[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 412 KB, 2514x1200, Visible-spectrum.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6442506 No.6442506[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

So the electromagnetic spectrum.
Why is that we as humans can only see this one portion of the spectrum as light? What dictated the evolution of animals with eyes to generally see the exact same visible spectrum? What was the evolutionary advantage of seeing this portion of EM spectrum?

Pic related duh

>> No.6442536

Best spectrum to identify stuff around.
/thread

>> No.6442543

>>6442506
>What dictated the evolution of animals with eyes to generally see the exact same visible spectrum?
They don't, but it is close.

>> No.6442544

Because visible light makes up the substantial majority of light emitted by the sun.
Certainly a damned sizeable portion of it.

>> No.6442548

it's the highest energy wavelengths that don't fuck up most biological tissues. you get the best signal you can without destroying your sensory apparatus

>> No.6442562

>>6442543
Which is why I said generally they do

>>6442544
Hmm, Yeah that would make sense.

>> No.6442564

I have to wonder how wed perceive the infrared and ultraviolet if we could. How organisms that can do.
>Inb4 really really purple/red
If we could only see the blue to yellow on that scale of visible light, 'ultrablue' and 'infrayellow' arent all that apt descriptions of purple and red.

>> No.6442566

>>6442562
Im not actually sure if its the majority, but I do know its a -really- substantial amount of it.

>> No.6442569
File: 27 KB, 450x570, waterabsorb.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6442569

>>6442506

>> No.6442571

>>6442564
we'd have to have some new qualia to deal with new colours

>> No.6442568

Although it's going away from humans. There are some animals which are able to see different amounts of the spectrum. For example Bee's are able to see some Ultra-Violet light because UV light causes sex-dependant markings on flowers to become viable. This is good for bee's as it means they are able to find flowers more easily.

I guess to answer your question, it was general evolution by natural selection. Humans don't need to see UV light or any other part of the spectrum so this gene just died out.

>> No.6442575

>>6442574
humans can too

>> No.6442574

>>6442568
Why the fuck do mantis shrimp need to see circularly polarized light, then?

>> No.6442580

>>6442571
if we could see infrared, it would probably manifest itself as "warmer things tend to glow".

>> No.6442583

>>6442569
This OP. The atmospheric window.

>> No.6442588

>>6442580
they do already

>> No.6442590

>>6442569
>>6442583
Is it coincidence that the atmospheric window pretty much matches black body at the photosphere temperature of the sun?

>> No.6442596

>>6442588
yes, but it would be much more noticeable

>> No.6442604
File: 681 KB, 3071x2048, sunspectrum_noao_big.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6442604

>>6442569
Well now that that's been answered, here's why we see color in mixtures of Red, Green and Blue.

>> No.6442904
File: 1.63 MB, 178x128, 360twist.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6442904

>>6442569
ooh... this man wins the thread for highest credibility response.

>> No.6442907

>>6442904
except he didn't answer the question at all

>> No.6442922

>>6442907
The answer is strongly implied by the evidence.

Learn to interpret graphs.

>> No.6442958

>>6442922
no, it's not strongly implied at all. if you want to connect the water absorption graph to biology you need a shitload of additional assertions regarding the mechanisms by which organisms sense electromagnetic radiation and the evolutionary benefits which seeing various parts of the spectrum would confer

furthermore, it says absolutely nothing about op's question about evolutionary advantages

OP asked a question about evolution, not about physics

>> No.6442965
File: 29 KB, 425x314, migrane.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6442965

>>6442958
......

People need water.
Thus seeing the color spectrum water absorbed help us find water.

Dummy.

>> No.6442974

>>6442965
are you legitimately a moron? it has nothing to do with that

>> No.6442994

>>6442974
>are you legitimately a moron? it has nothing to do with that

If it does not have something to do with this. Then yes i am a legitimate moron. However i do not see any evidence why im wrong.

Observation: People need water
Observation: 90% of the body is made of water
Observation: Liquid water is rare in the universe
Observation: Water reflects the visible band of light
Observation: People can see visible light
Hypothesis: People can see visible light because they need to find water.
Null Hypothesis: It would be a hell of a coincidence that we can see the visible light band reflected by water, which is known to be extremely precise, because we WERNT looking for water. Thus it would be needed to be proven what else we might be looking for that would create such an evolutionary selective pressure.

>> No.6443011
File: 53 KB, 622x562, 1394990180582.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6443011

>>6442994
well you know, ever since the first organism life has a LOT to do with water

Why you say they were looking for something else? Since the beginning we've needed water for almost every shit we do, of course we had develop our vision to be able to see it

>> No.6443021

>What was the evolutionary advantage of seeing this portion of EM spectrum?
Humans can only see 3 colors.
Birds can see up to 7 colors.

Why?

>> No.6443033
File: 369 KB, 1380x460, Bird_blink-edit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6443033

>>6443021
birds also have a 2nd eyelid

>> No.6443029

>>6443011
>Why you say they were looking for something else?

In proper scientific method a Null Hypothesis is meant to be the opposite of the first Hypothesis you WANT to come up with. That way, if you consider the opposite of what you WANT to be true. You atleast have both options covered in the eventuality your wrong.

>Not knowing scientific method from memory
>believing your a scientist because you graduate

>> No.6443043

infrared is heat
ultraviolet damages our our eyes

>> No.6443066

>>6442994
>Observation: Liquid water is rare in the universe
the universe is irrelevant. water is extremely common in the places where life evolved.

>Observation: Water reflects the visible band of light
the entire point of that graph is that water DOESN'T reflect the visible wavelengths

water is entirely transparent to visible light.

you can verify this for yourself by virtue of the fact that a glass of water is fucking transparent.

your hypothesis is nonsense

>> No.6443087

>>6443043
>infrared is heat
is this too simple of a comparison because as your statement stands it could sound like we DO ''see'' infrared when feeling objects with our skin

>> No.6443091
File: 136 KB, 1199x553, hot heat.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6443091

>>6442506
So the electromagnetic spectrum.
Why is that we as humans can only feel this one portion of the spectrum as heat? What dictated the evolution of animals with skin to generally feel the exact same spectrum? What was the evolutionary advantage of feeling this portion of EM spectrum?

Pic related duh

>> No.6443092

>>6443091

dudewhat

>> No.6443116

>>6443092
Same question as OP's, just different sense organs. I believe you should direct your 'dudewhat' to him.

>> No.6443118

>>6443043
>infrared is heat
But not all heat in the EM spectrum is infrared.

>> No.6443152

>>6442574
It could merely be a vestigial structure?

>> No.6443154

>>6442506

Google the peak wavelength at which the sun radiates, and you have your answer.

>> No.6443160

>>6443091

Any wavelength of light will heat up your skin.

>> No.6443172

>>6442506
because all other spectrums go through matter

>> No.6443174

Environment has a lot to do with it. It's close to the brightest part of the spectrum as far as solar illumination goes, especially after you take into account atmospheric absorption (UVB and UVC are completely dark). It's only natural that photosensitive organs would adapt to function at the wavelength of brightest illumination.

>> No.6443184

>>6443043
>infrared is heat
Not near-IR, at least not at Earth-like temperatures.
>>6443118
The overwhelming majority of it is.

>> No.6443212

>>6442562
>generally see the exact same

>> No.6443304

>>6442575
can't distinguish it

>> No.6443306

>>6442994
>Liquid water is rare in the universe
nigga, what?

>> No.6443334
File: 41 KB, 630x612, oldevnew.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6443334

>>6443152
>question:
>why did the mantis shrimp evolve such incredible vision
>your answer:
>vestigial.
>implying mantis shrimp ancestors had it—
>but then why did the ancestors evolve it?
>mfw circular reasoning
>mfw no face

>> No.6443337

>>6442548
This is the right answer.

This is actually a pretty banal question to anyone who is educated in physics or chemistry. An education in chemistry or physics is all you need to understand why visible light is more useful for sensing your environment than any other form of light.

To understand why, you would need to study the quantum mechanics behind how light interacts with matter. Quantization, selection rules, boundary conditions and the rest are all quantum mechanical concepts that describe what wavelengths of light matter will interact with and how.

A more interesting question imo is why we see visible light as the colors that we do.

>> No.6443341

Dudewhat

>> No.6443340

>>6443043
Like others have said, all radiation (EM, nuclear, gravitational) is technically heat.

>> No.6443345

>>6442583
>>6442590
>Atmospheric
nope.
>Absorption by water

Its because our eyes were mostly evolved in the ocean yes?

>> No.6443355

>>6443066
Nope... nope... im not following you with that one.

You are a moron for saying
>water is entirely transparent to visible light.

>water is extremely common in the places where life evolved.
Unless you happen to not live in the sea.

>> No.6443362

>>6443355
Not that anon, but dude, whut?

>Unless you happen to not live in the sea.
But that is precisely where life as we know it evolved.

>> No.6443368
File: 17 KB, 244x260, amazed-affiliate-woman.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6443368

>>6443340
>Like others have said, all radiation (EM, nuclear, gravitational) is technically heat.

I've heard people refer to infrared as heat (an understandable mistake) but you just went full retard

>> No.6443375

>>6443362
>But that is precisely where life as we know it evolved.

BUT WATER IS UNCOMMON ON LAND.

WHERE WE EVOLVED TO LIVE.

>>6443368
>I've heard people refer to infrared as heat (an understandable mistake) but you just went full retard
Well actually, if light confers heat energy then infact it is heat. Infact this is the only definition of heat.

>> No.6443379

>>6443337
>To understand why, you would need to study the quantum mechanics behind how light interacts with matter.

BULL
FUCKING
SHIT.

>> No.6443387

>>6443375

No you faggot what's wrong with you.

Just because EM waves heat things, that doesn't make them heat.

You're confusing the noun heat (which has no physical definition and is a linguistic term to describe warmth) and the verb heat, which is very strictly defined as the transfer of energy.

Outside of physics, warm things have heat.

In physics, energy transfer from a hot to a cold body is heating.

EM waves are not "Heat". But they CAN "Heat" regions of space by transferring energy.

>> No.6443397

>>6443387
What is the kinetic energy of an Ultraviolet particle?

The answer; heat.

>> No.6443400

>>6443387
Yer gettin brolled tro.

>> No.6443403

>>6443397

Did you not read a word I just said?

Let's pretend, briefly, that we have this definition:
Pouring - moving orange juice from a container to a more empty one.

If you have a container with orange juice, you can move the orange juice between containers by pouring.

Orange Juice is not 'pour' though. That doesn't make any sense. Neither is the container 'pour'. 'Pour' is a verb. It's a process that occurs, not a state of matter.

Now re-read that with 'energy' instead of OJ, and heat instead of pour.

>> No.6443406

>>6443403
What is the orange juice of a 12 oz. cup?

The answer; pour

>> No.6443408

>>6442548
>it's the highest energy wavelengths that don't fuck up most biological tissues.
Right
>you get the best signal you can without destroying your sensory apparatus
Wrong

The real answer is not why do humans adopt these colours. But why do plants adopt them. And the answer is; as you have said, because they dont destroy the biological tissues but allow maximum energy absorption. As is the case with chlorophyll.

But this is a case of convergent evolution. As we have evolved to see these chlorophyll pigments in plants. Not because
>"you get the best signal you can without destroying your sensory apparatus"
But because the plants do. They do this to gain the maximum energy from the sun it seems.

Not because we need to see underwater, because we can see the colour blue, which prevents this, but aids us to detect water and probably, some plants.

Which i suppose makes sense in terms of trophic level.

>> No.6443410

>>6442544

This is it.

Go home.

>> No.6443412

>>6443403
>Did you not read a word I just said?

Nice evasion there. But you didnt answer my question did you?

What is the kinetic energy of an Ultraviolet particle?

>> No.6443414

>>6443410
No.

This
>>6443408
Is it.

>> No.6443417

>>6443408
>>it's the highest energy wavelengths that don't fuck up most biological tissues.
>Right

Gamma rays, Beta rays, x-rays...
Right.

>> No.6443418
File: 83 KB, 732x264, 3sat-qbbr.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6443418

>>6443410
>>6443414
>2014
>nobody knowing this is it

>> No.6443420

>>6443379

Seriously you need only study basic geometric optics to get the underlying point as to why higher frequency means higher resolution.

>> No.6443421

Holy shit, you guys are legitimately retarded. This graph >>6442569 shows the wavelengths of light which PASS THROUGH water - thereby making it look invisible to us. If we could see light at any other wavelength, water would look opaque. Guess what? We evolved in water, so why the fuck would we need any opaque wavelengths?

Jesus, I thought you were a science board.

>> No.6443426

>>6443087
> it could sound like we DO ''see'' infrared when feeling objects with our skin
No, dipshit, we feel heat it is nonsense to apply that many senses to try to describe feeling, you don't sound the sight of feeling something, you just feel it.

>> No.6443427
File: 895 KB, 240x183, fedora.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6443427

>>6443420
Chaos Theory.

>> No.6443429

>>6443420
Oh! I guessed it.
Its because smaller wavelengths can be squeezed more compactly together. Presumably without cancelling out.

But still.

Chaos Theory.

>> No.6443433

>>6443421
Wrong. The answer has already been devised. And you are 3rd furthest away from it.

Bronze star.

>> No.6443431

>>6443418
What does Planck's law have to do with this?

>> No.6443435

>>6443433
What's the correct answer then, oh wise one?
Oh, wait; you don't know.

>> No.6443436

>>6443426
>No, dipshit, we feel heat it is nonsense to apply that many senses to try to describe feeling, you don't sound the sight of feeling something, you just feel it.

I dont see anything wrong with this.

I imagine that the brain purposefully hides certain data representations. But are nonetheless there.

We have, for instance, a mysterious ability to know the location of our arms and legs even with our eyes closed. I believe this has not been explained. This could be explained as seeing heat, but our brain might just refuse to represent this data as a sight.

>> No.6443438

>>6443435
\/
>>6443408

>> No.6443443

>>6443431
I am suggesting that that particular slice of the EM spectrum contains the most information computationally, as evidenced by the other graph showing the hardness of solving 3SAT problems.

>> No.6443447

>>6443436
>I dont see anything wrong with this.
I know you have demonstrated you are a very uneducated person with a terrible set of inferences.

Sight is the result of light interacting with photoreceptors in eyes.
Feeling is the result of information from nerve endings below the dermis.

Primarily visible light enters the photoreceptor cells in the eye because the rest is reflected rather than absorbed by the water in your eye.

Primarily heat (as opposed to visible light) is felt because it interacts with the nerve ending below the skin and visible light is filtered because you entire skin in not covered in photoreceptors as they can not withstand direct full spectrum light unfiltered by water.

What you are describing is not sight it is an abstract modeling system of the brain.

>> No.6443448
File: 43 KB, 946x607, 1395989045872.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6443448

>>6443438
Do you have any fucking clue about the spectral reflectance of chlorophyll? It's the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT characteristic of vegetation in remote sensing applications.
If we evolved this way to "detect plants" then we'd be able to see NIR frequencies, not the visible spectrum. Also, if we evolved according to the post you quoted, we would ALSO be able to see SWIR and LWIR.

Pic related.

>> No.6443452

>>6443447
>I know you have demonstrated you are a very uneducated person with a terrible set of inferences.
>Sight is the result of light interacting with photoreceptors in eyes.

But... Mungo. Infrared heat penetrates the body.

>photoreceptors
>nerve endings
He doesnt even know these two cell types are basically the same.

>What you are describing is not sight it is an abstract modeling system of the brain.
Their both nerves. Its all nerves. Even the neurons.

>> No.6443456

>>6443452
>But... Mungo. Infrared heat penetrates the body.
Yea and most visible light does not which is why you feel heat and see light because visible light penetrates the water in your eyes, but not the tissue of your skin.

>He doesnt even know these two cell types are basically the same.
Except for some very important things that photoreceptor cells only do http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phototransduction

>Their both nerves. Its all nerves. Even the neurons.
Yes but they all have different functions and work through different mechanisms, and photoreceptor cells themselves more neurons than nerve endings in the skin.

>> No.6443457

>>6443448
>Do you have any fucking clue about the spectral reflectance of chlorophyll?

Yes i do. Thats why i said it.
Chlorophyll a, b, and carotenoids all have different wavelengths. Which occurs between 400-550nm.
This is NOT near infrared.

>> No.6443460

>>6443456
>all have different functions and work through different mechanisms
Not as different as you'd think is my measure of it. They are afterall almost identical cell type.

>> No.6443469

>>6443460
Enough differences to easily distinguish the input type. You do afterall almost have a normal number of chromosomes .

>> No.6443481

>>6443469
>easily distinguish the input type.

And there in lays the assumption.

>> No.6443503

>>6443481
No assumption, just you feigning ignorance by ignoring previous evidence to play semantic word games.
There might be some rare forms of synesthesia (I can't even find sight/touch confusion documented its more sound/touch or smell/touch like people hear or smell heat) where people confuse those senses, but they are measureable different phenomena and provide vastly different kinds of information to the brain.

>> No.6443520

If we detected the whole spectrum, our vision would just be pure blinding white.
There's not much information that's meaningful (when living on trees in Africa) that can be conveyed to you through: Radio, X-Ray, Radar, Gamma Rays, Cosmic, etc.
The only thing you might argue for outside of visible light is infrared...

>> No.6443521

>>6443452
>Infrared heat penetrates the body.
No it doesn't...

>> No.6443524

>>6443387
>Heat has no physical definition
You're a fucking moron.

>> No.6443527

>>6442590
I would assume so.

Anyone maybe have any insight with regard to this? Is there some logical reason for this besides mere coincidence?

>> No.6443538

>>6442506
because beta carotenes and other carotenoids in our eyes absorb at that wavelength

>> No.6443608

>>6443375
>>BUT WATER IS UNCOMMON ON LAND.
>WHERE WE EVOLVED TO LIVE.
Eyes evolved in marine environments, not terrestrial ones.

>> No.6443614

>>6443608

And also we're made of water. Including, you know, our eyes....

>> No.6443731

>>6442994
This thread made me wat.

All animal eyes evolved from the Chordata format, they probably only saw light differences and few colours.

When terrestrials came about they were put under evolutionary pressure to see the entire spectrum because some frogs and berries are poisonous. Etc.

Visible light is the only part of the spectrum that doesn't reflect off water?

>> No.6443741

>>6443731

Visible light is the part that isn't ABSORBED by water, at least of the parts of the spectrum that are abundant on Earth. And what do you think your eyes are made of?

>> No.6444191

>>6442604
Nope. If that were the case then other animals would have RGB-stimulated photoreceptors too, but they don't always.

>> No.6444228

>>6443608
There are eye analogues that evolved on land (for instance, the pit organ of the pit viper), and they DO function in different wavelengths.