Putting 3D glasses on cuttlefish and praying mantises

[essentialsaltes]

Cuttlefish have the ability to watch 3D movies and react to them much like they would if they saw the real thing out in the ocean.

And when it comes to depth perception, they're incredibly proficient.
Those are the findings from a study published Wednesday in the journal Science Advances.

Wardill's team was inspired by scientists at Newcastle University who published a June 2019 study looking at the eyes of praying mantises in a similar fashion. Wearing the world's tiniest 3D glasses, the praying mantises looked like six-legged movie stars, and the results gained attention for their applications to the field of robotics.

Additionally, House of Wax with Vincent Price is rated 95% fresh on rottencuttlefish.com

 

[SelfSim]

3D headsets provide a glowing example (to us) of how dependent our sense of reality is on our mind's perceptions. These headsets can even be used to completely relocate our minds from our bodies. (This routinely happens in FPV drone flying for instance).

3D vision and stereopsis are both testable models invented for explaining, (and making predictions of), our own visual sense of depth perception. These models can then be applied to see if they can also explain to us the frame of reference of, (in this case,) a cuttlefish and a praying mantis. That the model works in doing this, across dissimilar species with some differences noted, then supports the notion of an in-common evolutionary (survival) trait. (We should also keep track of the cases where/if, it doesn't work also).

These in-common consistencies are expected, because that's a natural outcome of science's objective methodology. The notion that the evolution of stereopsis is evidence of "something existing independently from our minds' perceptions", (ie: 'the physical environment'), is of course, just another model we create .. but is different from: stereopsis, evolution and depth perception, because these are objectively testable .. whereas "something existing independently from our minds' perceptions", isn't.

(Mantises and cuttlefish are clearly modelled as also having the mind attribute in these studies .. which then supports the models of common descent and the standard genetic code).

 

[Bob Crowley]

Hey, buddy! Which end do I put my 3D contacts in?

 

[Brightmoon]

Hey, buddy! Which end do I put my 3D contacts in?

the front end , of course!

 

[The_Barmecide]

Everyone is missing the REAL news here: we can make 3D glasses that fit PRAYING MANTISES!!! Feynman was right about room at the bottom!

 

[jacks]

Were the cuttlefish volunteers?

"reported that cuttlefish must determine the distance to their prey, he also found that monocular animals, made blind surgically..." Ouch!

 

[Brightmoon]

Everyone is missing the REAL news here: we can make 3D glasses that fit PRAYING MANTISES!!! Feynman was right about room at the bottom!

well you haven’t quite figured out that it means that we know enough about how these animals see objects that we can test their vision . That’s not exactly the bottom

 

[grasping the after wind]

well you haven’t quite figured out that it means that we know enough about how these animals see objects that we can test their vision . That’s not exactly the bottom

How exactly does that matter? Is the field of preying mantis or cuttlefish ophthalmologist the next big employment opportunity for the liberal arts degree holder? Replacing stock clerk and cashier as automation causes those job to disappear due to redundancy?

 

[jacks]

Well it did lead to this impressive looking formula:

N=∫(1−exp(−kS(λ)l)) × R(λ)d(λ)

Put the formula and this picture on T-Shirts and one could quit their clerk job.

 

[The_Barmecide]

well you haven’t quite figured out that it means that we know enough about how these animals see objects that we can test their vision . That’s not exactly the bottom

Oh wow...you're right. I completely missed the IMPORTANT part there. I feel like a prize idiot now.

 

[Brightmoon]

Oh wow...you're right. I completely missed the IMPORTANT part there. I feel like a prize idiot now.

insects don’t have brains that allow a lot of bells and whistles so they see at a very basic level . So do robots . Getting robots to recognize objects was difficult iirc. So these organisms with basic vision are studied to learn how they see. the results can be applied to robotics . Don’t be like Sarah Palin ignorantly complaining about fruit fly researchers

 

[The_Barmecide]

insects don’t have brains that allow a lot of bells and whistles so they see at a very basic level .

Really? I mean I've watched a lot of Pixar cartoons about bugs and they seem to be pretty smart!

So do robots .

SHHHH! The robots are watching. Do NOT insult the robots.

Getting robots to recognize objects was difficult iirc.

Not Mr. Roboto.

So these organisms with basic vision are studied to learn how they see. the results can be applied to robotics .

I DO NOT want the scientists to make robot cuttlefish and robot praying mantises. I DO NOT want that at all.

Don’t be like Sarah Palin ignorantly complaining about fruit fly researchers

<Dude, in all seriousness I've got a doctorate in the sciences, don't lose your mind over a joke post. Seriously.>

 

[Brightmoon]

Hard to tell you were joking . I meet so many pig ignorant people who would take you seriously . And I’m female

 

[The_Barmecide]

Hard to tell you were joking . I meet so many pig ignorant people who would take you seriously . And I’m female

That's kinda why I invoked Feynman's seminal work on nanotechnology in the original post.

It's not that hard to tell someone is joking, we just use that excuse these days.

Oh, and congrats on your self-identification. What are your pronouns?

 

[Brightmoon]

Cis female . My issue is whether or not I’m Black , black or African American

 

[Chesterton]

Excuse my ignorance, but is there any animal which doesn't have depth perception? Seems like such animals would have got Darwined out of the game a long time ago.

 

[SelfSim]

Excuse my ignorance, but is there any animal which doesn't have depth perception? Seems like such animals would have got Darwined out of the game a long time ago.

Stereopsis in animals:

There is good evidence for stereopsis throughout the animal kingdom. It occurs in many mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibia, fish, crustaceans, spiders, and insects.[1]

 

[sesquiterpene]

Excuse my ignorance, but is there any animal which doesn't have depth perception? Seems like such animals would have got Darwined out of the game a long time ago.

There are many animals that are completely blind, mostly - but not always - cave dwellers. Some may get some depth perception via echolocation, but ones depending on smell probably only get directional information.

 

[SelfSim]

Its interesting that we can still get a perception of depth of field, even with one eye closed.

 

[Chesterton]

There are many animals that are completely blind, mostly - but not always - cave dwellers. Some may get some depth perception via echolocation, but ones depending on smell probably only get directional information.

Actually, I could imagine that echolocation might possibly provide more accurate information about distance than does vision. But my question still stands. The headline of the linked article says "the results were surprising", but it doesn't really say why they were surprising.