Wednesday, 30 July 2014

Evolution of vision

If you were a woman who naturally had super horrible vision and were so immobile that you struggle to move, would you make the descision to have no kids before you become too old to have some in exchange for super high vision and mobility? I think people should be given challenges on partner finding sites to give people with less desirable traits a lower chance of reproduction. Don't think of the purpose of this as being to treat people with lower vision worse; think of the purpose as being to cure the vision problems of people in future generations. Keeping the evolutionary pressure of vision zero really would make a much bigger difference to distant future generations than to the generation one away. The number of people in distant future generations this evolutionary change would prevent from suffering huge problems from genetic drift like total immobility will be much smaller than the number of people who will do a smaller amount of suffering from not finding a partner. The law orders employers to pay their employees minimum wage and people can be ordered to have their house torn down to straighten a highway. Since the law orders already existing people around in a harmful way to benefit other already existing people, why should it not do the same to benefit people who will exist? To make sure society doesn't ever lose support for eugenics and discontinue it, we should make sure that the fraction of the population that can't find a partner never exceeds 5%. That fraction might be made lower in distant future when a much smaller fraction of people have highly undesirable traits.

This is how the evolutionary change should get made: each person will be randomly assigned a time some time in their life to take a test showing how good their vision is and not taking the test on the assigned day should count as failing the test to avoid evolutionary pressure to not take the test. The test would actually test other desirable traits as well. Already eixisting partner finding sites should disappear and be replaced by a government made partner finding site that gives people challenges they must beat in order to find a partner. The better you are your parents did on the vision part of the test, the less hard the partner finding challenge will be. By doing it that way, there will also be evolutionary pressure for good vision in old age. If somebody refuses to not wear glasses during the test, it will be an absolute no no for the site finding them a partner. Actually, each person should not know until 1 day before their assigned day which day that is because otherwise, people might evolve to go out of their way to do something to make sure they have really good vision near the time of the test instead of evolutionary pressure to have really good vision their whole life. In fact their assigned day should not even be decided ahead and should occur when a random generator just happens to assign a time 1 day away to them. If somebody dies of old age before their randomly assigned time to take the test, it should be treated like failing the test.

Also, anyone who was allowed 3 kids one of which died from a disease or in an accident should not be allowed to have a new 3rd kid to replace them because that would remove the evolutionary pressure not to die. Following that rule would evolve babies not to die easily in India anymore. The only people who should not be permitted to have any kids at all are the descendants of those people who had more kids than they're allowed because otherwise there will be strong evolutionary pressure for people to have more kids than they're allowed causing a really high population and then people will gradually evolve to fight each other for food in a deadly fight. Doing this would also evolve happier men in future generations because they won't wish their wife wanted sex more often then she does. After all, having more kids than you're allowed is a purposeful breaking the rules.

Here are the aspects of vision there should be evolutionary pressure for and how it should be done:
  • good focusing at the back of the eyeball for all distances past a certain distance. There should actually be 2 tasks for testing this, one for how small relative size words you can read and one for how small absolute size you can read. The latter should be done by giving somebody a smooth sphere with a 4 letter word on it and they may hold it at what ever distance from their eyes they want. It turns out that after the evolutionay change, the age will have no effect on the smallest absolute size that can be read dispite the fact that very young kids have small eyeballs because a smaller eyeball can fit fewer cone cells on the retina but a smaller eyeball can also focus at a closer distance. The former should be done by restraining the head and then randomly generating a number between 9/8 and approximately average closest focusing distance for age/50 m then dividing average closest focusing distance for age by that number to use as the picked distance then randomly generating another number between 0 and 1 and setting the size of the word to min(picked distance, 1 m) * 2-second randomly generated number then keeping on halving the size of the randomly generated 4 letter string to be read until the subject can't read it anymore.
  • good focusing everywhere on the retina for infinite distances. What's the point in good focusing in the periphery without a brain that can make use of it by having really good field vision? An image that simulates an infinitely far away image should be projected into the eyes, possibly by reflecting a pattern similar to a condensation pattern on a flat surface off a finite number of curved mirrors if that's even mathematically possible. The subject should first be shown a blown up random small part of the image with the number of times the area of a condensation droplet the blown up picture is being linearly proportional to the log of the reciprocal of the size of the condensation droplets in the image than they should be shown the whole image and be asked to find the spot in the image where the blown up part of the image they saw earlier is. The eyes can be forced to lock onto one part of the image by projecting a really small random 4 letter string that they're tested on knowing when ever it changes into another 4 letter string.
  • addition of a 4th cone cell type that detects very near ultraviolet light that's just as close to violet as the other 3 cone cells are to each other in the logarithm of which wavelength they respond to and removal of rods cells. Stimulation of only blue cone cells actually makes people see violet, not blue. The confusion comes from the fact that no wavelength of light stimulates only one type of cone cell. Also, stimulation of only red cone cells makes us see red but we see the wavelength red cones most strongly respond to as yellowish green because it also stimulates green cone cells and green cone cells have a much taller sensitivity curve than red cone cells. Green cone cells respond even more strongly to green light which is what they're most sensitive to.
  • merging of all 4 cone cell types into a single cell type that distinguishes 4 primary colors
  • really small cone cell size
  • arrangement of cone cells into domains each of which has a hexagonal array of cone cells because of noneuclidian geometry of the retina. The size of the domains should be about cube root of eyeball size2 * cone cell size.
  • domains are arranged the same way in both eyes and in each domain, the domain in the same position in the other eyes has its cone cells arranged in the same orientation and within the domain cone cells are divided into 3 groups in such a way that within each group, the cone cells in that group are arranged in a hexagonal array with square root of 3 times the spacing between cone cells within the group as that between cone cells within the domain and half the spaces between cone cells are filled in with cone cells from the other eye and each cone cells corresponds to a cone cell of the other eye in one of the holes right beside it with the direction off from it depending on which of the 3 groups that cone cell is in. Another use in creating this evolutionary pressure is that it will create evolutionary pressure for super perfect eye allignment in the very centre of vision automatically because perfect eye alignment makes the cone cells in one eye at the centre of vision be in retinal image positions as far away from the retinal image positions of the cone cells of the other eye as possible maximizing visual acuity which there will already be evolutionary pressure for.
  • high visual accuity in all light intensities from that of the sunlight to 2-22 times that intensity. Furthermore, during the testing of that trait. A random real number between 0 and 1 should get generated then the intensity of the sunlight * 2-that number, half that intensity, and so on until 2-21 times that intensity should all be tested all in a row and the score on the part of the test testing that should be linearly proportional to the average of the log of the visual accuity for all 22 of those those intensities tested. To create evolutionary pressure for eyes to quickly adapt from light to dark and vice versa, it should be random which order all 22 of those intensities are tested in. After being tested on all 22 of those light intensities, a number x from 1 to 22 should be randomly picked and they should be asked, 'for which number y was intensity of the sunlight * 21 - y - that number, used on the xth intensity to be tested?' and 'Which 4 letter string was used on that attempt?' to create evolutionary pressure for memory. This evolutionary pressure also has the advantage of people not having a tendency disfavor the center of vision for seeing in the dark. In addition to that, the evolutionary change in the last bullet point combined with perfect eye allignment means the center of vision will always have the least clustering of cones cell in one eye on the retinal image with cone cells in the other eye completely eliminating the tendency to disfavor the center of vision.
  • absence of dispersion in the eyeball. Evolution would probably make that change by having the eye lens be made of very thin alternating layers of 2 substances for the high refractive index of one to cancel out the dispersion of the other. That evolutionary change should be made by showing the person doing the test a random 4 letter string where each letter is a monochromatic light source of random wavelength in the visible region and seeing how small a 4 letter string they can read. To make the dispersion finish evolving to disappear, there should be evolutionary pressure against the need for a directional accomodation stimulus. Normally the eye can tell the difference between an image focused in front of the retina and an image focused behind the retina by which of red or ultraviolet light is more out of focus. Another possible more complex way of telling whether an image is focused in front of or behind the retina is by knowing both the derivative of the shape of the lens and the derivative of the amount of blurriness with respect to time and using that to tell whether the image is focused in front of or behind the retina and adjust the shape of the eye lens, though the accomodation response would actually be an unconscious process. Preventing the evolutionary advantage of having a slight bit of dispersion in the eyes can be done by having one of the times somebody is tested on how small a 4 letter string they can read be when the room is lit by monochromatic light where having the ability to use dispersion for accomodation is an impossibility, and that will help people have even better vision from not having dispersion in their eyes.
  • reduction of movement blur. That can be done by giving evolutionary pressure for counting whether a falling maple key spun an odd or even number of times, that is, after it lands, put it back in its original orientation in such a way that the quaternion corresponding to its orientation is the same one as it started at, not the negative of it.
  • ability to tell very precisely where on the retina each part of an image is landing. That result would probably cause another result of seeing what a shape is with very high accuracy.
  • no need to blink from dry eyes. People's eyeballs should be dry all the time only needing to blink when something is moving fast towards the eyes. That prevents people from making themselves not see every few seconds when they blink. The tear fluid in front of the cornea is also slightly changing shape all the time blurring vision a tiny amount. The cornea needs oxygen and it needs to be wet to absorb oxygen from the air but I think it's possible for the cornea to evolve to instead do anaerobic respiration. That can be done by having people do the vision part of the test with a breathing tube where the air in the room over the generations gradually starts being replaced with helium until evolution totally stops the need for eyes to receive oxygen from the air. In addition to that because the cornea will no longer respire like a frog's skin, people will no longer suffer the pain of accidently letting the cornea get dry or the extreme pain of onion juice squirted onto the cornea.