phantom triangle



 Science > Philosophy > phantom triangle

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1

 
Topic: Science > Philosophy
User: "Art"
Date: 04 Feb 2008 05:35:38 PM
Object: phantom triangle
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html
Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg
.

User: "thinker"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 04 Feb 2008 08:49:53 PM
"Art" <null@zilch.com> wrote in message
news:988fq39l70eg0sf9qtjkfruj692ii2r33m@4ax.com...

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

Our brains work overtime!
.
User: "casey"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 01:38:53 PM
On Feb 5, 1:49=A0pm, "thinker" <notrealem...@notreal.com> wrote:

"Art" <n...@zilch.com> wrote in message

news:988fq39l70eg0sf9qtjkfruj692ii2r33m@4ax.com...

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html


Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg


Our brains work overtime!

It computes like mad!
We can look for computational explanations for the
reason we see things the way we do.
http://sharp.bu.edu/~slehar/webstuff/orivar/orivar3.html
JC
.


User: "tg"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 04 Feb 2008 06:02:41 PM
On Feb 4, 6:35 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html

Arthttp://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

Now Art, how do we distinguish between the 'triangle that isn't there'
and the other stuff? How do I know it isn't there?
-tg
.
User: "casey"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 04 Feb 2008 06:09:37 PM
On Feb 5, 11:02=A0am, tg <tgdenn...@earthlink.net> wrote:

On Feb 4, 6:35 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html


Arthttp://home.epix.net/~artnpeg


Now Art, how do we distinguish between the 'triangle that isn't there'
and the other stuff? How do I know it isn't there?

The triangle being there is a reasonable interpretation of the image.
If it were there that is what it would look like.
JC
.

User: "Art"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 04 Feb 2008 06:07:39 PM
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:02:41 -0800 (PST), tg <tgdenning@earthlink.net>
wrote:

On Feb 4, 6:35 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html

Now Art, how do we distinguish between the 'triangle that isn't there'
and the other stuff? How do I know it isn't there?

-tg

Examine it closely. There is no large white triangle.
Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

.
User: "zinnic"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 06:36:39 AM
On Feb 4, 6:07=A0pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:02:41 -0800 (PST), tg <tgdenn...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

On Feb 4, 6:35 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html

Now Art, how do we distinguish between the 'triangle that isn't there'
and the other stuff? How do I know it isn't there?


-tg


Examine it closely. There is no large white triangle.

Arthttp://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

Hi Art.
That is what the brain does unconsciously! It implements innumerable
algorithms to fill in the gaps in a manner that has PROVEN to favor
physical survival and reproduction (evolutionary advantage).
Filling in the gaps consciously is called superstition. Superstition
fills in scientific gaps in order to bolster wishful thinking for
personal immortality.
I also was 'hardheaded' by the time I turned fifteen years of age and
happily remain so to this day. Guess I am more thick-headed than
you :-/.
I am encouraged by the fact that we humans find our own sort of
'bliss' in our own sort of 'ignorance'. :-)
Regards
Zinnic
.
User: "Sean"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 06:46:24 AM
"zinnic" <zeenric2@gate.net> wrote in message
news:2765760f-b164-4a11-adbb-b49c07147241@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 4, 6:07 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:02:41 -0800 (PST), tg <tgdenn...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

On Feb 4, 6:35 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html

Now Art, how do we distinguish between the 'triangle that isn't there'
and the other stuff? How do I know it isn't there?


-tg


Examine it closely. There is no large white triangle.

Arthttp://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

Hi Art.
That is what the brain does unconsciously! It implements innumerable
algorithms to fill in the gaps in a manner that has PROVEN to favor
physical survival and reproduction (evolutionary advantage).
Filling in the gaps consciously is called superstition. Superstition
fills in scientific gaps in order to bolster wishful thinking for
personal immortality.
I also was 'hardheaded' by the time I turned fifteen years of age and
happily remain so to this day. Guess I am more thick-headed than
you :-/.
I am encouraged by the fact that we humans find our own sort of
'bliss' in our own sort of 'ignorance'. :-)
Regards
Zinnic
----------------------
or ... there's a method to our individual "madness" <smile>
Hi Zinnnnnn
.
User: "zinnic"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 08:27:32 AM
On Feb 5, 6:46=A0am, "Sean" <Hu_ca...@blah.com.au> wrote:

"zinnic" <zeenr...@gate.net> wrote in message

news:2765760f-b164-4a11-adbb-b49c07147241@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 4, 6:07 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:02:41 -0800 (PST), tg <tgdenn...@earthlink.net>
wrote:


On Feb 4, 6:35 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html

Now Art, how do we distinguish between the 'triangle that isn't there'
and the other stuff? How do I know it isn't there?


-tg


Examine it closely. There is no large white triangle.


Arthttp://home.epix.net/~artnpeg


Hi Art.
That is what the brain does unconsciously! It implements innumerable
algorithms to fill in the gaps in a manner that has PROVEN to favor
physical survival and reproduction (evolutionary advantage).
Filling in the gaps consciously is called superstition. Superstition
fills in scientific gaps in order to bolster wishful thinking for
personal immortality.

I also was 'hardheaded' by the time I turned fifteen years of age and
happily remain so to this day. Guess I am more thick-headed =A0than
you =A0:-/.

I am =A0encouraged by the fact that we humans find our own sort of
'bliss' in our own sort of 'ignorance'. :-)
Regards
Zinnic

----------------------

or ... there's a method to our individual "madness" <smile>

Hi Zinnnnnn

Hi Sean
Yep! For me, life is still good. I wish it could be so forever for
everyone.
I am happy in my belief (sorry Brian) that when I terminate I will not
be conscious of such a stupendous tragedy. That would be Hell
indeed! :-\
Z
.
User: ""

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 08:38:08 AM
On Feb 6, 12:27=A0am, zinnic <zeenr...@gate.net> wrote:

On Feb 5, 6:46=A0am, "Sean" <Hu_ca...@blah.com.au> wrote:





"zinnic" <zeenr...@gate.net> wrote in message


news:2765760f-b164-4a11-adbb-b49c07147241@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...=
On Feb 4, 6:07 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:


On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:02:41 -0800 (PST), tg <tgdenn...@earthlink.net>
wrote:


On Feb 4, 6:35 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html

Now Art, how do we distinguish between the 'triangle that isn't there=

'

and the other stuff? How do I know it isn't there?


-tg


Examine it closely. There is no large white triangle.


Arthttp://home.epix.net/~artnpeg


Hi Art.
That is what the brain does unconsciously! It implements innumerable
algorithms to fill in the gaps in a manner that has PROVEN to favor
physical survival and reproduction (evolutionary advantage).
Filling in the gaps consciously is called superstition. Superstition
fills in scientific gaps in order to bolster wishful thinking for
personal immortality.


I also was 'hardheaded' by the time I turned fifteen years of age and
happily remain so to this day. Guess I am more thick-headed =A0than
you =A0:-/.


I am =A0encouraged by the fact that we humans find our own sort of
'bliss' in our own sort of 'ignorance'. :-)
Regards
Zinnic


----------------------


or ... there's a method to our individual "madness" <smile>


Hi Zinnnnnn


Hi Sean
Yep! For me, life is still good. I wish it could be so forever for
everyone.
I am happy in my belief (sorry Brian) that when I terminate I will not
be conscious of such a stupendous tragedy. That would be Hell
indeed! :-\
Z- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I dont believe you said that !!!
You are happy "in your belief" but not because of your belief.
Happiness exists "now"...as you do.
Now dosent change, just ones consciousness of now.
Beyond belief.
It is not 'about time', as beliefs are.
BOfL
.
User: "zinnic"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 09:13:04 AM
On Feb 5, 8:38=A0am, "bigflet...@gmail.com" <bigflet...@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Feb 6, 12:27=A0am, zinnic <zeenr...@gate.net> wrote:





On Feb 5, 6:46=A0am, "Sean" <Hu_ca...@blah.com.au> wrote:


"zinnic" <zeenr...@gate.net> wrote in message


news:2765760f-b164-4a11-adbb-b49c07147241@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com.=

...

On Feb 4, 6:07 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:


On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:02:41 -0800 (PST), tg <tgdenn...@earthlink.net=


wrote:


On Feb 4, 6:35 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html

Now Art, how do we distinguish between the 'triangle that isn't the=

re'

and the other stuff? How do I know it isn't there?


-tg


Examine it closely. There is no large white triangle.


Arthttp://home.epix.net/~artnpeg


Hi Art.
That is what the brain does unconsciously! It implements innumerable
algorithms to fill in the gaps in a manner that has PROVEN to favor
physical survival and reproduction (evolutionary advantage).
Filling in the gaps consciously is called superstition. Superstition
fills in scientific gaps in order to bolster wishful thinking for
personal immortality.


I also was 'hardheaded' by the time I turned fifteen years of age and
happily remain so to this day. Guess I am more thick-headed =A0than
you =A0:-/.


I am =A0encouraged by the fact that we humans find our own sort of
'bliss' in our own sort of 'ignorance'. :-)
Regards
Zinnic


----------------------


or ... there's a method to our individual "madness" <smile>


Hi Zinnnnnn


Hi Sean
Yep! For me, life is still good. I wish it could be so forever for
everyone.
I am happy in my belief (sorry Brian) that when I terminate I will not
be conscious of such a stupendous tragedy. That would be Hell
indeed! :-\
Z- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


I dont believe you said that !!!

You are happy "in your belief" but not because of your belief.
Happiness exists "now"...as you do.

Now dosent change, just ones consciousness of now.

Beyond belief.

It is not 'about time', as beliefs are.

BOfL- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

OK Brian, whatever you say! I am made happy by the belief that you
understood what I was saying no matter how you convulate semantics and
syntax. :-)
Zinnic
.




User: "Art"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 09:22:23 AM
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 04:36:39 -0800 (PST), zinnic <zeenric2@gate.net>
wrote:

On Feb 4, 6:07 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:02:41 -0800 (PST), tg <tgdenn...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

On Feb 4, 6:35 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html

Now Art, how do we distinguish between the 'triangle that isn't there'
and the other stuff? How do I know it isn't there?


-tg


Examine it closely. There is no large white triangle.

Hi Art.
That is what the brain does unconsciously! It implements innumerable
algorithms to fill in the gaps in a manner that has PROVEN to favor
physical survival and reproduction (evolutionary advantage).
Filling in the gaps consciously is called superstition. Superstition
fills in scientific gaps in order to bolster wishful thinking for
personal immortality.

I also was 'hardheaded' by the time I turned fifteen years of age and
happily remain so to this day. Guess I am more thick-headed than
you :-/.

That's ok. I know it's not easy to awaken from one's slumber :)

I am encouraged by the fact that we humans find our own sort of
'bliss' in our own sort of 'ignorance'. :-)
Regards
Zinnic

If and when you do awaken, you'll find all of your precious
faculties enhanced. Hardheads like to believe it's all wishful
thinking and "dumbing down" but spiritual awakening is
just the opposite. It was truly a delight to actually
_understand_ through personal experience the basis
of man's religions. I had lost the "awe and wonder" that
Einstein mentioned, and I agree with him that without it
you are as good as dead.
I remember thinking as a child that God must have a sense
of humor to create humans with burning questions and a
desire to know the answers. Oddly enough, my current
views of the physical illusion as "smoke and mirrors" sometimes
results in a similar thought. I think the truth is so bizzare
that it hits my funny bone :) It's like some famous physicist
remarked about a certain theory ... that it wasn't
bizarre enough to be true.
Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg
.
User: "zinnic"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 11:22:20 AM
On Feb 5, 9:22=A0am, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 04:36:39 -0800 (PST),zinnic<zeenr...@gate.net>
wrote:

On Feb 4, 6:07=A0pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

=2E

I also was 'hardheaded' by the time I turned fifteen years of age and
happily remain so to this day. Guess I am more thick-headed =A0than
you =A0:-/.


That's ok. I know it's not easy to awaken from one's slumber :)

Is it possible that we are both dreaming we are awake? Nah!

I am =A0encouraged by the fact that we humans find our own sort of
'bliss' in our own sort of 'ignorance'. :-)

I had lost the "awe and wonder" that
Einstein mentioned, and I agree with him that without it
you are as good as dead.

I agree. I am happy to have retained the wonderment of existing in
this amazing universe, even for a short while. 'Eternal' existence
would eventually pall as experiences/memories piled and piled one on
another. One wonders, would eternity lead to an equilibrium state of
contentment or of misery?
Total termination holds no such uncertainty.

I remember thinking as a child that God must have a sense
of humor to create humans with burning questions and a
desire to know the answers. Oddly enough, my current
views of the physical illusion as "smoke and mirrors" sometimes
results in a similar thought. I think the truth is so bizzare
that it hits my funny bone :) It's like some famous physicist
remarked about a certain theory ... that it wasn't
bizarre enough to be true.

I guess the 'joke' will be over when the 'story' ends.
Z
.


User: "Anthony G. Rubino"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 08:19:29 AM
Zinnic wrote:
That is what the brain does unconsciously! It implements innumerable
algorithms to fill in the gaps in a manner that has PROVEN to favor
physical survival and reproduction (evolutionary advantage). Filling in
the gaps consciously is called superstition. Superstition fills in
scientific gaps in order to bolster wishful thinking for personal
immortality.
My Comment:
I was very tired when I first looked at it. I stared at it for 5 or 10
minutes and it didn't make sense to me. While relaxing
away from it, it became perfectly clear to me. Filling in the gaps is
the key, but, is there any detailed explanation provided on how and why
it creates the image, and the reason for each element? I'll post my
thoughts on how and why it appears when I get some rest. The how and
why presents an interesting question with regard to whether it should be
considered to be there or not: i.e., whether or not it should be
considered to be a phantom since it's there and not there at the same
time.
Tony, philosopher
http://www.geocities.com/trisector/

So many misconceptions, so little time.
.
User: "zinnic"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 09:04:22 AM
On Feb 5, 8:19=A0am,
(Anthony G. Rubino) wrote:

Zinnic wrote:

That is what the brain does unconsciously! It implements innumerable
algorithms to fill in the gaps in a manner that has PROVEN to favor
physical survival and reproduction (evolutionary advantage). Filling in
the gaps consciously is called superstition. Superstition fills in
scientific gaps in order to bolster wishful thinking for personal
immortality.

My Comment:
I was very tired when I first looked at it. I stared at it for 5 or 10
minutes and it didn't make sense to me. While relaxing
away from it, it became perfectly clear to me. Filling in the gaps is
the key, but, is there any detailed explanation provided on how and why
it creates the image, and the reason for each element? I'll post my
thoughts on how and =A0why it appears when I get some rest. The how and
why presents an interesting question with regard to whether it should be
considered to be there or not: i.e., whether or not it should be
considered to be a phantom since it's there and not there at the same
time.

Tony, philosopherhttp://www.geocities.com/trisector/

So many misconceptions, so little time.

There are many "good explanations" extant. Examples are Chapter 4 (The
Zombie in the Brain) and 5 (the Secret Life of James Thurber) of
Rachandran and Blakeslee's 'Phantoms in the Brain' and, in more
scientific detail, Chapter 4 (The Mind's Eye) in Pinker's 'How the
Mind Works'. Else 'Google' optical illusions.
IMO consideration whether or not an illusory image is present is
unlikely to be informative. Such consideration delves way too deep
into the abyss of subjective 'ingression'.
Regards
Zinnic
.
User: "Anthony G. Rubino"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 10:58:25 AM
Zinnic wrote:
There are many "good explanations" extant. Examples are Chapter 4 (The
Zombie in the Brain) and 5 (the Secret Life of James Thurber) of
Rachandran and Blakeslee's 'Phantoms in the Brain' and, in more
scientific detail, Chapter 4 (The Mind's Eye) in Pinker's 'How the Mind
Works'. Else 'Google' optical illusions.
IMO consideration whether or not an illusory image is present is
unlikely to be informative. Such consideration delves way too deep into
the abyss of subjective 'ingression'. Regards

First of all, I wish to thank Art for that contribution. as well as you
Zinnic. I had never seen that before and it fits perfectly as a visual
aid that could I use in explaining the triunity concept which also
'delves way too deep into the abyss of subjective 'ingression'.' A
perfect triangle is a basic model, but the beauty of this particular
illusion is that: A case could be made for the existence, or non
existence of any triangles or circles at all.
My website is a bit of a mess due to neglect, and I'm trying to build up
a head of steam to update it and consolidate some of my current thinking
as posted in this group in relation to my original writings of 50 years
ago that are now on my website. I will have to check copyright
implications as well as re-learning some computer stuff. I've been
using webtv for over ten years, and I'm spoiled with its simplicity.
Despite its severe limitations and incompatibilities that make it
difficult to format posts with alternating quotes for ease of reading,
its ease of use let's me concentrate on content and topic.
I recently got a new iMac with gigabytes of storage, but there's so much
clutter, and so many distractions, that I get frustrated trying to use
it. I got more done with an IBM 1401 with only 16K of memory and a CPM
with all of 64K of memory with floppy disks. I wrote all my own programs
for my own typewriter business, all of which have gone the way of the
dodo birds, my contemporaries. The comfort of full control of the source
code, and the other minor changes that have taken place in the past 20
to 30 years have got me stifled.
Tony, philosopher
http://www.geocities.com/trisector/

So many misconceptions, so little time.
.

User: "Anthony G. Rubino"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 11:19:49 AM
Zinnic wrote:
There are many "good explanations" extant. Examples are Chapter 4 (The
Zombie in the Brain) and 5 (the Secret Life of James Thurber) of
Rachandran and Blakeslee's 'Phantoms in the Brain' and, in more
scientific detail, Chapter 4 (The Mind's Eye) in Pinker's 'How the Mind
Works'. Else 'Google' optical illusions.
IMO consideration whether or not an illusory image is present is
unlikely to be informative. Such consideration delves way too deep into
the abyss of subjective 'ingression'. Regards

First of all, I wish to thank Art for that contribution. as well as you
Zinnic. I had never seen that before and it fits perfectly as a visual
aid that could I use in explaining the triunity concept which also
'delves way too deep into the abyss of subjective 'ingression'.' A
perfect triangle is a basic model, but the beauty of this particular
illusion is that: A case could be made for the existence, or non
existence of any triangles or circles at all.
My website is a bit of a mess due to neglect, and I'm trying to build up
a head of steam to update it and consolidate some of my current thinking
as posted in this group in relation to my original writings of 50 years
ago that are now on my website. I will have to check copyright
implications as well as re-learning some computer stuff. I've been
using webtv for over ten years, and I'm spoiled with its simplicity.
Despite its severe limitations and incompatibilities that make it
difficult to format posts with alternating quotes for ease of reading,
its ease of use let's me concentrate on content and topic.
I recently got a new iMac with gigabytes of storage, but there's so much
clutter, and so many distractions, that I get frustrated trying to use
it. I got more done with an IBM 1401 with only 16K of memory and a CPM
with all of 64K of memory with floppy disks. I wrote all my own programs
for my own typewriter business, all of which have gone the way of the
dodo birds, my contemporaries. The comfort of full control of the source
code, and the other minor changes that have taken place in the past 20
to 30 years have got me stifled.
Tony, philosopher
http://www.geocities.com/trisector/

So many misconceptions, so little time.
.
User: "Art"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 05:02:13 PM
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 12:19:49 -0500,
(Anthony G.
Rubino) wrote:

First of all, I wish to thank Art for that contribution. as well as you
Zinnic. I had never seen that before and it fits perfectly as a visual
aid that could I use in explaining the triunity concept

Tony, I scanned that image from a page of a book I'm currently
reading. The raw scanned image has a huge # of pixels, and I
reduced it to 600 wide X 565 deep. Let me know if you want or
need the image in a different size.
Incidentally, I had no particular motive in putting up the image
and posting the link. I did it on impulse. I had also never
seen it before and simply found it interesting. I'm glad that
some here found it interesting as well.
My wife insists that she sees lines outlining the phantom
triangle. I don't perceive lines myself, but I can't rid my
brain of the illusion of a large white trigngle every time I look
at it. I've never before seen such a stubborn and persistent illusion
as this :)
Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

.
User: "casey"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 06:01:05 PM
On Feb 6, 10:02=A0am, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

My wife insists that she sees lines outlining the
phantom triangle. I don't perceive lines myself,
but I can't rid my brain of the illusion of a
large white trigngle every time I look at it.

I've never before seen such a stubborn and
persistent illusion as this :)

It surprises me that everyone is taken by this old
example of illusionary contours. There are plenty
of even more complex examples on the internet.
How do you know it is an illusion? What logic are
you using to come to this conclusion?
Strictly speaking it is not an illusion. If you
were to place a real triangle (or any other shape
if you want to try it with a paint program) that
had the same color as the background then that
is exactly what it should look like.
This is where philosophy based on "thinking for
yourself" will fail. Empirical investigation will
show that your subjective views can be mistaken.
Our world is actively constructed. We are unaware
of these models until we detect an inconsistency.
For example when people look at a rainbow they
see color stripes and yet there are no stripes
in an actual rainbow. An illusion they don't
know they have because everyone sees it.
The hardest thing to do is convince someone they
are suffering from a cognitive illusion, particularly
if they just "think for themselves".
JC
.
User: "Art"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 06:45:53 PM
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:01:05 -0800 (PST), casey
<jgkjcasey@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

On Feb 6, 10:02 am, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

My wife insists that she sees lines outlining the
phantom triangle. I don't perceive lines myself,
but I can't rid my brain of the illusion of a
large white trigngle every time I look at it.

I've never before seen such a stubborn and
persistent illusion as this :)


It surprises me that everyone is taken by this old
example of illusionary contours. There are plenty
of even more complex examples on the internet.

How do you know it is an illusion? What logic are
you using to come to this conclusion?

??? Something that isn't there is a illusion, no?
Didn't you just call them illusionary contours
yourself?

Strictly speaking it is not an illusion. If you
were to place a real triangle (or any other shape
if you want to try it with a paint program) that
had the same color as the background then that
is exactly what it should look like.

??? When foreground color = background color
there's no shape there to be perceived.

This is where philosophy based on "thinking for
yourself" will fail. Empirical investigation will
show that your subjective views can be mistaken.

You don't think for yourself? Who does your thinking for
you?

Our world is actively constructed. We are unaware
of these models until we detect an inconsistency.

For example when people look at a rainbow they
see color stripes and yet there are no stripes
in an actual rainbow. An illusion they don't
know they have because everyone sees it.

The hardest thing to do is convince someone they
are suffering from a cognitive illusion, particularly
if they just "think for themselves".

JC

Sorry, but your post is unintelligible :)
Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg
.
User: "casey"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 07:49:56 PM
On Feb 6, 11:45=A0am, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

How do you know it is an illusion? What logic are
you using to come to this conclusion?



??? Something that isn't there is a illusion, no?
Didn't you just call them illusionary contours
yourself?

I never said it wasn't an illusion I said how do
you know it's an illusion. It is how we get to
know if what we see (or believe) is real.

Strictly speaking it is not an illusion. If you
were to place a real triangle (or any other shape
if you want to try it with a paint program) that
had the same color as the background then that
is exactly what it should look like.



??? When foreground color =3D background color
there's no shape there to be perceived.

If it obscures other objects there is a shape
to be perceived, that's why you perceived it!
Why else do you think such mechanisms would
have evolved?
Another way a shape can be perceived, when it
has the same texture as the background, is when
it moves. Very handy for predators trying to
detect camouflaged prey.

Our world is actively constructed. We are unaware
of these models until we detect an inconsistency.

For example when people look at a rainbow they
see color stripes and yet there are no stripes
in an actual rainbow. An illusion they don't
know they have because everyone sees it.


The hardest thing to do is convince someone they
are suffering from a cognitive illusion, particularly
if they just "think for themselves".



Sorry, but your post is unintelligible :)

No need to be sorry, it is your lose not mine :)
I wonder how unintelligible it is to others?
JC
.
User: "Anthony G. Rubino"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 08:38:39 PM
casey wrote:
If it obscures other objects there is a shape to be perceived, that's
why you perceived it! Why else do you think such mechanisms would have
evolved?
My reply:
Put 3 dots on paper and you will see a triangle. What's being obscured?
The background behind the dots?
What stimulus/response or cause/effect observation did you use to guess
one of the possible reasons for the observation?
I thought I perceived it because I looked at it. Silly me.
Tony, philosopher
http://www.geocities.com/trisector/

So many misconceptions, so little time.
.
User: "casey"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 09:17:54 PM
On Feb 6, 1:38=A0pm,
(Anthony G. Rubino) wrote:

casey wrote:


If it obscures other objects there is a shape to be
perceived, that's why you perceived it! Why else do
you think such mechanisms would have evolved?

My reply:
Put 3 dots on paper and you will see a triangle.

No, you will only be able to imagine a triangle' you will
not actually experience the contours.
The area within the Kanizsa triangle is often experienced
as being brighter than the background, something you most
likely would never have imagined would be the case. It is
instead presented as an actual experience, no imagination
required.

What's being obscured? The background behind the dots?


What stimulus/response or cause/effect observation did
you use to guess one of the possible reasons for the
observation?


I thought I perceived it because I looked at it.
Silly me.

I was talking about the perception of the so called
illusionary contours which are actually experienced
as real contours not just imagined as connections
between three points.
JC
.
User: "casey"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 10:33:21 PM
On Feb 6, 2:17=A0pm, casey <jgkjca...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

On Feb 6, 1:38=A0pm,

(Anthony G. Rubino) wrote:

Put 3 dots on paper and you will see a triangle.

Moving dots are interesting,
http://www.biomotionlab.ca/Demos/BMLwalker.html
All the moving dots are instantaneously and robustly
organized into a coherent and vivid percept.
theories to explain it,
http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/uni/knv/arl/arl-pathways.html
.





User: "Anthony G. Rubino"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 07:39:36 PM
casey wrote:
This is where philosophy based on "thinking for yourself" will fail.
Empirical investigation will show that your subjective views can be
mistaken.
How so? I see many relationships in this illusion, particularly for its
simplicity.
How do you know that what you see in any investigation does not contain
some illusions some can see and others can miss?
I see enumerable relationships in this simple model of observation that
are part of my common sense experiences that can be applied to any area
of knowledge. None are mistaken if I can find ways to interpret them for
some purpose. All empirical investigations depend not only what is there
to be observed, but also the sense that could be made from different
interpretations of the data that is there to be observed, especially the
data and information derived from what's missing.
They can be clues to discoveries.
Being fooled is a natural part of experience built into our instincts
and intuitions for a purpose. Understanding ways to separate the
relevant from the irrelevant by comparing the known to the unusual is
the stuff of conscious thought.
Tony, philosopher
http://www.geocities.com/trisector/

So many misconceptions, so little time.
.
User: "casey"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 05 Feb 2008 09:03:42 PM
On Feb 6, 12:39=A0pm,
(Anthony G. Rubino) wrote:

All empirical investigations depend not only what is there
to be observed, but also the sense that could be made from
different interpretations of the data that is there to be
observed, especially the data and information derived from
what's missing. They can be clues to discoveries.

Do you agree with this?
http://www.angelfire.com/mn2/tisthammerw/science.html
JC
.








User: "tg"

Title: Re: phantom triangle 04 Feb 2008 06:20:14 PM
On Feb 4, 7:07 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:02:41 -0800 (PST), tg <tgdenn...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

On Feb 4, 6:35 pm, Art <n...@zilch.com> wrote:

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/triangle.html

Now Art, how do we distinguish between the 'triangle that isn't there'
and the other stuff? How do I know it isn't there?


-tg


Examine it closely. There is no large white triangle.

So what if we shrink the segments which are not bordered by dark lines
to 1 micron. Is there still not a large white triangle?
-tg

Arthttp://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

.




  Page 1 of 1

1

 


Related Articles
 

NEWER

pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER