Skip to main content

The eyes have it!

I’ve been wandering around finding out about a neat little arthropod called a Trilobite — particularly their eyes. A few snippets...

Not only is the trilobite eye made of pure calcite (transparent Ca carbonate) which has a precisely aligned optical axis to eliminate any double image that would have formed, it is also a "doublet" of two lenses affixed together in order to eliminate spherical aberrations (as found in ground-glass lenses)! Trilobite eyes are massively arrayed in semicircular banks & even almost-circular banks of up to 30-60 lenses per row, each with its own individual retina
Ordovician trilobites such as Pricyclopyge binodosa and Jujuyaspis keideli are said to have had a “large visual field” with “close to 360-degree vision” and “could see anteriorly [backwards], laterally [sideways], dorsally [upwards], and even downwards and backwards,” from one position. Further, it has been shown that another Ordovician trilobite, Dalmanitina socialis, actually has a doublet lens arrangement where the top calcite lens has a “conspicuous central bulge, the cause of bifocality, which is a unique optical feature in the animal kingdom.”

Pretty recent for us, too. And so on. These little bony-looking greeblies are responsible for...

[...] the development of glasslike lenses that correct for spherical (and chromatic?) aberration, the density of seawater & the function of bifocality [...]

...and according to one bloke...

Trilobites had solved a very elegant physical problem & apparently knew about Fermat’s principle, Abbe’s sine law, Snell’s laws of refraction & the optics of birefringent crystals [...]

...that’s quite impressive for a Lower Cambrian to Permian arthropod (exoskeletal with symmetrical, segmented bodies; think cockroaches & other insects, spiders, ants, crabs, lobsters, centipedes and other chilopods, etc)...

However, amongst all of this little critter’s many wonders, the eyes particularly stand out. So much so that many classifiers simply raise their mental hands and avoid the problem.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An Open and Shut response to Darl McBride

Hi, Darl. I see you’re being dishonest again . It’d be really nice if you could shoot straight for a change, but I think Kerry’s Dad will be selling snowplows in Hell first. Three years ago, when I first joined The SCO Group, we focused the company on the area that was most profitable and provided the most benefit to customers, investors, resellers, developers and employees: UNIX No, you focused the company on suing people, which was most profitable to lawyers and provided some golden parachutes for your buddies. People thought we were crazy. They were right. But since SCO owns the UNIX operating system The SCO Group does not own UNIX® in any sense of the word. The Open Group owns the UNIX trademark, definition and other rights , The SCO Group does not. The SCO Group doesn’t even own the UnixWare® or OpenServer® code, the rights to those are held by Novell and TSG use them only by permission and under certain conditions — which they have violate...

5x7 text dot-matrix in five minutes...

This is a fairly primitive toy I threw together today for a specific purpose, published in case it’s any use to others... feed it a list of words as command arguments, which it will then display as a 5x7 ASCII dotmatrix with ‘#’ as a dot & ‘_’ as a blank. /* * display text using a 5x7 bitmap font in ASCII letters */ static unsigned char font [] [5] = { { 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00 }, // 0x20 32 { 0x00,0x00,0x6f,0x00,0x00 }, // ! 0x21 33 { 0x00,0x07,0x00,0x07,0x00 }, // " 0x22 34 { 0x14,0x7f,0x14,0x7f,0x14 }, // # 0x23 35 { 0x00,0x07,0x04,0x1e,0x00 }, // $ 0x24 36 { 0x23,0x13,0x08,0x64,0x62 }, // % 0x25 37 { 0x36,0x49,0x56,0x20,0x50 }, // & 0x26 38 { 0x00,0x00,0x07,0x00,0x00 }, // ' 0x27 39 { 0x00,0x1c,0x22,0x41,0x00 }, // ( 0x28 40 { 0x00,0x41,0x22,0x1c,0x00 }, // ) 0x29 41 { 0x14,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x14 }, // * 0x2a 42 { 0x08,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x08 }, ...

Citizens Augmenting Government Waste

So here we have Microsoft-funded “ Citizens Against Government Waste ” (CAGW) heavily criticising Massachusetts’s switch to an internationally accepted and open document standard (not open source, open standard — but I seem to remember a large monopolist who frequently confuses the two when it suits them). I remember CAGW, they were the organisation who had dead people writing in to support Microsoft in court a few years ago — thanks to sbergman27 for the link — is this “the dead hand of CAGW” at work again? Let’s follow the money and find out. Who stands to lose the most money and control if Massachusetts switches to an unencumbered document format? Big surprise, it’s CAGW sponsor Microsoft, through their dominant MS-Office suite. Why did CAGW list Microsoft’s suite last, after two other much-less-dominant examples which are waning anyway? If you’re inclined to wallow in additional irony, consider that at leas...