I have a question

Kenneth 'pawl' Collins k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Wed Feb 19 14:07:14 EST 2003


The visual system's response latencies vary from femto-seconds
[10^-18s - chemoreceptors in the eye] to seconds [inclusive, or
prolonged-'latencies'] within the visual cortex, as in easily
observed chromatic after-effects.

Within this range, there exists nothing like what your're looking
for.

If there were such, any organism that could 'time' it's attack with
respect to such 'inherent frequency' would quickly become universally
dominant [which is what happened during evolution with respect to the
stuff of your question].

In mamalian visual systems, there's a 'sliding' range of visual
coordination in which images "overlay" and with respect to which
'attention' can be sellectively-tuned via many different routes.

Back when I worked on older CRTs [early 1980s], I could actually see
all of this - the pixels showed a 'flowing-wave-like' 'winking' that
obviously could not, in any way, be correlated to the CRT's refresh
rate. What I was looking at is the compound-'flowing' of activation
within my own visual system - quite a delightful realization, which
I've never seen mentioned in print, but which is of immense
importance in the understanding of "vision", and, from there, to the
whole nervous system. [For those who have AoK, this stuff is
incorporated in Ap6.]

[Other matter: Since I've started smoking again, and since I'm having
to charge my cigarette purchases, I was experiencing 'guilt' with
respect to not going another $21.95 into debt for my inet account. So
I reinstated it, not knowing what, if anything, I can do that'll
'make a difference'. I'm 'devastated' that the world is, once again,
turning to War, rather than looking to understanding, and I'll
probably discuss that. The costs of War are so great. For instance,
the hard winter we're experiencing this year is probably the result
of the particulate matter that was ejected into the atmosphere during
the bombing of Afghanistan. This, because Earth's inclination is
'precariously' balanced, and pumping 'dust' into the atmosphere
reflects, diffuses, and, otherwise distributes, energy coming from
the sun. During winter, this effect is magnified because Earth's
inclination necessitates a longer passage of Sun's energy through the
atmosphere. So were paying for the Afghan bombing at the fuel pump.
Fuel oil is up 110& here in New England. Now, there will be more
bombing, and they're setting explosives around Iraq's oil wells, and,
in the worst case, there'll be so much 'junk' in the atmosphere that
the winter of 2003-4 is 'just' going to shut-down the U. S. Economy.

There is a better way for us Humans to reach consensus with respect
to marshall concerns.

Forgive me, the way has been mapped in NDT all along. No?

Yup.]

Cheers, k. p. collins

"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