At first I really loved the blue. Blue is a mood light, has a calming effect, often elemetary school walls will be painted light blue to chill the kids out, at least that is the theory. When reports came in of its brightness, espescially for dark adjusted eyes, my mild concern was immediately for inadvertantly resetting circadian rhythms. That’s what blue light will do: the studies are old, from the late 1960’s, and sufficiently repeated since then to become known as “good science,” (as opposed to “junk science” that is so popular, and untrustworthy, which is what I think Dale was getting at). As others mentioned, the issue has recently been in the news with LED screens disrupting sleep patterns for iDevice-like consumers keeping themselves awake inadvertantly with bright screens with a lot of blue light coming out of them. Some manufactures are responding to this, adding a feature to reduce the blue light, a night mode.
Then I had to admit to myself, in all honesty, that I am a night owl, so this won’t affect me adversely being up all night anyway. Night time is peaceful. The blue light will accentuate the peaceful mood with a tranquil calming. Though I love the Sun, flashlights work best at night.
Now after seeing your images, I realized suddenly there is a problem with blue light due to my subtropical location… bugs! For that reason alone, I may opt to switch to a lower frequency, higher wavelength. Most bugs should be entirely unaware of 660nm… but then there is the heat of red, which mosquitoes are somewhat attracted to, can apparently detect, and they investigate. I’m not sure what the ideal light frequency is to both avoid both attracting the little harmless critters as well as the annoying biting ones is— possibly an orange, 600nm, orange-red, whathaveyou.
With all the earlier talk of replacement switch assemblies without the LED, I’m now wondering of the possibility of attaining more switch assemblies with the LED, so multiple colors can be created for full swaps. How about entire assembled tail caps, so swapping out becomes nearly effortless? These lights can benefit from neat technical accessories like that. But I don’t know how far is too far, too luxurious and decadent, as having a drawer full of tail switch assemblies in their own tail caps, mostly going unused.
Yes, science is not truth, but instead but an evolving process that brings us ever-closer approximations of truth. Science attempts to model truth. Camelot! Camelot! Camelot! Its only a model. That’s not Truth! The science community moves forward when long standing paradigms are shattered by new theories backed by experiments that are repeatable anywhere with the same results, when these theories give us more accurate results. I’m not sure the paradigm-model of science is even the best one possible, but that’s what everyone has been using for some time now. Oh, you have a new idea? Its crap because this paradigm exists, and your ideas will be suppressed, maybe until long after you’re dead, until the evidence is overwhelmingly in your favor that you are correct. Until then, you’re just a wacko, fringe pseudoscientist. Science is approximations of truth, and models for predictions, and paradigms to protect the models. And it is clear there is a lot of junk out there, mostly the stuff that makes it to the popular media. I left science to study philosophy, because I love knowledge and I was interested in truth. Truth is the domain of philosophy, I’m afraid, and as it turns out, truth is likely unknowable. And science backs this up. What a waste of time and money. TIME and MONEY, now that is the new hotness. Forget science and philosophy, what you want is time and money.