3 ms·
> It's not put there explicitly but the wealth of knowledge they possess and the perfect lighting and shadowing and material reflections compared to the tiny am
by teddyh 4y ago
> It's not put there explicitly but the wealth of knowledge they possess and the perfect lighting and shadowing and material reflections compared to the tiny amount of weights strongly suggest they have proper representations
I don’t think they do, but I can’t prove it, either way.
> (just like humans by the way).
Oh, I don’t think humans have it either (mostly), since humans don’t have 3D vision; humans have the equivalent of wiggle stereoscopy¹, which gives some hints of depth, and humans have the additional advantage of the time dimension. People do have some intellectual capacity to reason about 3-dimensional shapes, and some people can even rotate things in their heads with ease. Blind people might have it too, since their concept of the world was not created by this pseudo-3D visual input. But mostly, people don’t think in 3D.
I think we can see this by looking at drawings by children. Child drawings are dominated by the concepts important to children: Faces, hands, etc. Concepts, not actual images. And it’s all in 2D, as was the majority of art for much of history.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiggle_stereoscopy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiggle_stereoscopy
- l33tman 4y agoI have to strongly disagree with you on this, I can walk around in my (small) city in my mind in 3D without any problems. Anybody who's ever had a dream would concur as well. It's absolutely not true that humans can't think in 3D. The sensory input modalities and specifics do not control or limit the internal representations; a sufficiently capable neural network will extract the most efficient rep to predict the input data, which is moving 3D objects. That it's difficult to "render" this to 2D by painting is not very surprising.
- teddyh 4y ago> I have to strongly disagree with you on this, I can walk around in my (small) city in my mind in 3D without any problems. Anybody who's ever had a dream would concur as well. It's absolutely not true that humans can't think in 3D. Well, some people reportedly can, but it’s rare. You say you can imagine walking around your small city, and infer that you have the city conceptualized as a 3D object, and can rotate it at will, in any direction. But how do we know that you simply have not memorized your admittedly small city? Can you imagine what going around the city upside down (i.e. like walking on your hands) would look like, with ease? It should be just a simple rotation, right?