N=1 but this perfectly matches my experience. I stare at a computer all day, and my power is almost exactly enough so that the screen is just on the edge of blu

N=1 but this perfectly matches my experience. I stare at a computer all day, and my power is almost exactly enough so that the screen is just on the edge of blurriness. Almost like my eyes have adapted to that focal length. This has also remained pretty stable over 10 years since I never wear the glasses for close work (why bother when I can pretty much see it fine, and increase font size if needed for fine detail). I wonder if the reason why it takes longer as you approach 0 diopters is because at that point the signal received by the brain is enough such that the brain can learn to "deconvolve" the image (blur adaption), removing any incentive for further axial shrinking. Edit: actually going further I wonder if the stressor you mentioned is indeed actually ciliary accommodation. This is known to be very taxing (hence why people get eye strain from looking at computers for a long time), so it makes sense that the body would adapt to relieve this stressor by elongating the eyeball itself so that the screen can now sit at optical infinity. It is also a relatively well-known result from large correlative studies that time spent outdoors decreases the chance for myopia. I read something about how it was total luminous flux of the bright outdoors that helped to prevent progression of myopia – just something to think about, especially given the recent trend of blue light blocking glasses. Who knows if those wavelengths might actually be needed in some subtle manner for optical development. But note that because convergence and accommodation are linked, without any accommodation there might be a greater tendency for the eye to develop exophorias. I wonder if you look at the data you might see a high correlation between exophoria and myopia?