You must log in or register to comment.
They can still see true magenta though.
Hardware vs software solution?
They still taste good. So they got that going for them I guess.
I’m not a fan, but that’s neither here nor there. I’m weird.
I’m just not sure that flavor can be considered a positive character trait?
Maybe I’m stupid. Who knows? Clearly not me.
Its the crunchy nature that I find appealing, the flavor is only okay by itself.
I like them in salad rolls, with marinara dip, and deep fried.
Usually you take the shell off before eating
Maybe you taste good at least.
So are any animals actually capable of seeing the invisible spectrums of light? Because humans technically can see them, since we make tools that allow us to. Suck on that, other animals. 😤
Birds ?
I’m not gonna pretend I understand the magic words here https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsif.2019.0295
Like infrared and ultraviolet? Yeah, there are animals that see those.
And all the other stuff we yse to see celestial objects and communicate long distance. Our phones are able to see colours we can’t!
I’ve been thinking about how a species with a metal horn could evolve to use it as a radio and even a hive mind.
Seems limited. Pheromone mix is far more suitable for a hive mind.
Good luck sending messages that bounce off the atmosphere without RF though.
Imagine aliens attacking us but getting fucked because their hive mind works on the same frequency of radio or wifi.
Imagine airdropping a meme directly into the brain of an alien
In my head as they evolve and learn how it works they customize their antenna to fit their needs. But yeah, that would be funny. Like Signs but shorter. They land somewhere quiet electromagnetically. Could even make it one of those super sensitive telescopes you can’t take any devices near for a bit of dramatic irony. There are some frequencies that are more quiet than others but most are pretty noisy. Sometimes I wonder what it would be like to time travel to the past and see how much noise there is compared to now.
I’m pretty sure if it worked on any frequency in the charged electromagnetic spectrum, they would get completely screwed long before they made it to earth.
As a qualified amateur operator, the radio spectrum is noisy.
Really wish talking about what shrimp see didn’t remind me that in farming them females have one eye removed to promote breeding
Anyone who eats shrimp should absolutely read this.
I am eternally gratefull the practice is forbidden in Europe in organic cultivation. It’s one of the small wins that fly under the radar. It’s still a long way to people choosing for organic, awareness is the start of every change.
Can’t fix what you don’t know is wrong.
!lemmysilver
Technically, all the colors are fake. They’re just the halucinations of a brain trying to understand the input from sensory organs.
That doesn’t make them fake, in the same way that x can mean 2. You are merely representing a given value (in this case light within a certain electromagnetic spectrum) in a useful way.
But is my red the same as your red? Hmmm?
if two people can both point to red and agree that it’s red, that’s close enough. anything beyond that is just pointless esoteric debate.
I disagree that it’s pointless. I think it may be beneficial to humanity (eventually) to establish whether or not there is an objective reality which we all experience.
i agree, but that’s a job for neuroscience, quantum mechanics, and psychology; not a pack of dorks on the fediverse.
it’s more in the philosophy ballpark, which shapes the interpretration of methodology and the consequences, in my humble opinion.
But what if the dorks on the fediverse are scientists?
then by all means
But I want to contribute to humanity in a meaningful way!
-me, a dork on the Fediverse nearly incapable of contributing to humanity in a meaninful way
Hey now, you could be the person to force manufacturers to add a new type of warning label to random products!
buy guns
Some people see numbers instead/along with colors, and different people see different numbers, so I guess the colors might be different between people too
I would be way more surprised if people who saw numbers with colors all saw the same numbers.
It was a joke?
hahaha?
Ehehehe
I hadn’t thought about it that way.
No, colors are real. And you see them.
Pink isn’t real. There is no wavelength of light that is pink.
Pink is real, or you couldn’t see it. And you couldn’t see it unless light was bringing it to your eyes.
Clearly, it’s light-ish red.
Its bright red, maybe toward purple! Brown is dark orange.
This person colors
Light frequencies between blue and red don’t exist.
Imagine how OP their colour perception would be if they did have that mental processing power
Oh that explains this scene
But compared with human eyesight, they could still see more ‘colors’ - As we see (almost) the same white in incandescent bulbs as LEDs and fluorescents, they might actually see the component colors and their intensities.
Not unlike how we may hear a combination tone when multiple other tones are played, and hear the difference (or sum) of them.
How would you suggest they do that. White light near equally activates our 3 cones because all spectrums of light are in it.
White light near equally activates all 12 shrimp cones because all spectrums of light are in it.
Which spectrum of color is left out of white light that wouldn’t light up a cone associated with it?
Because white light from an LED bulb is not all spectrums of light. It’s 3. It’s pure red, pure green, and pure blue that stimulates our cones equally so our brain can’t tell the difference. Like how TVs can make any color out of just three colors of sub pixel.
White light from an incandescent bulb is all spectrums of light. Through a prism it makes a rainbow. White LEDs through a prism make three stripes. For more information of this and some visuals check out this article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_rendering_index
6500k vs 5000k is noticeable for humans
I don’t think of it as drama so much as docucomedy.
I hate that it invalidates this episode of radiolab, which is, without a doubt, a masterpiece of podcasting:
https://youtu.be/jibvu9BHV_k?t=795
i saved the video at the 13 minute mark where they do the audio representation of the vivid colors. still worth a watch/listen
Blue blue green greeeeeeeeeeennnnn
super super ultravioleeeeet
The way mantis shrimp see is nonetheless super cool and interesting. They likely have no conception of 2D color at all, and can only sense the 12 different colors in general. Furthermore, only the midband of their eyes see color, when the eyes are moving and scanning for prey, they don’t see color at all, which probably helps offload mental load for their small brains. Once they do see something, they then stop moving their eyes to determine the color of what they’re looking at.
Also, mantis shrimp have 6 more photoreceptors in addition to the 12 colored ones, to detect polarized light. They likely see them the same way that they see color, so they probably don’t consider them anything different than wavelength which is what we interpret as color.
Ed Yong’s An Immense World has a section on this and I’d highly recommend it. The ways animals sense and perceive the world are often so different for ours and it’s so fascinating.
For anyone wondering why they would need to see polarized light: I actually looked into this a few months ago!
Other animals that are trying to blend in with the environment often use countershading appear less conspicuous. The problem with this is that this method can’t replicate the polarization of the light behind them, making them stand out if you can see that sort of thing. ((Sunlight in the ocean is always polarized based on the direction of the sun (look up fresnel equations for s and p polarized light))). Even transparent creatures will interrupt the polarization in some way, so this is a very useful skill to have.
More specifically, polarization changes with the angle of reflection of the surface towards the detector / eye / camera, so every bump in the surface gets a color gradient different from the surroundings when seen by a polarization sensitive eye
“Spiders can detect danger coming their way with an early-warning system called eyes.”
Really fantastic book. I did have some notes though. Firstly, if honeybees have such low dpi vision, how can they see each other dance? I assume it’s because they’re experiencing the dance some other way, but how? (Also it’s hella dark in there, isn’t it?)
He says many times that humanity’s umwelt is dominated by sight, but I very much disagree. To lose my hearing or sense of touch would make me feel quite blind, as I use them to perceive things outside my cone of vision constantly. Being in deep water is unnerving for this reason, because I can’t “see” what’s around me, and I have this whole new area below that I can’t hear either. So I have to wonder whether other people feel the way he does or whether my usage is more unique.
He really blew my mind when describing exafference and reafference because these things are reliant on a sense of self in the first place, which means that even the worm in his example must have some form of ego.
You show that you are dominated by sight even as you say you aren’t.
Losing your hearing or touch would remove peripheral senses, yes, and certainly that would be unnerving, but think how much worse it would be to lose sight. Hearing wasn’t even a factor for you beyond your peripheral, because what you can see is so much clearer, so much more comprehensive, than what you can hear, that hearing is negligible where you have sight.
Hearing is a backup sense. Something you lean on when you don’t have sight, but its fidelity is poor enough in people that we rely nearly wholly on sight, when we can.
Losing that cone of vision impacts us far more than our hearing, although of course losing either is massively detrimental.
While sound is not nearly as dominant, it’s absolutely not just a backup sense. It’s the fastest perception we have (the best rhythm game players can play blind but not deaf), it covers all directions, and even in our sleep we still respond to loud sounds.
Sound perception is so fast that it’s often what directs you to look in the right direction, even if what you’re reacting to happened in your field of vision.
Funny enough, even our peripheral vision is faster than our central field of vision, to help us avoid predators coming from behind! Our forward directed vision is for tracking and understanding what’s in front of us, sound and peripheral vision is in large part for environmental awareness. They’re co-dependent!
Humans can even learn echolocation!
I have heard that the incidence of suicide is higher in deaf people then in blind people, which would suggest that, while our senses are sight dominated, losing our hearing has a bigger impact in some way. That said I can’t find a citation for that, so make of it what you will.
This is the best I could find on the specific topic: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7888369/
People with visual or hearing sensory impairments had twice the odds of past-year suicidal ideation (OR 2.06; 95% CI 1.17 to 2.73; p<0.001), and over three times the odds of reporting past-year suicide attempt (OR 3.12; 95% CI 1.57 to 6.20; p=0.001) compared with people without these impairments. Similar results were found for hearing and visual impairments separately and co-occurring.
Guess I was misinformed. Thanks for doing the legwork.
Or maybe the blind people just miss more.
I can see only in a limited area at any given time, but I can hear in a full sphere around me simultaneously. I don’t think it’s accurate to characterize such a large area as “the periphery”. One sense is imprecise and covers pretty much everywhere while the other is detailed, but very limited. Both senses work in concert to build a full map of the world, and the loss of either is concerning. I’m more comfortable in a blindfold than isolating headphones though, because I can still echolocate while my vision is impaired, but my vision has no way of emulating hearing’s function. I’d have to be constantly looking around all over the place.
Hearing is a backup sense.
That might vary by person, but for me it’s not. If I had to pick between being able to see and being able to hear, it’d be hearing, hands down. Being able to see is amazing and I’d miss it, but hearing is just a whole other dimension.
Being able to know how someone is feeling, just by hearing their voice. Listening to music and hearing all the shapes, colors, and feelings that come with it. The colors aren’t always ones you can see, like blue or yellow. It’s hard to describe. I’ll close my eyes and just listen at a concert (not the whole time) and same with TV, a lot of times. I usually remember it better that way.
If I have to find something in a backpack, I’ll often do it by feel. I probably look like a raccoon washing its food, but it just works for me. You can tell things apart by feel and sound.
Your description of hearing shapes and colors sounds a lot like someone with synesthesia, a rare condition that’s seems to have no downsides and only benefits.
That’s neat.
It makes me wonder if your hearing is better than average or if your eyes are worse, making it not so clear-cut.
Do you need glasses, or have you ever had your hearing tested for whatever reason?
I don’t need glasses. Haven’t had my hearing tested, but I think it might be better than average. I can hear high frequencies annoyingly well, 20kHz or a little more (checked with a spectrum analyzer). It’s fun to listen to the high harmonics in music. Vacuum cleaners and electric cars are less fun.
I can usually hear my muscles and bones moving. It’s very quiet and low frequency, and the muscles rumble. I can usually tune it out though.
how can they see each other dance? I assume it’s because they’re experiencing the dance some other way, but how? (Also it’s hella dark in there, isn’t it?)
By touch. This 50s video shows it well.
Oh, I see. I thought they communicated much more complex information than that, but it’s very practical for simple directions with no further details.
Yup - as far as we know the dance conveys three pieces of info, about a food source:
- direction - by the direction of the waggling
- distance - by the duration of the waggling
- benefit - by how frequently they do it (based on the resources and potential predators)
They also release some pheromones while dancing, but I think that’s just to warn other bees “hey, someone is dancing in the hive”.
I need to use wherewithal more in my daily life
Every lunar month, when there is a full moon, i try quitting caffeine
werewithdrawal
(I initially misread you comment)
I wish I had the wherewithal to use it more often.
How did they test if they could see color? Did they make little shrimp dioramas or something?
They asked them politely
The easiest way is to use the principles of conditioning. Pair a stimulus with a certain color light, then start flashing up different colored lights. If the organism is cued to the stimulus by multiple colors of lights, it means that they can’t really distinguish between them.
That’s how we tested when kids lose the ability to distinguish certain phonemes.
it makes me happy when people understand science.
They give them a miniature color blind print that has those numbers in them that are hidden if you are color blind.
The shrimp are holier than we are because they cannot see the devil’s color (it’s pink 🩷)
You mean light red?
ITT: people saying pink (light red) when they mean magenta
I would say magenta is a different color than pink. But I was just making a joke about how there’s light bike and light yellow but if you add white to red it’s a different color
That is clearly embarrassed white
Blushing white lol
