Any science textbook will tell you we can’t see infrared light. Like X-rays and radio waves, infrared light waves are outside the visual spectrum.

But an international team of researchers co-led by scientists at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis has found that under certain conditions, the retina can sense infrared light after all.

Using cells from the retinas of mice and people, and powerful lasers that emit pulses of infrared light, the researchers found that when laser light pulses rapidly, light-sensing cells in the retina sometimes get a double hit of infrared energy. When that happens, the eye is able to detect light that falls outside the visible spectrum.

“We’re using what we learned in these experiments to try to develop a new tool that would allow physicians to not only examine the eye but also to stimulate specific parts of the retina to determine whether it’s functioning properly,” said senior investigator Vladimir J. Kefalov, PhD, associate professor of ophthalmology and visual sciences at Washington University. “We hope that ultimately this discovery will have some very practical applications.”

The findings are published Dec. 1 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Online Early Edition. Collaborators include scientists in Cleveland, Poland, Switzerland and Norway,

The research was initiated after scientists on the research team reported seeing occasional flashes of green light while working with an infrared laser. Unlike the laser pointers used in lecture halls or as toys, the powerful infrared laser the scientists worked with emits light waves thought to be invisible to the human eye.

“They were able to see the laser light, which was outside of the normal visible range, and we really wanted to figure out how they were able to sense light that was supposed to be invisible,” said Frans Vinberg, PhD, one of the study’s lead authors and a postdoctoral research associate in the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences at Washington University.

Vinberg, Kefalov and their colleagues examined the scientific literature and revisited reports of people seeing infrared light. They repeated previous experiments in which infrared light had been seen, and they analyzed such light from several lasers to see what they could learn about how and why it sometimes is visible.

“We experimented with laser pulses of different durations that delivered the same total number of photons, and we found that the shorter the pulse, the more likely it was a person could see it,” Vinberg explained. “Although the length of time between pulses was so short that it couldn’t be noticed by the naked eye, the existence of those pulses was very important in allowing people to see this invisible light.”

Normally, a particle of light, called a photon, is absorbed by the retina, which then creates a molecule called a photopigment, which begins the process of converting light into vision. In standard vision, each of a large number of photopigments absorbs a single photon.

But packing a lot of photons in a short pulse of the rapidly pulsing laser light makes it possible for two photons to be absorbed at one time by a single photopigment, and the combined energy of the two light particles is enough to activate the pigment and allow the eye to see what normally is invisible

http://www.punchng.com/health/healthwise/human-eye-can-see-invisible-infrared-light/

Sinequanon would ask "how come the human eyes didn't evolve the ability to see infrared light,since it's such a simple thing to do"
Sorry to disappoint you, but from this discovery,it's an indication that either the human eyes once were able to see infrared light but later the trait was discarded because it didn't actually give any profound survival advantage,or that our eyes are gradually evolving the ability to see infrared. You see,whatever claim you bring up against evolution, there would surely be a research somewhere studying it,and experiments that accidentally discovers it,but you won't bother to find out,

[size=17]afterall your agenda is to ridicule scientists, Which you always fail to do[/size]

This thread debunked-----> https://www.nairaland.com/2017963/evolution-eye

Really! So our naked eyes are evolving so we could now see I.R lights?

When will our ears be able to hear Ultra sound?

Perhaps this could help a great deal in detecting boko girls with IED under their hijabs

Atheist and fables..Xmen comes to mind! Smh

Maamin:
Really! So our naked eyes are evolving so we could now see I.R lights?

When will our ears be able to hear Ultra sound?

Perhaps this could help a great deal in detecting boko girls with IED under their hijabs

Atheist and fables..Xmen comes to mind! Smh

The finding was published in a peer reviewed journal....and it isn't as simple as you think it is....light as we see it is a packet of photons that have a specific wavelength...how we "see" infra-red light is merely applying the same method for perception of light.
And I would also like you to exclude "Xmen" in this conversation...because hollywood portrays evolution as a goal or intended process...

Maamin:
Really! So our naked eyes are evolving so we could now see I.R lights?

When will our ears be able to hear Ultra sound?

Dapo777 is a troll.

The thread he referenced was about...

sinequanon:
The OP SAYS infrared vision is not well-developed in animal eyes. (Why are you repeating it?)

The question is, why hasn't such a "simple" thing evolved, despite the eye itself supposedly evolving independently several times.

I didn't say eye sensitivity to infrared is absent. It is asking why it isn't developed.

I also mention that the infrastructure to use infrared seems to be present. So the research in the OP of this thread is confirming everything I said.

What is embarrassing is comments like...

Weah96:
Animals do not use their EYES to detect infrared radiation. Your OP, you admit, claims that this capability isn't well developed in the eyes of animals.

It was Weah saying that the eye has NO CAPABILITY AT ALL to detect infrared. And he acknowledges that I said it is NOT WELL DEVELOPED, as the research also indicates.

Do you think our troll is going to challenge Weah? Nope. Weah is on "the same side" as the troll. That is what matters first to the troll.

Maamin:
Really! So our naked eyes are evolving so we could now see I.R lights?

When will our ears be able to hear Ultra sound?

Perhaps this could help a great deal in detecting boko girls with IED under their hijabs

Atheist and fables..Xmen comes to mind! Smh

It is no surprise to me that some infrared capability is present. However, I believe that intent is required for things to develop. So, we must pay attention and make use of the capability for it to develop. I believe that we can also detect some ultra-violet light and definitely detect ultrasound. We simply don't pay attention and these things become or remain subliminal.

Some of us can hear the sound coming from electrical networks (I can). Other people cannot. I think we have a number of latent capabilities.

In fact, a challenge to the premise that infrared vision is not well developed in animals would have been a reasonable response in the other thread. (No chance of that with trolls like Dapo777)

My own suspicion is that prey may indeed see infrared. I don't know how scientists came to their conclusion. It could be related to the use of infrared lighting (flood lighting) when filming animals at night. Superficially and subjectively noting the reaction, or lack of reaction. of the animals may have led to the non rigorous belief that animals are infrared blind.

sinequanon:


It is no surprise to me that some infrared capability is present. However, I believe that intent is required for things to develop. So, we must pay attention and make use of the capability for it to develop. I believe that we can also detect some ultra-violet light and definitely detect ultrasound. We simply don't pay attention and these things become or remain subliminal.

Some of us can hear the sound coming from electrical networks (I can). Other people cannot. I think we have a number of latent capabilities.

When I said ultra sound you should know what ultra sound is..ultra sounds are sounds that are above the human hearing aid.


Well it is possible to hear the movement of moving electrons because of charges.

Maamin:


When I said ultra sound you should know what ultra sound is..ultra sounds are sounds that are above the human hearing aid.

True, but I think that they may discover that the frequencies that they are NOW calling ultrasound will turn out to be audible sound.

Maamin:
Well it is possible to hear the movement of moving electrons because of charges.

I am talking about clean, high pitched signals. I associate charges with uneven crackling.

True, but I think that they may discover that the frequencies that they are NOW calling ultrasound will turn out to be audible sound.

Which ever way Ultrasound remains a sound above the human ear..if it is audible then is no longer/was never ultrasound.

I am talking about clean, high pitched signals. I associate charges with uneven crackling.

No matter how clean and high pitched the signal is, it is still as a result of charges (flow of electrons)..is rather in sync as long as there is no sub charged body in contact. In contrast to this for example. Electrolyte and metallic surface(in the case of welding)

sinequanon:


It is no surprise to me that some infrared capability is present. However, I believe that intent is required for things to develop.

You like to take a stretch with your imagination, don't you?
Under certain conditions humans can do many things not normally done..
Under certain conditions you could lower your heart beat,temperature etc...this does not necessarily make such abilities an intent,but a conditioned anomaly.

So, we must pay attention and make use of the capability for it to develop.

I thought larmack's theory of "use and disuse" was ousted long ago....yet,here you are on the same path that a function can be greatly expressed by its use...care to explain what physical function....human or otherwise became more prominent by its use?

I believe that we can also detect some ultra-violet light and definitely detect ultrasound. We simply don't pay attention and these things become or remain subliminal.

UV is detected by animals and plants(through eyes,skin,etc)....I believe I read a paper on ultrasound boosting human sensory perception....detection of ultrasound itself is not normally done in humans(perhaps in another certain condition)...

Some of us can hear the sound coming from electrical networks (I can). Other people cannot. I think we have a number of latent capabilities.

Sound from electrical networks?!....please do enlighten me on that...
And your conclusion that there are latent abilities is what I cannot agree on,atleast not in the sense of functions being "latent" but rather an anomaly arrived at by certain conditions...

sinequanon:
When asked how something as complex as the eye evolved, atheist Richard Dawkins launched into his usual spiel about how such evolution is so easy that the eye evolved MANY times over, independently. For example, an octupuses eye evolved independently of a human eye, but has marked similarity.



[size=16]If the eye evolved so easily, how come the ability to see infrared didn't evolve?[/size]

This would have conferred huge advantage on creatures that get hunted at night. They would be able to see their predators easily by the heat of their bodies.

[size=16]All the framework is there to extend to infrared vision. Why didn't that happen?[/size]

Shame on you Sinequanon, weren't you the one that asked on the thread "how come the ability to see infrared didn't evolve" meaning that the human eyes cannot see infrared,that's the implication of your rhetorical question,then you come here to deny you claims after your ignorance have been exposed,I don laugh tire

sinequanon:


[size=16]It is no surprise to me that some infrared capability is present[/size]. However, I believe that intent is required for things to develop. So, we must pay attention and make use of the capability for it to develop. I believe that we can also detect some ultra-violet light and definitely detect ultrasound. We simply don't pay attention and these things become or remain subliminal.
Some of us can hear the sound coming from electrical networks (I can). Other people cannot. I think we have a number of latent capabilities.

After being exposed,he shamelessly succumb to the fact that some infrared capability is present,if not for this exposure,the ignoramus, Mr know it all would never make that statement "it is no surprise to me that some infrared ability is present" why didn't you say that anywhere in your thread.

Keep on trying to ridicule scientists,you will keep on failing because scientists don't just agree on a theory without rigorous testing,in case you don't know I have to restate that. The reason why I didn't mention every other person who said infrared cannot be detected by the human eye is because you were the one that brainwashed them with the idea that human eyes cannot detect infrared and you are the Op So ever rebuttal and debunking shall be loaded on you alone. Hahahaha, nobody would share it with you.

Maamin:


Which ever way Ultrasound remains a sound above the human ear..if it is audible then is no longer/was never ultrasound.

[url]http://www.tinnitus.vcu.edu/Pages/Ultrasonic%20Hearing.pdf[/url]

Ultrasonic Hearing in Humans: Applications for Tinnitus Treatment
Martin L. Lenhardt, Au.D., Ph.D. Professor
Departments of Otolaryngology and Emergency Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth
University, Richmond, VA

...Human ultrasonic hearing has been independently “discovered,” documented, and abandoned more than a dozen times over the last half century [3]. So outlandish is the concept that humans can have the hearing range of specialized mammals, such as bats and toothed whales, that ultrasonic hearing has generally been relegated to the realm of parlor tricks rather than being considered the subject of scientific inquiry. In one of the earliest reports [4], the experimental work of Dr. Roger Maass performed in 1946 was cited. Maass, never credited again for his original discovery, made all the essential observations in regard to ultrasonic hearing phenomenology. Ultrasonic hearing was possible in humans but only by bone conduction. Some deaf patients could hear ultrasound, albeit at levels higher than those in normal listeners, and frequency discrimination was possible, although far poorer than in the audio range.

Dapo777:
After being exposed,he shamelessly succumb to the fact that some infrared capability is present,if not for this exposure,the ignoramus, Mr know it all would never make that statement "it is no surprise to me that some infrared ability is present" why didn't you say that anywhere in your thread.

TROLL.

From original thread..

sinequanon:
The OP SAYS infrared vision is [size=18pt]not well-developed[/size] in animal eyes.

https://www.nairaland.com/2017963/evolution-eye#28394742

There is some sensitivity but, Theory of Evolution and survival of the fittest is about infrared vision conferring an advantage in the wild. No such evolution has been reported.

sinequanon:


TROLL.

From original thread..



https://www.nairaland.com/2017963/evolution-eye#28394742

There is some sensitivity but, Theory of Evolution and survival of the fittest is about infrared vision conferring an advantage in the wild. No such evolution has been reported.

That was just one of your post after the Op, no where in the Op did you indicate that infrared ability is not well developed in animals. Why don't you bold the statement in your Op that implies that infrared ability isn't well developed in animals,then I would accept that I am blind. If not,you have failed.

Dapo777:


That was [size=18pt]just one of your post after the Op[/size], no where in the Op did you indicate that infrared ability is not well developed in animals. Why don't you bold the statement in your Op that implies that infrared ability isn't well developed in animals,then I would accept that I am blind. If not,you have failed.

LOL, what a HYPOCRITE, you are! It really is laughable.

Are you still pretending to yourself that this thread "prompted" that post nearly two weeks ago. DUH!

And if you think the point being made in the OP of that thread is that infrared sight IS well developed in animals, then you are infinitely more stupid than I imagined.

sinequanon:


LOL, what a HYPOCRITE, you are! It really is laughable.

Are you still pretending to yourself that this thread "prompted" that post nearly two weeks ago. DUH!

And if you think the point being made in the OP of that thread is that infrared sight IS well developed in animals, then you are infinitely more stupid than I imagined.

sinequanon:
The OP SAYS infrared vision is not well-developed in animal eyes.

You claim that is what the Op said,So I am asking you to highlight the part of the Op that says So,now who is the hypocrite here? You can't show us where it is in the Op where you said So,then you are the liar here.

Dapo777:


sinequanon:
The OP SAYS infrared vision is not well-developed in animal eyes.

You claim that is what the Op said,So I am asking you to highlight the part of the Op that says So,now who is the hypocrite here? You can't show us where it is in the Op where you said So,then you are the liar here.

You are the HYPOCRITE. LOL!

You have failed to explain how a post nearly two weeks ago could have been prompted by this thread!

The relevant part of the OP..

"how come the ability to see infrared [size=16pt]didn't evolve?[/size]"

This means that scientists claim that it didn't take part in survival of the fittest mechanism. Otherwise prey and predator would be able to see themselves in the dark.

You can twist as much as you like, and make yourself look like a bigger fool and hypocrite. LOL!

Any more questions?

sinequanon:


You are the HYPOCRITE. LOL!

You have failed to explain how a post nearly two weeks ago could have been prompted by this thread!

The relevant part of the OP..

"how come the ability to see infrared [size=16pt]didn't evolve?[/size]"

This means that scientists claim that it didn't take part in survival of the fittest mechanism. Otherwise prey and predator would be able to see themselves in the dark.

You can twist as much as you like, and make yourself look like a bigger fool and hypocrite. LOL!

Any more questions?

Do you have any Idea why he's not questionin' Weah...??

BossTtdiamonds:


Do you have any Idea why he's not questionin' Weah...??

Hypocrisy.

sinequanon:


You are the HYPOCRITE. LOL!

You have failed to explain how a post nearly two weeks ago could have been prompted by this thread!

The relevant part of the OP..

"how come the ability to see infrared [size=16pt]didn't evolve?[/size]"

[size=16]This means that scientists claim that it didn't take part in survival of the fittest mechanism[/size]. Otherwise prey and predator would be able to see themselves in the dark.

You can twist as much as you like, and make yourself look like a bigger fool and hypocrite. LOL!

Any more questions?

Where is the source of that claim above. If you can't provide a source of your claim then you are biggest fool I have ever met on nl

Sinequanon, what are you?

Dapo777:
Where is the source of that claim above. If you can't provide a source of your claim then you are biggest fool I have ever met on nl

What you think is hardly important to me, but I am enjoying showing you up on this thread..

Why Animals Don't Have Infrared Vision

That is an example of such a research paper.

I also take it that you think that Weah is a "big fool"? Or do you think he was expressing his "personal opinion"? Answer. What are you afraid of, you cowardly hypocrite.

Weah96:
What are you asking? Animals do not use their eyes to detect infrared radiation.

undercat:
Sinequanon, what are you?

No political affiliation -- therefore no motivation to argue backwards or accept an idea on the grounds of who is saying it.

sinequanon:


No political affiliation -- therefore no motivation to argue backwards or accept an idea on the grounds of who is saying it.

The question was about religious, not political, affiliation, but I could be wrong. As usual. LOL.

sinequanon:


What you think is hardly important to me, but I am enjoying showing you up on this thread..

Why Animals Don't Have Infrared Vision

That is an example of such a research paper.

I also take it that you think that Weah is a "big fool"? Or do you think he was expressing his "personal opinion"? Answer. What are you afraid of, you cowardly hypocrite.

You are still an idi.ot,in that article scientists did NOT claim that it(evolution of the eye) didn't take part in survival of the fittest mechanism,they only talked about how false alarms an be triggered by the cone cells in the eyes if there is sufficient energy stimulating them,thereby giving the sensation of light where there is no visible light,but that didn't show where "scientists claim eye evolution didn't take part in survival of the fittest mechanism, you simply made the claim out of ignorance, I repeat show us where a reputable scientist make such a claim that evolution of the eye didn't take part in survival of the fittest,or forever remain the biggest fool on nl.

Funny dude

Weah96:


The question was about religious, not political, affiliation, but I could be wrong. As usual. LOL.

I consider religion to be political.

What I am saying is that I lack loyalty to any consensus.

I can happen to agree with a consensus, but I won't put myself in a position of loyalty to it.

sinequanon:


I consider religion to be political.

What I am saying is that I lack loyalty to any consensus.

I can happen to agree with a consensus, but I won't put myself in a position of loyalty to it.

Then in all likelihood, you're NOT a Theist. A deist maybe, that's as vague as they come.

Dapo777:
You are still an idi.ot,in that article scientists did NOT claim that it[size=16pt](evolution of the eye)[/size]...

Tell me, are you comfortable being a hypocrite. Don't you wish you could just throw it all away and start from clean?

See how hypocrisy escalates? Each time you try to defend yourself, you mire yourself in more hypocrisy.

We are talking about "evolution of infrared vision". Are you that stupid that you think you can change it to "evolution of the eye" and no-one would notice.

You even had to put it in brackets because any normal person would have assumed you were talking about evolution of infrared vision.

I tell you, your hypocrisy is playing havoc with your judgement.

Dapo777

You've done yourself enough damage on this thread, already. I'm not interested in any more of your posts.

I admit that I have no respect for people like you. I detest the hypocrisy you are displaying, here.

sinequanon:


Tell me, are you comfortable being a hypocrite. Don't you wish you could just throw it all away and start from clean?

See how hypocrisy escalates? Each time you try to defend yourself, you mire yourself in more hypocrisy.

We are talking about "evolution of infrared vision". Are you that stupid that you think you can change it to "evolution of the eye" and no-one would notice.

You even had to put it in brackets because any normal person would have assumed you were talking about evolution of infrared vision.

I tell you, your hypocrisy is playing havoc with your judgement.

Damn,you are So silly,are you blind? Can't you see the topic of your thread and this thread, its "Evolution of the eye" not evolution of infrared vision,Which Ofcourse is part of the eye,you are the hypocrite here trying to change the topic. Mumu

Weah96:


Then in all likelihood, you're NOT a Theist. A deist maybe, that's as vague as they come.

He doesn't support theism nor atheism, he could also be a pantheist ,or maybe he is confused and doesn't know what he believes yet.