What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
59 Comments
- Aeiri, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9What does evolution, creationism, or anything along those lines have ANYTHING to do with this?
You brain is essentially a clean slate of information when you are born, with certain parts of it doing base functions it is aware of. It has no knowledge of what a room is, let alone that if certain aspects of the room were to change, what to ignore.
Over time after our brains understand the world around us a little (I would say after we learn to walk and can explore by ourselves), THEN it learns what types of things to ignore and what not to.
Now, this could be a simple matter of the brain adapting to what it is being given on the fly. Was the room slowly increased in size? I didn't see anything describing how they performed this test...
If it was, then the brain was probably still trying to understand the room and didn't "know" the room yet, so it assumed that the size was correct at the end.
However, if they let the people explore until they felt comfortable, waited 30 minutes, and then showed them the same room 4x bigger and asked the same questions as before, then that shows the brain is adjusting its previous knowledge to fit "facts" the scientists gave them if they said "its the same room". - jemstar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I betcha that if a REAL room expanded to four times its size, I would notice.
- Gottschalk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Actually to dismiss the notion that the room is growing is the most logical solution.
- OsakaWilson, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8The good doctor forgot to tag "...in virtual reality" to the end of his sentence. Doing research on 3D perspective in a 2D environment, then generalizing the results to apply to our interaction in the real world is just silly.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6If you were wearing virtual reality gear, I'm sure it'd be harder to notice things like this.
If you put someone in an actual room where you could mechanically move the walls to make the room bigger, I'm sure the people would notice. - beoswulf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This reminds me of a British program that made it to PBS a number of years ago.
A test subject was led to believe they were scheduled for a job interview, a test or to attend a conference, something along those lines. The test subject(s) was instructed to have a seat and wait in a room. In this test location were several people (unfamiliar to the test subject(s)) sitting in chairs scattered around the room (The majority paid actors in on the experiment). There were no apparent authority figures in the room and the cameras filming the study were hidden. The researchers would start to fill the room with a strong smelling smoke. The actors were directed to remain in their chairs and act oblivious to the burning smell and smoke. The smell of fire would become more and more apparent as the room filled up with smoke but the actors ignored it. And almost always so would the test subject. Until the room was so thick with smoke the test subject couldn't see they'd sit there, waiting for someone else to confirm what they were seeing and smelling. - pype, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Kenobi said it best: Your eyes can deceive you - don't trust them...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I hear you and agree. I am sure that in the VR sim, there were probably no shadows that changed as they would in a real world situation. There would be other clues, like texture patterns on the walls that would reveal as the walls receded. I find it hard to beleive that all this was taken into consideration in the VR sim.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3So I'm guessing you're a scientist working towards a cure for cancer?
- mortal-god, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I know I notice when the room enlarges and distorts around me. In fact I think I will go enlarge this room right now.
- tonage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3- Not taking sides, but the article DOES bring up the notion...
Actually, the story does not bring up the notion. You just did. A flaw in someone's perception of a virtual fake room has absolutely nothing to do with faith. I don't even see this as a flaw in human judgement. It shows more of a flaw in virtual reality. Because if I was in a real room that got that much bigger, I would know. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3what, like beer goggles?
- johndi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Current Biology shows that in certain circumstances people do not even notice if a room grows to four times its size.
I don't notice a thing while I'm sleeping. This would be hard to recreate in the real world, and we have no idea how wearing a headset and two flat screens screws up human perception. What the resolution was like? Did it look like the old windows maze screen-saver? Also since rooms don't tend to magically change size, and if they did I suspect it'd be rather noisy this is an interesting concept that likely won't mean a thing in the real world, but could possibly impact video games. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"The swastika (from Sanskrit svastika) is an equilateral cross with its arms bent at right angles in either left-facing or right-facing direction. The swastika is a holy symbol in Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism. In the West, it is most widely known and used as a symbol of Nazism. It is traditionally oriented so that a main line is horizontal, though it is occasionally rotated at forty-five degrees. The Hindu version is often decorated with a dot in each quadrant." - wikipedia
- adolfojp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Well of course, this is how the "Somebody Else's Problem field" works.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEP_field - johndi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Canoe, and Kayak are derived from native American words. They knew what a boat was, hell they made a few themselves. Whoever wrote what you reading was either repeating BS he heard or making his own hoax.
- majorbabu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2yup, there's been an even more simplified version of that experiment in which the test subject is asked to pick the longest line drawn on a black board. The answer would be straight forward one, but the paid actors in the group would always get up and object every time the subject provided the obviously correct answer, often times forcing the test subjects to go along with the group and pick a line that is clearly not the longest.
i don't think its a matter of not believing what you see. Its more about what your group believes.
The emperor's new clothes, so to speak. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3it's a religious web site...
more info for your brain (I love wikipedia): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika - Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3boy, aren't some people stupid, then? If I saw an aircraft trying to land on the road I would leave the f*cking road.
- AuAndCs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Still no cure for cancer...
- Dontdieman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Reminds me of a quote from Penn Jillette of Penn & Teller It went something like "Smart people are the easiest to trick because if they cant figure something out the automatically think it must be real"
- DollarBillYall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Being able to hear the room gives our brains tremendous amount of clues for spatialization--this study ignores them. Not applicable to real life (unless you're deaf or are in an anechoic chamber), but interesting nonetheless.
- tonage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1- well because people didnt evolve DUH! i mean we were intelegently designed to not notice stuff like this.
I was referring to this comment. I am assuming he is being sarcastic. I was not talking about the story itself. - tonage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Perhaps rather than showing a flaw in human judgement, this shows a flaw in virtual reality.
- jtxx000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well it said it was a stereographic display, no? Not true 3D but it is pseudo 3D.
- chigaze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wonder if the explanation is that the driver does see the plane but assumes that the fact that he is seeing it on the road is an optical illusion. In highway driving there is little time to react and analyze a situation, when faced with a decision between: there's an airplane on the road and there's an airplane flying along the valley just ahead that must be there, the latter is the easier to accept.
- chigaze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Simply increasing the size of the room would not change the relative size of the shadows in the room. They would change the relative size of the shadows to you but then in the real world shadows are constantly changing around us and for the most part we ignore them.
- Midnightbrewer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That's a test of cognitive dissonance and is a well-documented and understood phenomenon; we use the feedback of the actions of those around us to error-check our own judgments.
The trick of putting somebody in a virtual room, however, and expanding it to four times its size seems pretty pointless, since the room isn't really even there. It's like saying, "When you put people into entirely artificial situations with no bearing on reality, they don't know how to respond!" Well, duh. - vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Johndi: check out this documentary movie: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Bleep_Do_We_Know%3F!
(or book)
It basically covers quantum physics and the problem with observation and human mind phenomenon. The tribes that met columbus were document (at least according to this movie) not being able to see Columbus's ships. Or at least not comprehend them... Since their language or culture could not explain what these things were.
Either way... I think there is some truth to the matter. Sometimes we humans have a bad habbit of believing something not to be a certain way just because we don't have the comprehension for it... Mostly in optical illusions or just belief that something is impossible. Doesn't change the facts of the matter or the laws of physics. We just end up ignoring them. - tr0gd0rr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Exactly. It seems like these researchers forgot about some key aspects of reality that VR headsets don't quite duplicate: peripheral vision, true colors, true light and shadow and perfectly real-time movement.
- BobCat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2That move is *****. It was made by RAMTHA followers. Now, if you believe a 35,000 year old warrior is channeled through the body of a middle-aged blond California woman, perhaps there is some BLEEP you learn before posting here again.
- HellFire1876, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Anybody else creeped out by the symbol of Communism in the website's logo? I can't find the explanation of the logo, and I know for a fact that Communism is not a religion.
- Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Ok, what is tupid about this research is that it was, obviously, done with virtual reality. I'm no technophile by any means, in fact I'm the opposite, but I will ALWAYS recognize the limitations of technology and the marvels of nature. If this was possible to recreate in a physically-real room, I'm certain that our eyes would detect the subtlest changes, not the least because of our eyes focussing ability.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2http://www.sosglobe.com.nyud.net:8080/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=409&Itemid=29
The coral cache as this site doesn't look like it's ready to get digged - HellFire1876, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Let me clarify...I know what the hammer and sickle mean, I just couldn't find their justification for its inclusion in a collection of religious symbols.
- fishbert, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7The fact that there is such a heated controversy over evolution vs. intelligent design makes me wonder why anyone considers this study newsworthy...
Hey, can I get money to conduct a study to see if the sky is blue? - alphacorvus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That sounds incredible. I'd like to see this show, if anybody knows the name of it.
You can say logically that you'd get the hell out of the room, but you never know until you're in the situation yourself. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2no idea... Atheism maybe?
- LonelyShifter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0We're more used to our eyes deceiving us than the rest of our body. It's not that hard to believe that when they conflict, the eyes are the first to be doubted.
- cosmovi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4" ‘These results imply that observers are more willing to adjust their estimate of the separation between the eyes or the distance walked than to accept that the scene around them has changed in size,’ says Dr Glennerster. "
That's an astounding implication, but one that I cannot ignore. I feel that this is probably very true. - mike_p, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@tonage: No one is attacking religion... while this doesn't specifically mention religion, it has everything to do with religion in the sense that people retain "faith" in something they choose not (or simply refuse to) notice. It kind of makes it easy for someone to draw a comparison to how humans on earth came to be. Were we products of our solar system with clues such as dinosaurs, the Yucatan meteorite crater and many many other forms of evidence? ... or were we created by God, as said in a book that has been passed down and revised throughout the generations of mankind?
Not taking sides, but the article DOES bring up the notion... - bowe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Many People have probably seen this before but,
See if you can count how many times the people in the white shirts pass the basketball in the following video.
http://viscog.beckman.uiuc.edu/grafs/demos/15.html - antuny2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It is still going on. For example about 50 years ago nobody could think about mobile phone. But know every child is using that. Some philosophers say, that the 21th century will be the age of psycology. We will learn much more about our capacities as never before...
- tonage, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Virtual reality? Give me a break. This is lame. Why are some humans so impressed with what we have created? I cannot believe some people actually think results from a virtual reality experiment have anything to do with reality. Perhaps a visit to the shrink is in order here.
And even more hilarious, some of you actually use this to attack religion. Geez, you are so desperate. - mennucc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0my opinion: the experiment shows that Virtual Reality still sucks. 10 years ago it was hype, and considered a very promising technology. Nowadays it is just promising, but never developed into a real technology. It is like Artifical Intelligence: nobody ever can get it right.
- tuk999, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Do you realy think the 21th century will be the time of general psycology or may be neuro-biology???...
- Chimera512, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1i assume the sickle and hammer were meant to represent the unity of industrial and agricultural workers under communist regimes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammer_and_sickle
yup, i was right. - minonda, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Guess that explains why Scarlett Johansson was voted sexiest woman in the world.
- GiggleStick, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Well, since communism (at least in the USSR and in the PRC) officially declared atheism to be superior, I guess you could say it is a religious belief. Belief that God does not exist is a "religious" belief, since it can't be proven that he does not exist, any more than it can be proven he does (unless he shows up or something).
If you don't agree, then consider this scenario. A hot chick sends you an email asking if you want to go out on a date with her. You don't send her an email declining, but you don't respond at all. Even though you have not taken action, you have. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4This is like a study a while back. It has to do with what people can accept in reality. For example, you see airplanes at an airport right? Well most pilots when they do an emergency landing on a highway they die. Well some do. Anyways you would think its because of a busy traffic and/or crashing. Actually alot of the time it a car hitting the plane/pilot. Why? Cant the driver see a massive object in front of them? Well that would make sense. But people cant accept that the plane is there. Because they see airplanes in airports not on highways they are not expecting it. Therefore some people wont see it. Also I read something about how Indians couldn't see the ships coming towards their land (Like in eastern Canada and US) because they had never seen a ship before, therefore their brain couldn't accept it or "draw" it.
-
Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is