[HN Gopher] Near-infrared spatiotemporal color vision enabled by...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Near-infrared spatiotemporal color vision enabled by upconversion
       contact lenses
        
       Author : ArnoVW
       Score  : 51 points
       Date   : 2025-05-22 15:30 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.cell.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.cell.com)
        
       | ArnoVW wrote:
       | Synopsis: Humans cannot perceive infrared light due to the
       | physical thermodynamic properties of photon-detecting opsins.
       | However, the capability to detect invisible multispectral
       | infrared light with the naked eye is highly desirable. Here, we
       | report wearable near-infrared (NIR) upconversion contact lenses
       | (UCLs) with suitable optical properties, hydrophilicity,
       | flexibility, and biocompatibility. Mice with UCLs could recognize
       | NIR temporal and spatial information and make behavioral
       | decisions. Furthermore, human participants wearing UCLs could
       | discriminate NIR information, including temporal coding and
       | spatial images. Notably, we have developed trichromatic UCLs
       | (tUCLs), allowing humans to distinguish multiple spectra of NIR
       | light, which can function as three primary colors, thereby
       | achieving human NIR spatiotemporal color vision. Our research
       | opens up the potential of wearable polymeric materials for non-
       | invasive NIR vision, assisting humans in perceiving and
       | transmitting temporal, spatial, and color dimensions of NIR
       | light.
        
         | wing-_-nuts wrote:
         | Yeah boss, I'm gonna need an ELI5 and potential use cases here
        
           | bobsmooth wrote:
           | Contact lens converts IR to visible light. Use cases include
           | night vision and seeing if your tv remote is working.
        
             | Mindless2112 wrote:
             | > _However, detecting environmental NIR information in the
             | natural conditions at night without NIR illumination still
             | remains challenging, requiring further advancements in
             | material science and optical design._
             | 
             | Sadly no night vision contact lenses yet.
        
               | alejoar wrote:
               | Well, using an IR flashlight will light the path only for
               | the contact lenses wearer, so still pretty cool and
               | plausible.
        
             | potato3732842 wrote:
             | Identifying things that aren't the right temperature a
             | trillions of dollars problem spread across many industries.
             | 
             | Though I think perhaps glasses are a better form factor for
             | such tech.
        
               | chankstein38 wrote:
               | This is what I was thinking. I already wear glasses. I
               | wonder if there's a coating or something I can get
               | applied that would add this.
        
           | avidiax wrote:
           | Seems like it would be good for marking cards. Make some
           | cards reflect in the NIR. These contacts don't focus,
           | however, so you can't get a clear perception of where the NIR
           | is coming from.
        
         | bediger4000 wrote:
         | > Mice with UCLs
         | 
         | Holy moly, putting contacts on mice?!?! It's just this side of
         | impossible to put contacts on another human, and not much
         | easier putting them on yourself.
         | 
         | That's dedication to science.
        
           | vlachen wrote:
           | I dunno, I think a mouse would be far less likely to react by
           | throwing hands than a human, plus, a mouse can be muzzled to
           | protect against their primary weapon.
        
       | RicoElectrico wrote:
       | As I expected, it needs additional optics to be useful. Consider
       | a sheet of fluorescent film you put on your eyeball. If there's
       | an omnidirectional point source of light, it would excite the
       | whole film virtually uniformly. Hence the upconversion contact
       | lens needs to lie on some sort of a focal plane to be useful.
        
         | fellowniusmonk wrote:
         | so would wearing these contacts paired with glasses to serve as
         | a focal plain work?
        
       | unsupp0rted wrote:
       | > However, the capability to detect invisible multispectral
       | infrared light with the naked eye is highly desirable.
       | 
       | What would be some practical (or fun) uses of this?
        
         | drewbeck wrote:
         | I love this line. The confidence! As if humans have of course
         | wanted IR visibility for ever.
        
           | kridsdale1 wrote:
           | In the past, when armies faced each other on a front,
           | activity halted at night.
           | 
           | You gain a huge advantage if you can infiltrate to sabotage
           | or assassinate the enemy camp in a way that you can see them
           | but they can't see you.
           | 
           | See the Japanese foxhole assaults on various island fronts.
        
             | cryptonector wrote:
             | IIUC the contact lenses in TFA don't upconvert sufficiently
             | long wavelength IR, so it's not going to be unaided night
             | vision just quite yet.
        
               | LtdJorge wrote:
               | I think you'd just need a couple of IR sources, can be
               | put in a headband like 2 flashlights, one on each side.
               | Even if you don't see much, any improvements in pitch
               | darkness would be great.
        
         | potato3732842 wrote:
         | Imagine being able to detect every situation where heat is a
         | potential indicator of either problems or a system working as
         | intended by simply looking at it.
         | 
         | It would be a wildly valuable tool to any industry that does
         | things. Currently such work is mostly done on a spot basis with
         | IR temp guns and cameras.
         | 
         | Imagine being able to see a failing conveyor bearing from
         | across a facility or a low pressure tire as it rolls by.
        
           | hollerith wrote:
           | But the OP is about _near_ -infrared (NIR) light. Sensitive
           | instruments for detecting NIR can only detect objects hotter
           | than 440 deg F (according to an LLM I just consulted) and
           | even then longer wavelengths are the preferred wavelengths
           | for detection: NIR doesn't start becoming the preferred
           | wavelength till the object gets up to at least 800 deg F.
           | 
           | The sun emits tons of NIR, so if this tech has a practical
           | application, I'm guessing it is in detecting objects outdoors
           | during the daytime that look distinctive in NIR and do not
           | look distinctive in visible light, e.g., maybe military
           | hardware covered by fabric or camouflage netting.
        
             | potato3732842 wrote:
             | >NIR doesn't start becoming the preferred wavelength till
             | the object gets up to at least 800 deg F.
             | 
             | My understanding is that due to the relative bell curve of
             | emitted wavelengths a hot object should still look "funny"
             | in the same way that a cherry red piece of iron still looks
             | like iron, just different. Is that not true for NIR?
        
               | hollerith wrote:
               | I can't understand the question.
               | 
               | But the spectrum of a hot object is _not_ a bell curve.
               | Specifically, there is a sharp cut-off such that there
               | are basically no photons with wavelength below the cut-
               | off. An incandescent light bulb of the type people used
               | in houses in the 1980s and before for example produces a
               | very small amount of UVA, but basically no UVB, UVC,
               | x-rays or lower wavelengths.
        
         | kridsdale1 wrote:
         | Military use.
        
         | readthenotes1 wrote:
         | Better vision at night, or during cloudy or Dusty conditions.
         | Every truck driver should have them.
         | 
         | Every search&rescue or police officer should have them although
         | I suspect for firefighters it might not help.
         | 
         | I wouldn't at all be surprised if Mr money mustache can make a
         | frugality case to wearing ir contact lenses instead of having
         | lights on at night.
         | 
         | Instead of splashing people with UV paint and using black
         | lights, just party in the dark.
         | 
         | As people age, one of the common complaints is the degradation
         | of low light vision. This will help some.
         | 
         | At least some hunters I know have night vision goggles for
         | going after wild hogs. They could just wear the contacts...
        
       | metalman wrote:
       | resolution is too low for any practical use case another article
       | pointed out that it makes no difference if you have your eyes
       | closed, as these things work behind your eyelids this is long way
       | from bieng able to help you tell if your date is interested or
       | what
        
       | dvh wrote:
       | If we pass infrared through nonlinear material, will it produce
       | distortion, which in turn will create higher harmonics which will
       | be in the visible spectrum?
        
       | ipsum2 wrote:
       | .
        
         | kadoban wrote:
         | This is a contact lens, not surgery.
        
       | amacbride wrote:
       | Infravision! (For you D&D nerds out there.)
        
       | interestica wrote:
       | I got fitted for contact lenses. The "fitting" pair were used to
       | measure and adjust. They didn't have an actual prescription.
       | However, they gave me super-human magnified vision for anything
       | closer than a foot to my face. It was clearer than anything that
       | could be achieved with lenses/magnification outside the eye. It
       | was like having microscopes for eyes.
       | 
       | I seriously just wanted to get a pair for fine vision tasks like
       | soldering. It made me wonder what type of other "vision
       | augmentation" things might be doable with existing tech. There's
       | probably a market for devices like this even for those with
       | normal/perfect vision.
        
         | blacksmith_tb wrote:
         | Sounds fun, but various kinds of jeweler's loupes and
         | magnifying glasses seem less invasive then needing to stick the
         | lenses directly in your eyes? I wore contacts in my 20s, but
         | don't miss all the mess these days.
        
           | Calwestjobs wrote:
           | or just webcam + display ;) seem you two too old lol.
        
       | mncharity wrote:
       | > Humans cannot perceive infrared light due to the physical
       | thermodynamic properties of photon-detecting opsins.
       | 
       | Seeing near-NIR without pointing a laser at your eye is
       | interesting, but "cannot perceive"?
       | 
       | It's _dim_ , yes. But there are perception reports well beyond
       | 1000 nm (like 1.3 or 1.5 um). People see NIR ophthalmoscopes. I
       | fuzzily recall a DIY attempt to wear a NIR bandpass filter, to
       | make bright day into dark-adapted near-NIR night. And two-photon
       | sensitivity[1] can level off the single-photon sensitivity log
       | curve above 900 nm.
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004269892...
        
         | Calwestjobs wrote:
         | this can be used in future by car drivers. illuminating road in
         | front by IR light, which is invisible to ordinary human, so you
         | do not disturb people, animals with visible light of headlights
         | 
         | or it can be made into display, you project IR image onto
         | contact lenses, which converts that into visible light. if
         | particle size is small enough.
         | 
         | im not sure about "efficiency" of such lens, we would need more
         | watts to display something on this lens than we would need to
         | project direct to eye. so im not sure if that difference is big
         | enough to not be suitable for wearables or not.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-22 23:01 UTC)