The EXACT SAME effect can be produced by feeding people shaggy mane mushrooms, (which are perfectly edible) due to the presence of a substance called Coprine.
Coprine acts similarly to a well known medicinal substance called Disulfriram" that has been used to treat alcoholism via this mechanism for nearly 100 years!
So, what you are telling me is that this doctor has essentially re-invented the wheel, and that this is news?
Its for emergency situations; keeping a heater running while waiting for roadside help. Keeping hazard lights on a stalled vehicle running, keeping a 12v outlet going to keep that cellphone you thought was charged but really wasn't going while you call a towtruck, and perhaps extending the range of the vehicle another 5 to 10 miles to get it either to a service station, or to a safe parking area.
The idea is NOT to make it "spare tank". The idea is "emergency situation".
As such, it doesn't need a humongous reactive area, and doesn't need a 15,000$ pricetag for platinum catalyst.
Just divorce the idea of "spare tank", because that is where all this misunderstanding about its utility comes from.
Think instead:
It's winter in michigan. There is lake effect snow everywhere that just suddenly dropped out of nowhere. Conditions were clear when I started driving. My EV simply isn't made for this, and I have to pull over for emergency service. What happens when the battery goes dead, trying to keep me from freezing to death in my vehicle, while waiting for overworked snowplows and wreckers to come save my ass?
Or:
My usual route home was blocked by a major traffic accident, forcing me to detour through an area I am unfamiliar with, and I got lost. My EV's battery is nearly depleted, and I can't make it to the service center I asked directions for. I wish there was a way to trickle some juice into my battery to get me that extra 5 miles, even if it takes 3 hours to trickle it up.
In both cases, a "rinky dink" fuel cell with a limited service life is a major feature.
They need very pure fuel to avoid catalyst poisoning, and to operate for many thousands of hours as primary power sources.
This is an *emergency* range extender setup. Having a life of 100 to 200 cycles for the life of the vehicle isn't outrageous. Even with catalyst poisoning from dissolved sulfur compounds, water, alcohols, alkaline earth metal ions, and other catalyst fouling impurities present in "torch grade" butane cylinders, if you only expect the system to cycle a few hundred times anyway it's less of a problem.
Intended use, and all that. The butane fuelcell feature having a limited number of uses before estimated failure just drives home the fact that it is *NOT* meant to be used everyday!
Making a clamp interconnect junction under the dash to hold, say, 4 butane lighter refill canisters as an "emergency" range extender, with the implication that you have to manually turn it on, seems like a reasonable idea.
The butane is supplied as a loaded cartrige: namely, the large "butane torch" size canisters themselves.
Building up soil can take centuries. It only takes decades to deplete.
Proper soil maintenence regimens involving proper crop rotations, incuding fallowing the field on a regular rotation and employment of green manures will mainain a productive plot between plantings. It means you have to divide your plot into a productive, and several unproductive sections, however. This makes economists and moron politicians very upset, because they demand production, see you have sections of your fields that are lying fallow, and don't comprehend why you do this, nor do they want to. (Proper crop rotation would involve a cashcrop, like corn, followed by an undisturbed fallow field of grass that is allowed to grow tall with only minimal hay harvesting, that gets tilled under in the fall, followed by a low disturbance legume, like alfalfa, which nitrates the soil and hastens natural composting of the grass straw tilled under the year before. Minimal harvesting of the alfalfa followed by winter tillage, then return to the cash crop. The hay and alfalfa production runs return carbon biomass and nitrogen compounds to the soil, and undo the damage caused by growing corn. Such a rotation should resupply the soil with sufficient organic matter to keep it healthy.)
Again, the situation is self resolving, if you accept the ultimate conclusion. The nitrogen source for nitrate fertilizers is also a finite resource, that is already dwindling; hence the mandate for ethanol. This system cannot persist, even with subsidies.
The fact that it "Scarcely grows weeds" is a directly contrary statement to your previous one, "farmers know how to take care of their land".
The reason the soil "scarcely grows weeds", is because of soil humus depletion, from the "100 years of continuous cultivation." There have been many studies on this.
I'd say it is more "MIT, CAL-TECH, and Stanford" vs "Government run learning center"
By preventing independent educational institutions from gaining hold, you get the homogeneity you seek, but you do so by preventing centers that specialize in excellence, (even if just in theory.)
No parent wants to admit that their little sunshine isn't the next einstien, even though he pulls straight C grades, and can't read. As such, no parent wants to have the de-facto segregation between schools that specialize in high performing youth, and in schools that specialize with those with learning problems, even though in both cases, the children who need those environments will better have those needs met.
Socially, it is unfavorable to accept the reality that not everyone is the same as everyone else, and that some people have disabilities, and others are naturally more gifted for academia. This is because it causes a glass cieling to occur, especially where poor academic performance is really caused simply by being financially disadvantaged. Eg, you could be brilliant, but be too poor to attend a premier school, and as such, be held back from your true potential-- while students that really shouldn't be in premier schools, are in those schools, because mommy and daddy are filthy fucking rich.
It is next to impossible to segregate academic scores from financial background, because the two correlate very closely. An increase in the quality and variety of food stuffs, and quality of academic freetime are both directly tied with increased test scores.
This is the basic catch-22 of the current system.
How do you reward excellence, and assist those that clearly need help, without appearing to give prefferential treatment to the financially affluent, and without stigmatizing people with only minor learning disabilities?
The shot version: you really can't.
We try anyway, and demand homogeneity, but the raw material of the students is simply just not homogeneous. This leads to all the failings we currently have, and an impetus by people who mean well and don't know any better, and those that have a specific philosophical or cultural/religious agenda to "fix it."
You simply can't fix the problems that plague the system we currently have, without discarding homogoeneity, and embracing specialist educational tracking.
The deep connections between affluence and test scores, mean that the affluent will always get unbalanced representation on the higher end of the distribution, when you do so.
Welcome to the real world, where shit fucking sucks, and ideal solutions don't exist.
Hydroponic gardening requires a controlled, and artificial environment. It also requires calibrated nutrient solution, and and needs constant monitoring.
Congratulations! You just increased the cost of a bushel of corn several hundred percent, and made corn based ethanol into a 100% straight up boondoggle! Issue with subsidies obfuscating the real costs resolved! Corn is now too expensive to even subsidize!
Again, self-resolving over time, if you are willing to accept the consequences.
Legumes, (if not tilled under, then allowing the field to fallow for a year to compost) only add nitrogen, which coupled with more intensive agriculture the next year, will only accellerate the depletion. To hold homeostatic, rotation must be every 3rd year, at the minimum.
The issue is with the cation carrying capacity of the soil, which is diectly tied to soil humus levels.
Levels which have been consistently shown to be on the decline.
Again, the problem is self-correcting, if you accept the ultimate outcome.
I didn't mean it was creating neutrinos. I mean it was absorbing them.
The W bosons are implicated in neutrino production by neutron decay, and a few others. They are the force carriers for the weak force, and have a very short life, even when they are real particles. (Virtual ones are really just oscillation artifacts.)
In the proposed system, we have a microwave source, with a uniquely shaped resonator cavity. Microwaves are just photons with an oscillation interval inside a certain range, which corresponds to their energy. The cavity concentrates these oscillations in such a fashion that their phase appears to exceed the speed of light. (This is normally just a curiosity.) If their concentration is high enough, their oscillation is fast enough, the could push a virtual w boson close enough to being on shell through charge interaction to make it undergo reverse neutrino decay. (All feynman diagrams are necessarily reversible.) A high energy neutrino (a real particle) from an outside source, such as the sun, gets absorbed by the virtual w boson pair (which is still not on shell, and thus not stable), adds additional energy to the system, and changes the equation.
The "box" around the experiment cannot block neutrinos, and thus cannot exclude them. Putting the device near a neutrino detector, and looking for a drop in neutrino flux would indicate abnormal neutrino absorption. Neutrinos are ubiquitous, at least here in our solar system, and are very high energy. They just only very rarely interact with matter, which is why putting a box around the experiment won't block them.
What about interaction with a virtual force carrier field?
Say, EM interaction on a virtual W boson pair? Theoretically, those have more mass potential than a photon does, and having a weak em charge, should have possible interaction with the em force carrier, photon.
Can we put this thing near a neutrino detector, and look for a change in neutrino flux?
These are the people that think they are entitled to have their business model protected by legislation, despite the supreme court of the US emphatically stating otherwise prior, and who feel that engaging in quid pro quo is a perfectly legitimate practice, and openly complains about politicians not staying bought.
These are people that are the very poster child for "entitlement complex", while openly complaining about that aspect in others, making them the poster children for "hypocrite" as well.
I fully expect them to stamp their little feet and throw a tantrum over this, and do so by employing very petty means, including but not limited to whining about how unfair the EU courts are, threatening to alter distribution timetables for licensed products until demands are met (WTC be damned!), offering clandestine kickbacks and flat out bribes to european lower courd judges to muddy the waters surrounding the matter with related cases, and stepping up enforcement efforts against eurozone companies it has dirt on.
Really, the best thing that can happen here is for somebody like NK to decide that their little "ownership" game is offensive, and give them a nuclear firecracker.
California is theoretically in range of NK's rickety ICBM "technology" right? Hitting the MPAA headquarters for daring to thwart their propoganda efforts would probably have a more profound effect on the US populace than hitting the pentagon would. Seriously.
I just took this color perception test and scored a 4. Perfect score is 0. Worst score is 1520 or something like that. I doubt my issue is colorblindness. According to that test I have near perfect color acuity.:D
I suppose, but I don't have any difficulties differentiating oranges, yellows, reds, or greens from one another, indicating that the photoreceptors are just fine. Rather, I noticed that the change in intensity of the color dots also has a change in blueness hue as well, and they stand out painfully to me. This might be an artifact of the printing process requiring a different ratio of blue to yellow pigment when creating the different shaded green dots, but the difference is painfully obvious to me, while it doesn't appear to be to others. They only see the intensity difference number show up after it's pointed out in most cases.
Maybe I should take a tetrachromacy test, just to be sure?
Sadly, it would also mean you see a crazy "3d glasses" effect when looking at the sky, and at certain flowers.
I should ask my mom if she has a similar phenomenon, since she had an artificial lense installed in the early 80s after developing a cataract, itself the result of a former corneal injury by a flying rivet. Never thought to ask.
The mechanism at work is known as "favored X". Essentially, any given cell in a woman's body will favor expression of one or the other of her X chromosomes. This includes retinal tissues. Women who are carriers of red-green colorblindness will have a nearly random distribution of cone cells that favor expression of the defective receptor protein, resulting in tetrachromatic vision. However, since the mutation is recessive, the distribution is usually not that high, meaning being female, and carrying the mutation does not garantee tetracromacy.
I learned about it in science class in 6th grade. The teacher was Mrs Mellen, the wife of the 8th grade math teacher. She had red/green color blindness, and often graded with a green pen instead of a red one. The loss of ancestral genes was reported in the lifescience textbook, but not covered in class.
That year, we did a number of interesting and fun lifesciences experiments on ourselves concerning genetic expression and heredity. It's when I discovered that I am either not my mother's child, or that I have bombay phenotype, because my mom is blood type AB+, where I, and all my siblings, are type O+. (Negative result on blood antigen test, with repeat trials).
Also learned I am one of the minority with a special bitterness receptor, and that my mouth's natural pH is alkaline instead of acidic.
She and the art teacher (Ms. Frakes) used to share the classroom with block schedules, alternating every other day, until the middleschool got expanded, then each got their own digs.
the expansion was completed in the third quarter of that year.
I still remember the particle board smell of the new science room, and how cold it was. (They moved teachers and classes into the room before the windows were installed, and had particleboard up in place of glass.)
The subject of my unusual memory has come up before here. A few posters suggested I have my brain examined by the local university neurology dept.:D
Frm what I remember reading, mamals actually LOST a color receptor early in their evolution, then re-evolved a new one later in the primate family, and in a few others, like elephants.
Birds actually have much better color fidelity than any mammal, having never lost the ancestral color receptor genes.
I'd put the functionality on the same mechanism as an audio filter. The brain may be more predisposed to looking at higher fidelity data than on subtle aspects of the data, with a full spectrum input than from an attenuated input.
Take for instance, how a background voice on a recording may become more prominent after a highpass filter, that basically just kills the highband. It does nothing to enhance or change the lowband, but the lack of highband makes you more aware of the lowband.
Personally, I've always wondered why I can see *all* solutions to those color dot tests, with near equal fidelity. Especially since I am male. (Tetrachromatism is only supposed to work in females. The only way I can think of that would explain that would be if I were a cellular chimera, formed from 2 zygotes. I don't show any skin banding under UV light though, so that seems unlikely. It just always struck me as odd that I can always see all the solutions. And those magic eye things don't work for me either. I just see randomized data.)
Purple lenses used to be quite common in the early 19th century, due to the primary decolorant used in glasswear being manganese. As a consequence, many styles appeared to use that color to accentuate rather than distract from features of the wearer, and many were quite attractive.
Not that I am suggesting people wear 19th century styles, just pointing out a possible wealth of subject matter from which to draw inspiration and ideas on how to overcome the issue with purple tinted lenses in security workers, doctors, and casino staff, if not just the ordinary public.
I thought red/green color blindness was associated with a defective gene for a photoreceptor protein, coded on the X chromosome. The defective gene produces an abnormal protein that responds to light in the "yellow" spectrum, causing the subject's retina to encode all red and yellow light as the same color.
Given that the gene does nothing to nerve function or distribution, perhaps the neurological effect is a result of neuroplasticity, resulting from the brain getting identical signals from different neural bundles in the eye? (Eg, eye does a LOT of signal encoding before it reaches the brain, so a loss of signal fidelity in the eye will result in a difference in higher level processing in the visual cortex, to make up for it. This could explain the retention of the after-image effects.)
Has there been a multidiscipline study conducted? As is, this data would seem in contradiction of the genetics implicated, and the existence of tetrachromatic females. If the difference was mostly neurological, and not the result of an ocular anomaly, then tetrachromats should not exist.
Appropriate styling can make purple lenses attractive, assuming a subset of supporting aesthetic features in the subject. Usually requires a dark hair color. Red hair clashes terribly with purple, for instance.
From your response, I take it that you are one of those people that just plain look bad when wearing purple?
Last I heard, you were "totally not engaged" in quid pro quo with legislators! How ya been man? Good times we had when you were governor of my state....
So, you are working the "law enforcement" angle of the protection racket now? How's that working out for you?
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously? This is news?
The EXACT SAME effect can be produced by feeding people shaggy mane mushrooms, (which are perfectly edible) due to the presence of a substance called Coprine.
Coprine acts similarly to a well known medicinal substance called Disulfriram" that has been used to treat alcoholism via this mechanism for nearly 100 years!
So, what you are telling me is that this doctor has essentially re-invented the wheel, and that this is news?
Its for emergency situations; keeping a heater running while waiting for roadside help. Keeping hazard lights on a stalled vehicle running, keeping a 12v outlet going to keep that cellphone you thought was charged but really wasn't going while you call a towtruck, and perhaps extending the range of the vehicle another 5 to 10 miles to get it either to a service station, or to a safe parking area.
The idea is NOT to make it "spare tank". The idea is "emergency situation".
As such, it doesn't need a humongous reactive area, and doesn't need a 15,000$ pricetag for platinum catalyst.
Just divorce the idea of "spare tank", because that is where all this misunderstanding about its utility comes from.
Think instead:
It's winter in michigan. There is lake effect snow everywhere that just suddenly dropped out of nowhere. Conditions were clear when I started driving. My EV simply isn't made for this, and I have to pull over for emergency service. What happens when the battery goes dead, trying to keep me from freezing to death in my vehicle, while waiting for overworked snowplows and wreckers to come save my ass?
Or:
My usual route home was blocked by a major traffic accident, forcing me to detour through an area I am unfamiliar with, and I got lost. My EV's battery is nearly depleted, and I can't make it to the service center I asked directions for. I wish there was a way to trickle some juice into my battery to get me that extra 5 miles, even if it takes 3 hours to trickle it up.
In both cases, a "rinky dink" fuel cell with a limited service life is a major feature.
Correction:
They need very pure fuel to avoid catalyst poisoning, and to operate for many thousands of hours as primary power sources.
This is an *emergency* range extender setup. Having a life of 100 to 200 cycles for the life of the vehicle isn't outrageous. Even with catalyst poisoning from dissolved sulfur compounds, water, alcohols, alkaline earth metal ions, and other catalyst fouling impurities present in "torch grade" butane cylinders, if you only expect the system to cycle a few hundred times anyway it's less of a problem.
Intended use, and all that. The butane fuelcell feature having a limited number of uses before estimated failure just drives home the fact that it is *NOT* meant to be used everyday!
I dunno...
Making a clamp interconnect junction under the dash to hold, say, 4 butane lighter refill canisters as an "emergency" range extender, with the implication that you have to manually turn it on, seems like a reasonable idea.
The butane is supplied as a loaded cartrige: namely, the large "butane torch" size canisters themselves.
like these for instance
4 of them would be over 20oz of butane!
Forest soils are not rich. Grassland soils are.
Building up soil can take centuries. It only takes decades to deplete.
Proper soil maintenence regimens involving proper crop rotations, incuding fallowing the field on a regular rotation and employment of green manures will mainain a productive plot between plantings. It means you have to divide your plot into a productive, and several unproductive sections, however. This makes economists and moron politicians very upset, because they demand production, see you have sections of your fields that are lying fallow, and don't comprehend why you do this, nor do they want to. (Proper crop rotation would involve a cashcrop, like corn, followed by an undisturbed fallow field of grass that is allowed to grow tall with only minimal hay harvesting, that gets tilled under in the fall, followed by a low disturbance legume, like alfalfa, which nitrates the soil and hastens natural composting of the grass straw tilled under the year before. Minimal harvesting of the alfalfa followed by winter tillage, then return to the cash crop. The hay and alfalfa production runs return carbon biomass and nitrogen compounds to the soil, and undo the damage caused by growing corn. Such a rotation should resupply the soil with sufficient organic matter to keep it healthy.)
Again, the situation is self resolving, if you accept the ultimate conclusion. The nitrogen source for nitrate fertilizers is also a finite resource, that is already dwindling; hence the mandate for ethanol. This system cannot persist, even with subsidies.
The fact that it "Scarcely grows weeds" is a directly contrary statement to your previous one, "farmers know how to take care of their land".
The reason the soil "scarcely grows weeds", is because of soil humus depletion, from the "100 years of continuous cultivation." There have been many studies on this.
One such digest, dated 1941! (warning, PDF)
This has been known about for a VERY long time. Nitrogen fertilizer accelerates soil humus depletion, by giving decomposing microbes a boost.
Note how the linked digest cites (correctly) that both potatoes AND corn are soil depleting! Fancy that!
I'd say it is more "MIT, CAL-TECH, and Stanford" vs "Government run learning center"
By preventing independent educational institutions from gaining hold, you get the homogeneity you seek, but you do so by preventing centers that specialize in excellence, (even if just in theory.)
No parent wants to admit that their little sunshine isn't the next einstien, even though he pulls straight C grades, and can't read. As such, no parent wants to have the de-facto segregation between schools that specialize in high performing youth, and in schools that specialize with those with learning problems, even though in both cases, the children who need those environments will better have those needs met.
Socially, it is unfavorable to accept the reality that not everyone is the same as everyone else, and that some people have disabilities, and others are naturally more gifted for academia. This is because it causes a glass cieling to occur, especially where poor academic performance is really caused simply by being financially disadvantaged. Eg, you could be brilliant, but be too poor to attend a premier school, and as such, be held back from your true potential-- while students that really shouldn't be in premier schools, are in those schools, because mommy and daddy are filthy fucking rich.
It is next to impossible to segregate academic scores from financial background, because the two correlate very closely. An increase in the quality and variety of food stuffs, and quality of academic freetime are both directly tied with increased test scores.
This is the basic catch-22 of the current system.
How do you reward excellence, and assist those that clearly need help, without appearing to give prefferential treatment to the financially affluent, and without stigmatizing people with only minor learning disabilities?
The shot version: you really can't.
We try anyway, and demand homogeneity, but the raw material of the students is simply just not homogeneous. This leads to all the failings we currently have, and an impetus by people who mean well and don't know any better, and those that have a specific philosophical or cultural/religious agenda to "fix it."
You simply can't fix the problems that plague the system we currently have, without discarding homogoeneity, and embracing specialist educational tracking.
The deep connections between affluence and test scores, mean that the affluent will always get unbalanced representation on the higher end of the distribution, when you do so.
Welcome to the real world, where shit fucking sucks, and ideal solutions don't exist.
Why, yes I have!
Hydroponic gardening requires a controlled, and artificial environment. It also requires calibrated nutrient solution, and and needs constant monitoring.
Congratulations! You just increased the cost of a bushel of corn several hundred percent, and made corn based ethanol into a 100% straight up boondoggle! Issue with subsidies obfuscating the real costs resolved! Corn is now too expensive to even subsidize!
Again, self-resolving over time, if you are willing to accept the consequences.
Legumes, (if not tilled under, then allowing the field to fallow for a year to compost) only add nitrogen, which coupled with more intensive agriculture the next year, will only accellerate the depletion. To hold homeostatic, rotation must be every 3rd year, at the minimum.
The issue is with the cation carrying capacity of the soil, which is diectly tied to soil humus levels.
Levels which have been consistently shown to be on the decline.
Again, the problem is self-correcting, if you accept the ultimate outcome.
Corn cultivation is intensive agriculture, and destroys soil viability with continued, and persistent cultivation.
This problem is self-resolving, if you are willing to accept the ultimate outcome.
That being, the corn growing states will eventually not be able to grow corn anymore, period. (No, adding chemical fertilizers wont do dick.)
You misunderstand,
I didn't mean it was creating neutrinos. I mean it was absorbing them.
The W bosons are implicated in neutrino production by neutron decay, and a few others. They are the force carriers for the weak force, and have a very short life, even when they are real particles. (Virtual ones are really just oscillation artifacts.)
In the proposed system, we have a microwave source, with a uniquely shaped resonator cavity. Microwaves are just photons with an oscillation interval inside a certain range, which corresponds to their energy. The cavity concentrates these oscillations in such a fashion that their phase appears to exceed the speed of light. (This is normally just a curiosity.) If their concentration is high enough, their oscillation is fast enough, the could push a virtual w boson close enough to being on shell through charge interaction to make it undergo reverse neutrino decay. (All feynman diagrams are necessarily reversible.) A high energy neutrino (a real particle) from an outside source, such as the sun, gets absorbed by the virtual w boson pair (which is still not on shell, and thus not stable), adds additional energy to the system, and changes the equation.
The "box" around the experiment cannot block neutrinos, and thus cannot exclude them. Putting the device near a neutrino detector, and looking for a drop in neutrino flux would indicate abnormal neutrino absorption. Neutrinos are ubiquitous, at least here in our solar system, and are very high energy. They just only very rarely interact with matter, which is why putting a box around the experiment won't block them.
What about interaction with a virtual force carrier field?
Say, EM interaction on a virtual W boson pair? Theoretically, those have more mass potential than a photon does, and having a weak em charge, should have possible interaction with the em force carrier, photon.
Can we put this thing near a neutrino detector, and look for a change in neutrino flux?
These are the people that think they are entitled to have their business model protected by legislation, despite the supreme court of the US emphatically stating otherwise prior, and who feel that engaging in quid pro quo is a perfectly legitimate practice, and openly complains about politicians not staying bought.
These are people that are the very poster child for "entitlement complex", while openly complaining about that aspect in others, making them the poster children for "hypocrite" as well.
I fully expect them to stamp their little feet and throw a tantrum over this, and do so by employing very petty means, including but not limited to whining about how unfair the EU courts are, threatening to alter distribution timetables for licensed products until demands are met (WTC be damned!), offering clandestine kickbacks and flat out bribes to european lower courd judges to muddy the waters surrounding the matter with related cases, and stepping up enforcement efforts against eurozone companies it has dirt on.
Really, the best thing that can happen here is for somebody like NK to decide that their little "ownership" game is offensive, and give them a nuclear firecracker.
California is theoretically in range of NK's rickety ICBM "technology" right? Hitting the MPAA headquarters for daring to thwart their propoganda efforts would probably have a more profound effect on the US populace than hitting the pentagon would. Seriously.
I just took this color perception test and scored a 4. Perfect score is 0. Worst score is 1520 or something like that. I doubt my issue is colorblindness. According to that test I have near perfect color acuity. :D
I suppose, but I don't have any difficulties differentiating oranges, yellows, reds, or greens from one another, indicating that the photoreceptors are just fine. Rather, I noticed that the change in intensity of the color dots also has a change in blueness hue as well, and they stand out painfully to me. This might be an artifact of the printing process requiring a different ratio of blue to yellow pigment when creating the different shaded green dots, but the difference is painfully obvious to me, while it doesn't appear to be to others. They only see the intensity difference number show up after it's pointed out in most cases.
Maybe I should take a tetrachromacy test, just to be sure?
Sadly, it would also mean you see a crazy "3d glasses" effect when looking at the sky, and at certain flowers.
I should ask my mom if she has a similar phenomenon, since she had an artificial lense installed in the early 80s after developing a cataract, itself the result of a former corneal injury by a flying rivet. Never thought to ask.
Not theoretical. Empirically observed.
The mechanism at work is known as "favored X". Essentially, any given cell in a woman's body will favor expression of one or the other of her X chromosomes. This includes retinal tissues. Women who are carriers of red-green colorblindness will have a nearly random distribution of cone cells that favor expression of the defective receptor protein, resulting in tetrachromatic vision. However, since the mutation is recessive, the distribution is usually not that high, meaning being female, and carrying the mutation does not garantee tetracromacy.
relavent wikipedia page, which has some citations.
32.
I learned about it in science class in 6th grade. The teacher was Mrs Mellen, the wife of the 8th grade math teacher. She had red/green color blindness, and often graded with a green pen instead of a red one. The loss of ancestral genes was reported in the lifescience textbook, but not covered in class.
That year, we did a number of interesting and fun lifesciences experiments on ourselves concerning genetic expression and heredity. It's when I discovered that I am either not my mother's child, or that I have bombay phenotype, because my mom is blood type AB+, where I, and all my siblings, are type O+. (Negative result on blood antigen test, with repeat trials).
Also learned I am one of the minority with a special bitterness receptor, and that my mouth's natural pH is alkaline instead of acidic.
She and the art teacher (Ms. Frakes) used to share the classroom with block schedules, alternating every other day, until the middleschool got expanded, then each got their own digs.
the expansion was completed in the third quarter of that year.
I still remember the particle board smell of the new science room, and how cold it was. (They moved teachers and classes into the room before the windows were installed, and had particleboard up in place of glass.)
The subject of my unusual memory has come up before here. A few posters suggested I have my brain examined by the local university neurology dept. :D
Frm what I remember reading, mamals actually LOST a color receptor early in their evolution, then re-evolved a new one later in the primate family, and in a few others, like elephants.
Birds actually have much better color fidelity than any mammal, having never lost the ancestral color receptor genes.
I'd put the functionality on the same mechanism as an audio filter. The brain may be more predisposed to looking at higher fidelity data than on subtle aspects of the data, with a full spectrum input than from an attenuated input.
Take for instance, how a background voice on a recording may become more prominent after a highpass filter, that basically just kills the highband. It does nothing to enhance or change the lowband, but the lack of highband makes you more aware of the lowband.
Personally, I've always wondered why I can see *all* solutions to those color dot tests, with near equal fidelity. Especially since I am male. (Tetrachromatism is only supposed to work in females. The only way I can think of that would explain that would be if I were a cellular chimera, formed from 2 zygotes. I don't show any skin banding under UV light though, so that seems unlikely. It just always struck me as odd that I can always see all the solutions. And those magic eye things don't work for me either. I just see randomized data.)
Purple lenses used to be quite common in the early 19th century, due to the primary decolorant used in glasswear being manganese. As a consequence, many styles appeared to use that color to accentuate rather than distract from features of the wearer, and many were quite attractive.
Not that I am suggesting people wear 19th century styles, just pointing out a possible wealth of subject matter from which to draw inspiration and ideas on how to overcome the issue with purple tinted lenses in security workers, doctors, and casino staff, if not just the ordinary public.
I thought red/green color blindness was associated with a defective gene for a photoreceptor protein, coded on the X chromosome. The defective gene produces an abnormal protein that responds to light in the "yellow" spectrum, causing the subject's retina to encode all red and yellow light as the same color.
Given that the gene does nothing to nerve function or distribution, perhaps the neurological effect is a result of neuroplasticity, resulting from the brain getting identical signals from different neural bundles in the eye? (Eg, eye does a LOT of signal encoding before it reaches the brain, so a loss of signal fidelity in the eye will result in a difference in higher level processing in the visual cortex, to make up for it. This could explain the retention of the after-image effects.)
Has there been a multidiscipline study conducted? As is, this data would seem in contradiction of the genetics implicated, and the existence of tetrachromatic females. If the difference was mostly neurological, and not the result of an ocular anomaly, then tetrachromats should not exist.
Appropriate styling can make purple lenses attractive, assuming a subset of supporting aesthetic features in the subject. Usually requires a dark hair color. Red hair clashes terribly with purple, for instance.
From your response, I take it that you are one of those people that just plain look bad when wearing purple?
Dan Glickman? 'Sat you!?
Last I heard, you were "totally not engaged" in quid pro quo with legislators! How ya been man? Good times we had when you were governor of my state....
So, you are working the "law enforcement" angle of the protection racket now? How's that working out for you?