"I was flabbergasted," he says, after finding that the volunteers reported seeing the rectangles as fast as the researchers could record it: two seconds.
This speed beats any other recorded bending of perception (known as "referred sensation"). The illusion of a phantom limb has been documented within about 24 hours of amputation, and similar cases of other senses, such as auditory, have yet to be examined, Dilks notes.
The surprising rapidity "is the most consistent with some kind of functional change—and not physical change," he explains. The results point to the idea that there are underlying silent connections that are already present. The brain, he points out, must be flexible to receive the constantly changing information from the world at large. "I think [the discovery] really is about how the visual system handles extreme changes in input."
A similar phenomenon called "filling in" has been known for some time. It happens when the brain "fills in" missing information in a person's blind spot if the other eye is covered. An optical illusion of broken lines can become continuous if the break falls in the blind spot. But the researchers aren't yet sure that the two occurrences happen for precisely the same reasons.
They do know, however, that the findings will help to shed light on how flexible the adult brain can be. "Our results highlight the stunning ability to adapt to moment-to-moment changes in experience even into adulthood," Dilks and his colleagues concluded in the paper.
Subscription Center
See what we're tweeting about
26 Comments
Add CommentAs a stroke victim, I still have a "cut" in the upper left like the volunteer in the experiment. With brain plasticity being what it is with other re-learning going to adjacent or other parts of the brain, it still appears that vision is one of the least likely to repair post stroke. Does this research shed any light on that?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The human brain has long been known to perceive things that aren't there—from phantom limbs to patterns in chaos."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNice sentence, but incorrect.
There are indeed patterns in chaos, as the Chaos Theory not only indicates, but demonstrates as proof through such things as Web-Bot Predictions, trees, crystals, galaxy formation, other fractal patterns, etc . . . Please correct.
"The human brain has long been known to perceive things that aren't therefrom phantom limbs to patterns in chaos."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNice sentence, but incorrect.
The sentence is correct, it is your assumption that may not be. Just because there are patterns in chaos doesn't mean that humans don't perceive patterns that are not there.
No, The sentence specifically states that humans are percieving things that are not there, from phantom limbs, TO PATTERNS IN CHAOS. There ARE patterns in chaos. Therefore, the statement is incorrect, as it implies that chaos has no order, yet humans think it does. We think it does, because IT DOES. Get it? The form your sentence takes is misleading. please correct.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is not about chaos but the fact that any of our senses are tied to other associated sense experiences to provide a perception of that experience. We 'fill in' by retaining associated sense perceptions as we attempt to replace a lost sense stimulus. Replacement of a lost sense requires new neural connections. New nerves or neural stem cells can learn to create a functional sense if the loss is limited to the nerve and not the supportive tissue.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisChaos is used in the article in the classical and informal sense of "complete disorder" not in the mathematical sense. The context makes that abundantly clear, especially since this is not an article about mathematics, so there is no real confusion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thispyrtolin said: "Chaos is used in the article in the classical and "informal sense of "complete disorder" not in the mathematical sense. The context makes that abundantly clear, especially since this is not an article about mathematics, so there is no real confusion."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm sorry Sir/Mamm, but there is confusion. I do Indeed understand what is being explained. The crux of the problem is that the sentence in question makes a statement of fact, and the statement is not true. If we were sitting around talking, I wouldn't bother correcting it. The problem is that anybody without a solid science background could get the impression that we are not capable of percieving proper reality in regards to chaos, that if we are finding patterns in chaos, it is because of an anomoly in our brain indicating mental illness or just improper thinking, not because there really are patterns in chaos.
Mathmatics only prove the point of order appearing in the middle of chaos, It does not introduce it. Trying to create classes for chaos that will allow the word to be used in one instance, but not another isn't possible. Chaos is Chaos, not chaos light, or chaos-the-brain-version.
One possible editing solution might be to add to the sentence like so:
"The human brain has long been known to perceive things that aren't there, such as phantom limbs. Our brains will frequently develop patterns from the chaos associated with thought, that allows for these phantom pains to exist."
Unfortunately, as it reads now, it gives the reader the idea that anything they believe to be a pattern in their lives/thinking that seems to be the result of chaos, is only mental illness. I hope you will make this small change. Otherwise you are purposefully allowing a false statement with broader ramifications to circulate, rather than changing around, or adding a couple of words. Likewise, the statement made by pyrtolin is untrue, in that it DOES matter very much how this may be percieved by a reader.
Frankly, I do not understand the relunctance to make such a simple change. I hope you will concider my request again. Best regards, sleekmason
How about "perceiving non-existent, or imagined patterns" or "perceiving a certain type of pattern where none exists". I perceived an underlying meaning in the sentence where there in fact was one. Kids perceive imagined patterns all the time as part of developing their conceptual world. They either correct them or get stuck in a false orientation to the reality around them. This can kill them, or make them kill others, or cripple their human potential (as with the false patterns of religion or nationalism or racism). Occasionally the patterns can release creative energy, if they are sufficiently benign.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPedantry is a false pattern based on a lack of perspective and judgement regarding what is relevant and appropriate. Hypercorrectness is another word for it, as is hairsplitting and nitpicking.
you're all overthinking...what the author is stating is SIMPLE:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisshe's saying that people can perceive false "phantom" limbs, which is true, and that people can also percieve false patterns is chaos. She nowhere states that people don't see correct patterns of chaos, just that some people see false ones.
You are all overthinking this whole thing. What the author is saying is that some people experience phantom limbs and some people experience false patterns in chaos. What you fail to see is that she nowhere says that people havn't seen or are able to see correct patterns in chaos, but that some people have seen false patterns. That's it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisi appologise for the repeat comment...my internet didn't register the first
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs far as chaos goes, it can take a bit of time to work out complex patterns. Isolating patterns as obscure as phantom limbs or blind spots can take time to sort out. It is my personal responsibility to be as self-aware as possible. Upon gaining understanding of whatever condition I find myself, I know to take a step back and consider the nature of my problem.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf I percieve a phantom limb, it just means I sub-consciously desire to have that lost connection reastablished. I believe that achieving knowledge of my condition should provide me with the ability to enjoy life with meaningful purpose, a happy cohesive outlook for the future rather than creating an aura lacking any real substance. Anyway, I liked the article. hope, you'll keep em coming. I always enjoy learning more about our human condition and the advances of new technology in our lives. Best regards, Sleekmason
@turtletech Are you proposing, sir, that these good people are attempting to invent a solution to non-existent problem? (god love us, we just can't help ourselves)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am of the opinion that "pattern" describes a human perception, apart from which it cannot be said to exist at all. It is a persistent illusion that patterns reflect anything other than an ordering function of the brain. To draw on an old Harvard limerick, "a tree, as a tree, simply ceases to be when there's no one about in the quad" and that's the end of it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"and that's the end of it." Not even close. Your level of ignorance about conception and perception is astounding, and indictive of our true problem.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAcceptance of such liabilities coupled with potential allows for growth. I am always appreciative when my understanding of our human nature has changed.
Do I need to see waterfall to extrapulate the possibility? At what point do I decide there is one? Remaining set in my conclusions won't serve. Allowance that my percieved waterfall may be a dam, or even a tape recorder, increases my potential for knowledge. Most sit on the banks and never find out. Many are blind and find A waterfall, and fall off the edge. A few accept the totality of the variables, record, and move on to something else. A smashed vessel later in the journey only verifies the possibility.
As variables accumulate in my own journey, I understand my perception may be flawed. Nevertheless, ignoring the danger would be foolhardy. I have learned that contempt prior to investigation will keep you sitting on those banks forever. "Better to pick a direction and allow for humility" and thats not the end of it . . .
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=patternicity-finding-meaningful-patterns
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs this is the reference used in the article itself and it refers to people seeing images like the Virgin Mary in tortillas and tree stumps, images which are not truly there, the idea that the patterns in Chaos is referring to the mathematical chaos theory is not applicable. I know that you are wishing that everyone hates the Chaos Theory so that you can indulge in your paranoid-self-affliction persona but it's not true. Most of us love the Chaos Theory and embrace it entirely as scientific fact.
You have no understanding whatsoever of how I think. I am quite capable, should I choose, to indulge myself in whatever form I wish, and accept an ever changing evolution of thought, without paranoia, or concern. What would be the point? And what is your agenda? Trying to associate negative attributes in regards to how I think based on my writings only shows your close minded narrow nature. Did you bother to read my next two comments? I think not. What do I care what people believe about chaos theory? My initial reason for posting was the ambiguous opening statement of the article, that could lead people to believe a falsehood about the nature of chaos and order. Why have you assigned mathmatics to my concern is beyond me. I become dismayed with people like you. Already have me classified due to your own limitations. Shame that. I wish you the best.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiser.... it was found that this phenomena also happens to solid objects (as would be expected). We found that a box is percieved to change its shape when it rotates. That is, its side face that is receding, stretches out, when carefully drawn by the observer. This seemed to happen in any light, and with binocular vision.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this-palf
That is only because few eye/vision care doctors engage in vision rehabilitation. As recently as this morning, a patient presenting with left visual field loss demonstrated instantaneous recoginition of objects on the left side through the use of yoked prism. TFE, OD and Clinical consultant
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat is only because few eye/vision care doctors engage in vision rehabilitation. As recently as this morning, a patient presenting with left visual field loss demonstrated instantaneous recoginition of objects on the left side through the use of yoked prism. TFE, OD and Clinical consultant
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat is because few eye/visioncare providers (MD/OD) actually provide vision rehabilitation. As recently as this morning, a patient presenting with left homonymous hemianopsia (loss of left visual field in each eye) responded positively demonstrating an increase in her 'awareness' on objects in her left visual field..without moving either her eyes or head to the left. This was also confirmed using confrontation visual field testing.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is a very petty point of discussion for an interesting article.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnyway, I was curious as to how these adjacent areas are utilised, and how this affects the original function of said area, and maybe if it causes conflicts when confronted with both inputs.
The brain will build new pathways in young people when their brains are still growing.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI don't see why people are making an argument either way. Relax, you are focusing on the wrong aspect of the article. Look at the article as a whole, imagine the chaos reference isn't there, and have a good day.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ sleekmason: Please remember that SA Magazine attempts to bring brings science to the average American layperson. The statement, while perhaps incorrect from a pure mathematical perspective, is, from a PRACTICAL perspective, correct. Most average people perceive chaos as lacking any definable patterns, and "chaos" exists in their minds (according to Gestalt psychology) when after a reasonable attempt is made to discern patterns (patterns which perhaps less than a handful of mathematicians would be able to see) they are unable to see them. While I have a higher than average intelligence, I experienced no cognizant dissonance with the statement when I read the article, becuase rather than adopting a critically pedantic attitude I accepted the spirit of what the author was trying to say rather than the true scientific intent of chaos theory. And as for being accurate, I'm going to hoist you on your own petard - you stated "There are indeed patterns in chaos, as the Chaos Theory not only indicates, but demonstrates as proof through such things as Web-Bot Predictions, trees, crystals, galaxy formation, other fractal patterns, etc." - My comment to you, sir or madam, is this: that which can be proven is no longer theory. If the study of chaos still resides at the theoretical level, then there can be no proof. Your statement, therefore, is incorrect, and is in need of correction.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYes, "demonstrates as proof" Not "proves true". Nice try though.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMy initial argument quickly turned from the inaccuracy in the article to the cruft being spread by other commenters, some of which have been removed. I felt it neccesary to defend myself against allegations that I was crazy for having said anything at all. All rather silly, and really baffling had you been able to see these comments. They really made no sense, and indicated that I was a conspiracy theorist or some such. Nonsense.
As far as your rebuttle, aside from being three and a half years late, is not correct in that it IS practical to find patterns in apparent chaos (think millions of snowflakes yet formations in each) as the article stated. I brought up chaos theory as the authority on such (this too has been changed to "Complexity Theory") as part of my rebuttle. So, while I don't expect 'Joe Blow' to understand Chaos Theory, I do expect him/her to understand the practical application of such, i.e. a snowflake. The article as written states that snowflakes cannot be observed, and is indeed incorrect. Good day.