Four eyes for four dimensional brain-processing

[moonlord]

We see 2D. With two eyes, using parallax, our brain can interpret a three dimensional scene. I suspect that with four eyes, stimulated in a certain way, you could form two three dimensional scenes that can be interpreted as a 4D scenery.

Till here, I think my theory is correct. The only problem is memory. The brain analyses as 3D because it perceives that we live in 3D (by memory and with the use of other senses).

So, you'd have to implant memories into a human brain that, with the help of four eyes, could interpret a 4D image. I believe this becomes possible, as soon as we find out how the brain works and map it, and technology permits this type of information manipulation. Does it make sense? :-?

[bo198214]

Yes! I mentioned the ability to see n dimensions with 2^n-2 eyes already in this post. So the insects are the real masters of the dimensions? :?

Instead of implanting new eyes we can btw also use the already split structure of the eyes. Each eye is splitted into a left and a right half and the nerves of each eye half is connected with the corresponding brain half. (i.e. left eye left half -> left brain, left eye right half -> righ brain, right eye left half -> left brain, right eye right half -> right brain). So we have already 4 eyes and need only to project the appropriate pictures on it (for example my 4D puzzles )

Then we give the person a 4d virtual reality relearning phase and afterwards he is no more able to orientate in physical 3d *lol*

PS: This splitted structure of the eyes was used to analyze the strange splitted consciousness of split brain patients (i.e. were for some reason the bridge between right and left brain hemisphere is destroyed).

[SpunkySkunk347]

I think that a creature sees in whatever the dimension it is above of. For example, the 2d creatures see in one d. us 3d creatures see in 2d. I think 4d creatures see in 3d. This meaning that if we could see in 3d, we would be able to look around corners and inside of things. There are some attempts of this in our world. For example, a bat may be able to "see" a bug around a corner due to its ultrasonic hearing.

[Nick]

I disagree. The increase in eyes results in an increase of the range you are capable of interpreting, not dimension. To "see" 4d, you need to truly see 3dimensions at once, which means seeing every point on and in an object; which is impossible in a 3d world, because 3d light cannot pass through 3d objects.

[jinydu]

I agree with irockyou.

[moonlord]

I agree with jinydu. Actually, I agree with irockyou. No, I agree with jinydu. In fact, I agree with irockyou. As a second thought, however...

The idea is not the number of eyes, but their dimensionality restrict us to seing 2D. In my first post, you'll see I was reffering to interpreting as 4D, not actually seing. You'd still see 2D with my four eyes theory.

[bo198214]

Of course its a poor 4D viewing with 4 eyes.
But isnt it a poor 3D viewing with 2 eyes? And despite we call it 3D seing.
So if we have two (double) eyes that can see poor 3D, then we can see poor poor 4D. It has nothing to do with the range (I disagree with irockyou). Seing with 2 eyes 3d does not inrease the range, but the dimensionality, not in a true way (i.e. seing each point of the object directly), but in a way (for example to discern distances to visible points).

Regardless, there is another solution for truly seing nd. Each eye is built up by lots of receptors. If we regard each of them as responsible for one perceived pixel (what unfortunately isnt true, for example the eye sees mainly through differences (and needs therefore continuous movement)). Then we can arrange the pixels in an kⁿ array interpreting it as an n-dimensional hypercube with sides of length k. Or if this is two small we can of course use 2 (n-1)-dimensional array, one for the (n-1)d left and one for the right eye, using parallax (for seing one-time-poor nd).

So we then stimulate the receptor-arrays according to our nd-world. With some interactive control for the person. And suddenly the person is again unable to navigate in real 3d world (what of course was our aim )

[wendy]

One has to laugh, i suppose.

Most animals have two eyes by way of biological feat. Animals of pray have their eyes on opposite sides of the head, to maximise field of view.

Preditors tend to have two eyes on the same plane, so much of the field of view is shared, and that they then have a single field of view over two eyes, and can guage distance by parallax.

There is not a great need for multiplicity of eyes in four dimensions. The evidence suggests that a larger number of eyes might confuse the poor brain, especially if some horrible astigmatism exists in several eyes.

There are of course, many one-eyed people getting around quite happily, and cameras do not need a multitude of lenses to take pictures: one suffices.

W

[bo198214]

One has to laugh, i suppose.

Yes, laughing is generally regarded as healthy. Though in this special case I do not exactly know for what reason (presumably the poor 4D view with complete astigmatic lenses gained by 4 eyes.)

Animals of pray ... Preditors tend to

Good that I dont have to look up the words in dictionary ...
Ok, that was your comment to the range vs. dimension topic, I guess.

There is not a great need for multiplicity of eyes in four dimensions.

But there seems need for some 3d-people to directly experience 4d. And the 4 eyes method was a suggestion into that direction.

The evidence suggests that a larger number of eyes might confuse the poor brain

oO which evidence? That insects sometimes fly strange lines?

many one-eyed people getting around quite happily,

Yes good point, instead of having two eyes, one can of course move the head like a baby owl to add a (poor) dimension.

[FortySIXandTWO]

maybe we don't need different eyes, just a different set of perceptions. i just posted this idea here: http://tetraspace.alkaline.org/forum/vi ... .php?t=559

[bo198214]

a bit more concrete?

[itzclay]

Your eyes are only sensors of light. More eyes would allow you to see things in 3D better, BUT you would only actually be only adding a bigger 3d perspective, thats it. The further your eyes were apart from each other, then the better picture you could draw.

To see beyond that, or to see 4d you need more types of sensors.

And personally, I find the thought of each dimension being seperate as absurd. I also believe it absurd to believe other creatures on earth aren't able to see in 4d or even more. And that some don't just see in 2d.

Close your eyes and what dimension do you live in? Did you change dimensions, or did your perception change dimensions? How do you see from that? Well your brain already seeing a 3d world, would still map out a 3d world, because you are programmed that way. You could touch objects and get a 3d representation of what you would see. But what if you were to touch a fire. At which point would you feel the object exists, where you can feel it's heat, which makes the object bigger and look different in your mind, or would you feel the object didn't exist as all because you could move your hand through it? You could only ever touch the object which was on fire, but your sensors would tell you it was there.

[Apeironian]

Cloe your eyes, and you see your eyelids.

You have to remember that a tetronian sees all points of a realm.

[bgavran3]

We see 2D. With two eyes, using parallax, our brain can interpret a three dimensional scene.

How exactly does our brain differs 2d from 3d? And not while you're moving, I understand that, but when you're standing in one spot not moving your eyes or head

[Apeironian]

It's sort of like you're moving, since your 2 eyes have 2 different perspectives. 1 eye can only perceive depth through shading, etc. Like a photo.

[zero]

My first thought is that you only need one eye to see, regardless of how many dimensions your world (and ths your eye, being a part of that world) might have.

Two eyes will give you the advantage of depth perception by triangulation. Doesn't matter haw many dimensions are involved. Or you could gain depth perception by focus, the way some animals do.

[ossium70]

Im sorry but i cant see what haveing four eyes has to do with how your precieve space and time im blind in one eye i dont see the world in 2 dimensions or even one, i see it just as you see it. its the physic's behind light which gives you the world you see before you not really the number or eyes you have. Now your depth preciption and field of view would be a good topic behind having 4 eyes. well like the guy above me said i didnt read all the posts but i agree with him!!

[papernuke]

So the insects are the real masters of the dimensions? :? .

No, they wouldn't be.
Just because although they have the ability and the eye number to see in extra dimensions, doesn't mean that their brains are complex enough to realize that they are seeing in different dimensions.
Also, this is a thought, if we simply put four cameras together, and hooked them up to a big screen, then, with some difficulty, wouldn't we be able to see in "4D"?
But then, would there be anything to "see"? As in would there be any 4D to see if we did that?

[ossium70]

its an idea but using four cameras in attenmt to see in four dimensions just isnt logical.... it would simply give you a large field of view your observation of objects is still in 4 dimenstions.

[Keiji]

Also, this is a thought, if we simply put four cameras together, and hooked them up to a big screen, then, with some difficulty, wouldn't we be able to see in "4D"?

No.

3D eyes, cameras and screens all have a 2D "retina", no matter how many of them you have. Having two eyes in our head only allows us to perceive depth. It does not let us see things that are obscured. Try covering one eye with your hand and notice that it doesn't make much difference.

Tetronians would probably only have two eyes.

[daemonflower]

We see the world in 2D because the light we perceive is projected through our pupils onto the retina, which happens to be two-dimensional. (In fact, it's hard to see how it could have any other dimension - three-dimensional beings which can see only one-dimensional images wouldn't make it far through the evolutionary process, and a three-dimensional retina wouldn't really add anything to your perception, because the light fronts you perceive are two-dimensional anyway.)

You can add as many retinas as you wish, but that still does not enable you to see anything else but 2D. Your ability to interpolate a three dimensional scene may be enhanced, though. But as you'll never be able to place a retina (eye, camera, whatever) outside the 3D realm you live in, no number of eyes in 3D will help you to construct a 4D space in your brain.

Four-dimensional beings have, one would assume by the same arguments that hold for 3D beings, three-dimensional retinas. The wavefronts reaching them are realms, not surfaces. And their brains would be wired to construct their 4D environment from the 3D projection they see, just as we do. I don't see why they'd need 2^n-2 eyes to do that, though (the link to bo198214's post is dead).