On Sun, 09 Feb 2003 01:48:30 GMT, "Mark Zarella"
<NzOaSrPeAlMlam at twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>I don't understand. Aren't thalamocortical oscillations usually in the 7-15
>Hz range?
Depends on the state of the individual. Can be 2-3x higher.
> How does that give rise to a limit?
>How can temporal frequency perception be limited by any thalamic activity?
See Llinas' papers.
>Am I incorrect that responses in V1 exhibit higher frequency detection than
>psychophysical data illustrates?
I am not surprised to find higher frequency activity in any area,
including brainstem. I though the issue was the limits of
psycophysical resolution.
>Wouldn't this imply that the limitation
>lies in "higher" areas?
Higher? Why?
Kal
>"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
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>>>
