• reluctant_squidd@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    1 month ago

    And blinded by security cameras?

    Seriously, wouldn’t being able to see infrared basically make you see night vision cameras like they are street lights?

    • corroded@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not really. While I don’t have the exact numbers, the output of an infrared LED is no higher (usually) than an LED in the visible range. My security cameras have an array of 10 or so LEDs.

      So looking at a security camera would be roughly equivalent to staring at a light bulb.

    • Brokkr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      Your phone’s camera should be able to “see” the IR from security cameras and IR remotes. That can give you a sense for home much and in what direction they emit.

      The sensitivities will be different, your phone should still help you some.

    • Psythik@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      So don’t stare directly at them, then?

      Infrared lights don’t need a lot of wattage to do their job. They wouldn’t be any more obnoxious than a light bulb.

    • Iamsqueegee@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      You would if you don’t like surprises.

      Big brother: “Okay, open your mouth and close your eyes, and I’ve got a big surprise!” Closes eyes: “not this time, fucker”

  • Psythik@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Maybe it’s just my ADHD, but the article doesn’t seem to be clear on something: do these contacts actually allow you to see into near-infrared as it exists, or do they merely shift the light into a spectrum we can see, the way cameras do? I’m hoping for the former, but I doubt we have the tech to allow us to see new colors simply by putting on a pair of contacts.

    (Also, the mental image of scientists putting tiny little contact lenses on mice is hilarious to me.)

    • Bubs@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 month ago

      TL;DR from Wikipedia: In photon upconversion, two or more incident photons of relatively low energy are absorbed and converted into one emitted photon with higher energy.

      Basically photons are combined into a photon that is nearer in wavelength to visible light.

      • Psythik@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Aww that’s disappointing, but I’m not surprised. Otherwise we’d be using this tech to help colorblind people tell the difference between red and green.

    • m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      It shifts the wavelength into the visible range, it doesn’t grant you the ability to see new “colors”. It’s more like a translation into a color you already know.

    • bluemellophone@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      To counter the first theory, a contact cannot change the physical biology of the photon detecting cells (rods and cones) in the back of your eye. Nothing can, short of modifying your genetics.

      So you can either become part mantis shrimp, or shift the wavelengths into the spectrum your biology already can absorb and interpret.