Post details: Tetrachromat Females

21/06/07

Permalink 06:45:53 pm, by RayTomes Email , 2035 words, 78405 views   English (NZ)
Categories: Cycles, biology, physics

Tetrachromat Females

The title is just a fancy way of saying that some women seem to have four colour receptors in their eyes rather than the usual three. Actually some people also have a different set of three and this was known for some time before the discovery that quite a few women see extra colours than the rest of the population. Of course some men are missing a receptor and have only two and as a result are called colour blind. Compared to tetrachromats we are all colour blind.

[For Americans, some of the world spell color as colour and colorblind as colourblind and so on. This is just to help the search engines to find this page.]

"Oh, everyone knows my color vision is different," chuckles Mrs. M, a 57-year-old English social worker. "People will think things match, but I can see they don't." What you wouldn't give to see the world through her deep blue-gray eyes, if only for five minutes.

Preliminary evidence gathered at Cambridge University in 1993 suggests that this woman is a tetrachromat, perhaps the most remarkable human mutant ever identified. Most of us have color vision based on three channels; a tetrachromat has four.

The theoretical possibility of this secret sorority -- genetics dictates that tetrachromats would all be female -- has intrigued scientists since it was broached in 1948. Now two scientists, working separately, plan to search systematically for tetrachromats to determine once and for all whether they exist and whether they see more colors than the rest of us do. The scientists are building on a raft of recent findings about the biology of color vision.

This is from Looking for Madam Tetrachromat which goes on to describe the search for women who can see more colours. I guess that we men, and the rest of the female population just have to accept that some women who give interior design advice should be listened to so that the results are suitable for all people, not just trichromats and bichromats (or is that dichromats?).

According to The Science Show site, Robyn Williams states that each year the London Daily Telegraph gives a prize for science writing. The prize for 2004 junior winner was Caoimhe McKenna who’s 18 and who thinks she knows why women are so much better men at seeing colour coding and properly matching clothes. Here’s Caoimhe McKenna's winning piece.

As an Irish, teenage girl, I have often wondered if the world of colour that I perceive with my eyes is the same as that of others. Not only my fellow XX chromosome holders but also those holders of the X chromosome paired with the puny and rather ineffectual Y chromosome, commonly known as "men''. I wonder this as my father sets out to work in his mismatched tie and my brother with his odd socks, while my mother and I discuss various shades of colour to match our newly decorated living room.

Let me begin with a look at the history of our colour vision. We are descendants of nocturnal tree dwellers. Colour vision is thought to have evolved in our ancestors about 35 million years ago, giving them more opportunities to find fruit and leaves to eat. Humans have inherited a colour visual system that is dependant upon three forms of iodopsin, or colour pigments, each responding to light of a different wavelength region. Each form of iodopsin occurs in a different cone type and the relative stimulation of each type is interpreted by the brain as a particular colour.

I can see a demonstration of this when I get up close to my television; there are only three colours: red, green and blue. These coloured spots on the screen stimulate the colour pigments in the retina of my eye to different extents, so that when I stand back I can see all the colours of the rainbow. Maybe. All this is down to that amazing chemical iodopsin. Iodopsin is a pigment that like all proteins is coded for in the DNA of my genes. Interestingly the genes controlling the production of the pigments in the eye that enables discrimination of red and green is sex-linked.

The green and red genes encode photopigments that respond to different, overlapping regions in the middle-to-long wavelength spectrum and are adjacent to each other on the X chromosome. Strangely, the blue photopigment gene is on its own on another chromosome - feeling blue in solitude? This explains why the most common form of colour-blindness, red-green, is hereditary and why it affects about eight per cent of Caucasian males and less than 0.5 per cent of females.

I have two X chromosomes, one from my mother and one from my father's mother (thank you, girls). My brother has to manage with mummy's two photopigment genes on his X chromosome but I have four between my two X chromosomes. This is where it gets interesting.

One of my X chromosomes may have a slightly different green photopigment gene from the other and "X inactivation'' might happen. This well-known biological phenomenon causes some cells to rely on one X chromosome and other cells to rely on the other. I might have four different types of photopigment; blue, red, green and shifted green (or red and shifted red). All I need now for four colour vision (tetrachromacy) is a superior brain.

A recent paper by Kimberly Jameson, Susan Highnote and Linda Wasserman of the University of California, San Diego, concerning females who may have tetrachromacy shows amazing results. Up to 50 per cent of women are tetrachromatic and can use their extra pigments in "contextually rich viewing circumstances". For example, when looking at a rainbow, tetrachromat females can segment it into, on average, 10 different colours, whereas their trichromat brothers and sisters can see only seven, much as Isaac Newton's red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet. Consequently, for those special tetrachromat women, this island that they inhabit may be seen in emerald, jade, verdant, olive, lime, bottle and 34 other shades of green. Apparently, men and women do see the world differently.

However, the tetrachromats among us should not think themselves too superior. If you want truly advanced colour vision it might be a good idea to become a bird. Pigeons, according to a paper by the late Francisco Varela of the University Hospital in Paris and colleagues, have five colour receptors and can process visual imagery up to 10 times faster than human beings. While we see a television producing smooth movement in realistic colour they will see dull flickering lights - this may be why you won't see a lot of pigeons watching Birds of a Feather.

4 colour receptors profiles

In an article A Life More Colorful Cynthia Wood describes that "Jumping spiders are natural tetrachromats, with four kinds of receptors, and while there are no known mammalian tetrachromats, there are believed to be tetrachromats among birds, insects, reptiles, and amphibians."

colour chart

The normal human retina's color receptors are tuned to green, blue, and red. Working together, the three give us our colorful view of the world. When one or more of those color receptors is missing the result is color-blindness. The genes for our red and green color receptors are located on the X-chromosome, giving women a redundant set of receptor genes. This is why men are far more prone to color-blindness than women. In order to be functionally color-blind a woman not only has to be missing a receptor gene on both X-chromosomes, it must be the same gene on each one. The chances of this happening are so slim that only 0.4% of the US female population is affected. By contrast male color-blindness is far more prevalent with 8% of the US male population affected - 95% of them with red or green receptor problems. Color-blindness makes it difficult or impossible to distinguish some colors, depending on which receptor is affected. The term color-blindness itself is somewhat of a misnomer, since color perception is altered, not eliminated. True color-blindness, wherein a person can distinguish no color at all, requires a malfunction of all three kinds of color receptors, and affects only 0.003% of the population regardless of gender.

With reference to searching for tetrachomats in humans, Cymthia Wood goes on to examine the question of whether having the two types of colours receptors in the two X chromosomes would be matched by the necessary brain development to use them ...

Dr. Gabriele Jordan of Cambridge University may have answered that one. She tested the color perception of fourteen women who each had at least one son with the right kind of color-blindness. She set up a test where the subjects had to manipulate and blend two wavelengths of colored light to produce any hue they liked. They then had to match their own results a second time. With normal color vision, several different combinations would match any given hue, with a tetrachromat the possible combinations to produce a visible match would be much reduced. Dr. Jordan reported that two of the fourteen women showed exactly the results she would have expected from a tetrachromat. At least one of the two women reports having a different sense of color from the people around her, with both better color matching and better color memory. While not completely conclusive, this initial study has so far provided our best candidates for natural human tetrachromats.

This is an interesting subject, and I note that the wikipedia article on primary colours does mention tetrachromats, but as other species

To generate optimal color ranges for species other than humans, other primary colors would have to be used. For example, for species known as tetrachromats, with four different color receptors, one would use four primary colors (since humans can only see to 400 nanometers (violet), but tetrachromats can see into the ultraviolet to about 300 nanometers, this fourth primary color might be located in the shorter-wavelength range and would probably be a pure spectral magenta rather than the magenta we see which is a mixture of red and blue).

However there is a wikipedia article on tetrachromacy also which states:

Tetrachromacy is the condition of possessing four independent channels for conveying color information, or possessing four different cones, one other than RGB. Organisms with tetrachromacy are called tetrachromats. For these organisms, the perceptual effect of any arbitrarily chosen light from its visible spectrum can be matched by a mixture of no less than four different pure spectral lights.

The normal explanation of tetrachromacy is that the organism's retina contains four types of higher-intensity light receptors (called cone cells in vertebrates as opposed to rod cells which are lower intensity light receptors) with different absorption spectra. This means the animal can see colors beyond those of a normal human being's eyesight. In practice the number of such receptor types may be greater than four, since different types may be active at different light intensities.

Tetrachromacy has not yet been confirmed in any mammals, though it is likely that it occurs in some birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles, arachnids and insects. Humans and closely related primates normally have three types of cone cells and are therefore trichromats (animals with three different cones). However, at low light intensities the rod cells may contribute to color vision, giving a small region of tetrachromacy in the color space.

It has been suggested that women who are carriers for variant cone pigments may be born as full tetrachromats, having four different simultaneously functioning kinds of cones to pick up different colors.[1] One study suggested that 2-3% of the world's women may have the kind of fourth cone that lies between the standard red and green cones, giving, theoretically, a significant increase in colour differentiation.[2] Although further studies will need to be conducted to verify tetrachromacy in humans, at least one tetrachromat has been identified - "Mrs. M," an English social worker, was discovered in a study conducted in 1993.[3] Variation in cone pigment genes is widespread in most human populations, but the most prevalent and pronounced tetrachromacy would derive from female carriers of major red-green pigment anomalies, usually classed as forms of "color blindness" (protanomaly or deuteranomaly). The biological basis for this phenomenon is X-inactivation.

To take a colour blindess test if you want. Sorry, we can't give you a tetrachromat test because your monitor only has 3 colours. :-)

Comments:

Comment from: Jill McMurray [Visitor] Email
I find this all extremely interesting. My daughter and I both have a very sharp sense of color. We are always being asked to go shopping with people because "we match things so well". We both see every color in many different shades and ways. I can't wait to share this with her.
PermalinkPermalink 24/06/07 @ 08:38
Comment from: Jailleto [Visitor] Email
It's explain why my wife take 2 hours to choose the perfect color match for his clothes... !
PermalinkPermalink 25/06/07 @ 08:42
Comment from: Matt [Visitor] Email
Hate to burst your bubble, Jill, but it's far more likely that you and your daughter just have a good sense of taste and understanding of simple color theory (regardless of whether or not you've learned about it). ;)
PermalinkPermalink 25/06/07 @ 12:37
Comment from: RayTomes [Member] Email · http://ray.tomes.biz/
Yes, I think that it is true that women in general are more interested in colour and matching things, whether they are tri- or tetrachromats. Perhaps we will have a test some time for this, but it will not be available on existing 3 colour monitors I think. ;-)
PermalinkPermalink 25/06/07 @ 19:14
Comment from: David Bradley [Visitor] Email · http://www.sciencebase.com
I'd not quote Caoimhe McKenna's complete on this page. The Daily Telegraph has the copyright and won't take too kindly, I'm sure.

By the way I one that very same award way back in 1991 for an article entitled "Not every sperm is sacred"

db
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 06:08
Comment from: Malizorica [Visitor] Email
Does this have anything to do with dreaming in color? My husband claims to dream in black and white and has a terrible time matching his clothes. My son, daughter, and I all dream in color and are all able to match our clothes. In fact, my son has a very keen sense of color and is very sensitive to light which makes me wonder if we aren't able to detect colors in degrees.
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 06:22
Comment from: Marc [Visitor] Email
We are evolving. There is more than just extra colors to see out there.

Use it or lose it .. is the old saying.. but I say it goes beyond that

Use it and watch it grow!

Whatever you place your attention on expands & grows. There are no limits
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 06:38
Comment from: RayTomes [Member] Email · http://ray.tomes.biz/
To David Bradley: I haven't quoted the entire article, I think two paragraphs.

To Malizorica: I would expect that you cannot dream in more colours than you can see, but could do so in less.

The hits to this article has gone crazy - now at 13,700 in 3 days and running at about 100/minute. It has featured in Stumbleupon, digg, topix, redit, and more, and I think my domain host is bending under the strain. :-)
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 06:48
Comment from: sleepsleep [Visitor] Email · http://www.google.com
how could you confirm that my red is your red? coz the colors interpreted by my eyes could be totally different from yours. eventhough we both agree it is red.
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 07:00
Comment from: RayTomes [Member] Email · http://ray.tomes.biz/
To sleepsleep: Well I hope that your red is not my green or we might have trouble at the traffic lights! ;-)
But seriously we cannot know that in an absolute sense. Your red might be my chord of C major. However the response of the rods and cones in the eyes can be compared between people and I suppose in principle the resulting nerve impulses. The rest we take on faith just like we assume that we all mean the same thing by all the words we use. In fact of course we use words a little differently and sometimes this leads to wars.
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 07:20
Comment from: John [Visitor] Email · http://www.digitalpoint.com
Comment from: Jailleto [Visitor] Email
It's explain why my wife take 2 hours to choose the perfect color match for his clothes... !


Your wife is a guy?
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 07:27
Comment from: Nancy Joslin [Visitor] Email
What a nice article to wake up to this morning. There have been times I times I thought I was going nuts, because when I see color I
so many different hues (quite enjoyable). It is nice to know I
am sane. Not all green is just green. How sweet it is!
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 08:02
Comment from: Bill Fredrickson [Visitor] Email
Caoimhe McKenna seems like an arrogant feminist.
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 08:09
Comment from: Dan [Visitor] Email
To those mentioning that there would be no tetrachromat test available on a standard three-color monitor - I believe that /human/ tetrachromats would be able to be tested with three color monitors - I recall from somewhere long ago (Mr. Wizard when I was a kid, I think) that normal/trichromat's cannot distinguish between two sequentially numbered Pantone colors, the closest we can usually tell is something like 7 (in daylight) and, assuming our monitors can produce on the order of 16million colors+, then couldn't a tetrachromat test be established with very closely related shades of color? Those that can tell the difference are more likely to be tetrachromats and those that think it's the same color are trichromats?

Please, let me know your thoughts on this!

P.S. I agree that for a tetrachromat with super-visual color perception (i.e. outside of our normal 400-700nm range) we couldn't use a three-color monitor, but I think that's limited to birds, bees, and the like =).
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 08:19
Comment from: Extra [Visitor] Email · http://home.earthlink.net/~yuba-yada-yada/
John re ~ Jailleto: More likely English is not his primary language.

Ray Tomes: It would not matter if one percieves red as green since one would have learned the color is called red. So it would be possible to go through life seeing the "wrong" color and never know.
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 08:19
Comment from: Brandon [Visitor] · http://www.digg.com
I agree with Matt - men generally don't care too much about color schemes, whereas most women do. It has nothing to do with color blindness or tetrachromats. I wear shades of grey and black not because I'm color blind, but because I'm lazy and impatient about my every-day professional attire. Who wants to spend an hour deciding what to wear? Not men.
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 08:51
Comment from: You fool! [Visitor] Email
WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A DEPENDABLE SOURCE!

*FOOLS* quote wikipedia. You quoted wikipedia. You, therefore, are a fool!
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 09:12
Comment from: Dale [Visitor] Email
I am pretty sure I only have two colors receptors. :(
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 09:37
Comment from: Vomar [Visitor] Email
@sleepsleep: I think you're right. With one eye I see slightly more red then with the other (more saturated might be a better way of describing it), so I think that one person's red can very well differ from another person's red.
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 09:40
Comment from: Brett Johnson [Visitor]
There was an excellent article last year in Scientific American that described tetrachromatic vision in birds: "What Birds See", by Timothy H. Goldsmith, Scientific American, July 2006

Article is online, but behind a pay-wall:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000DA6AC-F10C-1492-A7CE83414B7F0000&sc=I100322
[I read the dead-tree edition.]

Mammals are actually the genetically defective branch here. We lost the third (of the original four) receptors, leaving a "hole" in the blue-green range. The receptors on either side of the lost frequency range have adjusted their own peak sensitivity points to better cover the "hole". As a result, we cannot see into the ultraviolet range (useful for birds and insects), or the infrared range (useful for reptiles and insects).

I would speculate that tetrachromat human females probably encode for the missing receptor, giving them enhanced sensitivity in the blues and greens. However, I suspect their other receptors are "normal" (for humans), so they cannot see into the ultraviolet range (like birds).


PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 09:57
Comment from: aaaa [Visitor] Email
"Not only my fellow XX chromosome holders but also those holders of the X chromosome paired with the puny and rather ineffectual Y chromosome, commonly known as "men"."

What exactly is the point of this little blurb?
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 12:31
Comment from: Christine [Visitor] Email · http://grilled-cheese.org/blog
Is this the reason some have to keep pointing out to me that I have gray hair?
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 12:32
Comment from: Joe [Visitor] Email · http://www.negativland.com/squant/index.html
Negativland has known about this phenomenon for some time now. The name of the fourth colour is 'squant'.



Thank you.
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 12:48
Comment from: RayTomes [Member] Email · http://ray.tomes.biz/
To Dan: I think there is a difference between seeing tiny shade differences, visual acuity, and having 4 colour receptors. It is not in the details, but there is a whole extra dimension meaning that they describe a yellow as having a little purple in it and such like which makes no sense to a 3 colour person. You are right that the range of wavelengths is not extended but it relates to differences within the range.

Extra: Yes. I was just being silly. This is true of everything though isn't it?

You fool!: I don't believe everything in wikipedia. However it can be a useful source for what is generally known. You might like to read my blog article Is Wikipedia Broke?

Dale: Commiserations, but read this and cheer up:

Vomar: Interesting observation.

Brett Johnson: Thanks.

Joe: Wht you say is true. For others, see Squant
PermalinkPermalink 26/06/07 @ 19:55
Comment from: rabbit [Visitor] Email
"*FOOLS* quote wikipedia. You quoted wikipedia. You, therefore, are a fool!"

The above is not a valid statement.
The first premise is merely an opinion, not a true statement.
Syllogisms are dependant upon true premises for the conclusion
to be valid.

It seems like the entity behind the handle "You fool!" was aptly
given that handle by the Internet-gods...

/rabbit
PermalinkPermalink 27/06/07 @ 03:57
Comment from: DJ [Visitor]
Very useful articles, on a subject I'm very interested in anyway, though the one by the 18 year old Irish girl is offensive, and indicative of her immature understanding.

Describing the Y chromosome as "puny and rather ineffectual" is grossly sexist, and if you consider the difference it makes as being why men are physically bigger and stronger than women, wholly inaccurate.

If a man were to publish an article suggesting that the lack of a Y chromosome might be responsible for women's lack of spatial awareness, logic/reason and coordination (obviously not COLOUR though...), would it too win a prize from the Daily Telegraph? Somehow, I think not.

It would be interesting to see the results of these tests in those men who have two X chromosomes and the Y chromosome. Could there be tetrachomats among that small group as well?
PermalinkPermalink 27/06/07 @ 05:11
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Even among regular trichromats there is a lot of variation as seen here:
http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2299

I'd be interested to see that done on a Mrs. M or another tetrachromat.
PermalinkPermalink 27/06/07 @ 21:01
Comment from: Poodlebear [Visitor] Email
I'm one of those who are often asked by others to match colors. I am also often surprised when they can't see differences in shades that seem clear to me. I completely understand "yellow with a little purple in it". I say comments like that to my husband and he says, "Quit it." :D

I've also been told I have extra taste buds, a "Super Taster", I am able to discern different ingredients and combine flavors easily in my head. So I guess when I was on the assembly line someone tipped the senses bucket a little generously.

So any wonder I ended up a fat artist? :D

GREAT article! Thanks!
PermalinkPermalink 28/06/07 @ 02:52
Comment from: RayTomes [Member] Email · http://ray.tomes.biz/
To Poodlebear: Interestingly, in the last few decades it has been recognised that there are 5 tastes not 4, something that the Japanese had long maintained. According to Vedic tradition however there are 6.
PermalinkPermalink 28/06/07 @ 03:31
Comment from: Lizard [Visitor]
Poodlebear: First off, being able to combine flavors in your head simply requires experience with the tastes of the ingredients, much like any experienced artist will know how to combine colors easily. Second, look up "supertasters" on google. It's not that uncommon. About one fourth of the American population are supertasters. But it's not like what you think it is.

http://research.yale.edu/ysm/article.jsp?articleID=77

"[...]supertasters tend to experience more intense sensations from fat, irritants, and other foods. How does this affect their dietary preferences? Bartoshuk asserts that supertasters tend to find the taste world too strong. Consequently, they dislike a number of foods, making themselves more susceptible to health risks in the long run. For example, they eat less fruits and vegetables that contain bitter-tasting flavonoids. Since flavonoids are thought to play a role in preventing colon cancer, supertasters are more at risk for colon cancer.

At the same time, supertasters dislike and avoid fatty and sweet foods. They thus tend to be thinner and have a lower risk for cardiovascular disease. Additionally, medium and supertasters have a lower occurrence of alcohol- and smoking-addiction due to unpleasant oral sensations from these unhealthy habits.

Supertasters – Burning Mouth?

Supertasters have increased perception of pain and are prone to develop a pain disorder called burning mouth syndrome. In this disorder, taste and pain are not just anatomically associated in the periphery but also closely associated in the brain. Normally, taste inhibits oral pain, a mechanism to ensure that animals obtain proper nutrition. [...]"

There's lots of information on the web about the three categories (nontasters, medium tasters, and supertasters), so I won't clutter things up here with more quotes.

PermalinkPermalink 28/06/07 @ 08:28
Comment from: T-fin [Visitor]
You CAN determine if the colors you see are the same as those other people see with a color test similar to the one mentioned in the article. This is how those rare people who perceive red as green ans vice versa are able to know this. For starters, if it is completely impossible to match your monitor's output (RGB) to your printer's output (CYMK), then you've got some color vision issues.
PermalinkPermalink 28/06/07 @ 09:08
Comment from: RayTomes [Member] Email · http://ray.tomes.biz/
This article had a huge number of hits compared to my past blog articles. Many of these came from http://digg.com where more than 1000 people gave it a thumbs up. There are many additional comments and discussion there.
PermalinkPermalink 28/06/07 @ 18:00
Comment from: Amir [Visitor] Email
Actually the Y chromosome is physically smaller than the X (and codes for less proteins), so the writer is not out of line when she describes it as "puny and rather ineffectual."
PermalinkPermalink 29/06/07 @ 08:36
Comment from: Rabbie [Visitor] Email
It all depends where and how you draw the line. I'm not going to be drawn into a rant on perceived superiority of feminists but I doubt that a man would have been a prize if he had said that females are overburdened with excess genetic information.

It is interesting that the dichromats are able to discern differences in khaki as discovered by the researchers in Elise Kleeman's Article thereby making them useful in hunting. Perhaps the "tetrachromatic" females would be better at finding fruit and berries. Thereby confirming the stereotypical roles of the early hunter gatherers with the collaberative effect of the group being greater than the sum of the individuals.

Should it be tetrachromats or pentachromats? i.e. blue, green shade 1, green shade 2, red shade 1, red shade 2.
PermalinkPermalink 01/07/07 @ 04:28
Comment from: yvonne barrow [Visitor] Email
I have four sons of which 3 are colour blind. Each sees colours slightly differently. They mainly have problems with red, green and colours close in hue ie purple and blue. My brother is also colour-blind as was my maternal grandfather.
I can see many, many colours or should I say hues? I often take forever choosing colours if I am painting a room. Recently I was trying to pick a buff colour but when I put the samples on the wall they are either too grey, too yellow or too something even though others say they are the same!Also in relation to "If a man were to publish an article suggesting that the lack of a Y chromosome might be responsible for women's lack of spatial awareness, logic/reason and coordination" these areas are my strongest points and I am a woman thankyou.
PermalinkPermalink 18/07/07 @ 08:47
Comment from: SarahO [Visitor] Email
Halarious, the offence people have taken to the light hearted and frankly halarious piece by the Daily Telegraph young science writer. Grow up, she is 18, she is scientifically accurate in everything she said, and in addition, this topic, practically untouched by 'pop-science', is peppered with humour, engaging each of you as readers. Who says science is just for geeks? Clearly a few bloggers above.
PermalinkPermalink 12/08/07 @ 18:51
Comment from: RayTomes [Member] Email · http://ray.tomes.biz/
Hi SarahO
Thanks for your comments. Yes, some people got a little PC, but it seems that most enjoyed it very much. For me this article was a big surprise at about 30,000 people read it in a few days and almost up to 60,000 now. In particular it was a big hit at Digg, but also featured on at least 10 other sites.
All the best
Ray
PermalinkPermalink 13/08/07 @ 00:48
Comment from: Harmony Bentosino [Visitor] Email
Before I read about tetrachromes, I always wondered if colorful animals like birds, fish, or butterflies had good color vision or any color vision at all. Surely, Mother Nature would not bestow these beautiful colors on animals that lacked the ability to perceive them. Now, I know these animals not only see their colors but see them better than i do because they are tetrachromes!
PermalinkPermalink 24/11/07 @ 17:34
Comment from: Engineer M Junaid Rashid [Visitor] Email · http://www.flickr.com/people/junaidrashid
This is amazing information to read. Its another aspect of this urdu verse
وجود زن سے ھے تصویر کاینات میں رنگ
'The existence of women brings colours to Universe"
--Allama Iqbal
PermalinkPermalink 05/12/07 @ 13:19
Comment from: RayTomes [Member] Email · http://ray.tomes.biz/
Thanks for your comments Engineer, and for the link that you provided to me in our flickr discussion http://www.4colorvision.com/files/tetrachromat.htm
According to this very extensive analysis of colour and humans, people generally have 4 colour receptors, but the eye is not sufficiently transparent for one of the colours. In smaller creatures where the eye is smaller then the fourth colour works properly.
PermalinkPermalink 07/12/07 @ 13:36
Comment from: Kolin [Visitor] Email · http://loadingvault.com
Thisarticle mean that my wife is mutant?8)
PermalinkPermalink 23/01/08 @ 04:43
Comment from: Evan [Visitor] Email
This is interesting, and I do believe that it is possible to be tetra-chromatic, but I don't think this has anything to do with matching of clothes/other items.

Creating intriguing color combinations is a part of design and can be taught.
PermalinkPermalink 29/02/08 @ 17:09
Comment from: RayTomes [Member] Email · http://ray.tomes.biz/
Evan, I agree. Many woman want to believe that they are tetra-chromats because they feel they have a good sense of colour. But I don't want to be the one to tell them otherwise, do you? Ray
PermalinkPermalink 29/02/08 @ 23:37
Comment from: tatianahunt [Visitor] Email · http://fileshunt.com
At the same time, supertasters dislike and avoid fatty and sweet foods. They thus tend to be thinner and have a lower risk for cardiovascular disease. Additionally, medium and supertasters have a lower occurrence of alcohol- and smoking-addiction due to unpleasant oral sensations from these unhealthy habits.
PermalinkPermalink 12/03/08 @ 11:22
Comment from: Someone [Visitor] Email
Actually, all (good) search engines will equate colour and color for you -- no need to try to help them.
PermalinkPermalink 21/03/08 @ 03:08
Comment from: Anne Masters [Visitor] Email
I don't know about tetrachromacy but I definitely see colors that others don't. It's actually just one, I guess, color somewhere in the ultraviolet spectrum. I only see it around the edges of pink petunias. It's a blue/purple color but glowing in a halo around the edge of the petunia. It is darker, still glowing, closest to the petunia. So much so that I used to think that all pink petunias had a blue edge to them and I interpreted the glowing fade through blue to purple as just an optical effect of the intensity of the blue edge. But it's not. I don't know what this is all about but would really like to know if others experience anything similar. I, otherwise, have normal color vision and somewhat above average color sense when it comes to clothing and decorating.
PermalinkPermalink 21/03/08 @ 17:50
Comment from: nickie [Visitor] Email
Kolin wrote: "Thisarticle mean that my wife is mutant?8)"

hahaha! ofcourse not!
PermalinkPermalink 25/03/08 @ 04:56
Comment from: Ruth [Visitor] Email
I see green a lot more than other people, particularly in colours that other people say are grey. Anyone else experience this?

Also, colours seem to jar for me when others think they go together fine.
PermalinkPermalink 03/04/08 @ 04:47
Comment from: Austin [Visitor] Email
Ruth, I am male but I think about something similar to that. Any black/grey on a computer screen looks green to me. Also it is sometimes hard to distinguish it between an aqua green or a purple. Even though those colors are not the same. o_O

I see this on ink too. i wonder wether the explenation for this is tetrachromacy/colorblindness or brain damage :D
PermalinkPermalink 14/06/08 @ 15:30

This post has 1 feedback awaiting moderation...

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email and url)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))

Wobbly Universe

Blog of Ray Tomes research on cycles, news reports on cycles, my original research on the Harmonics Theory and discussion of these matters.

There are cycles in everything. There are cycles in the weather, the economy, the sun, wars, geological formations, atomic vibrations, climate, human moods, the motions of the planets, populations of animals, the occurrence of diseases, the prices of commodities and shares and the large scale structure of the universe. None of these are independent of each other.

Research shows that very different disciplines often find the same cycle periods in their data. The inter-relatedness of all things is an idea who's time has come. The study of cycles is an excellent way to understand this because the periods of cycles are as easy to recognise as fingerprints or DNA sequences.

"The universe, believe it or not, is nothing other than a giant musical instrument with a very special but predictable pattern of harmonically related oscillations which determine the structure of everything from galactic clusters to subatomic particles and we are just parts of the various vibration modes."

The single axiom of the Harmonics Theory is that:

The Universe consists of a standing wave which develops harmonically related standing waves and each of these does the same.

Search

XML Feeds

What is RSS?

Who's Online?

  • Guest Users: 31

powered by
b2evolution