I prefer to call it heat. Just to clarify the picture.

griffzhowl 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

This is specifically not thermal (blackbody) radiation, which is negligible at the visible frequency range for mice at these temperatures. The researchers find a difference in visible wavelength emission between living and dead mice at the same temperature

This point is addressed on page 2 of the paper.

Paper is accessible on bioarxiv: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.11.08.622743v1

▲

somenameforme 3 days ago | parent [-]

You should post this as a top-level comment because it's extremely informative and most of everybody is just assuming this is just talking about thermal radiation.

	▲	griffzhowl 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Done ^^

▲

alterom 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

>visible light

▲

SkiFire13 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I thought black bodies emitted light the whole spectrum, albeit with differences in the distribution depending on their temperature?

	▲	Sharlin 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yep, but the exponential decay at the short-wavelength end means you're going to hit a single-digit number of photons/m^2/s fairly quickly.

▲

cenamus 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> 10–10^3 photons cm^–2 s^–1

So probably invisible but under the very darkest of conditions?

	▲	ricardobeat 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Visible refers to being in the visible spectrum.