I have a question

Mark Zarella NzOaSrPeAlMlam at twcny.rr.com
Sat Feb 8 20:48:30 EST 2003


I don't understand.  Aren't thalamocortical oscillations usually in the 7-15
Hz range?  How does that give rise to a limit?

How can temporal frequency perception be limited by any thalamic activity?
Am I incorrect that responses in V1 exhibit higher frequency detection than
psychophysical data illustrates?  Wouldn't this imply that the limitation
lies in "higher" areas?

"Kalman Rubinson" <kr4 at nyu.edu> wrote in message
news:bp6b4vkfvaagn211kqkodps6h7r7u2m9nj at 4ax.com...
> On Sat, 08 Feb 2003 23:36:18 GMT, "Mark Zarella"
> <NzOaSrPeAlMlam at twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >I was referring to the response to a single stimulus being applied to
> >another different type of stimulus, as if there's somehow a constant
> >"refresh rate" so to speak.  I suppose I was unclear by my use of the
term
> >"applicable".
>
> Still unclear.  There's theory (and some evidence) that the frequency
> of thalamocortical rhythms is a universal limit on perception of all
> events.
>
> Kal
>
> >
> >
> >"Kalman Rubinson" <kr4 at nyu.edu> wrote in message
> >news:9e4b4vonidmpl95bhu24551uvqlrd68pu6 at 4ax.com...
> >> On Sat, 08 Feb 2003 21:28:51 GMT, "Mark Zarella"
> >> <NzOaSrPeAlMlam at twcny.rr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >It seems you're referring to a visual sampling rate.  There are
certainly
> >> >psychophysical thresholds having to do with effective sampling rates,
but
> >I
> >> >know of no evidence that it's constant and applicable to all types of
> >> >stimuli - like how a tv or computer monitor works.
> >>
> >> It's applicable to any visual input since it is defined by the
> >> physiological mechanisms of the brain.
> >>
> >> Kal
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"jakob ashtar" <bamsefarogkyllingen at mailer.dk> wrote in message
> >> >news:3e42e735$0$2550$ba624c82 at nntp04.dk.telia.net...
> >> >> the frequency i am talking about is the frequency in time as
> >> >> in how many "images" the brain is able to process and interpret per
> >> >second..
> >> >>
> >> >> the reason for my question is that if the human brain
> >> >> processes and interprets images perceived thru
> >> >> the human eye at a certain time-frequency, then
> >> >> the "reality" observed by this eye might look
> >> >> different if the brain operated at another frequency...
> >> >>
> >> >> example:
> >> >>
> >> >> if an object rotates around an observer at a certain frequency and
this
> >> >> observer always looks in the
> >> >> same direction, then the observer will either see no object or he
will
> >see
> >> >> the object standing still in mid air...
> >> >>
> >> >> or am I wrong?
> >> >>
> >> >> the point im trying to make is that the "reality" we observe
> >> >> depends on the frequency at which our brain is able
> >> >> to process and interpret the input we get thru our
> >> >> senses...
> >> >>
> >> >> this leads to the idea that the "reality" can have many
> >> >> forms and the one reality that we as humans see might
> >> >> be just one out of many realities...
> >> >>
> >> >> sincerely
> >> >>
> >> >> jakob
> >> >>
> >> >> ---------------
> >> >> the observer
> >> >> "Dag Stenberg" <dag.stenberg at nospam.helsinki.fi.invalid> wrote in
> >message
> >> >> news:b1unds$e1e$1 at oravannahka.helsinki.fi...
> >> >> > "smølf" <bamsefarogkyllingen at mailer.dk> wrote:
> >> >> > > Does the human brain interpret and process visual input
> >> >> > > at a certain frequency?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > How is this frequency measured?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Frequency" can mean different things. There is frequency in time,
> >> >> > angular frequency etc. Please specify your question.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Dag Stenberg
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
>





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list