Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

The 4th dimension of existence

Expand Messages
  • Masoud Borbor
    Hi all my friends. I am awake again but still wanna exist smart and slow. Like a tree, a river or just as the sea... forget it.. I was so tired of daily
    Message 1 of 21 , Oct 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi all my friends.
      I am awake again but still wanna exist smart and slow. Like a tree, a
      river or just as the sea...
      forget it.. I was so tired of daily journey and daily university. i
      was hanged up in a bus for 2 hours 10 pm to arrive home, and then
      falled into my bed.. so tired... and i thought about my loves my
      friends my family and all ppl around.." How much alone I am..." noone
      appreciate. I believe in God but i saw that God seems to have
      forgotten me... My only one friend who understood me (The God) also
      leaved me alone and i was like a dead body in my bed "How much ALone"
      And i swimmed! something flew in the air . It was all around and i
      felt light..no weight .. the flowing thing was every place aound me "
      In my Body, In my soul, ahead of me.. on the sky on my room and our
      city in paris coffeeshops! and on the Nile! Every Galaxy had it.. and
      it was in me..
      I had somehow knowledge about it i knew it's me! a new dimension in
      my existence ... I counted Existence Dimensions: 1-Being in itself..
      2- being for others 3- being for itself...
      no
      none of them
      i feel being for myself something in my soul but it was all over the
      world..
      I knew that we name "being-Diemensions" refer to who understand them:
      i know my existence so it s being for my self.. someone see me and
      its my being for others..
      who does understand this new dimension? it should be someone
      infinite! so big! all over the world..
      God
      Being for God
      I slept immediately!
      Good night ;)
    • eduard
      hi Masoud, Perhaps it is just your neurons [brain] releasing themselves ... as in a dream. There is something similar in Egyptian mythology where the Ba
      Message 2 of 21 , Oct 2, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        hi Masoud,

        Perhaps it is just your neurons [brain] releasing
        themselves ... as in a dream.

        There is something similar in Egyptian mythology
        where the "Ba" exits the tomb and flies about like
        a little bird. But since our neurons are sealed
        within the skull and cant "see" the outside world
        directly, they invent the dimensional world into
        which they visualize their escape.

        eduard

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Masoud Borbor [mailto:masborbor@...]
        Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 2:31 AM
        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [existlist] The 4th dimension of
        existence


        Hi all my friends.
        I am awake again but still wanna exist smart and
        slow. Like a tree, a
        river or just as the sea...
        forget it.. I was so tired of daily journey and
        daily university. i
        was hanged up in a bus for 2 hours 10 pm to arrive
        home, and then
        falled into my bed.. so tired... and i thought
        about my loves my
        friends my family and all ppl around.." How much
        alone I am..." noone
        appreciate. I believe in God but i saw that God
        seems to have
        forgotten me... My only one friend who understood
        me (The God) also
        leaved me alone and i was like a dead body in my
        bed "How much ALone"
        And i swimmed! something flew in the air . It was
        all around and i
        felt light..no weight .. the flowing thing was
        every place aound me "
        In my Body, In my soul, ahead of me.. on the sky
        on my room and our
        city in paris coffeeshops! and on the Nile! Every
        Galaxy had it.. and
        it was in me..
        I had somehow knowledge about it i knew it's me! a
        new dimension in
        my existence ... I counted Existence Dimensions:
        1-Being in itself..
        2- being for others 3- being for itself...
        no
        none of them
        i feel being for myself something in my soul but
        it was all over the
        world..
        I knew that we name "being-Diemensions" refer to
        who understand them:
        i know my existence so it s being for my self..
        someone see me and
        its my being for others..
        who does understand this new dimension? it should
        be someone
        infinite! so big! all over the world..
        God
        Being for God
        I slept immediately!
        Good night ;)


        ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups

        Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

        TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
        existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      • Masoud Borbor
        Dear eduard hi and thank u for response. the outside world and neurons wasnt my problem.. i defined the being for my self as my insight view. cuz i can see
        Message 3 of 21 , Oct 6, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear eduard
          hi and thank u for response. the outside world and neurons wasnt my
          problem.. i defined the "being for my self" as my insight view. cuz i
          can see my self in when i feel it...
          the most important was the common layer In and Out me.. something in
          and out of me something i knbow it and it knows me..
          u believe nothing but material? no matter... i live taking easy!
          good night ;)
          --- In existlist@y..., eduard <yeoman@v...> wrote:
          > hi Masoud,
          >
          > Perhaps it is just your neurons [brain] releasing
          > themselves ... as in a dream.
          >
          > There is something similar in Egyptian mythology
          > where the "Ba" exits the tomb and flies about like
          > a little bird. But since our neurons are sealed
          > within the skull and cant "see" the outside world
          > directly, they invent the dimensional world into
          > which they visualize their escape.
          >
          > eduard
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: Masoud Borbor [mailto:masborbor@y...]
          > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 2:31 AM
          > To: existlist@y...
          > Subject: [existlist] The 4th dimension of
          > existence
          >
          >
          > Hi all my friends.
          > I am awake again but still wanna exist smart and
          > slow. Like a tree, a
          > river or just as the sea...
          > forget it.. I was so tired of daily journey and
          > daily university. i
          > was hanged up in a bus for 2 hours 10 pm to arrive
          > home, and then
          > falled into my bed.. so tired... and i thought
          > about my loves my
          > friends my family and all ppl around.." How much
          > alone I am..." noone
          > appreciate. I believe in God but i saw that God
          > seems to have
          > forgotten me... My only one friend who understood
          > me (The God) also
          > leaved me alone and i was like a dead body in my
          > bed "How much ALone"
          > And i swimmed! something flew in the air . It was
          > all around and i
          > felt light..no weight .. the flowing thing was
          > every place aound me "
          > In my Body, In my soul, ahead of me.. on the sky
          > on my room and our
          > city in paris coffeeshops! and on the Nile! Every
          > Galaxy had it.. and
          > it was in me..
          > I had somehow knowledge about it i knew it's me! a
          > new dimension in
          > my existence ... I counted Existence Dimensions:
          > 1-Being in itself..
          > 2- being for others 3- being for itself...
          > no
          > none of them
          > i feel being for myself something in my soul but
          > it was all over the
          > world..
          > I knew that we name "being-Diemensions" refer to
          > who understand them:
          > i know my existence so it s being for my self..
          > someone see me and
          > its my being for others..
          > who does understand this new dimension? it should
          > be someone
          > infinite! so big! all over the world..
          > God
          > Being for God
          > I slept immediately!
          > Good night ;)
          >
          >
          > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
          >
          > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
          > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
          >
          > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
          > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • eduard
          Masoud, If you are asking whether I believe in souls and such things as a 4th dimension , the answer is, no. I do not think that there is anything
          Message 4 of 21 , Oct 6, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Masoud,

            If you are asking whether I believe in "souls" and
            such things as a "4th dimension", the answer is,
            no. I do not think that there is anything
            supernatural about existence. We are just here,
            like any other animal or plant or rock. Nothing
            special or supernatural.

            My reason for mentioning neurons, was that
            everything in the outside world is known to us
            through interpretation. In essence, it is our
            neurons [meaning our brain] which creates the
            outside world for us. For example, when we look
            at this world, it projected onto the retina of our
            eyes as a two-dimensional picture. It is our
            neurons which interpret this picture in order to
            make it into the three-dimensional world that we
            think we see. The manner in which we do this is
            based on certain parameters that are partially
            learned and partially genetic. When we become
            confused in our interpretation, it is referred to
            as "optical illusions".

            You can find some interesting optical illusions
            at:
            http://www.optillusions.com/

            eduard

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Masoud Borbor [mailto:masborbor@...]
            Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 9:25 AM
            To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [existlist] Re: The 4th dimension of
            existence


            Dear eduard
            hi and thank u for response. the outside world and
            neurons wasnt my
            problem.. i defined the "being for my self" as my
            insight view. cuz i
            can see my self in when i feel it...
            the most important was the common layer In and Out
            me.. something in
            and out of me something i knbow it and it knows
            me..
            u believe nothing but material? no matter... i
            live taking easy!
            good night ;)
          • Pogo Stick
            Amazing you can get to the
            Message 5 of 21 , Oct 6, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              << It is our neurons which interpret this picture in order to make it
              into the three-dimensional world that we think we see. >>

              Amazing you can get to the precipice and just stand there like a
              faggot.

              Sounds to me like everything is potentially an illusion from your
              description, so WHY ISN'T YOU INTERPRETATION?

              Loser Buckets
              ------------------------------------
            • eduard
              Pogo, It is apparent that you are going through a difficult time. Your
              Message 6 of 21 , Oct 6, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Pogo,

                <<< Amazing you can get to the precipice and just
                stand there like a faggot. >>>

                It is apparent that you are going through a
                difficult time. Your responses are becoming more
                and more base. Perhaps if you relaxed for a
                while.

                eduard
              • mrnavigator10
                ... OK I do not think that there is anything ... OK We are just here, OK ... What do mean nothing ... According to you and few others who dont really know In
                Message 7 of 21 , Oct 6, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In existlist@y..., eduard <yeoman@v...> wrote:
                  > Masoud,
                  >
                  > If you are asking whether I believe in "souls" and
                  > such things as a "4th dimension", the answer is,
                  > no.

                  OK

                  I do not think that there is anything
                  > supernatural about existence.

                  OK

                  We are just here,

                  OK

                  > like any other animal or plant or rock. Nothing
                  > special or supernatural.

                  What do mean nothing



                  >
                  > My reason for mentioning neurons, was that
                  > everything in the outside world is known to us
                  > through interpretation.

                  According to you and few others who dont really know

                  In essence, it is our
                  > neurons [meaning our brain] which creates the
                  > outside world for us.

                  In theory

                  For example, when we look
                  > at this world, it projected onto the retina of our
                  > eyes as a two-dimensional picture. It is our
                  > neurons which interpret this picture in order to
                  > make it into the three-dimensional world that we
                  > think we see.

                  What do YOU mean WE think we see

                  The manner in which we do this is
                  > based on certain parameters that are partially
                  > learned and partially genetic.


                  Bollox

                  When we become
                  > confused in our interpretation, it is referred to
                  > as "optical illusions".

                  THat might be true for you but you only speak for you

                  >
                  > You can find some interesting optical illusions
                  > at:
                  > http://www.optillusions.com/
                  >
                  > eduard
                  >
                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: Masoud Borbor [mailto:masborbor@y...]
                  > Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 9:25 AM
                  > To: existlist@y...
                  > Subject: [existlist] Re: The 4th dimension of
                  > existence
                  >
                  >
                  > Dear eduard
                  > hi and thank u for response. the outside world and
                  > neurons wasnt my
                  > problem.. i defined the "being for my self" as my
                  > insight view. cuz i
                  > can see my self in when i feel it...
                  > the most important was the common layer In and Out
                  > me.. something in
                  > and out of me something i knbow it and it knows
                  > me..
                  > u believe nothing but material? no matter... i
                  > live taking easy!
                  > good night ;)
                • Pogo Stick
                  ... Whoa, Mr. Navigator! That is le Duard, self appointed god of the every-one-who-can t-really think-for-themselves-come -follow-me-cask-of-amontillado... He
                  Message 8 of 21 , Oct 6, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > THat might be true for you but you only speak for you<

                    Whoa, Mr. Navigator! That is le 'Duard, self appointed god of the
                    every-one-who-can't-really think-for-themselves-come
                    -follow-me-cask-of-amontillado...

                    He might be too drunk to understand you, and too self important
                    to care if you made a point that wasn't already his. Either that, or
                    first he'd have to understand what you were saying.

                    If you search the phrase "i don't understand" on the list archives,
                    his messages come up 90% of the time...but he just keeps
                    talking. It's like a carnival fortune telling machine that broke and
                    won't shut up. Only this one wastes your time for free.

                    Vomit Onmy Shoes
                    ---------------------------------------
                  • eduard
                    mrnavigator10, My meaning of nothing was with regard to things that presumed to be special or supernatural . My point is that
                    Message 9 of 21 , Oct 6, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      mrnavigator10,

                      <<< What do mean nothing>>>

                      My meaning of "nothing" was with regard to things
                      that presumed to be "special or supernatural". My
                      point is that such things are a construct of the
                      mind ... a fanciful interpretation ... like gods
                      and souls.

                      <<< According to you and few others who dont
                      really know >>>

                      I would presume, from your comment, that you are
                      one of those who really do know. If so, then
                      please identify something that you "know" without
                      an interpretation.

                      <<< In theory >>>

                      Your comment seems to indicate a lack of agreement
                      to my statement that "it is our neurons [meaning
                      our brain] which creates the outside world for
                      us". I am not saying that the outside world does
                      not exist. The table, that we bump into, is very
                      real, but our understanding of it requires a
                      neural interpretation, as is the pain that we
                      sense from the impact.

                      <<< What do YOU mean WE think we see >>>

                      We "think we see" something, because this is the
                      only manner in which we do "see" anything. For
                      example, in some forms of brain damage, a person
                      can look upon a face and yet not be able to
                      interpret whether or not it is a friend, brother,
                      or simply a picture.

                      <<< Bollox >>>

                      Your simplistic response here is with respect to
                      my point that we see through "parameters that are
                      partially learned and partially genetic". The
                      fact is that such parameters are well known ...
                      obviously not to you.

                      <<< THat might be true for you but you only speak
                      for you >>>

                      This with respect to my statement that there are
                      things such as "optical illusions". Of course I
                      speak only for me. I sense that your real purpose
                      here is to be combative, rather than to discuss
                      the matter. What did you think of the website at"
                      http://www.optillusions.com/

                      eduard
                    • eduard
                      Ah, dear Pogo .... I see that you have come out of your hole to make another nothing response. At least you are consistent ... eduard ... From: Pogo Stick
                      Message 10 of 21 , Oct 6, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Ah, dear Pogo ....

                        I see that you have come out of your hole to make
                        another nothing response. At least you are
                        consistent ...

                        eduard

                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Pogo Stick [mailto:thebookdoc@...]
                        Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 8:01 PM
                        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [existlist] Re: optical delusions


                        > THat might be true for you but you only speak
                        for you<

                        Whoa, Mr. Navigator! That is le 'Duard, self
                        appointed god of the
                        every-one-who-can't-really
                        think-for-themselves-come
                        -follow-me-cask-of-amontillado...

                        He might be too drunk to understand you, and too
                        self important
                        to care if you made a point that wasn't already
                        his. Either that, or
                        first he'd have to understand what you were
                        saying.

                        If you search the phrase "i don't understand" on
                        the list archives,
                        his messages come up 90% of the time...but he just
                        keeps
                        talking. It's like a carnival fortune telling
                        machine that broke and
                        won't shut up. Only this one wastes your time for
                        free.

                        Vomit Onmy Shoes
                        ---------------------------------------




                        ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups

                        Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
                        (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

                        TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
                        existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      • bfsunshne@aol.com
                        I gots to say I like that. Rock on. Fiona
                        Message 11 of 21 , Oct 7, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I gots to say I like that. Rock on.

                          Fiona
                        • mrnavigator10
                          Hi Eduard Wrong on the purpose for my being here. Secondly this url http://www.optillusions.com/ doesnt seem to go anywhere is it co rrect Please advise and I
                          Message 12 of 21 , Oct 7, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hi Eduard

                            Wrong on the purpose for my being here.

                            Secondly this url

                            http://www.optillusions.com/

                            doesnt seem to go anywhere is it co rrect

                            Please advise and I wil check it out

                            Respect

                            N10


                            --- In existlist@y..., eduard <yeoman@v...> wrote:
                            > mrnavigator10,
                            >
                            > <<< What do mean nothing>>>
                            >
                            > My meaning of "nothing" was with regard to things
                            > that presumed to be "special or supernatural". My
                            > point is that such things are a construct of the
                            > mind ... a fanciful interpretation ... like gods
                            > and souls.
                            >
                            > <<< According to you and few others who dont
                            > really know >>>
                            >
                            > I would presume, from your comment, that you are
                            > one of those who really do know. If so, then
                            > please identify something that you "know" without
                            > an interpretation.
                            >
                            > <<< In theory >>>
                            >
                            > Your comment seems to indicate a lack of agreement
                            > to my statement that "it is our neurons [meaning
                            > our brain] which creates the outside world for
                            > us". I am not saying that the outside world does
                            > not exist. The table, that we bump into, is very
                            > real, but our understanding of it requires a
                            > neural interpretation, as is the pain that we
                            > sense from the impact.
                            >
                            > <<< What do YOU mean WE think we see >>>
                            >
                            > We "think we see" something, because this is the
                            > only manner in which we do "see" anything. For
                            > example, in some forms of brain damage, a person
                            > can look upon a face and yet not be able to
                            > interpret whether or not it is a friend, brother,
                            > or simply a picture.
                            >
                            > <<< Bollox >>>
                            >
                            > Your simplistic response here is with respect to
                            > my point that we see through "parameters that are
                            > partially learned and partially genetic". The
                            > fact is that such parameters are well known ...
                            > obviously not to you.
                            >
                            > <<< THat might be true for you but you only speak
                            > for you >>>
                            >
                            > This with respect to my statement that there are
                            > things such as "optical illusions". Of course I
                            > speak only for me. I sense that your real purpose
                            > here is to be combative, rather than to discuss
                            > the matter. What did you think of the website at"
                            > http://www.optillusions.com/
                            >
                            > eduard
                          • eduard
                            N10, I apologize, if I was a bit hard in my words. As to the URL ... it works for me ... http://www.optillusions.com/ Take a look at the green and yellow cube.
                            Message 13 of 21 , Oct 7, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              N10,

                              I apologize, if I was a bit hard in my words.

                              As to the URL ... it works for me ...
                              http://www.optillusions.com/

                              Take a look at the green and yellow cube. Your
                              brain flips it from one view to another, trying to
                              make a decision of which one to believe. The
                              other thing to consider about this cube is that it
                              is only 2 dimensional ... a flat picture ... but
                              your brain convinces you that it is 3 dimensional.
                              The elephant one is somewhat similar. Does the
                              elephant have 4 legs or 5??

                              eduard
                            • mrnavigator10
                              ... Forget about it I was out of order..Im fixed now ... YEs this dint flip I estimate the Blue is definitely the back left side. It is pseudo 3 d in
                              Message 14 of 21 , Oct 7, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In existlist@y..., eduard <yeoman@v...> wrote:
                                > N10,
                                >
                                > I apologize, if I was a bit hard in my words.

                                Forget about it I was out of order..Im fixed now
                                >
                                > As to the URL ... it works for me ...
                                > http://www.optillusions.com/
                                >
                                > Take a look at the green and yellow cube. Your
                                > brain flips it from one view to another, trying to
                                > make a decision of which one to believe. The
                                > other thing to consider about this cube is that it
                                > is only 2 dimensional ... a flat picture ... but
                                > your brain convinces you that it is 3 dimensional.

                                YEs this dint flip I estimate the Blue is definitely the back left
                                side.

                                It is pseudo 3 d in actuality..a close enough approximation for me
                                to perceive it clearly ..due to the aspect of perspective.

                                > The elephant one is somewhat similar. Does the
                                > elephant have 4 legs or 5??

                                Has it eaten another elephat..it has fiveth elephat leg hanging
                                outof its month.

                                The don Quiote one is great Ive counted 28 faces so far, I return to
                                complete latter....with a hand lense.

                                These creations dont actually indicate much about perception or
                                reality to me. For me they are what they are illusions, all be it
                                illusions Im aware of as illusions. We live in a universe which
                                agrees illusions exist and these have a component which knowingly or
                                unknowily effect our perception.

                                I suppose the danger or significane lies in illusions percieved or
                                mis-percieved which are not know to be illusions.

                                Consider looking at a forrest in spring. I generally see a semi blob
                                of green and lots of vertical bits of wood. An illusion.

                                In actuality there are millions ( or more) individual leaves and a
                                finte number of visible trunks, minute motions and a symphony of
                                sound and abundance of hues and so and so forth. I can experience
                                this too if I switch to different operating system ( for the want of
                                better words)



                                N10

                                >
                              • eduard
                                N10, It is not pseudo 3D, but rather a representation of how our brain strives to interpret what is seen. There are specific rules by which these processes
                                Message 15 of 21 , Oct 7, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  N10,

                                  It is not pseudo 3D, but rather a representation
                                  of how our brain strives to interpret what is
                                  seen. There are specific rules by which these
                                  processes occur and which are inherent to human
                                  vision.

                                  This is another website which shows what is called
                                  a "Necker" cube. It is somewhat similar to the
                                  blue/yellow
                                  http://dogfeathers.com/java/necker.html
                                  This cube is animated so that it helps you see the
                                  "flip".

                                  Another site which shows a number of illusions and
                                  thus rules is:
                                  http://www.cquest.utoronto.ca/psych/psy380f/C5/sld
                                  036.htm

                                  This particular slide #36 shows the Necker cube in
                                  the middle. The left and right images are
                                  referred to as Kopfermann cubes. These latter
                                  images appear to be flat, since specific rules of
                                  your brain prevent you from constructing 3D
                                  images. In the case of the Kopfermann cube on the
                                  left the rule is that lines which come to a point
                                  on your retina, continue to remain as forming a
                                  point in the interpreted image. Thus your brain
                                  maintains the flatness. You have to concentrate
                                  really hard to make a cube out of the left hand
                                  image.

                                  It is less difficult to construct a cube out of
                                  the right hand image, since the centre point is
                                  broken. But it still takes a bit of
                                  concentration.

                                  As I mentioned before, everything we see is simply
                                  a flat image that is projected on the retina. It
                                  is our brain which constructs the idea of
                                  something in 3D.

                                  eduard
                                • mrnavigator10
                                  Hi Eduard Thanks for the links Ill follow them up in liesure time I find this concept that 3D ness is a bio-electrical construct derived from a 2 D rentinal
                                  Message 16 of 21 , Oct 8, 2002
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Hi Eduard

                                    Thanks for the links Ill follow them up in liesure time

                                    I find this concept that 3D ness is a bio-electrical construct
                                    derived from a 2 D rentinal image fascinating to review. Presumabley
                                    you think 'reality is a 3D construct and that we some how capture a
                                    facsimile of that reality from 2D rendered data. Im a biologist so I
                                    have some understanding of the mechanic you describe.

                                    Do you know of a good description of the nature of this hypothesis
                                    and also do you consider the same type of mechnisms apply in the
                                    nature of 3D sound perception..Im fanscinated.

                                    Best N10





                                    --- In existlist@y..., eduard <yeoman@v...> wrote:
                                    > N10,
                                    >
                                    > It is not pseudo 3D, but rather a representation
                                    > of how our brain strives to interpret what is
                                    > seen. There are specific rules by which these
                                    > processes occur and which are inherent to human
                                    > vision.
                                    >
                                    > This is another website which shows what is called
                                    > a "Necker" cube. It is somewhat similar to the
                                    > blue/yellow
                                    > http://dogfeathers.com/java/necker.html
                                    > This cube is animated so that it helps you see the
                                    > "flip".
                                    >
                                    > Another site which shows a number of illusions and
                                    > thus rules is:
                                    > http://www.cquest.utoronto.ca/psych/psy380f/C5/sld
                                    > 036.htm
                                    >
                                    > This particular slide #36 shows the Necker cube in
                                    > the middle. The left and right images are
                                    > referred to as Kopfermann cubes. These latter
                                    > images appear to be flat, since specific rules of
                                    > your brain prevent you from constructing 3D
                                    > images. In the case of the Kopfermann cube on the
                                    > left the rule is that lines which come to a point
                                    > on your retina, continue to remain as forming a
                                    > point in the interpreted image. Thus your brain
                                    > maintains the flatness. You have to concentrate
                                    > really hard to make a cube out of the left hand
                                    > image.
                                    >
                                    > It is less difficult to construct a cube out of
                                    > the right hand image, since the centre point is
                                    > broken. But it still takes a bit of
                                    > concentration.
                                    >
                                    > As I mentioned before, everything we see is simply
                                    > a flat image that is projected on the retina. It
                                    > is our brain which constructs the idea of
                                    > something in 3D.
                                    >
                                    > eduard
                                  • eduard
                                    N10, The descriptive term, that I find most often for this, is visual intelligence . But there are likely other terms. I am an electrical engineer for
                                    Message 17 of 21 , Oct 8, 2002
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      N10,

                                      The descriptive term, that I find most often for
                                      this, is "visual intelligence". But there are
                                      likely other terms.

                                      I am an electrical engineer for Transport Canada.
                                      I would think that your country would have a
                                      similar government department that might be named
                                      "Civil Aviation Authority". My work involves
                                      signal lighting; specifically that of obstruction
                                      lighting that serves as visual aid to pilots. At
                                      times I get into things like visual acuity and
                                      brain functions related to processing of visual
                                      signals. I find the whole thing as utterly
                                      fascinating. Of course, as an electrical
                                      engineer, I tend to think in terms of systems and
                                      that leads to philosophy.

                                      As to sound, all of our senses are subject to
                                      interpretation. Like the learned response of
                                      Japanese to hear "r" and "l" as the same phonic
                                      element. As to 3D, I should think that
                                      interpretation of the Doppler affect is a learned
                                      response.

                                      eduard
                                    • mrnavigator10
                                      HI Eduard Yes your correct it is the Civil Aviation Authority. Im therefore martian ..lol The 3d construct stuff still intrigues me and actually I remeber
                                      Message 18 of 21 , Oct 8, 2002
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        HI Eduard

                                        Yes your correct it is the Civil Aviation Authority. Im therefore
                                        martian ..lol

                                        The 3d construct stuff still intrigues me and actually I remeber
                                        reading about this some years ago in a book by Rupert Sheldrake, the
                                        rebel biochemist. He's now the science correspondent for the times
                                        of the Gaurdian after some years of ''exile''. I will research the
                                        detail for you, if you are interested, as he did present some
                                        alternate views to the nature of perception.

                                        Interesting point;I have clear recall of not hearing the doppler
                                        effect until I had been told repetatively told it did exist and
                                        ofcourse made wrong for not going into the mass agreement on the
                                        nature of reality.

                                        I write music as a hobby and frequently experiment with psycho
                                        aucostics which in a similar manner borders on the areas of trained
                                        response. On an A / B Treated and Untreated sound comparison, the
                                        listener quite ( 60-70 % of the time) often cannot tell any audible
                                        difference during blind comparison which is greater than chance.

                                        Yet when told about or obliquely pick up some inference that a
                                        namless treatment has been applied the actual perception shift is
                                        towards accurately identifying the treated sound..which incidently
                                        in general magically becomes subjectively more ''attractive''.

                                        Funny thing is it only really works in this way when the acoustic
                                        treatment is applied below the threshold of perception of the
                                        engineer who mastered the particular program material. IE he turns
                                        the effector up it up so that it is just perceptable and then
                                        reduces the level...weird.

                                        On a tangent if we take the topic inward and look at our own
                                        internal mental synthesised or recalled constructs ( mental
                                        pictures/topographies etc etc) gain there can a sense of 3D and the
                                        perception of most if not all of the senses in those constructs.
                                        This aspect probabely varies from individual to individual and may
                                        be infinitely variable. The aspect of this area which intriques me
                                        is the percevied location of these constructs. By this I mean the
                                        sense of where in space in or around my personal ocation such
                                        constructs appear to locate. IN my case ( and this is all I can
                                        reliabley comment on) I can experience a sense of spatial distance
                                        between what I regard as I ( the looker). SO for example if I shut
                                        my eyes and think of 3d dog I may have the sense that this construct
                                        is located outside my head in the space around my body, say a half a
                                        meter in front of my head. That sense of dimension is automatic and
                                        quite definitely perceptble to me. Im not arguing this is the
                                        location of the construct but wonder why such a phenomena would or
                                        should occur.

                                        Do others have such experience and more general level I wonder what
                                        dimenstions others have in the experience of being themsleves.
                                        Relatedly I have learned that some people cannot hear music or see
                                        colour in there heads on spontaneous basis. When I write music I
                                        litterally 'hear it first'' usually as a complete but I cannot
                                        coneive a complete poem, only fragments.

                                        The leads me to observation that we constanley inflow perception
                                        which has the potential of being stored in very exact deatil
                                        according to the feats of those posed of great memories.

                                        In the mind this data apears to be processed, evaluated and fed to
                                        the 'i' constantly in various forms with various degress of
                                        significance. 'I' therefore appears to be constanly at the end of an
                                        unending documentary including news channels, religous
                                        indoctrination, grabage and the occasional good idea. The point here
                                        as I see it is that the 'I' is perhapes a lazy voyeur, an MP3 player
                                        of reality. Im ready for an upgrade.

                                        LOL musing

                                        BEst N10















                                        Your work sounds interesting to me
                                        --- In existlist@y..., eduard <yeoman@v...> wrote:
                                        > N10,
                                        >
                                        > The descriptive term, that I find most often for
                                        > this, is "visual intelligence". But there are
                                        > likely other terms.
                                        >
                                        > I am an electrical engineer for Transport Canada.
                                        > I would think that your country would have a
                                        > similar government department that might be named
                                        > "Civil Aviation Authority". My work involves
                                        > signal lighting; specifically that of obstruction
                                        > lighting that serves as visual aid to pilots. At
                                        > times I get into things like visual acuity and
                                        > brain functions related to processing of visual
                                        > signals. I find the whole thing as utterly
                                        > fascinating. Of course, as an electrical
                                        > engineer, I tend to think in terms of systems and
                                        > that leads to philosophy.
                                        >
                                        > As to sound, all of our senses are subject to
                                        > interpretation. Like the learned response of
                                        > Japanese to hear "r" and "l" as the same phonic
                                        > element. As to 3D, I should think that
                                        > interpretation of the Doppler affect is a learned
                                        > response.
                                        >
                                        > eduard
                                      • Charles
                                        N10, sorry, did not know you were a girl. My apologies. Charles ... From: mrnavigator10 To: existlist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 6:56 PM
                                        Message 19 of 21 , Oct 8, 2002
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          N10,

                                          sorry, did not know you were a girl. My
                                          apologies.

                                          Charles


                                          ----- Original Message -----
                                          From: mrnavigator10
                                          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                                          Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 6:56 PM
                                          Subject: [existlist] Re: neurons and optical
                                          illusions



                                          HI Eduard

                                          Yes your correct it is the Civil Aviation
                                          Authority. Im therefore
                                          martian ..lol

                                          The 3d construct stuff still intrigues me and
                                          actually I remeber
                                          reading about this some years ago in a book
                                          by Rupert Sheldrake, the
                                          rebel biochemist. He's now the science
                                          correspondent for the times
                                          of the Gaurdian after some years of
                                          ''exile''. I will research the
                                          detail for you, if you are interested, as he
                                          did present some
                                          alternate views to the nature of perception.

                                          Interesting point;I have clear recall of not
                                          hearing the doppler
                                          effect until I had been told repetatively
                                          told it did exist and
                                          ofcourse made wrong for not going into the
                                          mass agreement on the
                                          nature of reality.

                                          I write music as a hobby and frequently
                                          experiment with psycho
                                          aucostics which in a similar manner borders
                                          on the areas of trained
                                          response. On an A / B Treated and Untreated
                                          sound comparison, the
                                          listener quite ( 60-70 % of the time) often
                                          cannot tell any audible
                                          difference during blind comparison which is
                                          greater than chance.

                                          Yet when told about or obliquely pick up some
                                          inference that a
                                          namless treatment has been applied the actual
                                          perception shift is
                                          towards accurately identifying the treated
                                          sound..which incidently
                                          in general magically becomes subjectively
                                          more ''attractive''.

                                          Funny thing is it only really works in this
                                          way when the acoustic
                                          treatment is applied below the threshold of
                                          perception of the
                                          engineer who mastered the particular program
                                          material. IE he turns
                                          the effector up it up so that it is just
                                          perceptable and then
                                          reduces the level...weird.

                                          On a tangent if we take the topic inward and
                                          look at our own
                                          internal mental synthesised or recalled
                                          constructs ( mental
                                          pictures/topographies etc etc) gain there can
                                          a sense of 3D and the
                                          perception of most if not all of the senses
                                          in those constructs.
                                          This aspect probabely varies from individual
                                          to individual and may
                                          be infinitely variable. The aspect of this
                                          area which intriques me
                                          is the percevied location of these
                                          constructs. By this I mean the
                                          sense of where in space in or around my
                                          personal ocation such
                                          constructs appear to locate. IN my case ( and
                                          this is all I can
                                          reliabley comment on) I can experience a
                                          sense of spatial distance
                                          between what I regard as I ( the looker). SO
                                          for example if I shut
                                          my eyes and think of 3d dog I may have the
                                          sense that this construct
                                          is located outside my head in the space
                                          around my body, say a half a
                                          meter in front of my head. That sense of
                                          dimension is automatic and
                                          quite definitely perceptble to me. Im not
                                          arguing this is the
                                          location of the construct but wonder why such
                                          a phenomena would or
                                          should occur.

                                          Do others have such experience and more
                                          general level I wonder what
                                          dimenstions others have in the experience of
                                          being themsleves.
                                          Relatedly I have learned that some people
                                          cannot hear music or see
                                          colour in there heads on spontaneous basis.
                                          When I write music I
                                          litterally 'hear it first'' usually as a
                                          complete but I cannot
                                          coneive a complete poem, only fragments.

                                          The leads me to observation that we
                                          constanley inflow perception
                                          which has the potential of being stored in
                                          very exact deatil
                                          according to the feats of those posed of
                                          great memories.

                                          In the mind this data apears to be
                                          processed, evaluated and fed to
                                          the 'i' constantly in various forms with
                                          various degress of
                                          significance. 'I' therefore appears to be
                                          constanly at the end of an
                                          unending documentary including news channels,
                                          religous
                                          indoctrination, grabage and the occasional
                                          good idea. The point here
                                          as I see it is that the 'I' is perhapes a
                                          lazy voyeur, an MP3 player
                                          of reality. Im ready for an upgrade.

                                          LOL musing

                                          BEst N10















                                          Your work sounds interesting to me
                                          --- In existlist@y..., eduard <yeoman@v...>
                                          wrote:
                                          > N10,
                                          >
                                          > The descriptive term, that I find most
                                          often for
                                          > this, is "visual intelligence". But there
                                          are
                                          > likely other terms.
                                          >
                                          > I am an electrical engineer for Transport
                                          Canada.
                                          > I would think that your country would have
                                          a
                                          > similar government department that might be
                                          named
                                          > "Civil Aviation Authority". My work
                                          involves
                                          > signal lighting; specifically that of
                                          obstruction
                                          > lighting that serves as visual aid to
                                          pilots. At
                                          > times I get into things like visual acuity
                                          and
                                          > brain functions related to processing of
                                          visual
                                          > signals. I find the whole thing as utterly
                                          > fascinating. Of course, as an electrical
                                          > engineer, I tend to think in terms of
                                          systems and
                                          > that leads to philosophy.
                                          >
                                          > As to sound, all of our senses are subject
                                          to
                                          > interpretation. Like the learned response
                                          of
                                          > Japanese to hear "r" and "l" as the same
                                          phonic
                                          > element. As to 3D, I should think that
                                          > interpretation of the Doppler affect is a
                                          learned
                                          > response.
                                          >
                                          > eduard


                                          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                          ADVERTISEMENT





                                          Our Home:
                                          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
                                          (Includes community book list, chat, and
                                          more.)

                                          TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email
                                          to:
                                          existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
                                          Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        • mrnavigator10
                                          If I were a girl which Im not why would my gender engender you to aplogise Charles ? Best N10
                                          Message 20 of 21 , Oct 8, 2002
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            If I were a girl which Im not why would my gender engender you to
                                            aplogise Charles ?

                                            Best N10


                                            --- In existlist@y..., "Charles" <cvas2002@c...> wrote:
                                            > N10,
                                            >
                                            > sorry, did not know you were a girl. My
                                            > apologies.
                                            >
                                            > Charles
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > ----- Original Message -----
                                            > From: mrnavigator10
                                            > To: existlist@y...
                                            > Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 6:56 PM
                                            > Subject: [existlist] Re: neurons and optical
                                            > illusions
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > HI Eduard
                                            >
                                            > Yes your correct it is the Civil Aviation
                                            > Authority. Im therefore
                                            > martian ..lol
                                            >
                                            > The 3d construct stuff still intrigues me and
                                            > actually I remeber
                                            > reading about this some years ago in a book
                                            > by Rupert Sheldrake, the
                                            > rebel biochemist. He's now the science
                                            > correspondent for the times
                                            > of the Gaurdian after some years of
                                            > ''exile''. I will research the
                                            > detail for you, if you are interested, as he
                                            > did present some
                                            > alternate views to the nature of perception.
                                            >
                                            > Interesting point;I have clear recall of not
                                            > hearing the doppler
                                            > effect until I had been told repetatively
                                            > told it did exist and
                                            > ofcourse made wrong for not going into the
                                            > mass agreement on the
                                            > nature of reality.
                                            >
                                            > I write music as a hobby and frequently
                                            > experiment with psycho
                                            > aucostics which in a similar manner borders
                                            > on the areas of trained
                                            > response. On an A / B Treated and Untreated
                                            > sound comparison, the
                                            > listener quite ( 60-70 % of the time) often
                                            > cannot tell any audible
                                            > difference during blind comparison which is
                                            > greater than chance.
                                            >
                                            > Yet when told about or obliquely pick up some
                                            > inference that a
                                            > namless treatment has been applied the actual
                                            > perception shift is
                                            > towards accurately identifying the treated
                                            > sound..which incidently
                                            > in general magically becomes subjectively
                                            > more ''attractive''.
                                            >
                                            > Funny thing is it only really works in this
                                            > way when the acoustic
                                            > treatment is applied below the threshold of
                                            > perception of the
                                            > engineer who mastered the particular program
                                            > material. IE he turns
                                            > the effector up it up so that it is just
                                            > perceptable and then
                                            > reduces the level...weird.
                                            >
                                            > On a tangent if we take the topic inward and
                                            > look at our own
                                            > internal mental synthesised or recalled
                                            > constructs ( mental
                                            > pictures/topographies etc etc) gain there can
                                            > a sense of 3D and the
                                            > perception of most if not all of the senses
                                            > in those constructs.
                                            > This aspect probabely varies from individual
                                            > to individual and may
                                            > be infinitely variable. The aspect of this
                                            > area which intriques me
                                            > is the percevied location of these
                                            > constructs. By this I mean the
                                            > sense of where in space in or around my
                                            > personal ocation such
                                            > constructs appear to locate. IN my case ( and
                                            > this is all I can
                                            > reliabley comment on) I can experience a
                                            > sense of spatial distance
                                            > between what I regard as I ( the looker). SO
                                            > for example if I shut
                                            > my eyes and think of 3d dog I may have the
                                            > sense that this construct
                                            > is located outside my head in the space
                                            > around my body, say a half a
                                            > meter in front of my head. That sense of
                                            > dimension is automatic and
                                            > quite definitely perceptble to me. Im not
                                            > arguing this is the
                                            > location of the construct but wonder why such
                                            > a phenomena would or
                                            > should occur.
                                            >
                                            > Do others have such experience and more
                                            > general level I wonder what
                                            > dimenstions others have in the experience of
                                            > being themsleves.
                                            > Relatedly I have learned that some people
                                            > cannot hear music or see
                                            > colour in there heads on spontaneous basis.
                                            > When I write music I
                                            > litterally 'hear it first'' usually as a
                                            > complete but I cannot
                                            > coneive a complete poem, only fragments.
                                            >
                                            > The leads me to observation that we
                                            > constanley inflow perception
                                            > which has the potential of being stored in
                                            > very exact deatil
                                            > according to the feats of those posed of
                                            > great memories.
                                            >
                                            > In the mind this data apears to be
                                            > processed, evaluated and fed to
                                            > the 'i' constantly in various forms with
                                            > various degress of
                                            > significance. 'I' therefore appears to be
                                            > constanly at the end of an
                                            > unending documentary including news channels,
                                            > religous
                                            > indoctrination, grabage and the occasional
                                            > good idea. The point here
                                            > as I see it is that the 'I' is perhapes a
                                            > lazy voyeur, an MP3 player
                                            > of reality. Im ready for an upgrade.
                                            >
                                            > LOL musing
                                            >
                                            > BEst N10
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Your work sounds interesting to me
                                            > --- In existlist@y..., eduard <yeoman@v...>
                                            > wrote:
                                            > > N10,
                                            > >
                                            > > The descriptive term, that I find most
                                            > often for
                                            > > this, is "visual intelligence". But there
                                            > are
                                            > > likely other terms.
                                            > >
                                            > > I am an electrical engineer for Transport
                                            > Canada.
                                            > > I would think that your country would have
                                            > a
                                            > > similar government department that might be
                                            > named
                                            > > "Civil Aviation Authority". My work
                                            > involves
                                            > > signal lighting; specifically that of
                                            > obstruction
                                            > > lighting that serves as visual aid to
                                            > pilots. At
                                            > > times I get into things like visual acuity
                                            > and
                                            > > brain functions related to processing of
                                            > visual
                                            > > signals. I find the whole thing as utterly
                                            > > fascinating. Of course, as an electrical
                                            > > engineer, I tend to think in terms of
                                            > systems and
                                            > > that leads to philosophy.
                                            > >
                                            > > As to sound, all of our senses are subject
                                            > to
                                            > > interpretation. Like the learned response
                                            > of
                                            > > Japanese to hear "r" and "l" as the same
                                            > phonic
                                            > > element. As to 3D, I should think that
                                            > > interpretation of the Doppler affect is a
                                            > learned
                                            > > response.
                                            > >
                                            > > eduard
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                            > ADVERTISEMENT
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Our Home:
                                            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
                                            > (Includes community book list, chat, and
                                            > more.)
                                            >
                                            > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email
                                            > to:
                                            > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
                                            >
                                            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
                                            > Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                          • eduard
                                            N10, Yes, I tend to also project my thoughts in front of me. Like painting a picture. I am very visual, so that I need a construct that I can follow. For
                                            Message 21 of 21 , Oct 8, 2002
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              N10,

                                              Yes, I tend to also project my thoughts in front
                                              of me. Like painting a picture. I am very
                                              visual, so that I need a construct that I can
                                              follow. For example, I see the number system as a
                                              series of ladders which are primarily in segments
                                              of 10. Counting becomes a matter of adding
                                              sections. I have a difficulty of adding, say 3 +
                                              28, since at 30 the inclination of the ladders
                                              changes and thus you cant add a straight section
                                              of 3 to a straight section leading from 28.

                                              Something similar happens with dates. I see the
                                              year as a large circle or wheel. So depending
                                              upon the time of year, I can visualize myself in a
                                              certain position and orientation. Summer is at
                                              the bottom of the circle and winter is at the top.
                                              I have the sense that all this visualization is
                                              due my inability to grasp the abstract idea of
                                              time.

                                              I don't think that memories are stored in the
                                              brain in their original form. That is, we don't
                                              store precisely what we saw, but only certain
                                              aspects which allow us to reconstruct the memory
                                              as if from scratch. For example, I can remember
                                              the old cinema that I used to go to as a kid when
                                              I lived in Thunder Bay. But the memory is
                                              something that I reconstruct each time I think of
                                              it. That is why witnesses in a police case are
                                              not reliable. When trying to describe the thief
                                              or whomever, the witness reconstructs the image
                                              from bits and pieces. More often than not, the
                                              pieces get mixed with those of other memories, so
                                              that one witness may swear that the their had red
                                              hair and another will say it is blond.

                                              eduard
                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.