus_mystic 21d ago
Do you have a legitimate source for your claim that most people lack an inner monologue?
Is there a reason you’re rejecting multiple corrections, and demanding citations, while providing no evidence in support of your own claim?
Are you just going to ignore the 3 sources of information regarding aphantasia I provided in my last comment (which demonstrates that most of the population does have an internal monologue)?
0
u/Sea_Asparagus_526 21d ago
Nothing has been demonstrated or proven or the result of multinational studies. It’s just not known.
You can’t just contradict something and call it a correction.
It’s just not studied in depth with any rigor across cultures in the world for there to be a clear answer.
I stand by my statement
1
u/TheFckinUnNow 21d ago
It is studied extensively - hence the discovery people don’t have one.
In said extensive studies, the conclusion was that it is a rarity in human perception / existence.
You strike me as a person who always tries to be the smartest in the room - unfortunately, not the reality for you here.
1
u/Sea_Asparagus_526 21d ago
I’m glad you have an opinion. That’s a step. You seem to have much knowledge.
Most people with actual knowledge actual share it. Others just say “I have extensive knowledge” and then contribute as if they were a jellyfish.
2
u/TheFckinUnNow 21d ago
Still talking around your failure to provide contrasting evidence.
Get your GED, then come back here and we can talk.
→ More replies0
u/Sea_Asparagus_526 21d ago
The cite the study man if it’s so conclusive
2
u/TheFckinUnNow 21d ago
Your job to refute the claim with a source. Learn how to debate.
→ More replies1
u/citrus_mystic 21d ago edited 21d ago
You presented the generalizations that most humans lack an internal monologue, and folks without internal monologues “think voice overs in movies are insane”… but you have yet to share any evidence in support of this position.
Then you dismiss the evidence that only a small % of both US and UK populations experience aphantasia… on the grounds that it might be different internationally among populations in other cultures… but do you have any evidence to support why you think this would be the case?
Do you have any literature that would suggest not having an inner-monologue or visual imagination is the standard within humanity, and not an exception?
1
1
1
u/Distinct-Quantity-35 22d ago
If I do mushrooms I convince myself there is a second person in my head because I talk so much to myself and feel WAY to aware. Kinda why I stay away from them lol
1
u/ApprehensiveDouble52 22d ago
I can’t imagine not hearing my thoughts. Like bros be walking around and nothing is happening in there? Bonkers
1
u/Quantum-Chance 18d ago
Wrong. Most people have inner monlogue. Don't spread lies.
0
u/Sea_Asparagus_526 18d ago
Wow you made an unsupported, unproven assertion!
Tell your mom, she’s always proud of you being smart on the internet!
3
u/AxelNotRose 22d ago
We already know the answer. It's 42. Maybe it's working on the figuring out the right question.
1
1
u/Revolutionary-Box448 22d ago
We are all just a figment of a single jellyfish's imagination.
Feels pretty real tho. Ngl.1
3
1
u/KeepThePunk 22d ago
I’d rather be nothing at all would be a great bumper if I had to have a bumper sticker
1
1
1
u/Minus15t 22d ago
Darkness,
imprisoning me,
all that I see,
absolute horror,
I can not live,
I cannot die,
trapped in myself,
body my holding cell
1
1
81
u/PersnicketyYaksha 22d ago
Imagine if it had made even a one-time investment of $1 at 1% compounding interest on its 18th birthday...
21
u/Ichgebibble 22d ago
It would have enough to cover its medical bills maybe
5
3
2
2
1
1
31
22
u/danit0ba94 22d ago edited 21d ago
You're telling me this thing lived to see the Chicxulub Apocalypse, survived it, and has been able to endure ever since....
I'm no marine biologist. But I am calling bullhonkey on that one. How on Earth can you prove a life form is that old?
17
13
10
u/GoombahTucc 22d ago
Oh my god - googling the Chicxulub asteroid was such a great little visual surprise! I really hope to find more of those lmao sick.
1
u/danit0ba94 22d ago
What? .—.
2
u/GoombahTucc 22d ago
Brother. Google it. You won't be disappointed! Little easter egg i think
3
u/danit0ba94 22d ago
The asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs is an Easter egg?
Either I'm being whooshed to high heaven, or you're not making any sense at all.1
2
u/flyaguilas 22d ago
Just google it. Google put in an easter egg when you search for it.
1
u/danit0ba94 22d ago
Ooohhh i see now. The little animation meteor that goes across the screen. Yeah thats neat.
2
1
1
2
u/Interesting_Tea5715 22d ago
This was my thought. It's a creature without a brain that has predators. No way one had lived that long.
The species sure but not a single organism.
2
u/Secret-Painting604 20d ago
You can’t, it returns to plant form and then back to life, so technically some parts of it could be millions of years old and some parts are 1 day old, kind of like humans shedding skin cells, some could be a decade old and some were renewed last night (afa I understand)
1
1
u/Reckless_Waifu 21d ago
Depends on definition of what you consider an "individual", since those guys just revert back to polyp when they get old and grow anew from that. And since they do it for millions of years now they are technically both very old and young at the same time.
16
u/RedJet97 22d ago
That jellyfish has seen some shit
17
u/T_Peters 22d ago
Well technically it hasn't.
8
2
1
u/RedJet97 22d ago
Well, it has definitely floated through some shit in its time. Figuratively not literally. But probably also literally
10
u/Casual_Curser 22d ago
I need clarification: The species is 66mil years old, or this particular specimen is 66mil years old?
22
u/PlasmaGoblin 22d ago
In a way yes to both. From my 5 minute research, it would be possible for a single jellyfish to be 66mil (according to the theories), but in a way it's closer to reincarnation then immortality. " If the jellyfish is exposed to environmental stress, physical assault, or is sick or old, it can revert to the polyp stage" so it's kind of like "well I'm about to die... better be a toddler again!"
9
2
9
7
7
3
u/hectorxander 22d ago
Lichen on the other hand are immortal.
1
u/uhuuuh262 22d ago
The moss?
1
u/hectorxander 22d ago
Lichen specifically, it often grows on rock in the far far north, it's what reindeer eat. I forget if the life form is a symbiosis of moss and bacteria or something, but it lives forever, and eats igneous rock.
2
2
u/daveb__91 22d ago
How do they know...
3
u/KiranEvans 22d ago
Asked him
2
u/daveb__91 22d ago
Lol what if I send a T1000 back in time to kill the first one.
1
u/shay-doe 22d ago
Wouldn't you need two to make one? Or I have no clue how jelly fish reproduce
1
u/daveb__91 22d ago
Only things I know they hurt when they sting and every kid wants to poke them with a stick when they wash up to shore.
2
2
2
u/Gloomy_Season_8038 22d ago
difficult to proove, no ?
1
21d ago
Not really, we discovered that these jellyfish popped up 66 million years ago, which means it’s very possible of a jellyfish out there to be that old.
We can’t do observations in nature because of how quick and rapid their processes are, but we can make estimates around the information we already have.
1
u/Gloomy_Season_8038 21d ago
Thanks for such details. I thought the same animal was alive for that long ;) Sure, some species were here long long time ago. Sharks are here for 350 millions years , but i don't know the life span of thoses virtually perfect fishes
1
u/Gloomy_Season_8038 21d ago
Can we prove the very same jellyfish has been swimming around for 66 millions y. without have been eaten or simply died ? it's were i got blasted
1
1
1
1
u/zbubblez 22d ago
What is the difference in their DNA replicating than other species that allows it not to decay and fail over time?
1
1
1
u/Fancy_Ad2919 21d ago
"Potentially". There's an awful lot of weight being placed on this word in my honest opinion.
1
1
u/Gloomy_Season_8038 21d ago
the astounding beauty of that snapshot. AI generated or not, it's just plain amazing imho
1
1
1
u/The-Rare-Road 19d ago
Okay not sure we have a way to verify this, but does anybody know which land based animal has been blessed with one of the longest life spans? on average (even though no day is guaranteed)
1
1
u/SignalMountain7353 10d ago
So basically it’s theoretically possible for them to be 66 million years old because they contain a mechanism to infinitely evade death. So nobody knows how old they are, just what is possible.
1
1
1
0
230
u/KrevinHLocke 22d ago
Don't worry, if humans get involved we'll fuck up that too.