Seeing With Your Skin?

Iddo Genuth writes to tell us that a researcher from Tel Aviv University is exploring the possibility that humans may be able to "see" via their skin. Professor Leonid Yaroslavsky hopes to utilize this possible technology to find solutions for the blind in addition to new types of image capture that might be able to work where conventional lenses fail. Unfortunately he has a long uphill battle ahead to convince others that his theories are possible. "The lenses currently used for optics-based imaging have many problems. They only work within a limited range of electromagnetic radiation. Relatively, these are still costly devices greatly limited by weight and field of view. The imaging Professor Yaroslavsky has in mind has no lenses and he believes the devices can be adapted to any kind of radiation and wavelength. They could essentially work with a 360-degree field of view and their imaging capability will only be determined by computer power rather than the laws of light diffraction."

Comments

My eyebrows are raised

[BWJones]

As a vision scientist, my eyebrows are raised. I am highly skeptical for a variety of really, very good reasons...

Re:My eyebrows are raised

[philspear]

Yes, but does that increase or decrease what you're seeing with your forehead?

Re:My eyebrows are raised

[Psychotria]

He said he was skeptical. All good scientists must be skeptical. It has nothing to do with having "faith in your fellow scientists".

Re:My eyebrows are raised

[BWJones]

Argh, too many windows open on the desktop and I clicked submit accidentally before elaborating.

My first concern is that this little "story" or press release has been either re-released or duplicated on various sources verbatim for weeks if not months and I've yet to see anything in the scientific literature about it. Publishing scientific progress in the popular press before peer review typically means bogus science to me.

There certainly are photoreceptive skin cells in "lower" vertebrates and invertebrates that do transduce photosensitive information. However, any experiments I've seen in the literature or in popular press (or even weird Soviet 1960s "dermo optical" experiments that have attempted to evaluate "skin vision" in humans have failed or not accounted for temperature or other confounds.

Re:My eyebrows are raised

[J Story]

Further, I would say that being open to criticism and being able to accept that, move on and improve (based on the criticism) separates the mediocre from the brilliant. It doesn't matter how much knowledge you have. We all make mistakes and we all overlook things. We all say silly things now and again.

This is what makes the "science" of Global Warming so frustrating. Criticism or scepticism is anathema, and we hear the constant chant that "the debate is over". Real science thrives on argument and experiments, and not on ad hominem attacks.

Re:My eyebrows are raised

[Psychotria]

I cannot believe I am replying to this.

a) Where did I say that I have an "education"?
b) Why do you think that being sceptical is bad?
c) If you think that by typing "skeptical" (mirroring the OP) was bad, then you miss the point.
d) What did I say that sounded "elitist"?
e) Where did I imply that all good scientists must think like me? (Apart from adhering to basic principles)

Done before, using different sensory organ

[glueball]

Dr. Paul Bach-y-Rita who was at UW Madison has done something with vision being projected via electrical stimulation on the tongue. It is called sensory substitution.

I've seen it first hand. It works.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensory_substitution

Sir, Put Your Shirt Back On.

[bill_mcgonigle]

"I'm just having a look around."

Seriously, though:

These theories may lead to future devices with practical applications. He says that such devices will end up having distinct advantages over conventional optics-based imaging. He expects these devices to have special sensors for detecting radiation at sea and in airports to indentify terrorist threats, innovative night vision devices or near-weightless mechanisms to steer spaceships in space.

Did anybody else read this, "Homeland Security grants, DARPA grants, or NASA grants would all be just fine."

Ummm it's called a sunburn

[gregbot9000]

Seriously anyone who has had a 2nd degree sunburn will tell you the burns sensitivity to light is amazing. I had a redhead friend who had a burn and he could tell when light was on his back while walking under trees, and even if you were passing your arm over it.

That's probably how the eyes started, as a sensitive patch of skin. Sight would be a different interpretation of pain, with color being different degrees of pain.

Obvious in retrospect

[David Gerard]

The next stage after talking out your ass.

Sorry, misspelling.

[EWAdams]

Meant to write "dermo-optical perception." As for citations, see Carl Sagan or Martin Gardner.

Cognitive Science: This sounds familiar

[Anonymous Coward]

I recall a discussion about this in a cognitive science class I took about 3 years ago. Apparently, somebody developed an aparatus that was hooked to a person's back and used pins to provide a monochrome image of what a camera on the person's head was displaying. The interesting part was that they discovered that the visual part of the brain ended up being used to process the images. Eventually the person could see...sort of.

Of course, this kind of trick won't work at all if the person is blind because of a brain problem rather than an eye problem. People who lose their sight overly early on in life will not necessarily develop their visual cortex enough for this type of technology to work. However, people who lose their eyes as adults or teens due to accidents will be fine.

That will come in handy ...

[PPH]

... as an excuse when I'm staring at some gal's tits while talking to her. Hey, they were staring at me first!