On Mon, 13 May 2024 18:02:36 -0400, Richard Aiken - raikenclw at gmail.com
(via tml list) <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote to Freelance Traveller:

>Question: does this biological night vision have the same quirk as
>mechanical night vision (eg converting an image into differing shades of
>one particular color)?

There is no way to answer that question; an entity that has night vision as
an inherent biological process also has a brain that can handle the
processing of that vision.

More, the mechanism of 'night vision' isn't specified, so there's no way of
knowing whether it's implemented as a higher sensitivity to lower levels of
electromagnetic radiation within a specific spectrum, or whether it's some
other mechanism, such as

>On Mon, May 13, 2024, 2:47 AM Timothy Collinson - timothy.collinson at
>port.ac.uk (via tml list) <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 12 May 2024, 22:32 James Catchpole - jlcatchpole at googlemail.com
>> (via tml list), <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 12 May 2024, 21:45 Timothy Collinson - timothy.collinson at
>>> port.ac.uk (via tml list), <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> While I'm here and sort of on the subject, am I right in thinking IR/UV
>>>> Vision is meant to be read, typically, as an either/or option, i.e. IR
>>>> Vision or UV Vision rather than a Trait of "IR/UV Vision"?
>>>> How reasonable/likely would it be for an animal to have both?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Using the same eye(s), very unlikely I think, unless acuity of vision
>>> wasn't an issue. IR and UV are opposite ends of the visible spectrum
>>>
>>
>>
>> That's what I thought which is why I suspect it should be read as an OR.
>>
>> and, IIRC, the range we have is about as broad as it can be without
>>> spectral separation occuring. Put more simply, you can't use the same lens
>>> to cleanly focus a wider range of frequencies than we use - one end will be
>>> in focus while the other is out of focus.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, I *felt* that but couldn't have expressed it clearly.  Thank you.
>>
>> They could use different eyes for different frequency bands (I believe
>>> some insects and arachnids do this), or they could accept the problem and,
>>> much as we automatically change focus for near and far fields without being
>>> conscious of it, compensate for a mix of sharp and fuzzy images of the same
>>> object in the brain.
>>>
>>
>> Like both of those suggestions.  Great.
>>
>> tc
>>
>> -----
>> The Traveller Mailing List
>> Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
>> Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
>> To unsubscribe from this list please go to
>> https://https://www.simplelists.com/subs/
>>
>-----
>The Traveller Mailing List
>Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
>Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
>To unsubscribe from this list please go to
>https://www.simplelists.com/confirm/?u=wfcoddcMsNO4BxJM3qWTs4LGDbHIt4XD

®Traveller is a registered trademark of
Far Future Enterprises, 1977-2024. Use of
the trademark in this notice and in the
referenced materials is not intended to
infringe or devalue the trademark.

--
Jeff Zeitlin, Editor
Freelance Traveller
    The Electronic Fan-Supported Traveller® Resource
xxxxxx@freelancetraveller.com
http://www.freelancetraveller.com

Freelance Traveller extends its thanks to the following
enterprises for hosting services:

onCloud/CyberWeb Enterprises (http://www.oncloud.io)
The Traveller Downport (http://www.downport.com)