• AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    8 months ago

    Well, probably not. From the article:

    While we cannot possibly imagine how ultraviolet appears to the animals who can perceive it, we can visualize it using false color imagery.

    So they’re displaying the wavelengths that the animals see shifted into the range that we see, but no one knows what it actually looks like to them.

    • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The key thing for me is whether all color distinctions visible to the animals are made visible to us by the simulations. Wavelength shifting can do that as long as the animals are trichromats. If they’re tetrachromats, it’s impossible in theory even with color shifting.

      • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        What you’re saying is for sure true, but even if the wavelengths were a complete match we can’t know if they’re represented to the animals the same way they are to us. It could be something wildly different. If you think of trying to explain what colors are to someone who was blind from birth, it could be that same level of difference between us an animals - something impossible to envision.

        • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          That’s kind of the philosophical issue of qualia: we don’t know if I experience red the same way you do, even if our eyes are physiologically identical. The most we can say is that my red maps onto yours in a way that preserves distinctions of meaning, and I think that’s all they’re trying to do with these cameras.

          • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            I agree that’s what they’re trying to do, but the headline is a bit misleading. Even the people making the system aren’t saying this is what it looks like to the animals.

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    I wish we could see what they see. How does a human look to them? And how come birds look so good to our eyes, when they are designed to look good for other birds…

    • averyminya@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      I think it’s a byproduct of 1 color being able to be seen from different perspectives.

      To birds, other birds may look even more enticing than they do to us, but to a mantis shrimp they would look even more different than either of those.

      In reality the bird is using a select few hues, but how those hues are perceived will differ by other animals. What I find so crazy on top of that is that there are animals that grow to have colors and patterns based on their surroundings, like owls or lizards. Or even crazier, changing on command.