What i mean is they can’t see well while out of water, just like we can’t see well when we’re underwater. Our eye evolved to see above water, so when we try to see underwater, the water will mess up the light going into our eye, so everything would be blurry for us. The reverse is true for fish as well. So while they poke their head out as if they trying to take a peek, what they most likely see is blurry mess.
“Same effect” what effect? H2O has no special impact on vision. The gaseous atmosphere likewise has no effect on fish’s vision. Why the hell would either of these solutions affect vision? They’re essentially invisible. Have YOU ever opened your eyes in crystal clear water? You can see extremely far.
This entire thread is confused. What makes it difficult for land dwellers to see underwater also affects those animals that live underwater. The particulates and lack of light.
There is absolutely zero scientific basis for any of the ideas you’re offering.
Go dunk your head! Seriously, you can see the effect in a pool - look at how well you can see things above and below the surface, go underwater, and open your eyes. Things will be fuzzier.
You’re trying to reason away an effect that people actually see, and that you can verify independently. That’s the opposite of how science works.
For a scientific explanation, my first Google got came up with this - an article about some kids who do seem to see normally underwater. It also includes this explanation for our blurrier experience:
When the eye is immersed in water, which has about the same density as the cornea, we lose the refractive power of the cornea, which is why the image becomes severely blurred
I contest the idea that vision innately becomes severely blurred when submerged. I’ve swam in crystal clear water, you can see far and with clarity.
And even if the concept you introduced was taken at face value, how is that supposed to address my original point that fish can see out of water? The cornea theory enhances my point, somehow.
OldManBOMBIN@lemmy.world
on 29 Jul 12:44
nextcollapse
I can’t see under the water, because I’m in my bed
MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca
on 29 Jul 14:29
collapse
If i am not wrong, and iirc, they have different lens systems as compared to humans (or other land dwelling beings). For us, light goes from air to a lens made of “watery” substance and then through a (different) “watery” fluid in our eyes, and then to the back. whenever you have refractive index changes (air and water have different indices(water is ~1.33)), light bends, and so, the way light would refract differently, or in other words, the angle at which “focuses” (not the current optical term here, but works in a colloquial sense, angle of cone of focus would be better) is different if you have air-watery*-watery system vs water-watery*-watery system. since fish live in water mostly, they develop for the lattery system (since most of the system is water esque, there is not much refractive difference which would bend light at larger angles), so they would have to use a more “powerful” (not correct again, better would be shorter focus) lenses, or else there eyes and eye sockets would have to be large. so if they come above water, these “powerful” lenses would resolve the focus spot before the back of eye (so they would be myopic). inverse happens with land dwelling beings going in water.
Amphibians (and some other “beings”) have some special “arrangements”. iirc, some frogs have an extra layer of “transparent eyelid” like thingy, that they close underwater, which gives the “additiional focussing power” required to resolve.
I’ve known muskies to do something similar- swim around at the surface with their head out of the water.
I remember looking into it, and it’s definitely a thing, but no one seems to know why exactly they do it. There’s a few theories that have to do with the oxygen concentration at the surface, regulating temperature, buoyancy, etc. but the one I personally like to subscribe to is the same as this, that they’re just looking around.
It makes me feel a little less bad about not being able to catch one if they’re at least more intelligent and curious than the average bass or bluegill or whatever else I’m pulling out of their lake.
Yes, really, great white sharks are not an agressive man eater, accidents ocurred by confusing a swimmer or diver with a seal, biting these to notice the error. But naturally with this bite you miss 5 kg of your body, the sorry from the shark then don’t help really.
ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
on 29 Jul 17:56
collapse
Mark [The sea captain]: Oh . . . I used to be the captain of my own cruise ship. It was the kind of boat folks rent for weddings, parties, you know, that kind of thing. But on the night in question it had been rented for a prom. Oh, the girls looked so lovely in their dresses, the boys such fine little gentlemen in their tuxedos. They were all drinking and dancing and spiking the punch. I was dizzy with delight when suddenly - my ship sank. We all went into the water. Then came Skoora, picking us off one by one by one by one. Till only I was left. And as he bore down on me, he paused as if to say, “What can I do? I’m a shark. I eat.” And then he cut me in half, cut me right in half - my wife measured me, I’m exactly half my former length. But as he swam away with my lower extremeties dangling from his jaw, I swear to god he was crying.
Kevin: Crying?
Mark: Yes, crying. Oh to be sure, he’s a brutal killing machine. But he shows more remorse than I’ve ever seen in a human.
One of the few dangerous shark for humans is the Bull Shark, they are very agressive and really attack everything, also humans. Even Spielberg regret the damage made by his Shark movie, relating the white shark as agressive killer monster, it isn’t.
Bytemeister@lemmy.world
on 29 Jul 20:12
nextcollapse
Plenty of people swim with bullsharks and hand feed them. Sharks are dangerous when you act like easy prey. Easy prey bleeds, it struggles, and it turns away from the predator to flee. That white shark didn’t bite Valerie Taylor because there was easier food, and she was aware of the shark.
Check the link for what happens when you act like prey around these animals. (Trigger warning : shark attack, if it wasn’t obvious)
threaded - newest
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/1bfa2806-af08-4495-a7fd-fde7b0750646.png">
Can they even see above water? It would be just blurry view. They do it for fun, are they?
If you can see under water then why wouldn’t they be able to see above water?
Because they have shark eyes.
What i mean is they can’t see well while out of water, just like we can’t see well when we’re underwater. Our eye evolved to see above water, so when we try to see underwater, the water will mess up the light going into our eye, so everything would be blurry for us. The reverse is true for fish as well. So while they poke their head out as if they trying to take a peek, what they most likely see is blurry mess.
This is the dumbest thing I’ve ever read. Holy.
What do you think makes vision blurry under water?
What makes you think fish and human eyes didn’t evolve for their environment?
Lol, considering how they are right, I am wondering what you think makes vision blurry underwater
We see a blurry mess underwater because of the particulates in the water. Fish don’t see a blurry mess when they look through air.
People being clueless is not my worry.
…so what happens when you use goggles? Or a camera?
Lakes can be dirty, but you can see the same effect in a pool. Or your bathtub.
“Same effect” what effect? H2O has no special impact on vision. The gaseous atmosphere likewise has no effect on fish’s vision. Why the hell would either of these solutions affect vision? They’re essentially invisible. Have YOU ever opened your eyes in crystal clear water? You can see extremely far.
This entire thread is confused. What makes it difficult for land dwellers to see underwater also affects those animals that live underwater. The particulates and lack of light.
There is absolutely zero scientific basis for any of the ideas you’re offering.
Go dunk your head! Seriously, you can see the effect in a pool - look at how well you can see things above and below the surface, go underwater, and open your eyes. Things will be fuzzier.
You’re trying to reason away an effect that people actually see, and that you can verify independently. That’s the opposite of how science works.
For a scientific explanation, my first Google got came up with this - an article about some kids who do seem to see normally underwater. It also includes this explanation for our blurrier experience:
I contest the idea that vision innately becomes severely blurred when submerged. I’ve swam in crystal clear water, you can see far and with clarity.
And even if the concept you introduced was taken at face value, how is that supposed to address my original point that fish can see out of water? The cornea theory enhances my point, somehow.
I can’t see under the water, because I’m in my bed
Big, if true.
Are you calling me a skinny liar?
…yes.
Thanks, I’ve been working on losing weight.
Not really.
I’ve been watching my figure
expand
If i am not wrong, and iirc, they have different lens systems as compared to humans (or other land dwelling beings). For us, light goes from air to a lens made of “watery” substance and then through a (different) “watery” fluid in our eyes, and then to the back. whenever you have refractive index changes (air and water have different indices(water is ~1.33)), light bends, and so, the way light would refract differently, or in other words, the angle at which “focuses” (not the current optical term here, but works in a colloquial sense, angle of cone of focus would be better) is different if you have air-watery*-watery system vs water-watery*-watery system. since fish live in water mostly, they develop for the lattery system (since most of the system is water esque, there is not much refractive difference which would bend light at larger angles), so they would have to use a more “powerful” (not correct again, better would be shorter focus) lenses, or else there eyes and eye sockets would have to be large. so if they come above water, these “powerful” lenses would resolve the focus spot before the back of eye (so they would be myopic). inverse happens with land dwelling beings going in water.
Amphibians (and some other “beings”) have some special “arrangements”. iirc, some frogs have an extra layer of “transparent eyelid” like thingy, that they close underwater, which gives the “additiional focussing power” required to resolve.
I’ve known muskies to do something similar- swim around at the surface with their head out of the water.
I remember looking into it, and it’s definitely a thing, but no one seems to know why exactly they do it. There’s a few theories that have to do with the oxygen concentration at the surface, regulating temperature, buoyancy, etc. but the one I personally like to subscribe to is the same as this, that they’re just looking around.
It makes me feel a little less bad about not being able to catch one if they’re at least more intelligent and curious than the average bass or bluegill or whatever else I’m pulling out of their lake.
Lookin fer’ birds to eat.
Source - Ima shark.
Blåhaj is that you?
Muskies are basically freshwater sharks.
So, gonna go with… probably looking for a duck to eat, or something.
So that’s what Bruce the shark was doing.
Orcas do it too
He’s got an eye on where you are as well as where you could flee to (If you were normal prey). Casing the joint lol
Wrong, they do it so you can boop the snoot
Yes, really, great white sharks are not an agressive man eater, accidents ocurred by confusing a swimmer or diver with a seal, biting these to notice the error. But naturally with this bite you miss 5 kg of your body, the sorry from the shark then don’t help really.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7yTRVfztRQ
Skora the Gentle Shark
Who knew sharks were nosy fuckers.
One of the few dangerous shark for humans is the Bull Shark, they are very agressive and really attack everything, also humans. Even Spielberg regret the damage made by his Shark movie, relating the white shark as agressive killer monster, it isn’t.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHuzcR2vMac
Plenty of people swim with bullsharks and hand feed them. Sharks are dangerous when you act like easy prey. Easy prey bleeds, it struggles, and it turns away from the predator to flee. That white shark didn’t bite Valerie Taylor because there was easier food, and she was aware of the shark.
Check the link for what happens when you act like prey around these animals. (Trigger warning : shark attack, if it wasn’t obvious)
youtu.be/IogBpXY2VZQ
also the fact that bull shark can survive in freshwater as well.
Dun-uhn…