(continued...) There are no naturally-occurring Martian rovers. No, it doesn't. Maximum web integrity would involve a very dense, solid web. Spiders don't build those. They build tenuous, easily-damaged structures. Yes. You're only wrong about what is "efficient" for a spider's web. Where did those different patterns exist before humans used them? No. Evolution doesn't do that. Lots of things are very inefficient in evolution. Are you willing to learn anything new about evolution, or are you going to tell me I'm wrong? Or will you just ignore this and keep right on believing what you believe? Word salad. "More and less" is not a differential equation. Come on, Write4U. You've looked up "differential equation" on wikipedia before. You have even cut-and-pasted definitions across to this forum. Didn't you read those definitions in the process of doing that? Did you not understand them? What about the conversations we had with you previously, after you misused the term "differential equation"? Did you learn anything from those conversations? Or have you forgotten them? Or did you simply ignore them, to go on believing what you believe, regardless? If "aerodynamics" is the formal study of flight, then birds and insects don't use it. Yes. That suggests that they have some sort of intuitive mathematical sense or heuristic "built in" by evolution, which is similar to something you said earlier about bees. However, they aren't getting out pencil and paper and solving equations. They aren't "doing maths". Also, experience counts for lot here. Lots of animals learn from experience. It is not. Do you recall previous discussions on what a mathematical function is? Or did you ignore those, to go on believing what you believe? It's one thing to make a mistake once and then learn how to do better next time. It's another to keep making the same mistake over and over, never accepting correction. It's pathological or, at best, hopelessly stubborn. If only you were able to convince anybody else of your views. But that would require having a reason, for starters. --- That's all there was in terms of actual Write4U contributions to posts #526 through #537. Signal to noise ratio remarkably low, albeit consistent with your usual output here.