Subject: Re: Gibson From: Christian Kaernbach <chris(at)PSYCHOLOGIE.UNI-LEIPZIG.DE> Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 09:56:34 +0100Dear Al, > I think we are on the same wavelength. Your Mezger example was > very interesting and I didn't know about it before. Our library > only has the German version and I read German only painfully > slowly with a dictionary. Would you know whether it has been > translated into English? I don't know, and I fear not. Searching the internet for a citation of the translated version (+metzger +laws.of.vision) did not yield any result. > The transformations you mention below all preserve the relation > "next to" in both X and Y. I believe that the brain can adapt to > such transformations. But note that the transformation that I > proposed does not preserve "next to" relations. Do you think > that under these circumstances, the Gestalt laws of proximity and > good continuation (in the world) would have the same effects > after transformation to the B movie? Sure, this is a major difference. I am not sure it would work with adults. It seems pretty plausible that it would work with embryos at the very moment that these connections get learned. They get learned in utero by lines and edges, slow movements etc. This starts with eyes closed, and there seems even to be an algorithm at this age to generate slow moving wave-like excitation on the retina in the absence of any visual input, probably just for this purpose. This is sufficient to learn neighbouring relations, and finally to have a topic map. As for adults: with lots of training people can learn to use a transplanted hand. I suspect that the new connections don't respect old "next to" relations. Anyway, the argument is the same, independent of whether this works for adults or for embryos. Kind regards, Christian -- Dr. Christian Kaernbach Institut fuer Allgemeine Psychologie Universitaet Leipzig Seeburgstr. 14-20 Tel.: +49 341 97-35968 04 103 Leipzig Fax: +49 341 97-35969 Germany http://www.kaernbach.de/