If you have x-ray vision, and you can see through anything, wouldn't you see through everything and actually s

Question

does that make sense???

If you have x-ray vision, and you can see through anything, wouldn't you see through everything and actually see nothing

Answer 1

no,actually it does not make any sense at all.or maybe
there are some words lost with the x-rays.

Answer 2

Btw, tlbs101 is wrong despite being an engineer. Focusing is not a problem, because after a small distance, the focal length is infinite. For example you don't have to adjust your focus when you shift your gaze from distant mountains to the more distant stars.

If you could see thru everything perfectly, then you would by definition see nothing at all. You see bones clearly in XRays because those rays do not penetrate them. If they could penetrate them perfectly, you would see no "shadows" at all, and thus nothing.

Just occured to me that the only "rays" I can think of that would give you something like this is the neutrino rain that comes from the sun. These particles are so small and light they have virtually no interaction with matter at all and billions pass thru the Earth all the time, with only a few ever hitting an atom's nucleus. If you had a machine that could manufacture those, then the picture they would make would show the universe as virtually transparent.

Answer 3

It looks as though your question got cut off, but I am guessing that you are asking if you can see through everything, wouldn't you just see nothing?

If your x-ray vision were such that everything were completely transparent, then what you ask would be true; you would see nothing. But think about what an x-ray shows. It shows differences in density as varying degrees of transparency. Very dense things, such as lead, show up as opaque.

So your question is flawed. X-ray vision wouldn't let you see through everything, it would let you see things with varying degrees of transparency, depending on their density and, as a result, you would see some tings better than others.

Answer 4

If your eyes were sensitive to x rays, you wouldn't see very much at all because there are hardly any background x-ray photons to illuminate objects. Just like you need a light bulb to see, to "see" x-rays, you'd need an x-ray source. Fortunately for us, there aren't that many background x-rays or gamma photons flying around, or we'd all be dead. If you sat in front of a 100 W x-ray source (small x-ray tube) for about 10 minutes continuously you'd be dead of radiation poisoning by the end of the day.

Answer 5

I assume it'd be like looking at everything like looking through an x-ray machine. Things would be semi-transperant, not invisible. They'd appear as shadowy, semi-solid-looking forms that you could see through to some extent, but would still be able to see the form of.

Further, there'd be some things you wouldn't be able to see through at all - x-rays can't penetrate all substances.

Answer 6

When you read a paper, up close, can you see distant objects in focus at the same time?

When you look at a mountain in the distance, can you see close objects in focus at the same time?

The answer to those is, no.

The same thing would apply to X-ray vision. You would focus on whatever you wanted to see. It would probably be harder to do -- harder to concentrate on a single area of focus, but that's how it would work.

.

Answer 7

Since your question was cut off, the last few words are "... and actually s". That does not make sense.

Have you actually seen an X-ray picture, like the ones doctors use?

Answer 8

X-ray radiation would not penetrate any sufficiently dense/thick medium. Lead would be a classic occasion, yet some meter-thick take care of of old newspapers would to the activity too. as quickly as the medium resists the radiation, it turns into seen.

Answer 9

Yes, because previously in the question, it states; "and you can see through anything" thus you would see through everything and see nothing

Answer 10

In other words, you'll only see straight through soft tissue and soft bones ending up with viewing the skeletal outline and portions through that. Kinda "deflating", 'aint it?