• 0 Posts
  • 240 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: March 1st, 2024

help-circle






  • There are other better answers here already.

    But you got me wondering, how red are red dwarfs really? Maybe they’re just like a few % more red than our sun, but I bet they’re still quite broad band.

    So you maybe could have a similar range of colour reflection and absorption. And maybe there’s enough R,G,B to saturate the receptors. I assume white is just that, when all color receptors are near saturated.

    The eyes might not need to differ much, the brain can probably do everything in post processing anyway. All evolution needs to do to your eyes is to gather enough raw data that your brain can learn to differentiate, food, water, danger, things to breed with, and so on.

    Maybe reduce the sensitivity of red receptor a wee bit, or maybe not, if plants are still absorbing lots of red, and we live amongst plants . . .










  • I think the point is that the tech doesn’t materially change most starwars characters interactions from present day. It’s not really scifi because the science / tech doesn’t shape how the characters interact dramatically.

    If you give the characters some real scifi-tech like put them inside computers, or have backup throwaway clone bodies, or jack them in to a hive mind, or give them time travel or alternate universes then the whole dramatic context of the character interactions has to change and the story has to be shaped by the technology to some degree. It’d likely be a bit more alien as our innate sense of constraints and jeopardy doesn’t apply.

    Only really the deathstar is anything different tech wise - it is only used once, and becomes more like a part of the maguffin.

    The other fantastic dramatic features that starwars does use that are alien to us - precognition, mind control, reincarnation(sortof) - are magic rather than tech.





  • “Americans” is a stupidly large and diverse population to say anything meaningful about. It’s extremely unlikely that that any population of humans of such a size doesn’t include some individuals who are more extreme than you, both more and less, for almost all traits.

    You’re less likely to observe introverts than extroverts because one of those types will tend to do things in a way that are less likely to get your attention. You might well be experiencing observation/selection bias, possibly also reinforced by confirmation bias.

    But whatever you think to be the “typical”, even if you could estimate it using some unbiased sampling method, it is often not a helpful way describe the whole population, or at best a reductive “average” that has limited useful applications.

    TLDR - human populations are diverse. I don’t think any nation has ever effectively brainwashed or eugenicised their population into a single homogeneous group.