I keep telling them, "Count on your fingers", but then they start arguing with me about whether or not the thumb is a finger. It's a whole thing.

@Novenae_CCG

8 күн бұрын

Count on your digits.

@alanherlan3429

8 күн бұрын

@@Novenae_CCG that sounds like an argument about toes being digits would follow

@Bacopa68

8 күн бұрын

A long time I saw a guy from PNG showing how they count in base-20. 5 digits on one hand, and the joints and segments are another 5. The other hand and arm add up to 20. They then point at a digit/joint/segment to convey the "20's" place and so forth.

@StefanReich

8 күн бұрын

When the monkey said "Yeek yaak jeek", I felt he made a really good point

@Novenae_CCG

8 күн бұрын

@@alanherlan3429 I did think about it, and I posted it anyway. I mean, why _not_ use your toes?

This desperately needs the song "I can only count to four" as background music

@MinuteEarth

8 күн бұрын

That was the soundtrack to much of our production process!

@TheJohn553

8 күн бұрын

That's so cool 😂

@alankoh807

8 күн бұрын

This remind me of Drowning Pool - "Let the bodies hit the floor"

@accountwith16chr

8 күн бұрын

@@alankoh807 There's a parody of that song but it's replaced with "I can only count to four", 'tis the reference!

@dragoncatoverload

8 күн бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/p2yXxamjkdWaddY.htmlsi=1SMaGWlkFcgvLkIY I CAN ONLY COUNT TO FOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOUR

Took me 2 minutes to realize that any difference below 4 is also 25% or more.

@minor_2nd

8 күн бұрын

I realized that in only a matter of seconds, it's really easy. You just scroll downto the comment section, and read your comment :P

@kruks

8 күн бұрын

This could be tested using something smaller. We could test to see if 100 blueberries vs 125 blueberries is noticed and figure out what the percentage threshold is. If monkeys care about blueberries, anyway.

@rosverlegaspo6752

8 күн бұрын

@@kruks 100 and 125 has about 20% difference, so is 4 and 5.

@KiokuJonny

7 күн бұрын

​@@rosverlegaspo6752 While 100 is 80% of 125, 125 is 125% of 100. The difference is 25, which can be expressed as both percentages.

@BGP00

7 күн бұрын

@@rosverlegaspo6752 well assuming they expect to see 100 and instead 125 were revealed, there would be a 25% difference. (125-100)/100 = 25%

This reminds me of *Through the Looking Glass* when the chess queens host a math quiz: "Can you do Addition?" the White Queen asked. "What's one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one?" "I don't know," said Alice. "I lost count." "She can't do Addition," the Red Queen interrupted.

@GregMoress

3 күн бұрын

Computer Scientist: "It's one"

@albinoasesino

2 күн бұрын

The answer is "True".

@Spacccee

2 күн бұрын

I tried counting these, and then stopped myself when I realized I was just repeating “one and” instead of counting.

@BusinessWolf1

Күн бұрын

@@GregMoress it's true not 1, a comparison operation returns a boolean

@Nny_V

Күн бұрын

well 10 sets of ones equals 10 i'm pretty sure.

Okay, but what if you placed 6 small apples on the table, and then revealed 4 big ones?

@MinuteEarth

8 күн бұрын

There's a whole subset of experiments about just this thing - and the results are pretty interesting (though hard to control for all sorts of potential confounders)

@yyeetmax2849

8 күн бұрын

@@MinuteEarth aaaannnddd?? saying there are experiments but not saying anything else is just torturing the curious, at least guide us to the papers, please (and thank you for the video)

@ianvanancheta9005

8 күн бұрын

​@yyeetmax2849 bro, there are references in the descriptions of the video for you to check out if you like.

@yyeetmax2849

8 күн бұрын

@@ianvanancheta9005 thank you (being curious doesn't mean not being a dumbass sometimes as you an see)

@stormreach1234

8 күн бұрын

@@yyeetmax2849 I always like to say intelligence extends in both directions. Some people are just average, but some are incredibly smart- and also sometimes the dumbest people you've ever met. I like to think I'm occasionally smart despite being mostly a dumbass lmao

So what does that make of Gabe Newell?? He can only count to 2.

@CrownVirtual

8 күн бұрын

scientists have been debating this question for centuries

@pplesandoranges

8 күн бұрын

Well, if a whole-lifeform can count to 4, a half-lifeform......

@endermannull4420

8 күн бұрын

@@pplesandoranges that's crazy

@halfsine

8 күн бұрын

@@pplesandoranges GENIUS

@ZoofyZoof

8 күн бұрын

He can count to 4. He goes straight from 2 to 4, and has no idea what 3 is.

I wonder if Richard Adams knew this when he wrote Watership Down. It's built into the rabbit language that they can only count to four. There's no explanation given, but the popular theory is that the rabbits were counting on their paws, and they only have four paws.

@euthymialy

7 күн бұрын

The mentioning of only having four paws! I forgot that bit, now I want to read it all over again 🩷

@octoscorpion2506

5 күн бұрын

Yes! I was thinking about that. "Hrair" means "thousand" or "many" and "Hrair-roo" means little thousand/more than four or "Fiver"

@berlinflight_tv

Күн бұрын

I think it’s a pretty well-known concept in general. When I was a kid, I remember reading about how, if there are four or less items in a set, humans are able to determine its size just by looking at it. If it’s larger than that, we either have to count or go by its relative size. In other words, as long as we avoid counting, we’re really no better at this than other animals.

@thethiefmaster

Күн бұрын

@@berlinflight_tv Unless they're in a specific pattern. People can recognise the "cross" shape of five dice dots and anything in that pattern, or the three-and-two pattern, and so on. But 8 scattered things vs 9 scattered things? Compared to a 2x4 grid vs a 2x2 grid _plus one?_ The pattern makes it easy.

From my marketing lessons I remember that also the human brain begins to have difficulties when the choice between products gets higher than 4. It also confuses us.

That's no stuff animal. That's famous news host Tulio Triviño, from the super serious chilean news channel 31minutes, no wonder they were surprised that there weren't three, but in fact, two famous news host Tulio Triviño in the box.

@MinuteEarth

8 күн бұрын

Tulio!

@pastaconcarne9100

8 күн бұрын

tUlio -juanin juan harry

@levyrangeletchichury9279

8 күн бұрын

Yes! I knew I would not be the only one to know it. Túlio and the 31 minutes news are the best!

@nocredits8066

8 күн бұрын

OMG 31 Minutos reference kdjsha

@Ildskalli

8 күн бұрын

We need to put this up top, for Tulio’s honor! ¡Tuuulio, estamos al aire!

I cannot help but think of Blackadder trying to teach Baldrick adding: Blackadder: If I have two beans, and then I add two more beans, what do I have? Baldrick: Some beans. Blackadder: Yes... and no. Let's try again, shall we? I have two beans; then I add two more beans. What does that make? Baldrick: A very small casserole.

@le9038

8 күн бұрын

What video game is this?

@Squirrelthing

8 күн бұрын

@@le9038 Blackadder is a television series about Lord Blackadder, played by Rowan Atkinson (and his descendants, every new season is a new time period).

@daveogfans413

8 күн бұрын

@@le9038 Google is an information retrieval simulator game. It allows you to look up things up and the game will provide simulated information based on your query. You gotta try it.

@Merennulli

8 күн бұрын

I guess I need to watch that. A PBS station in a neighboring city used to broadcast British shows during their fundraising and sometime in the early 90s they introduced "The Black Adder", but then aired a rather dull office sitcom set in a yellowish office with an angry boss with a very 70s-ish mustache. I've been stuck with the wrong impression of the show for 30 years until you corrected it just now. 🤦‍♂

@DrRank

8 күн бұрын

​@@MerennulliI'm not convinced that you're talking about the same show.

I saw some similar experiments with small children and coins. It was something like they valued physically bigger coins more than smaller ones regardless of their actual value. But the more interesting part was how when coins were lined up, they would think 4 coins spaced away were worth more than 4 identical coins lined up one touching the other. Or even how 4 coins were worth more than 5 identical coins, because the were spaced out in such a way that the length of the four-coin line was longer than the five-coin one. Makes you think about how our brains perceive and estimate numbers, sizes, values and such.

@iang0th

8 күн бұрын

I've seen a video of that experiment with the spaced-out coins, but I'm not totally convinced the kids aren't just trying to guess what answer the experimenter is looking for and give them that. They show the kid one arrangement of coins, ask a question about it, change the arrangement, repeat the question, and then "obviously" the answer must be different, or they wouldn't have asked again, right? Even adults will sometimes give plainly incorrect answers to questions when they think they're being prompted to give those answers.

@sociallyineptsnapper

7 күн бұрын

@@iang0thas someone who is autistic and has spent my entire life trying to figure out what is really being asked when I’m posed a question in school, THIS. THIS is absolutely what happened. The researches gives you two set ups. Four coins pushed together, and four spread apart. They then ask you which is worth more, suggesting they’re looking for two different answers. We shall now reason that the more spread apart ones are worth more because they have something more looking.

For anyone wondering and wanting to do more research on the topics: The abilities in question are called "Subitizing" for instinctively knowing (not counting) the exact amount of things ≤ 4 and "Approximate Number Sense" (ANS) for being able to differentiate large amount of grouped things, if the difference is big enough. :)

Is this similar to Be Smart's recent video about why all numbering systems created by humans usually use tick marks until 4 or 5?

@superspider64

8 күн бұрын

I had thought about that as well lol

@prvashisht

8 күн бұрын

Not that I mind it, because usually it's slightly to quite different matter, but MinuteEarth usually makes videos on similar topics as those on recent other science channels. I have noticed it at least twice in the last few weeks.

@malingpalsu

8 күн бұрын

Tbh a few science channels have discussed similar topics before, like vsauce, but its still interesting with the added info the channels before didnt mention

@notkamara

8 күн бұрын

Exactly this!

@huonglarne

8 күн бұрын

​@@prvashisht Is minute earth stealing content?

I CAN ONLY COUNT TO FOUR! I CAN ONLY COUNT TO FOUR! I CAN ONLY COUNT TO FOOOOOOUUR!

@vanatrix1942

8 күн бұрын

1, 2, 5, 4 (5, 4)... Mee count so poor....

@30pranaypawar17

7 күн бұрын

Young siblings when we give them a perfect half of the m&ms and they still cant trust us and neither count:

@calvocat

7 күн бұрын

1! I CAN COUNT TO ONE! 2! I CAN COUNT TO TWO! 3! I CAN COUNT TO THREE! 4! I CAN'T COUNT NO MOREEE!

@MisterCynic18

7 күн бұрын

THE ARE FOUR LIGHTS

@jaredkennedy6576

6 күн бұрын

One what comes after one Two what comes after two Three what comes after three FOOOOUUUUUURRRRR!

"I can only count to four. I can only count to four. I can only count to FOOOOOUUURRRRRRR." - Psychostick

Performing magic tricks for spiders?? Hehehehe! Now I'm imagining the spider version of Statler and Waldorf. "Boo! It's up his sleeve!"

@MinuteEarth

8 күн бұрын

now I feel an overwhelming urge to sketch what that might look like :)

@bandaro1234

7 күн бұрын

@@MinuteEarthYes please!

How much were the adults prepared to count? Because if they went into the experiment unprimed, I can imagine lots of them not bothering to count and just eyeballing it just like the other animals.

@trla6505

8 күн бұрын

I think we can eyeball better then animals

@xxizcrilexlxx1505

8 күн бұрын

​@@trla6505 well we eye Ball diferently than said animals We or at least i throw a random number when eyeballing and then Maybe try counting from there Rather than Just pile vs bigger pile

@TheFinalChapters

8 күн бұрын

The thing is, adult humans will subconsciously count the apples, keeping an exact tally of them. When they see all the apples at once, their first thought will be to compare how many apples they see now to how many they counted. Animals and small children do not "count" the apples, as they do not have a number system to count with.

@spindash64

8 күн бұрын

​@@bywonlinei guess brains are way better at multiplication and division than addition and subtractkkn

@ferwiner2

8 күн бұрын

​@@spindash64I think it is more about visual recognition. I would guess that a set of 4 and set of 5 would not be easily recognisable in a culture that does not use such pattern.

3:23 love that 31 minutos reference!

@guystreamsstuff7841

8 күн бұрын

I screamed IS THAT TULIO out loud

@chrsalx

8 күн бұрын

Came here just to say this! ♥️

@Yuio_Quaz

8 күн бұрын

I'm happy i'm not alone here

@poisonjam4564

8 күн бұрын

Vengo a lo mismo. Estoy en shock!

@yuzmanito

7 күн бұрын

Isn't it just a sock monkey? Tulio is literally one. I did have the same reaction tho, he looks like him but it might just be a coincidence

I did a similar experiment with horses, which apparently cannot count at all despite the "hoof counting" trick. If you have an entire Gator full of oats, separated into feed bags or buckets, and the horse KNOWS all those oats are there, merely setting a container on the ground, or bringing it closer to the horse, or just setting it down slightly closer, results in the horse going after the container instead of the jackpot. It's like they have no idea whether amounts are greater or smaller, just whichever food is closer. Similarly, but with a single notable difference, if you get two horses, the dominant one will always want whatever the other is eating, even if it' a significantly lesser amount. That one "dominant" horse will waste more time chasing off the "rival" and travelling between food supplies than actually eating for about ten minutes. Then they get hungry enough that they just eat whatever is in front of them at the time. They do this because they are grazing animals, so relative size doesn't normally matter to them. Food is everywhere, and any other animal is a threat. A horse can be terrified by a small child, or a rabbit, because the horse is too flighty to know that those things couldn't possibly hurt them. They have no sense of their own size, except when it comes to other horses, and even then, it's dicey. A small horse can run off a big one if it is aggressive enough. I didn't continue my experiments much further because I wasn't really conducting a proper experiment and I love horses too much to bother. But I still affectionately call them "stupids". Yes, they are intelligent enough to be trained very well, and they aren't completely clueless. I had a horse that figured out how to open doorknobs. But that same horse couldn't figure out that not EVERY part of the fence was a potential gate. He'd just stand at the fence, waiting for me to open it, when the gate was open twenty feet away. Beautiful creatures, kinda smart, and still dumb as a bag of hammers when compared to a human.

0:13 neurones activated

@couchdoggo

2 күн бұрын

I'm just happy I wasn't the only one that seen that

@Frebdear

17 сағат бұрын

Monkey sees action

3:25 Is that Tulio??? 🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱

@user56603

8 күн бұрын

Pensé lo mismo

@martinsilva2190

8 күн бұрын

El mismisimo Tulio Triviño

@sohopedeco

8 күн бұрын

@@martinsilva2190 Túlio Trivinho in the Brazilian dub🇧🇷

@juior3356

2 күн бұрын

Es el

Isn't it true that humans can immediately see if there are 5 things, but when there are more they have to actually count them. Seems pretty relevant to this video?

@westonding8953

8 күн бұрын

Probably. Magicians use these principles too.

@nikkamagizia

8 күн бұрын

That was definitely true for me when i worked as a cashier. Had to count really fast sometimes, 5 or less was just instinctive and with more i had to group them into 5s and math out the groups

@Echo_the_half_glitch

8 күн бұрын

Yeah, five and six are about the highest numbers that you can do that with, in my experience

@Niko-zf5ml

8 күн бұрын

In my experience it’s 4 not 5.

@LucasL512

8 күн бұрын

@@Niko-zf5ml perhaps you are a monkey

Ok as a book nerd I love this because Watership Down was published in 1972 and one of the characters is literally named after the rabbit word for being the runt of too large a litter, Fiver. Richard Adams consulted a naturalist when he was writing his rabbit story and in the text he specifically mentions that rabbits can only count to four, with anything over five being considered hrair meaning "many/a thousand”. Xenofiction is made richer by understanding an animal’s subjective experience and understanding of its world!

@daisempai3882

8 күн бұрын

This was my first thought as well! There must have been some inkling then, in research or anecdotally that 4 is the “magic” number

@seatbelttruck

8 күн бұрын

Thanks! Should have scrolled down a bit before I posted my comment. I was just wondering whether he researched or just happened to put a correct detail in his book. When I read it in middle school, I just considered it a fun bit of world-building, demonstrating that the rabbits still aren't as smart as humans even though they're talking to each other. It didn't occur to me that it might have basis in fact.

@euthymialy

7 күн бұрын

@@seatbelttruck it’s one of my all time favorite books, not only was Richard Adams a lover of nature himself but he took his first book very seriously and wanted it to be as true to reality as he could make it. He struggled to get it published because of its subject matter and maturity, they wanted him to tone it down to better appeal to children and he insisted that he wasn’t making a story targeted towards maintaining innocence but rather to show the harsh realities of wild animals’ lives. He makes it clear that his rabbits know their place in the world as prey animals and gave them an entire culture and mythology to explain their existence and rationalize the horrors they endure. Naming and characterizing the rabbits after human comrades in arms that he knew while serving in the military really brings it home that they’re not gentle little sweet bunnies, but rather just like any wild animal they’re capable of being vicious and cruel to defend themselves and their own. They survive so much in the story that a human wouldn’t think a rabbit could be capable of achieving but Richard makes it clear that in the wild rabbits can swim, they’re clever enough to trick and evade predators, and they’re smart enough to do whatever they need to do to survive. It’s not a fantasy story, it’s as real as he could possibly make it!

@nathangamble125

Күн бұрын

There's a few things which are included in Watership Down which are based on the real behaviour of rabbits, but which are surprisingly difficult to find documentation about anywhere online. For example, the behaviour of rabbits leaving their warren if they're dying, in order to distract predators and prevent diseases spreading to other rabbits, is real. It's described in Watership Down, but I tried looking it up and couldn't find any academic sources describing it. I've seen it directly in nature though - a few years ago, late at night, I was walking with a friend past a grassy area where a lot of wild rabbits lived, and a rabbit with myxomatosis crawled up to us (I was able to diagnose it, also based on description from Watership Down). The rabbit wasn't just fearless or ignorant of us, it actually approached us when it heard us walking past, apparently intentionally. We took it to a vet to have it put down.

@euthymialy

Күн бұрын

@@nathangamble125that’s fascinating, thank you for sharing and for your compassion to end the suffering for the poor rabbit.

🎵I can only count to four. One, two, five four. I can't count no more.🎵

3:25 Tulio!

@isacami25

8 күн бұрын

siiiiiiiiiiiiii

@yankofelipe7209

8 күн бұрын

Estamos al aire!

Funnily enough, there are even human languages (such as Aka-Jeru (Andaman Islands) and Munduruku (Amazon)) that have no words for numbers above 3 (or sometimes even 2). The people who spoke them had no real need for number words, so all they had words for were "one," "two," "three" "a little" and "a lot."

@edgargaebolg9307

8 күн бұрын

On a similar note I've heard of how some older cultures used the number 8 for "a lot" or "all" because it's two fours

@penand_paper6661

8 күн бұрын

@@edgargaebolg9307 Awesome - tell me more! In what sense? As in, the biggest number they have in the lang is just used to mean "a lot" (like the number 20 in Ainu), which is sort of a chicken-or-the-egg situation (did 20 come to mean a lot, or a lot come to mean 20)? Or just that eight is special?

@edgargaebolg9307

8 күн бұрын

@@penand_paper6661 In ancient Japan the number 8 was used that way but apparently there's not an official reason to why. Some theories I've found are: - 3 and 5 are the male and female numbers, so their sum 8 encompasses all. - The kanji 八 suggests infinite expansion. - It's homophonic with 弥 (ya), which means "more and more" - 4 is a holy number, so 8 is "double holy" and perfect

I wasn't expecting to see a Tulio Triviño on MinuteEarth... What a nice surprise!

i saw a video where the test for dogs was the person would throw balls into tall grass where one can't see them. then after a small number was thrown they would tell the dog to "fetch" and the dog would go looking for a ball. they'd repeat the fetch command but when they said to fetch a 4th time and only 3 were thrown the dog would just look at them and not get it because it knew there weren't any more left in the grass. but it didn't work for larger numbers

@lompeluiten

7 күн бұрын

I tought so. I just tought of that experiment. Because I know humans can also instintivly count 4 objects, without actually counting.

Similar thing happens in some human tribes that have been known for this phenomenon too, it's super interesting how nature forms our perception. They are simply unable to count beyond a certain threshold, referring to simply "a lot". Same with colours, a subset of humanity struggles to differentiate shades of blue from green but are perfectly capable to differentiate shades of blue that others can't.

@etuanno

Күн бұрын

I mean numerically speaking the difference between 3 and 4 is as big as the difference between 99 and 100. However the difference between 3 and 4 feels a LOT bigger. Thinking in proportions is often more useful than thinking in numbers. As an example if you look at diagrams in politics, they never start at 0, but at some arbitrary point in order to exagerate the point they're trying to make.

3:23 Tulio Triviño?

Birds seem to be able to determine either smaller or greater numbers above 4. But not the actual numbers. And they also understand death. I have watched a Magpie funeral, where several birds repeatedly brought individual pieces of straw, and placed them on the body, and walked around the body making sad sounds. It moved me greatly.

1 WHAT COMES AFTER 1 2 WHAT COMES AFTER 2 3 WHAT COMES AFTER 3 FOOUUUURRR

@ItsTheDogsVibes.

2 күн бұрын

I CAN ONLY COUNT TO 4!

TULIO TREVIÑO SALE AL FINAL 3:22

TULIO REFERENCE

“I can only count to 4!” “I can only count to 4!” “I can only count to fouuuuuuurrrrrr!!!”

@statesburgproductions

Күн бұрын

You can count to 24? Not bad.

3:24 Missed opportunity for a "Two-lio" joke

Be smart has a video on a very similar topic! Definitely check that one out it was really good

Still higher than Valve can

3:22 Tulio Triviño!!!

We shorthand numbers/amounts too. That's why it's a lot easier to visually eyeball 3-5 items but it becomes an impossible task when there's more than 5ish elements. Unless everything's arranged/grouped in a way where eyeballing starts working again. Otherwise, the exact amount of a random assortment of items cannot be known without counting everything, and often counting in itself becomes difficult as elements can get missed or double counted if they're too scattered and there's no systemic way of counting them, marking them, or moving them to a counted pile.

0:53 - Instead of saying the monkey can count, wouldn't it be more accurate to say that they have some concept of object permanence?

@MinuteEarth

8 күн бұрын

Scientists call it an "object tracking system" and it's definitely needed - along with the so-called "approximate number system" that they use

@LuckySketches

8 күн бұрын

If they lacked object permanence the number of apples wouldn't affect whether or not they're surprised.

I can’t imagine how a surprised spider or rabbit looks like. How can we tell, that the animal was surprised in this experiment?

@Clkr3

7 күн бұрын

They'll dissect their brains and test for the surprise hormone

@lemguins7031

7 күн бұрын

I don't know about spiders, but rabbits have eye dilation/restriction and verbalized responses to cue when they're surprised (and no I don't mean talking specifically when I say verbalize haha).

@thatrandomguy8124

5 күн бұрын

As a pet rabbit owner, I have learned to read rabbit body language. Its fairly subtle but they have a reaction when they are surprised (or in the case of mine begging for food)

There’s another educational video that was discussing this as it relates to Roman numerals and the symbols for writing numbers. Like basically at a certain point volume because a more important variable than the specific quantity.

3:24 Want to count past four? You’re going to need today’s sponsor, Brilliant.

I kept thinking of the metal song "I can only count to four!" which is a parody of "Let the Bodies Hit the Floor"

3:22 Is that... is that Tulio Treviño? Boy, even I was surprised.

Maybe that's why Apollo(the parrot) likes the number 4 so much.

That "island in the Caribbean" that he mentions is a small tiny island off the coast of south-eastern Puerto Rico called Cayo Santiago where a very studied group of Rhesus monkeys, around 1800 of them, have been under research since *1938* !! Researchers brought around 400 originally, so all their descendants have been tracked in detail to do all sorts of genetic and behavior research on them. It's amazing how they have also survived lots of really heavy hurricanes.

I mean, even though we can count to like seventy-three and know that's objectively more than seventy-two, in daily life we don't really care to count that much. Like if you gave me a pile of 73 jelly beans and 72 jelly beans, I won't be able to differentiate them, to me it's just "oh here's two big piles of jelly beans" unless you laid them out in a rectangle or some other regular pattern that made it clear there's an extra. If you told me there's 15 jelly beans I picture 3 groups of 5 jelly beans because I just sort of intuitively get 5 of something, but above 6 or 7? then it's in terms of smaller numbers

Not a biologist here, but I belive it is rather generally accepted fact that human senses (and I would reasonably expect that also animals) work on logarithmic scale instead of linear. For example touch: if I put a 100g and 110g weights into either of your hands, you would be able to tell them apart, but if it were 200 and 210 grams, you would be much less likely to suceed. Or hearing: when you take 3 tones you would percieve as having same interval 1->2 as 2->3, say an octave, you would find that their physical property frequency is actually in ration 1:2:4 (twice as much as before). It likely boils down to the fact that we do comparisons (this is twice as much as before so I will consider it a next step). Again, I do not do research in biology so feel free to tell me if I am wrong on anything.

Basing everything on "the animals seemed surprised" is super dubious

2:38 Add one more apple, please.

@viquezug3936

8 күн бұрын

Nice

If counting is just "naming quantities", it seems to explain some mental biases. Like how 1 and 1000 seems more different than 1 million and 2 millions. Above some number we loss intuition of the underlying quantity and the number become nothing more than a stranger's name

“There are four lights!”

For reference, tests performed on human regarding noticing a change in the number of dots revealed that humans can somewhat accurately notice changes in amounts up to 13. So that would indicate even in regards to set sizes human brains are able to deal with about 4 times as many objects, which is pretty impressive.

@lompeluiten

7 күн бұрын

And then tey can instinctivly see it has changed, but not knwo the new number after they counted?

Four is a very important number to count to, as the great scholar said; "There are Four lights!" - John Luc Picard

This is very interesting! it reminds me of the Numberphile videos with Brian Butterworth that were sharing research coming to a related conclusion, that both people and fish alike count groups sizes up to about 4 or 5 discretely, but larger groups are approximated as you describe!

"I can only count to four. I can only count to four. I can only count to fooooooooour"

Years (decades?) ago, I heard about researchers who studied the aboriginal tribes of Australia. The only part I remembered was that they counted like this: 1, 2, 3, a bunch. (or rather, a word that meant more than 4) I latched onto this curiosity and used it in my career training apprentices. A running joke that appeared to amuse me more than some of my apprentices. I still get a chuckle from my brother when I answer, "a bunch," as in "how many beers do you want?"

TULIO TRIVIÑO MENTIONED!!!! TULIO TRIVIÑO MENTIONED!!!! TULIO TRIVIÑO MENTIONED!!!! GREATEST VIDEO EVER

Wow, a 261 seconds video that has 4 seconds of advertising at the begining and 57 at the end. A 23% of the video is advertising. If you don't have an adblocker (why you wouldn't???) the advertising could go up to over half of the content. The internet is becoming more and more like TV.

@iang0th

8 күн бұрын

It's not difficult to just stop the video when the sponsorship segment starts.

Monkeys can only count to four because they can't use jujutsu!!!! -Suguru Geto

An interesting thing about human babies is that they share 90% of hand gestures with chimpanzees.

2nd hand story, my friend used to do something similar with his dog. He’d put 1 treat, 2 treats, 3 treats… behind a screen and after give them 1 by 1 to her. At first she could only count to 3, after giving her 3, if there was a 4th, she’d stand up and not be sitting eagerly waiting for the next. With practice though, she learned to count to 6. Dunno if he was giving her verbal cues though, counting as he placed them, or not.

is that tulio? jajajaja, viva chile

Today's Fact: In 2007, a man in Japan proposed to his girlfriend by writing 'Marry Me' in a field of rice plants using different colored plants.

@volodyadykun6490

8 күн бұрын

Stop with the spam

@Avendesora

8 күн бұрын

This is the first time i haven’t been able to find something immediately wrong based off the first or second article in a search… because I can’t find ANYTHING about it. Anyone else have more luck? All I’m getting is a guy in 2010 who used GPS to draw a proposal.

@volodyadykun6490

8 күн бұрын

@@Avendesora great, it's even wrong

@Avendesora

8 күн бұрын

@@volodyadykun6490 Literally always is. I’m still not sure if it’s lack of care or if it’s on purpose to drive engagement or something.

@lonestarr1490

8 күн бұрын

​@@RobKaiser_SQuest At least it's not as bad as that one pedo guy who plagues Vsauce's shorts and others. I report him everytime I see him, but he's still around.

Isn't this related to our ability to instantly recognize up to four objects in a flash of a picture, but struggle to accurately count the number of objects when there are more than four? I recall reading that our brain uses two different regions: one for handling fewer than four objects and another for managing quantities larger than four.

I am definately calling my nephew a pre verbal human every time he pronounces something wrong from now on

There is (was?) a tribe in the Amazonia that had a similar situation. They would count until 4-5, but after that it was more like "many" or "a lot". There are some papers about them, quite interesting.

3:22 is that tulio triviño? main face of the famous show 31 minutos?

Have they tested crows? Seems those nifty borbs can count to way more than four!

One of my university courses (I studied Exercise Sciences) required us to become sort of an expert in a very small field of research and they provided several topics for a group to present the next week. My subject was, 'Core Knowledge', or what knowledge is pre installed in our brain. Only a handful of studies were done at the time (2007), but one was quite interesting and relevant to this video. In this study, a group of scientists traveled to a reclusive tribe in the Amazon. After spending some time they found out that they only had words for 'one', 'two', 'three' and 'four'. Then there was their word for many. This tribe obviously developed a complex language, but never developed a system of math. Funny that this concept of four is in line with the core knowledge of many animals and toddlers.

“How many apples do you have” “uhhhhhhh 4 x 1.25”

Great, interesting video thanks - one of your best imo!

once you get to 4, the monkeys are like "STOP THE COUNT"

3:29 hey, thoose toys look alike Tulio Triviño (from 31 minutos a chilean puppet cartoon)

This is the type of video I would find on my recommended that was posted 7 years ago💀

this channel is really amazing and thought-provoking, i love watching and learning

Thank you for very interesting video

Thank you!! Excellent

*The humans audibly gasped as the 300000 apples turned into 300001 apples*

the directional blur when the apples gets switched to toys is funny as hell

I need to research now how a surprised spider looks like, my imagination fails

Some animals can count higher numbers, though, if they're taught. I saw a video years ago, where they were teaching a chimp to count candies on a tray and then press the button with the correct number. The chimp could go as high as about seven or eight. I also remember seeing a parrot trained to count objects on a table, but I don't remember how high the parrot could go.

If the 25% difference is consistent if you add the apples to the pile invisibly but introduce them visibility one by one, it means that monkeys can count further than 4.

This sounds *very* similar to Piaget's 7 conservation tasks done one (human) children. It shows the same thing, they don't really count (or understand conservation of volume / mass / amount), but gauge how much stuff there is linearly. One of the examples shows that kids young enough (below 4 or so?) will think a tall narrow glass of milk contains more milk than a short wide glass, _even when they are shown the milk being poured from one to the other._ I highly recommend grabbing a small child and trying for yourself - if that's illegal in your local jurisdiction and you don't have the patience to make one yourself, just google Piaget's tasks.

Is it that they don’t notice or don’t care? Very different things.

Counting isn't a natural talent for humans. It must be taught. Some Isolated tribes in New Guinea have a simple way of "counting" one, few, many. And when asked to pick the next amount in a series, their choices were logarithmic not simply adding just one.

@lompeluiten

7 күн бұрын

Counting to 4 is actually completly natural. It is called subitising. Almost all humans can instantly reconize groups up to 4. After that it needs to be learned.

Reminds me of how we can inherently tell how many objects are in a non-organized set without counting, until we reach a certain number, i believe it's around 6-8, and then we have to count them out in order to tell

Took me half the video to realize that the background music is in 5+5+4. This Nathaniel Schroeder is incredible! Making this quite odd Rhythm an easy listening track is pure art!

I feel like being able to quickly estimate the relative size or value of something is a good survival skill, while having the vocabulary to denote specific amounts of things is a good societal skill.

Cool video, cool research

So monkeys are like drummers. They can only count to 4

King Arthur always counting to 4 even if he's supposed to count to 3. FIVE IS RIGHT OUT.

Aliens: "Humans are simple creatures, and can't comprehend figures greater than a billion." 😂

I can't help but to hear psychostick playing in my head as I watch this.

This is so amazing! My mind is blown.

3:17 "What is this sorcery! I mean... Goo goo Ga ga!"

This, just after I watched Be Smart video on the subject, got me in a very interesting rabbit hole.

"Monkeys can only count to 4" Me to the kindergartener: "hello!, monkeys!"