3 ms·
> not just "believable" data filled in by the net Your brain already does this in may ways. Last year I watched a fascinating series, The Brain with David Ea
by Steve44 8y ago
> not just "believable" data filled in by the net
Your brain already does this in may ways. Last year I watched a fascinating series, The Brain with David Eagleman [1], and one of the main points I got from that is how the visual system works. Your eyes are not connected to your brain like a camera, instead they feed into a 'processor' which creates a model of what it thinks your eyes are seeing and it's this model you see. Your brain also feeds back into this area.
1) You can't see your blind spot, that is filled in.
2) When you move your eyes they effectively shut down but you continue to think you can see. This is demonstrated by the "count how many times the ball is passed" type video where there is also a gorilla walking about which you don't notice. This is also the cause of a lot of road crashes, you think you are scanning but your eyes 'miss' the cyclist.
3) Psychosis 'visions' are caused by the brain writing whole images into this processor, this model is then fed back into the brain. To you it's as real as if your eyes had seen then.
4) Witnesses are incredibly unreliable. People not only see things differently but also remember things differently.
With your brain though, you can usually slow down and study an image or scene to keep pulling more real detail out, with this digital processing though you can't as all you've got is the machine constructed image.
[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06yjrdp https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06yjrdp
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- thesz 8y ago>When you move your eyes they effectively shut down but you continue to think you can see. Fascinating! I read Peter Watt's Echopraxia three years ago and still keep finding holes in his "hard SciFi". For example, sentry zombies employed by vampiress Valerie rolled their eyes constantly and explanation given by one of them (or by author) is that it extends their visual area and allows for more visual information to be processed. And now your remark allowed me to see how it is, really, not quite real. Thank you very much! I consider Watts a bad author and his series a bad ones (they incredible dull and heroes look like badly written puppets), but they allow me to not pass over information like yours and have more connected world-view. Maybe, Watts is not as bad as I like to think after all.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]