Akiyoshi’s Illusion Pages

It kind of works, but for me it feels more like the blue ring now has a variable depth, with parts below and parts above the red rings, kind of like a piece of fabric draped over a bar.

I wonder how it feels for people who see blue in front?

then: blue ring appeared "closer" to me (very similar to a stereogram - yes)

I was able to "force" the blue ring to snap to being "behind" the red rings by rapidly blinking but the effect wouldnt stick .... the perception would slowly snap back to my default - blue in the front

I spend a lot more time in churches, especially ones with stained glass, than most people, but I hadn't thought to ask if it happens to other people too.

http://www.psy.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/Kitaoka2015_Referenc...

> More specifically, a closer object projects to a more temporal part in the retina and so does red light. This suggestion, however, made Bruecke immediately reject his hypothesis because some of his observers reported red receding with respect to blue.

> The Stiles-Crawford effect is a phenomenon that the rays entering the eye through the peripheral regions of the pupil are less efficient than those through the central region [24]. This two-factor model, which Vos [4] called the “generalized Bruecke-Einthoven explanation,” has been widely accepted, while a few authors did not approve it [25]. Many studies suggested that pupil size affects chromostereopsis [19, 21–23], which supports the generalized Bruecke-Einthoven explanation. Simonet and Campbell [26], however, did not find any consistent relationship between pupil size and chromostereopsis.

Maybe the explanation is not 100% physiological in nature.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.03726

Human Perception as a Phenomenon of Quantization – Diederik Aerts, Jonito Aerts Arguëlles – 2022

> For two decades, the formalism of quantum mechanics has been successfully used to describe human decision processes, situations of heuristic reasoning, and the contextuality of concepts and their combinations. The phenomenon of 'categorical perception' has put us on track to find a possible deeper cause of the presence of this quantum structure in human cognition. Thus, we show that in an archetype of human perception consisting of the reconciliation of a bottom up stimulus with a top down cognitive expectation pattern, there arises the typical warping of categorical perception, where groups of stimuli clump together to form quanta, which move away from each other and lead to a discretization of a dimension. The individual concepts, which are these quanta, can be modeled by a quantum prototype theory with the square of the absolute value of a corresponding Schrödinger wave function as the fuzzy prototype structure, and the superposition of two such wave functions accounts for the interference pattern that occurs when these concepts are combined. Using a simple quantum measurement model, we analyze this archetype of human perception, provide an overview of the experimental evidence base for categorical perception with the phenomenon of warping leading to quantization, and illustrate our analyses with two examples worked out in detail.

> in this article, we would like to pay attention to visual perception that takes place in this more primitive first-line phase and quantum structures that would be present there. A specific situation in visual perception, namely, the bi-stability that occurs when viewing figures drawn on a two-dimensional background that we nevertheless visually reconstruct into ‘seeing three dimensional entities’, of which the ‘Necker cube’ is the archetypal example, was studied within the quantum cognition approach. The presence of quantum structure was investigated and convincingly demonstrated (Conte at al., 2009; Atmanspacher & Filk, 2010).

Meanwhile, each image on its own is offering no kind of perceptive illusion to me...

Besides seeing yellows and other fringe colors appear from the moiré, I always wondered if the patterns were linked to ocular migraines I would have for some decades after.

(Edit: yeah, this book: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2446119.Optical_Designs_...)

The answers are likely to be varied and along multiple axis:

- Do they affect the muscles of the eye, especially the ones that affect the lens

- Do they affect the rods/cones (and do they equally affect people with genetic differences)

- Do they affect the way the signals are sent to the brain

- Do they affect the visual cortex itself

and

- Do they affect the brain’s processing of visual input in some way

In my personal experience, I’d say we’d need to look at someone for a minimum of 3 years, and ideally 5 or more.

https://www.moillusions.com/dragon-illusion/

What we see is a reconstruction by the brain interpolated from our sensors. The idea of Mark is that the image is not only an interpolation of the present, but actually also an extrapolation of what the image will be in the next tenth of a second. For tasks such as catching a ball, this would allow us to compensate for the delay of the signal between our brain and our muscles.

Based on this idea, he wrote a classification of many illusions [2].

[1]: https://www.livescience.com/4950-key-optical-illusions-disco...

[2]: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1080/03640210802...