Thoughts

I had mentioned in my Comment of 1/20/06 the concept based on the “quantal catch” hypothesis that the rate of photon capture in cone receptors forms the basis for discrimination between cone types. This concept was referenced and proposed as factual in both the Mollon and Nathans papers. Upon reflection, this concept contains a glimmer of truth. I have proposed that an even more generalized interaction between all types of receptors is based on the wave nature of light. In my view, light as a wave interacts “along the sides of receptor outer segments” imparting energy to (via an evanescent wave), and electrically polarizing, what must be considered fundamental, “devices” composed of two adjacent outer segments. I have diagrammed this in “Diagram of the Fundamental Light Detection Device of the Retina” under the heading “Important Material” on the webpage. One might view the overall effect, i.e., energy absorbed by the receptor outer segment, as similar in the two cases but, the wave interaction provides crucial additional information. A polarized (“giant dipole”) signal from adjacent receptors in the wave construction encodes the directionality of the impinging wave thus satisfying the requirement of the Fourier equation – it already having been geometrically demonstrated that the retina is actually the Fourier plane of the optics of the eye.

I note again that the fundamental devices that I propose are also “tuned” to three very narrow optical wavelength bands (forming the necessary trichromatic RGB centers). In engineering terms this represents a “high Q” antenna geometry for each device. These devices located on the retinal surface to interact with wavelengths directed to them by the light refractive properties of the eye.

There is therefore no need to consider “spectral tuning” of light detection centers with the array of such centers detecting via the spatial density of tuned centers the intensity (or brightness) of each wavelength.

GCH