
Biologically extending human vision into the near-infrared: Initial success - irollboozers
http://experiment.com/u/aAcR2Q?helloHN
======
JacobAldridge
Link to the original Project Page, if (like me) you're playing catch up on the
experiment:

[https://experiment.com/projects/can-we-biologically-
extend-t...](https://experiment.com/projects/can-we-biologically-extend-the-
range-of-human-vision-into-the-near-infrared)

~~~
theophrastus
Thank you for that link (it really helped)

There is anecdotal evidence that the since the proteins in the human lens
become opaque (absorptive) in the near infrared (search: crystallin
transmission spectrum); that patients who have had their lenses removed for
cataract surgery see beyond both traditional limit ends (as the polymer lens
replacement has a different transmission spectrum) ... so [semi-serious-only]
perhaps it would be more efficacious to have one lens removed? (no lens over a
snake's thermal pits etc)

~~~
mikeash
Just providing one of those anecdotes: my father's cataract surgery extended
his vision into the near ultraviolet. We discovered this when we walked past a
window of a room containing a black light, and he remarked at the bright
purple glow coming from within, whereas I could barely see it. Fascinating
stuff.

------
gus_massa
Copy of a comment I made in a previous submission, a few hour ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8207152](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8207152)

Well, the data is very noisy. The main problem is that this data doesn't have
a before/after comparison. Is the 850nm light visible now or it was always
visible???

It's also very difficult to make a fair comparison. The room must be the same,
the light sources must be the same (a new coffeepot with a small led can ruin
the experiment, removing a coffeepot because it has recently broken can ruin
the experiment).

For a preliminary experiment, the before-after comparison is enough. For a
serious experiment you need many voluntaries, compare the before-after signals
of them all at the same time in the same experimental conditions, and double
blind testing.

There is a small possibility that they are measuring "excitement" instead of
light. The subject hears that they are now going to test with very near
infrared light. He got exited. They measure that. Perhaps the flash makes a
slight sound, perhaps the light operator makes a slight sound. (Perhaps the
850nm flash makes a sound that the other flashes don't make?)

~~~
lotsofmangos
If you read the text, it tells you that the 850nm was always visible.

~~~
gus_massa
I reed the previous version of this URL. IIRC it has the same graphs, but the
text was much shorter, and didn't explain that. Replace 850 with 950 in my
comment. The article now says that 950nm was not visible, but they don't link
to the graph.

------
specialp
This could certainly be possible. Jay Neitz did experiments on monkeys to cure
colorblindness using gene therapy and was successful. [1] He has said that
perhaps one day humans can have genes for more color receptors added to be
able to see more colors as some birds do.

1\.
[http://www.neitzvision.com/content/genetherapy.html](http://www.neitzvision.com/content/genetherapy.html)

~~~
avz
To see an extra color, i.e. to become tetrachromats, we would need a lot more
than a dietary change, so this is an entirely new subject barely related to
the original post.

To distinguish an extra color we would need a new type of cone cells with a
different spectral response to the three types we already have (called L-, M-
and S-cones). We could modify a subset of the existing cells or add new cells.
If you modify the existing cells, you then need to teach the visual cortex
that the signals coming from the modified cones indicate a new color. How
would this be done? If you add new cone cells, you then need to add new neural
pathway along the optic nerve and plug it into the visual cortex somehow. How
would this be done?

On the other hand, the original experiment proposed to alter the availability
of different types of vitamin A by dietary changes with the intention of
modifying the spectral response of the existing photosensitive cells so that
light of previously invisible wavelength would become visible. This does not
increase the number of colors, but changes the range of wavelength
corresponding to each color for the affected individual.

~~~
wlesieutre
I haven't read it myself, but it's worth pointing out that research has
claimed that there already _are_ some humans with four types of cones.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Possibility_of_h...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Possibility_of_human_tetrachromats)

------
leoc
On the other end of the scale:
[http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/02/14/165202/followup-u...](http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/02/14/165202/followup-
ultraviolet-vision-after-cataract-surgery)

~~~
irollboozers
It's funny that most of the jokes tend to revolve around becoming some sort of
super hero. The stranger thing is that no one has pondered the potential cons
having the ability to see beyond the spectrum. Or maybe I don't read enough
comic books?

~~~
johnchristopher
I read something on imgur or here some days ago from a guy who could "see"
some UV. He had to wear polarizing glasses because of headaches and had
developed a fascination for violet objects.

~~~
CGudapati
By any chance, do you have a link to them?

~~~
johnchristopher
It took some google search terms tweaking[0] but I found it:
[http://imgur.com/owXEe41](http://imgur.com/owXEe41) (sfw).

> I have 20/11 vision with a mutation that causes me to see a lower-band of
> UV. It overstimulates my ocular processing and causes migraines. I wear
> amber glass eye glasses with +.02 diopiter lenses to help reduce this
> problem. Because of this, I have an absolute obsession and facination with
> purple objects.

I remember the original poster participated in the comment section but (sigh)
I don't know how to get there.

[0] site:imgur.com comment uv glasses headache

------
diziet
I'd love to see the ERG readings for more experiments and before vs after at
950nm~

~~~
irollboozers
a lengthy discussion over on reddit about this:
[http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/2e5wry/biohacker...](http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/2e5wry/biohackers_declare_initial_success_in/)

------
dedward
I seem to recall an article from some years back about someone using welding
goggles with multiple layers of a specific blue filter on a very bright day
and being able to see near-IR.. or something darn close to it.

~~~
jerf
I think you're thinking of this:
[http://amasci.com/amateur/irgoggl.html](http://amasci.com/amateur/irgoggl.html)

It did take a bit for me to dig it up... I actually ended up having to use
Google image search because I remember the guy talking about how trees looked.
Without that I got a series of short uninteresting breathless YouTube videos
on the topic and a whole bunch of contentless reblogging of said video that
drowned out the original article.

------
qwerta
My astronomy friends are into hard-core start gazing. One experiment was in La
Palma island with near-perfect night sky at 8 000 feet. One guy could see 8.1
magnitude stars at 80% cases (independent stats). With oxygen and some
training he would probably get to 8.5 magnitudes.

There are similar stories with sound etc. I think some people can see near
infrared, it is just question of finding them.

------
sigil
What an interesting experiment. Could there be some basis, after all, to the
urban legend that eating carrots improves night vision? Carotenes are "partly
metabolized into Vitamin A" [1], but this experiment is skipping the
precursors and going straight for what I assume are large and exclusive doses
of Vitamin A. Can it really be that no one has tried this before?

Related and probably equally silly idea: I've always wanted a pair of
sunglasses that could tune in to different EM spectra. How far are we from
that? Night vision goggles are bulky because they need external power to do
the frequency shifting, right?

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrot#Nutrition](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrot#Nutrition)

~~~
wisty
The urban legend was mostly due to its use in WWII, to explain why the allied
night fighters were so good. The fighters actually used radar, which was still
top secret.

~~~
dredmorbius
Source?

~~~
27182818284
_" Much publicity has been given to the good effects of carrots on night
vision and some newspapers have even begun to use the vegetable as a nickname
for certain ace pilots. Actually, night-fighter pilots don't eat anymore
carrots than day fighters do..."_ —LIFE June 23, 1941

(Not quite the same, but in a similar vein)

~~~
dredmorbius
Thanks. Snopes has this:

[http://www.snopes.com/food/ingredient/carrots.asp](http://www.snopes.com/food/ingredient/carrots.asp)

"While carrots are a good source of vitamin A (which is important for healthy
eyesight, skin, growth, and resisting infection), eating them won't improve
vision. The purported link between carrots and markedly acute vision is a
matter of lore, not of science. And it's lore of the deliberately manufactured
type.

"In World War II, Britain's air ministry spread the word that a diet of these
vegetables helped pilots see Nazi bombers attacking at night. That was a lie
intended to cover the real matter of what was underpinning the Royal Air
Force's successes: Airborne Interception Radar, also known as AI. The secret
new system pinpointed some enemy bombers before they reached the English
Channel.

"British Intelligence didn't want the Germans to find out about the superior
new technology helping protect the nation, so they created a rumor to afford a
somewhat plausible-sounding explanation for the sudden increase in bombers
being shot down. News stories began appearing in the British press about
extraordinary personnel manning the defenses, including Flight Lieutenant John
Cunningham, an RAF pilot dubbed "Cats Eyes" on the basis of his exceptional
night vision that allowed him to spot his prey in the dark. Cunningham's
abilities were chalked up to his love of carrots. Further stories claimed RAF
pilots were being fed goodly amounts of this root vegetable to foster similar
abilities in them...."

That's an interesting form of disinformation. I've been known to employ
somewhat similar tactics myself.

~~~
Scoundreller
> I've been known to employ somewhat similar tactics myself.

How can we be sure?

~~~
dredmorbius
The context involved a disagreement with someone else which grew to include a
legal action.

Turns out I'd managed to access a significant trove of documents, admissible
in court, strongly supporting my side's case.

I was in communication with several entities I suspected were communicating
(directly or otherwise) with the opposing side, and while it was useful to
communicate that we had significant information, detailing just what it was,
or how it was obtained, was somewhat less so.

So the cover story we worked out was that we had deep connections to the
black-hat online hacker community who were able to pull all kinds of random
information out of the Net. Playing up the whole hacker mistique thing.

One consequence of this was opposing counsel strongly suspecting that the
evidence we introduced wasn't admissible. They were rather surprised when it
turned out to be _very_ admissible. The fact that the opposing side's
witnesses were shown to be markedly less than credible didn't help their side
(and may have sabotaged their own case).

It was a vaguely satisfying aspect of an otherwise fairly unpleasant episode.

------
tdaltonc
When is the flash on and when is it off in these plot? What would these plots
look like in a control subject? Does the subject have any other indication of
when the flashes are occurring?

I know that this isn't written to be read critically, but I don't know what
the take-away is.

------
tylermenezes
What's really cool is that this entire project was done for under $5k!

------
Garbledup
Through technological enhancement[1] or practice it seems that anyone can make
an attempt at monitoring & responding too these frequencies.

[1][http://eyewiki.aao.org/Intravitreal_Injections](http://eyewiki.aao.org/Intravitreal_Injections)

------
TTPrograms
Those plots really need labels.

------
_greim_
> near-infrared

So, still red then?

~~~
lutusp
No. "near-infrared" isn't a red color shade, in fact it's not normally visible
at all. Near-infrared is what your media remote uses to control your TV and
audio system. You really cannot see it.

~~~
StavrosK
Well, you _can_ see the LED blinking if you look at it straight on, but I
guess it may bleed into the visible spectrum.

~~~
ay
That's pretty fascinating if you can see it. I just tried with three different
remotes - and alas, I can't see a thing, no matter how hard I try.

All three give very bright flash when viewed via my Mac's camera (just
launching Facetime with no call and pointing the remote to it).

~~~
StavrosK
Huh. No, I can definitely see it. I just looked at my HTC One's IR transmitter
for the first time, without knowing where the LED is. It's pretty clearly on
the right side of the lock button, just under it.

~~~
ay
I don't have HTC One to make a comparison - but if you have some "vanilla"
remotes laying around and can see the IR LEDs blink in all of them when active
- then yeah, probably you do see into the IR and I don't!

~~~
StavrosK
Yeah, I just tried both TV remotes (one is just a Samsung remote). I can see
all of them, but it's only a faint glow. Try it in a dark room, you should be
able to see it.

~~~
ay
Nope, I just tried and went into a pitch-black room with a remote control
whose LED on the Mac camera looks very bright, and tried to look at it while
activating the LED - nothing, not a blip, I can not see the IR LED with my
eyes...

~~~
StavrosK
Huh, weird. I'm going to ask a few friends to see if they can see it, thanks.

------
userbinator
This is particularly relevant given that there's been a recent trend of
interest in thermal imaging cameras... of course, the range of those is in
much longer wavelengths.

