Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: How to Exploit Post-Cataract Ultraviolet Vision?

xmas2003 writes "I recently had cataract surgery with a Crystalens implant. With my cloudy yellowing (UV-filtering) natural lens removed, I see the world in a new light (more on that in a moment) as everything is brighter and colors are more vivid ... plus in focus. As a typical Slashdot reader, I've been myopic since childhood, so it's wonderful not to have to wear glasses/contacts for distance. One interesting oddity is that I can now see ultraviolet light — it seems that there are a few people who have photoreceptors sensitive below 400nm into the UV spectrum. I've done some testing with a Black Light and UV filter to confirm this but would love to do more conclusive testing such as using a Monochromator — anyone in the Boulder, Colorado area have access to one? And any suggestions from Slashdot readers on how I can further explore this phenomenon? While I can't see dead people, I guess I have a 'superpower' ... although I'm not sure a middle-aged suburbanite dad should don purple tights and cape to become a crime-fighter!"

255 of 350 comments (clear)

  1. First step (or post) by OzPeter · · Score: 2

    Think up a really cool super hero name. Then we can you welcome you as an overlord. Assuming that you can get Natalie Portman to deliver the Hot Grits!

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    1. Re:First step (or post) by Haedrian · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ultraman

    2. Re:First step (or post) by mark_elf · · Score: 1

      Ultraman.

    3. Re:First step (or post) by mark_elf · · Score: 1

      I shouldn't have typed the period.

    4. Re:First step (or post) by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Obviously, with his newfound UV-vision powers, he is ready to decode(or manipulate) the hidden coloration used by plants to attract bees...

      As HiveLord, numberless swarms of eusocial attack insects will bend to his will! The crops of man shall be bounteous, or wither unpollinated, by his hand! His amazonian suicide warriors will throw themselves at all foes, laying down their lives that the Swarm's venom may find its target!

    5. Re:First step (or post) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ultraviolator.

      Though I guess that could be open to misinterpretation.

    6. Re:First step (or post) by morari · · Score: 1

      Obviously, with his new found UV-vision powers, he is ready to decode the hidden alien propaganda spread throughout our daily lives. Him and Roddy Piper should get together and finally put a stop to the ruling class of alien invaders!

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    7. Re:First step (or post) by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      After having a ten minute fight scene, of course.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    8. Re:First step (or post) by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      ...and his "quirky" sidekick Violetboy.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    9. Re:First step (or post) by Manos_Of_Fate · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ultragirl. I didn't even click the links yet, because I already know that only females are gifted with vision in or near the ultraviolet part of the spectrum.

      although I'm not sure a middle-aged suburbanite dad should don purple tights and cape to become a crime-fighter!"

      You need to take some remedial biology lessons, I think.

      --
      Isn't enough that I ruined a pony, making a gift for you?
    10. Re:First step (or post) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You don't need to click the links - the summary specifically mentions a "suburbanite dad" so i guess you don't know as much as you think.

    11. Re:First step (or post) by Baloroth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That would be tetrachromats, who can see richer colors (the fourth cone is somewhere between red and green) but not ultraviolet. It is however extremely rare. Totally different phenomenon AFAIK, and girls can have it due to having two X chromosomes. I've never heard of humans seeing into ultraviolet, but I suppose it is possible.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    12. Re:First step (or post) by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      There are a few - VERY few - women who can see the edges of the ultraviolet wavelengths. No men, at all.

      Have they tested that by dissecting women's eyeballs and measuring reception on the retina itself? Or are they asking the women what they see? Because the key difference here is the man in TFA has had his eyeballs surgically altered and his lenses replaced with a synthetic material. He doesn't have normal human eyes.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    13. Re:First step (or post) by martin-boundary · · Score: 3, Funny

      He should wear ultraviolet skin tights, then most people won't see them and he can pass incognito. Plus, he won't need a phone booth.

    14. Re:First step (or post) by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It isn't the lenses that detect ultravision. Nor, do the lenses pre-process photo stimuli. Nor, do the lenses send signals to the brain. It's the rods and cones at the back of the eyeball that detect, pre-process, then send signals along the optic nerve. Women who see anywhere near the ultraviolet have slightly different rods and cones at the back of the eye.

      Baloroth was kind enough to provide a link, just a post or two down from here, which you might find informative. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromats#Possibility_of_human_tetrachromats

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    15. Re:First step (or post) by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      t isn't the lenses that detect ultravision.

      No, but do natural lenses absorb UV?

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    16. Re:First step (or post) by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      After having a ten minute fight scene, of course.

      Where he gets shot anyway after exposing the alien menace.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    17. Re:First step (or post) by priceslasher · · Score: 1

      apparantly not if some women can see in UV

    18. Re:First step (or post) by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      apparantly not if some women can see in UV

      Well ... they are from Venus after all.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    19. Re:First step (or post) by Z8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That wikipedia article you linked to said that the new type of cone that some women may have "lies between the standard red and green cones". It has nothing to do with seeing ultraviolet.

    20. Re:First step (or post) by flaming+error · · Score: 1

      Brilliant idea. My superhero uniform reflects Radio Disney.

    21. Re:First step (or post) by RichardJenkins · · Score: 1

      That's a fantastic way for him to test or disprove this notion that he can see in UV!

    22. Re:First step (or post) by JWSmythe · · Score: 5, Interesting

          Well, I can say that your assertion is flawed. I am a male. I can also see UV light with one eye. I had a congenital cataract (it was there from birth). When I was 19 (almost 20 years ago), the vision in one eye was 20/200 due to this. They cut the old lens out, and slid the new one in. At the time, we were advised to leave the bandage on for a week, so I did.

          When I removed the bandage, I didn't see anything remarkable, other than I could see clearly. I also found that the lens was not easy to bend, so my focus in that eye has been fixed ever since.

          Around Halloween time, I had my first experience under black lights. Well, it was more like extreme pain. The natural lens filters out the UV light. Being bathed in this bright UV light was roughly like looking straight into a very bright light.

          Over the next 5 years or so, I became adjusted to being able to see UV. It's not a big deal. Sometimes I see the rough equivalent to visual feedback when looking at particular colors (blue, violet, and UV). Each eye is seeing a different color on the same object.

          It's hard to explain what it looks like to most people though. A black light normally doesn't really look like anything. I see a bright blue light instead, only in one eye. Sometimes I close one eye, then alternate, so I can figure out what color the rest of you see. It's a very bright blue. Kind of like the difference between bottle of mustard, and a yellow caution sign. Well, except most of you would never have seen the yellow caution sign, so you won't have a frame of reference.

          So is it the whole UV range? Hell if I know. Maybe. Maybe not. I've never been presented with a color wheel that covers UV colors to help determine the full range.

          I always wear UV & polarized sunglasses when I'm outside. Light is really bright, especially in areas with a clear sky. Going from LA's smog to Florida's bright blue sky is like living in a house with 40W bulbs, and then replacing them all with 100W bulbs. Sunglasses are generally a good idea, but if I don't have them, I end up walking around with one eye open.

          About 20 years later, I still see it. I was at a convention over the weekend, and they had blue backdrops behind the speakers, with black lights pointing at them. In one eye, it was a dull blue glow. In the other eye, it was a distracting bright blue light. So I watched most of the time with one eye open. :) It could have been worse. I would be blind in that eye by now.

       

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    23. Re:First step (or post) by JWSmythe · · Score: 4, Informative

      Before you go off calling someone a liar, maybe you should check up on it first. Google "see ultravilot". I just replied to another of your messages. I have a replacement lens in one eye, so I see both ways (normal and altered vision).

      The following are quotes from http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2002/may/30/medicalscience.research

      These harmful effects are reduced by the lens, which absorbs UV and prevents it entering the eye. When the lens becomes opaque due to cataracts, it may be surgically removed, and can be replaced with an artificial lens. Even with the lens removed (a condition known as aphakia) the patient can still see, as the lens is only responsible for about 30% of the eyes' focusing power.

      However, aphakic patients report that the process has an unusual side effect: they can see ultraviolet light. It is not normally visible because the lens blocks it. Some artificial lenses are also transparent to UV with the same effect. The receptors in the eye for blue light can actually see ultraviolet better than blue. Military intelligence is said to have used this talent in the second world war, recruiting aphakic observers to watch the coastline for German U-boats signalling to agents on the shore with UV lamps. ...

      An illustration of how ultraviolet appears is provided by the Impressionist painter Claude Monet. Following cataract surgery in 1923, his colour palette changed significantly; after the operation he painted water lilies with more blue than before. This may be because after lens removal he could see ultraviolet light, which would have given a blue cast to the world.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    24. Re:First step (or post) by walshy007 · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, but do natural lenses absorb UV?

      Yes, and the extra type of rods she is talking about is _between_ the red and blue kind.. so all it does is allow greater differentiation of already seen colours, i.e. absolutely nothing to do with UV at all. So 2-3% of the female population can see a crazy amount of shades of colour.

      The blue cells _can_ detect into the UV range, in both men and women, however normally this is blocked by the natural lens.

    25. Re:First step (or post) by mikael · · Score: 1

      Simple way to test - get some camera lens filters (Hoya) of suitable wavelengths, turn them into a pair of "The Chronicles of Riddick" glasses, let your eyes adjust to the relative darkness of the view, then you'll find out whether or not you can perceive that wavelength of light.

      Did that with some Hoya (72) filters which only allow infra-red light through.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    26. Re:First step (or post) by RobbieThe1st · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not really; The paints are made from different materials which may or may not do the same thing in the ultraviolet range as the real objects he was painting.

    27. Re:First step (or post) by MrLogic17 · · Score: 1

      -Document how a rainbow looks, compaired to a photo at the same time frame. Maybe skeetch/paint something for the rest of us to understand!
      -My first thought was to find UV ink, for secret notes. Not sure if such a thing exists....
      -Do any TV remotes work on UV instead of IR?
      -Some plain old UV LED's wold make for a good night-light that burglers can't see. As others have noted, keep the intensity low!

    28. Re:First step (or post) by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      You might be interested in the Shades of Grey series [1] by Jasper Fforde. Society is split based on what segments of the colour spectrum people can see and how strongly they can detect those colours. Ability to see certain colurs is partially hereditary (a blue breeds with a red and will get a purple), but there is no guarentee as the the quality of the vision from generation to generation.

      [1] for a given value of series, the author has stated that it will be a trilogy, but currently only the first book is available. Given he has over half a dozen titles in print, it is likely he will follow through on the rest in time.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    29. Re:First step (or post) by Sniper98G · · Score: 2

      I think you are confusing this with being a tetrachromat (the opposite of being color blind), that is a trait that only women can. However; being a tetrachromat does not allow you to see a greater range of frequency (like into UV or IR) it just lets the normal range of colors be detected with a greater granularity.

    30. Re:First step (or post) by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Better yet, use a (fused) quartz prism, which should be good to 230 nm. With the proper setup, you should be able to get a very sharply defined continuum. The trick, of course, is to calibrate it.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    31. Re:First step (or post) by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Whoa, now - I called no one a liar. My skepticism bleeds through, sure. But, I allowed that the man sees something more than he ever saw before. And, I did my best to explain, for myself at least, what it is that he's seeing.

      Now, if you'd care for a bit of explanation - I am "color blind". Pretty severely color impaired, actually, but not "blind". You can literally hide a red flower in a yard of green grass - I'll never find it. Blue, yellow, maybe orange, white - I can see all of those. Only on an extremely bright sunshiny day will I notice that damned red flower in a green background.

      For that reason, I've studied, off and on, how vision works. And, I've read many times about UV sensitive vision.

      I remain skeptical, and don't really believe that this male is seeing ultraviolet. But, I'm open minded enough to follow links, to read, to listen, and to learn. Maybe the guy really is seeing the outside edges of the ultraviolet. A lot of people are posting stuff that seems to support his statement.

      Still skeptical, here, but looking, and learning. Is that good enough for you? I've certainly not put myself forward as an "authority" on vision. Crap, I can't even see half the reds and greens, and certainly can't see purple, violet, and all that other stuff. I couldn't be an authority on color vision if I really worked hard at it!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    32. Re:First step (or post) by Sulphur · · Score: 2

      Ultraman

      And his sidekick Violet.

    33. Re:First step (or post) by Genda · · Score: 1

      Ah... I see you are going for that "Abiguously Gay Duo" thing...

    34. Re:First step (or post) by pmontra · · Score: 3

      Or he can see UV reflected by sunscreen lotions. That would be a good test to check if he can really see UV. I guess that the reflected wavelengths of different products might vary and he might not be able to see all of them, nevertheless a crowded beach should provide a good enough sample.

    35. Re:First step (or post) by Genda · · Score: 2

      This is absolutely correct. When photographed in ultraviolet, many flowers have color ques for insects to lead them to nectar (and obviously pollen) and are therefore much brighter and more vividly patterned in UV than the pigments in paint which may or may not have very narrow spectral content outside the visual spectrum we normally perceive.

    36. Re:First step (or post) by Genda · · Score: 1

      There are two things happening in human UV perception. There are the limits of the cones in the retina, then there is the filtering that happens in the lens and cornea. Its almost certainly arguable that protecting the retina against UV has survival value (because high energy light would almost certainly over time damage the retina in a longer lived species.) So the lenses in human beings stop UV, of course this also means that over time the damage by UV will be in the lenses.

      Replacing failed lenses with new lenses that pass UV, would suddenly make that color available to the retina, and some people (of both sexes) have significant UV sensitivity. I would also suggest that if these people are younger, it would be highly advised that they wear UV protection when outside.

    37. Re:First step (or post) by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      But so, so awesome.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    38. Re:First step (or post) by m50d · · Score: 1

      Have we finally discovered how The Pain got started?

      --
      I am trolling
    39. Re:First step (or post) by JosKarith · · Score: 2

      I can see the edges of the UV spectrum and I'm male. It makes nightclubs very wierd places to be, but is quite helpful as it means I can actually see what people look like under the blacklight.
      Of course that hasn't stopped me making some awful mistakes, but I blame that on the alcohol...

      --
      'Don't worry' said the trees when they saw the axe coming, 'The handle is one of us.'
    40. Re:First step (or post) by dintech · · Score: 1

      A side-kick is necessary. But who suggested he use his powers for 'good'?

      I think your side-kick could surreptitiously beam information to nearby visible surfaces. Think answers in 'Who wants to be a millionaire' or the opposition's hand in poker.

      If you did this enough, you could easily earn yourself..... one million dollars!

    41. Re:First step (or post) by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I have a CrystaLens implant, and it's an illusion. A cataract cuts down on light entering the eye, especially towards the violet. The brain adapts, the illusion of "seeing ultraviolet" will go away.

      The CrystaLens itself is awesome if you have a good surgeon. It will actually focus, unlike the older implants and natural geezer lenses. I'm 59 and don't need corrective lenses at all. My vision is now better than 20/20 at all distances! Also, it doesn't just cure cataracts, but nearsightedness, farsightedness, and astigmatism.

      My right eye is still extremely nearsighted, though (only had one implant, the cataract was caused by prescription eyedrops).

    42. Re:First step (or post) by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Don't believe everything you read. Your eye actually has two lenses -- the cornea and the crystaline lens behind the iris. The crystaline lens is what does the actual focusing (both lenses focus, but the crystaline lens is a variable focus); that is, if you're young. The lens gets hard with age and no longer focuses, which is why geezers need reading glasses.

      The operative phrase is "patients report". I had the same illusion after my surgery. It goes away after the brain adapts.

    43. Re:First step (or post) by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      Cataracts cut down all frequencies, but especially the blueer colors. I have the same implant, after surgery all colors are brighter (for a while), but especially cool colors.

      The brain is the organ that actually sees -- the eye merely focuses and collects light. The illusion of seeing ultraviolet goes away when the brain adapts to its new inputs.

    44. Re:First step (or post) by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      UV is just another frequency. What would make it more harmful to the retina? Do you have a citation, or is that simply your own hypothesis?

      UV is thought to cause cataracts, but I haven't read anything about it being harmful to the retina. If you have a citation that will educate me I'd be very interested.

    45. Re:First step (or post) by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

      UV is damaging in general. Sit out in the summer sun for an entire day without any protection and you'll be quite aware of how damaging it is :) As for retina's isn't that what happens to high mountain climbers who don't wear proper eye protection?

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    46. Re:First step (or post) by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Pseudoscience, sure. But, your anecdotal evidence doesn't make science either. Did you volunteer for any studies? Are you saying that you can see ultraviolet, or are you just complaining that you weren't part of any test group?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    47. Re:First step (or post) by ZeroExistenZ · · Score: 3, Informative

      Or are they asking the women what they see?

      These women just say "pfffrrt I can seen all colours, even ultraviolet!"

      To which the researchers tried to explain how that's unlikely and would try to run some tests..

      As suddenly the women says "Is it me, or is it getting hot inhere ?" while there's some 70s funkmusic that comes from her bra, which is bulging...

      As the scientist tries to remain his posture, and tries to convince the woman with all spectrum vision he needs to investigate her claims.. she replies "Investigate this.... doctor..." while she pushes her boobs in his face and scientists view is blurred and limited to only a few spectrums... While making up his results out of shame to write down his actual personal findings.

      This is generally how women partake in research.

      --
      I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
    48. Re:First step (or post) by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      A black light normally doesn't really look like anything. I see a bright blue light instead, only in one eye.

      Seriously? I've always seen 'black' lights as bright 'blue'. I could see a few near-UV spectrum lines in the spectrometers in high school chemistry class that other kids couldn't see but I thought blacklights weren't near-UV.

      If this is what the OP is talking about, I don't think there are many advantages. I can see a bit better at night than the average human, but that's within the range of normal anyway. I seem to have fewer cones than average too, so I just figured it was more rods.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    49. Re:First step (or post) by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

      My right eye is still extremely nearsighted, though (only had one implant, the cataract was caused by prescription eyedrops).

      Yikes, what kind of eyedrops? I've got glaucoma so I've bounced between Betamol and Travatan-Z a few times...hopefully those aren't what caused it?

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    50. Re:First step (or post) by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Well, UV is bad for the eye's lens, as it's thought (although afaik not proven) that UV leads to cataracts, but I think they wear the eye protection for the wind (I could be wrong).

      Again, I haven't heard of retinal damage from UV. This wiki article about retinal diseases doesn't mention UV. In fact, the two primary retinal diseases to strike slashdotters would be from diabetes (lots of us are overweight) and retinal detachment; the #1 cause of that is severy myopia (I suffered a detached retina a few years ago).

      BTW, the linked wiki article has some errors: "There are several modern treatment methods for fixing a retinal detachment: pneumatic retinopexy, scleral buckle, cryotherapy, laser photocoagulation and pars plana vitrectomy." Cryotherapy and laser photocoagulation are used for a torn retina, but not when one is detached; I had both these procedures before the retina actually detached. They are preventive therapies, used to keep a tear from becoming a detachment. Once it detaches you're in for a world of misery (cryotherapy isn't fun either).

      That light the retina specialist shines into your completely dialated eye is like looking straight at the sun, you can't see anything out of the eye for a long time.

      As to sitting in the sun, I don't burn easily, but the sun's rays usually don't shine right into your retina. Your retina will only get reflected light unless you look right at the sun.

    51. Re:First step (or post) by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      They were steroid eyedrops prescribed for an infection that antibiotics weren't affecting. Being nerds, that's probably our only danger from steroids. However, being severely myopic is the leading cause of a retinal detachment. If you see black snow or nonexistant snakes, or especially if you see a gray curtain coming down, you have a medical emergency and need immediate treatment. Oh, and the treatments for a torn or detached retina are NOT FUN!!!

    52. Re:First step (or post) by turtledawn · · Score: 1

      Most sunscreens work by absorbing UV light in the process of breaking chemical bonds in the sunscreen, not reflecting it. TiO2, which does work by reflection, is just going to look extra-white to him. The breakdown of the sunscreen chemicals is the reason why, other than sweat and water, you have to reapply the lotions.

      --
      Uh, "if it looks roughly mouse-shaped according to my infra-red sensitive pit, eat it"? --Chris Burke 09-08-10
    53. Re:First step (or post) by Fieryphoenix · · Score: 1

      What appears to be happening is that organic human lenses block UV and it never reaches the retina. The replacement lenses allow it through, and the retinal cells can distinguish it as with other wavelengths. All cataract patients have color shifts, but they are different from what is described here, mostly in the yellow range. Tetrachromacy is a completely different phenomenon, with certain females having four receptors instead of three, and while their ability to distinguish more subtle grades of green and blue is unquestionable, there's nothing that supports the notion that they are seeing ultraviolet other than that the idea, when presented as an explaination feels agreeable.

    54. Re:First step (or post) by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      A "black" light has a little bit of leakage into the "violet" end of the traditional visible spectrum: most people see them as having a dim purple glow.

      You've probably got a difference in the lenses in your eyes: rods and red and green cones all have a sensitivity cutoff around 400nm, while blue cones are sensitive well into the ultraviolet. With most people, the lenses filter out UV.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    55. Re:First step (or post) by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Interesting, thanks for the reply.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    56. Re:First step (or post) by pmontra · · Score: 1

      I didn't know that. Thank you.

    57. Re:First step (or post) by cffrost · · Score: 1

      More like this; TIA.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    58. Re:First step (or post) by Medievalist · · Score: 1

      You made an absolute statement. I provided a single verifiable data point (which is probably repeatable over thousands of individuals reading your post) that disproves it. Referring to data you don't like as "anecdotal" won't make your absolute statement correct.

      Avoiding making statements you cannot prove to be correct is the first step towards the scientific method, I think.

  2. Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't go out of your way to expose your eyes to UV!

    1. Re:Dangerous by GuldKalle · · Score: 1

      Then again, remember that sunlight contains lots of UV light, so those levels are fine (except if you're a basement dweller)

      --
      What?
    2. Re:Dangerous by Baloroth · · Score: 1

      After having his natural UV eye-filters removed, he might want to avoid sunlight too. Shouldn't be too hard for a /.'er...

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    3. Re:Dangerous by asvravi · · Score: 1

      No they aren't safe. In the case of sunlight, eyes see it pretty strongly and the pupils contract to cut down the amount of light that strikes the retina thus protecting it. In case of UV, there is a chance he may not see a part of the spectrum so his pupils remain dilated letting in dangerous amounts of UV light. Same reason it is advised to never look at an eclipse with unprotected eyes.

    4. Re:Dangerous by jamesh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Then again, remember that sunlight contains lots of UV light, so those levels are fine (except if you're a basement dweller)

      Except that the filter that prevents the UV reaching the back of his eyeball is now gone... There is probably a good reason why you have that filter there in the first place!

    5. Re:Dangerous by hedwards · · Score: 2

      That was my first thought, even with normal eyes UV isn't good for them, but if the OP has lost a layer of protection, then he needs to be even more careful about exposure as there's that much less eyeball protecting the nerves in the back of the eye.

      Had it been IR sensitivity that would have been cool. But because UV unlike IR is higher energy than light in the visible spectrum you're much more likely to have eye problems in the future.

    6. Re:Dangerous by subreality · · Score: 5, Informative

      UV is a very wide spectrum. Near-UV isn't too scary.

      UV-A (400-315 nm) is OK for short-term exposure. Your pupils won't constrict like they do for visible light, so keep the intensity low. Plain old blacklights are 350-400nm with the peak at 365nm, plus a small peak in the very bottom of the visible spectrum (which is the purple glow).

      UV-B (315-280 nm) will probably be invisible, and it will do bad things to your eyes, so please stick to very low intensities if you want to fool with this. Read up on the risks first.

      UV-C (280-100 nm) is utterly hostile to biology - the upper atmosphere filters this range out so life never evolved mechanisms to deal with it. Actually, UV-C is hostile to damn near everything: just from my own experience, it bleaches everything, and most plastics will degrade and become brittle with mere hours of exposure. I've test-fired a 185nm lamp in the open for a few seconds (wearing goggles!) and even across the room you can instantly smell ozone forming as it starts ripping oxygen apart. Stay away!

    7. Re:Dangerous by Pharmboy · · Score: 2

      You have the better of the replies so far (I've worked with UV devices daily, for 20 years). Many flowers have colors that can only be seen in the barely sub 400nm range, high into UVA, and just passed violet in the rainbow. This is where blacklights work as well. Staying above 315nm (and better above 350nm) presents much less risk, and is likely where his extended vision is anyway.

      UVB exposure to the eyes should be avoided by everyone, and I don't recommend very long exposures of longer wave UVA either, but it is a very different animal.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    8. Re:Dangerous by JWSmythe · · Score: 2

          They have this new fangled device, called "sun glasses". :)

          For people who have had their lenses replaced, it's strongly advised to use UV filtering sunglasses. I'm one of them, for almost 20 years now, but only in one eye. I haven't actually checked, but I'm fairly sure that you are right. I can see UV, but I suspect my pupils don't contract, as I my night vision is maintained normally. Bright UV tends to hurt, so I normally react by closing that eye. At least that natural function works (bright light, close eye.)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    9. Re:Dangerous by Whiternoise · · Score: 1

      If he can now see UV light surely it means his eyes will respond to the perceived brightness and contract? Conversely us mortals who can't see in UV should have the opposite effect and our pupils will stay dilated. And presumably in sunlight the brightness should be high enough that your pupils will constrict massively anyway - the danger would be in a dark place with a strong UV source.

    10. Re:Dangerous by WillDraven · · Score: 4, Funny

      UV-C (280-100 nm) is utterly hostile to biology - the upper atmosphere filters this range out so life never evolved mechanisms to deal with it. Actually, UV-C is hostile to damn near everything: just from my own experience, it bleaches everything, and most plastics will degrade and become brittle with mere hours of exposure. I've test-fired a 185nm lamp in the open for a few seconds (wearing goggles!) and even across the room you can instantly smell ozone forming as it starts ripping oxygen apart. Stay away!

      Next month's Slashdot headline: WickedLasers introduces 185nm 5W "My 1st Death Ray" for $150 ;-)

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    11. Re:Dangerous by cyberfunk2 · · Score: 1

      Subreality,

      I'm curious, I'm a chemist and I use a UV lamp nearly every day to visualize TLC plates. The lamps, as I understand it emit from ~254-365 nm. The lamp is typically used against a black benchtop background to illuminate a white silica TLC plate, usually impregnated with a fluorescent dye to help visualization (the whole plate typically glows green under UV light, except where your compound is).

      I always avoid looking directly at the lamp of course (but occasionally catch sight of it). However, I'm wondering, how dangerous this frequent exposure is. I'm often wearing my regular prescription glasses while doing this (which I believe block UV), but I know some people don't wear anything when looking at their TLCs. Furthermore, I always wear at least reasonably thick gloves when my hands are under the UV, but again, some people do not (this is direct exposure to the UV lamp source, which seems like a really bad idea...). Do you think the reflection is hazardous ? Given the frequency of use by the average bench chemist, it seems like this should be more of a concern than people typically talk about.

      A typical lamp used for this purpose is shown here: http://www.uvp.com/compactlamps.html#thumb or here: http://orgchem.colorado.edu/hndbksupport/TLC/TLCprocedure.html#visualize

      Also, some people sell enclosures to help visualization, but also to help block the UV light ... the annoyance with these of course is that they're typically quite clunky to use in comparison to the "flashlight" method people often use: http://uvp.com/cabinetsoverview.html.

    12. Re:Dangerous by subreality · · Score: 3, Informative

      Brief glimpses won't hurt you at low power levels - this isn't a laser leaving a scorch track wherever it goes. The danger is in continuous exposure where your total absorbed dose accumulates to high levels.

      365nm at a few watts is pretty low (but nonzero) risk. I work in a room with 300 watts of 365nm in the open every day and I don't really give it any thought when the lights click on.

      Life has not evolved ways to deal with anything below about 300nm, which does not occur on the surface of the earth. 254nm is what they use for germicidal lamps. It kills bacteria by causing massive DNA damage... Consider that. Your skin is a little more resilient, but like sun exposure, it will result in sunburn if you blast yourself with a high dose, and over time it causes skin aging and eventually cancer. On your eyes you're running the risk of cataracts.

      On the upside: your glasses almost certainly block 254nm. Pretty much everything does - the bulbs and any windows are made of fused quartz which is one of very few things that will pass 254nm. It also doesn't tend to reflect around as much as visible light. Even shiny aluminum surfaces will absorb most of it. Silver mirrors reflect it as long as it's first-surface reflections; glass in front will absorb it. So perhaps you're not getting that much exposure except when you reach under the lamp. You can measure it with a radiometer if you have one handy to see how much is really being reflected toward you.

      My suggestion: I always use glasses regardless of exposure. For your skin, it kind of depends how you use it. If you flip the lights on for a minute to examine a sample and then turn them off, and you're only reaching under the light for a few seconds, it might be OK to accept (but not ignore!) the skin risks. If you're leaving samples to react under the lights for hours at a time, I'd suggest you go down to Tap Plastics and buy a sheet of polycarbonate - it's what they use in UV safety goggles, and it's completely opaque to UV. Attach it to the front of the bench, and just reach around when you have to prod your sample.

    13. Re:Dangerous by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      I've been told before that in case of sunglasses you should always have UV filtering glasses. This as the sunglasses block part of the light (their purpose), causing your pupils to open a bit more, and letting in more UV light than your eyes would receive when not wearing sunglasses at all.

      Personally I'm barely wearing sunglasses any more. I'm living in a really sunny country now, and am getting used to it. The sun being high up the sky may also help, wearing a hat works great to keep the direct sun out of your eyes. Very few people here wear sunglasses, far less than I'm used to seeing in cooler, less sunny climates.

    14. Re:Dangerous by astar · · Score: 1

      HeeHee. "hostile to biology". Remember when that evil green stuff took out the last biosphere? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Oxygenation_Event

      The point here is that life evolved before there was an ozone layer and 90% got wiped as part of creating the ozone layer. Thus your absolute statements are challenging to find agreeable. You might well know better about biology, but do you really want to encourage your readers to hold extremely unfortunate ideas about absence of change, which ideas have so often been a hinderance to our species..

    15. Re:Dangerous by subreality · · Score: 4, Informative

      Fortunately we were all living underwater back then. Before the Oxygen Catastrophe we were really damn deep where there's no light at any wavelength. Even the green things stayed well under the surface until the ozone layer was established.

      Nothing has ever lived in the presence of UVC. There are few absolutes in biology, and I certainly want my readers to consider the implications of that before they go experimenting with short wavelengths: life evolves to fill any niche it can, but it has never gone there, and neither should you.

    16. Re:Dangerous by subreality · · Score: 1

      These are industrial lamps, several feet long and a couple dozen watts each. Yes, the bodies are fused quartz, but it's not a notch filter; they let 254nm out too.

      Some plastics live longer, but the PVC on power cords yellows within minutes, probably from the organobromide flame retardants breaking down. I stood across the room for that test for a reason... Those things are violent.

      I wouldn't want to leave even a low-power test source running in the open. That's just begging for someone to take a close look at the pretty glowy purple thing.

      If you care to try it, run your source for a few minutes pointed into an enclosed area like a bottle or a box. You should be able to get a good whiff of ozone when you open it up. Don't inhale too deep!

    17. Re:Dangerous by skovnymfe · · Score: 1

      Don't joke with stuff like that. It just might happen, y'know.

    18. Re:Dangerous by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      ALL sunglasses filter UV light. in fact your car windshield and side windows filters 98% of all UV light.

      Thats the trick, almost ALL transparent materials filter out UV light.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    19. Re:Dangerous by thiophene · · Score: 2

      In addition to your prescription glasses, you should be wearing safety glasses. Polycarbonate (what safety glasses are made of) absorbs like hell in the UV. If you want to test, just take a TLC plate and put a pair of whatever eyewear between it and the UV lamp. the once glowing silica should now be dark (if it is absorbing properly).

    20. Re:Dangerous by TheFakeMcCoy · · Score: 1

      Nonsense, quit throttling my UV light.. this isnt comcast

    21. Re:Dangerous by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      For us mere mortals, many of whom will never "see" UV except via night-vision goggles or something like that... what does UV look like? Is it purple-ish, white, something you can't describe?

      (I understand it may be difficult, since for me describing the difference between red and green to someone colorblind is practically impossible.)

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    22. Re:Dangerous by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      On your eyes you're running the risk of cataracts.

      No, he's not, he has a interocular lens implant that isn't susceptible to cataracts.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    23. Re:Dangerous by astar · · Score: 1

      Clear answer so let us play some more.

      I suppose I should have said blue-green stuff. Being "really damn deep where there is no light at any wavelength" suggests strongly there was no light gathering to generate oxygen. So if you are right, I guess I am anaerobic.

      Regarding rotten concepts versus eye damage, I reflect on the megadeaths generated by rotten concepts vs a few individuals being damaged. Hee, playing carelessly with claimed absolutes is a lot like the static concept.

    24. Re:Dangerous by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

      It just so happens that when you heat those "inorganically" formed cells, they replicate under high temperatures and create daughter cells.

      So you were saying?

      --
      Here be signatures
    25. Re:Dangerous by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      There is probably a good reason why you have that filter there [eye lens opaque to UV] in the first place!

      Or it could be a side effect of chemicals optimized to be a good lens, happening to limit the upper end of the visual spectrum below the sensitivity limit of the blue cones (but not creating a serious disadvantage thereby), as a side effect.

      (Either way the retina would have evolved with the protection in place.)

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    26. Re:Dangerous by subreality · · Score: 1

      No, the story poster has the implants, but I was replying to someone else.

    27. Re:Dangerous by subreality · · Score: 1

      All life is made out of bacteria.

      I and the other eukaryotes are offended by your speciesism.

      Do considder that the Earth isn't the only source of life.

      I admit I'm being Earth-centric. I'm sure somewhere in the universe some critters have found a way.

      On this rock, though, you can stick a 254nm lamp under the bio hood and it really won't matter what kind of awful bugs you were growing... In a few minutes they'll all be dead.

    28. Re:Dangerous by subreality · · Score: 1

      Adaptation to UVC has never occurred on this planet, partly because it's hard, but mostly because it's not been necessary. Sure, anything could happen in the future, but that's a simple and absolute fact regarding the last few billion years here.

      I reflect on the megadeaths generated by rotten concepts vs a few individuals being damaged. Hee, playing carelessly with claimed absolutes is a lot like the static concept.

      You're asking me to compromise on the way I present scientific facts because you don't like the political implications of my language. Fuck that.

    29. Re:Dangerous by astar · · Score: 1

      Fact? "really damn deep where there is no light at any wavelength" I repeat, playing careless with absolutes. Finally, the absolute is stated as local in time and space, but in a way that is still fully evasive. I treat few as two or three, (but my cite is to"one or two", so a few billion years is less than the 3.5 billion years oxygen producing from sunshine stuff *may* have been around. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanobacteria. Also,

      few
      determiner
      not many, one or two, hardly any, scarcely any, rare, thin, scattered, insufficient, scarce, scant, meagre, negligible, sporadic, sparse, infrequent, scanty, inconsiderable In some districts there are few survivors.
      not many many, divers (archaic), abundant, plentiful, sundry, manifold, inexhaustible, multifarious, bounteous

      So, it seems possible your statement is "factually" correct simply because the evolution took place outside of your time specifications of your "absolute". Who can say, you so,like to be shifty.

      have a great day

    30. Re:Dangerous by subreality · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying "few" to weasel out by limiting the scope of my argument. Let me rephrase: "That's a simple and absolute fact that's persisted from the beginning of life on Earth (estimated 3.5-4.5 billion years ago) to the present day." Better?

      Water blocks UVC, and we didn't start crawling out of the ocean until 1-1.5 billion years ago, long after the ozone layer was established.

    31. Re:Dangerous by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      What would happen if the power levels were over say, 9000?

    32. Re:Dangerous by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      I posted up higher, and also work with UV daily (different job). The kind of UV exposure you are talking about isn't particularly dangerous in the short term, although it is cumulative. I keep a pair of inexpensive and light shaded sunglasses around when I need to be looking at reflected or direct UV in modest doses. The darkness of the glasses has nothing to do with the ability to filter UV, as long as they are rated to block at least 95% of UVA and UVB, you should be fine. (100% is great, but not necessary since we are talking low level UV radiation here) If you are like me, and get regular low doses of UV to the eyes (reflected or direct) then it is a good idea and preventative to have around. Even clip ons (if you wear glasses already) may be worth the investment, just to prevent problems 20 years from now.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    33. Re:Dangerous by jc79 · · Score: 1

      For example: we've had meteors visiting our atmosphere and rained down in organic shaped forms. One event has been the wel documented 'blood rain' in India. Lab analysis showed red blood cells without DNA.

      >

      [citation needed]

      "Red blood cells without DNA". Those would be, erm, red blood cells. Mammalian erythrocytes lose their nucleus, golgi apparatus, mitochondra and ER during maturation, which makes them more efficient oxygen carriers.

  3. Purple by SEWilco · · Score: 1

    Actually, you should don purple lights.

    1. Re:Purple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, he should don an ultraviolet costume over more normal clothes. That way only other superhumans could tell he's one of them, while he avoids the sex offender charges he'd get if he wore only ultraviolet tights.

  4. Boulder is one of the optics capitals of the world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Given the presence of NIST, NOAA, JILA, and a whole bunch of optics and laser companies, I'm sure someone can hook you up! ^_^

  5. You know how UV light makes your skin turn dark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Your eyes do not. UV light damages your eyes. That's why all but the most rubbish shades include a UV filter. Don't look at strong UV sources with remaining eye.

  6. Black lights actually look black? by justin12345 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do black lights actually look black when on to most people? I thought they only looked black when they're off. To me they've always looked white with purple edges when on. I thought that was normal.

    --
    Cool art gallery, if you're into that sort of thing.
    1. Re:Black lights actually look black? by artor3 · · Score: 2

      The purple you see is just purple light. Most of the light emitted by black lights is ultraviolet, and thus invisible. But some of it is just regular old violet.

    2. Re:Black lights actually look black? by swalve · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have this "power" as well. Found it out when got my first set of UV blocking contact lenses. Prior to that, in sunlight, there would be an uncomfortable unfocused ghosting off of things. With the new lenses, it was gone. (Same lens material, brand, shape and power.) Unlike the photo of the black light in the link, black lights emit a ghostly violet blob of unfocusable light. It is very uncomfortable, like being shined in the face with a flashlight.

  7. List of ideas. by allaunjsilverfox2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    1. Check to see if this ability enhances your sight during low level light. 2. Check the boundaries of your abilities and record such data. Is there a certain amount of UV light you can and can not detect? 3. Use this ability for a stealth motion detector. If a robber can't see in the dark, but you can, this would be a advantage. 4. Use this ability to sneak in late at night to prevent people yelling at you! :p 5. During a Solar eclipse, TOTALLY watch it, with proper protection of course. You will be recieving a special view that few humans will ever experience. :3

    --
    Restore the madness of youth's lechery
    1. Re:List of ideas. by Joce640k · · Score: 1, Insightful

      3. Use this ability for a stealth motion detector. If a robber can't see in the dark, but you can, this would be a advantage.

      That would be infra-red, not UV...

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:List of ideas. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Unless, he, you know, has UV lights turned on.

    3. Re:List of ideas. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yep, Go find a really nicely filtered LED UV torch that only emits 400nm light. You're now your own nightvision.

    4. Re:List of ideas. by Haedrian · · Score: 1

      That would be awesome! In the long run your quarries would end up getting cancer though after you track them for long enough, so YMMV.

    5. Re:List of ideas. by 32771 · · Score: 1

      Fluorescence will ruin your cover. Some biological things including your teeth will emit some greenish whitish light, paper will look the typical blue, and then there are some minerals that could be lying around that show fluorescence.

      400nm is still not dramatic though.

      --
      Je me souviens.
    6. Re:List of ideas. by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Yep, Go find a really nicely filtered LED UV torch that only emits 400nm light.

      That would still make loads of stuff fluoresce unless you treated your entire house with special paint and hope the burglar isn't wearing any cotton and everybody keeps their mouth closed and hasn't washed their hair with certain brands of shampoo.

      --
      No sig today...
    7. Re:List of ideas. by guanxi · · Score: 1

      4. Use this ability to sneak in late at night to prevent people yelling at you! :p

      He said he was a middle-aged Dad. He's more likely to use it to detect the sneaker than to be him.

    8. Re:List of ideas. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Yep, Go find a really nicely filtered LED UV torch that only emits 400nm light.

      That would still make loads of stuff fluoresce unless you treated your entire house with special paint and hope the burglar isn't wearing any cotton and everybody keeps their mouth closed and hasn't washed their hair with certain brands of shampoo.

      Man, you are one serious buzz-kill. Lots of fun at parties, I'm sure.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    9. Re:List of ideas. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hotel room inspector. Seeing stains where most people don't want to.

      CAPCHA: appall

      lol

    10. Re:List of ideas. by mikael · · Score: 1

      Remember as a teenager, having to go through a hotel disco we were staying at, in order to order a meal at the bar. Tried to look inconspicuous, but the cheap washing powder we had brought with us, made my T-shirts and jeans glow in the black-light. Which was a bit of shame, because those kind of powders were banned in the state we were in.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    11. Re:List of ideas. by Destoo · · Score: 1

      Cellphones, spaceships and submarines were once fiction, too!

      --
      Nouvelles de jeux et technologies en français. TC
    12. Re:List of ideas. by danlock4 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's always annoying when you're trying to be unseen and then you realize your clothes have been washed with soap or fabric softener containing fluorescent whiteners! I hate that, but they seem to be common in fabric-cleaning products in the USA....

      --
      To .sig or not to .sig, that is the question.
    13. Re:List of ideas. by danlock4 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and time machines, too.

      --
      To .sig or not to .sig, that is the question.
    14. Re:List of ideas. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      You do know the moon reflects UV radiation from the sun, yes?

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  8. Is there anything.. by Haedrian · · Score: 1

    Which naturally gives off UV which could make this power very useful? Aside from being able to see UV bulbs...

    I can't remember much from physics ... IR vision would have been much more cool and useful.

    1. Re:Is there anything.. by nickersonm · · Score: 5, Informative

      Flowers are often more varied in the UV than in the standard visible light range.

    2. Re:Is there anything.. by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2

      I suppose that many flowers will look different, as well as the plumage of many birds, which have UV color patterns that humans usually do not see:

      http://www.usatoday.com/news/healthscience/science/aaas/2002-01-03-budgies-glow.htm
      http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cockatiel_under_blacklight.jpg
      http://www.naturfotograf.com/UV_ARNI_ANG.html
      http://www.naturfotograf.com/UV_LATH_PRA.html
      http://i.livescience.com/images/i/7881/i02/fish-uv-pattern-100225-02.jpg?1296089823

      There are a number of species of animal that can see ultraviolet light, and a number of plant and animal species have evolved to take advantage of this. Parrots are known for having UV patterns in their feathers, butterflies use UV patterns to communicate with each other, and most flowers have UV patterns to attract insects. Some fish-eating birds use UV light to help identify fish underwater.

      So if you are truly able to see UV light, you should be seeing a very interesting world!

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:Is there anything.. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      Raptors use UV vision. I read a couple of articles about birds floating in the sky, watching the ground for fresh rodent urine. The urine gives off a bright glow under UV, that is invisible in the "visible" light spectrum.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    4. Re:Is there anything.. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Flowers are often more varied in the UV than in the standard visible light range.

      Go forth and pollinate.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    5. Re:Is there anything.. by Nethead · · Score: 1

      And crows.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    6. Re:Is there anything.. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      Raptors use UV vision. I read a couple of articles about birds floating in the sky, watching the ground for fresh rodent urine. The urine gives off a bright glow under UV, that is invisible in the "visible" light spectrum.

      Don't tell Randall about this! He's just recently calmed down.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    7. Re:Is there anything.. by swalve · · Score: 2

      Parakeets are also wild to look at in sunlight or with a blacklight.

    8. Re:Is there anything.. by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      IR vision would indeed be cool. The most interesting range (about 10 microns) would allow you to see animals in the dark. The primary difficulty would be that you too radiate at that wavelength, which would tend to fog your vision.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    9. Re:Is there anything.. by black+soap · · Score: 1

      Don't forget underwater - it turns out that corals, cnidarians, lobsters, crabs, shrimp etc. flouresce, while most fish don't. Ongoing research suggests that some fish actually alter UV patterns to communicate.

      I am going to pretend that all these nerds on /. are intentionally conflating seeing UV with seeing flourescence, (the visible-light glow observed in many objects when illuminated with UV,) because I would be very sad to find out so many failed basic science.

    10. Re:Is there anything.. by black+soap · · Score: 1

      So are the raptors looking for UV, or glow caused by UV?

      Because most people can see the visible glow when certain materials are illuminated by UV.

    11. Re:Is there anything.. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      I don't know, to be honest. I've only read enough to know that the raptors use UV light to find their prey. I BELIEVE that they actually see in UV, but it's possible that they only see that visible light glow. Google?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  9. Re:Start hunting? by Joce640k · · Score: 2

    I guess you'd be a good "natural" tracker now...

    Wouldn't that be infra-red, not UV?

    UV vision would let you see semen stains more easily but I'm not sure if that's a superpower or not.

    --
    No sig today...
  10. Perhaps back in WWII by RLBrown · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Back in WWII, when the medical treatment was much more primitive, elderly persons in England, who had vision partially restored by cataract surgery, were asked to watch for long wave UV covert signals, from off the coast vessels, as part of the war effort. This may be an urban legend -- it is unanswered on Snopes http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=25056, but I do recall reading about it as a child, I believe in a commentary written by Arthur C. Clarke. But the memory is vague, and who knows where Clarke might have learned of it. So as something vaguely remembered from a book half a century old, that may or may not exist, where the original author may or may not have had first hand knowledge, ... well, by Internet standards, that's your proof right there!

    --
    -- Perhaps I see less than some, but more than many.
    1. Re:Perhaps back in WWII by Mashiki · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I dunno. I remember my great grandmother talking about sitting with her grandmother watching for this on the coast along with a naval officer to report. It could very well still be sealed, which considering how useful it would still be today, wouldn't surprise me at all.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    2. Re:Perhaps back in WWII by swalve · · Score: 1

      That's because the original cataract surgeries simply removed the lens. The partial part was that they were no longer able to focus on anything and had super strong glasses that restored some focus ability. (A couple of the more ancient people I knew when growing up had them. The lenses were very spherical.)

    3. Re:Perhaps back in WWII by black+soap · · Score: 1

      I've seen accounts of using UV beacons for clandestine boat landings on the English Channel (transporting spies etc) on dark nights - only old people who'd had cataract surgery could see the UV beacon, and it was unlikely the enemy would have any such people on watch.

  11. They don't look black. by sirwired · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sorry; you do not have special UV-sensitive super-powers. So-called "black" lights are not, by any stretch of the imagination, UV-only. They have a filter on them that blocks most, but not all, visible light. They are called "black" lights because the UV causes appropriately fluorescent and phosphorescent materials to glow out of proportion to the visible light emitted by the bulb.

    1. Re:They don't look black. by justin12345 · · Score: 2

      I didn't think so. The summary links to an illustration that is very misleading.

      --
      Cool art gallery, if you're into that sort of thing.
    2. Re:They don't look black. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Sorry; you do not have special UV-sensitive super-powers. So-called "black" lights are not, by any stretch of the imagination, UV-only. They have a filter on them that blocks most, but not all, visible light. They are called "black" lights because the UV causes appropriately fluorescent and phosphorescent materials to glow out of proportion to the visible light emitted by the bulb.

      Incandescent UV bulbs have a filter, fluorescent UV lamps are just a different phosphor. The discharge through the mercury vapor generates copious amounts of rather dangerous shortwave UV, which is downconverted by the phosphor coating the tube.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:They don't look black. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I thought I would throw into the discussion the fact that there are some people who see in the top end of the IR band as well. Also, there is a definite racial variant in some groups causing the dyes to center on different frequencies than other groups. Black Africans for example tend to have a slightly lower frequency reception in the blue and the red ranges. This really isn't minor, it affects how things look and is about 35nm different from most caucasians.

      I as a teen went caving with a man who saw in near IR He really didn't care if he brought a flashlight or whatever. He never got lost in a cave and saw just fine with the lights out.

    4. Re:They don't look black. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I've always seen "black lights" as an eye-searing light-purple, so bright I can't be near 'em.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    5. Re:They don't look black. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      No, they're called 'black' lights because of the Wood's Glass used in the construction of the glass envelope.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  12. Ultraviolet astronomy. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I understand that the definitive text on ultraviolet astronomy was written about then by an astronomer who had also been through the operation.

    For him astronomical objects with high UV emission were "naked eye objects". He could just look through the telescope eyepiece and zero in on interesting stuff, when others had to wait for the film to be developed.

    Not as big a deal these days, with 'scopes aimed using semiconductor image sensors rather than naked eye. But may still be an advantage.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Ultraviolet astronomy. by hendrikboom · · Score: 1

      I believe he published a paper on his observations, called something like "Visual Astronomy in the Ultraviolet". You might try looking for it.

      -- hendrik

  13. Something I've wondered about by carleton · · Score: 1

    My prescription glasses have the tint that goes from essentially clear to sunglasses depending on light. I've noticed if I look at black light with them on, they go kind of foggy, which I guess makes sense given that IIRC, it's actually ultraviolet light that makes the shift happens, which is also why they're less effective in cars. Anyone else have this effect?

    1. Re:Something I've wondered about by EagleFalconn · · Score: 1

      Its a chemical equilibrium. The tinting reaction is catalyzed by UV. One of the major downsides of those glasses is that the reaction is also hindered by heat, and so they're not as effective on hot days.

    2. Re:Something I've wondered about by LaruRidi · · Score: 1

      The glass in my model starts luminescing when exposed to UV or near-UV light (405 nm laser does this very well). The luminescence is white-ish and possibly due to scattering goes out even from part of the glass which is not directly illuminated. To an unprepared observer, the effect might look like "foggy" vision.

    3. Re:Something I've wondered about by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      It is NOT coated. it's made of a silicate glass that on it's own removed 98% of the UVA and UVB. Unless BMW and Audi are now shipping cars with Quartz windows.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  14. Re:You know how UV light makes your skin turn dark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sigh. No. Only excessive UV light can damage the eye. If you are both lacking the UV filter in your lens and are able to perceive a reasonable spread of UV light, you'll instinctlively blink when it gets bright enough to do damage, just like regular light.

    There's a real danger for people who have the surgery but don't see anything in the UV spectrum that's now hitting their retinal cells. But at the age most people get cataract surgery, who cares? They generally don't.

  15. purple tights and cape to become a crime-fighter? by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

    "purple tights and cape to become a crime-fighter?"

    Of course not!!! They should be black as in Batman and possibly some green as in the Green Lantern!

    Purple?! No way for a dad!

    But if you are serious with fighting crime on a regular basis i guess the police blue would fit too, and if you get the badge then you're set.

  16. No Capes! -- Edna Mode by otmar · · Score: 3, Informative
    1. Re:No Capes! -- Edna Mode by Oryn · · Score: 1

      I love this, The Incredibles is a great Movie. Did anyone know that Edna is voiced by a guy?
      Back to the topic, my glasses have UV filters in them, I have a UV laser pointer, with my glasses on it produces a Dim blue light, without them I can see the beam produced by the laser. UV lasers are fun things to shine around the garden at night, flowers glow brightly in unexpected colours.
      The other fun thing to do with UV laser pointers is to graffiti up glow in the dark fire exit signs, I bought a sheet of glow paper and you can write on it with the laser pointer.

      I guess a UV laser pointer may not be the best thing to play with if you have no natural UV filtering in your eyes

    2. Re:No Capes! -- Edna Mode by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      I loved it too. Does anyone else know that The Incredibles was a spoof on Watchmen? Even Edna's rant is based on the death of Dollar Bill

    3. Re:No Capes! -- Edna Mode by Yewbert · · Score: 1

      Came to make sure someone said, leaving satisfied.

  17. UV imaging application by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Many things appear different and downright gross under UV light. I've rented a UV CCD imager - here are some things that you may find interesting to look at:

    Skin damage
    Dental plaque
    Oliy/organic stains and contaminants - fingerprints, floor wax patterns
    Anything with fine structure - scratches and scattering are wavelength dependent
    reapir jobs - cars that are repainted, furniture

    You can rent such a device here: http://www.uvcorder.com/ . The product is excellent. Their customer service department seems to be staffed by extraterrestrials, though - dealing with them was a bizzare experience.

    1. Re:UV imaging application by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Many things appear different and downright gross under UV light. I've rented a UV CCD imager

      Yeah. The fact that UV sensitivity in humans is possible yet exceedingly rare indicates that it doesn't have any evolutionary advantage. I guess going around being grossed out by most of what you see would be problematic.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  18. Clothing? by vlm · · Score: 1

    Do I really have to suggest to a bunch of /.ers to try and see thru clothing using UV light? Some clothing is sorta IR transparent, sorta.

    My gut level guess is very little clothing is UV transparent, but bleached underclothes might fluoresce brightly beneath regular clothes, maybe.

    In a completely unrelated topic, does anyone know of any (long term) UV phosphors? Perhaps the original poster could see glow in the dark "whatever" that most of us couldn't see. I'm not talking about short term florescence, but long term phosphorescence. florescence is that rock that momentarily glows yellow when hit with UV. phosphorescence is that weird kids plastic toys that glow and give off green light for a couple minutes after being charged with light. This is what I'm interested in, is there anything that glows UV for a couple minutes after being flashed momentarily with light?

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:Clothing? by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Funny

      Do I really have to suggest to a bunch of /.ers to try and see thru clothing using UV light?

      If I could see through clothing, I don't think I could ever shop at Walmart again.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:Clothing? by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      Just turn it into a game, if you can find 10 people from here, you win.

    3. Re:Clothing? by Sqr(twg) · · Score: 1

      Some clothes are transparent to IR because long wavelengths are scattered less than shorter wavelengths. (The same reason why the sunset is red and the sky is blue.)

      UV, on the other hand, is scattered more than visible light, so no transparent clothing.

      (Please mod this up before a bunch of /. pervs go through unnecessary cataract surgery.)

  19. Re:You know how UV light makes your skin turn dark by Hadlock · · Score: 1

    I thought all sunglasses had UV protection because the cheapest plastics aren't transparent to UV light. I was under the impression that UV filtration was easy because very few materials are UV transparent.

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  20. Can you turn it on and off like Superman? by WebManWalking · · Score: 1

    Superman can see even beyond the ultraviolet, into the x-ray spectrum, but only when he wants to. Me, I've been trying like heck to shut off my ability to see blue, primarily during Redskins/Cowboys football games, but I haven't yet gotten it to work. So I was thinking, maybe the shorter wavelengths are what allow voluntary control. Please let us know what you discover.

    In related news for nerds, here's a B movie about a guy who wanted to see more outside the normal-human spectrum, but without the ability to turn it off: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057693/

  21. Re:Start hunting? by Haedrian · · Score: 2

    UV vision would let you see semen stains more easily but I'm not sure if that's a superpower or not.

    A career in CSI, or pornography set-cleaner.

  22. I can too but... by bazmail · · Score: 1

    I can too but I never knew it was a rare/unusual thing, it just never came up in conversation or ophthalmologist visits. This is strange news indeed.

  23. Telescope parties? by vlm · · Score: 1

    One interesting oddity is that I can now see ultraviolet light — it seems that there are a few people who have photoreceptors sensitive below 400nm into the UV spectrum. I've done some testing with a Black Light and UV filter

    1) Purchase a UV source and filter the heck out of it to output purely UV (no purple leakage). Ask a geologist or perhaps a scorpion exterminator, they'll know what to buy...

    2) Visit astronomical telescope parties and offer your safety assistance... help walking down the mountain, help reading directions, help stepping off the road curb without tripping, just .. sighted help in general.

    What to them is pitch black, to you, could be lit up like a searchlight, at least until your batteries die.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:Telescope parties? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Get glasses made that filter out everything *but* UV, also, to see without the fluorescence.

      If all else fails, these guys can help: http://www.cvimellesgriot.com/

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  24. We should be breeding this trait RIGHT NOW. (NT) by DiSKiLLeR · · Score: 1

    We should be breeding this trait RIGHT NOW.

    --
    You can tell how powerful someone is by the magnitude of the crime they can commit and be able to get away with.
  25. Of spies and stratagems by westlake · · Score: 2

    One interesting oddity is that I can now see ultraviolet light â" it seems that there are a few people who have photoreceptors sensitive below 400nm into the UV spectrum.

    In World War II the OSS recruited elderly cataract patients as coastwatchers --- able to read Morse sent over UV light.

    Stanley Lovell's "Of Spies & Stratagems" can be found quite cheaply in paperback and as a legit free download on the web. It's well worth a read.

    Lovell was the head of R&D for the OSS, their "Professor Moriarity," and it is here you will learn why.

    1. Re:Of spies and stratagems by westlake · · Score: 1

      The OSS put a lot of time and thought into keeping its agents safe.

      It was among the first to use small hand held and battery powered VHF FM transceivers.

      Communication was with a high altitude aircraft flying directly overhead. The system was infinitely safer than the suitcase sized shortwave sets you are likely to have seen in the movies.

      Late in the war, the OSS felt confident enough in its methods to begin placing agents inside Germany itself.

  26. One of us! One of us! by EnigmaticIndustries · · Score: 1

    Every Xmas one of the folks in the neighborhood puts up decorations that emit a purplish light. It never fails to give me a sinus headache. Older Xenon lights did the same thing.

  27. I see UV too... by Keebler71 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I see UV too,... at least technically and I don't believe it is that uncommon. In a college quantum physics lab we were looking at the emission spectrum of Hydrogen and the instructor was guiding us through various emission lines. He asked if we could see the purple line and then asked who could see the *other* purple line. I was the only one who could. He said he always asks that because every class there are one or two students (out of about 20) who could see just enough into the UV spectrum to see it. I don't recall which line it was but assume it was the Balmer n=6 line at 397nm.

    I can't say this has been particularly more useful to me although I do think I see rainbows as 'wider' than most people with a much thicker "purple" band than others seem to see. Totally subjective and something I can't substantiate but I think I am more sensitive to sunlight as well.

    --
    "It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
    1. Re:I see UV too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It can also be different in each eye.

      My right sees farther into the UV, and my left a bit into IR. It can be confusing when trying to match colors, especially to what someone else wants.

    2. Re:I see UV too... by KritonK · · Score: 1

      He asked if we could see the purple line and then asked who could see the *other* purple line.

      Now, this is very interesting: Do you see UV as just more purple, or do you see it as an entirely different color, that you cannot describe to people who cannot see it, just as they cannot describe purple?

    3. Re:I see UV too... by Keebler71 · · Score: 1

      The experiment was over 15 years ago so I'm not sure but I seem to recall they both looked rather pinkish-violet. Honestly - I don't know when I am seeing UV if at all... I would say though that the purple section of a rainbow looks thicker, and terminates with a pinkish-whitish-violet color that just sort of fades. I've always assumed that's what everyone sees regardless of where their sensitivity ends,... maybe I'm wrong.

      --
      "It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
  28. Poker by houghi · · Score: 2

    And then mark the cards with UV paint.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:Poker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1) Grow a beard
      2) Wet it with UV paint
      3) Sit down at blackjack/poker table
      4) Rub your chin
      5) Mark cards
      6) Profit

    2. Re:Poker by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Already watched for in casinos, and you dont understand how they deal cards at a poker table do you. cards are NEVER re-used due to the possibility of marking.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  29. Do the equivalent of the IR guys are doing by kanweg · · Score: 1

    People have been doing the same thing for IR.
    http://amasci.com/amateur/irgoggl.html

    You could make UV goggles to let the UV pass only and go out on a sunny day. You wouldn't expose your eyes to much more UV than regular (well, your pupils will be open wider so it may be about 10x more). Enjoy the new experience.

    Bert

  30. I don't think so. by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

    I had cataract surgery earlier this year. My ophthalmologist told me that all modern replacement lenses filter out the UV to protect the eyes. However, the lenses do reflect light better than natural ones giving you a bit of a "cat's eye" effect. I like to tell people that I now have bionic eyes to go along with my augmented hearing. Does this make me a cyborg?

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
    1. Re:I don't think so. by virginiajim · · Score: 1

      Isn't the UV concern related to the lens of the eye which was replaced in this case, or is it also the cornea?

    2. Re:I don't think so. by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      I don't really know. However, the natural lens blocks UV, so it's reasonable to guess that the retina wouldn't have any resistance to it. I remember hearing, once, that before they developed UV blocking lenses anybody who had cataract surgery had to wear sunglasses outdoors for the rest of their life, no matter how dim the sunlight was.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    3. Re:I don't think so. by swalve · · Score: 1

      There is an extra twinkle in the eyes of people with the modern lenses. Very Santa Claus.

    4. Re:I don't think so. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Does this make me a cyborg?

      Answer the following true/false questions:

      1. I'm cybernetic.

      2. I'm an organism.

      If you answered Yes to both questions, you are, in fact, a Cybernetic Organism.

      Otherwise, you're either a computer or not even alive.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:I don't think so. by bytesex · · Score: 1

      Well, you're on Slashdot, so you'll be taking seriously for saying that.

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
  31. Re:There is a known condition by PPH · · Score: 1

    A percentage of women have an extra type of cone in their eyes which would seem to indicate sensitivity to more light spectrum

    And gay guys? This would explain their ability to perceive more than the six colors straight guys can see.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  32. Re:We should be breeding this trait RIGHT NOW. (NT by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    We should be breeding this trait RIGHT NOW.

    Well, he did refer to himself as a "suburban dad" - so he's been doing his part...

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  33. Magic tricks, card counting aparatus, etc. by PPH · · Score: 1

    Anything where your ability to see a custom display that others cannot gives you an advantage. An alphanumeric LCD with a UV back light and filter for example.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Magic tricks, card counting aparatus, etc. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Anything where your ability to see a custom display that others cannot gives you an advantage. An alphanumeric LCD with a UV back light and filter for example.

      Replace the projection lamp in your DLP big-screen TV with a UV bulb. People will see you laughing and enjoying movies and TV shows on what is apparently a blank screen.

      I don't know if the DMD chips will even reflect UV though.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Magic tricks, card counting aparatus, etc. by PPH · · Score: 1

      People will see you laughing and enjoying movies and TV shows on what is apparently a blank screen.

      But its difficult to operate the remote control once they put you into one of those jackets with the sleeves that buckle in the back.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:Magic tricks, card counting aparatus, etc. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      People will see you laughing and enjoying movies and TV shows on what is apparently a blank screen.

      But its difficult to operate the remote control once they put you into one of those jackets with the sleeves that buckle in the back.

      Yeah. I hadn't thought of that.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  34. WTF? by geekoid · · Score: 1

    ". As a typical Slashdot reader, I've been myopic since childhood,"

    Seriously, WTF?With that kind of biased reasoning, it's no wonder you have convinced yourself you can see into the UV.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:WTF? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Are you saying you haven't been myopic since childhood? Wow! When did your myopia start?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  35. You sure it is ultraviolet? by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    It could be Octarine. Not sure if being able to do or at least see magic is considered superpower, but it could have interesting applications. In any case, is better than seeing infra-black.

  36. Re:You know how UV light makes your skin turn dark by Smidge204 · · Score: 2

    Any UV likely to reach your eye is non-ionizing. At the energies where it becomes potentially ionizing, it can't travel in air very far... so unless you have an short wavelength UV emitter up against your face there's hardly any danger there.

    =Smidge=

  37. "typical Slashdot reader" by elashish14 · · Score: 1

    As a typical Slashdot reader, I've been myopic since childhood,

    Hey now, that's uncalled for. Sure, there are some around here who are still expecting the next Year of the Linux Desktop, but you can't let them speak for all of us!

    But more seriously, I've had great vision more or less for my whole life. I don't think it's entirely genetic either (though my father has never needed glasses either), and I have always done a lot of reading/computer in my time as well. I just make sure to look away every few minutes and focus on something far away so my eyes don't adjust too rigidly. So I wonder if it wouldn't be too difficult to prevent bad eyesight if other people did this too.

    --
    I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
  38. Re:You know how UV light makes your skin turn dark by gilleain · · Score: 2

    That may be true for non-ionizing radiation, such as visible and IR. However, because UV light is ionizing, the damage it does is CUMULATIVE. I.e., there is no threshold.

    Sayeth wikipedia:

    Most ultraviolet is classified as non-ionizing radiation. The higher energies of the ultraviolet spectrum from about 150 nm ('vacuum' ultraviolet) are ionizing, but this type of ultraviolet is not very penetrating and is blocked by air.

    So, probably okay unless Ultraman wants to look at a strong source in a vaccum.

  39. Aging does it by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 3, Informative

    Babies can see further into the UV than adults, probably due to the gradual yellowing of the cornea, which usually becomes apparent in old age. Water reflects UV to varying degrees, too.

  40. I'm in denver and know ophthalmologists by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

    I'll ask around and see what I can find. Work has a lab to specifically measure human eye sensitivity across the spectrum, but unfortunately it's in Illinois. However, I'm wondering if you couldn't build a DIY spectrophotometer using a DVD as a diffraction grating, and see what your sensitivity/wavelength/intensity graph would be.

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    1. Re:I'm in denver and know ophthalmologists by cffrost · · Score: 1

      However, I'm wondering if you couldn't build a DIY spectrophotometer [...]

      Of course he couldn't. Anyone could not do X, simply by not attempting to do X. =)

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  41. Almost Useful... by W.+Justice+Black · · Score: 1

    ...though "ability to see into the UV part of the spectrum" is not quite as useful as "ability to smell into the future" (my personal fave).

    --
    "Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." --Groucho Marx
    1. Re:Almost Useful... by camperdave · · Score: 1

      "ability to smell into the future"

      Do you mean to detect scents from the future, or to emit odours into the future?

      "Let me focus... concentrate... Okay pull my finger!"
      [tug]
      "Now quick! Let's go. Trust me, five minutes from now you will not want to be here."

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  42. Vader? by notcreative · · Score: 1

    He's more machine than man now

    1. Re:Vader? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      He's more machine than man now

      "Steve Austin, a man barely alive. We can rebuild him ... we have the technology."

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  43. Superhero Pants by PhotonSphere · · Score: 1

    ' ... although I'm not sure a middle-aged suburbanite dad should don purple tights and cape to become a crime-fighter!"

    You're correct; you'll be wanting ultraviolet pants for this job...

  44. Re:Differential Vision by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

    If it were me, I'd want the ability to switch the "shimmer" off: I'd keep both replacement eye lenses unfiltered, and then get a pair of glasses with a filter on one lens (which is also an idea more helpful for the submitter, since he already had the surgery).

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  45. Photokeratitis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Photokeratitis can happen even when yours eyes do constrict. The Inuit eskimos used to make goggles out of caribou antlers to protect their eyes from UV light. Without that protection, the UV light reflecting off of snow was enough to cause blindness.

  46. Re:You know how UV light makes your skin turn dark by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    I thought all sunglasses had UV protection

    Yep.

    That's why you can buy $5 sunglasses with full UV certification.

    Neither glass nor polycarbonates will let UV though. Anything else is bad science by sunglass salespeople.

    --
    No sig today...
  47. Marked Cards by virginiajim · · Score: 1

    Years, nay decades, back I read about gamblers who wore rose-colored glasses to read marked cards. Tinted contacts were substituted in later years. Perhaps there are clear fluids that now have a 'color' to you! Expect to soon see spinoffs in CSI, The Fringe, Alphas, etc.

  48. Re:Start hunting? by Joce640k · · Score: 2

    Downside: He might find hotel rooms less appealing...

    --
    No sig today...
  49. Re:Start hunting? by Joce640k · · Score: 2

    (and he might not be able to buy any more second hand cars ... )

    --
    No sig today...
  50. Duh! by wonkavader · · Score: 1

    1. Mark some nice decks of cards in ultraviolet ink and give them to all your friends.
    2. Develop an interest in poker.
    3. Show restraint.

  51. you should be a woman by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    and what i mean by that is, natural mutations in cone pigments means that 2-3% of women are tetrachromatic. only women can achieve this, with their two X chromosomes. the inference is that half their brothers would be somewhat colorblind, with a pigment with a skewed sensitivity range overlapping with normal ranges

    for these rare women, the new sensitivity range falls in between existing blue/ green, or red/ green pigment ranges, not outside the normal human range into the ultraviolet. this is still important and potentially useful: looking at a simple vista of foliage or swirling river water, the tetrachromatic woman would theoretically see color patterns a normal human cannot

    it is even more theoretical as to whether or not human neurology can support a fourth color channel, but normally dichromatic mice have been mutated to express a third channel, and further tests show that these mice can take advantage of the new color information. so at least mice brains can support the bandwidth for a new color channel

      i suppose every superhero needs a supervillian, yours is obviously some chick somewhere. cue the softcore fan fiction

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

    Variation in cone pigment genes is widespread in most human populations, but the most prevalent and pronounced tetrachromacy would derive from female carriers of major red-green pigment anomalies, usually classed as forms of "color blindness" (protanomaly or deuteranomaly). The biological basis for this phenomenon is X-inactivation of heterozygotic alleles for retinal pigment genes, which is the same mechanism that gives the majority of female new-world monkeys trichromatic vision.
    In humans, preliminary visual processing occurs within the neurons of the retina. It is not known how these nerves would respond to a new color channel, that is, whether they could handle it separately or just lump it in with an existing channel. Visual information leaves the eye by way of the optic nerve; it is not known whether the optic nerve has the spare capacity to handle a new color channel. A variety of final image processing takes place in the brain; it is not known how the various areas of the brain would respond if presented with a new color channel.
    Mice, which normally have only two cone pigments, can be engineered to express a third cone pigment, and appear to demonstrate increased chromatic discrimination,[14] arguing against some of these obstacles; however, the original publication's claims about plasticity in the optic nerve have also been disputed.[15]
    People with four photopigments have been shown to have increased chromatic discrimination in comparison to trichromats.[11]
    Each of the three cone types in a trichromatic human retina can pick up about 100 different gradations of color, and the brain can combine those variations so that the average human can distinguish about a million different colors; a true human tetrachromat would have another type of cone, and its 100 shades theoretically would allow them to see 100 million different colors.[12][16]

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  52. And then you get sent to a prison... by CatNTHat · · Score: 1

    ... where they tell you you'll never see daylight again. So you dig up a doctor, pay him twenty menthol Kools to do a surgical shine job on your eyes

    --
    Of course it's company policy never to, imply ownership in the event of a dildo... always use the indefinite article a d
  53. Re:Heinlein by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    Every LL quote I've posted on /. in the last few years is moderated troll.

    The single worst indicator of how fucked /. is.

    For example watch the moderation:

    Violence is the last resort of the incompetent. Because by the time it's your last resort it's usually too late. The competent go to violence much sooner. (L.L. Paraphrase).

    Yeah ... there's someone out there who does not like Robert A. Heinlein. I could see it if it were L. Ron Hubbard quotes but ... Heinlein? I mean, Lazarus Long was something of a elitist in his own way (so was Heinlein for that matter) but he was right about a lot of things.

    I mean, small change can, in fact, be found beneath seat cushions.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  54. Sorry, dude you just missed out- by CCTalbert · · Score: 1

    If only you'd gotten IR vision instead of UV. Then you'd be able to see through womens clothing!

    Sounds like you got the wrong end of the spectrum :(

  55. Re:We should be breeding this trait RIGHT NOW. (NT by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    We should be breeding this trait RIGHT NOW.

    Well, he did refer to himself as a "suburban dad" - so he's been doing his part...

    That's what his wife wants him to think anyway. Looking up rates of superfecundation is an exercise for the reader.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  56. Re:visible light by swalve · · Score: 1

    For those of use who can see it, it is very close to being a different color. Or, at the very least, there is much more violet there than normal people see. Can't focus on it, however. It is a diffuse blur, quite like trying to read a blue LED clock in the dark.

  57. Re:visible light by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    It is called visible light for a reason. UV wavelengths reflect poorly which makes "seeing" anything lit up in UV light unlikely. Items exposed to UV light fluoresce rather than reflect. Also, what makes you think UV light has anything to do with violet or purple? The wavelength is beyond violet. If you could see UV light, you would be seeing the next color in the spectrum, which would be very cool. What you are experiencing is sensitivity to UV light due to your natural UV filter being removed.

    I once made a night vision viewer, gosh, thirty years ago or so by removing the IR filter from an old B&W TV camera. I think it was a vidicon tube: might have predated CCDs, I don't remember. Anyway, it worked well enough for near-infrared, although it wasn't very sensitive.

    I put together a light source with a handheld spotlight (big old thing that used the sealed-beam from GE aircraft landing light) and used a layer of exposed camera film to get rid of the visible output. I could shine that thing and see for a half mile around in pitch darkness. Any of you know how dark a moonless Western night is? Yeah, dark. I was visiting a girlfriend's parents who lived out West near the Rockies. We mounted the camera and the light on the rail running around the deck on the back of their house.

    There were all kinds of nocturnal animals there: you could hear them rustling around and making noises all night. So we hooked the output up to their TV set, and we had a private nature show right there on the screen. Some of them could see us, I think: they seemed to notice the infrared source. I have no idea what a lot of those creatures were, but we could see them plain as day. The bats were cool. Well, I think they were bats. I mean, the camera was an antique: not exactly hi-def. But it was a lot of fun.

    I tried it again with a CCD imager a few years ago: picked up the output from TV remotes quite nicely.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  58. Re:There is a known condition by swalve · · Score: 1

    There are six? I thought there was only three or four: red, blue, green and rage.

  59. Re:DON'T LOOK AT UV LIGHT by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    Don't look at UV light.

    UV light bulbs are used to kill germs (really all living things) in hospitals and to erase EPROMs.

    UV light is extraordinarily dangerous for your skin and ESPECIALLY your eyes. I had moderate eye damage from looking at one as a kid for several minutes. It never goes away or gets better. It's a cool purpley-white color for those of you who want to know what it looks like.

    Frankly I'm concerned about the health implications of having no natural UV filter. What protects the rest of your eye(s) from UV light?

    Yes and no. Long-wave UV (such as what comes out of the typical black-light lamp you'll see at Toys 'R Us) isn't particularly harmful. Shortwave UV, like what you would get from a welding arc or a fluorescent tube with no phospor coating is. I knew a guy in high school that built himself a carbon-arc furnace, and made the mistake of starting at the naked arc for a couple of seconds. He was blind for a few days: fortunately he recovered. He was very lucky.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  60. Re:the tights are just a bonus! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    i'd love to be a super human crime-fighter.

    I'd love to be superhuman, but I suspect that I could find better things to do with my time than fight crime. All that does is get all the bad guys trying to find ways to kill you.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  61. Begin a career in UV photography by vadim_t · · Score: 1

    UV photos can look very cool. You should have an advantage in being able to see things that look interesting in UV without having to make a photo to check.

    I have no clue if what you see is anything like on the photos, but I figure it should at least give you a clue of what kind of thing to photograph.

  62. Re:Go look at flowers. by camperdave · · Score: 1

    From the posted link, a monochromator is nothing more than a prism and a slit. The prism spreads the white light into a spectrum, and the slit selects only a narrow part of that spectrum. You could probably make one out of cardboard, old razor blades, some duct tape, and a diamond.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  63. Re:You know how UV light makes your skin turn dark by turbidostato · · Score: 1

    "Your eyes do not. UV light damages your eyes. That's why all but the most rubbish shades include a UV filter."

    While it is true that UV exposition might damage your eyes, that's not why shades should have an UV filter.

    Think: have you heard of all people being blind before somebody invented them?

    The point is that vogues filter *visible* light and thus avoid the natural reflex of both your iris contracting at high light intensities and/or your eyes blinking. Wearing sunglasses your eyes remain wide open so a higher than usual UV will pass through. *That* is why sunglasses should have an extra UV filter that pairs to their visible-spectrum filters.

  64. IR end some people see into a little further too by Psychofreak · · Score: 1

    I see slightly into the infra-red end of the spectrum, and proved it repeatedly in film photography class. When we were rolling negatives for small batch developing in full darkness I could see my classmates, and if they dropped something I could pick it up and take their hand and put the whatever in their hand.

    The downside is my resolution in IR requires total darkness, and is very very faint. I didn't believe that I was doing it until I had several experiences with it and some conversations with classmates. I have met another person who also reports a similar experience, so I have to believe it is not terribly uncommon, just uncommon to recognize and not all that useful for most people. I would be unaware of this ability if I never took film photography.

    Because your experiences in the UV end of the spectrum are obvious enough during full light I expect that projecting a large rainbow from a prism on a wall and having several people mark the lowest and highest portions of the spectrum will give you results you will find useful. Have them also mark individual color bands and you can calibrate the setup to other people in a repeatable manner.

    Phil

    --
    Laugh, it's good for you!
  65. Re:There is a known condition by PPH · · Score: 1

    There are six?

    Well, eight actually. But I ate two of my Crayons when I was a kid and never did learn what those were.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  66. Re:Start hunting? by soundguy · · Score: 2

    UV vision would let you see semen stains more easily but I'm not sure if that's a superpower or not.

    It would be handy in the average strip club, especially in the VIP room

    --
    Nothing worthwhile ever happens before noon
  67. Hydrogen Spectrum! by tastiles · · Score: 1

    As a physics professor, I must suggest that you test this with a hydrogen spectrum and a diffraction grating. You may remember that each element has its own "spectral fingerprint" of wavelengths of light that it emits when excited. Several of the spectral lines for hydrogen are in the visible spectrum, 656 nm (red), 486 nm (cyan), 434 nm (blue), 410 nm (indigo), 397 nm (UV). I've only ever seen the first three, my eyes aren't sensitive to the 410 nm light (plus it's fairly weak) . If you really have UV-sensitive eyes you should see the 410 nm easily and even the 397 nm light. Good luck!

    1. Re:Hydrogen Spectrum! by whit3 · · Score: 1

      The spectrum of hydrogen has several lines that
      might be seen (3835 Angstroms, 3889, 3970,
      and 4102) but that's no improvement on so-called
      blacklight (which has Hg gas lines, a very strong
      one at 3650, another at 4046, and a dozen or more
      weak lines inbetween).

      The filament of a halogen lamp, on the other hand,
      fills a monochromator slit nicely and gives broadband
      radiation - continuous UV spectrum.

      So, get a grating (Edmund Scientific used to sell
      little replica gratings) use two slits in series to
      collimate a bit of the light from a halogen lamp, and
      admire the spectrum it throws on a wall, in a dark room.

      The hard part, is calibrating the wall (for that, use the
      strong-spectral-line source).

  68. How will it improve your sex life? by itsybitsy · · Score: 1

    There is really no other question of relevance.

  69. Re:I guess you did ask for this... by retchdog · · Score: 1

    no, i wanted infrared; it gave me ultraviolet. it's the maintenance man, he knows i like infrared.

    --
    "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
  70. You can cheat at casinos! by randombilly · · Score: 2

    The apple remote uses ultraviolet light, doesn't it? If you point it at a webcam you can see it light up, but when you look at it you can't... So you can have someone use it to signal things for various reasons.. Shrug.

  71. Re:DON'T LOOK AT UV LIGHT by FlyingGuy · · Score: 1

    I was trained to arc weld in high school and one of the things the teacher said was that after the first couple of time your eyes would feel a little like they had some grit in them and that was of course wearing traditional arc welding gear.

    --
    Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
  72. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  73. Come on over . . . by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 2

    . . . and help me find all the places the cat peed when he had that bladder condition.

    --
    I am not a crackpot.
  74. spectrometers in Boulder by Huckminster · · Score: 2

    I know all the right people. You're sitting in a very fortunate place (lots of science in Boulder). Email me at noah (dot) bronstein (at) gmail (dot) com if you are serious about finding a spectrometer.

  75. Monochromator in Boulder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    University of Colorado Boulder happens to have a top notch optics program. There are likely more monochromators in a ten mile radius of the city than almost anywhere else on earth. My suggestion, however, is to consult your ophthalmologist and to be certain that you are not doing damage to your eyes in looking at UV radiation. If you darken a room and turn up the UV, your pupils will dilate and you will see some light below 400 nm. However, UV light exposure to the retina can occur in eyes with natural lenses and can lead to macular degeneration - I would definitely not volunteer for a test with a monochromator in the UV!

    Protect your vision - you are lucky to have it!

  76. Violet for sure ... by kbahey · · Score: 1

    My mom had cataract surgery a while ago.

    She works in clothing/fashion, designing garments for kids and the like.

    She noticed after the surgery that violets are different. I asked my optometrist, and she said that the cloudiness in the removed lens is yellowish, and the brain compensates for it, and therefore she is seeing a different color/hue after the surgery.

    She did not tell me she had Steve Austin powers so far ...

  77. rodent-hunting superpower by sribe · · Score: 1

    Well, mouse piddle reflects UV--it's how hawks hunt, follow the trails of piddle that lead to mouse burrows since the nasty little things piddle everywhere they go. So there you are, super rodent-hunter man!

  78. This is how we timed D-day. by F34nor · · Score: 1

    According to Neil Stephenson in the Cryptanomicon (sp?) They had post cataract soldiers in a row boat and on shore and used UV lights to meet. The German soldiers could not see UV so they were blind to the lights.

    According to the some Toaists if you spend 21 days in total darkness the brain converts melatonin to tryptophan then to 5meoh-DMT then to DMT (most powerful hallucinogen in the world.) After 14 days or so people claim to be able to see in UV and IR. This is before the ass-kicking drugs kick in.

    You cold use a UV flashlight to illuminate object and see the reflections that we cannot. Apparently bees see in UV so many flower intricacies are lost on us.

  79. Re:We should be breeding this trait RIGHT NOW. (NT by reasterling · · Score: 2

    This thread is entirely off topic, but slashdot needs a "+1 more interesting than the current subject" moderation. Thank you for the link.

    --
    "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice" -- God
  80. Re:Start hunting? by danlock4 · · Score: 1

    Yee-haw. "Pillow Fluffer" in New Reno, if I recall correctly a job you could get in Fallout or Fallout 2.

    --
    To .sig or not to .sig, that is the question.
  81. Re:Start hunting? by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

    Or furniture. Don't ever touch furniture in a newlywed's house because chances are they've had sex on it.

  82. Reading the posts below.... by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

    You should become an astronomer, a bee, a flower expert, a raptor, a hawk hunting by mouse piddle, or a crow. Oh, and of course the superhero that can find supervillains that only radiate in UV. I think there were a few somewhat plausible ideas in there, too, LOL.

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  83. Re:tesla could see electrical fields by Genda · · Score: 1

    I've been wondering if being able to see magnetic fields was a direct visual sensing or if something else wasn't inducing some perceptual experience either in the visual cortex or the optic nerve of Tesla. There have been experiments where audio signals have been induced along the long nerves of the arm and subjects report hearing a sound (the brain receives the nerve impulse, recognizes it as an audio signal and processes it as such. I recall someone patenting an invention for people with profound damage to the ear using this technique to provide some sense of hearing (of course surrounding yourself with a strong electromagnetic field would almost certainly have its down side.)

  84. Re:Boulder is one of the optics capitals of the wo by RadioElectric · · Score: 1

    I'd recommend that the OP join this list:
    http://visionscience.com/mail/cvnet/cvnet.info.html

    You could try getting a message posted out to people who work in perceptual psychology and visual neuroscience to see what they have to say about your condition. Some of them might even be local. Be careful not to come across as too crazy though!

  85. Re:You know how UV light makes your skin turn dark by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Sorry but if your "rubbish shades" dont filter UV light then you need to buy all of them because it's made of Crystalline Quartz and are exceedingly expensive.

    UV is filtered by 99.99786% of all transparent materiel. Only fools believe the "Filters UV radiation" label, as EVERYTHING filters UV radiation. It's like buying a stereo certified Digital TV antenna. a 3 foot piece of lamp cord is a stereo certified Digital TV antenna.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  86. question on komar.org by mr_boodog · · Score: 1

    I poked around komar.org and found it somewhat eery. Clicked on the first link(cataract surgery), then scrolled down---Whooboy... There is a lot of family info, and some basic content, but the site has not been updated for years. There remains the descriptions of diseases, which is certainly sad, along with detailed walk-throughs of an evolutionary new cataract surgery. Humbly, I enquire: Is it relevant, or even appropriate, to post a Ask Slashdot question that is laden with links to obviously stale content which also happens to include all sorts of donation opportunities? Don't think I will be buying Dirk a beer anytime soon.

  87. What color is it? by TexVex · · Score: 1

    One interesting oddity is that I can now see ultraviolet light

    What color is it?

    --
    Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
  88. The goggles by drainbramage · · Score: 1

    They do nothing!

    --
    No brain, no pain.
  89. They also use filter glass by sirwired · · Score: 1

    Black lights use filter glass in addition to the different phosphor. UV lights that just change the phosphor are used as bug lights (the light-blue you see in bug zappers); but the parts of the visible spectrum those emit is too bright to be used as black lights.

  90. I know how to test if you can see UV (or IR) by gurps_npc · · Score: 1
    1. Find a source of UV. Blacklights work well for UV. You can do the same trick with IR light using a standard remote control (TV, stereo, whatever).

    2. Point it at any standard digital camera (in a phone is fine.) Take a picture of it while pressing activating the UV (press the button on a remote control for IR)

    3. The picture should have a bright light on it. Remember that location

    4. Point the UV source (or remote control for IR) at your eye and activate Do you see that same bright light?

    If you can see it, you can see Ultraviolet (or Infrared.)

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  91. UV photography! by l00sr · · Score: 1

    Share your gift with the world by taking a photograph with an ultraviolet-sensitive camera of whatever looks cool to you.

  92. Nasally ejected soda post by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

    MOD PARENT UP
    Wiping liquid from LCD screen.

    --
    There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
  93. Re:We should be breeding this trait RIGHT NOW. (NT by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the link. Very interesting.

  94. Infrared, not Ultraviolet. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Clothing is generally at least as opaque and/or randomly refracting in UV as in visible.

    Some synthetics, though, are transparent in infrared. A few paparazzi have taken advantage of this by using IR film and snapping celebrities. If they happen to be wearing all IR-transparent clothing they look naked or dressed only in underwear (and slightly out-of-focus, since the longer wavelength results in visible issues that are just below eye resolution in visible wavelengths.)

    Was a famous shot of a movie star debarking an airline via the roll-around stairway, published in a tabloid, a couple decades back.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  95. Re:UV-man by danlock4 · · Score: 1

    Make sure you mention observations to scientists or people with naturally-inquisitive natures (who are probably scientists of a sort anyway) and not to "common people," though, or you're likely to offend people all the time. I know that from personal experience.

    --
    To .sig or not to .sig, that is the question.
  96. Been there done that by tigersha · · Score: 1

    I had cataracts out too. Can also see much better into the UV than most. Actually, this is not very useful as the lenses do cut of UV a bit further than before but not that much. You can see blacklights but much more.

    While UV sight seems like a cool "superpower" except for the blacklight thing there is not much difference to normal life. There are definite downsides as well:

    a) You are now extremely sensitive to sunlight. Get a pair of good polorized glasses. That really makes a difference. I work for a company that makes testing equipment with really intenst lamps that can generate the same radiation as the sun indoors, and that lamp really a headache-induction machine.
    b) After a while your lens might shift, and now one eye is not locked on infinity anymore. No more 3D films. Reading becomes a bitch. Invest in a monitor arm that allows you to quickly shift your screen around.
    c) You are going to pay the college education of your optometrist when the lens shifts over time for reading glasses
    d) Wanna buy a camera? MAke sure it has a viewfinder with a diopter adjustment, and small handheld point-and shoots become a hassle to use. Manual focus old cameras? Forget it.
    e) One upside: When I have to clean house I can tell my missus that that I did not see the dust on the floor as I cannot focus there, and (usually) I am not lying
    f) Another upside: I can buy an iPad and get it by the missus because it is much easier to read than books as you can increase the font size.

    Another thing, you will have a layer of cells growing over your lens soon. this has to be burned off with a YaG laser. That is a really cool experience, it feels like an electric shock right in the middle of your brain.

    In short, enjoy your new ultra-crisp sight, be careful in sunlight, get sunglasses and get annoyed by reading hassles and inability to focus you eyes up close.

    --
    The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
  97. Bird's eye view by Wormholio · · Score: 1

    Birds supposedly have UV vision, and some of their markings are for each other, and are more clearly distinguished by other birds that can see UV.

    So you might consider observing birds and making sketches of their markings, much like the naturalists of 100 years ago, so that the rest of us can see what the birds can see of each other.

    --
    "Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire." -- William Butler Yeats