Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

[Inform] Improving NPC Conversation (?)

250 views
Skip to first unread message

Doeadeer3

unread,
Jul 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/15/98
to
Okay, I am working on improving NPC conversation. A limited
improvement, because after I started thinking about it I realized
a MAJOR improvement would mean more work for me the game writer/
programmer, coding all those responses to countless possible player inputs.

So aiming low, what I am trying to do is include certain types questions in the
orders routine of an NPC. Looking over the code of parserm.h
and reading the manual -- anything that is not understood by orders is
passed back to the life routine of the NPC as a say action.

Bob, hi becomes say hi to Bob

The only way questions are handled by orders is: "Bob, tell me about whatever"
which becomes "ask Bob about whatever". But I want orders to be able to handle
a question like, "Bob, where is Jimboy?".

I looked at parserm for processing orders and decided trying to rewrite
that section was beyond me and would probably totally muck up the parser.

So here is what I came up with and frankly I think it er... sucks.
Not only because I have to code a separate verb routine for how, why, etc., but
because on top of that I have to create two verb routines for the same type of
question so that one can be processed by orders and one by the life routine.

orders processing--

[ WhereIsSub; "You need to address that question to someone,
>someone, where is someone";]

Verb "where" * "is" creature ->Whereis;

life processing--
Extend "ask" last
* creature "where" "is" creature -> Query;

[ QuerySub;
stuff;
if (RunLife(noun, ##Query)~=0) rfalse;
more stuff;
];

I can "condense" this by:

Bob "Bob"
with name "Bob" "overused" "and" "underpaid",
life
[; Query : "~How should I know?~";
],
orders
[; WhereIs: <<Query self second>>;
];

But that isn't really what I want. Anyone have a better suggestion? Is there
some way I could set the noun to Bob, the action to Query and second to the
text, etc. in the grammar pre-routine to orders, that would eliminate having to
write separate verb routines for life and orders? Or set the actor to the NPC
the action to orderquest and the text to second, so I wouldn't have to write
separate routines for different types of questions? Anything that could improve
on this? Frankly, I am stumped.

(BTW - Scoping isn't an issue, I have that covered.)

Doe :-)


Doe doea...@aol.com (formerly known as FemaleDeer)
****************************************************************************
"In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane." Mark Twain

Andrew Plotkin

unread,
Jul 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/15/98
to
Doeadeer3 (doea...@aol.com) wrote:
> The only way questions are handled by orders is: "Bob, tell me about whatever"
> which becomes "ask Bob about whatever". But I want orders to be able to handle
> a question like, "Bob, where is Jimboy?".
> [...]

> So here is what I came up with and frankly I think it er... sucks.
> Not only because I have to code a separate verb routine for how, why, etc., but
> because on top of that I have to create two verb routines for the same type of
> question so that one can be processed by orders and one by the life routine.

> orders processing--
>
> [ WhereIsSub; "You need to address that question to someone,
> >someone, where is someone";]
>
> Verb "where" * "is" creature ->Whereis;
>
> life processing--
>
> Extend "ask" last
> * creature "where" "is" creature -> Query;
>
> [ QuerySub;
> stuff;
> if (RunLife(noun, ##Query)~=0) rfalse;
> more stuff;
> ];

Actually, that seems quite reasonable. Putting in two routines for a verb
is not bad if one of them is a stub.

The only thing I'd change is to make the default WhereIsSub try to
*infer* a creature. If there's exactly one around, print "(asking Bob that)"
and direct the query; If there are more than one around, print "You'll
have to ask that of someone in particular."; otherwise print "You're
talking to yourself again."

> But that isn't really what I want. Anyone have a better suggestion? Is there
> some way I could set the noun to Bob, the action to Query and second to the
> text, etc. in the grammar pre-routine to orders, that would eliminate having to
> write separate verb routines for life and orders?

Probably, but I'm tired again. Sorry. :)

--Z

--

"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the
borogoves..."

Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/15/98
to
Adding new ways to converse with NPC's scares me - each new level of
complexity generates new ways to break mimesis, if you'll pardon the
phrase. However I think Where is, What is and Who is shouldn't cause too
much fuss - there is a library already extant - whowhat.h - which handles
the Zork-like question grammar like "Who is Khelavastar?" and "What is a
grue?" Putting these questions to NPC's is another kettle of fish but the
principle of bringing topics into scope can't be far removed.

I think it'll be some time before we see a 'Why' implemented well in
anything other than multiple choice, though. "Bob, Why did the chicken
cross the road?" - at the moment you'd probably need a keyword searching
thing - why just opens up too many possibilities and introduces the
problem of giving NPC's explicit motives, not just programmed actions
with implicit motives.

Can't help you a great deal, but...

On 15 Jul 1998, Doeadeer3 wrote:

>Extend "ask" last
> * creature "where" "is" creature -> Query;

You should include

* creature "where" creature "is" -> Query;

Also, do you really intend to limit the object of queries to creatures?

-> BOB, WHERE IS THE STUNT CD?

(I know, you were hoping not to have to include such details... Of course
this does rather depend on what sort of work you're writing.)

Or indeed singular objects/people?

-> BOB, WHERE ARE THE KIDS?

(I know, not so likely to happen to animates, but you'll want an "are"
grammar line for plural objects and plurally-defined singular objects
like trousers if there are any such things)

--
Den [waiting impatiently for a 12 cm import from across the Atlantic]


GLYPH

unread,
Jul 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/15/98
to
On 15 Jul 1998, Doeadeer3 wrote:

> Okay, I am working on improving NPC conversation. A limited
> improvement, because after I started thinking about it I realized
> a MAJOR improvement would mean more work for me the game writer/
> programmer, coding all those responses to countless possible player inputs.

Yeah. That's inevitable.

> So aiming low, what I am trying to do is include certain types questions in the
> orders routine of an NPC. Looking over the code of parserm.h
> and reading the manual -- anything that is not understood by orders is
> passed back to the life routine of the NPC as a say action.
>
> Bob, hi becomes say hi to Bob
>

> The only way questions are handled by orders is: "Bob, tell me about whatever"
> which becomes "ask Bob about whatever". But I want orders to be able to handle
> a question like, "Bob, where is Jimboy?".

Hmm. I did exactly the opposite. Everything is converted to "Bob, blah"
form for Bob's grammar routine to handle. Actually, it's "Bob, blah blah
blah blah blah" form. Then the game's heirarchy of message translation
objects have a go at it, and pass the translated message to Bob.

Anyway, instead of yakking about it, I'll just release it. Maybe in a few
days now.

- GLYPH

E-Mail <y8...@unb.ca>
or <graham...@hotmail.com>

------------------

Shameless plug for my web page:
<http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/9315>

Doeadeer3

unread,
Jul 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/15/98
to
>From: Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk>
>Date: Wed, Jul 15, 1998 09:17 EDT

>I think it'll be some time before we see a 'Why' implemented well in
>anything other than multiple choice, though. "Bob, Why did the chicken
>cross the road?"

I am probably not going to implement a why, I was just using that as an
example. However, a how would be okay.

Bob, how about those rangers? could be turned into ask Bob about the rangers

>you'll want an "are"
>grammar line for plural objects and plurally-defined singular objects
>like trousers if there are any such things)

Yes, I have are on the grammar line, just didn't include it in my example.

Doeadeer3

unread,
Jul 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/15/98
to
>From: erky...@netcom.com (Andrew Plotkin)
>Date: Wed, Jul 15, 1998 00:22 EDT

>*infer* a creature. If there's exactly one around, print "(asking Bob that)"
>and direct the query; If there are more than one around, print "You'll
>have to ask that of someone in particular."; otherwise print "You're
>talking to yourself again."
>
>> But that isn't really what I want.

Not a bad idea. Maybe I will replace saysub and do that there too. It keeps
annoying me because it doesn't infer. Only one character in a room and "say
hi" procudes the result. "who do you want to say hi to?" although no one else
is there.

Doe :-)

Lucian Paul Smith

unread,
Jul 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/15/98
to
Doeadeer3 (doea...@aol.com) wrote:
: >From: Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk>
: >Date: Wed, Jul 15, 1998 09:17 EDT

: I am probably not going to implement a why, I was just using that as an


: example. However, a how would be okay.

: Bob, how about those rangers? could be turned into ask Bob about the rangers


>BOB, HOW ABOUT DEM APPLES?


-Lucian

Irene Callaci

unread,
Jul 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/15/98
to
I did something similar in my UnknownVerb routine. If you're
interested, here's the code. If an animate creature is in the
location, it presumes the player is speaking to that creature.
If there's more than one animate creature, it selects one and
speaks to it (or him or her -- I'm sensitive, I'm sensitive!).
If no animate creatures are in the location, it returns the
usual "That's not a verb I recognize" error.

[ UnknownVerb i j;
objectloop (i in location)
{ if (i has animate && i hasnt concealed && i ~= player)
{ second = i;
j++;
}
if (j > 1)
print "(speaking to ", (the) second, ")^";
}
if (second ~= 0 && RunLife(second,##Answer) ~= 0) rfalse;
else L__M(##Miscellany,38);
rfalse;
];

If you get your SaySub routine working, I'd really like to see
it, if you're willing to share.

irene

Irene Callaci

unread,
Jul 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/15/98
to
So, of course, I forgot one crucial line in the code below.
You need a break after the line:

print "(speaking to ", (the) second, ")^";

and, of course, that means you have to add { and } around the if
statement, too. Sorry. I've tried to mark the original code,
below so that it makes sense.

irene

On Wed, 15 Jul 1998 18:58:49 GMT, ical...@csupomona.edu (Irene
Callaci) wrote:

>[ UnknownVerb i j;
> objectloop (i in location)
> { if (i has animate && i hasnt concealed && i ~= player)
> { second = i;
> j++;
> }
> if (j > 1)

{ ! add this bracket


> print "(speaking to ", (the) second, ")^";

break; ! add this statement
} ! add this bracket

Doeadeer3

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
>[Inform] Improving NPC Conversation (?)
>From: GLYPH <y8...@unb.ca>
>Date: Wed, Jul 15, 1998 11:25 EDT

>Anyway, instead of yakking about it, I'll just release it. Maybe in a few
>days now.
>
> - GLYPH
>

Sure, I am still very interested.

Doeadeer3

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
>From: ical...@csupomona.edu (Irene Callaci)
>Date: Wed, Jul 15, 1998 14:58 EDT

>If you get your SaySub routine working, I'd really like to see
>it, if you're willing to share.

Sure, will do, thanks fro sharing unknownverb.

Doeadeer3

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
>From: Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk>
>Date: Wed, Jul 15, 1998 09:17 EDT

>new level of
>complexity generates new ways to break mimesis, if you'll pardon the
>phrase

>However I think Where is, What is and Who is shouldn't cause too
>much fuss

Yes, I agree. Think every parent of a two-year old (or is it a four-year old?)
knows that. They break mimesis all the time. "Why is the sky blue? Why do I
have to do that?"

Would force the game writer into the usual reponse, "BECAUSE I SAID SO!!!"

Now that I think about it, HOW probably opens a big can of worms too.

From: lps...@rice.edu (Lucian Paul Smith)
Date: Wed, Jul 15, 1998 14:41 EDT

>BOB, HOW ABOUT DEM APPLES?


:-) Because they are all kinds of hows...

how about.........

Bob, how about dem buns?

how can/do/does........

Bob, how can I win this game?

Bob, how do I make a molotov cocktail?

how would.....

Bob, how would you like to play thermonuclear war?

I am sure there are even more types of hows, just haven't thought of them yet.

<Kaboom>

Joe Mason

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
Irene Callaci <ical...@csupomona.edu> insribed:

>
> objectloop (i in location)
> { if (i has animate && i hasnt concealed && i ~= player)
> { second = i;
> j++;
> }
> if (j > 1)
> print "(speaking to ", (the) second, ")^";
> }

I would use LoopOverScope instead of objectloop, so that you can easily
expand the scope beyond the current location.

Joe

Doeadeer3

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
>From: ical...@csupomona.edu (Irene Callaci)
>Date: Wed, Jul 15, 1998 14:58 EDT

>If you get your SaySub routine working, I'd really like to see
>it, if you're willing to share.

Well, it's pretty simple and is almost exactly like your UnknownVerb.

Extend 'answer' first
* topic -> VagueAnswer

[ VagueAnswerSub i;
objectloop(i in location)
if (i has animate && i~= player){ second = i; break; }
if (second~=0){
print "(saying to ", (name) second, ")^";
<<Answer noun second>>; }
L__M(##Tell,1,noun);
];


Tested it and it works just fine and dandy. I was thinking it could be refined
with an attribute "sayfirst" to default to a specific NPC in a location if
there is more than one there, but I don't really need to do that in the game I
am working on because the major NPC in a location is already listed first (ergo
first in the object tree).

But you probably figured it on your own, anyway.

Dylan Thurston

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
ical...@csupomona.edu (Irene Callaci) writes:

>
> I did something similar in my UnknownVerb routine. If you're
> interested, here's the code. If an animate creature is in the
> location, it presumes the player is speaking to that creature.
> If there's more than one animate creature, it selects one and
> speaks to it (or him or her -- I'm sensitive, I'm sensitive!).
> If no animate creatures are in the location, it returns the
> usual "That's not a verb I recognize" error.
>

[Code deleted]

Wouldn't it be good to prefer to speak to someone with a pronoun
associated, so it's possible to carry out long conversations while
ignoring a third party? (This isn't perfect, if, say, there's a man
and a woman in the room, both with a current pronoun, but it would
help.)

If the situation really is ambiguous, I don't like arbitrarily picking
someone to talk to; it doesn't fit with the way ambiguities are
handled in the rest of the libraries.

--Dylan Thurston
d...@math.berkeley.edu

Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
On 16 Jul 1998, Doeadeer3 wrote:

>Yes, I agree. Think every parent of a two-year old (or is it a four-year old?)

That's something a parent _really_ ought to know...

>knows that. They break mimesis all the time. "Why is the sky blue? Why do I
>have to do that?"

Surely a child breaking mimesis would be one who said things like "Why
thank you, mother, that was a delicious dinner. You must have worked
hard to make it and I'm very grateful for all the things you've done
for me today. Now I think I'd like to play quietly."

>Would force the game writer into the usual reponse, "BECAUSE I SAID SO!!!"

:D

--
Den (Tell kids the real reason for the sky being blue. With a two-hour
physics practical to demonstrate the effect and some homework -
that'll make 'em less keen to ask such questions.)


Irene Callaci

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
Good idea. I'll check it out.

irene

Brandon Van Every

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to

Den of Iniquity wrote in message ...

>--
>Den (Tell kids the real reason for the sky being blue. With a two-hour
> physics practical to demonstrate the effect and some homework -
> that'll make 'em less keen to ask such questions.)


Better yet, quit being a tired, grumpy grown-up and put your energy into
genuinely educating/broadening your kid. Go take some aerobics classes so
you'll have the stamina to keep up with 'em.


Cheers,
Brandon Van Every

Todd Baumann-Fern

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to

GLYPH wrote:

> Anyway, instead of yakking about it, I'll just release it. Maybe in a few
> days now.

Can't wait to see it. NPC's can be such a pain....


Doeadeer3

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
>From: Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk>
>Date: Thu, Jul 16, 1998 06:12 EDT

>That's something a parent _really_ ought to know...

Well... er... actually I don't have any kids.

>Surely a child breaking mimesis would >be one who said things like"Why
>thank you, mother, that was a delicious dinner. You must have worked
>hard to make it and I'm very grateful for all the things you've done
>for me today. Now I think I'd like to play quietly."

Yep.

>(Tell kids the real reason for the sky being blue. With a two-hour
> physics practical to demonstrate the effect and some homework -
> that'll make 'em less keen to ask such questions.)

Hmmm, come to think of it, I don't think I know why the sky is blue. I guess I
need that demonstration. (Here's your chance to go completely totally
annoyingly pointlessly endlessly frustatingly fillibusterly insanely
off-topic.)

;-) But then, again, why bother?

okbl...@usa.net

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
In article <Pine.SGI.3.95L.98071...@ebor.york.ac.uk>,
Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
> --
> Den (Tell kids the real reason for the sky being blue. With a two-hour

> physics practical to demonstrate the effect and some homework -
> that'll make 'em less keen to ask such questions.)


Heh. But if you do that, you haven't actually answered the
question--certainly not for a young child. All you've done is described the
mechanics. You haven't explained *why* it's blue, only the trivial details
of *how*. ;-)

The child may be asking "Why is it blue and not red?" or "I really like blue!
How did you know to make it blue?" or "Why is it still blue when I've been
trying to change it to green?"

Of course, those are a *lot* tougher questions to answer. ;-)

[ok]

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum

J. Robinson Wheeler

unread,
Jul 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/16/98
to
Doeadeer3 wrote:

> >However I think Where is, What is and Who is shouldn't cause too
> >much fuss

> Now that I think about it, HOW probably opens a big can of worms too.


> :-) Because they are all kinds of hows...
>
> how about.........
>

> Bob, how can I win this game?


Surely I'm not the only one who has actually asked this of an NPC
at a particularly trying time? (Around the same time I'll be typing
"Scream" "Pray" "say 'AAAAARGHHH'" into the parser.)

Talk about faith vs. logic. But perhaps a really merciful IF writer
would put some miracle response in for those situations...

--
J. Robinson Wheeler
whe...@jump.net http://www.jump.net/~wheeler/jrw/home.html

Joe Mason

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
Doeadeer3 <doea...@aol.com> insribed:

>>(Tell kids the real reason for the sky being blue. With a two-hour
>> physics practical to demonstrate the effect and some homework -
>> that'll make 'em less keen to ask such questions.)
>
>Hmmm, come to think of it, I don't think I know why the sky is blue. I guess I
>need that demonstration. (Here's your chance to go completely totally
>annoyingly pointlessly endlessly frustatingly fillibusterly insanely
>off-topic.)

Different wavelengths of light will bend more when they refract. That's
why you get a rainbow when light passes through a prism or through mist in
the air. It happens that through most of the day, sunlight falling
through the atmosphere scatters off particles so that blue light hits the
ground and most other wavelengths bend off into space (I believe).
However, near sunset the light is coming in at a different angle, so red
light hits our eyes and everything else goes elsewhere.

This can also be changed by air pressure, so the exact colour of the sky
can be used as a barometer in some circumstances. "Red sky at night,
sailor's delight", and all that.

There, now that wasn't so hard, was it?

(Wait, wait - I just posted information! Think, think...)

No, actually its because of pollution. See, the sky is the face of Mother
Nature, and because of all the smog in the air, Mother Nature has to hold
her breath. Yeah, that's it...

Joe

Andrew Plotkin

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
Joe Mason (jcm...@uwaterloo.ca) wrote:
> >Hmmm, come to think of it, I don't think I know why the sky is blue.

> Different wavelengths of light will bend more when they refract. That's


> why you get a rainbow when light passes through a prism or through mist in
> the air. It happens that through most of the day, sunlight falling
> through the atmosphere scatters off particles so that blue light hits the
> ground and most other wavelengths bend off into space (I believe).
> However, near sunset the light is coming in at a different angle, so red
> light hits our eyes and everything else goes elsewhere.

Nope! Totally wrong. :) Well, mostly wrong. Scattering is right,
refraction is wrong.

> CONSULT SCI.PHYSICS FAQ ABOUT RAYLEIGH SCATTERING

The molecules of the atmosphere scatter blue light, slightly. That is, a
small percentage of the blue photons get kicked into random directions
as they travel. When you look into the sky, those scattered photons are
coming at you from every direction, so you see blue in every direction.
The sun, in contrast, is slightly reddened (a bit of blue is missing) but
you don't notice.

At sunset, you're looking at the sun through much more air (consider the
geometry), so there's much more scattering. Practically all the blue is
scattered out -- forming the blue sky of people to the west of you -- so
you see a very red sun.

Refraction is a minor effect in air, since the index of refraction is so
small. Not naked-eye noticeable -- although someone is going to bring up
the "green flash" effect, which I don't remember how it works.

> This can also be changed by air pressure, so the exact colour of the sky
> can be used as a barometer in some circumstances. "Red sky at night,
> sailor's delight", and all that.

I believe that's just different kinds of clouds, or lack of clouds, on
the horizon.

"Hydrogen fusion, the sun makes shine
Vascular pressure makes the ivy twine.
Because of Rayleigh, the sky's so blue.
Hormonal fixation is why I love you."

Laurel Halbany

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
On Thu, 16 Jul 1998 11:12:43 +0100, Den of Iniquity
<dms...@york.ac.uk> wrote:

> (Tell kids the real reason for the sky being blue.\

But it *isn't* blue. It just *looks* blue.

Dennis....@delta-air.com

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
In article <erkyrathE...@netcom.com>,
erky...@netcom.com (Andrew Plotkin) wrote:
>>snip<<

> Refraction is a minor effect in air, since the index of refraction is so
> small. Not naked-eye noticeable -- although someone is going to bring up
> the "green flash" effect, which I don't remember how it works.

OK, for those who don't know the "green flash" is an effect which sometimes
occurs just as the sun sets. When the sun sets in a position where there is
no obstructions all the way down to the horizion (I have only seen it over
ocean) sometimes, just as the sun disappears, there is a flash of green
light. This is not an optical illusion; it has been photographed.

The flash is caused by the fact that different wavelengths of light are
bent at different angles by the atmosphere. This effect is most pronounced
at sunrise and sunset, when the light from the sun passes through the most
atmosphere. When we are watching a sunset, we can still see the sun even
after it has physically dropped below the horizion. We are seeing light that
has been bent around the horizion by the atmosphere. As the image of the sun
sets, the longer wavelenghts of light (which are bent less) disappear first;
first red, then orange, then yellow. After the yellow disappears, we are
left with green, blue and violet; The blue and violet are scattered as
described above, so for a brief moment we are left with a green flash of
sunlight.

There is a sunset ceremony every evening in Key West where everyone gathers
for the sunset and waits for the green flash. I was on a dive cruise last
November where, every evening, everyone would gather on the top deck and
watch for the flash. Apparently conditions have to be just right for it to
occur, but when it does it is quite vivid.

I hope my ramblings are at least semi-understandable...
--
"You can't run away forever, but there's nothing wrong
with getting a good head start" --- Jim Steinman

Dennis Matheson --- Dennis....@delta-air.com
--- http://home.earthlink.net/~tanstaafl

L. Ross Raszewski

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
In article <erkyrathE...@netcom.com>,
erky...@netcom.com (Andrew Plotkin) wrote:

> "Hydrogen fusion, the sun makes shine
> Vascular pressure makes the ivy twine.
> Because of Rayleigh, the sky's so blue.
> Hormonal fixation is why I love you."

Heh! and here I thought I was the only person who knew that song

Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
On Thu, 16 Jul 1998, Brandon Van Every wrote:

>Better yet, quit being a tired, grumpy grown-up and put your energy into
>genuinely educating/broadening your kid.

You can get criminal sentences for broadening kids nowadays.


Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
On 16 Jul 1998, Doeadeer3 wrote:
>Hmmm, come to think of it, I don't think I know why the sky is blue.
>I guess I need that demonstration. (Here's your chance to go completely
totally annoyingly pointlessly endlessly frustatingly fillibusterly insanely
>off-topic.)

Don't tempt me. :) Anyway, by the time I read this there are already two
explanations, neither of which is right. You see...

The sky wasn't always blue. In fact, up until the mid 1930's, it was clear
through, and during the day looked, well, something like black night sky,
only without so many stars. Water, likewise, was completely clear, deep
water appearing dark, like the sky. Then in 1937, Pepsico commissioned
popular magzine artist Samuel K Jeffries III to illustrate numerous scenes
with the sky depicted in a dark blue instead of the normal black.
Initially these were his original works, picturesque rural scenes with
happy folk in the foreground pouring Pepsi Cola into tall glasses and the
extraordinary 'blue sky' rising above the fields and hills behind. Later,
Jeffries imitated existing works, only adding blue skies and pepsi cola
bottles to the original scene. Who can forget 'The Pepsi Seller' (based on
'The Hay-Wain')? At the moment this can be seen beside John Constable's
original in The National Gallery, London, along with several other
examples of Jeffries' work - a highly recommended exhibition. These
pictures have become extremely popular and some of the originals sell for
as much as $200,000 in auctions today.

In 1942, Pepsico created a vast machine, and, ostensibly to aid the war
efforts of the Allied forces, began sucking huge volumes of the
atmosphere, and lightly coated every molecule of nitrogen, oxygen, water
vapour, carbon dioxide - in fact just about every gaseous particle present
in the air - with a blue colouring agent. Of course, the painting of the
molecules took a long time and an incredibly large volume of blue paint -
even though each molecule required such an infinitessimal amount of dye,
the number of molecules in the atmosphere required many thousands of
megatonnes of dye.

And more machines were needed - a total of over 1200 machines were built
in a very short amount of time, just six months from September '42 to
March '43. Slowly but surely, the atmosphere turned blue - initially it
was so blue in the vicinity of these machines, scattered up and down the
east coast from New England to North Florida, that a dense blue fog
settled over the East coast of the states and Canada, reducing visibility
to just a few metres in some parts. There were many calls to stop the
atmosphere polluters, but when the positive effects on the war in Europe
became known, there was nothing that could stop them. Although most
of the machines have now been dismantled, one of the remaining few
can be seen in the Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago.

What effect could it have possibly had on the Second World War, you might
ask? Well, it was customary to paint the undersides of the wings of
fighting aircraft black, so that they are harder to detect against the sky
above, making them harder to hit from the ground. The allied forces had
retained a little blue paint, but just about the whole of the world's
supply had been snapped up by Pepsico. So the Allied forces painted the
B52's, Lancasters, spitfires, hurricanes and all other craft with a light
blue tinge while the German air-force were left black. As you can tell,
this helped the Allies enormously. Of course it only bought a few months
before the Germans managed to produce enough blue dyes from plant extracts
to camouflage their planes. And so in March 1943, the atmosphere
colouration was stopped.

But things hadn't gone entirely to plan. The dye had been thought to have
a limited life, and that it would eventually wear off. To some extent it
did, and you will never again see those vivid navy-blue skies again. But
much of the dye remained in the atmosphere, and that which had washed off
ended up in the seas, oceans, lakes and rivers, giving them a blue tinge
as well. Pepsi's biggest advertisement will probably go on to colour our
skies for many years yet - it is thought that the blue colour will still
be visible as late as the twenty-fourth century.

And that's why the sky - and the sea - is blue.

So now you know.

--
Den


Laurel Halbany

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
On 16 Jul 1998 01:30:09 GMT, doea...@aol.com (Doeadeer3) wrote:


>Yes, I agree. Think every parent of a two-year old (or is it a four-year old?)

>knows that. They break mimesis all the time. "Why is the sky blue? Why do I
>have to do that?"

Hm. My nearly-four-year-old breaks mimesis by insisting the sky is NOT
blue. (It is whatever color you say it isn't.)

John Francis

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
In article <Pine.SGI.3.95L.98071...@ebor.york.ac.uk>,

Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk> wrote:

Here in California you can get penalized for *educating* them, too.

A new law just went on the books to outlaw bilingual education. Now any child
who is not a native English speaker gets put into an English immersion program
(for six months of education, or one school year).

After that all education *must* be given only in English. Parents can bring
a court action against teachers who don't conform to these regulations.
--
John Francis jfra...@sgi.com Silicon Graphics, Inc.
(650)933-8295 2011 N. Shoreline Blvd. MS 43U-991
(650)933-4692 (Fax) Mountain View, CA 94043-1389
Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your father. Prepare to die.

Jonadab the Unsightly One

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to

Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk> wrote in article
<Pine.SGI.3.95L.98071...@ebor.york.ac.uk>...

> On Thu, 16 Jul 1998, Brandon Van Every wrote:
>
> >Better yet, quit being a tired, grumpy grown-up and put your energy into
> >genuinely educating/broadening your kid.
>
> You can get criminal sentences for broadening kids nowadays.
>
>

"Well, son, the sky used to be gray, but it turned colour with everything
else back in the fourties. It was pretty grainy colour for a while, too."


Yr. Obd't & Humble Servant,
Jonadab the Unsightly One


----------------

One of the many uses for peanut butter:
228. Have congress declare "National Peanut Butter Awareness Week."

(Need more uses? see http://members.kconline.com/kerr/pb.htm)

Send replies to username@isp, where username is jonadab
and isp is bright.net

The zerospam.com address works, but you get an ugly confirmation.


Jonadab the Unsightly One

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
Den of Iniquity wrote

[deep, deep snippage]

Wow! I feel really embarrased now; I had actually believed the line that
blue light was more easily refracted (and therefore spread about) by the
atmospheric particles than red light because of its wavelength, causing the
sun to appear orange and the sky blue! Imagine the gullability ;-)

Joe Mason

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk> insribed:

>
>The sky wasn't always blue. In fact, up until the mid 1930's, it was clear
>through, and during the day looked, well, something like black night sky,
>only without so many stars. Water, likewise, was completely clear, deep
>water appearing dark, like the sky. Then in 1937, Pepsico commissioned
>popular magzine artist Samuel K Jeffries III to illustrate numerous scenes
>with the sky depicted in a dark blue instead of the normal black.

Remind me again: was this before or after the world turned from
black-and-white to colour? (3 pts.)

Joe

Jonadab the Unsightly One

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
Joe Mason <jcm...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote in article
<slrn6qv8b1...@xenocide.execulink.com>...

Before. The world turned colour back in the fourties, and it was pretty


grainy colour for a while, too.

Why did Mr. Jeffries illustrate the sky in colour, then? Well, artists
have always been a bit crazy. Of course, his colour illustrations appeared
black and white at the time, but they turned colour with everything else in
the fourties. Likewise, the blue paint Pepsico used in '42 was still grey,
but it turned colour with everything else a couple of years hence.

Bob F.O.R. Apples

unread,
Jul 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/17/98
to
Den of Iniquity wrote in message ...
>On 16 Jul 1998, Doeadeer3 wrote:
>>Hmmm, come to think of it, I don't think I know why the sky is blue.
>>I guess I need that demonstration. (Here's your chance to go completely
>totally annoyingly pointlessly endlessly frustatingly fillibusterly
insanely
>>off-topic.)


<snip>


Wow! Den, dude. You must write some good IF or at least good fiction.
Sure you're not Douglas Adams? ;)

--Bob


HarryH

unread,
Jul 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/18/98
to
In article <01bdb19d$c7bee440$LocalHost@jonadab>, jon...@zerospam.com
says...

>"Well, son, the sky used to be gray, but it turned colour with everything
>else back in the fourties. It was pretty grainy colour for a while, too."

>
>Yr. Obd't & Humble Servant,
>Jonadab the Unsightly One

Hey, I recognize these sentences! You ripped these off Bill Watterson's
Calvin and Hobbes! Guilty of Plagiarism. Go directly to Jail. Do not pass go.
Do not collect $200.

Try not to put your name on somebody else's work next time, eh?

-------------------------------------------------------
Of course I'll work on weekends without pay!
- successful applicant


HarryH

unread,
Jul 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/18/98
to
In article <199807161954...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
doea...@aol.com says...

>Hmmm, come to think of it, I don't think I know why the sky is blue. I guess
I
>need that demonstration. (Here's your chance to go completely totally
>annoyingly pointlessly endlessly frustatingly fillibusterly insanely
>off-topic.)
>
>;-) But then, again, why bother?

Huh? I'm checking the sky right now, and it's dark and full of stars.
There's Mars, and Mercury, and Venus. There's also Cancer, Orion, and
Sagitarius. I don't get this "blue" thing here. :)

(Obviously, I'm a nocturnal creature)

HarryH

unread,
Jul 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/18/98
to
In article <6oluc3$sej$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, okbl...@usa.net says...
>In article <Pine.SGI.3.95L.98071...@ebor.york.ac.uk>,
> Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Den (Tell kids the real reason for the sky being blue. With a two-hour

>> physics practical to demonstrate the effect and some homework -
>> that'll make 'em less keen to ask such questions.)
>Heh. But if you do that, you haven't actually answered the
>question--certainly not for a young child. All you've done is described the
>mechanics. You haven't explained *why* it's blue, only the trivial details
>of *how*. ;-)

By Definition.

We chose to call blue Blue, and red Red. If we all agree to call blue Red,
and red Blue, the sky would be Red at noon and Blue at Dusk.


You see one red ball and one blue ball.

> DAN, GET THE BLUE BALL

Dan joyfully takes the red ball.

GLEEMOTH

unread,
Jul 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/18/98
to
Joe Mason dangles this question in our faces:

>Remind me again: was this before or after the world turned from
>black-and-white to colour? (3 pts.)
I'll field this one. Calvin's dad?
Shay Caron (Shay_...@letterbox.com
-or-
glee...@aol.com)
This brings my point total up to 5. Yippee.

Jonadab the Unsightly One

unread,
Jul 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/18/98
to

Bob F.O.R. Apples <B...@Bobster.com> wrote in article
>
> Wow! Den, dude. You must write some good IF or at least good fiction.
> Sure you're not Douglas Adams? ;)

No, no. He's really Calvin's dad.

Yr. Obd't & Humble Servant,
Jonadab the Unsightly One

der...@tfn.net

unread,
Jul 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/19/98
to
In article <slrn6qqq2p...@xenocide.execulink.com>,
jcm...@uwaterloo.ca (Joe Mason) wrote:
> Irene Callaci <ical...@csupomona.edu> insribed:
> >
> > objectloop (i in location)
> > { if (i has animate && i hasnt concealed && i ~= player)
> > { second = i;
> > j++;
> > }
> > if (j > 1)
> > print "(speaking to ", (the) second, ")^";

> > }
>
> I would use LoopOverScope instead of objectloop, so that you can easily
> expand the scope beyond the current location.
>
> Joe
>

This is certainly the track I need to take, as one of my actors resides within
a container. But I'm not sure exactly how to use LoopOverScope. Could you
provide an example?

Derek | der...@tfn.net

Joe Mason

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
Jonadab the Unsightly One <jon...@zerospam.com> insribed:

>
>"Well, son, the sky used to be gray, but it turned colour with everything
>else back in the fourties. It was pretty grainy colour for a while, too."

Well, you didn't connect them explicitly, but I guess that'll get you the
three points I offered in another thread...

Joe


Joe Mason

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
der...@tfn.net <der...@tfn.net> insribed:

>In article <slrn6qqq2p...@xenocide.execulink.com>,
> jcm...@uwaterloo.ca (Joe Mason) wrote:
>> Irene Callaci <ical...@csupomona.edu> insribed:
>> >
>> > objectloop (i in location)
>> > { if (i has animate && i hasnt concealed && i ~= player)
>> > { second = i;
>> > j++;
>> > }
>> > if (j > 1)
>> > print "(speaking to ", (the) second, ")^";
>> > }
>>
>> I would use LoopOverScope instead of objectloop, so that you can easily
>> expand the scope beyond the current location.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>
>This is certainly the track I need to take, as one of my actors resides within
>a container. But I'm not sure exactly how to use LoopOverScope. Could you
>provide an example?

Unfortunately, the Designer's Manual doesn't go into much detail either.
See Section 28 for a discussion of scope and lots of examples on other
aspects of it. The only thing really said about LoopOverScope is on p160:

Two library routines are provided to enable you to see what's in scope
and what isn't. The first, TestScope(obj, actor), simply returns true or
false according to whether or not obj is in scope. The second is
LoopOverScope(routine, actor) and calls the given routine for each object
in scope. In each case the actor given is optional; if it's omitted,
scope is worked out for the player as usual.

Unlike objectloop, LoopOverScope needs to run a routine, instead of just
having a block of code after it. So you would need to move some of the
code in Irene's example above to its own routine:

[ CheckForAnimate i j;


if (i has animate && i hasnt concealed && i ~= player)

{ GlobalAnimateSecond = i;
GlobalAnimateCount++;
}
];

A problem here. There doesn't seem to be any way to pass info back from
this routine, or parameters in, so you need to use global variables.
Messy. Seems that LoopOverScope was really only meant for printing
things. (Anybody: is there a better way?)

Anyway, the code to call this routine would go:

GlobalAnimateCount = 0;
LoopOverScope(CheckForAnimate);
if (GlobalAnimateCount > 1) {
second = GlobalAnimateSecond;


print "(speaking to ", (the) second, ")^";
}

Note that this will actually overwrite GlobalAnimateSecond each time the
test succeeds, so it will actually be the LAST item matched by
CheckForAnimate that is used. Also, note that Irene's original code will
print "(speaking to the xxx)" several times, leaving second pointing to
the last one printed. And that it assumed j was already 0.

Joe


Joe Mason

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
Joe Mason <jcm...@uwaterloo.ca> insribed:

Or was it, in fact, in this thread? I seem to be a little confused

Joe, who also got the lyrics to Come Together wrong over in r.g.i-f

Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
On Fri, 17 Jul 1998, Andrew Plotkin wrote:

>"Hydrogen fusion, the sun makes shine
>Vascular pressure makes the ivy twine.
>Because of Rayleigh, the sky's so blue.
>Hormonal fixation is why I love you."

Very cute. Is this a Plotkin original or can you attribute it? I might
want to borrow it...

While I remember, I was going to give that 'experiment' info for the blue
sky/Rayleigh scattering thing - I'd have done it on Friday but I nearly
missed my train to London getting the Pepsi version finished... :)

I haven't actually tried this, so I can't vouch for it, but it goes
something like this:

Get a big transparent container, perhaps that long aquarium you used for
the pen-laser experiment (don't forget to tip out the sugar solution
first). Fill with water, add a little milk and mix well. Milk is an
emulsion, so in the water it should scatter light in much the same way as
particles in the atmosphere do. Then shine a bright light into the water,
darken your room, and with any luck, the water-milk mixture should take on
a definite blue-ish tinge that can't be attributed to either the water or
milk (consider buying from a different dairy if your milk is blue). If
your container is long enough, you might even notice that your light
source looks redder when viewed through the tank, but if your container
isn't very big it would probably take a spectrometer to tell the
difference.

You can get a refraction effect from the difference between water/glass
and air (unlike the minimal difference between atmosphere and vacuum) but
this is undesirable. Ideally you should shine a torch directly at a flat
face of your water-milk container. Also, a broad band spectrum emitter is
necessary but most household light-sources should be fine. So that's why
your pen laser won't work and nor will an array of like-coloured LEDs or a
sodium light. If your light looks vaguely white you're OK.

--
Den


Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
On 17 Jul 1998, John Francis wrote:

>After that all education *must* be given only in English. Parents can bring
>a court action against teachers who don't conform to these regulations.

I take it that learning a foreign language doesn't count?

Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
On Sat, 18 Jul 1998, HarryH wrote:

>We chose to call blue Blue, and red Red. If we all agree to call blue Red,
>and red Blue, the sky would be Red at noon and Blue at Dusk.

Indeed, one of the most fascinating questions about visual sensation is to
ask whether we all perceive the spectrum in the same way (and I suppose
the rest of our electromagnetic input). What I call Red is what you call
Red but if you could see the colour that I see when I see Red you might
call it Blue. I think it's one of those questions that will be
mind-bogglingly difficult to answer without the use of possession or
something. :)

--
Den


Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
>Bob F.O.R. Apples <B...@Bobster.com> wrote
>> Wow! Den, dude.
<wince>

>> You must write some good IF or at least good fiction.

I must, I know. I really ought to. I have never-finish-what-you-start
syndrome. Actually, I have never-finish-starting-what-you've-just-started-
to-start syndrome. They'll probably identify it as a medical condition
and find a cure for it just after I die. If I wrote IF right now it would
probably bring tears to your eyes, but not for humorous reasons. Maybe
I could write and illustrate kids' books, though. Young 'uns like stories
about anthropomorphised geometric shapes, don't they?

>> Sure you're not Douglas Adams? ;)

Hang on, let me check my bank balance. <sigh> Yup. Quite definite on that
one. Flattery will get you...

... suddenly Jonadab wrote:

>No, no. He's really Calvin's dad.

Actually, that hits the mark a little bit too well for my liking.

Then again, did anyone else used to fancy Calvin's mom?

--
No Douglas

"Billy the undecagon saw his new friend, Jane the semi-ellipsoid, so he
went over to offer her some delicious candied spline curves...."

Andrew Plotkin

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
Den of Iniquity (dms...@york.ac.uk) wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jul 1998, Andrew Plotkin wrote:

> >"Hydrogen fusion, the sun makes shine
> >Vascular pressure makes the ivy twine.
> >Because of Rayleigh, the sky's so blue.
> >Hormonal fixation is why I love you."

> Very cute. Is this a Plotkin original or can you attribute it? I might
> want to borrow it...

I wrote that verse, and you're welcome to borrow it.

The idea was inspired by Pamela Dean's really brilliant novel _Juniper,
Gentian, and Rosemary_, in which some kids sing a similar verse. But not
actually the same one. Answering the same questions, but using different
words. I can't remember how that one went, but I would have written my
own anyway, since Dean's didn't scan very well.

I'm sure someone came up with the idea long before either Dean or I wrote
our particular instances of it.

--Z

--

"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the
borogoves..."

Andrew Plotkin

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
Den of Iniquity (dms...@york.ac.uk) wrote:

I think it's theoretically impossible to answer. Saying "if we had
telepathy" begs the question; is there a translation of sensation involved
in telepathy or not? It's no different than our *existing* telepathic
function (transferring thoughts from one person to another via sound
waves.)

Since the question is impossible to answer, it's not fascinating at all.
It's maximally uninteresting, because there's nothing to say about it.

Doeadeer3

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
>From: Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk>
>Date: Mon, Jul 20, 1998 13:23 EDT

>While I remember, I was going to give that 'experiment' info for the blue
>sky/Rayleigh scattering thing -

[ experiment snipped]

I got it! I know who Den IS NOW! He's Mr. Whizard!!!

(Since Den lives in the uk that will probably mean nothing to him. So
explanation - Mr. Whizard appeared on American t.v. doing scientific
experiments with/for kids, i.e., it was a kids' show.)

Yep, well, nice to know you are still around, Mr. Whizard.

:-)
Doe doea...@aol.com (formerly known as FemaleDeer)
****************************************************************************
"In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane." Mark Twain

Adam Cadre

unread,
Jul 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/20/98
to
Dennis Smith wrote:
> Indeed, one of the most fascinating questions about visual sensation is to
> ask whether we all perceive the spectrum in the same way (and I suppose
> the rest of our electromagnetic input). What I call Red is what you call
> Red but if you could see the colour that I see when I see Red you might
> call it Blue. I think it's one of those questions that will be
> mind-bogglingly difficult to answer without the use of possession or
> something. :)

Andrew Plotkin replied:

> I think it's theoretically impossible to answer.

> Since the question is impossible to answer, it's not fascinating at all.
> It's maximally uninteresting, because there's nothing to say about it.

For what it's worth, I once ran across a study in which subjects from a
variety of cultures were presented with color charts and asked to point
to the best representative of variousterms for colors in their language.
The results were the same for every culture. That is, the best "red" for
English speakers was the same as the best "aka" for the Japanese, the
best "lichi" for the Dineh of the American Southwest, and the best
"anpalultak" for the Inuit. (Heider & Olivier, 1972, via Wade and
Tavris, 1993.)

-----
Adam Cadre, Anaheim, CA
http://www.retina.net/~grignr

Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/21/98
to
On 20 Jul 1998, Doeadeer3 wrote:

>>From: Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk>
>

>>While I remember, I was going to give that 'experiment' info for the blue
>>sky/Rayleigh scattering thing -

>I got it! I know who Den IS NOW! He's Mr. Whizard!!!

Nah. I'm really Johnny Ball.

--
Den


Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/21/98
to
On Mon, 20 Jul 1998, Andrew Plotkin wrote:
>I wrote that verse, and you're welcome to borrow it.

Cheers!


ical...@csupomona.edu

unread,
Jul 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/21/98
to
In article <slrn6r58bo...@xenocide.execulink.com>,
jcm...@uwaterloo.ca (Joe Mason) wrote:

> >> Irene Callaci <ical...@csupomona.edu> insribed:
> >> >
> >> > objectloop (i in location)
> >> > { if (i has animate && i hasnt concealed && i ~= player)
> >> > { second = i;
> >> > j++;
> >> > }
> >> > if (j > 1)
> >> > print "(speaking to ", (the) second, ")^";
> >> > }

> Note ... that Irene's original code will


> print "(speaking to the xxx)" several times, leaving second pointing to
> the last one printed. And that it assumed j was already 0.

Yeah, I know (hits self on forehead). I forgot the break
statement after the print statement. Duh.

irene

L. Ross Raszewski

unread,
Jul 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/21/98
to
In article <erkyrathE...@netcom.com>,

erky...@netcom.com (Andrew Plotkin) wrote:
> Den of Iniquity (dms...@york.ac.uk) wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Jul 1998, Andrew Plotkin wrote:
>
> > >"Hydrogen fusion, the sun makes shine
> > >Vascular pressure makes the ivy twine.
> > >Because of Rayleigh, the sky's so blue.
> > >Hormonal fixation is why I love you."
>
> > Very cute. Is this a Plotkin original or can you attribute it? I might
> > want to borrow it...
>
> I wrote that verse, and you're welcome to borrow it.
>
> The idea was inspired by Pamela Dean's really brilliant novel _Juniper,
> Gentian, and Rosemary_, in which some kids sing a similar verse. But not
> actually the same one. Answering the same questions, but using different
> words. I can't remember how that one went, but I would have written my
> own anyway, since Dean's didn't scan very well.
>
> I'm sure someone came up with the idea long before either Dean or I wrote
> our particular instances of it.
>

There's an interesting (in several ways) anecdote I have which tiews in nicely
ot both this song and the color of the sky.

Many years ago, when I was abotu ten any my sister abouit five, an aunt asked
us "Why is the sky blue". I launched into an explanation of Rayleigh and
diffraction, and atmospheric conditions. My sister just said "Because God
said so."

It's taken me quite a few years to realize that her answer was probably
better.

"Because God made the sun to shine,
Because God made the ivy twine,
Because God made the sky so blue,
Because God made you, that's why I love you."
(Personally, i had always sort of guessed Garrison Keillor wrote it :-)

David Glasser

unread,
Jul 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/21/98
to
Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Jul 1998, HarryH wrote:
>
> >We chose to call blue Blue, and red Red. If we all agree to call blue Red,
> >and red Blue, the sky would be Red at noon and Blue at Dusk.
>

> Indeed, one of the most fascinating questions about visual sensation is to
> ask whether we all perceive the spectrum in the same way (and I suppose
> the rest of our electromagnetic input). What I call Red is what you call
> Red but if you could see the colour that I see when I see Red you might
> call it Blue. I think it's one of those questions that will be
> mind-bogglingly difficult to answer without the use of possession or
> something. :)

And the question I've always wondered is, what in the world is
color-blindness? I have it, and the only effect I can see are people
continually saying "What color is this? What color is that?" OK, I do
have some problems distinguishing colors, but where does it come from?
Are my eyes messed up? Is my brain's color-part just stupid? Do I
really see the world in black-and-white (as some people assume
color-blindness to be) and just not realize it?

--David Glasser
gla...@NOSPAMuscom.com | dgla...@NOSPAMfcs.pvt.k12.pa.us
http://onramp.uscom.com/~glasser | http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6028
DGlasser @ ifMUD : fovea.retina.net:4000 (webpage fovea.retina.net:4001)
Interactive Fiction! MST3K! David Eddings! Macintosh!

David Glasser

unread,
Jul 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/21/98
to
Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk> wrote:

> I must, I know. I really ought to. I have never-finish-what-you-start
> syndrome. Actually, I have never-finish-starting-what-you've-just-started-
> to-start syndrome. They'll probably identify it as a medical condition
> and find a cure for it just after I die. If I wrote IF right now it would
> probably bring tears to your eyes, but not for humorous reasons. Maybe
> I could write and illustrate kids' books, though. Young 'uns like stories
> about anthropomorphised geometric shapes, don't they?

Flatland for kids?

Irene Callaci

unread,
Jul 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/21/98
to
Now *that* would make an interesting piece of i-f, wouldn't it?
It's one of my favorite books.

irene

Andrew Plotkin

unread,
Jul 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/21/98
to
L. Ross Raszewski (rras...@hotmail.com) wrote:
> > > On Fri, 17 Jul 1998, Andrew Plotkin wrote:
> >
> > > >"Hydrogen fusion, the sun makes shine
> > > >Vascular pressure makes the ivy twine.
> > > >Because of Rayleigh, the sky's so blue.
> > > >Hormonal fixation is why I love you."
> >
> > The idea was inspired by Pamela Dean's really brilliant novel _Juniper,
> > Gentian, and Rosemary_, in which some kids sing a similar verse. But not
> > actually the same one. Answering the same questions, but using different
> > words. I can't remember how that one went, but I would have written my
> > own anyway, since Dean's didn't scan very well.

> Many years ago, when I was abotu ten any my sister abouit five, an aunt asked


> us "Why is the sky blue". I launched into an explanation of Rayleigh and
> diffraction, and atmospheric conditions. My sister just said "Because God
> said so."
>
> It's taken me quite a few years to realize that her answer was probably
> better.

This is, among many other things, exactly what Dean's novel is about.
At 12, instead of 10, but that's close.

michael...@ey.com

unread,
Jul 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/22/98
to
In article <1dcha3d.ta...@usol-phl-pa-061.uscom.com>,

gla...@NOSPAMuscom.com (David Glasser) wrote:
> Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> And the question I've always wondered is, what in the world is
> color-blindness? I have it, and the only effect I can see are people
> continually saying "What color is this? What color is that?" OK, I do
> have some problems distinguishing colors, but where does it come from?
> Are my eyes messed up? Is my brain's color-part just stupid? Do I
> really see the world in black-and-white (as some people assume
> color-blindness to be) and just not realize it?
>

It's been a while since my Psychology of Perception class, but...

<ahem>

You do not see the world in black and white, and you are within your rights
to thoroughly trounce anyone who suffers from this misconception. Your visual
apparatus is unable to make distinctions between certain wavelengths of
reflected light (most commonly the confusion is between red & green, although
there's also yellow-blue and I think a couple more). I can't remember if the
problem lies in the distribution of rods & cones on your retina, or if it's
the way the color-processing area of your brain is wired. I think it could be
either, but it makes little difference one way or the other.

It DOESN'T mean you don't know what color is. Putting aside all solipsistic
arguments for the moment, what you see when you look at a blue thing is
pretty much what everyone else sees when they look at the blue thing
(assuming your color blindness is red-green, of course). The trouble only
comes up when you're trying to distinguish certain specific wavelengths.
Essentially, if I held up a green apple and said, "This is a green apple,"
you'd say, "Uh-huh," and then if I held up a red apple and said, "This is a
red apple," you'd say, "Uh-huh," and then if I put the apples behind my back
and then brought them out again and said, "Tell me which is the red apple,"
-- you'd have a real hard time figuring it out.

Also, you may have difficulty color-coordinating your wardrobe.

The "defect" (and I use that word VERY loosely -- unless you make a living by
reading subway maps, or are deathly allergic to green apples, it's hardly a
defect at all) is a gender-based genetic trait located on the male
chromosome, so it's more common in males than in females. It can be
congenital, so your son might get it, too.

Any further questions should be taken to my TA.

--
--M.

Adam Cadre

unread,
Jul 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/22/98
to
Michael Gentry wrote:
> The "defect is a gender-based genetic trait located on the male

> chromosome, so it's more common in males than in females. It can
> be congenital, so your son might get it, too.

Close but not quite. The gene for color-blindness is actually located on
the *X* chromosome, not the Y. The reason that color-blindness is far
more common in men than women is that women have two different X
chromosomes, so both have to be defective for the trait to show. This is
very rare. Men only have one, so if it's busted, they're out of luck --
the Y doesn't help any.

An offshoot of this is that while color-blindness can be hereditary, it
cannot be passed from father to son, since a son gets his father's Y
chromosome, and not the defective X. It can be passed from father to
grandson, in the sense that it can be passed from father to daughter, and
while she probably doesn't show the trait, she has a 50% chance of
passing it on to her children.

michael...@ey.com

unread,
Jul 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/22/98
to
In article
<Pine.SOL.3.91.980722...@godzilla1.acpub.duke.edu>, Adam
Cadre <ad...@acpub.duke.edu> wrote:

>
[a correction to my lecture on color-blindness]
>

Whoops -- you got me. Thanks for the clear-up.

Matt Ackeret

unread,
Jul 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/22/98
to
On 17 Jul 1998, John Francis wrote:
>After that all education *must* be given only in English. Parents can bring
>a court action against teachers who don't conform to these regulations.

I didn't see the original of this post, but I presume it's talking about
the proposition passed in California.. (227? 209?)

If I am right in that is what it is talking about, this statement is
absolutely false.

Parents can sign up for waivers, and if enough parents sign up for
waivers, bilingual education can *continue*. It does not make bilingual
education illegal, it just changes the default to going into all
English classes after one year. (Which seems completely logical to me,
though I admit I was too lazy to go and vote.. This was the only proposition
I really cared about, so I'm glad it passed.)
--
mat...@area.com

gen...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Jul 23, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/23/98
to
In article <6p4re3$hnn$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,

michael...@ey.com wrote:
> I can't remember if the
> problem lies in the distribution of rods & cones on your retina, or if it's
> the way the color-processing area of your brain is wired. I think it could be
> either, but it makes little difference one way or the other.

I just spoke to my friend Travis the Psych-Major about this, and he told me
the following:

Color-blindness of DOI's variety occurs in neither the retina NOR the
color-processing area of the brain, but in a layer of cells in-between the
retina and the optic nerve. They are called bi-polar cells, and they do
something along the lines of separating pairs of colors like red-green,
blue-yellow, etc. Red-green color-blindness (which is BY FAR the most common),
is caused by a defect in these cells.

Color-blindness can also be caused by a lesion in the color-processing area of
the brain, and this type of problem usually DOES cause the person to see in
black and white.

So forget what I said about trouncing.

Lucian Paul Smith

unread,
Jul 23, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/23/98
to
David Glasser (gla...@NOSPAMuscom.com) wrote:

: And the question I've always wondered is, what in the world is
: color-blindness?

Here goes--this is from class several years ago, so the details may be
fuzzy, but anyway,...

In your retina, you have rods and cones. Rods detect the difference
between light and dark. Cones detect the difference between color. There
are three different types of cones in your eye; they detect the
differences between two opposite colors on the so-called 'color wheel'.
Hence, you have one type of cone that distinguishes between red and green,
another between blue and orange, and another between yellow and purple.

If you're color-blind, it means that one or more of the three types of
cones fail to function. The most common one to go is the red/green one,
which is why 'color blind' is usually taken to mean 'red/green color
blind'. Some people are a different cone color blind, though, and some
people even can't seen *any* color--everything just looks gray to them
(since their rods still work).

This is the reason why the trick works where if you stare at an image for
a while, then look at a blank screen/wall/piece of paper, you'll see the
'reversed' version of that image--reds become greens, blues become orange,
and so on. Your cones have adapted to transmitting one signal, and
therefore when they rebound, they transmit the opposite signal instead.

ObIF: So, anyone want to implement a multi-player IF game where one of
the protagonists is colorblind?

-Lucian

Aponar Kestrel

unread,
Jul 23, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/23/98
to
Lucian Paul Smith wrote:
>
> ObIF: So, anyone want to implement a multi-player IF game where one of
> the protagonists is colorblind?
>

well, there is that one with the sociopath that i'm making... i see no
reason that one of my characters could not be colorblind...

--
Aponar's Stolen-Tagline-of-the-Period-Between-Bootups

Why are Chinese fortune cookies written in English?

Matt Kimball

unread,
Jul 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/24/98
to
Lucian Paul Smith <lps...@rice.edu> wrote:
: ObIF: So, anyone want to implement a multi-player IF game where one of
: the protagonists is colorblind?

Maybe. Are you sure that we don't already have any protagonists who
are colorblind? You could certainly make some sort of a puzzle about
it, but I'm not sure that the adventurer in Zork, for instance, isn't
colorblind. I don't remember anything in any of the descriptions that
would necessarily preclude it.

I'm colorblind, but I don't feel like it has a major impact on my
day-to-day life...

--
Matt Kimball
mkim...@xmission.com

Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/24/98
to
>Color-blindness of DOI's variety...

s entrely faked. Msattrbuton problem somewhere down the lne. thnk
you mean Mke Gentry. FTR my eyesght s almost perfect. :)

--
Den


Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/24/98
to
[Michael Gentry wrote]

>>Color-blindness of DOI's variety...

No, hang on a minute, you are Mike Gentry. So who is colour-blind then? Or
does DOI stand for something else?

--
Department of Iniquity


Andrew Plotkin

unread,
Jul 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/24/98
to
Matt Kimball (mkim...@xmission.com) wrote:
> Lucian Paul Smith <lps...@rice.edu> wrote:
> : ObIF: So, anyone want to implement a multi-player IF game where one of
> : the protagonists is colorblind?

> Maybe. Are you sure that we don't already have any protagonists who
> are colorblind? You could certainly make some sort of a puzzle about
> it, but I'm not sure that the adventurer in Zork, for instance, isn't
> colorblind. I don't remember anything in any of the descriptions that
> would necessarily preclude it.

He has no problem distinuishing between red and blue crystal spheres;
purple, red, yellow, and blue books; red, green, blue, and yellow
buttons; I forget the colors inside the mirror-box in Zork 3, but he
could tell those apart too...

--Z (what's the genetic basis for the sensory defect where you can't
intuitively tell which way is north all the time?)

gen...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Jul 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/24/98
to
In article <6p94tt$jj7$1...@news.xmission.com>,

Matt Kimball <mkim...@xmission.com> wrote:
> Lucian Paul Smith <lps...@rice.edu> wrote:
> : ObIF: So, anyone want to implement a multi-player IF game where one of
> : the protagonists is colorblind?
>
> Maybe. Are you sure that we don't already have any protagonists who
> are colorblind? You could certainly make some sort of a puzzle about
> it, but I'm not sure that the adventurer in Zork, for instance, isn't
> colorblind. I don't remember anything in any of the descriptions that
> would necessarily preclude it.
>

In Zork II, weren't two of the cookies from the Alice in Wonderland puzzle
colored red and green, respectively? Red-green color-blindness would
essentially render that puzzle a guessing game.

gen...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Jul 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/24/98
to
In article <Pine.SGI.3.95L.98072...@ebor.york.ac.uk>,

Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk> wrote:

Not unless it stands for Devilishly Omitted I's.
^ ^ ^

OK everyone: raise your hand if you can pick out the green apple.

--

gen...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Jul 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/24/98
to
In article <erkyrathE...@netcom.com>,
erky...@netcom.com (Andrew Plotkin) wrote:
>
> --Z (what's the genetic basis for the sensory defect where you can't
> intuitively tell which way is north all the time?)
>

I don't know; those twisty little chromosomes are all alike.

Larry Smith

unread,
Jul 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/24/98
to
gen...@my-dejanews.com wrote:

> Color-blindness of DOI's variety occurs in neither the retina NOR the
> color-processing area of the brain, but in a layer of cells in-between the
> retina and the optic nerve. They are called bi-polar cells, and they do
> something along the lines of separating pairs of colors like red-green,
> blue-yellow, etc. Red-green color-blindness (which is BY FAR the most common),
> is caused by a defect in these cells.

One man's "defect" is another man's "feature".

Color "blindness" is to some extent a cultural phenomena, it
arises from the fact that, although the majority of living
humans process colors in one way, there is a significant
minority that process colors a different way. While the
above-noted "defect" does mean the person has problems
differentiating certain shade of red/green, this change
also makes them much more sensitive to intensity.

A friend of mine by the name of DJ Delorie (of djgpp fame
for you hackers out there) once demonstrated this in a
very convincing manner. I had complained about Cabletron's
choices of green and red shades in their Spectrum product,
pointing out that anyone with red-green colorblindness (as
much as 20% of the male population) could not distinguish
an icon showing an alarm from one not doing so, given the
sizes of the icons and the saturation level of the monitor.
I was overruled by management (which liked the "aesthetics"
of the original colors, and decided to offer an optional
"colorblind" palette for those smart enough to enable it).
But DJ was intrigued and did some research on it.

One day I walked into his cube and noticed a screen showing
several icons, some of which were clearly showing alarms,
which I could see (I have precisely this color blindness)
from across the room. I complemented him on the quality
of his "color blind" palatte, whereon he informed me that
these particular colors were not only totally obvious to
someone with r/g colors blindness, they were ALSO completely
INdistinguishable to people with "normal" vision. Though
_I_ could see the differences from across the room, _he_
could not even sitting right in front of the monitor. The
difference? Intensity. I could see it, he couldn't. With
the "normal" colors, the difference was in wavelength - he
could see THAT, but I could not.

I suspect that there was a survival value in being able to
more minutely distinguish intensities of colors that was
marginally better than being able to distinguish shades of
color in some circumstance the species found itself in a
long time ago - possibly while hunting, since it is linked
to the male sex. But in modern civilization it seems to
be of marginal use, and is probably slowly vanishing from
the population. There's a probably a doctorate in here
somewhere for whoever finally figures this all out in detail.

Anyway, it's not as simple as a "defect". REAL defects
cause very dramatic changes in color vision, sometimes
reducing it to true monochrome (rare).

--
.-. .-. .---. .---. .-..-. |Politics is the art of looking for
| |__ / | \| |-< | |-< > / |trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing
`----'`-^-'`-'`-'`-'`-' `-' |it and then misapplying the wrong
My opinions only. |remedies. Groucho Marx

Matt Kimball

unread,
Jul 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/25/98
to
Larry Smith <l...@zk3.dec.com> wrote:
: Color "blindness" is to some extent a cultural phenomena, it

: arises from the fact that, although the majority of living
: humans process colors in one way, there is a significant
: minority that process colors a different way. While the
: above-noted "defect" does mean the person has problems
: differentiating certain shade of red/green, this change
: also makes them much more sensitive to intensity.

This is fascinating. I was completely unaware of this, but it does
agree with my experience. When people are aware of my particular
flavor of colorblindness, they will sometimes ask questions like, "So,
you can't tell the difference between these two colors?" to which I
would often reply "Of course I can! This one is much darker than the
other." I thought they were just confusing the hue of the color with
the hue/intensity combination.

--
Matt Kimball
mkim...@xmission.com

Kathy I. Morgan

unread,
Jul 26, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/26/98
to
Larry Smith <l...@zk3.dec.com> wrote:

> One man's "defect" is another man's "feature".

(snip)


> I suspect that there was a survival value in being able to
> more minutely distinguish intensities of colors that was
> marginally better than being able to distinguish shades of
> color in some circumstance the species found itself in a
> long time ago - possibly while hunting, since it is linked
> to the male sex.

My maternal grandfather was red/green color blind, so my mother
obviously received one chromosome for red/green color blindness from
him, but a presumably normal one from her mother. She is able to see all
colors, and pass all the normal vision tests, but can also see the
patterns that the color blind are supposed to see.

She is a wonderful asset on a hunting trip (whether with gun or camera),
because apparently animal camoflage patterns don't work for her. Color
blindness may be like sickle cell anemia; not necessarily a benefit or
even a disadvantage for those who who have it, but a survival advantage
for the larger population who only "half" get it.

--
Kathy
http://www.ptialaska.net/~kmorgan
See discussion of RFD:comp.software.shareware.* moderated in
news:news.groups

TenthStone

unread,
Jul 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/27/98
to
erky...@netcom.com (Andrew Plotkin) caused this to appear in our collective minds on Fri, 24 Jul 1998 13:17:12 GMT:

>--Z (what's the genetic basis for the sensory defect where you can't
>intuitively tell which way is north all the time?)

Hey, I once knew a guy who had that... really too bad, you know? Nice
guy and all, but he had the most devilish time when vacationing. Almost
as bad as those Eskimos about the magnetic north get.

For any matter, I asked him about it once; I'm not entirely sure -- it's been
so long since I've seen him -- but I believe I remember it being sex-linked.
Hope that helps.
-- TenthStone
tenth...@hotmail.com mcc...@erols.com a987...@titan.vcu.edu

Bradd W. Szonye

unread,
Jul 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/27/98
to
Andrew Plotkin wrote:
>
> --Z (what's the genetic basis for the sensory defect where you can't
> intuitively tell which way is north all the time?)

Is this a joke? I thought that it was more typical that people
*couldn't* intuitively sense direction than the other way around.
Apparently a 'compass sense' is common in many animals, but I didn't
think that humans were one of those animals.
--
Bradd W. Szonye|bra...@concentric.net|http://www.concentric.net/~Bradds
My reply address is correct as-is. The courtesy of providing a correct
reply address is more important to me than time spent deleting spam.

Daryl McCullough

unread,
Jul 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/27/98
to
erky...@netcom.com (Andrew Plotkin) says...

>
>Den of Iniquity (dms...@york.ac.uk) wrote:

>> Indeed, one of the most fascinating questions about visual sensation is to
>> ask whether we all perceive the spectrum in the same way (and I suppose

>> the rest of our electromagnetic input)...

>Since the question is impossible to answer, it's not fascinating at all.
>It's maximally uninteresting, because there's nothing to say about it.

That's the way I feel about the philosophical questions surrounding
the field of artificial intelligence---would a robot that was
programmed to behave exactly like a human *really* have emotions,
sensations, etc., or would it just *seem* to? It's really a pointless
question, as far as I can see, but it doesn't stop philosophers like
Searle, Ned Block, etc. from talking about it.

Daryl McCullough
CoGenTex, Inc.
Ithaca, NY

Jonadab the Unsightly One

unread,
Jul 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/27/98
to

> Andrew Plotkin wrote:
> >
> > --Z (what's the genetic basis for the sensory defect where you can't
> > intuitively tell which way is north all the time?)
>

Bradd W. Szonye

> Is this a joke? I thought that it was more typical that people
> *couldn't* intuitively sense direction than the other way around.
> Apparently a 'compass sense' is common in many animals, but I didn't
> think that humans were one of those animals.

Well, I don't know about *real* humans, but *text adventurers* always
seem to be able to manage it without any trouble.


Yr. Obd't & Humble Servant,
Jonadab the Unsightly One


----------------

One of the many uses for peanut butter:
249. Sell by the tonne as a fundraiser.

(Need more uses? see http://members.kconline.com/kerr/pb.htm)

Send replies to username@isp, where username is jonadab
and isp is bright.net

The zerospam.com address works, but you get an ugly confirmation.

Joe Mason

unread,
Jul 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/27/98
to
Bradd W. Szonye <bra...@concentric.net> insribed:

>Andrew Plotkin wrote:
>>
>> --Z (what's the genetic basis for the sensory defect where you can't
>> intuitively tell which way is north all the time?)
>
>Is this a joke? I thought that it was more typical that people
>*couldn't* intuitively sense direction than the other way around.
>Apparently a 'compass sense' is common in many animals, but I didn't
>think that humans were one of those animals.

Define defect. If there's a sense that most animals have, and most humans
do not, this is a sensory defect in humans. From a certain point of
view...

Seriously, if there's a gene (or combination of some sort) for "unable to
intuitively tell which way is north all the time", and 99% of the human
population shares this gene, that doesn't make it any less a defect. From
a certain point of view, it makes it more of a defect...

Of course, it may be that the "typical" citizen of Earth CAN intuitively
sense north, and those of us that can't simply assume we're the norm. I
really don't know anything about it.

Joe

Mark J. Tilford

unread,
Jul 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/28/98
to
On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 14:06:58 GMT, gen...@my-dejanews.com <gen...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>In article <6p94tt$jj7$1...@news.xmission.com>,
> Matt Kimball <mkim...@xmission.com> wrote:
>> Lucian Paul Smith <lps...@rice.edu> wrote:
>> : ObIF: So, anyone want to implement a multi-player IF game where one of
>> : the protagonists is colorblind?
>>
>> Maybe. Are you sure that we don't already have any protagonists who
>> are colorblind? You could certainly make some sort of a puzzle about
>> it, but I'm not sure that the adventurer in Zork, for instance, isn't
>> colorblind. I don't remember anything in any of the descriptions that
>> would necessarily preclude it.
>>
>
>In Zork II, weren't two of the cookies from the Alice in Wonderland puzzle
>colored red and green, respectively? Red-green color-blindness would
>essentially render that puzzle a guessing game.
>

Yes, but there was a way to distinguish them without referring to color...

>-
>--M.
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum


--
-----------------------
Mark Jeffrey Tilford
til...@cco.caltech.edu

J. Robinson Wheeler

unread,
Jul 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/28/98
to
Joe Mason wrote:
>
> Bradd W. Szonye <bra...@concentric.net> insribed:
> >Andrew Plotkin wrote:
> >>
> >> --Z (what's the genetic basis for the sensory defect where you can't
> >> intuitively tell which way is north all the time?)
> >
> >Is this a joke? I thought that it was more typical that people
> >*couldn't* intuitively sense direction than the other way around.
>
> Define defect. If there's a sense that most animals have, and most humans
> do not, this is a sensory defect in humans. From a certain point of
> view...
>
> Of course, it may be that the "typical" citizen of Earth CAN intuitively
> sense north, and those of us that can't simply assume we're the norm.


I find this thread to be rather strange. I assumed the original query
was a light-hearted jab at the fact that, rather amazingly, the protag-
onists of 99% of IF stories have a perfect (mazerooms excluded) intuitive
sense of compass north, east, south, west at all times.


--
J. Robinson Wheeler
whe...@jump.net

pke...@hotmail.com

unread,
Jul 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/28/98
to
> From: "Bradd W. Szonye" <bra...@concentric.net>

>Is this a joke? I thought that it was more typical that people
>*couldn't* intuitively sense direction than the other way around.

>Apparently a 'compass sense' is common in many animals, but I didn't
>think that humans were one of those animals.

Really? I always thought it was common. At the most all I have to do is
turn in a circle once to figure out which way is north. Really came in
handy back when I used to work underground at a mine in Nevada (great work
if you can get it and love being underground :-)

My prob is East and West, I always get the two switched for some reason.

Patrick

Mark J Musante

unread,
Jul 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/28/98
to
J. Robinson Wheeler (whe...@jump.net) wrote:
> I find this thread to be rather strange. I assumed the original query
> was a light-hearted jab at the fact that, rather amazingly, the protag-
> onists of 99% of IF stories have a perfect (mazerooms excluded) intuitive
> sense of compass north, east, south, west at all times.

See, that's one of the many problems with Usenet. Those of us who got it
chuckled and moved on. Those of us who didn't, posted a query. The result
being it looked like *nobody* got it.

Also, I'm not important enough to spend time thinking about a fix. Mind
you, I'd much rather have Usenet with this problem than have no Usenet at
all.


-=- Mark -=-

Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/28/98
to
On 28 Jul 1998 pke...@hotmail.com wrote:

>At the most all I have to do is turn in a circle once to figure out which

>way is north...<snip> and love being underground :-)

Patrick Kellum. Born to adventure.


Mark J. Tilford

unread,
Jul 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/28/98
to
On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:54:25 -0400, Larry Smith <l...@zk3.dec.com> wrote:
>
>One man's "defect" is another man's "feature".
>
>Color "blindness" is to some extent a cultural phenomena, it
>arises from the fact that, although the majority of living
>humans process colors in one way, there is a significant
>minority that process colors a different way. While the
>above-noted "defect" does mean the person has problems
>differentiating certain shade of red/green, this change
>also makes them much more sensitive to intensity.
>

I recall reading that in WWII, the military started looking for
colorblind pilots when they discovered that some of the enemy's
camouflage, which was extremely effective on color-sighted
people, did not fool colorblind people at all.


>I suspect that there was a survival value in being able to
>more minutely distinguish intensities of colors that was
>marginally better than being able to distinguish shades of
>color in some circumstance the species found itself in a
>long time ago - possibly while hunting, since it is linked

>to the male sex. But in modern civilization it seems to
>be of marginal use, and is probably slowly vanishing from
>the population. There's a probably a doctorate in here
>somewhere for whoever finally figures this all out in detail.
>

If I remember the Hardy Weinberg law correctly, I think the
frequency of the colorblind gene should be staying the same.

>
>--
> .-. .-. .---. .---. .-..-. |Politics is the art of looking for
> | |__ / | \| |-< | |-< > / |trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing
> `----'`-^-'`-'`-'`-'`-' `-' |it and then misapplying the wrong
> My opinions only. |remedies. Groucho Marx

gen...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Jul 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/28/98
to
In article <slrn6rs0l9....@ralph.caltech.edu>,

til...@cco.caltech.edu wrote:
>
> I recall reading that in WWII, the military started looking for
> colorblind pilots when they discovered that some of the enemy's
> camouflage, which was extremely effective on color-sighted
> people, did not fool colorblind people at all.
>

I've read that the military ran tests during WWII wherein they subjected
soldiers to intense chemical therapy -- specifically, chemicals that affected
the sensitivity of the human retina to various wavelengths of light. The
object was to develop a soldier who could see in infra-red. Apparently, some
test subjects actually did experience vision encroaching on the infra-red
portion of the spectrum -- but they were practically blind in the rest of the
spectrum, and probably sick as dogs from the chemicals to boot.

True story. Or at least, true insofar as I heard it from a lecture in a
Psychology class, rather than from some drunk guy on the street.

--

Phil Goetz

unread,
Jul 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/28/98
to
In article <slrn6rs0l9....@ralph.caltech.edu>,

Mark J. Tilford <til...@cco.caltech.edu> wrote:
>On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:54:25 -0400, Larry Smith <l...@zk3.dec.com> wrote:
>>I suspect that there was a survival value in being able to
>>more minutely distinguish intensities of colors that was
>>marginally better than being able to distinguish shades of
>>color in some circumstance the species found itself in a
>>long time ago - possibly while hunting, since it is linked
>>to the male sex. But in modern civilization it seems to
>>be of marginal use, and is probably slowly vanishing from
>>the population.

Only if it's killing people. Which I doubt.

Phil

Joe Mason

unread,
Jul 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/28/98
to
J. Robinson Wheeler <whe...@jump.net> insribed:

>
>I find this thread to be rather strange. I assumed the original query
>was a light-hearted jab at the fact that, rather amazingly, the protag-
>onists of 99% of IF stories have a perfect (mazerooms excluded) intuitive
>sense of compass north, east, south, west at all times.

Couldn't be that. That would be on-topic.

(Besides, in my games, they don't!)

Joe

okbl...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Jul 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/29/98
to
In article <6plgh0$nkp$1...@prometheus.acsu.buffalo.edu>,

go...@cs.buffalo.edu (Phil Goetz) wrote:
>
> Only if it's killing people. Which I doubt.
>

In a fiendish evolutionary twist, Zebras switch their stripes to red-and-green
and all colorblind people get killed at zebra crossings....

[ok]

Dan Shiovitz

unread,
Jul 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/30/98
to
In article <6pnppr$89p$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,

<okbl...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>In article <6plgh0$nkp$1...@prometheus.acsu.buffalo.edu>,
> go...@cs.buffalo.edu (Phil Goetz) wrote:
>>
>> Only if it's killing people. Which I doubt.
>>
>
>In a fiendish evolutionary twist, Zebras switch their stripes to red-and-green
>and all colorblind people get killed at zebra crossings....

The joke makes more sense once you know that "zebra crossing" is a
Britishism for "crosswalk".

>[ok]
--
Dan Shiovitz || d...@cs.wisc.edu || http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~dbs
"...Incensed by some crack he had made about modern enlightened
thought, modern enlightened thought being practically a personal buddy
of hers, Florence gave him the swift heave-ho and--much against my
will, but she seemed to wish it--became betrothed to me." - PGW, J.a.t.F.S.

Joe Mason

unread,
Jul 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/30/98
to
Dan Shiovitz <d...@sol23.cs.wisc.edu> insribed:

>>
>>In a fiendish evolutionary twist, Zebras switch their stripes to red-and-green
>>and all colorblind people get killed at zebra crossings....
>
>The joke makes more sense once you know that "zebra crossing" is a
>Britishism for "crosswalk".

Oh! I never got that joke before...

Joe

Helen

unread,
Jul 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/30/98
to
"Jonadab the Unsightly One" <jon...@zerospam.com> writes:

>
>
> > Andrew Plotkin wrote:
> > >
> > > --Z (what's the genetic basis for the sensory defect where you can't
> > > intuitively tell which way is north all the time?)
> >
>

> Bradd W. Szonye

> > Is this a joke? I thought that it was more typical that people
> > *couldn't* intuitively sense direction than the other way around.
> > Apparently a 'compass sense' is common in many animals, but I didn't
> > think that humans were one of those animals.
>

> Well, I don't know about *real* humans, but *text adventurers* always
> seem to be able to manage it without any trouble.
>
>
> Yr. Obd't & Humble Servant,
> Jonadab the Unsightly One
>

:-) :-)

I have problems with compass directions even when I'm playing a game and
using a *map* ! (drawn by myself !) and still I always forget that east is
right and west is left, and that "north" and "up" are actually different
things. I've always thought if something is "breaking mimesis", it is
ending every room description with "there is a door to the north, and
a bathroom to the west, ..." (although some books do describe places in
such a way, and it always looks to me like a game transcript :-)

What do you think about replacing it with "left", "right", "forward" and
"backward" ? (of course then the orientation of the player must be taken
into account, and it is necessary to implement a "turn" command, and I'm
not sure how to translate mixed directions, such as "nw", but it would
be much more natural, at least for humans... and use the standard way
if the playing character, or the player will be an animal :-)


Helen


>
> ----------------
>
> One of the many uses for peanut butter:
> 249. Sell by the tonne as a fundraiser.
>
> (Need more uses? see http://members.kconline.com/kerr/pb.htm)
>
>
> Send replies to username@isp, where username is jonadab
> and isp is bright.net
>
> The zerospam.com address works, but you get an ugly confirmation.
>
>

--
>^.^<
|"|
" "~~~

Den of Iniquity

unread,
Jul 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/30/98
to
On Tue, 28 Jul 1998 gen...@my-dejanews.com wrote:

>I've read that the military ran tests during WWII wherein they subjected
>soldiers to intense chemical therapy -- specifically, chemicals that affected
>the sensitivity of the human retina to various wavelengths of light. The
>object was to develop a soldier who could see in infra-red.

That's weird. Thinking about the way sight works at a chemical level,
that's very scary research if it's true. To alter the wavelength reception
you'd need to add or subtract stuff from the photo-responsive chemicals in
the cone-cells and do it reversibly. Preferably without affecting any
other cells in the body. Chemistry wasn't what it is now. It's no wonder
it didn't work.

>Apparently, some test subjects actually did experience vision encroaching
>on the infra-red portion of the spectrum -- but they were practically
>blind in the rest of the spectrum, and probably sick as dogs from the
>chemicals to boot.

Best possible explanation would be that if you blind someone to most of
the visible spectrum they'll naturally become more keen in the areas they
have left. But it wouldn't be a huge effect. All it would do is establish
the absolute limit of our visible range. They say that infants see
slightly further into the ultra-violet than adults, enabing them to spot
certain features that adults can't, the example I remember being things
buried just under the surface on the beach, where sand transmits the
longest uv frequencies to a small extent.

>True story. Or at least, true insofar as I heard it from a lecture in a
>Psychology class, rather than from some drunk guy on the street.

Hey, I've been some drunk guy on the street before. Don't knock 'em. :)

--
Den


Larry Smith

unread,
Jul 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/30/98
to
Den of Iniquity wrote:

> >I've read that the military ran tests during WWII wherein they subjected
> >soldiers to intense chemical therapy -- specifically, chemicals that affected
> >the sensitivity of the human retina to various wavelengths of light. The
> >object was to develop a soldier who could see in infra-red.
>
> That's weird. Thinking about the way sight works at a chemical level,
> that's very scary research if it's true. To alter the wavelength reception
> you'd need to add or subtract stuff from the photo-responsive chemicals in
> the cone-cells and do it reversibly. Preferably without affecting any
> other cells in the body. Chemistry wasn't what it is now. It's no wonder
> it didn't work.

It has many of the earmarks of an urban legend. But it did
remind me of an interesting effect that was reported first some
years ago: humans can see ultraviolet. At least a little. Your
"normal" human does not because the uv can't get past the protein
lens of the iris - but a few people who have had their lenses
replaced with experimental glass lenses (mostly people with
degenerative eye diseases not requiring full corneal transplants)
report being able to see at least partway into the uv band. I
have no idea whether this info is useful, but it's sort of cool.

gen...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Jul 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/30/98
to
In article <Pine.SGI.3.95L.98073...@ebor.york.ac.uk>,

Den of Iniquity <dms...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jul 1998 gen...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> They say that infants see
> slightly further into the ultra-violet than adults, enabing them to spot
> certain features that adults can't, the example I remember being things
> buried just under the surface on the beach, where sand transmits the
> longest uv frequencies to a small extent.
>

Bizarre mental image: scavenger geek on the beach looking for vintage 50's
bottle caps or whatever, but instead of an army-surplus metal detector he's
got a pack of babies on leashes, sniffing up the goods.

--
--M.

David Given

unread,
Jul 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM7/31/98
to
In article <6pqcp0$g4e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <gen...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
[...]

>Bizarre mental image: scavenger geek on the beach looking for vintage 50's
>bottle caps or whatever, but instead of an army-surplus metal detector he's
>got a pack of babies on leashes, sniffing up the goods.

I recall an experiment we did at prep school, at about the age of 8 or 9.
The teacher set up a large, rusty tin lid with a bunsen playing on the
back and heated it up until just below red heat. It was emitting large
quantities of infra-red but practically no visible. We all saw it
definately *change*; we were seeing something, but I don't know what.
Unfortunately, I can't remember whether the teacher said if he could do it
too...

I know the cornea gradually becomes more and more opaque to low
frequencies as it ages. (There was a French painter who had cataracts, got
his lenses replaced, and was horrified at how blue his recent paintings
were.)


--
+- David Given ----------------+
| Work: d...@tao.co.uk | FNORD
| Play: dgi...@iname.com |
+- http://wiredsoc.ml.org/~dg -+

It is loading more messages.
0 new messages