|
|
Post by Daedalus on Feb 24, 2014 1:32:23 GMT
Necropost, engage!
GK, my head nearly exploded seeing your name with a different avatar.
|
|
|
|
Post by Intelligence on Feb 24, 2014 1:58:28 GMT
It's certainly much more creepier looking.
|
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Mar 4, 2014 2:55:16 GMT
Necropost, engage! GK, my head nearly exploded seeing your name with a different avatar. Sorry, I try not to raise anyone's blood pressure on a day-to-day basis but sometimes it cannot be avoided. I also want to give credit to Sarah Taylor, who is the artist of the picture from which the avatar was cropped. |
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Mar 5, 2014 3:16:29 GMT
Returning to this thread to say that eyemyself has the best status for this moment, and more people should try it on, at least temporarily. Like a 'I support Tom Siddell' ribbon. |
|
|
|
Post by thedoomblahsong on Mar 6, 2014 0:45:20 GMT
Unless it's double-plus against the rules, I would like to rate snipertom. Avatar: most amazing ever! Good gif and ref to Monty Python. Also somewhat kinky >_>. 11/10 Status: I very much enjoy GKC searchableness ^.^ 9/10 Signature: bunnies part makes me think of suicide bunnies. As for the magenta part: actually there's a non-psychological explanation for why we perceive colors as a wheel rather than as a linear spectrum. Our retinas have three types of cells that detect color, called L-cones, M-cones, and S-cones. There is a tendency to say that L-cones detect red light, M-cones green, and S-cones blue or violet. This is incorrect. Each of the three types of cone cells are activated to varying degrees by different frequencies across the visible spectrum (see graph below). L-cones, for example, can react to different frequencies, but they react most strongly to about 564-580 nm. The signal that a cone cell sends to the brain is the same regardless of which frequency activated it. The brain receives only three types of signals, one from each type of cone cell, and translates these into color based on the ratio of the signals. So red light activates L-cones very strongly, but also M-cones to a much lesser degree, and S-cones not at all, giving a high ratio of L-cone signal to M and S cone signal, which is interpreted as 'red'. Yellow light (~550 nm), on the other hand, activates both L-cones and M-cones to the same degree. You can trick the brain into 'seeing' yellow where there is none, simply by activating the L-cones with red light and activating the M-cones with green light at the same time.  <-- This smiley is not yellow. Your screen is not producing any ~550 nm light at all to make that image. Instead it produces both red and green in equal amounts, which sends the same signals to the brain as actual yellow light would.  Now you might be able to guess why we perceive magenta as a combination of red and blue. For whatever reason, data for cone response curves like the graph above vary significantly, so take this with a grain of salt. But you can see that the curve for the 'red' cone (L-cone) doesn't go all the way down to zero to the left of the peak, it starts to come back up again near 400 nm. Blue light (~450 nm) causes a high S-cone signal, lower M-cone signal, and even lower L-cone signal. Violet light (~400 nm), on the other hand, will give some S-cone signal, slightly lower L-cone signal, and much lower M-cone signal. But once again, you don't necessarily need violet light to make your brain 'see' purple - a mixture of red and blue light will send your brain the same signals. Perceiving colors as a wheel is not an illusion that we suffer because (for some reason) we can't handle the visible spectrum having ends. After all, we can deal with the audible spectrum of sound having ends - we don't perceive a pitch wheel. Rather, it is the direct result of how our retina responds to light on the biochemical level. Biology ftw. TL;DR signature: 8/10. Overall: 9.3 zero gravity protein crystals out of 10! |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyhoo on Mar 6, 2014 3:41:05 GMT
This is an incredible post. Thanks for finally explaining that! It still doesn't make it any less creepy that there is no magenta wavelength, but at least now I can add human vision to the list of things I can half-intelligently discuss. Covalent D: Your sig! why avas demon why |
|
|
|
Post by Covalent on Mar 6, 2014 3:46:36 GMT
This is an incredible post. Thanks for finally explaining that! It still doesn't make it any less creepy that there is no magenta wavelength, but at least now I can add human vision to the list of things I can half-intelligently discuss. Covalent D: Your sig! why avas demon why  ɪ sᴀɪᴅ ɪ ᴅɪᴅɴ'ᴛ ᴡᴀɴᴛ ᴛᴏ ᴛᴀʟᴋ ᴀʙᴏᴜᴛ ɪᴛ |
|
|
|
Post by Señor Goose on Mar 6, 2014 4:09:33 GMT
Unless it's double-plus against the rules, I would like to rate snipertom. Avatar: most amazing ever! Good gif and ref to Monty Python. Also somewhat kinky >_>. 11/10 Status: I very much enjoy GKC searchableness ^.^ 9/10 Signature: bunnies part makes me think of suicide bunnies. As for the magenta part: actually there's a non-psychological explanation for why we perceive colors as a wheel rather than as a linear spectrum. Our retinas have three types of cells that detect color, called L-cones, M-cones, and S-cones. There is a tendency to say that L-cones detect red light, M-cones green, and S-cones blue or violet. This is incorrect. Each of the three types of cone cells are activated to varying degrees by different frequencies across the visible spectrum (see graph below). L-cones, for example, can react to different frequencies, but they react most strongly to about 564-580 nm. The signal that a cone cell sends to the brain is the same regardless of which frequency activated it. The brain receives only three types of signals, one from each type of cone cell, and translates these into color based on the ratio of the signals. So red light activates L-cones very strongly, but also M-cones to a much lesser degree, and S-cones not at all, giving a high ratio of L-cone signal to M and S cone signal, which is interpreted as 'red'. Yellow light (~550 nm), on the other hand, activates both L-cones and M-cones to the same degree. You can trick the brain into 'seeing' yellow where there is none, simply by activating the L-cones with red light and activating the M-cones with green light at the same time. <-- This smiley is not yellow. Your screen is not producing any ~550 nm light at all to make that image. Instead it produces both red and green in equal amounts, which sends the same signals to the brain as actual yellow light would. Now you might be able to guess why we perceive magenta as a combination of red and blue. For whatever reason, data for cone response curves like the graph above vary significantly, so take this with a grain of salt. But you can see that the curve for the 'red' cone (L-cone) doesn't go all the way down to zero to the left of the peak, it starts to come back up again near 400 nm. Blue light (~450 nm) causes a high S-cone signal, lower M-cone signal, and even lower L-cone signal. Violet light (~400 nm), on the other hand, will give some S-cone signal, slightly lower L-cone signal, and much lower M-cone signal. But once again, you don't necessarily need violet light to make your brain 'see' purple - a mixture of red and blue light will send your brain the same signals. Perceiving colors as a wheel is not an illusion that we suffer because (for some reason) we can't handle the visible spectrum having ends. After all, we can deal with the audible spectrum of sound having ends - we don't perceive a pitch wheel. Rather, it is the direct result of how our retina responds to light on the biochemical level. Biology ftw. TL;DR signature: 8/10. Overall: 9.3 zero gravity protein crystals out of 10! Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by zimmyhoo on Mar 6, 2014 6:28:06 GMT
I've stared at this for about five minutes and I'm still perplexed. |
|
|
|
Post by Covalent on Mar 6, 2014 6:40:05 GMT
I've stared at this for about five minutes and I'm still perplexed. It's an animation of the hydrogen atom where the electron is visualised as a probability cloud that moves around the nucleus in its orbital. |
|
|
|
Post by freeformline on Mar 6, 2014 9:12:42 GMT
I'm not sure if I should be happy or sad that the things I have been studying in the last year are appearing in this forum. I demand that fewer students occupy this space!
|
|
|
|
Post by Gotolei on Mar 6, 2014 16:42:20 GMT
Heh, at first I this was a sceencap of somebody breaking the powder toy or something  |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyhoo on Mar 6, 2014 16:47:14 GMT
I've stared at this for about five minutes and I'm still perplexed. It's an animation of the hydrogen atom where the electron is visualised as a probability cloud that moves around the nucleus in its orbital. Oh, that makes sense. Can you find one for something more complex, like nitrogen? |
|
|
|
Post by snipertom on Mar 6, 2014 17:32:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by snipertom on Mar 6, 2014 17:34:29 GMT
Heh, at first I this was a sceencap of somebody breaking the powder toy or something nah it's sauron |
|
|
|
Post by Covalent on Mar 6, 2014 18:48:29 GMT
It's an animation of the hydrogen atom where the electron is visualised as a probability cloud that moves around the nucleus in its orbital. Oh, that makes sense. Can you find one for something more complex, like nitrogen? Well.. I can't find an animation but here's a picture of how the orbitals of the nitrogen atom, as well as oxygen, fluorine, and neon are put together.  |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 6, 2014 19:30:39 GMT
Necropost, engage! GK, my head nearly exploded seeing your name with a different avatar. Sorry, I try not to raise anyone's blood pressure on a day-to-day basis but sometimes it cannot be avoided. I also want to give credit to Sarah Taylor, who is the artist of the picture from which the avatar was cropped. Somehow I was sure "...credit to Sarah Taylor, who is...." sentence would end "...the person depicted in my avatar" and was horrified by that. Too much caffeine and too little sleep? |
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Mar 7, 2014 5:49:41 GMT
It's probably been said before, but Gotolei's avatar is incredibly clever.
Also, you have ruined me with this "Powder Toy" contraption. For years I thought Burning Sand was the limit of that genre, but now I see they've taken it much farther.
|
|
|
|
Post by zimmyhoo on Mar 7, 2014 13:32:53 GMT
GotoleiWhy. Why did you link or even mention that accursed thing. I'm stuck. (I'm going to be internetless for about a week, so maybe it's a good thing, but it sure hasn't helped me get on the road. Also, bye, temporarily!)
|
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Mar 8, 2014 14:43:20 GMT
GotoleiWhy. Why did you link or even mention that accursed thing. I'm stuck. (I'm going to be internetless for about a week, so maybe it's a good thing, but it sure hasn't helped me get on the road. Also, bye, temporarily!) Huh, I always saw it under the name 'Dust' on the website NotDoppler. So addicting. |
|
|
|
Post by Gotolei on Mar 8, 2014 23:28:35 GMT
Pleasure doing business with you.  |
|
|
|
Post by Intelligence on Mar 9, 2014 1:21:16 GMT
GotoleiAvt: Smiling claw-Rey. 10/10 Txt: N/A Sig: Nothing interesting. 0/10
|
|
|
|
Post by CoyoteReborn on Mar 9, 2014 21:33:55 GMT
GotoleiAvt: Smiling claw-Rey. 10/10 Txt: N/A Sig: Nothing interesting. 0/10 : You dare steal my image for your avatar?!? Heresy/10: I don't like impersonators. Their legs always get stuck in my teeth. |
|
|
|
Post by KMar on May 22, 2014 5:17:32 GMT
Lord Coyote: What a beautiful creature. It looks like it's about eat the moon. Magnificent. 10/10. Text: what.  /10. Sig: NaN. I necro'd this thread because of obvious reasons ( NEW AVATAR I THINK AVATARS ARE NEAT.) edit: also, all glory to fwip for the pic. |
|
<-- This smiley is not yellow. Your screen is not producing any ~550 nm light at all to make that image. Instead it produces both red and green in equal amounts, which sends the same signals to the brain as actual yellow light would.
/10. Sig: NaN.