Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Monday September 29 2014, @11:58PM   Printer-friendly
from the seeing-is-believing dept.

The University of Queensland reports:

Mantis shrimp eyes are inspiring the design of new cameras that can detect a variety of cancers and visualise brain activity.

University of Queensland research has found that the shrimp’s compound eyes are superbly tuned to detect polarised light, providing a streamlined framework for technology to mimic.

Professor Justin Marshall, from the Queensland Brain Institute at UQ, said cancerous tissue reflected polarised light differently to surrounding healthy tissue.

“Humans can’t see this, but a mantis shrimp could walk up to it and hit it,” he said.

“We see colour with hues and shades, and objects that contrast – a red apple in a green tree for example – but our research is revealing a number of animals that use polarised light to detect and discriminate between objects.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by SlimmPickens on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:28AM

    by SlimmPickens (1056) on Tuesday September 30 2014, @12:28AM (#99848)

    awesome little creatures, but they don't really see better than we do http://www.popsci.com.au/science/nature/mantis-shrimp-vision-is-not-as-mindblowing-as-youve-been-told,388723 [popsci.com.au]

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @01:09AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @01:09AM (#99854)

      Is SlimmPickens related to Hugh Pickens?

      • (Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:57AM

        by SlimmPickens (1056) on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:57AM (#99880)

        No more than gOOgle and yahOO.

      • (Score: 2) by redneckmother on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:59AM

        by redneckmother (3597) on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:59AM (#99881)

        I doubt it... Slim Pickens rode an A-Bomb out of a B52 in a great movie.

        --
        Mas cerveza por favor.
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by kstox on Tuesday September 30 2014, @01:24AM

      by kstox (2066) on Tuesday September 30 2014, @01:24AM (#99856)

      The issue isn't that they see "better," it is that they see different. They "see" polarization, humans don't. So, those extra photoreceptors are for polarization, not color.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by SlimmPickens on Tuesday September 30 2014, @01:48AM

        by SlimmPickens (1056) on Tuesday September 30 2014, @01:48AM (#99862)

        Well the internet at large certainly think they see "better" and I've had to defend my point of view several times from drunk people armed with smartphones. I try to explain that our receptors are more sensitive (the trade-off for polarization I imagine), we have orders of magnitude more of them and the processing power to back it up, but the drunk people say "no, 12 colours is better!"

        At least one of my eye books (I only have the kindle one handy) says:

        Stomatopods (mantis shrimps) have 12 visual pigments devoted to colour in the mid-band of each eye (see Plate 4), plus another three or four in other regions of the eye

        and

        polarization.....detection requires that the photopigmentmolecules are appropriately aligned in the photoreceptor membrane

        http://www.amazon.com/Animal-Eyes-Oxford-Biology/dp/0199581142/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1412041455&sr=8-1-fkmr1&keywords=animal+eyes+oxford+nissen [amazon.com]

        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Marand on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:11AM

          by Marand (1081) on Tuesday September 30 2014, @02:11AM (#99868) Journal

          I try to explain that our receptors are more sensitive (the trade-off for polarization I imagine), we have orders of magnitude more of them and the processing power to back it up, but the drunk people say "no, 12 colours is better!"

          You can have a variation of that argument with anything that involves numbers. Some people just have trouble with the idea that bigger numbers doesn't always correlate to better. It's a shortcut to making comparisons in cases where you don't understand enough to make an informed decision.

          • 16 megapixel camera? Obviously better than 12, because it's easier to quantify "16 > 12" than "the 12mp camera has a better lens and sensors"

          • That razor has 7 blades? Must be better than this one that has 3

          These go to eleven. [youtube.com]

          Best you can do is try to explain it and then leave it alone after that, because it's no use fighting it.

  • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:32AM

    by Gaaark (41) on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:32AM (#99939) Journal

    “Humans can’t see this, but a mantis shrimp could walk up to it and hit it,” he said.
       

    "That's what it said!"

    --
    --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---