| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Seeker |
Posted - 07/04/2011 : 22:07:11
Doesn't everyone? But, before I say what this theory is, here's some data.
When one studies photography, one learns that each color of the spectrum has a different temperature. Blue is a cool temperature, green is just a tad warmer, and they get hotter as they move to white.
On black and white film, such as an old movie, white has the hottest temperature and black is the coolest. We might not notice but, every other color is represented by a different shade of gray.
They have a program to colorize old movies. If they know the color of one image on the film, say, a woman's face, then they adjust until the face looks the skin tone that it is. The program, then, evaluates the temperatures of every other shade of gray and the original colors of all the objects on the film will be displayed.
Amphibians and Cuttlefish can match the object that they are on. Some, better than others.
My theory is this:
For these creatures to match the colors, shading and contours of the object, these creatures must have color/temperature sensors on their unsides that transmit the data to different pigments on their backs.
Being cold blooded, them being on the object won't change the object's temperature, just the opposite. The object changes their temperature.
However, because their backs are subjected to winds, sunlight and other influences, I believe that the color sensors have to be on their undersides because their backs will change temperature, although, they retain their camouflage colors on their backs. |
| 9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Seeker |
Posted - 27/04/2011 : 18:07:31
What I have read about the armoured vehicles was that they were trying to bend light around the vehicle, making it "invisible" in that manner, not the system I have described.
I haven't been able to find anything that puts the sensors on the underside and then connected to the pigments on the backs of animals. If you know of such a study, please tell me.
I'm just saying that people keep looking at the animals' backs as the governor for pigment camouflage and that doesn't make sense to me. I think it would have to be the part of the body that is on the object.
The brain couldn't gauge all of the patterns of the object and the back certainly couldn't even see them, at all. It must be the underside.
Don't forget, being a cold blooded animal, these creatures' undersides will change temperature to match the object, they won't be warming the object up. The object will remain a constant.
I believe I could build the system and, like you, I am fighting for my discoveries all the time. One has to include that in the equation. :) |
| Paulusworm |
Posted - 27/04/2011 : 16:40:11
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker
C'mon guys, put the beers down and pay attention. A new discovery is not found in books...kinda the definition of a new discovery...
I received my honours degree in Forensic Biology from the University of Portsmouth back in 2009 after completing an honours research project of my own creation which aimed at discovering a new method for establishing a post-mortem interval from blowfly pupae found at a crime scene. My research project was very hands on and is currently being further investigated by a fellow graduate who is studying for his PhD. I faced scepticism and ridicule in the early stages but was able to counter with hard scientific facts and reproducable evidence. I am a biologist and not new to the concept of new theories due to the specialist nature of my field. If you would like me to lie and tell you that your theory is amazing then you have come to the wrong place. I'm just being honest with you and not being critical for the sheer hell of it. I went to my supervisor with hundreds of crazy ideas before landing on my one. Keep looking around and get stuck into some academic journals, research papers, etc. Just tread carefully when you do put a theory forward as plagerism is taken extremely seriously in the academic world.
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker
What if we reversed it and built a suit that had the sensors on the back and the pigments on the front. One could stand with their back against a wall and the front of them would change to match the wall. Think of the military and espionage applications. An invisible man. Or a tank or... Remember, you heard it here first.
I'm sure I saw something on Discovery or Nat Geo about research already taking place on that very thing. I think it was for armoured vehicles. A Predator suit would be pretty cool but a bit confusing on the battlefield if both sides have them, lol   |
| Seeker |
Posted - 25/04/2011 : 23:58:55
C'mon guys, put the beers down and pay attention. A new discovery is not found in books...kinda the definition of a new discovery...
What if we reversed it and built a suit that had the sensors on the back and the pigments on the front. One could stand with their back against a wall and the front of them would change to match the wall. Think of the military and espionage applications. An invisible man. Or a tank or... Remember, you heard it here first. |
| Paulusworm |
Posted - 19/04/2011 : 10:07:41
Have you put your theory forward to any universities over your side of the pond to see what they think? I would need to go back over some of my first year degree notes and textbooks but I'm pretty certain I remember correctly that they have pretty much sewn up how cuttlefish, flatfish, etc mimic their surroundings and I certainly don't remember any mention of "mood rings" or temperature of colours when we covered it.
Not really missed much K. I think that Seeker is just hearing/interpretting posts so that they fit their argument rather than accepting many years of scientific research and proven scientific fact . |
| Seeker |
Posted - 17/04/2011 : 14:32:58
Just a new discovery refining itself as it goes. It's fun to watch it take shape. The immediate wall of of critism until it is just a commonly known fact.
|
| Kehhlyr |
Posted - 16/04/2011 : 22:12:46
Eh what?
Is there missing posts here??
Or is the post above this agreeing with themselves in the post above that??
|
| Seeker |
Posted - 16/04/2011 : 19:02:40
I am so glad that you made the comparison to a mood ring. Mood rings work because of temperature changes.
When someone is stressed, their capillaries constrict, blood flow slows and the temperature drops.
When someone is calm, the capillaries expand, flood flow increases and the temperature rises.
That is how it works. Not their mental mood, as such but, the physiological changes that the mood causes.
The difference with animals that have camouflage capabilities is that the sensors are on their undersides and they are connected to the pigment on their backs
Once again, thank you. |
| Seeker |
Posted - 16/04/2011 : 18:49:43
That wouldn't explain how a Cuddlefish matches the colors, shadows, shapes and patterns of the rock that it is on. That would be a very strange mood, indeed.
Nor would it explain the Tree Frog that matched the green leaf it was on all the way down to the dead brown edge of the leaf. One of it's legs was hanging over the edge, slightly, and it matched the edge of the leaf with a brown strip of color right across the top of it's leg, matching it perfectly.
It may very well act as a mood ring, just as I said, matching it's temperature with what ever it is on. That is how a mood ring works-different colors for different temperatures.
They don't always go camouflage. Sometimes they turn a color to match their mood, such as courtship.
Thanks, you just backed up what I said and didn't even know it. :) |
| Paulusworm |
Posted - 14/04/2011 : 13:02:32
Nice theory but, unfortunately, incorrect. With a few exceptions such as the mimic octopus colour, shape, etc are displays of "mood". The whole chameleon camouflaging itself this only came about through humans misunderstanding what was happening. Another example is birdsong. We all think it sounds beautiful, etc but consider what the birds are really doing. |
|
|
