Forums > Social Discussion > Eye differences
Login/Join to Participatemember
517 posts
Location: Sheffield, England
517 posts
Location: Sheffield, England
Posted:
Ok, so I've always assumed that people see colours differently. Some like red, some like blue etc. I guess the brain interprets eye signals differently in each of us.
Also I was wondering if a similar principle could apply to the transparancy left in the air by fire or glo spinning. Will the trail from a spinner be longer in some peoples eyes than others?
I'm thinking probably yes - anyone know?
Jo.
Ok, so I've always assumed that people see colours differently. Some like red, some like blue etc. I guess the brain interprets eye signals differently in each of us.
Also I was wondering if a similar principle could apply to the transparancy left in the air by fire or glo spinning. Will the trail from a spinner be longer in some peoples eyes than others?
I'm thinking probably yes - anyone know?
Jo.
Educate yourself in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
GOLD Member
Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
8,428 posts
Location: Wales
Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
8,428 posts
Location: Wales
Posted:
I think it probably has to do with the number of rods and cones in a particular persons retina and the ratio of one to the other.
This site explains about cones and rods for those that are a bit rusty on their anatomy of the eye.
I'm guessing people with more rods will see longer trails. People with more cones will see brighter colours.
When I don't have such a fuzzy head I'll come back and put what I mean in not so simplistic terms. That is if someone doesn't come along and prove my theory utter pants before then
I think it probably has to do with the number of rods and cones in a particular persons retina and the ratio of one to the other.
This site explains about cones and rods for those that are a bit rusty on their anatomy of the eye.
I'm guessing people with more rods will see longer trails. People with more cones will see brighter colours.
When I don't have such a fuzzy head I'll come back and put what I mean in not so simplistic terms. That is if someone doesn't come along and prove my theory utter pants before then
Feed me Chocolate!!! Feed me NOW!
GOLD Member
veteran
1,508 posts
Location: Out, United Kingdom
veteran
1,508 posts
Location: Out, United Kingdom
Posted:
The trail left across your vision would remain for as long as the retina didnt heal itself (if thats the right way of describing it
), and some peeps heal quicker than others, so while it maywell only be a matter of milliseconds, i reakon some peeps would see a longer trail than others
The trail left across your vision would remain for as long as the retina didnt heal itself (if thats the right way of describing it
), and some peeps heal quicker than others, so while it maywell only be a matter of milliseconds, i reakon some peeps would see a longer trail than others AAARRRGGGHHH!!! My giant stick broke!!! In two!!! My stick broke in two!!! 
member
54 posts
54 posts
Posted:
I wonder then how many cones and rods a perfect eye should have? Would they be equal numbers or more than one and less of the other?
I wonder then how many cones and rods a perfect eye should have? Would they be equal numbers or more than one and less of the other?
Diamond In The Rough
459 posts
Location: Richmond, Virginia
459 posts
Location: Richmond, Virginia
Posted:
Ideally, the distribution of rods & cones would be just as it is, unless you would want to say, sacrifice color for contrast...
Even a person with 20/20 vision can't claim perfect sight, because a classmate of mine actually had 20/10 vision. I don't think there is a perfect eye, or any other organ for that matter. As long as they function, I'm happy. (Although Sandra Bullock has a near-perfect...um, nevermind)
Ideally, the distribution of rods & cones would be just as it is, unless you would want to say, sacrifice color for contrast...
Even a person with 20/20 vision can't claim perfect sight, because a classmate of mine actually had 20/10 vision. I don't think there is a perfect eye, or any other organ for that matter. As long as they function, I'm happy. (Although Sandra Bullock has a near-perfect...um, nevermind)
Dance like it hurts; Love like you need money; Work like someone is watching.
Never criticize someone until you've walked a mile in their shoes. That way, when you DO criticize them, you are a mile away, and you have their shoes.
BRONZE Member
member
92 posts
Location: just behind your left shoulder, Australia
member
92 posts
Location: just behind your left shoulder, Australia
Posted:
I'm a little dubious on the whole matter.
It certainly is true that a different ratio of rods and cones (or, technically, chemicals within) will change the way you see the earth - this is the basis of monochromat/dichromat colourblindness, where one type of cone is missing (usually the 'green' or 'red' cone), resulting in the confusing of colours. A lack of rods, however, will NOT ostensibly increase the intensity of colour you see, as you still have the same number of cones producing the same level of neural signal. You will lose your night vision (rods are responsible for low-light vision but only see in black and white, which is why, when you see in the dark, everything is pretty much in black and white.) and your light vision may become altered somewhat in intensity etc., I'm not entirely sure. To increase the level of colour you see or the amount of light input into the eye, you would need to increase the number of receptors, dilate the pupil (increase light input) or increase permativity of the optic ganglia (increase nerve signals per amount of light).
Flame Boy had an interesting idea about the rate at which the retina 'healed itself', by which I think he meant the time which nerve cells take to repolarise after firing (I'm not ragging on you, I was just a bit confused and wanted to clear it up). This could potentially have a difference in vision, though given the rate nerve cells actually fire at (up to 100 shots a second), differences will be minimal.
As I mentioned, I think that differences produced by minor differences in numbers of rods and cones (major differences, as in colour-blindness, being a different matter) and nerve cell transmittance etc. will probably be negligent in changing how two people see the poi in flight and the colour/length etc. of trail they see. However, we can never really be sure - there is no way to see through someone else's eyes and see what they see, so the mystery may well remain unsolved.
Some things that could change the way we see poi flames could be actual colour-blindness (a lack of one or more cone types on the retina), the rare achromatopsia (I think it's called) where all cone types are missing, resulting in very 'fuzzy', ill-focused vision and a blindspot at the fovea (focus-point) of the eye; this would kind of be like looking through a glass of water in black and white and not seeing the stuff in the centre. Some other interesting variations could those rare individuals who are dichromat (partially colour-blind) in one eye and trichromat (normal) in the other eye, who would see flames (especially coloured ones) differently with each eye; or, rarer still, people who cannot see motion, but instead see the world as a series of isolated snapshots - as if the world were perpetually in a strobe light (this, interestingly, is caused by a defect in the visual cortex of the brain rather than in the eye). Amazing, really, how vision works.
I'm a little dubious on the whole matter.
It certainly is true that a different ratio of rods and cones (or, technically, chemicals within) will change the way you see the earth - this is the basis of monochromat/dichromat colourblindness, where one type of cone is missing (usually the 'green' or 'red' cone), resulting in the confusing of colours. A lack of rods, however, will NOT ostensibly increase the intensity of colour you see, as you still have the same number of cones producing the same level of neural signal. You will lose your night vision (rods are responsible for low-light vision but only see in black and white, which is why, when you see in the dark, everything is pretty much in black and white.) and your light vision may become altered somewhat in intensity etc., I'm not entirely sure. To increase the level of colour you see or the amount of light input into the eye, you would need to increase the number of receptors, dilate the pupil (increase light input) or increase permativity of the optic ganglia (increase nerve signals per amount of light).
Flame Boy had an interesting idea about the rate at which the retina 'healed itself', by which I think he meant the time which nerve cells take to repolarise after firing (I'm not ragging on you, I was just a bit confused and wanted to clear it up). This could potentially have a difference in vision, though given the rate nerve cells actually fire at (up to 100 shots a second), differences will be minimal.
As I mentioned, I think that differences produced by minor differences in numbers of rods and cones (major differences, as in colour-blindness, being a different matter) and nerve cell transmittance etc. will probably be negligent in changing how two people see the poi in flight and the colour/length etc. of trail they see. However, we can never really be sure - there is no way to see through someone else's eyes and see what they see, so the mystery may well remain unsolved.
Some things that could change the way we see poi flames could be actual colour-blindness (a lack of one or more cone types on the retina), the rare achromatopsia (I think it's called) where all cone types are missing, resulting in very 'fuzzy', ill-focused vision and a blindspot at the fovea (focus-point) of the eye; this would kind of be like looking through a glass of water in black and white and not seeing the stuff in the centre. Some other interesting variations could those rare individuals who are dichromat (partially colour-blind) in one eye and trichromat (normal) in the other eye, who would see flames (especially coloured ones) differently with each eye; or, rarer still, people who cannot see motion, but instead see the world as a series of isolated snapshots - as if the world were perpetually in a strobe light (this, interestingly, is caused by a defect in the visual cortex of the brain rather than in the eye). Amazing, really, how vision works.
C8H18 + 12.5O2 ---------> 8CO2 + 9H2O + you know what
member
517 posts
Location: Sheffield, England
517 posts
Location: Sheffield, England
Posted:
Nice replies.
aat Jazz, thats excellent stuff, there's just one thing I think still confuses me out of all that - when you say:
"This could potentially have a difference in vision, though given the rate nerve cells actually fire at (up to 100 shots a second), differences will be minimal. "
So why do we see longer trails than 1/100 second? I think trails for bright poi are about 1/5 second - that's too big a difference for there to be no other factors involved if what you said is spot on (I'm sure it is)
Jo.
Nice replies.
aat Jazz, thats excellent stuff, there's just one thing I think still confuses me out of all that - when you say:
"This could potentially have a difference in vision, though given the rate nerve cells actually fire at (up to 100 shots a second), differences will be minimal. "
So why do we see longer trails than 1/100 second? I think trails for bright poi are about 1/5 second - that's too big a difference for there to be no other factors involved if what you said is spot on (I'm sure it is)
Jo.
Educate yourself in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Posted:
and how dialated their irises are!
Written by: Skulduggery
I think it probably has to do with the number of rods and cones in a particular persons retina and the ratio of one to the other.
and how dialated their irises are!
-v-
Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!
GOLD Member
Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
8,428 posts
Location: Wales
Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
8,428 posts
Location: Wales
Posted:
oh ok so you have all proved my half baked, half asleep, A-lever biology theory to be pants. I'll go back to being pervy in the intro's threads and leave the science to the big boys 
oh ok so you have all proved my half baked, half asleep, A-lever biology theory to be pants. I'll go back to being pervy in the intro's threads and leave the science to the big boys
Feed me Chocolate!!! Feed me NOW!
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Posted:
it wasn't me! I was just making a joke!
it wasn't me! I was just making a joke!
-v-
Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!
GOLD Member
Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
8,428 posts
Location: Wales
Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
8,428 posts
Location: Wales
Posted:
I know hun, I was just joking
I know hun, I was just joking Feed me Chocolate!!! Feed me NOW!
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com