Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

how many additional eyes would we need

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-29 7:46

to see everything around us in a 360° circle?

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-29 10:49

probably around 20-30

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-29 11:49

That just made me wonder...

What's the evolutionary advantage of only having 180° of vision?

Name: 4tran 2009-09-29 14:56

>>1
0 (additional) - rabbits have 360 vision

>>3
depth perception

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-29 15:52

They make sunglasses that have a mirror coating on part of the inside of the lenses so you can actually see behind you.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-29 17:47

You really wouldn't need more eyes.  You'd just need to change the positions of the eyes.  Put them on the side of the head, like a horse or a rabbit, and you'd be able to see 360 degrees

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-30 20:36

ANDERSON COOPER IS A RABBIT

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-30 22:04

>>6
I'm pretty sure you would still need one or two more eyes to get a full range of vision, not just 360 degrees of peripheral vision.

Name: Anonymous 2009-10-01 14:10

>>3
Funny that actually made me think! A full 360° field of vision would be a shitload of information to process. And it wouldn't really help unless our bodies were symmetrical from front to back also.

Name: Anonymous 2009-10-01 14:34

>>9
I don't think your body NEEDS to be radially symmetrical to derive advantages from 360 vision.

Name: Anonymous 2009-10-03 0:02

Potato Head Bobby was a friend of mine.

He opened three of his eyes in the food stamp line.

He opened four of his eyes in the food stamp line.

He opened five of his eyes in the food stamp line.

He opened six of his eyes in the food stamp line.

Name: Anonymous 2009-10-03 10:22

>>10
I guess not. But spiders are more or less radially symmetrical... Then again frogs and lizards aren't. But they don't really see a full 360° all the time. Only when they point their eyes a certain way. Our body shapes and movements wouldn't really be able to take advantage of it was my main point.

Name: Anonymous 2009-10-03 21:08

>>12
But spiders are more or less radially symmetrical...

Arthropods are bilateral symmetrical.  NO EXCEPTIONS

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List