Home

Pasted Graphic

By simplifying everything we end up suffering form the “knowledge” syndrome. In other words, we forget how little we know and despite, we continue claiming the truth.
Contrary to our superficial beliefs, there is a multitude of visible and invisible lights.
It is the silly to use logics and analyze “visible” light by dissecting it into frequencies. In this case, we claim that one particular frequency of light is named “red”, but in reality, there is no such thing as “red light”. What we perceive as “colour red” is nothing but the extrapolated frequency. Light contains all frequencies at once and division of colours is either purely theoretical or pragmatic; in other words, untrue to complexity of nature.
Perception of coloured objects requires entirely different thinking. Colour of the object comes from reflected (better to say rejected) light/frequency, leaving us with the notion of inverse or complimentary perception. Absorbed light/frequency is translated into energy (temperature) of the object. In this sense, we neither see the object, nor it’s colour.
Another kind of light produces image inside the mind. This light is purely “mental”, inducted and stored as “visual memory”. It is still mystery how we see dreams and imagination, but there must be some kind of energy that stimulates the visual cortex. This inner energy is in fact memory-based light, only resembling the “normal” light. Memorization of “mental images” acts like a JPEG compression, reducing the number of information to “essential”. Every recollection changes the structure of the “compression”. This way we can “see” and imagine objects but without particulars: dropped shadows or specific light source. This kind of image-memory is a foundation of Oriental arts. Oriental Masters are concerned to recall memory by fewer possible elements and they are not concerned by the shadows cast by the (specific) light. On the contrary, their European colleagues are attracted to visible light (source), which guides the image making according to the eye-perception.
Digital light resembles mind’s vision. Virtual reality uses same conceptual framework as dreams, or our mental space. Virtual games offer only “indication for dimensions and directions”, which is then completed by the mind’s vision. Cartesian geometry depends on real-life coordinates and has to be abandoned or turned into conceptual coordinates. This means that digital and virtual & mind-space doesn’t recognize parameters such as “north” or “south”. Mind does not generate specific spatial (light source) or reference points; instead it generates a system without coordinates and proportions. Reference to real space is lost, defragmented and dislocated, but still our mind finds a way to make some sense out of it. That’s why in our dreams (and computer games) objects and our size may vary.
All vision, inner and outer is resolved within visual cortex. The path is the same, yet the “flow of data” runs in opposite directions. Inner vision uses “stored light”, which might be compared to multidirectional illumination, and perceptive vision uses inducted light coming from the eyes (directional) light sources.
Digital dreams might be the very next step of computation, where we may encounter more clues to comprehend the nature of light & vision… and better understand the paradox of multiple realities.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s