![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sciatrixFor context, my day job involves studying animal communication, where I am a PhD student in evolution/animal behavior. I don't work on organisms that use non-standard sensory modalities directly, but I'm very familiar with the adaptations that electroceptive and echolocatory systems (mostly in bats, that latter one) generally require.
I also spend an awful lot of time watching my cat Dent, who has been blind probably from birth and definitely since he was about ten weeks old. (We're not entirely sure whether he can see light or movement, and he definitely can't see anything else.) Dent therefore has access to certain sensory modalities that are more sensitive than vision (cats can hear much higher into the ultrasonic than humans and have a wider range of olfactory sensitivities) without actually having vision to rely on, and thinking about what it is that specific sensory modalities actually bring to the table in terms of function.
What I am not is a blind person, nor have I lived or worked closely with someone who is. This is therefore going to be a discussion that focuses pretty heavily on "okay, let's assume Matty really does have ears like a bat--how does that constrain what he can and cannot do?" and less on the actual functional issues for someone who is, you know, a blind human--although if folks have comments on that, I would absolutely fucking love to hear them.
One of the things you have to understand when you're trying to study sensation and perception is that different sensory modalities--sight, touch, hearing, proprioception/balance, echolocation, etc--are good for different things. We tend to intuitively understand this in humans, but when reading experiences of characters with very different sensory toolboxes I often find that people simply... assume that the "extra-sensitive" senses can more or less perfectly compensate for the loss of vision.
The thing is, different sensory modalities are good for different things. That's why different groups of animals develop specialties in different modalities in the way they do. Some of what evolution can do is constrained by phylogenetic history--mammals are always going to have a leg up on birds when it comes to hearing in high frequencies, for example, because of a quirk of the development of the mammalian jaw--but a lot comes down to the interaction between the world around a particular animal and the needs and ecological niche that the animal takes up. Species generally specialize and hone the sensory systems that they have available which are useful to the needs of the animal in question.
What I mean by this is that you have to understand that different sensory systems are really good at different things, and sometimes you need different levels of resolution for different tasks. You can think of sensory systems as having two kinds of resolution: temporal and spatial. Vision has, generally speaking, pretty fine temporal resolution--you get a continuous "picture" of things around you and where they are at any given time. Your spatial resolution, as anyone who wears glasses (me included!) can tell you, varies based on your individual eyes and level of focus.
There's one final distinction that is important to bring up with respect to choosing sensory modalities, and that is active versus passive sensation. You can define this by asking yourself: do you have to do anything to work this sense and pick up stimuli from the environment around you? If yes, we're active; if not, we're passive. Humans don't really have any equivalent active sensory modalities with the possible exception of touch, but because Matt is almost always depicted as having access to at least one (echolocation, "radar"), I'm going to talk a little bit about those here, too.
Why does resolution matter?
Well, when we talk about modalities compensating for each other as an individual navigates the world, resolution is what lets us adapt senses to do each other's jobs. Fine resolution isn't always the most useful range for a given sense, either: olfaction has very coarse temporal resolution and moderate spatial resolution in most species, and that means that you can use it to tell where things have been even if the thing creating the signal is no longer there. Echolocation has perhaps the finest possible temporal resolution in that it is not a continuous signal--more on that in a minute--and very, very fine spatial resolution, but only for the instant of a given vocalization. Vision has very tight temporal resolution and very tight spatial resolution, depending on the level of focus a given person has.
What's the deal with active versus passive sensation?
For one thing, that means that Matt should not be able to use either echolocation or "radar" unless he's actually producing some kind of signal. I keep putting "radar" in quotes because it's not used by any known biological system; the closest analogue is probably electroception, but electroception is prettyk much exclusively used and developed by aquatic or semi-aquatic animals and uses different ranges of electromagnetic waves to most human-built radar systems. That means that echolocation doesn't produce continuous information the same way that passive sensory systems (like vision!) do, which means that Matt has to string together a series of disconnected "impressions" of where things are in space and time to make a "picture" of the world around him, at least with respect to that sense.
Basically, the way these sensory systems work is that you produce a signal and you "listen" to the response patterns. This means that if you aren't producing that signal, you don't get anything. This is interesting and important in the context of Daredevil because Matt very specifically does not produce any vocalizations or noises that could be used for echolocation in the human range, and it's even less likely that he's continously emitting weak electric charges into his environment--the air just isn't a good enough conductor to give him any real distance.
So if he's doing this, he's doing it at either very high pitches, outside the usual human auditory range, or else at very low pitches--and high is much more likely. High-frequency vocalizations decay faster over space, which is why they don't carry well. Because of this, and because the pattern of reverberation and decay of the sound is what you're using to construct the idea of shape with echolocation, all known echolocating species use very high-frequency, very loud vocalizations to create pulses of sound that will decay in ways that are sensitive to the shape of whatever they're bouncing off of.
Personally, I like to imagine Matt squeaking at very high pitches like a real bat might, mostly because I think it's funny. This is particularly amusing because in many social species that rely very heavily on echolocation or electroception, individuals produce a signal that is unique to them within the local group--so it's the equivalent of Matt wandering around yelling MATT MATT MATT MATT whenever he wants to get a good sense of its position and shape without having to actually, you know, touch it. (This may or may not be a good way for Stick and Matt to get a sense for where each other are at a distance--if they're managing to make a super high-pitched vocalization, it probably doesn't carry too well. On the other hand, if they're fighting something as a team, as we see both of them doing, the odds are good that each is listening to the information that the other is getting if one or both is using whatever this sensory system is. )
If I'm going to take a more realistic tack on the whole thing, I'd guess he's probably vocalizing through his nose, which is pretty common in both human vocalizations (you don't need your mouth to be open to say nnnnn or mmmm, because those sounds are produced via reverberations through the nasal cavity) and also in many ultrasonic vocalizations specifically (for example, the ultrasonic communication that rodents often engage in).
(Humans who say they can use echolocation in real life rely on clicks and taps, which is why I think it's particularly interesting that Matt is consistently shown using his long cane a few inches above the ground. I don't think he ever uses it to tap the ground in the show, and he certainly isn't making a loud click noise with it. Both clicks and taps can work for echolocation because these are wide-frequency noises, so you still have the decay patterns of the higher frequencies to work off of if you can filter through the lower-frequency stuff muddying the waters. It's not very sophisticated and will only give you a comparatively broad sense of where things are, but it's certainly better than nothing. But whatever Matt is using, he's specifically not using that to navigate his world.
A friend who uses a long cane suggested dryly that this might be an attempt to avoid the common peril of getting one's cane stuck in a pothole and winding up taking your cane to the balls or the kidneys, which... given the general lack of maintenance of Hell's Kitchen in other venues of the show, I suspect this is a peril Matt has been negotiating for some time.)
So what is Matt likely to use?
Honestly, I'm pretty sure that Matt's most important sense day-to-day isn't echolocation. It's his proprioception--his sense of where he is in the world, his spatial memory and his sense of balance. I heavily suspect that he has an incredibly good spatial sense and ability to process spatial information, and I notice that his combat style is heavily geared towards blocking his opponents into a space and hitting them until they go down. (Matt spends a lot of time using space to his advantage in combat--when he's not stalking an opponent and bringing them down by surprise, he's either constantly blocking them in and grappling close in or he's using a narrow confine like a hallway or an alley to constrain his opponent's ability to move quickly. Because the ability to echolocate does require him to produce a sound and because I'm not aware of any way to produce sufficiently high-pitched sounds that doesn't involve forcing air through the larynx at some level, I would guess that he's actually primarily relying on passive listening to pick up cues about what is going on in his environment in the middle of combat. I'd gamble he's most likely to quickly use his active sense (whatever it is) to make a rough "sketch" of what's going on around him in moments of relative quiet, when he's not moving too quickly to control his breathing.
I like constraint in my headcanons, because it lets me plumb the unexpected boundaries of abilities, perceptions, and creates avenues for conflict and unexpected humor; if you don't--and the writers of Daredevil in all forms certainly don't seem to be particularly careful about this--seriously, by all means ignore me or pick out whatever you like and leave the rest. But I figured that this might be something folks here might be interested in, as far as meta goes, and anyway--it was certainly fun to write.
What I am not is a blind person, nor have I lived or worked closely with someone who is. This is therefore going to be a discussion that focuses pretty heavily on "okay, let's assume Matty really does have ears like a bat--how does that constrain what he can and cannot do?" and less on the actual functional issues for someone who is, you know, a blind human--although if folks have comments on that, I would absolutely fucking love to hear them.
One of the things you have to understand when you're trying to study sensation and perception is that different sensory modalities--sight, touch, hearing, proprioception/balance, echolocation, etc--are good for different things. We tend to intuitively understand this in humans, but when reading experiences of characters with very different sensory toolboxes I often find that people simply... assume that the "extra-sensitive" senses can more or less perfectly compensate for the loss of vision.
The thing is, different sensory modalities are good for different things. That's why different groups of animals develop specialties in different modalities in the way they do. Some of what evolution can do is constrained by phylogenetic history--mammals are always going to have a leg up on birds when it comes to hearing in high frequencies, for example, because of a quirk of the development of the mammalian jaw--but a lot comes down to the interaction between the world around a particular animal and the needs and ecological niche that the animal takes up. Species generally specialize and hone the sensory systems that they have available which are useful to the needs of the animal in question.
What I mean by this is that you have to understand that different sensory systems are really good at different things, and sometimes you need different levels of resolution for different tasks. You can think of sensory systems as having two kinds of resolution: temporal and spatial. Vision has, generally speaking, pretty fine temporal resolution--you get a continuous "picture" of things around you and where they are at any given time. Your spatial resolution, as anyone who wears glasses (me included!) can tell you, varies based on your individual eyes and level of focus.
There's one final distinction that is important to bring up with respect to choosing sensory modalities, and that is active versus passive sensation. You can define this by asking yourself: do you have to do anything to work this sense and pick up stimuli from the environment around you? If yes, we're active; if not, we're passive. Humans don't really have any equivalent active sensory modalities with the possible exception of touch, but because Matt is almost always depicted as having access to at least one (echolocation, "radar"), I'm going to talk a little bit about those here, too.
Why does resolution matter?
Well, when we talk about modalities compensating for each other as an individual navigates the world, resolution is what lets us adapt senses to do each other's jobs. Fine resolution isn't always the most useful range for a given sense, either: olfaction has very coarse temporal resolution and moderate spatial resolution in most species, and that means that you can use it to tell where things have been even if the thing creating the signal is no longer there. Echolocation has perhaps the finest possible temporal resolution in that it is not a continuous signal--more on that in a minute--and very, very fine spatial resolution, but only for the instant of a given vocalization. Vision has very tight temporal resolution and very tight spatial resolution, depending on the level of focus a given person has.
What's the deal with active versus passive sensation?
For one thing, that means that Matt should not be able to use either echolocation or "radar" unless he's actually producing some kind of signal. I keep putting "radar" in quotes because it's not used by any known biological system; the closest analogue is probably electroception, but electroception is prettyk much exclusively used and developed by aquatic or semi-aquatic animals and uses different ranges of electromagnetic waves to most human-built radar systems. That means that echolocation doesn't produce continuous information the same way that passive sensory systems (like vision!) do, which means that Matt has to string together a series of disconnected "impressions" of where things are in space and time to make a "picture" of the world around him, at least with respect to that sense.
Basically, the way these sensory systems work is that you produce a signal and you "listen" to the response patterns. This means that if you aren't producing that signal, you don't get anything. This is interesting and important in the context of Daredevil because Matt very specifically does not produce any vocalizations or noises that could be used for echolocation in the human range, and it's even less likely that he's continously emitting weak electric charges into his environment--the air just isn't a good enough conductor to give him any real distance.
So if he's doing this, he's doing it at either very high pitches, outside the usual human auditory range, or else at very low pitches--and high is much more likely. High-frequency vocalizations decay faster over space, which is why they don't carry well. Because of this, and because the pattern of reverberation and decay of the sound is what you're using to construct the idea of shape with echolocation, all known echolocating species use very high-frequency, very loud vocalizations to create pulses of sound that will decay in ways that are sensitive to the shape of whatever they're bouncing off of.
Personally, I like to imagine Matt squeaking at very high pitches like a real bat might, mostly because I think it's funny. This is particularly amusing because in many social species that rely very heavily on echolocation or electroception, individuals produce a signal that is unique to them within the local group--so it's the equivalent of Matt wandering around yelling MATT MATT MATT MATT whenever he wants to get a good sense of its position and shape without having to actually, you know, touch it. (This may or may not be a good way for Stick and Matt to get a sense for where each other are at a distance--if they're managing to make a super high-pitched vocalization, it probably doesn't carry too well. On the other hand, if they're fighting something as a team, as we see both of them doing, the odds are good that each is listening to the information that the other is getting if one or both is using whatever this sensory system is. )
If I'm going to take a more realistic tack on the whole thing, I'd guess he's probably vocalizing through his nose, which is pretty common in both human vocalizations (you don't need your mouth to be open to say nnnnn or mmmm, because those sounds are produced via reverberations through the nasal cavity) and also in many ultrasonic vocalizations specifically (for example, the ultrasonic communication that rodents often engage in).
(Humans who say they can use echolocation in real life rely on clicks and taps, which is why I think it's particularly interesting that Matt is consistently shown using his long cane a few inches above the ground. I don't think he ever uses it to tap the ground in the show, and he certainly isn't making a loud click noise with it. Both clicks and taps can work for echolocation because these are wide-frequency noises, so you still have the decay patterns of the higher frequencies to work off of if you can filter through the lower-frequency stuff muddying the waters. It's not very sophisticated and will only give you a comparatively broad sense of where things are, but it's certainly better than nothing. But whatever Matt is using, he's specifically not using that to navigate his world.
A friend who uses a long cane suggested dryly that this might be an attempt to avoid the common peril of getting one's cane stuck in a pothole and winding up taking your cane to the balls or the kidneys, which... given the general lack of maintenance of Hell's Kitchen in other venues of the show, I suspect this is a peril Matt has been negotiating for some time.)
So what is Matt likely to use?
Honestly, I'm pretty sure that Matt's most important sense day-to-day isn't echolocation. It's his proprioception--his sense of where he is in the world, his spatial memory and his sense of balance. I heavily suspect that he has an incredibly good spatial sense and ability to process spatial information, and I notice that his combat style is heavily geared towards blocking his opponents into a space and hitting them until they go down. (Matt spends a lot of time using space to his advantage in combat--when he's not stalking an opponent and bringing them down by surprise, he's either constantly blocking them in and grappling close in or he's using a narrow confine like a hallway or an alley to constrain his opponent's ability to move quickly. Because the ability to echolocate does require him to produce a sound and because I'm not aware of any way to produce sufficiently high-pitched sounds that doesn't involve forcing air through the larynx at some level, I would guess that he's actually primarily relying on passive listening to pick up cues about what is going on in his environment in the middle of combat. I'd gamble he's most likely to quickly use his active sense (whatever it is) to make a rough "sketch" of what's going on around him in moments of relative quiet, when he's not moving too quickly to control his breathing.
I like constraint in my headcanons, because it lets me plumb the unexpected boundaries of abilities, perceptions, and creates avenues for conflict and unexpected humor; if you don't--and the writers of Daredevil in all forms certainly don't seem to be particularly careful about this--seriously, by all means ignore me or pick out whatever you like and leave the rest. But I figured that this might be something folks here might be interested in, as far as meta goes, and anyway--it was certainly fun to write.
no subject
Date: 2018-10-14 02:44 pm (UTC)I've read several things postulating that humans with extra good hearing/sensory-spatial processing could be doing "passive" echolocation - using reflections of normal ambient noises to locate things, like clock ticks or cars passing or whatever. Is that just total bullshit? It always sounded to me like something that was just on the edge of possible if you're already allowing supersenses, but not likely. I mean, you wouldn't be able to catch mosquitoes in flight, but you might be able to punch someone in the face from it.
(I calculate distances and depths from reflections of ambient light without having to generate my own light source, after all....)
no subject
Date: 2018-10-14 04:23 pm (UTC)Oh, absolutely that's possible, and to be honest quite likely. All active senses have passive aspects to them--again, think of touch. Or with respect to electroception, most electroception species actually use the sense passively, usually to find prey in muddy riverbeds or sandy ocean floors. (This includes the only electroceptive mammal I'm aware of, which is the platypus.) Using it as an active sense is something that comes from leaning more and more heavily on a passive sense and integrating information from it more and more finely until you have the framework to make creating your own signal to bounce on things worth it.
Come to think of it, deep sea fishes that produce their own lights are using vision as an active sense, too. Sort of.
Anyway, the main trade off of using ambient signals like that for echolocation is that a) you need to be able to predict how that sound decays over time to get a sense for what the changes in it mean and b) you need to know, if it's a directional sound, where the other sound is being pointed to get a sense for what things bouncing off it mean. This is one of the reasons that social animals that expect there to be other actively sensing individuals around them all branch out to create their own distinctive "call-signs"--it lets them know which rebound patterns are coming from themselves and which are coming from others.
Basically, you can totally get information from ambient noise like that, and I would bet that Matt can use ambient sound reflections to tell roughly where real big things are (like walls) and to tell big things made of soft, absorptive materials apart from big things made out of hard, reflective materials. Fine stuff, like precisely where the edges are or locating smaller things, seems much less likely.