Some parameters of it can be changed, because brains are pretty plastic, but to a very limited degree. We just deter the entire computation required to the cerebellum, sort of like computers offload graphical computations to the purpose-built graphics card, rather than computing it on the CPU. When we imagine or manipulate 3D objects, we don't do this with logic, reason, and faithful analysis. The cerebellum has (a neural analog of) purpose-built hardware to efficiently process 3D scenes. Most of the time, higher dimensional modeling is simply done to take advantage of the mathematics, not to make things easier to visualize. The same thing goes for models of space with extra dimensions, or even more abstract things such as related data points in a file. I’m not sure if that interpretation is intuitively helpful though, since we don’t have a good frame of reference for what such an object would be like. You can accurately model a three dimensional object with causal transitions over time as if it were a four dimensional object. There are infinitely many other things which also model well as dimensions which have nothing to do with time.Īs with all scenarios wherein vectors and spaces are used to model phenomena, the geometric and spatial interpretation can be useful. Time is modeled as a dimension because it turns out to fit the math very very well, though there are some problems with it (mostly relating to directionality). I recommend you actually find some blind people and read about their experiences, because you seem to greatly misunderstand how blindness works.ĭimensions are a mathematical construct used to model information and translation. Hell, even Helen Keller could do school-level math, including long division, just fine, she considered it boring but not really difficult. wait, did you say long division? You expect blind people to be unable to comprehend, of all things, something as elementary as long division? What do you think blindness is, complete unawareness of everything? My father learned statistical mechanics in college from a professor born blind, and yes, he was writing on a blackboard (using straight edges and similar implements to keep lines separate), because you only need spatial awareness to do it, not actual vision. You don't have to physically draw lines on paper to understand. So you'd teach number lines, graphing, and long division to someone who can't presumably see what they are supposed to be drawing? Since we are 3D and have never seen or experienced 4D, it's very difficult to imagine it, and any representations we come up with of a 4D object are only in 3D, just like the 2D "slice" of a 3D pencil would be to a stick figure. We are like that 2D stick figure trying to figure out the 3rd dimension. If you could pass a 3D object through the paper, such as a pencil, he could see the "slice" of that pencil that is currently in the paper, but there is no way for him to actually see the whole pencil in 3 dimensions at once, and it would be very difficult for him to accurately imagine it, let alone explain it to someone else. He can go up, down, left, and right, but his world ceases to exist past the front and back of that piece of paper. Say there is a stick figure who lived his whole life on a piece of paper. It would not be dissimilar to trying to explain 3D to a 2D stick figure. Simply because we don't experience it on a day-to-day basis.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |