Do we see reality as it is according to neuroscience?

[buket]

Interface Theory of Perception by Donald Hoffman suggests that evolution has given us interface to perceive the reality which does not resemble what we see.. What do you think about this theory?

 

[serotonin2A]

It is correct that the world we see is a construct created by our brains. The eye only fixates on one point at a time, so we never actually see a complete view at one time. We also only see a limited range of EM radiation, and hear a range of air vibration frequencies. Everything visually is picked up by filters that detect moving edges. We can't sense charge distribution, or magnetic fields, or UV, or infrasonic.

The thing is though, the world that we construct has to be pretty accurate, otherwise we would die. So we obviously do a pretty good job representing it, or we would get eaten like the beetles he mentioned at the begining.

 

[buket]

What if we perceived a lion as a cat? ?

 

[Deleted member 170540]

All of us have our own personal reality, which depends on our culture, life experiences and genetics. That reality can also be suspect to manipulation. As the nazi propaganda minister Goebbels said, "if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth".

 

[Coolwhip]

This is very Platoesque.

 

[Limpet_Chicken]

Actually, some people CAN see into the UV end of the spectrum, into the near-ultraviolet. This is because they are aphakic, having had the lens of the eye (which blocks UV) removed, or having been born the lens absent, and these people can percieve near-ultraviolet light as a whitish-blue or whitish violet. And other people, are born with tetrachromatic vision, humans normally possess three separate cone cell types (the cones are responsible for perception of color, each sensitive to a separate part of the spectrum, red, green and blue) trichromachy is the most common visual architetcture, not of course counting the rod cells, monochromatic cells sensitive to low light levels but being monochromatic, thats all they do, they perceive greyscale, and are very sensitive to low light levels but useless in bright light in which they lose capacity to respond (temporarily, that is, as they reversibly bleach out)

There has been a research study of a woman (its X-linked seemingly) with true functional tetrachromacy, who can (or could, I have no idea when she was born or if she is still alive, during modern times with respect to research but the date of death is of no import since nothing was reported pertaining to health conditions linked to or correlated with her enhanced color vision.)
percieve many more hues and distinctions in her visual spectrum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Humans

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentachromacy This is also interesting.

What I wouldn't give for some genetic tweaking. I have also for a long, long time wondered if by tweaking the structure of vitamin A, or perhaps the portion of beta-carotene, for a safer experiment, in terms of cis- and trans- orientation of the double bonds in the chain of vitamin A, or perhaps chain length or other substitutions, thus altering its absorption spectrum as a chromophore could be used as an orally administered (rather than being injected into the eye, I am not about to go so far as to do an intracular injection of anything, and certainly not repeated ones. Shooting into a vein, IM or subcut is one thing, and I've had an IP injection once (not done myself) and that was less than pleasant. But I am certainly not going to stick my head in a stereotactic frame and push a sharpened steel spike slowly, steadily into my eyeball, pull it out, get another and plunge it slowly and squelchily into my into my OTHER eyeball, with a squelch and a scpplickt-pop as I drag it from within the juicy bit of the globe of my second eye.

But a tweaked beta-carotene or vitamin A, even a topical preparation for the eye, having been designed to facilitate formation of an abnormal 'visual purple' pigment, the retinaldehydes, only having been modified so the resultant photorhodopsins undergo alterations in their active conformations upon irradiation by light and thus (one would hope) conveying enhanced spectral resolution.

Would this be possible? Would be fucking sweet (to use the highly technical term in the optician's jargon) to have the capacity to see into the IR waveband and so have an innate thermal imaging ability, rather than as people do if they wish to view wavelengths into the IR region of the electromagnetic spectrum, wear big bulky thermal imaging goggles or use specialist cameras. I'd be happy with even the greyscale-like IR camera-like vision, but full thermal imaging would be even better.

 

[Coolwhip]

At the risk of de-railing the thread further(not exactly what the point of the paper was LC)...everything through my right eye has a red tint, and through my left eye has a green/blue tint, but with both eyes open it looks "normal"...I kind of always assumed this was common as a child, but I've never met anyone with the same defect, and never looked into it any further.

 

[Limpet_Chicken]

Must be defective cones for the relevant eyes, only selective. The combined colors of the spectrum making the complete bandwidth available to normal eyes (white is not a true color as such, but a combination of all of them viewable to our (average, normally functioning) eyesight.

 

[serotonin2A]

Actually, some people CAN see into the UV end of the spectrum, into the near-ultraviolet. This is because they are aphakic, having had the lens of the eye (which blocks UV) removed, or having been born the lens absent, and these people can percieve near-ultraviolet light as a whitish-blue or whitish violet. And other people, are born with tetrachromatic vision, humans normally possess three separate cone cell types (the cones are responsible for perception of color, each sensitive to a separate part of the spectrum, red, green and blue) trichromachy is the most common visual architetcture, not of course counting the rod cells, monochromatic cells sensitive to low light levels but being monochromatic, thats all they do, they perceive greyscale, and are very sensitive to low light levels but useless in bright light in which they lose capacity to respond (temporarily, that is, as they reversibly bleach out)

There has been a research study of a woman (its X-linked seemingly) with true functional tetrachromacy, who can (or could, I have no idea when she was born or if she is still alive, during modern times with respect to research but the date of death is of no import since nothing was reported pertaining to health conditions linked to or correlated with her enhanced color vision.)
percieve many more hues and distinctions in her visual spectrum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Humans

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentachromacy This is also interesting.

What I wouldn't give for some genetic tweaking. I have also for a long, long time wondered if by tweaking the structure of vitamin A, or perhaps the portion of beta-carotene, for a safer experiment, in terms of cis- and trans- orientation of the double bonds in the chain of vitamin A, or perhaps chain length or other substitutions, thus altering its absorption spectrum as a chromophore could be used as an orally administered (rather than being injected into the eye, I am not about to go so far as to do an intracular injection of anything, and certainly not repeated ones. Shooting into a vein, IM or subcut is one thing, and I've had an IP injection once (not done myself) and that was less than pleasant. But I am certainly not going to stick my head in a stereotactic frame and push a sharpened steel spike slowly, steadily into my eyeball, pull it out, get another and plunge it slowly and squelchily into my into my OTHER eyeball, with a squelch and a scpplickt-pop as I drag it from within the juicy bit of the globe of my second eye.

But a tweaked beta-carotene or vitamin A, even a topical preparation for the eye, having been designed to facilitate formation of an abnormal 'visual purple' pigment, the retinaldehydes, only having been modified so the resultant photorhodopsins undergo alterations in their active conformations upon irradiation by light and thus (one would hope) conveying enhanced spectral resolution.

Would this be possible? Would be fucking sweet (to use the highly technical term in the optician's jargon) to have the capacity to see into the IR waveband and so have an innate thermal imaging ability, rather than as people do if they wish to view wavelengths into the IR region of the electromagnetic spectrum, wear big bulky thermal imaging goggles or use specialist cameras. I'd be happy with even the greyscale-like IR camera-like vision, but full thermal imaging would be even better.

Yes, but those people still cannot see the full range of UV radiation.

I think the IR vision thing was in Predator. The fact that some IR frequencies can penetrate walls is a good example how we are unable to perceive a really interesting part of the world. The same is true of magnetic and electrical fields. However, if our brain responded to such phenomena then it would require additional sense organs and processing power, but without any real benefit in terms of survival.

 

[Solipsis]

http://www.bluelight.org/vb/threads/805899-Interface-theory-of-perception

Why did you make a new thread?

It's funny that I also took the electomagnetic spectrum as an example, is that a coincidence? :D
Tetrachromy is very interesting, I think it's only recently been shown in humans but has been known in the pelagic world (certain shrimp iirc?) for longer. Still it changes little about the relative modesty of the perceptual spectrum vs the total spectrum, which I assume is technically unlimited in both directions (well if you call infinitesimal also a sort of infinite), but some of the waves at the extreme ends are just exceedingly rare? Which reminds us of energies used at CERN, although astronomically we already knew there are much greater energies.

Wow trying to engineer or induce the ability to see other kinds of radiation is fascinating to think about, maybe a matter of time before they can CRISPR not only the known type of tetrachromy but perhaps also tweak the absorptions and activation of retinal proteins. Yes UV and IR may be interesting as they are still abundantly generated on our planet, but something like gamma-rays seems really pointless, not in the least because at some point high-energy radiation will be killing you if you perceive it lol?
I guess that means it also requires parallel genetic engineering of genetic modifications to be able to resist radiation, using not the cockroach as our model but tardigrades which amazingly have compounds protecting their DNA from radiation that NASA would kill for..

Oh my off-topic sense is tingling.

 

[Limpet_Chicken]

Mantis shrimp. They are IIRC hexachromats. Would love to have some transgenic, humanized cell lines engineered and grafted. As well as a nictitating membrane and tapetum lucidum, to reflect back otherwise lost light onto the retina.

 

[Solipsis]

Cat eyes?

 

[Coolwhip]

Yes, but those people still cannot see the full range of UV radiation.

I think the IR vision thing was in Predator. The fact that some IR frequencies can penetrate walls is a good example how we are unable to perceive a really interesting part of the world. The same is true of magnetic and electrical fields. However, if our brain responded to such phenomena then it would require additional sense organs and processing power, but without any real benefit in terms of survival.

Like vipers?

 

[Limpet_Chicken]

Precisely.

Cat eyes (wouldn't mind if it were possible to get surgery in a cosmetic sense also-cat/(some)-snake's eyes' slit pupils.

And recombinant humanized cells from pit viper or boa, say, connected to some spare facial sensory nerves, or perhaps minor olfactory nerve connections to the main olfactory nerve, so as to be able to literally sniff out heat. Artificial lenses for the eyes to filter and regulate the amplitude of UV, but pass near-UV wavelengths.

And if we are going to get a whole bunch of surgery, hell why not magnetosensory perception, somewhere one doesn't need conventional sense of touch, ears, bridge of nose or something, cell-to-neurone grafts of cells containing magnetite particles (perhaps coupled to stretch-activated ion channels, if we are going to theorize about how such alterations could be done) and a fish-like sharks have.

Tell you one thing I'd really like though, with regards to more mundane, cosmetic hacks. a tail. A long, cat-furry, prehensile tail.

 

[Coolwhip]

Seems like we aren't too far off.

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-...lant-restores-sense-of-touch-to-paralyzed-man

http://www.pcworld.com/article/209553/Move_a_mouse_cursor_with_your_brain.html

http://www.livescience.com/49991-bionic-eye-implanted-man.html

I mean how hard would it be to program the bionic eye to detect magnetic/radio waves and transmit the signal to the brain in an interpretable way.

 

[buket]

Seems like we aren't too far off.

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-...lant-restores-sense-of-touch-to-paralyzed-man

http://www.pcworld.com/article/209553/Move_a_mouse_cursor_with_your_brain.html

http://www.livescience.com/49991-bionic-eye-implanted-man.html

I mean how hard would it be to program the bionic eye to detect magnetic/radio waves and transmit the signal to the brain in an interpretable way.

Did you read the theory?(Interface Theory of Perception)

 

[serotonin2A]

Precisely.

Cat eyes (wouldn't mind if it were possible to get surgery in a cosmetic sense also-cat/(some)-snake's eyes' slit pupils.

And recombinant humanized cells from pit viper or boa, say, connected to some spare facial sensory nerves, or perhaps minor olfactory nerve connections to the main olfactory nerve, so as to be able to literally sniff out heat. Artificial lenses for the eyes to filter and regulate the amplitude of UV, but pass near-UV wavelengths.

And if we are going to get a whole bunch of surgery, hell why not magnetosensory perception, somewhere one doesn't need conventional sense of touch, ears, bridge of nose or something, cell-to-neurone grafts of cells containing magnetite particles (perhaps coupled to stretch-activated ion channels, if we are going to theorize about how such alterations could be done) and a fish-like sharks have.

Tell you one thing I'd really like though, with regards to more mundane, cosmetic hacks. a tail. A long, cat-furry, prehensile tail.

Seems like we aren't too far off.

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-...lant-restores-sense-of-touch-to-paralyzed-man

http://www.pcworld.com/article/209553/Move_a_mouse_cursor_with_your_brain.html

http://www.livescience.com/49991-bionic-eye-implanted-man.html

I mean how hard would it be to program the bionic eye to detect magnetic/radio waves and transmit the signal to the brain in an interpretable way.

The brain integrates multiple streams of sensory input into a coherent unitary construct of reality. The manipulations listed above wouldn't induce new "senses", but rather just provide a few informative cues using existing senses. This isn't really any different then the tools we commonly use everyday -- your phone rings or vibrates when you get a call, and then you know that the antenna on the phone has received a radio transmission from a cell phone tower. But that perception of radio waves isn't integrated into our sensity perception of reality, and doesn't really give us the subjective impression that we can sense radio waves. The same is true with the proposal to link heat sensors to nasal nerves -- it would cue you to the presence of heat, but you would never directly integrate that into your perception of reality in the same was as your existing senses are. In other words, you would never subjectively feel like you were directly sensing heat.

A better example of something that you can do right now to actually mimic a new sense is to implant small subcutaneous magnets over your entire body. People have already implanted single magnets in their fingers, which allows them to sense magnetic fields. If you did that over your entire body then the magnetic firld sensitivity would probably eventually become completely integrated into your perception of the world.

 

[Limpet_Chicken]

That was more or less the idea 5HT2a. To essentially hotwire existing sensory channels for more...interesting datastreams.

I like the magnet idea. And here is a theoretical idea to one up it, so to speak.

Hows about nanoscale electromagnets coupled to a ligand-activated ion channel that otherwise, humans do not possess, grafted to an autologous cell line. Would this allow for a pharmacologically switchable effect?

 

[Solipsis]

I think I will have to disagree that people can't learn over time to integrate new senses... it likely depends on the complexity on the signals, but I think humans can adapt - the younger a person is to be exposed to new input, the more likely it is that it can be integrated just like learning a native language or learning music.
An example to the contrary is that there are blind people who have been given sight at an older age and struggle immensely to integrate that. In this context it seems that it is too complex and too much to start with at an older age just like it is not workable to try to teach a senile person Chinese or Russian, yet you can teach it to younger people. It's a gradual thing IMO and whether it is succesful depends on 'difficulty / complexity level' and age among other things.

Adding a broader part of the electromagnetic spectrum to sight, like UV, may be less radical because you have your existing sight as a scaffold to integrate the new information. But adding perception of a very very wide new range of wavelengths will be immensely disorienting. Similarly I'd expect a limit to how much sensory input it's reasonable for an infant to learn to interpret, more processing power might be needed to deal with it, then new questions arise like what are emotional consequences of such overstimulation - are they still serious if processing power is increased? Becomes more difficult to predict I guess.

Oh sorry seems that I missed the point that a very simple signal will not be integrated as such - on that I agree because it's incredibly one-dimensional. Yet there are a lot of pretty one-dimensional "senses" aren't there? However those are secondary senses and not really sensory but more like a transistor that has received heavily processed primary sensory input which triggers something like a sense of danger or a general presence.
Despite the fact that in that way it's a very integrated kind of sense regarding how it is triggered, I'm not sure if what is downstream from that is necessarily different from a 'one-dimensional' sense that is artificially triggered.

It can still get integrated in other ways and get involved in emotional learning, by connecting the sense with the experiences that surround and follow it. If every time your 'fire alarm' sense is triggered you have an experience of being in a fire afterwards, think of what you would feel like if you would have that sense alerted a third time and the richness of memories relived etc. And that's a very simple example compared to senses that may be triggered much more often.
I think the bigger difference with true senses is that it's scalar rather than vector if you get what I mean. You cannot separate sight and hearing from the directionality involved with it, but with sensing that there is a fire you can.

 

[iksaxophone]

Would this be possible? Would be fucking sweet (to use the highly technical term in the optician's jargon) to have the capacity to see into the IR waveband and so have an innate thermal imaging ability, rather than as people do if they wish to view wavelengths into the IR region of the electromagnetic spectrum, wear big bulky thermal imaging goggles or use specialist cameras. I'd be happy with even the greyscale-like IR camera-like vision, but full thermal imaging would be even better.

This would be so sweet, I would do it in a heartbeat.