Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Frumple]

Eh, if wikipedia is accurate there's, like, actually a bunch of different aspects to depth perception, several of which don't actually require binocular vision. So you'd still have some sorts of depth perception with one working eye, just not the full suite, so to speak.

Also apparently biocular and binocular are different things, which I don't think I knew. Neat.

[Naturegirl1999]

Eh, if wikipedia is accurate there's, like, actually a bunch of different aspects to depth perception, several of which don't actually require binocular vision. So you'd still have some sorts of depth perception with one working eye, just not the full suite, so to speak.

Also apparently biocular and binocular are different things, which I don't think I knew. Neat.

i meant to type binocular, I need to look at what I type before sending

[methylatedspirit]

To clarify: it's not that I'm one-eyed, it's just that my left eye is lazy; always too far left for depth perception to kick in. I get a wider field of vision on my left, which seems to be of dubious benefit at best.

Eh, if wikipedia is accurate there's, like, actually a bunch of different aspects to depth perception, several of which don't actually require binocular vision. So you'd still have depth perception with one working eye, just not the full suite, so to speak.

My monocular depth perception isn't that accurate, though. It's fine for day-to-day stuff, but if you were to ask me how far away something is, I'd only be able to answer in vague, order-of-magnitude terms. And that's after staring at it for a couple seconds.

So really, what's it like to have fast and accurate depth perception?

[Naturegirl1999]

Isn’t it normal to do the depth by relating to how far things are relative to other things?

[methylatedspirit]

Sounds about right. Though if I were locked into a white room with smooth walls and soft lighting to prevent shadows, I'd be screwed as far as depth perception goes.

Plus, all my judged distances are inaccurate. Using inaccurate measurements to find how far away something is will always produce an inaccurate result. Compounding that, I don't really have much memory to store those measurements in, so I normally just make a guess.

[Frumple]

Sod if I know what fast and accurate depth perception is like. I can hit a moving target or whatever but if you asked me to say how far something is in, like, feet or meters I'd just be like ~hell if I know~

I can do better when I have a frame of reference -- car length, distance between telephone poles, books, whatever -- but if you're asking me to eyeball distance without something on hand to compare it to I'm pretty shit at it.

Fast is more of a thing, though. Doesn't actually help too much unless you're idly throwing things at cats or summat. Or being suicidally stupid. Most of the time you're close enough to something you need that kind of rapid response for you're too damn close to it and should back off anyway. Mostly just think of those few seconds you need, and image it happens in a blink instead. It's nice, I guess, but not super helpful in most contexts, especially relative to behavior that would mitigate the need for it to be.

[Naturegirl1999]

Since feet and meters and such are arbitrary concepts, the brain would have evolved to measure in comparisons, right? Otherwise how would, like, spiders know if the beetle is closer to it compared to the grasshopper? Spiders don’t use feet or meters

[delphonso]

The only way I'd be able to guess distance in feet or meters would be some heavy cognition, imagining a top-down perspective which probably has little to do with vision at that point.

Hitting something that's moving doesn't feel like anything, really. It all sort of happens in the automatic sphere.

[Yoink]

What does "up, up" mean in military terms?   
I'm assuming it means "[on the] up and up" or "all good" or something, but Google was entirely unhelpful in trying to confirm that.   

[TheSteppeWolf]

Why do some people think killing flies on sight is unethical? They can't really think, and they are intruding on my territory, and I don't want them to disturb me during gaming, coding, or meditation, whatever. So if I see one I grab the flyswatter.

[delphonso]

It's probably respect for life in all its various forms. Most people would make an exception for harmful things - as far down as mosquitoes, or as indirect as roaches, but flies are generally pretty harmless, so are a prime candidate for not killing.

[Naturegirl1999]

I don’t kill ties, also I learned that simply holding a flyswatter causes them to stay away from the person holding it, so they mus have memory and can pick how they respond to stimuli, how do you define thinking?

[scriver]

I define thinking as having thoughts

I wouldn't go out of my way to kill a fly just for being in my proximity either but bugging me is a capital offence. I only have lenience for cuteness and/or usefulness.

[Naturegirl1999]

What do you think a thought is?

[scriver]

a thought is defined as a kind of think