2
$\begingroup$

Usually we have 3 types of color cones namely red, green and blue but 25% of us will have the 4th color cone that is rumored to be able to see 100 million colors that is about 100x more. But what if a person has Red color cones in the left eyes and Green and Blue color cones in the right eyes? Would this person see things similarly to someone with a 3D glasses if both stares at an anaglyph images? Would this be problematic and is there a correction prescription for the poor soul or is it actually a blessing in disguise?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Likely, a positive answer. The brain will integrate and mould itself around the extra sensorial capability and make use of it. With probably funny buggers around situations in which monocular vision is involved (e.g. looking through a spyglass) $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 22, 2021 at 2:20
  • $\begingroup$ Just as an aside, not an answer, if you want the 4th colour to be infra red, then they'd better be cold-blooded else they just see their own internal glow, if UV then they'll need lenses transparent to it. (Humans with an artificial lens can see into that part of the spectrum) $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 22, 2021 at 5:13

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

Q: Usually we have 3 types of color cones namely red, green and blue but 25% of us will have the 4th color cone that is rumored to be able to see 100 million colors that is about 100x more."

Remarkable subject tetrachromatry, but it is not clear to me how this relates to the other 2 questions.. which I can answer,,

Q: "But what if a person has Red color cones in the left eyes and Green and Blue color cones in the right eyes? Would this person see things similarly to someone with a 3D glasses if both stares at an anaglyph images?"

At first, it would indeed look like a 3d bicolor image, as seem without the 3d glasses ! You'll see red and green edges everywhere.

But that only happens, when this condition suddenly occurs. The brain cells connected to the retina will combine the information of left and right eyes, and blend the result accordingly, vision will be corrected within a few hours. Your person will see all colors as before.. however for some objects, objects with certain colors, the edges may become blurred.

https://theconversation.com/how-do-our-brains-reconstruct-the-visual-world-49276

Q: "Would this be problematic and is there a correction prescription for the poor soul or is it actually a blessing in disguise?"

Ok, well I don't think it's a real problem, the brain will correct it.. but also see no advantages.. the normal, symmetrical case is better vision. A difference in color perception in both eyes will not enhance your vision resolution, your cornea and eye lenses remain unchanged.

Suppose I'm wrong, a correction prescription would involve a pair of lenses, contact or intra-ocular, which have a chromatic abberation corresponding to the deviation, left and right. When that lens can be made, it will be a solution for that patient's color perception, however other things like the amount of light could differ. The cure may be worse than the disease, in this case.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ "but also see no advantages" higher visual acuity could be one. Because the same density of receptors are split across higher surface area (the green cells no longer compete with the red/blue ones, the "green seeing eye" can see finer details. At least where the green light is well represented in the light spectrum, the case of Sun light). The evolutionary disadvantage: if something were to happen to the green seeing eye (impaired or lost vision), the situation is worse than in the case of the current compromise. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 22, 2021 at 2:55
  • $\begingroup$ This aquity is inverse proportional to wavelength, that is color itself.. a factor 2-3 across the visible spectrum.. a different mix of receptors won't relevantly change things.. an exclusively blue view could enhance resolution a bit, but that would inhibit the person from seeing colors. Acuity (MTF) is determined by the eye lens, not by the retina. $\endgroup$
    – Goodies
    Commented Dec 22, 2021 at 2:59
  • $\begingroup$ Everything being the same (lens, receptor size/density), the distance between 2 green cells in the "receptors for all color together" is larger than for "only green in one eye". In the first case, the brain will have to correlate the nearby blue or red cell firing with green firing. "an exclusively blue view could enhance resolution a bit" - your implicit assumptions: the blue receptor is as sensitive as the green one and the intensity of the two colors is the same in the spectrum. I doubt any of them hold true. Note: I don't believe the increase in acuity would be dramatic, probs about10% $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 22, 2021 at 3:15
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think it would make much difference in acuity of the person's view. The eye lens MTF determines the acuity, not retina cell density. Retina cell density accommodates all wavelengths. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1427131 And when you want to see a full color spectrum, the (small) advantage disappears. $\endgroup$
    – Goodies
    Commented Dec 22, 2021 at 3:25
  • $\begingroup$ "The eye lens MTF determines the acuity, not retina cell density." I beg to disagree, on the basis of the eagle eye "In the eagle, the retina's fovea has one million cells per mm2 as compared to 200,000 per mm2 in humans." I'm not saying the quality of the lens (and the capability of ocular adjustment) is not important, I'm saying it's not the only factor. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 22, 2021 at 4:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .