Dogs and Certain Primates May Be Able To See Magnetic Fields

originally posted by: skunkape23
I have no doubt that dogs and cats perceive frequencies human's don't.

Frequencies of what?

Cows tend to face north in a field if nothing else disturbs them. Tips of tall conifers point north.

a reply to: Bedlam

So what error?

a reply to: dragonridr

Just because humans can't see magnetic fields, even with current technology, doesn't mean other species can't.
It might well be possible some animals have some type of ferrocell technology implanted into there brains or eyes.

originally posted by: intergalactic fire
a reply to: Bedlam

So what error?

You can't call it "see" if there's no image, now, can you?

originally posted by: intergalactic fire
a reply to: dragonridr

Just because humans can't see magnetic fields, even with current technology, doesn't mean other species can't.
It might well be possible some animals have some type of ferrocell technology implanted into there brains or eyes.

Well, yeah, it does. You see light images by reflected or emitted photons. They travel from the object to your eye, pass through the lens, form a real image on the retina, and there cause chemical changes in dye molecules in the rods and cones, leading to a visual perception.

Magnetic fields don't propagate like a photon. Especially a static magnetic field like the Earth's. They aren't focused by a lens, and they can't form an image like photons. It just doesn't work the same way.

a reply to: Bedlam

That doesn't say anything on how the brain perceives the information.

It's just a matter of time before we invent glasses to view magnetic fields and that light and magnetism are very close related imo.
Our understanding of all this is just at it's beginnings, it would be ignorant to believe what we know or think doesn't contain any errors.
As i said, further investigation could shed more light.

The title of the thread is just a copy of the article which clearly says,...May Be Able To See Magnetic Fields.

originally posted by: intergalactic fire
a reply to: Bedlam

That doesn't say anything on how the brain perceives the information.

It's just a matter of time before we invent glasses to view magnetic fields and that light and magnetism are very close related imo.

Well, I guess "never" is a measure of time. You can't see magnetic fields, really, you can't. Or electric fields either.

Our understanding of all this is just at it's beginnings, it would be ignorant to believe what we know or think doesn't contain any errors.
As i said, further investigation could shed more light.

We're pretty cool on the basic behavior of light, electric, and magnetic fields. One elicits "sight", two others don't. Because electric and magnetic fields don't emit or reflect photons. They can't be refracted, and don't focus to provide an image. Hell, you can't even see radio waves and they're the same thing as light, only lower frequency.

The title of the thread is just a copy of the article which clearly says,...May Be Able To See Magnetic Fields.

Sure. I understand. But it's a magazine article writer's spin on a cool topic, and as usual, it's wrong.

Hell, they've got basic stuff wrong, too. They say that primates can't do it, and while they may not do it through cytochrome in the retina like a dog, I've known many a person that could tell you north, even when they were underground. I can't do it. But we did some ad hoc experimentation on a few people, and they could always find north, even disoriented in a new environment and unable to get visual cues from the sky (some people can see polarization in the blue light of the sky that tells them the direction of North). We were able to fox them by putting them in the SCIF, which is pretty well shielded by steel walls. But outside it, they got it in a few seconds.

It seems to me that when our sense organs are stimulated there are a number of processes that occur until finally the brain reacts to the stimuli and creates a "sense" of it. There is no literal image in the brain, the only place an image occurs is where light hits the retina. After that, no real image is actually "sensed".

We "sense" things like light, sound waves, chemicals in the air, surfaces we touch, and even motion. Everything we experience is merely mental constructs made from our excited sense organs. At that point we are far removed from the actual physical environment we "sense". Personally I believe that we have a pretty good system in place to navigate reality, but our senses are flawed from the get go and we will never truly know what reality is, just what our mind constructs from impulses in our nervous system.

Who can say what form the sense of a magnetic wave will take in the brain of the animal that perceives it? I'm sure that we can come close to knowing how it is sensed, but we will probably never really know for sure.

originally posted by: MichiganSwampBuck
It seems to me that when our sense organs are stimulated there are a number of processes that occur until finally the brain reacts to the stimuli and creates a "sense" of it. There is no literal image in the brain, the only place an image occurs is where light hits the retina. After that, no real image is actually "sensed".

We "sense" things like light, sound waves, chemicals in the air, surfaces we touch, and even motion. Everything we experience is merely mental constructs made from our excited sense organs. At that point we are far removed from the actual physical environment we "sense". Personally I believe that we have a pretty good system in place to navigate reality, but our senses are flawed from the get go and we will never truly know what reality is, just what our mind constructs from impulses in our nervous system.

Who can say what form the sense of a magnetic wave will take in the brain of the animal that perceives it? I'm sure that we can come close to knowing how it is sensed, but we will probably never really know for sure.

Well, we know for sure it won't be a visual image. Any more than you can make one from a scent.

Your argument doesn't hold water at all. If I remove the crystalline lens from your eye, you will not be able to see any image, because no image falls on your retina. Without the retina, or proper focus, no image on the retina, no stimulation of millions of retinal receptors, no perception.

A magnetic field does not convey image any more than a scent can. There is no detail. You can sense intensity, and orientation, and that's it. You can't focus it. Your retina will not make an image of it. Because things you CAN image, are done by photons. Which magnetic fields do not emit, or reflect. A magnetic field doesn't have a lot of detail.

You guys are trying to beat something out of the article that isn't there. The writer wasn't using "see" literally.

a reply to: Bedlam

I totally get what your saying here Bedlam, but I politely disagree somewhat as I believe there is no real image in the brain, merely on the retina. Given that much, I doubt that even with some type of magnetic receptors in a retina that some visual image of magnetism is created through the structure of the eye, so agreement there. But that gives no indication of how the mind may perceive magnetism, so no one can be certain about that.

What I contend is that even with photons forming an image on the back of an eyeball, that what is created in the mind is not that image. Do you get where I am with this? The "image" in our mind is merely a mental construct based on input from a nervous system that has been excited by the light projected upon the retina.

Also, and this is a minor point, even without a lens, a pupil can create an image on a retina like a pin hole camera or a camera obscura would. Of course that has zero to do with the perception of reality in the mind. This point is more to show that you may have more to learn about optics then your ego might allow you to admit. Please know that the use of the word "ego" here is not meant as an insult but to get you out of your box. Also know I'm not really disagreeing with your main point about the difference between photons and magnetism.

ETA: When the nervous system is confused by mind altering substances, scents and sounds can be perceived as sight. Other more natural sensations, like after images also have no real existence out side of perception.

a reply to: Bedlam

It's a wide subject i believe.

Let's take blind persons, there is no "image falling on their retina" yet they can perceive the same things as a non-blind person.
In a different way off course, but it's well know that blind persons have images in their heads, they create the world around them by the help of touch, sound and smell or even echolocation.
So is it real imagery?it sure isn't real visual information.

There might also be a connection with hallucinations?

So at the end it's the brain that is responsible, no?

Maybe the same could be said for magnetic fields, by sensing magnetic fields images can be made in the brain.

a reply to: Bedlam

You can't see magnetic fields, really, you can't. Or electric fields either.

We also couldn't see UV or infrared.

Hell, they've got basic stuff wrong, too. They say that primates can't do it, and while they may not do it through cytochrome in the retina like a dog, I've known many a person that could tell you north, even when they were underground. I can't do it. But we did some ad hoc experimentation on a few people, and they could always find north, even disoriented in a new environment and unable to get visual cues from the sky (some people can see polarization in the blue light of the sky that tells them the direction of North). We were able to fox them by putting them in the SCIF, which is pretty well shielded by steel walls. But outside it, they got it in a few seconds.

It's not only the cryptochrome that plays a role here, they speak of two mechanisms

In animals in general, two basic mechanisms are discussed for the detection of the geomagnetic field: one based on spin-correlated radical pairs probably generated by Cryptochrome , the other based on ferrimagnetic particles like magnetite

Maybe some humans have more magnetite in their bodies than others and so it's easy for them to align themselves?

among Primates, humans are discussed to be able to detect the Earth’s magnetic field. However, it is unknown what kind of mechanism underlies their magnetic responses. Furthermore, magnetic alignment has also been observed in mammals that do not show Cry1* label in their S1 cones

There was a study done several years ago that showed male humans, along with a couple other mammals have a small deposit of iron oxide in the nose, and its correleates to a seeming ability to sense magnetic north.

Stephen Juan, an anthropologist from the University of Sydney answers Lee Staniforth of Manchester, UK question, “Do humans have a compass in their nose?” He writes about some scientists at California Institute of Technology discovered that humans possess a tiny, shiny crystal of magnetite in the ethmoid bone (pink bone to the image on your right), located between your eyes, just behind the nose… but doesn’t give us any clue as to where the research was published.

and

In other species of animals, magnetite, a magnetic mineral, is present in homing pigeons, migratory salmon, dolphins, honeybees, and bats. Even some bacteria even contain strands of magnetite that function, according to Charles Walcott of the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology in Ithaca, New York,


““as tiny compass needles, allowing them [the bacteria] to orient themselves in the earth’s magnetic field and swim down to their happy home in the mud.””

Magnetite helps orientation and direction finding in animals. It no doubtingly helps migratory species migrate successfully by allowing them to draw upon the earth’s magnetic fields. In the case, when it comes to humans, magnetite makes the ethmoid bone sensitive to the earth’s magnetic field and helps one’s sense of direction. Some have even suggested that this “compass” was helpful in human evolution as it made migration and hunting easier.

Magnetite Compass in humans males

Many animals migrate. There are several examples where they do so due to this sense of their surroundings. In the case of natural disasters what to the animal is probably a sensation that usually very calm. Such events would in all probability trigger fear and flight as behavior responses.

Akin to a loud sound or bright light as interpreted the means this magnetic fields are sensed.

a reply to: Bedlam

Another thing to consider here Bedlam is the MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) process. Of course this employs pulses of radio wave energy and a computer to make pictures of organs and structures inside the body so I'm not saying that a dog's retina structure is at all similar to this process, but it seems to indicate that magnetic lines of force can produce "images". Technically, however, the image comes from radio frequency changes in the atoms and not the magnetic field itself. Still, it is a concept to consider for some out of the box thoughts on this subject.

originally posted by: MichiganSwampBuck
a reply to: Bedlam

I totally get what your saying here Bedlam, but I politely disagree somewhat as I believe there is no real image in the brain, merely on the retina.

No information, no image. It's really that simple.

You can't "see" an detailed image created by something that's giving you a vector and an intensity. I don't care if it conjures up memories of the old home place, that's not "seeing" magnetic fields.

You guys are frantically doing backflips trying to beat this into "seeing magnetic fields". It's sad, really it is.

If no structure in your eye interacts with magnetic fields but your retina, you will. Not. Form. An. Image. Damn, man. Pinholes are for photons. Magnetic fields are not photons.

BTW, real image is opposed to virtual image, it's an optics term, not a philosophical statement on whether perception is real or not.

And if you're high on some hallucinogen and a scent is 'perceived as sight', I guarantee you you can't read by it, or tell who's in the room, unless it's Mr Horse. Because there's no information there. It's triggering a memory.

originally posted by: intergalactic fire
a reply to: Bedlam

It's a wide subject i believe.

Let's take blind persons, there is no "image falling on their retina" yet they can perceive the same things as a non-blind person.

No, they can't.

In a different way off course, but it's well know that blind persons have images in their heads, they create the world around them by the help of touch, sound and smell or even echolocation.
So is it real imagery?it sure isn't real visual information.

Real image is something created by a lens, on a surface, as opposed to virtual image.

Now, take your blind person touching and smelling. Have them tell you what color the dress is on the person across the road. Read the billboards.

See? It's not the same.

Back to the topic, a magnetic field cannot be focused, cannot create a real image on the retina, thus does not produce anything that is "seen" in the form of an image. Thus "seeing magnetic fields" can be no more than a sense that something is there or not. You can't "see magnetic fields" in the sense that you could look around the room and see ripples coming off of the wiring and speakers and such, and that's what you wanted to think at the start of the thread. It. Doesn't. Work. That. Way. It really doesn't.

a reply to: intergalactic fire

One issue with this ability is that Earths magnetic fields every so many hundreds of thousands of years become chaotic for a time (about 100 years) and then flip entirely to the opposite poles. So, if you wait say 300,000 years or so, your compass will probably point south.

As to why that happens I don't know.

Source: www.livescience.com...

originally posted by: intergalactic fire
a reply to: Bedlam

You can't see magnetic fields, really, you can't. Or electric fields either.

We also couldn't see UV or infrared.

RIGHT. And those are photons, and are grossly similar to visible light, which you CAN see. And even so, you can't see UV or infrared, because your eye doesn't have a dye molecule for it, or filters it out.

How do you expect to see a magnetic field, which doesn't emit photons, or reflect them? Nor does it provide any image detail?

Sense it, yes. "see" it, no.