|
このページは大阪弁化フィルタによって翻訳生成されたんですわ。 |
| 2015-04 | Schweizer Fernsehen |
| 2012-03 | Focus?1? | 2? | 3 | 4 (in German) |
| 2011-07 | Demand from China so high that my domain was down a day |
| 2009-10 | in abc News |
| 2008-09 | portrayed by Die ZEIT |
| 2008-04 | referenced by NY Times |
| 2007-11 | portrayed in fudder |
| 2007-11 | daVinci ? 3sat |
| 2007-10 | Planetarium Freiburg |
| 2007-06 | Bayerisches Fernsehen: Faszination Wissen |
| 2006-09 | Dugg, →4.5 million hits/day |
| 2006-08 | Focus online |
| 2005-10 | PC Magazine: a Top 101 Site |
| 2005-08 | BBC Online |
| 2005-08 | the Mac Observer |
| 2005-07 | Planetarium Freiburg |
| 2005-06 | a > 2 million hits/days spike |
| 2005-05 | “Image of the week” by Viperlib |
| 2005-05 | > 1 million hits/day |
| 2005-02 | “Web Pick” by Yahbooks |
| 2004-12 | |
| 2004-11 | TV: Discoveries, Sci Chan |
| 2004-11 | NSDL Reports Life Sci |
| 2004-10 | Highlighted in Science |
| 2004-10 | > 500,000 hits/day |
| 2004-09 | Wikipedia |
| 2004-03 | N?rnberger Nachrichten |
| 2004-03 | Brainweek |
| 2004 | Yahoo Directory |
| 2003-09 | > 100,000 hits/day |
|
|
Optical?Illusions & Visual Phenomena123 of them ? by Michael Bach (G+) |
… are fascinating! They also teach us about our visual perception, and its limitations. Emphasis here is on beauty, interactive experiments, and attempts at explanation of the visual mechanisms involved.
Befriending mobile: only 14 of 123 still require Flash, but up-to-date browser versions are a must.
Don’t let it irk you if you don’t see all the phenomena described. For many illusions, there is a percentage of people with perfectly normal vision who just don’t see it, often for reasons currently unknown.
If you are not a vision scientist, you might find my explanatory attempts too highbrow. That is not on purpose, but vision research is not trivial, like any science. So, if the explanation seems gibberish, simply enjoy the phenomenon ;?). More: Bach & Poloschek (2006) Optical Illusions Primer; on the programming: Bach (2014, PDF).
?Optical illusion? sounds pejorative, as if exposing a malfunction of the visual system. Rather, I view these phenomena as highlighting particular good adaptations of our visual system to experience with standard viewing situations. These experiences are based on normal visual experiences, and thus under unusual contexts can lead to inappropriate interpretations of a visual scene (=Bayesian interpretation of perception).
Before we delve in, I’d like to express my thanks for your @feedback; any advice is appreciated.
| Some demonstrations require the free Macromedia’s/Adobe’s Flash player . |
|