WEBVTT - Optography: Image in a Dead Man's Eye

0:00:08.640 --> 0:00:21.640
<v Speaker 1>This incredible. What's the last thing? Increase? It's a funny's

0:00:21.680 --> 0:00:26.040
<v Speaker 1>inspecting the image just being contained in the fluid exactly.

0:00:26.880 --> 0:00:30.680
<v Speaker 1>The treat's visual memory is located nothing it's brain, but

0:00:30.760 --> 0:00:40.519
<v Speaker 1>in the eye itself. Welcome to stuff to Blow your

0:00:40.520 --> 0:00:49.280
<v Speaker 1>Mind from how Stuff Works dot Com. Hey you welcome

0:00:49.280 --> 0:00:50.960
<v Speaker 1>to stuff to blow your mind. My name is Robert

0:00:51.040 --> 0:00:54.320
<v Speaker 1>Lamb and I'm Christian Seger. Hey, Robert, if you were murdered,

0:00:54.720 --> 0:00:57.480
<v Speaker 1>would you mind if I scooped your eyeball out, cut

0:00:57.480 --> 0:00:59.960
<v Speaker 1>it in half, dipped it in some chemicals, and then

0:01:00.120 --> 0:01:02.279
<v Speaker 1>looked at that to see if I could find the

0:01:02.400 --> 0:01:05.679
<v Speaker 1>image of your murderer on your eye. Only if you

0:01:05.760 --> 0:01:09.360
<v Speaker 1>had the professionals like the late great Christopher Lee and

0:01:09.440 --> 0:01:13.479
<v Speaker 1>Peter Cushing doing the investigating as they as they do

0:01:13.600 --> 0:01:16.160
<v Speaker 1>in this clip that we just heard from the nineteen

0:01:16.280 --> 0:01:19.559
<v Speaker 1>seventy two horror film Horror Express. I have to confess

0:01:19.640 --> 0:01:22.000
<v Speaker 1>I've never seen this movie, So tell me and tell

0:01:22.040 --> 0:01:25.880
<v Speaker 1>the audience what is what's it about? Well? This is yeah,

0:01:25.920 --> 0:01:28.520
<v Speaker 1>this is the fun wild little film that uh it

0:01:28.760 --> 0:01:33.040
<v Speaker 1>is shockingly public domain property at the moment. You can

0:01:33.080 --> 0:01:35.920
<v Speaker 1>find it on on YouTube and and pretty much anywhere

0:01:36.000 --> 0:01:39.120
<v Speaker 1>that you're going to grab your your horror cinema. It's

0:01:39.160 --> 0:01:42.200
<v Speaker 1>a it has a shockingly star studded cast. You got

0:01:42.240 --> 0:01:45.480
<v Speaker 1>Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing and not in our audio clip,

0:01:45.800 --> 0:01:49.680
<v Speaker 1>Telly savalis as a as a Cossack captain. Wow with

0:01:49.680 --> 0:01:52.640
<v Speaker 1>without any attempt at at a Russian act center anything,

0:01:52.720 --> 0:01:54.600
<v Speaker 1>just straight up tell Y savalas. So it's just Ko

0:01:54.800 --> 0:01:59.480
<v Speaker 1>Jack pretending like he's a Cossack captain on this train. Yeah, exactly.

0:01:59.560 --> 0:02:02.040
<v Speaker 1>And there is a oh god goodness that they're all

0:02:02.080 --> 0:02:05.400
<v Speaker 1>these additional character actors as well. There is a there's

0:02:05.400 --> 0:02:09.040
<v Speaker 1>a respute and sue character uh that's walking around. It

0:02:09.080 --> 0:02:12.560
<v Speaker 1>all takes place on a Trans Siberian Express from China

0:02:12.600 --> 0:02:16.920
<v Speaker 1>to Moscow, and it concerns this uh, this alien possessed,

0:02:17.120 --> 0:02:22.080
<v Speaker 1>reanimated prehistoric commented. They just starts running amuck, draining the

0:02:22.160 --> 0:02:25.160
<v Speaker 1>memories from its victims, leaving them with milky white eyes.

0:02:25.440 --> 0:02:27.760
<v Speaker 1>And there's this fabulous scene which we we just heard

0:02:27.760 --> 0:02:30.880
<v Speaker 1>the audio from where the scientists use a microscope on

0:02:30.960 --> 0:02:34.000
<v Speaker 1>the creature's eye fluid to reveal its final sites, as

0:02:34.040 --> 0:02:37.880
<v Speaker 1>well as a kind of hilarious glimpse at the prehistoric world.

0:02:38.080 --> 0:02:42.000
<v Speaker 1>But so that may sound totally ridiculous in the scheme

0:02:42.040 --> 0:02:44.239
<v Speaker 1>of this film, and and it did when I first

0:02:44.240 --> 0:02:46.399
<v Speaker 1>saw it. I first saw this, I think in college,

0:02:46.480 --> 0:02:49.079
<v Speaker 1>and I had no idea that it had any connection

0:02:49.480 --> 0:02:51.560
<v Speaker 1>to the rational world. I was like, what kind of

0:02:52.160 --> 0:02:54.720
<v Speaker 1>dove for these guys on when they wrote this, because

0:02:54.760 --> 0:02:58.280
<v Speaker 1>this is the most crazy pseudo scientific idea I've ever heard.

0:02:58.360 --> 0:03:01.520
<v Speaker 1>And it turns out that it is that actually over

0:03:01.560 --> 0:03:05.360
<v Speaker 1>two hundred year old theory that still floats around occasionally,

0:03:05.360 --> 0:03:07.880
<v Speaker 1>though we mainly just see it in our film nowadays.

0:03:08.240 --> 0:03:12.120
<v Speaker 1>But man, it connected to forensic science for almost a

0:03:12.160 --> 0:03:16.040
<v Speaker 1>century and to the criminal mind in terms of what

0:03:16.080 --> 0:03:19.680
<v Speaker 1>they needed to do to get away with their murderous crimes. Yeah,

0:03:19.720 --> 0:03:21.600
<v Speaker 1>and and of course as well get into the topic

0:03:21.800 --> 0:03:25.079
<v Speaker 1>will explore to what extent it was it was tied

0:03:25.120 --> 0:03:27.880
<v Speaker 1>to forensic science, It has a it has an interesting

0:03:27.960 --> 0:03:33.480
<v Speaker 1>history there. Essentially it is it is still a pseudoscience, um.

0:03:33.600 --> 0:03:36.840
<v Speaker 1>But you know, pseudoscience often enters our world where magic fails,

0:03:36.920 --> 0:03:41.240
<v Speaker 1>us seeming to make the impossible possible via the invocation

0:03:41.360 --> 0:03:46.160
<v Speaker 1>of actual scientific and technological marvels. And and so today

0:03:46.200 --> 0:03:49.880
<v Speaker 1>what we're discussing is is unmistakably necromantic. You know, it's

0:03:50.000 --> 0:03:53.960
<v Speaker 1>it's communicating with the dead, but it's wrapped up in

0:03:54.320 --> 0:04:01.000
<v Speaker 1>these nineteenth century technological advancements, and uh, it's extremely fascinating.

0:04:01.040 --> 0:04:04.160
<v Speaker 1>I can't believe it's taking me this long to finally

0:04:04.280 --> 0:04:09.200
<v Speaker 1>get to the the actual science behind this ridiculous movie. Yeah,

0:04:09.200 --> 0:04:12.800
<v Speaker 1>it's it's fun, but it's also utterly bizarre. What we're

0:04:12.800 --> 0:04:16.240
<v Speaker 1>talking about here is optography. There's a name for this

0:04:16.440 --> 0:04:19.200
<v Speaker 1>scientific practice. What we're gonna do is we're gonna give

0:04:19.200 --> 0:04:22.680
<v Speaker 1>you kind of a precursor to optography, and then discuss

0:04:23.120 --> 0:04:26.960
<v Speaker 1>the experiments surrounding it, and then how that led to

0:04:27.560 --> 0:04:32.000
<v Speaker 1>a lot of confusion of forensic science for a long time. Alright,

0:04:32.040 --> 0:04:35.159
<v Speaker 1>So in order to to understand how this false notion

0:04:35.720 --> 0:04:38.279
<v Speaker 1>could have gained any traction, we have to first look

0:04:38.279 --> 0:04:41.719
<v Speaker 1>at the scientific advancements that preceded it and made it

0:04:41.960 --> 0:04:45.679
<v Speaker 1>seem possible even to serious researchers at the at the time.

0:04:45.800 --> 0:04:48.680
<v Speaker 1>As as we'll get into. Uh, but as always, you know,

0:04:48.720 --> 0:04:50.800
<v Speaker 1>a little bit of knowledge is always a dangerous thing.

0:04:51.600 --> 0:04:56.679
<v Speaker 1>So in eighteen thirty seven, French artist and physicist Louis

0:04:57.240 --> 0:05:01.600
<v Speaker 1>Daguerre invented the Dagara type. This is the first commercially

0:05:01.640 --> 0:05:06.880
<v Speaker 1>successful photographic process, and it used an iodine synthitized silverized

0:05:06.920 --> 0:05:10.960
<v Speaker 1>plate and mercury vapor to capture the image, and it

0:05:11.000 --> 0:05:14.120
<v Speaker 1>produced very detailed images. And while it took minutes of

0:05:14.160 --> 0:05:18.120
<v Speaker 1>exposure time, this was still swifter than previous photographic methods. Uh,

0:05:18.160 --> 0:05:22.080
<v Speaker 1>they couldn't be replicated. Um, and each Daguara type image

0:05:22.160 --> 0:05:25.080
<v Speaker 1>was a mirror image, but still it had just an

0:05:25.080 --> 0:05:28.120
<v Speaker 1>incredible cultural impact at the time, right, Yeah, I mean

0:05:28.360 --> 0:05:31.160
<v Speaker 1>we're still close enough I think in the like relative

0:05:31.200 --> 0:05:33.560
<v Speaker 1>scheme of history that some of us have seen Decara

0:05:33.680 --> 0:05:37.480
<v Speaker 1>types before. I have this book that's utterly macabre and

0:05:37.600 --> 0:05:41.160
<v Speaker 1>somewhat related to this, that's just Daguero types of dead

0:05:41.200 --> 0:05:44.599
<v Speaker 1>bodies from the nineteenth century because that was a thing

0:05:44.680 --> 0:05:47.520
<v Speaker 1>where people would photograph the dead before they were buried.

0:05:48.000 --> 0:05:51.240
<v Speaker 1>And uh, it's fascinating and there's like a cultural history within.

0:05:51.320 --> 0:05:54.200
<v Speaker 1>It's not just me being a weird secko looking at corpses.

0:05:54.520 --> 0:05:58.760
<v Speaker 1>But the Daguera types have a specific texture to them

0:05:58.880 --> 0:06:01.719
<v Speaker 1>that I don't think you see photographs today. Yeah, And

0:06:01.720 --> 0:06:03.800
<v Speaker 1>it's it's also just it's hard for us to put

0:06:03.839 --> 0:06:07.840
<v Speaker 1>ourselves and given just how how how photographs fill our

0:06:07.839 --> 0:06:11.440
<v Speaker 1>world and how a custom we are to the technology.

0:06:11.600 --> 0:06:13.440
<v Speaker 1>It's it's hard for us to imagine what it was

0:06:13.520 --> 0:06:18.280
<v Speaker 1>like to suddenly have this technology more readily available. Um.

0:06:18.320 --> 0:06:20.280
<v Speaker 1>But but when you looked at some of the commentary

0:06:20.320 --> 0:06:23.000
<v Speaker 1>from the time, you can really begin to to to

0:06:23.000 --> 0:06:27.520
<v Speaker 1>to zero in on it. Um. For instance, Oliver Wendell

0:06:27.600 --> 0:06:30.839
<v Speaker 1>Holmes called the aa Gara type quote the mirror with

0:06:30.920 --> 0:06:34.400
<v Speaker 1>a memory, which which I think is rather fitting. And

0:06:34.920 --> 0:06:38.960
<v Speaker 1>Edgar Allan Poe uh wrote about the invention in eighteen

0:06:39.080 --> 0:06:42.080
<v Speaker 1>forty and I want to read uh some quotes from

0:06:42.120 --> 0:06:44.000
<v Speaker 1>him because I think he's he summed up. They're just

0:06:44.040 --> 0:06:46.719
<v Speaker 1>the wonder and awe of this invention rather nicely. And

0:06:46.800 --> 0:06:50.159
<v Speaker 1>it's Halloween. So what Poe has to say, if we

0:06:50.240 --> 0:06:53.080
<v Speaker 1>examine a work of ordinary art by means of a

0:06:53.120 --> 0:06:57.120
<v Speaker 1>powerful microscope, all traces of resemblance to nature will disappear.

0:06:57.560 --> 0:07:01.760
<v Speaker 1>But the closest scrutiny of the photogenetic rawling discloses only

0:07:01.839 --> 0:07:06.160
<v Speaker 1>a more absolute truth, a more perfect identity of aspect

0:07:06.400 --> 0:07:10.440
<v Speaker 1>with the thing represented. The variations of shade, the gradiations

0:07:10.440 --> 0:07:13.720
<v Speaker 1>of both linear and aerial perspective are those of truth

0:07:13.840 --> 0:07:17.640
<v Speaker 1>itself and the supremeness of its perfection, the results of

0:07:17.640 --> 0:07:22.000
<v Speaker 1>the invention cannot even remotely be seen. But all experience

0:07:22.080 --> 0:07:25.560
<v Speaker 1>in matters of philosophical discovery teaches us that in such

0:07:25.600 --> 0:07:28.880
<v Speaker 1>a discovery, it is the unforeseen upon which we must

0:07:28.920 --> 0:07:33.080
<v Speaker 1>calculate most largely. It is a theorem almost demonstrated that

0:07:33.160 --> 0:07:36.600
<v Speaker 1>the consequences of any new scientific invention will at the

0:07:36.640 --> 0:07:40.520
<v Speaker 1>present day exceed by very much the wildest expectations of

0:07:40.600 --> 0:07:43.800
<v Speaker 1>the most imaginative. So I hear that Poe quote, and

0:07:43.840 --> 0:07:47.520
<v Speaker 1>it sounds to me like the advent of photography was

0:07:47.560 --> 0:07:51.360
<v Speaker 1>really changing how people thought about the world, right, Because

0:07:52.000 --> 0:07:55.240
<v Speaker 1>up until then, let's be honest, like our awareness of

0:07:55.280 --> 0:07:58.680
<v Speaker 1>the world is essentially from the self, because we're looking

0:07:59.160 --> 0:08:03.560
<v Speaker 1>out from ourselves to the world. Right. But with this photograph,

0:08:03.760 --> 0:08:07.280
<v Speaker 1>you can start perceiving the world through the eyes of

0:08:07.400 --> 0:08:11.720
<v Speaker 1>the other. Yeah, And that sounds uncanny, like a complete change,

0:08:11.720 --> 0:08:13.760
<v Speaker 1>And thought, Yeah, you don't have to depend on the

0:08:13.800 --> 0:08:17.120
<v Speaker 1>fallibility of memory, you don't have to depend on on

0:08:17.200 --> 0:08:21.640
<v Speaker 1>an artistic representation that is created by somebody. It's virtually

0:08:21.680 --> 0:08:25.560
<v Speaker 1>instant compared to two artistic techniques and uh, and has

0:08:25.640 --> 0:08:28.800
<v Speaker 1>just incredible detail. So it makes sense that people would

0:08:28.800 --> 0:08:32.360
<v Speaker 1>be just applying photography to everything, and and you know,

0:08:32.520 --> 0:08:35.080
<v Speaker 1>to your point about taking pictures of the dead to

0:08:35.120 --> 0:08:38.439
<v Speaker 1>commemorate them. Uh, it reminds me. For instance, you remember

0:08:38.440 --> 0:08:41.680
<v Speaker 1>when everybody was getting these um these picture frames that

0:08:42.000 --> 0:08:45.120
<v Speaker 1>would throw up multiple digital images. Yes, I got one

0:08:45.160 --> 0:08:47.800
<v Speaker 1>for my grandmother a couple of years ago. Yeah, because

0:08:48.559 --> 0:08:51.040
<v Speaker 1>all of our photos were digital and she didn't have

0:08:51.080 --> 0:08:53.240
<v Speaker 1>a computer, So we got her one of those. And

0:08:53.280 --> 0:08:55.160
<v Speaker 1>then my sister brother and I we just all like

0:08:55.280 --> 0:08:57.679
<v Speaker 1>uploaded like a hundred photos into the thing and sent

0:08:57.760 --> 0:08:59.520
<v Speaker 1>it to her for Christmas. Yeah. I mean they still

0:08:59.559 --> 0:09:01.760
<v Speaker 1>have them, I obviously, but I feel like for a

0:09:01.760 --> 0:09:04.559
<v Speaker 1>while there everybody had them. It was it was the thing.

0:09:04.760 --> 0:09:07.120
<v Speaker 1>And even at the time, I remember thinking, this is

0:09:07.200 --> 0:09:10.559
<v Speaker 1>this is gonna be a detail in a historic reenactment

0:09:10.640 --> 0:09:12.599
<v Speaker 1>in the future. This is gonna this is a technology

0:09:12.600 --> 0:09:15.000
<v Speaker 1>that is going to quickly fade because it's a bit weird.

0:09:15.360 --> 0:09:18.760
<v Speaker 1>It's just not working in the way that a digital

0:09:18.800 --> 0:09:21.719
<v Speaker 1>image and a more traditional digital medium works, or as

0:09:21.760 --> 0:09:25.000
<v Speaker 1>a or or the way the physical uh photograph works

0:09:25.000 --> 0:09:27.520
<v Speaker 1>in a frame. Right, Yeah, yeah, it is. It is

0:09:27.520 --> 0:09:29.079
<v Speaker 1>a strange thing. I think you're right, that's going to

0:09:29.160 --> 0:09:31.800
<v Speaker 1>be one of those things that like period pieces fifty

0:09:31.880 --> 0:09:34.800
<v Speaker 1>years from now, well they'll they'll throw those weird digital

0:09:34.800 --> 0:09:38.240
<v Speaker 1>frames in. All right, So you had the degerotype. It

0:09:38.360 --> 0:09:41.960
<v Speaker 1>was new, technology was game changing, it was exciting and

0:09:42.080 --> 0:09:45.560
<v Speaker 1>uh and you had a lot of people already appropriating

0:09:45.600 --> 0:09:49.400
<v Speaker 1>all of this excitement to the pseudo to pseudoscientific and

0:09:49.480 --> 0:09:51.920
<v Speaker 1>mystical purposes. And we're not gonna get into all those

0:09:51.920 --> 0:09:56.720
<v Speaker 1>purposes today. But obviously this was the era of spirit photography. Um,

0:09:56.800 --> 0:10:00.360
<v Speaker 1>you know, images of ectoplasm and ghosts and fair area's.

0:10:00.840 --> 0:10:04.040
<v Speaker 1>Uh So, anything we're talking about today that gets a

0:10:04.080 --> 0:10:08.000
<v Speaker 1>little uh mystical in nature is really nothing compared to

0:10:08.000 --> 0:10:10.840
<v Speaker 1>some of the other uses that were out there. Right,

0:10:10.920 --> 0:10:14.920
<v Speaker 1>But this led to how we study the eyeball right,

0:10:14.960 --> 0:10:19.320
<v Speaker 1>because there was this cultural idea that the function of

0:10:19.360 --> 0:10:22.600
<v Speaker 1>a camera was the same as the biological function of

0:10:22.640 --> 0:10:25.360
<v Speaker 1>an eye, whether that being a human being or a

0:10:25.480 --> 0:10:28.160
<v Speaker 1>rabbit or a rat. That's right. And you know, at

0:10:28.160 --> 0:10:30.440
<v Speaker 1>the same time, we were also making huge strides and

0:10:30.520 --> 0:10:35.120
<v Speaker 1>studying the eye itself. Uh. In in eighteen fifty we

0:10:35.160 --> 0:10:37.960
<v Speaker 1>saw the invention and and some argue this was just

0:10:38.000 --> 0:10:44.840
<v Speaker 1>an independent reinvention of the ophthalmaloscope by German physiologist and

0:10:44.920 --> 0:10:50.640
<v Speaker 1>physicist Herman von Helmholtz and the engage revolutionized ophthalmology and

0:10:50.720 --> 0:10:53.560
<v Speaker 1>that it allowed the doctors to see inside the fundness

0:10:53.559 --> 0:10:55.920
<v Speaker 1>of the eye. Okay, so this is like the thing

0:10:56.000 --> 0:10:58.480
<v Speaker 1>when I go to the optometrist every year and they

0:10:58.720 --> 0:11:00.760
<v Speaker 1>look at my eye with what feels to me like

0:11:00.800 --> 0:11:03.760
<v Speaker 1>it's like a microscope or something. But it's obviously a

0:11:03.800 --> 0:11:07.200
<v Speaker 1>lot more complicated than what Helmholtz was working with. So

0:11:07.240 --> 0:11:12.520
<v Speaker 1>you take these two technological advancements and in retrospect, it

0:11:12.559 --> 0:11:15.000
<v Speaker 1>seems inevitable that we would get to this realm of

0:11:15.120 --> 0:11:17.800
<v Speaker 1>optimology because we're learning more about the eye. We have

0:11:17.840 --> 0:11:21.360
<v Speaker 1>this fabulous news technology, and time and time again, we

0:11:21.480 --> 0:11:24.000
<v Speaker 1>can't help but think about the human experience in the

0:11:24.040 --> 0:11:27.760
<v Speaker 1>human body in terms of the technology we use. When

0:11:27.800 --> 0:11:30.280
<v Speaker 1>we've talked about memory on the show, we often talk

0:11:30.360 --> 0:11:32.640
<v Speaker 1>about how we we fall into this trap of thinking

0:11:32.720 --> 0:11:36.440
<v Speaker 1>about the eyes as video cameras and memory as like

0:11:36.480 --> 0:11:41.240
<v Speaker 1>the tape database, and when it's really nothing like that,

0:11:41.320 --> 0:11:45.760
<v Speaker 1>you know, aside from the most simplistic uses of that metaphor. Yeah,

0:11:45.840 --> 0:11:49.280
<v Speaker 1>it's actually interesting when you look at that period of

0:11:49.280 --> 0:11:53.680
<v Speaker 1>time during the Industrial Revolution, after this invention, right, there

0:11:53.880 --> 0:11:57.760
<v Speaker 1>is a lot of focus in sort of fantastic fiction

0:11:58.240 --> 0:12:00.520
<v Speaker 1>on the ideas of being able to do the things

0:12:00.559 --> 0:12:03.680
<v Speaker 1>that you do in industry better with the biology of

0:12:03.679 --> 0:12:07.760
<v Speaker 1>the human body, whether that's like moving faster or being stronger,

0:12:07.920 --> 0:12:11.000
<v Speaker 1>or having better eyesight, like all of those things, like

0:12:11.040 --> 0:12:15.480
<v Speaker 1>how can it uh increase the production? Right? And then

0:12:15.559 --> 0:12:19.679
<v Speaker 1>you start seeing investigations like this in science where it's like, oh, well,

0:12:19.720 --> 0:12:22.120
<v Speaker 1>maybe if we peek inside of here, we'll we'll get

0:12:22.160 --> 0:12:24.959
<v Speaker 1>some idea how to make it so everybody's got superhuman vision.

0:12:25.240 --> 0:12:28.760
<v Speaker 1>And yet it's still so hard to shake mystical interpretations

0:12:29.120 --> 0:12:33.360
<v Speaker 1>of vision. Uh. For instance, just consider that the long

0:12:33.440 --> 0:12:36.360
<v Speaker 1>outdated emission theory of vision. This is the idea that

0:12:36.440 --> 0:12:39.679
<v Speaker 1>you see with I beams, the idea that there's some

0:12:39.720 --> 0:12:42.440
<v Speaker 1>sort of force that comes out of my eye and

0:12:42.640 --> 0:12:45.400
<v Speaker 1>touches something that, you know, the the thing I'm trying

0:12:45.440 --> 0:12:50.000
<v Speaker 1>to see, and relates the information back to my eyes somehow. Uh.

0:12:50.200 --> 0:12:53.599
<v Speaker 1>This has long been abandoned, but according to the to

0:12:53.679 --> 0:12:57.240
<v Speaker 1>an American Psychologist article published in two thousand two, as

0:12:57.280 --> 0:13:00.600
<v Speaker 1>many as fifty percent of adults still bought the emission

0:13:00.640 --> 0:13:04.720
<v Speaker 1>theory rather than the correct intromission theory. Really. Yeah, I've

0:13:04.720 --> 0:13:08.680
<v Speaker 1>never even heard the emission theory outside of like comic books.

0:13:08.960 --> 0:13:11.440
<v Speaker 1>Well in the comic books is a great example because

0:13:11.440 --> 0:13:14.280
<v Speaker 1>it comes down to local Cyclops. The x Cyclops is

0:13:14.320 --> 0:13:17.240
<v Speaker 1>who I immediately think of. It gets into this idea

0:13:17.240 --> 0:13:19.960
<v Speaker 1>that without like really thinking about it and room and

0:13:20.000 --> 0:13:22.559
<v Speaker 1>even in many cases I think, just reminding yourself, oh yeah,

0:13:22.679 --> 0:13:25.120
<v Speaker 1>light is entering my eyes and that's how I see.

0:13:25.679 --> 0:13:29.480
<v Speaker 1>You end up thinking about reality and thinking about sight

0:13:29.600 --> 0:13:33.920
<v Speaker 1>in terms of Cyclops's laser vision. Right, something's coming out

0:13:34.200 --> 0:13:37.600
<v Speaker 1>blasting things. If someone staring at you, they're like peering

0:13:37.679 --> 0:13:40.080
<v Speaker 1>into you with some sort of a force. Yeah, yeah,

0:13:40.800 --> 0:13:43.319
<v Speaker 1>this is interesting. It says more I think about our

0:13:43.440 --> 0:13:48.200
<v Speaker 1>uncomfortableity with looking at a living being's eyes than it

0:13:48.280 --> 0:13:51.439
<v Speaker 1>does about what we think about how we see things,

0:13:51.480 --> 0:13:53.480
<v Speaker 1>you know what I mean. Alright, So, so far we

0:13:53.559 --> 0:13:56.880
<v Speaker 1>have the inherent mystical nature of sight or the experience

0:13:56.880 --> 0:14:00.520
<v Speaker 1>of sight. We have these new technological advancements up. Plus

0:14:00.559 --> 0:14:03.439
<v Speaker 1>you can throw in a little bit of experiential support

0:14:03.480 --> 0:14:05.960
<v Speaker 1>as well. If you stare at something for a long

0:14:06.040 --> 0:14:10.000
<v Speaker 1>time and then you gaze at a blank wall, what happens? Yeah,

0:14:10.440 --> 0:14:12.840
<v Speaker 1>you can still see an impression of that image. And

0:14:12.880 --> 0:14:15.400
<v Speaker 1>you may experience this too with computer screens and whatnot

0:14:15.440 --> 0:14:16.840
<v Speaker 1>as well. And to the point of what we're going

0:14:16.840 --> 0:14:20.720
<v Speaker 1>to discuss with optography, that effect is heightened if you

0:14:20.840 --> 0:14:23.600
<v Speaker 1>go from being in a dark place to a bright

0:14:23.640 --> 0:14:27.240
<v Speaker 1>place or vice versa. Yeah. And in eighteen fifty four,

0:14:27.760 --> 0:14:33.640
<v Speaker 1>English scientist Reverend William Scoresby UH connected this experiment where

0:14:33.680 --> 0:14:35.320
<v Speaker 1>you would stare in an object and then look at

0:14:35.360 --> 0:14:38.000
<v Speaker 1>the wall and then time the image to see how

0:14:38.080 --> 0:14:41.840
<v Speaker 1>long it lasted. Um. And that there was this uh

0:14:42.000 --> 0:14:45.160
<v Speaker 1>that the paper was on pictorial and photochromatic impressions of

0:14:45.160 --> 0:14:48.240
<v Speaker 1>the retina and of the human eye. Uh. And there's

0:14:48.280 --> 0:14:51.320
<v Speaker 1>this wonderful quote. This is from an eighteen fifty four

0:14:51.400 --> 0:14:56.160
<v Speaker 1>right up in the uh Antheneum. Upon removing the eyes

0:14:56.200 --> 0:14:59.080
<v Speaker 1>from the object, the author explained the early appearance of

0:14:59.120 --> 0:15:02.400
<v Speaker 1>the picture or image which had been thus impressed on

0:15:02.440 --> 0:15:06.200
<v Speaker 1>the retina, or as he expressed it, photographed upon the retina.

0:15:06.880 --> 0:15:09.840
<v Speaker 1>So we have the technology observable perks of human side

0:15:09.960 --> 0:15:12.680
<v Speaker 1>backed up in an experiment, and a general human history

0:15:12.720 --> 0:15:16.360
<v Speaker 1>of seeing the eyes as windows into the soul, as

0:15:16.400 --> 0:15:20.000
<v Speaker 1>well as observeration observational changes in the eyes of say

0:15:20.040 --> 0:15:22.080
<v Speaker 1>a fish, because how do you judge the freshness of

0:15:22.080 --> 0:15:24.160
<v Speaker 1>a fish? You look to its eyes. Right when they

0:15:24.160 --> 0:15:28.600
<v Speaker 1>start changing and getting cloudy, you know they've been dead longer. Right, Yeah, Okay,

0:15:28.680 --> 0:15:31.120
<v Speaker 1>so let's take a break, and when we get back,

0:15:31.160 --> 0:15:34.760
<v Speaker 1>we're gonna take this step and we're gonna move forward

0:15:35.000 --> 0:15:41.880
<v Speaker 1>into the rise of optography. All right, we're back. So

0:15:41.960 --> 0:15:48.000
<v Speaker 1>optography seems to have begun in the mid seventeenth century actually,

0:15:48.120 --> 0:15:50.880
<v Speaker 1>or at least the rumors of something like it, when

0:15:50.880 --> 0:15:55.280
<v Speaker 1>a Jesuit friar called Christopher sheen Or observed a faint

0:15:55.320 --> 0:15:57.880
<v Speaker 1>image that was disappearing from the bare retina of a

0:15:57.920 --> 0:16:00.600
<v Speaker 1>dissected frog. So, like you were saying, just before a break, right,

0:16:00.920 --> 0:16:02.960
<v Speaker 1>we look at fish's eyes to see if they're starting

0:16:02.960 --> 0:16:06.000
<v Speaker 1>to decompose, essentially, and it seems like he was doing

0:16:06.040 --> 0:16:08.000
<v Speaker 1>something similar with a frog. But then he was like, wait,

0:16:08.360 --> 0:16:11.360
<v Speaker 1>I see a picture in this frog's eyes. This means something,

0:16:11.480 --> 0:16:16.520
<v Speaker 1>right now, Remember what we were talking about earlier with photography.

0:16:16.640 --> 0:16:19.880
<v Speaker 1>Photography wasn't really invented until the eighteen forties. This is

0:16:19.920 --> 0:16:23.120
<v Speaker 1>what gave rise though, to the idea that the animal

0:16:23.240 --> 0:16:27.040
<v Speaker 1>I worked like a camera. So, uh, Shiner's kind of

0:16:27.280 --> 0:16:29.680
<v Speaker 1>hypothesis of that there was an image left over in

0:16:29.680 --> 0:16:32.080
<v Speaker 1>the frog's eye seems to have connected with that become

0:16:32.200 --> 0:16:35.680
<v Speaker 1>somewhat of an urban legend. Then we get in eighteen

0:16:35.720 --> 0:16:38.880
<v Speaker 1>sixty three, there's an English photographer who takes a photograph

0:16:39.000 --> 0:16:42.320
<v Speaker 1>of an ox's eye right after the ox dies, and

0:16:42.360 --> 0:16:45.120
<v Speaker 1>he uses a microscope to search for any evidence of

0:16:45.160 --> 0:16:49.640
<v Speaker 1>the images left inside. This ox is retina. The photographer

0:16:49.840 --> 0:16:53.760
<v Speaker 1>claims that he could see the fleeting image of stones

0:16:54.160 --> 0:16:58.480
<v Speaker 1>arranged just like the slaughterhouse road that the ox was

0:16:58.560 --> 0:17:01.320
<v Speaker 1>facing just before it received a blow to the head

0:17:01.360 --> 0:17:04.960
<v Speaker 1>that killed it. Okay, so this helps spur this on

0:17:05.080 --> 0:17:06.960
<v Speaker 1>even further. It becomes a little bit more of a

0:17:07.280 --> 0:17:09.879
<v Speaker 1>so it's sort of just like a rumor, like, oh,

0:17:10.000 --> 0:17:12.000
<v Speaker 1>did you know, like the last thing you see before

0:17:12.000 --> 0:17:15.159
<v Speaker 1>you die is imprinted on your eyeball. Then it was

0:17:15.280 --> 0:17:18.840
<v Speaker 1>really studied for the first time by Franz Christian Bull

0:17:19.280 --> 0:17:22.679
<v Speaker 1>and in eighteen seventies six he discovered that there was

0:17:22.680 --> 0:17:25.800
<v Speaker 1>a pigment hiding in the back of the eye that

0:17:25.880 --> 0:17:29.600
<v Speaker 1>could bleach in light and then would recover in the dark,

0:17:29.640 --> 0:17:33.640
<v Speaker 1>and he called this visual purple. Now today we call

0:17:33.720 --> 0:17:36.000
<v Speaker 1>it rhodopson. I'll give you a little bit of a

0:17:36.080 --> 0:17:38.439
<v Speaker 1>lesson on rhodopsin, but but he's certainly worth noting in

0:17:38.480 --> 0:17:41.000
<v Speaker 1>all this that that that bull was the real deal.

0:17:41.119 --> 0:17:44.359
<v Speaker 1>Like this, This wasn't just a photographer who is making

0:17:44.400 --> 0:17:48.159
<v Speaker 1>some judgments based on the photographs that he take. In

0:17:48.240 --> 0:17:50.240
<v Speaker 1>this is a guy who who studied and made some

0:17:50.240 --> 0:17:54.399
<v Speaker 1>real achievements. Absolutely, so we now know today that rhodopson

0:17:54.520 --> 0:17:59.000
<v Speaker 1>is a pigment that contains sensory proteins and that converts

0:17:59.119 --> 0:18:04.160
<v Speaker 1>light into an electrical signal. This is a common pigment.

0:18:04.240 --> 0:18:07.080
<v Speaker 1>It's in a lot of organisms, from vertebrates to bacteria.

0:18:07.119 --> 0:18:09.639
<v Speaker 1>In fact, I was seeing all kinds of academic papers yesterday.

0:18:09.680 --> 0:18:13.840
<v Speaker 1>You're doing this research on how there's there's some potential animals,

0:18:13.840 --> 0:18:17.760
<v Speaker 1>like some octopi that may have rhodopsin in their skin

0:18:18.280 --> 0:18:21.040
<v Speaker 1>that allows them to quote see through their skin in

0:18:21.080 --> 0:18:25.199
<v Speaker 1>some ways. It's common, but it's also required for vision

0:18:25.320 --> 0:18:28.840
<v Speaker 1>in dim light, and it's located in the tightly packed

0:18:29.160 --> 0:18:32.359
<v Speaker 1>disks that make up the outer segment of the retina's

0:18:32.440 --> 0:18:36.280
<v Speaker 1>photo receptive rod cells. Basically, the way it works is

0:18:36.320 --> 0:18:40.000
<v Speaker 1>it sends an electrical signal along the optic nerve to

0:18:40.200 --> 0:18:44.080
<v Speaker 1>the visual cortex in the brain. The eye sensitivity is

0:18:44.119 --> 0:18:47.760
<v Speaker 1>dependent on how much rhodopsin is present, and part of

0:18:47.800 --> 0:18:51.800
<v Speaker 1>the visual process involves it being destroyed in this bleaching

0:18:51.880 --> 0:18:54.960
<v Speaker 1>process that I mentioned when it's exposed to light. Now

0:18:55.000 --> 0:18:58.800
<v Speaker 1>here's a weird thing. Mutations in the rhodopsin gene can

0:18:58.800 --> 0:19:02.280
<v Speaker 1>actually lead to night blindness. So this is where the

0:19:02.359 --> 0:19:06.120
<v Speaker 1>eye fails to adapt to darkness. So radoption is really

0:19:06.160 --> 0:19:08.480
<v Speaker 1>important for us being too in D and D terms

0:19:08.480 --> 0:19:11.639
<v Speaker 1>like low light vision right um. And it can be

0:19:11.720 --> 0:19:17.920
<v Speaker 1>affected by environmental factors, especially vitamin A deficiency. So if

0:19:17.960 --> 0:19:20.560
<v Speaker 1>your vitamin A is low, this can mess with your

0:19:20.600 --> 0:19:23.520
<v Speaker 1>adoption and how well you see at night. Now I

0:19:23.600 --> 0:19:28.440
<v Speaker 1>love despite Bowl's scientific pedigree. I love how his experiments

0:19:28.440 --> 0:19:32.080
<v Speaker 1>sounds so much like alchemy. I ran across a bit

0:19:32.160 --> 0:19:36.400
<v Speaker 1>from his writings as quoted in Optagrams and Criminology, Science

0:19:36.440 --> 0:19:40.359
<v Speaker 1>News Reporting and Fanciful Novels by Douglas J. Lanska, and

0:19:41.040 --> 0:19:44.640
<v Speaker 1>here's what both said. I simultaneously decapitated a dozen dark

0:19:44.680 --> 0:19:47.439
<v Speaker 1>adapted frogs and kept their heads dark in order to

0:19:47.520 --> 0:19:51.960
<v Speaker 1>examine their eyes consecutively at stated intervals. Yeah, man, that

0:19:52.280 --> 0:19:56.040
<v Speaker 1>is a common thing with optography, cutting animals heads off

0:19:56.040 --> 0:19:58.800
<v Speaker 1>and just keeping them around in the dark. Get ready

0:19:58.840 --> 0:20:00.960
<v Speaker 1>for it, because everybody does this, and they even do

0:20:01.040 --> 0:20:02.840
<v Speaker 1>it to a couple of people. Yeah, and it's the same,

0:20:02.960 --> 0:20:05.520
<v Speaker 1>it's it's it's lines up so well with accounts you

0:20:05.560 --> 0:20:09.800
<v Speaker 1>read about how to make a homunculous right exactly. So. Actually,

0:20:09.840 --> 0:20:13.920
<v Speaker 1>before bowl there's this report that in eighteen sixty eight,

0:20:13.920 --> 0:20:18.400
<v Speaker 1>a doctor in the German town of Vosquez presented pictures

0:20:18.440 --> 0:20:22.479
<v Speaker 1>that he made of the images from to murder victims eyes,

0:20:23.040 --> 0:20:28.320
<v Speaker 1>and a medical expert named August Gabriel Maxim Vernois was

0:20:28.400 --> 0:20:32.119
<v Speaker 1>asked to examine this concept and tested empirically. So he's

0:20:32.160 --> 0:20:35.160
<v Speaker 1>basically the outsider scientist comes to this town, he takes

0:20:35.200 --> 0:20:38.840
<v Speaker 1>a look. Was he do experiments on sixteen dogs and cats,

0:20:38.880 --> 0:20:42.280
<v Speaker 1>presumably cutting up their eyeballs in their heads. He finds

0:20:42.320 --> 0:20:45.439
<v Speaker 1>no pictures. He finds that this isn't true. This but

0:20:45.560 --> 0:20:47.639
<v Speaker 1>something's wrong here, right, Yeah. I think one of the

0:20:47.680 --> 0:20:51.960
<v Speaker 1>interesting things though, particularly about bowls experiments um, is that

0:20:51.960 --> 0:20:54.879
<v Speaker 1>that he was excited by the chemical process that seemed

0:20:54.880 --> 0:20:57.240
<v Speaker 1>to be taking place there because it was it was

0:20:57.440 --> 0:21:00.679
<v Speaker 1>rather like the silver nitrate in photograph plates. It was

0:21:00.720 --> 0:21:02.520
<v Speaker 1>like this chemical process that was a part of this

0:21:02.600 --> 0:21:07.600
<v Speaker 1>exciting technology. So again we can't help but see the

0:21:07.600 --> 0:21:12.560
<v Speaker 1>comparisons between the technology and the human experience. Yeah, and

0:21:12.600 --> 0:21:14.560
<v Speaker 1>I think that's the difference here, right, is that bull

0:21:14.680 --> 0:21:19.360
<v Speaker 1>was actually like working with the chemistry and biology, whereas

0:21:19.440 --> 0:21:22.960
<v Speaker 1>like whatever went on in this town of Vosquez, like

0:21:23.359 --> 0:21:26.280
<v Speaker 1>it was really just somebody taking pictures of murder victims

0:21:26.320 --> 0:21:29.199
<v Speaker 1>eyes and thinking they saw something there. Right, But this

0:21:29.240 --> 0:21:32.879
<v Speaker 1>all changes and in Germany. Germany seems to be the

0:21:33.000 --> 0:21:34.719
<v Speaker 1>center point for a lot of this. I wonder if

0:21:34.720 --> 0:21:37.879
<v Speaker 1>there's something specific to German culture that revolves around the

0:21:37.920 --> 0:21:40.720
<v Speaker 1>idea of being able to see an image on a

0:21:40.760 --> 0:21:43.119
<v Speaker 1>dead person's eyeball. Oh, I don't know, I mean to

0:21:43.200 --> 0:21:44.640
<v Speaker 1>I mean to a certain extent. I think just sort

0:21:44.640 --> 0:21:48.520
<v Speaker 1>of necromatic ideas about communicating with the dead or or

0:21:48.800 --> 0:21:52.360
<v Speaker 1>perhaps universal. Now on the chemistry side, though, of course,

0:21:52.400 --> 0:21:55.120
<v Speaker 1>you can look to the the huge achievements in chemistry

0:21:55.160 --> 0:21:58.920
<v Speaker 1>that were made in Germany, you know, around this time

0:21:59.040 --> 0:22:02.360
<v Speaker 1>and into the they Well, German listeners, if you've got

0:22:02.359 --> 0:22:04.280
<v Speaker 1>some insights into this, we'd love to hear from you.

0:22:04.400 --> 0:22:09.359
<v Speaker 1>But here comes Wilhelm Friederic Kuhn now Kun, was a

0:22:09.400 --> 0:22:13.560
<v Speaker 1>professor of physiology at the University of Heidelberg and he

0:22:13.640 --> 0:22:17.920
<v Speaker 1>studied rhodopson. He devised a process to fix the chemical

0:22:18.200 --> 0:22:21.119
<v Speaker 1>in the eyeball and then develop an image from it.

0:22:21.520 --> 0:22:25.720
<v Speaker 1>And these experiments grew out of his accidental observation of

0:22:25.760 --> 0:22:29.159
<v Speaker 1>the shape of a gas flame from his laboratory on

0:22:29.200 --> 0:22:34.200
<v Speaker 1>the retina of a frog. So Kun performs this famous experiment.

0:22:34.240 --> 0:22:35.600
<v Speaker 1>This is the one. Like any time you look at

0:22:35.600 --> 0:22:39.920
<v Speaker 1>optography articles or anything, this always comes up. This is

0:22:39.960 --> 0:22:43.080
<v Speaker 1>the most famous experiment. He takes an albino rabbit in

0:22:44.040 --> 0:22:46.840
<v Speaker 1>seven and he fastens this rabbit's head so that it's

0:22:46.880 --> 0:22:51.160
<v Speaker 1>forced to look at a barred window. Then he covers

0:22:51.160 --> 0:22:53.240
<v Speaker 1>its head for several minutes I think with like a

0:22:53.280 --> 0:22:57.000
<v Speaker 1>bag or something, uh, and this lets the rhodopson accumulate

0:22:57.000 --> 0:23:01.359
<v Speaker 1>in the rabbit's eyeballs. Then takes the bag or whatever

0:23:01.480 --> 0:23:04.679
<v Speaker 1>off of the rabbit's head, lets the eyeball be exposed

0:23:04.680 --> 0:23:07.720
<v Speaker 1>to light for three minutes, and then decapitates the rabbit.

0:23:08.240 --> 0:23:12.639
<v Speaker 1>He removes the rabbit's eyeball, cuts the eyeball open, and

0:23:12.720 --> 0:23:17.000
<v Speaker 1>takes the retina and lays it in a solution of alum.

0:23:17.080 --> 0:23:21.880
<v Speaker 1>Then he would bathe the eyeball afterward in sulfuric acid

0:23:22.000 --> 0:23:26.080
<v Speaker 1>and this would cement these images. The next day, the

0:23:26.160 --> 0:23:28.879
<v Speaker 1>image would then become printed and it would show a

0:23:28.920 --> 0:23:32.440
<v Speaker 1>clear pattern of this window that the rabbit was looking

0:23:32.480 --> 0:23:36.560
<v Speaker 1>at with its bars right before it died. So Kun

0:23:36.840 --> 0:23:41.280
<v Speaker 1>is actually the one who coins the term optography, and

0:23:41.359 --> 0:23:46.280
<v Speaker 1>he calls these images optographs. So we're looking at the

0:23:46.280 --> 0:23:48.840
<v Speaker 1>beginning of what is maybe going to be a science

0:23:48.920 --> 0:23:51.480
<v Speaker 1>but really doesn't end up panning out. And the reason

0:23:51.560 --> 0:23:54.600
<v Speaker 1>why is con himself really felt like this wasn't you know,

0:23:54.840 --> 0:23:58.560
<v Speaker 1>something that was reliable enough that you could use it

0:23:58.600 --> 0:24:01.720
<v Speaker 1>over and over again, right, So his experiments ultimately showed

0:24:01.720 --> 0:24:06.560
<v Speaker 1>that only simple, high contrast surroundings were able to produce

0:24:06.640 --> 0:24:11.280
<v Speaker 1>interpretable optograms, and that the retina, whatever it was, whether

0:24:11.320 --> 0:24:13.320
<v Speaker 1>it was from a frog or a human being or rabbit,

0:24:13.440 --> 0:24:16.720
<v Speaker 1>needs to be removed very quickly from the deceased. He

0:24:16.800 --> 0:24:20.679
<v Speaker 1>determined for rabbits the limitation you need to get it

0:24:20.720 --> 0:24:23.440
<v Speaker 1>out of their head between sixty and ninety minutes of death.

0:24:23.520 --> 0:24:27.560
<v Speaker 1>In oxen it was useless after one hour. Yeah, and

0:24:27.560 --> 0:24:29.640
<v Speaker 1>then one of the problems with it with human eyes

0:24:29.640 --> 0:24:31.800
<v Speaker 1>that I've seen pointed out is that human eyes are

0:24:31.880 --> 0:24:35.720
<v Speaker 1>arguably more like bird's eyes than mammalian eyed. This according

0:24:35.760 --> 0:24:39.080
<v Speaker 1>to author Simon Ings, author of A Natural History of Seeing,

0:24:39.119 --> 0:24:43.760
<v Speaker 1>the Art and Science of Vision. Um. Yeah, Coon's history

0:24:43.800 --> 0:24:46.920
<v Speaker 1>with this technology is rather interesting because on one side

0:24:46.960 --> 0:24:49.680
<v Speaker 1>there is just sort of the grizzly and very specific

0:24:49.880 --> 0:24:53.399
<v Speaker 1>nature of of the research. For instance, when he was

0:24:53.800 --> 0:24:55.720
<v Speaker 1>trying to figure out in a better way of fixing

0:24:55.760 --> 0:24:59.520
<v Speaker 1>the images, which again is akin to fixing bath in

0:24:59.560 --> 0:25:02.840
<v Speaker 1>the chemical the process of photo development. Uh, he eventually

0:25:02.840 --> 0:25:05.639
<v Speaker 1>realized that a retinal image would fade and vanish, you know,

0:25:05.720 --> 0:25:08.919
<v Speaker 1>due to just metabolic processes in the eye even a

0:25:08.920 --> 0:25:12.520
<v Speaker 1>short time after death. So in one experiment with with

0:25:12.680 --> 0:25:17.440
<v Speaker 1>a dog that had essentially been put under and then

0:25:17.440 --> 0:25:21.040
<v Speaker 1>put on artificial respiration respiration, and that dog he had

0:25:21.080 --> 0:25:25.399
<v Speaker 1>previously hooked up it's corona artery with an injection apparatus

0:25:25.440 --> 0:25:28.479
<v Speaker 1>so as to quote drive a rapid stream of warm

0:25:28.600 --> 0:25:31.560
<v Speaker 1>alumn solution into the head and into the eye. Okay,

0:25:31.560 --> 0:25:33.359
<v Speaker 1>so it sounds like here what he's looking to do

0:25:33.440 --> 0:25:37.560
<v Speaker 1>then is is basically limit the after effect right by

0:25:37.680 --> 0:25:41.800
<v Speaker 1>having the animals still living while he's injecting the chemical

0:25:41.880 --> 0:25:47.560
<v Speaker 1>fluid for the processing. Yeah, poor dog. Well yeah, I mean, hey,

0:25:47.600 --> 0:25:51.000
<v Speaker 1>but those rabbits, those rabbits didn't have it easy. Those rabbits. Yeah. No,

0:25:51.480 --> 0:25:53.520
<v Speaker 1>I wouldn't want to be those rabbits either, But at least,

0:25:53.800 --> 0:25:58.120
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I'm assuming the decapitation was quick. I hope. Well,

0:25:58.160 --> 0:26:00.240
<v Speaker 1>he's in a hurry. I mean, he has to see.

0:26:00.800 --> 0:26:04.399
<v Speaker 1>This dog is like, you know, thankfully put under, But

0:26:04.680 --> 0:26:07.560
<v Speaker 1>it's got all the stuff running directly into its eyeball.

0:26:08.280 --> 0:26:10.639
<v Speaker 1>But but it does boil down. Just how difficult it

0:26:10.640 --> 0:26:13.520
<v Speaker 1>would be to use this uh in any way, for

0:26:13.840 --> 0:26:16.360
<v Speaker 1>especially for forensic purposes, because in order to pull it off,

0:26:16.359 --> 0:26:20.240
<v Speaker 1>he realized, you need a a a very simple, high

0:26:20.320 --> 0:26:23.520
<v Speaker 1>contrast target to look at anyway, so you know, like

0:26:23.600 --> 0:26:26.800
<v Speaker 1>window beams, et cetera, these things we've talked about. You

0:26:26.840 --> 0:26:29.679
<v Speaker 1>need a paralyzing agent or some other means of locking

0:26:29.720 --> 0:26:32.240
<v Speaker 1>the eyes on the target, and then the eye would

0:26:32.280 --> 0:26:35.560
<v Speaker 1>have to be rapidly removed and opened in darkness the

0:26:35.600 --> 0:26:38.800
<v Speaker 1>retina hardened and fixed, and even then the method often

0:26:38.880 --> 0:26:42.680
<v Speaker 1>failed because the pigment regenerated and obscured the image. Now,

0:26:42.680 --> 0:26:45.480
<v Speaker 1>while others out there in the world speculated on the

0:26:45.480 --> 0:26:51.080
<v Speaker 1>potential forensic applications here. Coon initially dismissed these possibilities. He

0:26:51.119 --> 0:26:54.639
<v Speaker 1>wanted no part of the quote various popular accounts to

0:26:54.680 --> 0:26:57.879
<v Speaker 1>which my name has been in the most unusual manner

0:26:57.920 --> 0:27:03.200
<v Speaker 1>attached still um. When presented with the opportunity, he gave

0:27:03.200 --> 0:27:05.280
<v Speaker 1>it a shot. Yeah, he couldn't pass it up. So

0:27:05.640 --> 0:27:09.679
<v Speaker 1>he actually retrieved the eyeball from a human being named

0:27:09.920 --> 0:27:13.199
<v Speaker 1>Earhard Gustav Reef. And this was a man who was

0:27:13.280 --> 0:27:16.119
<v Speaker 1>sentenced to death for drowning his two children. This is

0:27:16.280 --> 0:27:20.040
<v Speaker 1>eight we're talking about here. And this guy was killed

0:27:20.040 --> 0:27:24.360
<v Speaker 1>by guillotine, so his head was decapitated. Kon creates an

0:27:24.359 --> 0:27:27.680
<v Speaker 1>optagram in ten minutes, he like grabs his head the

0:27:27.720 --> 0:27:30.800
<v Speaker 1>minute falls off, scoops the eyeball out, and just immediately

0:27:30.880 --> 0:27:34.640
<v Speaker 1>begins his chemical process. Now, when the image came out,

0:27:34.800 --> 0:27:37.560
<v Speaker 1>Coon and other people who saw it, they were all like, oh, wait,

0:27:37.600 --> 0:27:39.960
<v Speaker 1>I see this, I see that. They but then nobody

0:27:40.000 --> 0:27:42.840
<v Speaker 1>could really agree what it was, and ultimately it was

0:27:42.880 --> 0:27:45.639
<v Speaker 1>decided this is too ambiguous. It didn't really so there

0:27:45.680 --> 0:27:48.359
<v Speaker 1>might have been an impression, but was it a useful

0:27:48.400 --> 0:27:51.040
<v Speaker 1>impression in any way shape or form. Wasn't an identifiable

0:27:51.160 --> 0:27:54.400
<v Speaker 1>pre impression doesn't seem to be especially in any way

0:27:54.440 --> 0:27:57.119
<v Speaker 1>that could be used to like, for instance, identify a

0:27:57.359 --> 0:28:03.680
<v Speaker 1>murder victims killer now. Coon later worked with American physician Dr. W. C. Ayers,

0:28:04.160 --> 0:28:06.920
<v Speaker 1>who have conducted a long series of experiments. We're talking

0:28:06.960 --> 0:28:11.040
<v Speaker 1>a thousand plus experiments, and he concluded that optography would

0:28:11.119 --> 0:28:13.879
<v Speaker 1>never have a place in forensics. Uh. This is a

0:28:13.960 --> 0:28:17.560
<v Speaker 1>quote here from that Douglas J. Lanscope piece I cited earlier,

0:28:17.760 --> 0:28:20.320
<v Speaker 1>And this is and the sources this into an anonymous

0:28:21.240 --> 0:28:25.840
<v Speaker 1>source that he quotes. He meaning airs believes it utterly

0:28:25.920 --> 0:28:28.399
<v Speaker 1>idle to look for the picture of a man's face

0:28:28.840 --> 0:28:31.320
<v Speaker 1>or of the surroundings on the retina of a person

0:28:31.359 --> 0:28:33.840
<v Speaker 1>who has met with sudden death, even amid the most

0:28:33.960 --> 0:28:38.360
<v Speaker 1>favorable circumstances. And you know it would it would remain

0:28:38.440 --> 0:28:41.360
<v Speaker 1>this way. There's no evidence of a human optography experiment

0:28:41.400 --> 0:28:44.200
<v Speaker 1>ever producing as as as clear an image as we

0:28:44.240 --> 0:28:47.800
<v Speaker 1>saw with those rabbit experiments. And and even then those

0:28:47.880 --> 0:28:50.720
<v Speaker 1>rabbit experiments, again, it just looks very abstract. It's like

0:28:50.800 --> 0:28:53.280
<v Speaker 1>three beams. If you're told that it's a window, then

0:28:53.320 --> 0:28:54.920
<v Speaker 1>you can say, okay, I can see where that would

0:28:54.920 --> 0:28:58.080
<v Speaker 1>be a window. Yeah, we actually have the photo here

0:28:58.200 --> 0:28:59.880
<v Speaker 1>in our notes if if you want to look it up,

0:28:59.880 --> 0:29:02.440
<v Speaker 1>I'm sure you could find it if you just google optography.

0:29:02.800 --> 0:29:06.400
<v Speaker 1>But yeah, I mean it really it's a very simple, basic,

0:29:06.480 --> 0:29:09.560
<v Speaker 1>high contrast image. I doubt that you would be able

0:29:09.560 --> 0:29:13.280
<v Speaker 1>to even with a rabbit, uh, discern a person's face, right,

0:29:13.600 --> 0:29:15.880
<v Speaker 1>And that is the vast consensus from people who dealt

0:29:15.880 --> 0:29:19.240
<v Speaker 1>with the science. It was just refuted again and again

0:29:20.880 --> 0:29:23.200
<v Speaker 1>all the way up into the twentieth century. And yet

0:29:23.640 --> 0:29:27.560
<v Speaker 1>the idea didn't quite die out. Yeah, it's it still

0:29:27.680 --> 0:29:30.360
<v Speaker 1>hasn't panned out, and yet for some reason it's like

0:29:31.040 --> 0:29:33.560
<v Speaker 1>stuck in our cultural memory. Maybe it's because of the

0:29:33.560 --> 0:29:37.720
<v Speaker 1>pop cultural implications. But people just forged ahead and kept

0:29:37.720 --> 0:29:40.280
<v Speaker 1>trying and trying and trying. And at the same time

0:29:40.280 --> 0:29:44.160
<v Speaker 1>you had various individuals and pop culture writers or or

0:29:44.200 --> 0:29:49.320
<v Speaker 1>celebrities that were either playing with this idea or they

0:29:49.440 --> 0:29:52.960
<v Speaker 1>just outright talking about how photography had this link with

0:29:52.960 --> 0:29:56.200
<v Speaker 1>the supernatural. For instance, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the author

0:29:56.240 --> 0:30:01.080
<v Speaker 1>of Sherlock Holmes Stories and uh self self experiment or

0:30:01.160 --> 0:30:03.880
<v Speaker 1>of poisons, as we know from our recent Poisons episode.

0:30:03.960 --> 0:30:07.240
<v Speaker 1>Yet in nine three he gave a talk on spiritualism

0:30:07.240 --> 0:30:10.200
<v Speaker 1>in the Mormon Tabernacle in Salt Lake City. Uh. And

0:30:10.280 --> 0:30:13.959
<v Speaker 1>he made use of photography to make his point. Um.

0:30:14.320 --> 0:30:17.720
<v Speaker 1>And this was eight years after the attempted forensic use

0:30:17.800 --> 0:30:22.080
<v Speaker 1>of optography that we're discussing here. Uh. He he showed

0:30:22.120 --> 0:30:26.160
<v Speaker 1>off spirit photography as proof of the afterlife and it

0:30:26.200 --> 0:30:29.200
<v Speaker 1>was well received. And he's talking about photography as this

0:30:29.280 --> 0:30:33.720
<v Speaker 1>means of communicating with the dead, and in the spiritualist

0:30:34.640 --> 0:30:37.360
<v Speaker 1>enthusiasm of the day, people were still buying into it.

0:30:37.600 --> 0:30:39.560
<v Speaker 1>And this gets back into what we were talking about

0:30:39.560 --> 0:30:43.040
<v Speaker 1>in that Poisons episode. How Like most people associate those

0:30:43.040 --> 0:30:45.640
<v Speaker 1>Sherlock Home stories and Arthur Conan Doyle with being like

0:30:45.760 --> 0:30:49.120
<v Speaker 1>pretty firmly grounded in reality, right, But there's always this

0:30:49.160 --> 0:30:53.560
<v Speaker 1>like lingering kind of whiff of the occult in them.

0:30:54.040 --> 0:30:55.840
<v Speaker 1>And that was something that I think both you and

0:30:55.880 --> 0:30:58.520
<v Speaker 1>I were always attracted to by those stories. Right. And

0:30:58.560 --> 0:31:01.520
<v Speaker 1>it turns out it's because he like had one foot

0:31:01.600 --> 0:31:04.080
<v Speaker 1>in the occult a little bit. Yeah. And you know what,

0:31:04.320 --> 0:31:07.400
<v Speaker 1>at the same time, it's Um, it is important to

0:31:07.440 --> 0:31:13.320
<v Speaker 1>note that he wasn't being completely illogical in all of this.

0:31:13.640 --> 0:31:17.240
<v Speaker 1>He was applying a logic to it, like he's saying, yeah,

0:31:17.360 --> 0:31:20.960
<v Speaker 1>there's there's a there's an afterlife, there's there's a spirit world,

0:31:20.960 --> 0:31:23.840
<v Speaker 1>there's more to us than what we see, and here's

0:31:23.880 --> 0:31:28.400
<v Speaker 1>the evidence. Now, there's some some fallacies involved there, but

0:31:28.520 --> 0:31:34.920
<v Speaker 1>it wasn't like a blind illogical um exercise for sa

0:31:35.320 --> 0:31:37.760
<v Speaker 1>and Doyle. Well, I think we are all owed an

0:31:37.760 --> 0:31:42.960
<v Speaker 1>episode of Benedict Cumber patches uh Sherlock Holmes where he's

0:31:43.280 --> 0:31:45.800
<v Speaker 1>hunting down ghosts. Yeah, yeah, I get into it. I

0:31:45.880 --> 0:31:48.400
<v Speaker 1>believe there was some sort of a TV series, and

0:31:48.440 --> 0:31:50.560
<v Speaker 1>I don't recall the name of it. I think it

0:31:50.880 --> 0:31:52.560
<v Speaker 1>maybe it had something like The Great Detective in the

0:31:52.600 --> 0:31:56.400
<v Speaker 1>in the title, but it was it was a fictionalized

0:31:56.400 --> 0:32:01.320
<v Speaker 1>account of Sacon and Doyle's interest in the super natural. Okay,

0:32:01.360 --> 0:32:03.720
<v Speaker 1>I've never heard of that. Yeah, it was a British series.

0:32:03.720 --> 0:32:05.080
<v Speaker 1>I don't I don't know that it went more than

0:32:05.160 --> 0:32:08.360
<v Speaker 1>a single series. Okay, cool, Well, now that we've got

0:32:08.400 --> 0:32:11.120
<v Speaker 1>the biggest fictional example out of the way, why don't

0:32:11.160 --> 0:32:12.800
<v Speaker 1>we take a break and the when we get back,

0:32:12.840 --> 0:32:15.360
<v Speaker 1>we're going to look at the forensic history of people

0:32:15.440 --> 0:32:22.160
<v Speaker 1>trying to use optagrams in actual criminal investigations. So all right,

0:32:22.200 --> 0:32:26.959
<v Speaker 1>we discussed that Coon showed optography wasn't feasible, even he

0:32:27.040 --> 0:32:31.280
<v Speaker 1>himself came to this conclusion, but the idea still took hold,

0:32:31.520 --> 0:32:35.000
<v Speaker 1>and it still leapt into fiction. People continued to claim

0:32:35.080 --> 0:32:37.640
<v Speaker 1>that they were using the technique. There was a hope

0:32:37.840 --> 0:32:40.920
<v Speaker 1>that the technique would be allowed to determine a murder

0:32:41.000 --> 0:32:44.800
<v Speaker 1>victims assailant. And you see this across the century. You've

0:32:44.840 --> 0:32:47.760
<v Speaker 1>got a Jules Verne wrote a story about it there,

0:32:47.880 --> 0:32:49.840
<v Speaker 1>They've used it in Doctor Who a couple of times,

0:32:49.880 --> 0:32:52.720
<v Speaker 1>and there's an episode of that TV show Fringe that

0:32:53.000 --> 0:32:55.520
<v Speaker 1>they used optography and as well. It seems like a

0:32:55.560 --> 0:33:00.680
<v Speaker 1>missed opportunity for the TV series Hannibal. Uh not, because

0:33:00.680 --> 0:33:04.760
<v Speaker 1>I can clearly imagine a scenario where the killer tries to,

0:33:05.160 --> 0:33:08.120
<v Speaker 1>uh to, to put his own image on the retina

0:33:08.320 --> 0:33:11.080
<v Speaker 1>of a murder victim and then he like makes a

0:33:11.120 --> 0:33:14.880
<v Speaker 1>specific meal with that eyeball like on the top of it,

0:33:14.920 --> 0:33:17.080
<v Speaker 1>like a child. Well, I would hope the episode ends

0:33:17.080 --> 0:33:20.520
<v Speaker 1>we have with Hannibal eating the killer's eyes. Yeah, well

0:33:20.520 --> 0:33:22.360
<v Speaker 1>that maybe if they get a fourth season, we'll see

0:33:22.360 --> 0:33:25.320
<v Speaker 1>that episode. By the way, if anyone out there wants

0:33:25.320 --> 0:33:28.280
<v Speaker 1>to check out the Kipling story, its title is at

0:33:28.280 --> 0:33:30.880
<v Speaker 1>the end of the passage and the Jewels Verne story

0:33:30.880 --> 0:33:34.160
<v Speaker 1>from nine two is the Kip Brothers. That's interesting. I

0:33:34.200 --> 0:33:37.160
<v Speaker 1>wonder if he named it after Kipling. I don't know.

0:33:37.640 --> 0:33:39.600
<v Speaker 1>I haven't read it, but perhaps some of you have,

0:33:39.640 --> 0:33:41.760
<v Speaker 1>and you can you can give us your thoughts. So

0:33:42.560 --> 0:33:45.320
<v Speaker 1>here's an example of where this was first starting to

0:33:45.360 --> 0:33:49.720
<v Speaker 1>be used by actual police. They in eighteen seventy seven

0:33:49.880 --> 0:33:53.800
<v Speaker 1>April police photographed the eye of a murdered man. They

0:33:53.800 --> 0:33:57.800
<v Speaker 1>were only partly aware of what optography involved, so they

0:33:57.800 --> 0:34:01.040
<v Speaker 1>had clearly heard about Coon's experiments, but they they were

0:34:01.080 --> 0:34:04.320
<v Speaker 1>just taking pictures of somebody's of a corpse's eyes. Uh.

0:34:04.320 --> 0:34:07.040
<v Speaker 1>And in fact, the investigators on the Jack the Ripper

0:34:07.080 --> 0:34:10.759
<v Speaker 1>case may have also considered the technique. There's a rumor, uh,

0:34:10.840 --> 0:34:15.080
<v Speaker 1>it's never been confirmed, but that the technique of optography

0:34:15.160 --> 0:34:18.440
<v Speaker 1>was carried out on Ripper victim Mary Jane Kelly in

0:34:18.600 --> 0:34:24.240
<v Speaker 1>eight Yeah. Apparently this comes from a memoir by Scotland

0:34:24.280 --> 0:34:27.840
<v Speaker 1>yard inspector Walter do And even in his account he

0:34:27.880 --> 0:34:30.319
<v Speaker 1>claimed he basically says that they took the photos but

0:34:30.400 --> 0:34:32.879
<v Speaker 1>they had no real hope that anything would come of it.

0:34:32.960 --> 0:34:35.080
<v Speaker 1>But you know, like you said, they kind of heard

0:34:35.120 --> 0:34:37.080
<v Speaker 1>that this was a thing, so why not get in

0:34:37.080 --> 0:34:39.480
<v Speaker 1>there and take some get the best camera over here,

0:34:39.719 --> 0:34:41.720
<v Speaker 1>take some shots of the eyes in case the boys

0:34:41.719 --> 0:34:43.400
<v Speaker 1>in the bat can do something with it. So they

0:34:43.400 --> 0:34:45.600
<v Speaker 1>were just they were desperate at that point because it

0:34:45.680 --> 0:34:49.000
<v Speaker 1>was I mean, they've never experienced anything like a serial

0:34:49.080 --> 0:34:51.719
<v Speaker 1>killer at all that point. So but but you see

0:34:51.719 --> 0:34:55.319
<v Speaker 1>the same scenario time and time again, where where the

0:34:55.360 --> 0:34:59.480
<v Speaker 1>inspectors don't really have any intimate knowledge of the science

0:34:59.600 --> 0:35:02.080
<v Speaker 1>that's an evolved here. They just have this general idea

0:35:02.640 --> 0:35:06.319
<v Speaker 1>that technology can make use of the image of an

0:35:06.320 --> 0:35:08.520
<v Speaker 1>individual's eye to see what they saw before death, and

0:35:08.560 --> 0:35:11.360
<v Speaker 1>therefore go ahead and take the photos justin case, just

0:35:11.440 --> 0:35:13.760
<v Speaker 1>to be on the safe side. Well, the next example

0:35:13.840 --> 0:35:16.880
<v Speaker 1>that I found of this came from a German newspaper

0:35:17.000 --> 0:35:21.480
<v Speaker 1>article that reports an optography attempt in the nine trial

0:35:21.680 --> 0:35:25.160
<v Speaker 1>of Fritz A. Gerstein. And this is for the murder

0:35:25.160 --> 0:35:28.160
<v Speaker 1>of his wife and seven other people. So again we've

0:35:28.200 --> 0:35:32.839
<v Speaker 1>got like pretty you know, elaborate case of murder here. Uh.

0:35:32.880 --> 0:35:37.120
<v Speaker 1>The corner in this case claimed that he saw images

0:35:37.520 --> 0:35:41.320
<v Speaker 1>of the killer holding a hatchet axe in the eyes

0:35:41.360 --> 0:35:44.879
<v Speaker 1>of not one but two of the victims. So Angerstein

0:35:45.040 --> 0:35:50.360
<v Speaker 1>was convicted and executed partly due to this optographic evidence.

0:35:50.400 --> 0:35:52.840
<v Speaker 1>It wasn't even and I'm saying evidence with quotes surround it, like,

0:35:52.880 --> 0:35:55.719
<v Speaker 1>they didn't take pictures, they didn't do the whole coon

0:35:55.840 --> 0:35:57.720
<v Speaker 1>thing where they cut the eyeball up and they soaked

0:35:57.719 --> 0:36:00.560
<v Speaker 1>it and fluid, none of that. This guy just went, yeah,

0:36:00.600 --> 0:36:03.239
<v Speaker 1>I saw an ax in those people's eyes, and that

0:36:03.320 --> 0:36:07.120
<v Speaker 1>was admitted as evidence. Yeah, Lanska talked a little bit

0:36:07.160 --> 0:36:10.160
<v Speaker 1>about this in his his ride up and Yeah, essentially

0:36:10.160 --> 0:36:12.000
<v Speaker 1>it was just a case of the police rolling up

0:36:12.000 --> 0:36:14.640
<v Speaker 1>a suspect by telling him, look, we grabbed the image

0:36:14.640 --> 0:36:16.880
<v Speaker 1>of you, you know, wielding the murder weapon from the

0:36:16.920 --> 0:36:20.880
<v Speaker 1>dead gardener's eyes, and and there probably wasn't even a photo,

0:36:21.000 --> 0:36:23.319
<v Speaker 1>but the police only needed the threat of it to

0:36:23.400 --> 0:36:25.360
<v Speaker 1>force a confession out of a man who was willing

0:36:25.400 --> 0:36:28.880
<v Speaker 1>to believe that such things were possible. So this totally

0:36:28.920 --> 0:36:33.000
<v Speaker 1>renewed the interest and the supposed credibility and using it

0:36:33.320 --> 0:36:36.560
<v Speaker 1>for forensic investigation. Now on the other side of the Atlantic,

0:36:36.600 --> 0:36:41.000
<v Speaker 1>in nineteen fourteen, a headline from the Washington Times reports

0:36:41.040 --> 0:36:44.360
<v Speaker 1>that an image was taken from a murder victims retina

0:36:44.440 --> 0:36:46.640
<v Speaker 1>that might show who her killer was, and that this

0:36:46.760 --> 0:36:51.560
<v Speaker 1>victim was twenty year old Teresa Hollander in Illinois. Now,

0:36:51.560 --> 0:36:54.239
<v Speaker 1>the police had hoped that the face of her murderer

0:36:54.320 --> 0:36:57.880
<v Speaker 1>was imprinted like a photo negative on her retina's but

0:36:57.960 --> 0:37:01.279
<v Speaker 1>the technique never revealed anything in the case, and it

0:37:01.360 --> 0:37:05.560
<v Speaker 1>was used to accuse Hollander's former boyfriend, Anthony Petris of

0:37:05.600 --> 0:37:08.879
<v Speaker 1>the crime. However, he was tried twice for this crime

0:37:08.880 --> 0:37:11.040
<v Speaker 1>and he was never found guilty, so it was not

0:37:11.200 --> 0:37:15.239
<v Speaker 1>successfully used there. And again, I just want to reiterate this,

0:37:15.280 --> 0:37:17.960
<v Speaker 1>like we're talking about these examples and we're saying, oh,

0:37:18.000 --> 0:37:20.840
<v Speaker 1>this is so ridiculous, can you believe it? It sounds

0:37:21.040 --> 0:37:23.680
<v Speaker 1>silly and unbelievable to us today, But in the nineteenth

0:37:23.760 --> 0:37:28.319
<v Speaker 1>century and obviously early twenty century here people were fascinated

0:37:28.360 --> 0:37:32.239
<v Speaker 1>by the developments between biology and photography and the fact

0:37:32.239 --> 0:37:33.680
<v Speaker 1>that they just they could not get out of their

0:37:33.680 --> 0:37:35.759
<v Speaker 1>heads that they thought, oh, the human eye and a

0:37:35.800 --> 0:37:39.080
<v Speaker 1>camera the same thing essentially, right, So surely we can

0:37:39.160 --> 0:37:41.560
<v Speaker 1>just do what we do with a camera to the

0:37:41.600 --> 0:37:44.640
<v Speaker 1>human eye and figure out who these killers are. So

0:37:44.680 --> 0:37:48.360
<v Speaker 1>that brings us to the nineteen seven murder case of

0:37:48.440 --> 0:37:52.759
<v Speaker 1>police officer George William Gutteridge. And this is in the UK.

0:37:53.360 --> 0:37:59.000
<v Speaker 1>The perpetrators who killed Officer Gutteridge believed in optagrams, and

0:37:59.080 --> 0:38:03.439
<v Speaker 1>so they shot him through the eyes after killing him

0:38:03.680 --> 0:38:06.879
<v Speaker 1>to destroy the evidence. Ah, so this is just the

0:38:07.000 --> 0:38:08.960
<v Speaker 1>kind of the reverse of the whole take photos of

0:38:08.960 --> 0:38:11.359
<v Speaker 1>the eyes just in case, shoot out the eyes just

0:38:11.440 --> 0:38:14.600
<v Speaker 1>in case, exactly. So this goes all the way up

0:38:14.719 --> 0:38:19.920
<v Speaker 1>until nine we've got We're back in Heidelberg, Germany. This

0:38:20.000 --> 0:38:23.760
<v Speaker 1>is where Coon did his research, and the Heidelberg police

0:38:23.800 --> 0:38:26.440
<v Speaker 1>department in town are like, you know what, we might

0:38:26.480 --> 0:38:29.799
<v Speaker 1>want to revisit this. Let's one more crack at. It's

0:38:29.800 --> 0:38:31.960
<v Speaker 1>been a century, but let's take a look. So they

0:38:32.040 --> 0:38:40.040
<v Speaker 1>invite physiologists Evangelos Alexandridas to reevaluate Coon's experiments. So he

0:38:40.120 --> 0:38:44.040
<v Speaker 1>comes up there, he performs similar rabbit experiments. He places

0:38:44.040 --> 0:38:46.440
<v Speaker 1>them in front of paintings and images, he cuts their

0:38:46.440 --> 0:38:49.760
<v Speaker 1>heads off or takes their eyeballs out, all of this stuff.

0:38:50.160 --> 0:38:54.799
<v Speaker 1>This seems like it's the last serious optography research that

0:38:54.880 --> 0:38:58.279
<v Speaker 1>has has been performed, or at least reported to be performed.

0:38:58.600 --> 0:39:02.560
<v Speaker 1>But he again found owned nothing particularly valuable there. And

0:39:02.600 --> 0:39:07.080
<v Speaker 1>that should be enough, because the whole history of optography

0:39:07.280 --> 0:39:11.480
<v Speaker 1>entailed experts refuting it time and time again. So you know,

0:39:11.520 --> 0:39:13.320
<v Speaker 1>someone would get it in their mind that hey, we

0:39:13.320 --> 0:39:15.800
<v Speaker 1>should we can look at the eyes of this murder victim,

0:39:15.880 --> 0:39:18.279
<v Speaker 1>right and see what happened, And then the experts would say, no,

0:39:18.480 --> 0:39:21.279
<v Speaker 1>actually you can't. There's even even if we had the

0:39:21.320 --> 0:39:25.480
<v Speaker 1>most pristine environment, you had total control over it, like

0:39:25.520 --> 0:39:29.560
<v Speaker 1>even before the individual's death, which is totally unrealistic. Even

0:39:29.600 --> 0:39:33.279
<v Speaker 1>if if conditions were perfect, it would probably be useless. Yeah,

0:39:33.360 --> 0:39:38.520
<v Speaker 1>I'm trying to be sympathetic and imagine not a science

0:39:38.560 --> 0:39:41.880
<v Speaker 1>fiction possibility, but something that seems within the realm of

0:39:41.880 --> 0:39:47.640
<v Speaker 1>the empirical where clearly raddoption does have the ability to

0:39:47.680 --> 0:39:49.680
<v Speaker 1>retain an image for a certain amount of time. Yeah,

0:39:49.719 --> 0:39:52.239
<v Speaker 1>there's no doubting that that there is an image there

0:39:52.280 --> 0:39:55.400
<v Speaker 1>that that that that that for instance, the crossbars and

0:39:55.520 --> 0:39:58.200
<v Speaker 1>lines that we have from the rabbit's eyes, those are

0:39:58.560 --> 0:40:02.600
<v Speaker 1>the effects of the the eyeball looking at the window

0:40:02.640 --> 0:40:06.160
<v Speaker 1>and taking in this this contrast. Yeah. So I'm just

0:40:06.200 --> 0:40:09.560
<v Speaker 1>trying to like, potentially somebody's gonna come along another ten years,

0:40:09.600 --> 0:40:12.240
<v Speaker 1>twenty years and say, well, I don't know, like, let's

0:40:12.520 --> 0:40:16.040
<v Speaker 1>let's try that thing. Where we pump a fluids directly

0:40:16.080 --> 0:40:18.640
<v Speaker 1>into the eyeball of a dog again or something, or

0:40:18.880 --> 0:40:21.000
<v Speaker 1>or maybe they'll they'll take a corpse and they'll try

0:40:21.000 --> 0:40:25.279
<v Speaker 1>to like uh, reverse engineer the re adopts in process

0:40:25.360 --> 0:40:28.759
<v Speaker 1>on it, and it seems like something that might work.

0:40:28.800 --> 0:40:31.719
<v Speaker 1>It seems like they're onto something right, but it's just

0:40:31.920 --> 0:40:34.920
<v Speaker 1>not quite there. Well, the interesting thing about all this

0:40:35.040 --> 0:40:36.920
<v Speaker 1>is that, you know I mentioned earlier that book in

0:40:37.000 --> 0:40:39.480
<v Speaker 1>Natural History of Seeing, the Art and Science of Vision

0:40:39.560 --> 0:40:42.960
<v Speaker 1>by Simon Inings. Yeah, well I ran across an interview

0:40:43.040 --> 0:40:46.920
<v Speaker 1>with him for PRX Media, and and in it um

0:40:47.040 --> 0:40:52.560
<v Speaker 1>he he suspects that modern brain scanning technology could wind

0:40:52.640 --> 0:40:54.279
<v Speaker 1>some of us up in some of us up in

0:40:54.400 --> 0:40:58.120
<v Speaker 1>very similar territory years from now, when we've learned more

0:40:58.880 --> 0:41:02.000
<v Speaker 1>about what the evidence actually is compared to all the

0:41:02.080 --> 0:41:04.880
<v Speaker 1>things we're taking away from it right now. And he

0:41:04.960 --> 0:41:08.520
<v Speaker 1>specifically suspects that this will be the case with the

0:41:08.560 --> 0:41:12.280
<v Speaker 1>first time a suspect is placed in a brain scanner

0:41:12.320 --> 0:41:15.879
<v Speaker 1>to see if they remember a crime. So I think

0:41:15.920 --> 0:41:17.759
<v Speaker 1>that is probably that's probably the best way to try

0:41:17.800 --> 0:41:20.160
<v Speaker 1>and put ourselves in the heads of people who are

0:41:20.239 --> 0:41:23.920
<v Speaker 1>studying this and even advocating it. And entertaining the idea

0:41:23.960 --> 0:41:27.520
<v Speaker 1>of its usefulness you know on up into basically modern

0:41:27.880 --> 0:41:32.000
<v Speaker 1>modern day is that you know, we're we're likely doing

0:41:32.080 --> 0:41:35.719
<v Speaker 1>some of the same missteps today with with some of

0:41:35.719 --> 0:41:38.360
<v Speaker 1>our brain scanning technology. You know, we we have this

0:41:38.440 --> 0:41:42.000
<v Speaker 1>amazing ability to look inside the brain and see what's happening.

0:41:42.440 --> 0:41:44.120
<v Speaker 1>And you know, there's not a day goes by that

0:41:44.239 --> 0:41:47.319
<v Speaker 1>there's not some cool study that's talking about what this

0:41:47.400 --> 0:41:53.799
<v Speaker 1>may reveal about cognition and UH and memory. But are

0:41:53.840 --> 0:41:57.240
<v Speaker 1>are all of those connections legitimate and uh and where

0:41:57.239 --> 0:42:02.319
<v Speaker 1>do we start uh misapply rying the technology to forensics.

0:42:02.320 --> 0:42:05.480
<v Speaker 1>So it sounds here like rather than looking at the rhodoption,

0:42:05.640 --> 0:42:08.560
<v Speaker 1>rather than looking at the chemical itself interacting with light

0:42:08.560 --> 0:42:12.560
<v Speaker 1>and turning it into electricity, that maybe the idea here

0:42:12.640 --> 0:42:15.560
<v Speaker 1>is that if we can look at that electrical signal somehow,

0:42:15.920 --> 0:42:18.480
<v Speaker 1>if we can get ahold of that somehow from the brain,

0:42:19.080 --> 0:42:22.399
<v Speaker 1>then that might be a possible way to make optography

0:42:22.400 --> 0:42:25.520
<v Speaker 1>come to life. Unintended, I mean, I guess optography comes

0:42:25.560 --> 0:42:28.439
<v Speaker 1>to life in the future if you have a sort

0:42:28.440 --> 0:42:30.799
<v Speaker 1>of black mirror scenario where you have some sort of

0:42:31.320 --> 0:42:35.399
<v Speaker 1>computer brain interface. Right then, as is often the case

0:42:35.480 --> 0:42:39.840
<v Speaker 1>with with with technology, it makes the magic possible. Something

0:42:39.840 --> 0:42:44.640
<v Speaker 1>that was previously pure necromancy or or or you know,

0:42:44.800 --> 0:42:48.720
<v Speaker 1>scientific reality that could not really be inflated to equal

0:42:48.960 --> 0:42:51.840
<v Speaker 1>the magic. Suddenly it's possible because of some sort of

0:42:52.360 --> 0:42:54.920
<v Speaker 1>you know, technological grain that's been implanted in the in

0:42:54.960 --> 0:42:57.800
<v Speaker 1>the in the head. Well, listeners, what do you think

0:42:57.960 --> 0:43:01.520
<v Speaker 1>do you think that there's some value to of, you know,

0:43:01.640 --> 0:43:04.880
<v Speaker 1>continuing experiments like this on the eyeball, whether it's with

0:43:05.000 --> 0:43:07.840
<v Speaker 1>human beings or other animals, or do you think that

0:43:07.960 --> 0:43:12.399
<v Speaker 1>maybe we're onto something here talking about potential brain computer interfaces.

0:43:12.440 --> 0:43:15.160
<v Speaker 1>Will we ever be able to see what the last

0:43:15.239 --> 0:43:20.200
<v Speaker 1>image was on a dead person's by right us on

0:43:20.280 --> 0:43:22.880
<v Speaker 1>social media if you've got an answer. We're on Twitter,

0:43:22.960 --> 0:43:26.080
<v Speaker 1>we're on Facebook, we're on tumbler, and we're on Instagram,

0:43:26.120 --> 0:43:29.040
<v Speaker 1>and hey, maybe even send us pictures of what your

0:43:29.040 --> 0:43:32.160
<v Speaker 1>eyeballs are seeing. That's right, Uh yeah, don't forget to

0:43:32.239 --> 0:43:34.399
<v Speaker 1>check out the the mother ship. That's stuff to bluing

0:43:34.440 --> 0:43:37.279
<v Speaker 1>your Mind dot com and you can email us all

0:43:37.320 --> 0:43:40.200
<v Speaker 1>of your inquiries, all of your questions at blow the

0:43:40.239 --> 0:43:52.840
<v Speaker 1>Mind at how stuff works dot com for more on

0:43:52.920 --> 0:43:55.680
<v Speaker 1>this and thousands of other topics. Does it how stuff works.

0:43:55.680 --> 0:44:00.560
<v Speaker 1>Dot com