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

Re: optical delusions

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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 12 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 13 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 14 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.