/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7999556
It doesn't. Next time there is a thunderstorm count the seconds between the flash and the boom. The same is true for a person talking to you, it's just that the distance is so small you don't notice the lag.

both light and sound travel extremely quickly. light travels much much faster than sound, but if you're standing 2 meters from somebody...
t = D/V = 2/V
Vs = 340 m/s
Vc = 300,000,000 m/s
ts = 0.00588 s
tc = 0.00000000667 s
So the lag between seeing someone and hearing them is about 1/170th of a second, if they're at a conversational distance, which is shorter than we can really perceive.

Note that if you're a few hilltops over from someone, you DO see them open their mouths before you hear them, due to the longer distance and therefore longer lag time.

>>7999571
Does that mean the brain doesn't perceive reality in real time and forces you to believe what you're seeing due to a lag in our brain?

>>7999580
You can't see an individual pixel on a screen from a few feet away either, that doesn't mean your brain is "tricking you"

>>7999560
>>7999571
This, and not to mention that all the sensory information your eyes and ears is post-processed and integrated by your brain, so what you experience is not the 'real' world but a constructed model. In fact, some experiments showed that if someone was played a video with the audio and visual tracks desynced, as long as the offset was below a certain (surprisingly high, I seem to remember) threshold then they wouldn't perceive anything wrong and would say they experienced sounds occurring at the 'correct' moment.

>>7999597
>that doesn't mean your brain is "tricking you"
yes it does

>>7999628
That implies the brain has access to the real data, and is purposefully misleading you.

In fact, it's just smoothed over a gap in your sensory data by essentially guessing what should be there, and it's incredibly good at this - you only notice when it goes wrong and not the majority of the time where it's working fine. I mean, you're not aware of your blind spots right now, are you?

>>7999647
>That implies the brain has access to the real data
It does. Are you implying it has access to fake data?
>is purposefully misleading you.
It's doing this as well. A smooth consciousness is better for survival than chunks of incoherent information, so the brain evolved to purposefully mislead us to increase our chances for survival.

>>7999669
The 'real data' is the actual state of the universe.

The model of the universe that you are aware of is the information your senses have received, processed and integrated. I understand that you're arguing that the processing part is where the 'misleading' takes place, but it's not actually as though there's some executive part of the brain deciding what you are and aren't allowed to experience, the brain is simply processing the information as it has evolved to - it doesn't get the 'real' data exactly and then alter it for your protection, in other words. It just does its best with limited information and fills in the gaps as well as it can, but it's not 'dishonest'.

Perhaps we're having an argument over nothing, but I guess my issue is with anthropomorphising an individual part of the anatomy, even if just by semantics.

Does this mean visual learners are superior to auditory learners since they receive and begin processing information before it even gets to the auditory learner?

>>7999968
top zozzle

>>7999647
>when it goes wrong
when does it "go wrong"? You talking about motion sickness?

>>7999999 GET
/sci/ is a shit board and this thread proves it.

>>8000000
nice

>>8000000
WITNESSED

>>8000000 /sci/ doesn't exist, it's all part of your imagination.

>>8000000
You are shit, and so is your shitty GET.

>>8000000
we literally had 2 attempts at superb gets, and both are fucking garbage. /sci/ must really be a shitty board.

>>8000000
you know /sci/ is slow when someone can quote a post in another thread and still be the next post

>>8000000
CHECKED

>>8000000
ebin fail

>>8000000
nice get fag

>>8000000

>>7999988
Motion sickness, optical illusions, auditory illusions, that thing where you think the rubber hand is actually your own. The brain cuts a lot of corners to do what it does and so you end up with these 'glitches' that are quite noticeable, but the fact you can even comment on the fact that it's not relaying information from the world around you with perfect accuracy is a testament to its processing power.

>>8000000

>>8000000
nice

>>8000000

[USER DID BANTER IN THIS POST]

>>8000000
this is a pretty shit thread, yes.
and yours is a shit post, fukken checked

>>7999556
>FUCK I have something to contribute to this board for once...
This groundbreaking work by Denmark's leading science writer draws on psychology, evolutionary biology, information theory, and other disciplines to argue its revolutionary point: that consciousness represents only an infinitesimal fraction of our ability to process information. Although we are unaware of it, our brains sift through and discard billions of pieces of data in order to allow us to understand the world around us. In fact, most of what we call thought is actually the unconscious discarding of information. What our consciousness rejects constitutes the most valuable part of ourselves, the "Me" that the "I" draws on for most of our actions--fluent speech, riding a bicycle, anything involving expertise. No wonder that, in this age of information, so many of us feel empty and dissatisfied. As engaging as it is insightful, this important book encourages us to rely more on what our instincts and our senses tell us so that we can better appreciate the richness of human life.

>>7999556
Here
https://youtu.be/K4vyRvMASPU

>>8000000
CHECKIN THIS EPIC GET

TOASTIN IN AN EBIN BRAD

>>8000000