How the moon stirs tension between the conscious and subconscious minds
nautil.us
nautil.us
What?
Binocular vision is used for mid-range (something like 3-6 feet) depth perception. Other visual clues are used for further away objects, like occlusion. His counterargument against the first hypothesis described is invalid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_illusion#mediaviewer/File:...
I get the same thing with the Ebbinghaus illusion you linked to - there seems to be a very slight difference between the diameter of the two centre circles, but only perhaps 1/4 of the width of the lines. If I stare at it for a while, even that difference goes away. Is that what you see too, or is the effect stronger?
I have been looking at this sentence for a few minutes, and still have no idea what it is saying.
Basically, the argument here is that we judge the size of things in the sky under the assumption that they are in the sky. But the moon is not; it does not follow the perspective rules of things that are actually close to us. The figure is saying that when we see situation 1, our brain assumes situation 3 will hold.
I will continue to fight you and your 'social media' buddies.
The truth: http://whyfiles.org/2010/i-saw-a-photo-of-the-sun-rising-abo...
That image of San Francisco has huge mountains blocking the way, so you can't even see the moon at the horizon. Ridiculous!