eh
November 6, 2003, 11:34 PM
From the little I've read about the visual cortex and how the brain processes vision, it would appear that the same general area of the brain is active for both actual images received from the retina and imagined visions. That is to say the visual cortex is active when we imagine any kind of geometric object.
But obviously, there is a big difference between an imagined object and a real image. Well, at least for most folks with normal mental heath, I will assume. An imagined object is not very clear or detailed, and is not all that intense. However, we all seem to be able to do both at the same time. That is to say we can imagine an object while looking at a real image. The odd thing is, it almost seems as if we can do both without the real image loosing any focus or clarity.
And that leads to my question. Can we imagine an object without the imagined image obstructing our actual visual perception? I guess its a question of spatial relations. Does an imagined object have a spatial relationship to the field of vision. An example would be looking at a computer screen, and at the same time imagining a big insect flying across it. Surely, I can imagine such a bug touching the screen, but it's hard to tell if it actually blocks out the image behind it.
Since imagined visions must be taking place in different parts of the visual cortex than the real deal, does it mean there there is no spatial relationship between imagined and real experiences?
But obviously, there is a big difference between an imagined object and a real image. Well, at least for most folks with normal mental heath, I will assume. An imagined object is not very clear or detailed, and is not all that intense. However, we all seem to be able to do both at the same time. That is to say we can imagine an object while looking at a real image. The odd thing is, it almost seems as if we can do both without the real image loosing any focus or clarity.
And that leads to my question. Can we imagine an object without the imagined image obstructing our actual visual perception? I guess its a question of spatial relations. Does an imagined object have a spatial relationship to the field of vision. An example would be looking at a computer screen, and at the same time imagining a big insect flying across it. Surely, I can imagine such a bug touching the screen, but it's hard to tell if it actually blocks out the image behind it.
Since imagined visions must be taking place in different parts of the visual cortex than the real deal, does it mean there there is no spatial relationship between imagined and real experiences?