2006-12-15
06:05:56
·
14 answers
·
asked by
jonas e
1
in
Science & Mathematics
➔ Biology
Yeah I know our brain flips the image (and I also know that it will adapt after a couple of weeks if you wear lenses/glasses to flip the image upside up). I was just wondering if there is anything making this solution "better"? Could it be that having a second lense to flip the image one more time is just more of a hassle than having our brain adapt?
2006-12-15
06:14:11 ·
update #1
Figures a creations would post here. The science community have moved beyond the "evolution violates the second law of thermo dynamics". It simply just does not. Read this:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#thermo
And don't please bring up bacterial flagellum without reading this: http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/design2/article.html
2006-12-15
06:22:22 ·
update #2
Not clever. Its because of lensing. Then our brains flip it right side up.
If we had to develop a second lens, that would be too much that could go wrong. you ever tried to take two lenses and look through both of them? its gotta be just perfect to work. And yeah, its easier for a brain to just process the info different. Easier than waiting millions of years to develop a second lens while seeing everything upside down.
But then again, whats the difference? the eye merely catches the light, then transmitts the info to our brain through electrical impulses. How can electrical impulses be upside down?
2006-12-15 06:07:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by vanman8u 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is the nature of a lens to invert an image.The image is formed upside down on the retina. the optic nerves ane bundled upside down, in corresponding array. In the only correction process, the optics nerves cross, so information from the left half of the right retina (the right side of the world) is transmitted to the left side of the brain, and vice versa. The nerves go to the thalamus inverted, and then to the occipital cortex inverted.
Why use two elements when one would do? Correction means that nerves would have to make a haIf twist somewhere. That requires extra space and more complexity in creating pathways. When you take a photo with a digital camera, the chip is two dimensional, but the data stream containing the image is one dimensional. When you want to display the photo, the computer takes the one dimensional data stream and reconstructs the two dimensional image. It does not matter how you represent data, so long as it makes sense throughout the process.
2006-12-15 08:37:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by novangelis 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, the cleverest of all actually and one to keep in mind as you consider all of evolution's evidence and reasoning: it is the easiest thing. Once the eye developed to receive an image and that image happened to be upside down, it could either continue evolving to one that then reversed the image before using the information OR it could let the processing part of the system (the brain) deal with the upside down image. Probably both solutions have existed, but for some reason letting the brain work it out turned out to be the most efficient use of resources and capabilities. Also, as the eye evolved in steps still shown in many animals today, the processing likely was done by brains or their simpler cousins and they likely handled the adjustments to the upside down information faster than the evolving eye itself since that is actually more or less exactly what brains and their cousins do.
2006-12-15 06:13:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by roynburton 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's like looking in a mirror. The image is flipped because of the plate of reflective surface. The lens that light passes through, Like looking through a telescope, gets flipped due to the lens. Interestingly, while your brain flips things right side up, it also filters out veins and other things that are actually between the image and the receptor.
There was even a study where a guy wore glasses all day every day that flipped things upside down, and eventually he could function normally because the brain is an amazing machine in its capacity to adapt, and that adaptability is truly what evolutionary trait is important to us.
2006-12-15 06:14:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by stevenhendon 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
The image is projected onto the retina backwards. This is purely because of how the lens system in the eye is set up, as you know. The brain is only concerned with being able to use it's information to properly orient itself and the body in it's environment.
The brain does not know the image is upside down when it gets the information from the optic nerve. Your brain relies greatly on gravity with the help of your other senses to orient itself and will adjust what you see, or think you see, accordingly.
2006-12-15 15:31:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by minuteblue 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
My brain is not at all hassled by dealing with the inverted image. In any case, evolution, like all natural systems, is not about optimization. Any solution that works, get used. A truly "intelligently designed" world would do many things differently. But if it were being done to a budget, I suspect the erecting lens idea would be rejected. Some things are just easier to do in software.
2006-12-15 06:26:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by injanier 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
We don't perceive it as being upside down. It's just the way that the laws of physics work with lenses and has nothing to do with evolution. Now wild evolution would have been if we grew with a pentaprism which made everything right side up like in a single lens reflex camera.
2006-12-15 06:09:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by Gene 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yeah, if you brain can flip the image right-side up, then there was no need for a second lens to evolve.
2006-12-15 07:04:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Take it from Toby 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well since evolution never happened the question is pointless.
I do believe that evolution contradicts at least one of the laws of thermal dynamics. Oh what was it again? Lemme tell ya.
Chaos can come from order but order never comes from chaos without the help of on outside force. Wanna know what (rather who) that force is? Open the bible up to Genesis Chapter 1 verse 1. Evolution involves "The Big Bang" theory. The "big bang" theory is that two large masses called "Dark Matter" collided in a chaotic explosion! and somehow managed to start a slow process called "Evolution". Oh and BTW thermal dynamics is a proven fact and "Evolution" is theory.
2006-12-15 06:15:15
·
answer #9
·
answered by Warrior Poet 3
·
0⤊
3⤋
im not sure if we do see upside down cause what eyes see is just transported to the brain and to our mind. Our eyes are just image transporters. SO id we see upside down that must mean it is transported to our brain upside down. I don't really know, im just pondering.....
2006-12-15 06:10:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋