Bad science - Perception of time

"There is no way to fake it," says some rather poor scientists.

I show how a particular experiment proves nothing... despite the strong claims. "The first evidence that a persons brain can speed up and they can see the world more slowly."

http://youtube.com/watch?v=RjlpamhrId8

Category:

Education

Tags:

• michio
• kaku
• time
• drugs
• freefall
• Marijuana
• cocaine
• experiments

[lawless101aa07]

It would only induce the effect if his arm was moving back and forth across his area of vision. I beleive it was stationary at the time the person who was dropped viewed it. In dealing with the perception of time this was a good experiment. A body in motion is experiencing time at a different rate or way than a body that is not. I think that is what they were trying to get at. I see the experiment as pretty sound. I think you may have misunderstood it.

[DayfallKat]

@lawless101aa07 "A body in motion is experiencing time at a different rate"

You mean relative to those not moving. However since his arm, as you say, was not moving relative to the person falling, it also "experienced time at a different rate", specifically at the exact same rate as the person falling. Hence, NO.

I work with POV all the time. This experiment was extremely flawed as far as science goes.

[shananagans5]

I can't believe more people are not familiar with this. This going into slo mo for a few seconds is well known among people that do lots of intense things. I have done it many times and I do believe it allows you to think & react faster. I also agree this experiment is junk. It's not really even an experiment, it is more of a demonstration and not even a good one at that.

[DayfallKat]

@scrfce123 The wand has much LESS of a POV effect because the colors are in the same space. Alternating (moving) lights are easier to detect than alternating colors.

[scrfce123]

@DayfallKat Yes, I agree. Pretty much a summary of what I was trying to say. I probably wasn't specific enough though. That said, you would be getting a much more pronounced effect with the wand than with the wrist mounted device.

[DayfallKat]

@scrfce123 "is not moving in relation to their body. "

actually you mean eyes or head. Which in the case of the experiment was not the case. Also any movement is aggravated by the fact that the brain might not be able to cancel movements of the eye when falling as it normally does.

Only given that the image of the device if fixed in the same position on the retina, then yes, otherwise the effect is explained by mundane persistence of vision.

[scrfce123]

@DayfallKat Stationary relative to the observer means that the object is fixed to the observer and is not moving in relation to their body. 

[DayfallKat]

@scrfce123 All correct except your last line. Ordinary reflexes will do for the device in the experiment.

[scrfce123]

The reason that the individual colors become visible is because they have been spread over a larger and constantly changing geometric region - Each color is not necessarily interpreted on every given revolution - you may interpret the red after every 2 or 3 revolutions. It also depends where you focus.

You can't achieve the same effect with an object that is stationary relative to the observer unless the observers reflexes (or perceptions of time) increase.

[DayfallKat]

@IronHorsez88 Your time will always go as normal. The faster you go, the faster time around you will go. You could go to the past somewhere else if you travel faster than light. If you curve space past vertical then time might loop and you can go back in the same place. Watch the movie "Primer" for what that might look like.