otherwise known as photographic memory. This seems to be an all to common trope in fiction. I've done some superficial research into the topic and I don't get the impression that there is such a thing as photographic memory. I think all practitioners of improved memory are using memory skills (mnemonics etc.) rather than some sort of super memory.
I've always been skeptical about the entire concept. My experience of memory is that it is a set of stories and relationships rather than fact storage. When I am trying to recall a fact I do so by thinking about facts that might be related, f.eks. in the GOT thread I was trying to remember the name of Myrcella, which I had temporarily forgotten. I tried thinking about Tommen, who's name I had also forgotten, so that didn't work. Then I went through Balon Swann, Prince Doran, Sunspear and when I got to The Water Gardens it popped into my head. Once I thought about Myrcella then Tommen's name came back to me as well.
Has anybody any reason to demonstrate that there is such a thing as eidetic memory or any source I can look at that supports the concept. Right now I'm inclined to declare this myth busted on the grounds of no supporting evidence existing.
this reminds me of when someone here said they thought dyslexia didn't exist. of course there are those who have photographic memories. a professor with aspergers i know has this. she has read a book every day since thirteen, sometimes two. she scans the page "like a photocopier" and then "reads it" later--often when she sleeps (lucid dreaming). she worked at an archive in britain for some time, and to this day people will call her up and ask where a certain file might be located. she has said it usually takes a moment for her to "flip" through the pages in her memory before she can find it, but otherwise she has little difficulty with it
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 12:16:26 AM
this reminds me of when someone here said they thought dyslexia didn't exist. of course there are those who have photographic memories. a professor with aspergers i know has this. she has read a book every day since thirteen, sometimes two. she scans the page "like a photocopier" and then "reads it" later--often when she sleeps (lucid dreaming). she worked at an archive in britain for some time, and to this day people will call her up and ask where a certain file might be located. she has said it usually takes a moment for her to "flip" through the pages in her memory before she can find it, but otherwise she has little difficulty with it
do you have a source for that info? or more interestingly a study on the topic or the person.
just what she has explained in person. a google search reveals nothing in particular. she also said various universities (she didn't specify which ones, and i didn't ask) have scans of her brain on file. and no, she is simply not the sort of person who would be lying or exaggerating
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 12:16:26 AM
this reminds me of when someone here said they thought dyslexia didn't exist.
It's just an excuse for sloppy spelling. :mad:
remember, just because you cannot do it, doesn't mean no one else can. we do not all think the same way, not by a long shot
@wiggin: it's a cruel joke that dyslexia is called/spelled the way it is :lol:
There was an article in National Geographic that talked about this a few years ago. It made it sound like an absolute curse. I'll try to see if I can find it.
Quote from: Viking on July 18, 2011, 12:11:12 AM
I think all practitioners of improved memory are using memory skills (mnemonics etc.) rather than some sort of super memory.
Savants? They don't use mnemonics.
Found it.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/11/memory/foer-text
This autistic artist recreates entire cityscapes accurately from memory. Click through the gallery.
http://www.stephenwiltshire.co.uk/ (http://www.stephenwiltshire.co.uk/)
Quote from: citizen k on July 18, 2011, 01:46:34 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 18, 2011, 12:11:12 AM
I think all practitioners of improved memory are using memory skills (mnemonics etc.) rather than some sort of super memory.
Savants?
:bleeding: PC gone mad.
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 12:24:10 AM
remember, just because you cannot do it, doesn't mean no one else can. we do not all think the same way, not by a long shot
Sure. Telepathy, telekinesis, mind control, it's all within the realm of the possible. Remember we only use 3% of our brain, typically. I once spoke to a woman who claimed her dog was her spiritual guardian from Venus, and that she was from another galaxy. It's all within the realm of the possible, nay perhaps even plausible.
Quote from: The Brain on July 18, 2011, 03:42:03 AM
Quote from: citizen k on July 18, 2011, 01:46:34 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 18, 2011, 12:11:12 AM
I think all practitioners of improved memory are using memory skills (mnemonics etc.) rather than some sort of super memory.
Savants?
:bleeding: PC gone mad.
:D
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 04:16:46 AMI once spoke to a woman who claimed her dog was her spiritual guardian from Venus, and that she was from another galaxy. It's all within the realm of the possible, nay perhaps even plausible.
Kinda like how Swedes sometimes think they're German, or Canadians think they're Americans but without the air conditioning.
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 04:16:46 AM
Remember we only use 3% of our brain, typically.
Not all of us, just the people who believe that myth.
Quote from: DGuller on July 18, 2011, 05:44:43 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 04:16:46 AM
Remember we only use 3% of our brain, typically.
Not all of us, just the people who believe that myth.
:lol:
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 04:16:46 AM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 12:24:10 AM
remember, just because you cannot do it, doesn't mean no one else can. we do not all think the same way, not by a long shot
Sure. Telepathy, telekinesis, mind control, it's all within the realm of the possible. Remember we only use 3% of our brain, typically. I once spoke to a woman who claimed her dog was her spiritual guardian from Venus, and that she was from another galaxy. It's all within the realm of the possible, nay perhaps even plausible.
The reason we only use 3% or 5% or 10% (depending on who you ask) of our brain capacity is that the remaining 90% is junk matter that has accumulated over time. It is worthwhile for the genes to produce the brain in the manner it does because the brain capacity from the 3% is worth spending the energy on building the remaining 97%.
We don't have some massive hidden brain capacity. That much unused capacity is an extinction level waste of energy. We build the smallest possible brain for the greatest possible effect, losing any part of the genetic code writing any part of the brain would be a massive blow to human fitness for survival.
Quote from: Viking on July 18, 2011, 05:51:09 AM
The reason we only use 3% or 5% or 10% (depending on who you ask) of our brain capacity is that the remaining 90% is junk matter that has accumulated over time. It is worthwhile for the genes to produce the brain in the manner it does because the brain capacity from the 3% is worth spending the energy on building the remaining 97%.
We don't have some massive hidden brain capacity. That much unused capacity is an extinction level waste of energy. We build the smallest possible brain for the greatest possible effect, losing any part of the genetic code writing any part of the brain would be a massive blow to human fitness for survival.
The 10% myth is just that, a myth. Here's Wiki debunking it thoroughly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10%25_of_brain_myth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10%25_of_brain_myth)
QuoteNeuroscientist Barry Beyerstein sets out seven kinds of evidence refuting the ten percent myth:[8]
- Studies of brain damage: If 90% of the brain is normally unused, then damage to these areas should not impair performance. Instead, there is almost no area of the brain that can be damaged without loss of abilities. Even slight damage to small areas of the brain can have profound effects.
- Evolution: The brain is enormously costly to the rest of the body, in terms of oxygen and nutrient consumption. It can require up to twenty percent of the body's energy--more than any other organ--despite making up only 2% of the human body by weight.[9][10] If 90% of it were unnecessary, there would be a large survival advantage to humans with smaller, more efficient brains. If this were true, the process of natural selection would have eliminated the inefficient brains. By the same token, it is also highly unlikely that a brain with so much redundant matter would have evolved in the first place.
- Brain imaging: Technologies such as Positron Emission Tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) allow the activity of the living brain to be monitored. They reveal that even during sleep, all parts of the brain show some level of activity. Only in the case of serious damage does a brain have "silent" areas.
- Localization of function: Rather than acting as a single mass, the brain has distinct regions for different kinds of information processing. Decades of research has gone into mapping functions onto areas of the brain, and no function-less areas have been found.
- Microstructural analysis: In the single-unit recording technique, researchers insert a tiny electrode into the brain to monitor the activity of a single cell. If 90% of cells were unused, then this technique would have revealed that.
- Metabolic studies: Another scientific technique involves studying the take-up of radioactively labelled 2-deoxyglucose molecules by the brain. If 90 percent of the brain were inactive, then those inactive cells would show up as blank areas in a radiograph of the brain. Again, there is no such result.
- Neural disease: Brain cells that are not used have a tendency to degenerate. Hence if 90% of the brain were inactive, autopsy of adult brains would reveal large-scale degeneration.
Quote from: Brazen on July 18, 2011, 06:20:04 AM
The 10% myth is just that, a myth. Here's Wiki debunking it thoroughly:
(snip)
Yopu know, you could have a lot more fun here if you gave the internet experts more rope before you definitively disprove their claims. :lol:
Quote from: grumbler on July 18, 2011, 06:26:28 AM
Quote from: Brazen on July 18, 2011, 06:20:04 AM
The 10% myth is just that, a myth. Here's Wiki debunking it thoroughly:
(snip)
Yopu know, you could have a lot more fun here if you gave the internet experts more rope before you definitively disprove their claims. :lol:
Yeah. :mad:
Quote from: DGuller on July 18, 2011, 05:44:43 AM
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 04:16:46 AM
Remember we only use 3% of our brain, typically.
Not all of us, just the people who believe that myth.
I thought the rest of my post would indicate the level of seriousness, but apparently as usual I am too optimistic when it comes to my predictions about how perceptive you people are. :lol:
Quote from: grumbler on July 18, 2011, 06:26:28 AM
Quote from: Brazen on July 18, 2011, 06:20:04 AM
The 10% myth is just that, a myth. Here's Wiki debunking it thoroughly:
(snip)
Yopu know, you could have a lot more fun here if you gave the internet experts more rope before you definitively disprove their claims. :lol:
I didn't realize you could use Wikipedia to definitely disprove things. Interesting assertion. :hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 04:16:46 AMTelepathy, telekinesis, mind control, it's all within the realm of the possible.
:lol: no
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 01:02:44 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 04:16:46 AMTelepathy, telekinesis, mind control, it's all within the realm of the possible.
:lol: no
:ph34r: yes
I tried to mind control Slargos, but it keeps telling me "Device not found". :(
Quote from: citizen k on July 18, 2011, 01:05:05 PM:ph34r: yes
okay, fine, maybe mind control, but not in the way slargos meant :P
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 01:18:29 PM
Quote from: citizen k on July 18, 2011, 01:05:05 PM:ph34r: yes
okay, fine, maybe mind control, but not in the way slargos meant :P
:lol: i was making fun of you, you stupid git
:lol:
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 01:24:58 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 01:18:29 PM
Quote from: citizen k on July 18, 2011, 01:05:05 PM:ph34r: yes
okay, fine, maybe mind control, but not in the way slargos meant :P
:lol: i was making fun of you, you stupid git
:lol:
I wanna hear more about the woman from another galaxy. ;)
Quote from: Brazen on July 18, 2011, 06:20:04 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 18, 2011, 05:51:09 AM
The reason we only use 3% or 5% or 10% (depending on who you ask) of our brain capacity is that the remaining 90% is junk matter that has accumulated over time. It is worthwhile for the genes to produce the brain in the manner it does because the brain capacity from the 3% is worth spending the energy on building the remaining 97%.
We don't have some massive hidden brain capacity. That much unused capacity is an extinction level waste of energy. We build the smallest possible brain for the greatest possible effect, losing any part of the genetic code writing any part of the brain would be a massive blow to human fitness for survival.
The 10% myth is just that, a myth. Here's Wiki debunking it thoroughly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10%25_of_brain_myth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10%25_of_brain_myth)
QuoteNeuroscientist Barry Beyerstein sets out seven kinds of evidence refuting the ten percent myth:[8]
- Studies of brain damage: If 90% of the brain is normally unused, then damage to these areas should not impair performance. Instead, there is almost no area of the brain that can be damaged without loss of abilities. Even slight damage to small areas of the brain can have profound effects.
- Evolution: The brain is enormously costly to the rest of the body, in terms of oxygen and nutrient consumption. It can require up to twenty percent of the body's energy--more than any other organ--despite making up only 2% of the human body by weight.[9][10] If 90% of it were unnecessary, there would be a large survival advantage to humans with smaller, more efficient brains. If this were true, the process of natural selection would have eliminated the inefficient brains. By the same token, it is also highly unlikely that a brain with so much redundant matter would have evolved in the first place.
- Brain imaging: Technologies such as Positron Emission Tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) allow the activity of the living brain to be monitored. They reveal that even during sleep, all parts of the brain show some level of activity. Only in the case of serious damage does a brain have "silent" areas.
- Localization of function: Rather than acting as a single mass, the brain has distinct regions for different kinds of information processing. Decades of research has gone into mapping functions onto areas of the brain, and no function-less areas have been found.
- Microstructural analysis: In the single-unit recording technique, researchers insert a tiny electrode into the brain to monitor the activity of a single cell. If 90% of cells were unused, then this technique would have revealed that.
- Metabolic studies: Another scientific technique involves studying the take-up of radioactively labelled 2-deoxyglucose molecules by the brain. If 90 percent of the brain were inactive, then those inactive cells would show up as blank areas in a radiograph of the brain. Again, there is no such result.
- Neural disease: Brain cells that are not used have a tendency to degenerate. Hence if 90% of the brain were inactive, autopsy of adult brains would reveal large-scale degeneration.
Science FTW!!!!!
well, thats what I get for surplus credulity and sloppy thinking.
I have to admit I'd just accepted the 10% figure and never gave much thought to whether or not it was true.
+1 for languish today. :bowler:
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 01:24:58 PM:lol: i was making fun of you, you stupid git
:lol:
:lol: then you don't seem to have understood my post
:lol:
mentally disturbed neighbour. long story.
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 02:37:31 PM
mentally disturbed neighbour. long story.
i didn't even read that, i saw you (whether jokingly or not) bring up three magical powers in a thread that had nothing to do with magic
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 12:16:26 AM
this reminds me of when someone here said they thought dyslexia didn't exist. of course there are those who have photographic memories. a professor with aspergers i know has this. she has read a book every day since thirteen, sometimes two. she scans the page "like a photocopier" and then "reads it" later--often when she sleeps (lucid dreaming). she worked at an archive in britain for some time, and to this day people will call her up and ask where a certain file might be located. she has said it usually takes a moment for her to "flip" through the pages in her memory before she can find it, but otherwise she has little difficulty with it
I know a person like this. If you give give them a page of characters they can recite the characters back in any order you wish. They can also recite the complete dialogue of a movie - even if they have only seen it once - complete with accents which is really quite cool.
But before someone may be tempted to wish they could do this too, this kind of manner of processing memory has draw backs as well. For example, if you give them a word list they can spell all the words on the list perfectly but if you get them to write out a sentence that has some of those same words there is a good likelihood they will mispell those words if they have not seen the sentence before. ie they have memorized the list not the individual words. It is a question of context. Once they build up their knowledge of ways in which words can be used spelling improves.
The way you desribe it as flipping through memory and examining those memories is a good description.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 18, 2011, 02:56:52 PMThe way you desribe it as flipping through memory and examining those memories is a good description.
some people are just able to step back into their heads and view their mental creations (whether recalled through memory or created themselves) with extraordinary vividness and control. the perfect example is nikola tesla, who described his ability brilliantly
http://www.teslaplay.com/autosection1.htm
QuoteThis I did constantly until I was about seventeen when my thoughts turned seriously to invention. Then I observed to my delight that I could visualize with the greatest facility. I needed no models, drawings or experiments. I could picture them all as real in my mind. Thus I have been led unconsciously to evolve what I consider a new method of materializing inventive concepts and ideas, which is radically opposite to the purely experimental and is in my opinion ever so much more expeditious and efficient. The moment one constructs a device to carry into practise a crude idea he finds himself unavoidably engrost with the details and defects of the apparatus. As he goes on improving and reconstructing, his force of concentration diminishes and he loses sight of the great underlying principle. Results may be obtained but always at the sacrifice of quality.
My method is different. I do not rush into actual work. When I get an idea I start at once building it up in my imagination. I change the construction, make improvements and operate the device in my mind. It is absolutely immaterial to me whether I run my turbine in thought or test it in my shop. I even note if it is out of balance. There is no difference whatever, the results are the same. In this way I am able to rapidly develop and perfect a conception without touching anything. When I have gone so far as to embody in the invention every possible improvement I can think of and see no fault anywhere, I put into concrete form this final product of my brain. Invariably my device works as I conceived that it should, and the experiment comes out exactly as I planned it. In twenty years there has not been a single exception. Why should it be otherwise? Engineering, electrical and mechanical, is positive in results. There is scarcely a subject that cannot be mathematically treated and the effects calculated or the results determined beforehand from the available theoretical and practical data. The carrying out into practise of a crude idea as is being generally done is, I hold, nothing but a waste of energy, money and time.
Anecdotal evidence: back in grade school, I went up against a girl in a spelling bee who used eidetic memory; it was kinda weird watching her eyes go back and forth when she was reciting, until my dad realized and explained after the fact that she was reading the entry on the page from memory.
I don't see what is so incredible about eidetic memory. One of the key instructions on a database, no less important than creating a new record, is deleting it. We need it to focus on relevant information only.
The same happens in the brain. We forget, because we evolved a tool for it out of necessity. A tool that sometimes malfunctions.
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 03:07:58 PM
the perfect example is nikola tesla, who described his ability brilliantly
How do we know he wasn't just talking shit?
Quote from: Iormlund on July 18, 2011, 03:35:23 PM
I don't see what is so incredible about eidetic memory. One of the key instructions on a database, no less important than creating a new record, is deleting it. We need it to focus on relevant information only.
The same happens in the brain. We forget, because we evolved a tool for it out of necessity. A tool that sometimes malfunctions.
I fail to see the downside, since it's not like the people with eidetic memory are running out of space.
Quote from: Iormlund on July 18, 2011, 03:35:23 PM
I don't see what is so incredible about eidetic memory. One of the key instructions on a database, no less important than creating a new record, is deleting it. We need it to focus on relevant information only.
The same happens in the brain. We forget, because we evolved a tool for it out of necessity. A tool that sometimes malfunctions.
Nah. We don't always forget though - we just can't find it.
How many times have you gone "it's on the tip of my tongue", and have ahd the memory flooding back ocne you're prompted about it.
Well, it is known that members of societies that are not majority literate can have very impressive memory capabilities. Medieval European townsmen are recorded to have known lists that were thousands of entries long. There were mnemonics to aid in this (the 'walking through the house' one where each room was a shorter list, for example), but it was pretty impressive memory skills.
Reading killed that off.
Quote from: DGuller on July 18, 2011, 03:38:04 PM
I fail to see the downside, since it's not like the people with eidetic memory are running out of space.
Really? We're having a hard time finding any hard information, and you can make that statement as if it's a certainty? How about backing that up with some research on retention rates or time needed to absorb new information before throwing that out there?
Quote from: DGuller on July 18, 2011, 03:38:04 PM
I fail to see the downside, since it's not like the people with eidetic memory are running out of space.
Because at certain point it affects survival negatively. For example, what do you think would be to relive the death of a loved one forever? To constantly have life-like flashbacks while you are hunting or bashing someone's head in?
A good part of getting over something is losing the index address that pointed to that particular memory. That's moving on. It lets us focus on the present.
Quote from: Iormlund on July 18, 2011, 03:50:39 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 18, 2011, 03:38:04 PM
I fail to see the downside, since it's not like the people with eidetic memory are running out of space.
Because at certain point it affects survival negatively. For example, what do you think would be to relive the death of a loved one forever? To constantly have life-like flashbacks while you are hunting or bashing someone's head in?
A good part of getting over something is losing the index address that pointed to that particular memory. That's moving on. It lets us focus on the present.
It is similar to the "doors of perception" issue with taking hallucinogens. If that allows one to see things from multiple perspectives, and this insight is valuable, why not be like that
all the time?
The answer is that such a state is very distracting from actually getting anything done.
Quote from: Barrister on July 18, 2011, 02:04:35 PM
I have to admit I'd just accepted the 10% figure and never gave much thought to whether or not it was true.
+1 for languish today. :bowler:
I've always wanted the "I use 100% of my brain" characters you occasionally run across in genre fiction to collapse in a pants-pissing mess because the large scale activation of neurons is the mechanical cause of a a tonic-clonic seizure.
Quote from: Iormlund on July 18, 2011, 03:50:39 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 18, 2011, 03:38:04 PM
I fail to see the downside, since it's not like the people with eidetic memory are running out of space.
Because at certain point it affects survival negatively. For example, what do you think would be to relive the death of a loved one forever? To constantly have life-like flashbacks while you are hunting or bashing someone's head in?
A good part of getting over something is losing the index address that pointed to that particular memory. That's moving on. It lets us focus on the present.
Why do you assume people do not have control over what they remember? Your posts suggests that memory is a kind of insanity.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 18, 2011, 03:36:12 PMHow do we know he wasn't just talking shit?
because there are some people who just don't talk shit, and if one researches tesla they would know that he was one of those people. others took advantage of him, but he never did to others. he was a very honest person with innate moral convictions.
besides that, anyone who knew tesla and how he operated could see that he wasn't just bsing. this is a man who created his inventions in his mind down to the most mundane details; he then "ran" the machine and could see when it might break down due to some flaw in the design weeks or months later--and then fix it; all in his head. he could leave an invention running in his mind while working on other projects and then "come back" to it later to see where it stood. rarely did he write down or draw up plans for his inventions, which is why many of his most brilliant ideas remain mysteries to this day
it's also telling in his criticism of edison-
"If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found the object of his search. ... I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor."
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 18, 2011, 03:57:42 PM
Why do you assume people do not have control over what they remember? Your posts suggests that memory is a kind of insanity.
Hardly insanity. Whether you remember something or not seems to follow a fairly rational pattern. Moments of shock, for example, are given priority. Whether you tied your shoes correctly this morning is of far less importance and will surely be forgotten sooner than the birth of your first child.
And you do have some control over it. You can use several techniques to exercise your memory.
Quote from: Iormlund on July 18, 2011, 04:04:34 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 18, 2011, 03:57:42 PM
Why do you assume people do not have control over what they remember? Your posts suggests that memory is a kind of insanity.
Hardly insanity. Whether you remember something or not seems to follow a fairly rational pattern. Moments of shock, for example, are given priority. Whether you tied your shoes correctly this morning is of far less importance and will surely be forgotten sooner than the birth of your first child.
And you do have some control over it. You can use several techniques to exercise your memory.
Borges wrote a story about a person with elidic memory called Funes the Memorious:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funes_the_Memorious
It's an interesting read.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 18, 2011, 03:57:42 PMWhy do you assume people do not have control over what they remember? Your posts suggests that memory is a kind of insanity.
agreed. while undoubtedly there will be those whose "super-memories" can be horrific, that does not mean it is the case with everyone. some are able to greatly benefit from their ability. the professor i mentioned, for example, is a walking history encyclopedia--and i don't mean she just knows facts and nothing else, either
@iormlund- maybe so, but that does not mean moments of shock will always remain at the forefront of the consciousness. it's not as if every single person with vast memories endures a life where they are haunted by every bad thing that has happened to them. some can block it out, to recall later
if needed
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 12:16:26 AM
this reminds me of when someone here said they thought dyslexia didn't exist. of course there are those who have photographic memories. a professor with aspergers i know has this. she has read a book every day since thirteen, sometimes two. she scans the page "like a photocopier" and then "reads it" later--often when she sleeps (lucid dreaming). she worked at an archive in britain for some time, and to this day people will call her up and ask where a certain file might be located. she has said it usually takes a moment for her to "flip" through the pages in her memory before she can find it, but otherwise she has little difficulty with it
Wha?
This book thing sounds hard to believe, is the resolution on the letters good enough for them to be picked out at a glance like that?
I mean...when I glance at a book I don't 'see' all the letters/words. I can't read it after looking at it even a few seconds later.
That doesn't so much seem to be photographic memory but...photographic awareness or somesuch.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 18, 2011, 03:36:12 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 03:07:58 PM
the perfect example is nikola tesla, who described his ability brilliantly
How do we know he wasn't just talking shit?
Because he put his method into practice and achieved brilliant things with it?
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 02:40:43 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 18, 2011, 02:37:31 PM
mentally disturbed neighbour. long story.
i didn't even read that, i saw you (whether jokingly or not) bring up three magical powers in a thread that had nothing to do with magic
:lmfao:
Never. Fucking. Mind.
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 03:58:40 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 18, 2011, 03:36:12 PMHow do we know he wasn't just talking shit?
because there are some people who just don't talk shit, and if one researches tesla they would know that he was one of those people. others took advantage of him, but he never did to others. he was a very honest person with innate moral convictions.
besides that, anyone who knew tesla and how he operated could see that he wasn't just bsing. this is a man who created his inventions in his mind down to the most mundane details; he then "ran" the machine and could see when it might break down due to some flaw in the design weeks or months later--and then fix it; all in his head. he could leave an invention running in his mind while working on other projects and then "come back" to it later to see where it stood. rarely did he write down or draw up plans for his inventions, which is why many of his most brilliant ideas remain mysteries to this day
it's also telling in his criticism of edison-
"If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found the object of his search. ... I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor."
First of all, Tesla was a Serb, and a rural one at that, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt. And he probably thought camomile tea was a cure for any ailment, and that sleeping with the air conditioner on would give you TB.
Quote from: DGuller on July 18, 2011, 03:38:04 PM
I fail to see the downside, since it's not like the people with eidetic memory are running out of space.
The drawback is you could never forget anything. Imagine having perfect recall on every shitty moment in your life?
Quote from: Warspite on July 19, 2011, 07:52:57 PM
First of all, Tesla was a Serb, and a rural one at that, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt. And he probably thought camomile tea was a cure for any ailment, and that sleeping with the air conditioner on would give you TB.
I've never seen "rural" been used as euphemism for "Croat".
Quote from: Viking on July 20, 2011, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: Warspite on July 19, 2011, 07:52:57 PM
First of all, Tesla was a Serb, and a rural one at that, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt. And he probably thought camomile tea was a cure for any ailment, and that sleeping with the air conditioner on would give you TB.
I've never seen "rural" been used as euphemism for "Croat".
It makes etymological sense. :yes:
Quote from: Strix on July 20, 2011, 05:29:14 PM
Quote from: DGuller on July 18, 2011, 03:38:04 PM
I fail to see the downside, since it's not like the people with eidetic memory are running out of space.
The drawback is you could never forget anything. Imagine having perfect recall on every shitty moment in your life?
I'd probably be desensitized to it. I do remember many shitty moments in my life, but after enough recalls, I just meh at them.
So, any one read the National Geographic article I linked? What did you think?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 18, 2011, 03:36:12 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 18, 2011, 03:07:58 PM
the perfect example is nikola tesla, who described his ability brilliantly
How do we know he wasn't just talking shit?
Well, you don't really.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 20, 2011, 07:17:59 PM
So, any one read the National Geographic article I linked? What did you think?
No.
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 20, 2011, 07:41:34 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 20, 2011, 07:17:59 PM
So, any one read the National Geographic article I linked? What did you think?
No.
Don't say that, he'll post it again.
Quote from: Viking on July 20, 2011, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: Warspite on July 19, 2011, 07:52:57 PM
First of all, Tesla was a Serb, and a rural one at that, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt. And he probably thought camomile tea was a cure for any ailment, and that sleeping with the air conditioner on would give you TB.
I've never seen "rural" been used as euphemism for "Croat".
Normally it is whackjob Croatian nationalists claiming Tesla was a Croat.
First read the title as "eclectic memory". I can remember random, trivial things quite clearly but struggle with some important stuff, particularly short-term. It drives my wife nuts when I can remember a line from a movie or TV show I saw just once, and several years ago at that.
Quote from: derspiess on July 21, 2011, 11:25:17 AM
First read the title as "eclectic memory". I can remember random, trivial things quite clearly but struggle with some important stuff, particularly short-term. It drives my wife nuts when I can remember a line from a movie or TV show I saw just once, and several years ago at that.
Same. i can recall random, and in all honesty, useless facts and trivia, but i have trouble trying to remember stuff i want to remember. Say when studying. I suck at self studying. i can be in class listening tangently and recall later the important details. When i ry to study its hit and miss what sticks.
Quote from: HVC on July 21, 2011, 11:33:02 AM
Say when studying. I suck at self studying. i can be in class listening tangently and recall later the important details. When i ry to study its hit and miss what sticks.
That's exactly how I was in college. And for any training offered at work, I tend to retain more if it's traditional training with a live instructor as opposed to most computer-based training (save for maybe training/tutorials on specific computer applications).
Quote from: HVC on July 21, 2011, 11:33:02 AM
When i ry to study its hit and miss what sticks.
Studying ain't the only thing that is hit and miss...
Quote from: Warspite on July 21, 2011, 08:05:46 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 20, 2011, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: Warspite on July 19, 2011, 07:52:57 PM
First of all, Tesla was a Serb, and a rural one at that, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt. And he probably thought camomile tea was a cure for any ailment, and that sleeping with the air conditioner on would give you TB.
I've never seen "rural" been used as euphemism for "Croat".
Normally it is whackjob Croatian nationalists claiming Tesla was a Croat.
"whackjob" is redundant when referring to Croatian and Serbian Nationalists. But, in the world of moving borders he was born in Austria in a place that is now Croatia. When you referred to him as a rural Serb I pointed out that he was a Croatian-Serb.
Quote from: Viking on July 21, 2011, 04:18:29 PM
Quote from: Warspite on July 21, 2011, 08:05:46 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 20, 2011, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: Warspite on July 19, 2011, 07:52:57 PM
First of all, Tesla was a Serb, and a rural one at that, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt. And he probably thought camomile tea was a cure for any ailment, and that sleeping with the air conditioner on would give you TB.
I've never seen "rural" been used as euphemism for "Croat".
Normally it is whackjob Croatian nationalists claiming Tesla was a Croat.
"whackjob" is redundant when referring to Croatian and Serbian Nationalists. But, in the world of moving borders he was born in Austria in a place that is now Croatia. When you referred to him as a rural Serb I pointed out that he was a Croatian-Serb.
It's funny how these "colour blind" people are so obsessed by ethnicity and race when they stop thinking about how marvellously correct they are.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 20, 2011, 07:49:42 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 20, 2011, 07:41:34 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 20, 2011, 07:17:59 PM
So, any one read the National Geographic article I linked? What did you think?
No.
Don't say that, he'll post it again.
:rolleyes: Viking asked for references, I gave him one and it's ignored.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 21, 2011, 05:54:52 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 20, 2011, 07:49:42 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 20, 2011, 07:41:34 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 20, 2011, 07:17:59 PM
So, any one read the National Geographic article I linked? What did you think?
No.
Don't say that, he'll post it again.
:rolleyes: Viking asked for references, I gave him one and it's ignored.
That was just a list of anecdotes. Not a general study of the supposed phenomena.
Quote from: Viking on July 21, 2011, 05:58:22 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 21, 2011, 05:54:52 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 20, 2011, 07:49:42 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 20, 2011, 07:41:34 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 20, 2011, 07:17:59 PM
So, any one read the National Geographic article I linked? What did you think?
No.
Don't say that, he'll post it again.
:rolleyes: Viking asked for references, I gave him one and it's ignored.
That was just a list of anecdotes. Not a general study of the supposed phenomena.
They talk about studies being done on those individuals. That's a starting point, just look up those studies. Surely something has been published on them.
Quote from: Viking on July 21, 2011, 04:18:29 PM
Quote from: Warspite on July 21, 2011, 08:05:46 AM
Quote from: Viking on July 20, 2011, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: Warspite on July 19, 2011, 07:52:57 PM
First of all, Tesla was a Serb, and a rural one at that, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt. And he probably thought camomile tea was a cure for any ailment, and that sleeping with the air conditioner on would give you TB.
I've never seen "rural" been used as euphemism for "Croat".
Normally it is whackjob Croatian nationalists claiming Tesla was a Croat.
"whackjob" is redundant when referring to Croatian and Serbian Nationalists. But, in the world of moving borders he was born in Austria in a place that is now Croatia. When you referred to him as a rural Serb I pointed out that he was a Croatian-Serb.
That's great you know that, but I was talking him for being born and raised in the countryside (ie, being 'rural'), not about him being born in the Croatian Military Frontier.