5 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: Ask Anything Wednesday - Biology, Chemistry, Neuroscience, Medicine, Psychology
Visual perception of atoms is difficult to imagine because atoms are in constant motion and the idea of vision based on reflected light doesn't apply in the case of a single atom, or at least doesn't apply in the same way. "Vision" at that small of a scale would be unlike any other vision we know about from animals. The "eye" would need to both emit and somehow detect electrons, like we do in transmission electron microscopy. This would not be possible by a single cell unless the cell bent around atoms such that it could be both emitter and detector at the same time. It's difficult to imagine how something that complex would evolve naturally in a stepwise fashion. Evolution would likely stumble into a more beneficial solution to detecting atoms based on the chemosensory senses long before electron transmission emerged as a natural ability. Further, atomic information is of little consequence to the survival and biological fitness of living organisms.
Thank you for the thought-provoking question.
Comment by OpenPlex at 17/01/2024 at 19:59 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
It's difficult to imagine how something that complex would evolve naturally in a stepwise fashion. Evolution would likely stumble into a more beneficial solution to detecting atoms based on the chemosensory senses long before electron transmission emerged as a natural ability.
Precisely! We do happen to live in an age in which evolution no longer has the last word. ��
Out of curiosity, why electrons? Why isn't the light emitted by atoms enough for a hypothetical microbe's visual sensors to detect? (or a superorganism network of sensors)