yeah the direct pathway to spinal cord (you need really good spinal nerves for that though) thingy, which skips the main motor arch coming from higher cortex (which is actually intentional muscle mov.) .. good dueling thingy though .. i would love to play that with my brother/friends to see who has faster reaction time .. good stuff.
well duh ,, if your primed to attack or to evading , more process if your attacking to counter a multiply number of counters sit and weight as the Buddha said lol
I was reading about this just a few hours ago in Physics World! That article said that although your speed was increased by the sense of danger, it wasn't enough to win.
Neihs Bohr didn't discover it, he merley proposed it, and he won apparently because he was a btter shot. I don't know what Borh used as a gun though...
@Jaconium it means that with at about 20 metres duelling distance or less, you could fire the gun before your opponent. any further than that, then the opponent would also be able to get a shot off, but he would get hit first.
Why would valuable resources be wasted in such an absurd research. Did you REALLY base your proposal on just movies???? Those were filmed as such so they would increase the suspense and not based on how our brain works!!!
You coming to this conclusion was completely by mere luck!!
...I hope at least you find a useful way to use it! ...I personally doubt there is one though!!
the tobacco companies were paying for reassert to find out if smoking was bad for humans some forced dogs and monkeys to chain smoke , like the Japanese doing research on walls like which part tastes best,
so a good technique in a gun fight (or mabye sports) to be quicker is when your going to strike, visualize that your reacting to something, not just acting.
logically obviously a reaction should not be faster than a planned movement. it is curious why it helps the brain perform quicker.
also, this might work for a layman perhaps, but i suspect it doesn't work as much for veteran gunslingers.
in theory you should be able to mimic whatever happens in your brain that makes the movement faster even when you're not responding. trick yourself into believing you are responding or something...
Logically, obviously, a reaction SHOULD be faster than a planned movement :-/.
When responding it's important to react fast whereas the planned movement doesn't have the same necessity (IMO). Honestly I think the main difference is that your "decision" has already been made; you're choosing to perform a certain action (in this case perform the sequence in progress) in response to what you see.
logically a planned movement does have the same necessity in this situation because you know the other will respond.
the suggestion that because you see the other person drawing a weapon making you feel more urgent is not rational. rationally you'd thnk in both cases you would try just as hard to be as fast as you can.
what this implies is that there is an irrational part of your brain, outside of your rational control, that is also involved in initiating movement.
i read this a few months in Scientific American. apparently, the difference in reaction times would not be sufficient to account the person reacting winning the gun fight scenario. this is nevertheless a very interesting finding.
btw, the google transcribe audio doesn't seem to work very well with this guys accent =D
@mistletoe88 You are right about the CC transcribe, it is really funny to watch this with the captions turned on. It is like one of those e-mails from Nigeria that start out "Dear Sir". I like at 1:30 when it says "twenty minutes second pasta"
If a gun fires a bullet at 1200 ft/s, and the reaction time is 20 ms faster than the decision time, by my calculations a person would have to be within 24 feet from the other in a duel in order to kill that person prior to them being able to get off their own shot. Assuming the bullet leaves instantaneously upon pulling the trigger, which of course is not realistic. You'd have to add some delay time between trigger and actual bullet exit from the barrel, which would decrease the distance.
your reaction time might be faster than your decision time, but your decision time will always be faster in a study like this in the sense that if you go first, you win. thats not always necessarily the case, but in this study its true.
American settlers more or less wiped out the native Americans but you never hear that mentioned in the news, its always the same crap about the holocaust "go up to your URL, put the a Q between the words you and tube and then press enter or click go"
so many people here does not understod what he said. i lol at all of you! idiots!
The reaction movement would be 20ms faster than the decided movement. However, reaction time is somewhere between 200-500ms.
This means that even though you will pull and fire 20ms faster than the "bad guy" who drew first, you will fire your shot appriximatly 180-480ms after he has fired. thus in same cases you can already have been hit before you yourself gets a chance to fire.
Actually im verry bad at spelling in all the 6 language that i speak, only two of those are closely related to eachother. For me, its an effort being able to spell even this "good". Enlgish was the theird language i lernt.
How many do you know, and in which can you express yourself as good as this in? ofcourse not counting your nativ language, english. How many of the two non primary languages are you this good in?
It is a proven fact that spelling, which is illogical, is non-correlated to iq
but yes, i often try to spoell better in those posts where i do call idiots idiots, since it helpts to give a solid impression, so you are not totaly at fault.
you chose the wrong person to show off the many languages you know, because i myself know 5, in my 21 years of life i have stayed in many parts of the world. i know 5 languages fluently , however this does not prove the fact that i am a above average student or person. me knowing 5 languages does not indicate in the slightest of my knowledge, so i do not know where you were going with your "6 language" point.
and my native language is not english .but i can express my self better in english
my point was not that i speak 6 languages, my point was that im bad at spelling in all of them.
The more languages you know the less likely is it for you to be an idiot. There are significantly less idiots that knows several languages than there are non-idiots that knows several languages. Thus the more languages yopu know it get increasingly less likely for you to be an idiot.
so, my post could be logicaly summed up as: I always spell bad, and its not because im an idiot.
You 'lol' at everyone, yet you missed the point of the video/study. It's not about determining who would win in a shoot-out, its about determining if/why reaction time is faster than deciding.
I just think that the setting which they set up to make the analogy is flawed, since the faster motion of reaction movement compared to the decision movement is negligable when reaction speed is taken into acount.
if you had read the others comments aswell, you would see why i wrote this. i thought that after reading other comments and comparing the relevant ones to mine it would be evident that i had gotten the point this video tried to make.
after reading your comment again, it seems that it is a little ambigious.
"determining if/why reaction time is faster than deciding"
Its not the reaction time, its the entire motion. The one that decides performes his motion in x sec, the one that reacts performs the same motion in x-0,020 sec, each measured from when they started their respictive motions.
The actual deciding time, and reaction times are not conciderd. thats why their hands start at button, move to edge, and back.
what is your problem? In that article they conclude the EXACT same thing as i stated here. quoteing
"The reacting players took 21 milliseconds less time to move, on average, than the first ones. Welchman thinks reaction movement involves a faster brain pathway than intentional movement. So Bohr was right? Not quite.
There was also a "reaction time", a delay of 200 milliseconds before the players started to respond to their opponent's actions. So although they moved faster, they never won."
compare the qoute to what i originaly said and then take some time and think how you could have had such problems with realizing that those two statements are equivalent.
Do you actualy belive that i did not get that this was a study of how the brain works, wheater or not reacting movement is faster than decided movement, and if it is, why it could be so?
I have long thought that reaction movement is faster and they concluded that. But it is still negliable when reaction time is taken into acount, as both i and them concluded. That is the scope of their investigation, shot-outs and duels.
Ofcourse, I imediately realized the implications of the study.
looks like the person executing first is focusing on the person reacting -- she can probably move faster if she focused on speed. the guy is obviously interested in beating the woman in this clip; she seems less interested in competing for the fastest time.
Probably has something to do with mirror neurons? The mirror neurons, perhaps, can fire the impulse faster than you can build the intention to action in your brain. That would be my guess as to the explanation anyways.
I Think it's just easier for the brain to follow than lead. To lead you have to make decisions on which way to go, all that takes more neurons than simply following the motions of another.
I love how these videos are some of the only Youtube ones not disrupted by evil trolls...
quipitory633 1 year ago 3
@quipitory633 They seem more disrupted by trolls than most videos on youtube, actually.
Bobstew68 1 year ago
yeah the direct pathway to spinal cord (you need really good spinal nerves for that though) thingy, which skips the main motor arch coming from higher cortex (which is actually intentional muscle mov.) .. good dueling thingy though .. i would love to play that with my brother/friends to see who has faster reaction time .. good stuff.
kutaro13 1 year ago
yeah got it somatic arc reflex .. fascinating
kutaro13 1 year ago
well duh ,, if your primed to attack or to evading , more process if your attacking to counter a multiply number of counters sit and weight as the Buddha said lol
youstupidwoman 1 year ago
Don't shoot your foot off!
trime1851 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
WHO GIVES A FLYING FUCK?!
shubidubar 1 year ago
@shubidubar lmao
wrathallll 1 year ago
@shubidubar
Because people are interested in ourselves and science.
Why are you watching this then?
ChairmanKiel 1 year ago
I was reading about this just a few hours ago in Physics World! That article said that although your speed was increased by the sense of danger, it wasn't enough to win.
Neihs Bohr didn't discover it, he merley proposed it, and he won apparently because he was a btter shot. I don't know what Borh used as a gun though...
FizzyMcPhysics 1 year ago
this video gave me an imperceptible erection
zx1011 2 years ago
your erection is always imperceptible
coolman9999uk 1 year ago
why?
000how 1 year ago
20 milli seconds? how significant is that? even more, does it mean much if anything?
Jaconium 2 years ago
@Jaconium it means that with at about 20 metres duelling distance or less, you could fire the gun before your opponent. any further than that, then the opponent would also be able to get a shot off, but he would get hit first.
sutasman 2 years ago
Why would valuable resources be wasted in such an absurd research. Did you REALLY base your proposal on just movies???? Those were filmed as such so they would increase the suspense and not based on how our brain works!!!
You coming to this conclusion was completely by mere luck!!
...I hope at least you find a useful way to use it! ...I personally doubt there is one though!!
giorgos424 2 years ago
@ giorgos
It's called curiosity. Apparently you have none.
chodaboy51500 2 years ago
Old news. Niels Bohr already discovered that some 60 years ago, and he wasn't even a neurologist.
Still, good video.
Timrath 2 years ago
the tobacco companies were paying for reassert to find out if smoking was bad for humans some forced dogs and monkeys to chain smoke , like the Japanese doing research on walls like which part tastes best,
when its cheaper to farm tuna
people want jobs that pay well so they sell out
youstupidwoman 1 year ago
ha! our crazy brain almost makes sense!
Paxmax 2 years ago
so a good technique in a gun fight (or mabye sports) to be quicker is when your going to strike, visualize that your reacting to something, not just acting.
Magician12345 2 years ago
Don't think that'll work; it's still a decision :-/ ...the point is that by reacting you're not making the decision :-/
DigitizedSelf 2 years ago
in theory you should be able to trick your mind into believing it is a reaction. if you have enough imagination...
i'm pretty sure some buddhist monk or something, somewhere, has developed a technique to do so.
lygophile 2 years ago
That one of the individuals with stuff of commitment sequence and the President with Andrea. YOU brought up the gap! CC ftw
maulcs 2 years ago
logically obviously a reaction should not be faster than a planned movement. it is curious why it helps the brain perform quicker.
also, this might work for a layman perhaps, but i suspect it doesn't work as much for veteran gunslingers.
in theory you should be able to mimic whatever happens in your brain that makes the movement faster even when you're not responding. trick yourself into believing you are responding or something...
lygophile 2 years ago
Logically, obviously, a reaction SHOULD be faster than a planned movement :-/.
When responding it's important to react fast whereas the planned movement doesn't have the same necessity (IMO). Honestly I think the main difference is that your "decision" has already been made; you're choosing to perform a certain action (in this case perform the sequence in progress) in response to what you see.
Evolutionary it makes plenty of sense :-/
DigitizedSelf 2 years ago
logically a planned movement does have the same necessity in this situation because you know the other will respond.
the suggestion that because you see the other person drawing a weapon making you feel more urgent is not rational. rationally you'd thnk in both cases you would try just as hard to be as fast as you can.
what this implies is that there is an irrational part of your brain, outside of your rational control, that is also involved in initiating movement.
to me that's curious.
lygophile 2 years ago
scary, even.
lygophile 2 years ago
This is interesting stuff.
Robomansk8 2 years ago
what is this video all about can anyone explain it
LYD1990 2 years ago
Is this because you already made the decision to fire in response?
Or we already trained ourselves to do this every time without making a decision?
Either way we already decided to do the thing. After we shoot we can have time to regret it later :)
asumazilla 2 years ago
this guy repeats himself like 4x times in the beginning saying the same thing, ugh annoying.
quosmo1 2 years ago
lol @ the CC transcribe audio X-D
djindio555 2 years ago
i read this a few months in Scientific American. apparently, the difference in reaction times would not be sufficient to account the person reacting winning the gun fight scenario. this is nevertheless a very interesting finding.
btw, the google transcribe audio doesn't seem to work very well with this guys accent =D
mistletoe88 2 years ago
@mistletoe88 You are right about the CC transcribe, it is really funny to watch this with the captions turned on. It is like one of those e-mails from Nigeria that start out "Dear Sir". I like at 1:30 when it says "twenty minutes second pasta"
jbear0000 2 years ago
Facinating!
TheAmericanRifleman 2 years ago
If a gun fires a bullet at 1200 ft/s, and the reaction time is 20 ms faster than the decision time, by my calculations a person would have to be within 24 feet from the other in a duel in order to kill that person prior to them being able to get off their own shot. Assuming the bullet leaves instantaneously upon pulling the trigger, which of course is not realistic. You'd have to add some delay time between trigger and actual bullet exit from the barrel, which would decrease the distance.
onehotseat 2 years ago
You also have to hit the target. I'm sure skill has a lot to do with it.
starrychloe 2 years ago
@starrychloe
Nonsense... it all has to do with the colour of your hat!
AnonEyeMouse 2 years ago 6
your reaction time might be faster than your decision time, but your decision time will always be faster in a study like this in the sense that if you go first, you win. thats not always necessarily the case, but in this study its true.
idontevenhavestuff 2 years ago 3
thats crazy
defect530 2 years ago
American settlers more or less wiped out the native Americans but you never hear that mentioned in the news, its always the same crap about the holocaust "go up to your URL, put the a Q between the words you and tube and then press enter or click go"
binkiie4dictator 2 years ago
its just like muscle memory in karate.
Madmonkeythegreat 2 years ago
Oo cool
thestrongwar 2 years ago
Very interesting.
jhamaker 2 years ago
Interesting!
Roan1414 2 years ago
so many people here does not understod what he said. i lol at all of you! idiots!
The reaction movement would be 20ms faster than the decided movement. However, reaction time is somewhere between 200-500ms.
This means that even though you will pull and fire 20ms faster than the "bad guy" who drew first, you will fire your shot appriximatly 180-480ms after he has fired. thus in same cases you can already have been hit before you yourself gets a chance to fire.
N3CR1S 2 years ago 2
you might want to correctly spell , when you are calling someone else an idiot. idiot.
outlawkelb 2 years ago
Actually im verry bad at spelling in all the 6 language that i speak, only two of those are closely related to eachother. For me, its an effort being able to spell even this "good". Enlgish was the theird language i lernt.
How many do you know, and in which can you express yourself as good as this in? ofcourse not counting your nativ language, english. How many of the two non primary languages are you this good in?
It is a proven fact that spelling, which is illogical, is non-correlated to iq
N3CR1S 2 years ago
but yes, i often try to spoell better in those posts where i do call idiots idiots, since it helpts to give a solid impression, so you are not totaly at fault.
N3CR1S 2 years ago
you chose the wrong person to show off the many languages you know, because i myself know 5, in my 21 years of life i have stayed in many parts of the world. i know 5 languages fluently , however this does not prove the fact that i am a above average student or person. me knowing 5 languages does not indicate in the slightest of my knowledge, so i do not know where you were going with your "6 language" point.
and my native language is not english .but i can express my self better in english
outlawkelb 2 years ago
my point was not that i speak 6 languages, my point was that im bad at spelling in all of them.
The more languages you know the less likely is it for you to be an idiot. There are significantly less idiots that knows several languages than there are non-idiots that knows several languages. Thus the more languages yopu know it get increasingly less likely for you to be an idiot.
so, my post could be logicaly summed up as: I always spell bad, and its not because im an idiot.
N3CR1S 2 years ago
Assuming accuracy.
You 'lol' at everyone, yet you missed the point of the video/study. It's not about determining who would win in a shoot-out, its about determining if/why reaction time is faster than deciding.
BenjaminFranklin2u 2 years ago
i got that, perfectly fine.
I just think that the setting which they set up to make the analogy is flawed, since the faster motion of reaction movement compared to the decision movement is negligable when reaction speed is taken into acount.
if you had read the others comments aswell, you would see why i wrote this. i thought that after reading other comments and comparing the relevant ones to mine it would be evident that i had gotten the point this video tried to make.
N3CR1S 2 years ago
no:2 @Ben
after reading your comment again, it seems that it is a little ambigious.
"determining if/why reaction time is faster than deciding"
Its not the reaction time, its the entire motion. The one that decides performes his motion in x sec, the one that reacts performs the same motion in x-0,020 sec, each measured from when they started their respictive motions.
The actual deciding time, and reaction times are not conciderd. thats why their hands start at button, move to edge, and back.
N3CR1S 2 years ago
None of that is relevant to my main point, again you fail to see the subject matter of concern.
I suggest you go to their website and read the full article, it's a couple of pages, good reading.
BenjaminFranklin2u 2 years ago
what is your problem? In that article they conclude the EXACT same thing as i stated here. quoteing
"The reacting players took 21 milliseconds less time to move, on average, than the first ones. Welchman thinks reaction movement involves a faster brain pathway than intentional movement. So Bohr was right? Not quite.
There was also a "reaction time", a delay of 200 milliseconds before the players started to respond to their opponent's actions. So although they moved faster, they never won."
N3CR1S 2 years ago
compare the qoute to what i originaly said and then take some time and think how you could have had such problems with realizing that those two statements are equivalent.
I expect an apology from you Benjamin.
N3CR1S 2 years ago
I am going to assume you just don't understand my reply because you have difficulty with English.
MY issue with what you said has nothing to do with the science. You laugh at everyone because you say they don't understand, yet either do you.
This is a study about the brain, not about shoot-outs in general.
Milliseconds have no bearing in the end result of a shoot-out, because accuracy is more important than timing.
This study is about the brain. So stop 'lol'ing and get reading.
BenjaminFranklin2u 2 years ago
Do you actualy belive that i did not get that this was a study of how the brain works, wheater or not reacting movement is faster than decided movement, and if it is, why it could be so?
I have long thought that reaction movement is faster and they concluded that. But it is still negliable when reaction time is taken into acount, as both i and them concluded. That is the scope of their investigation, shot-outs and duels.
Ofcourse, I imediately realized the implications of the study.
N3CR1S 2 years ago
so my bullet will have 20ms more time to stop the other guy from shooting at me? Is that enough time?
showABCshow 2 years ago
Chuck Norris will always react to reactions
oldakustikblues 2 years ago
looks like the person executing first is focusing on the person reacting -- she can probably move faster if she focused on speed. the guy is obviously interested in beating the woman in this clip; she seems less interested in competing for the fastest time.
Pelonetillo 2 years ago
20 ms.. ok.... buy it takes a minimum of 100ms to react right? so that makes you dead in a shoot out o.O
luckystrke 2 years ago
@luckystrke
They said 20ms faster than the other guy..
so it doesn't matter what their times are because on average, the reactor person will be faster.
showABCshow 2 years ago
Probably has something to do with mirror neurons? The mirror neurons, perhaps, can fire the impulse faster than you can build the intention to action in your brain. That would be my guess as to the explanation anyways.
websnarf 2 years ago
I Think it's just easier for the brain to follow than lead. To lead you have to make decisions on which way to go, all that takes more neurons than simply following the motions of another.
BenjaminFranklin2u 2 years ago
With practice movements become locked in muscle memory. That's the entire basis of martial arts training.
bamboo4tameshigiri 2 years ago 3
im betting with training this could be reversed
88think 2 years ago 4
Han shoots first no matter how much you train! lol, but maybe you're right
M30W3R 2 years ago 2
yes but equally you could be trained to react more quickly as well
SheepJumpFish 2 years ago 2
20 milli seconds..
ObliviuxProductions 2 years ago
i call bullshit xD
sweYoda 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
2nd
13baldjj 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
first view and comment
ROHCAB91 2 years ago
Oh my god, you are the chosen one! ;-)
FuzzyHead007 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you fucking cunt i'll rape your bitch ass mouth
darkalchemistninja 2 years ago