From: jeff@is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Jeff McAffer)
Subject: Re: TECH: Are sensory inputs a help or hinderance
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1993 03:48:24 GMT
Organization: University of Tokyo / Object Technology International


In article <1m673eINNbpe@shelley.u.washington.edu> COS.MARSHALL@GLASGOW-POLY.AC.UK writes:

 >see (no pun intended) what the difference would be, unless of course
 >you have poor sight, hearing, etc. But if all your senses are
 >"reasonably" accurate, then as long as your brain is getting fed
 >the appropriate signals, what difference will it make *where* the
 >signals are coming from. The fact is the brain is receiving, say,
 >visual information so who cares whether its from the eye or a
 >machine (suppose the eye is a machine too). Besides the brain can
 >only distinguish between about 16 million or whatever colours
 >anyway, so even though a machine can provide more, it won't
 >make any difference
 >  Its like, the ear providing "record" quality input signals, so
 >would there be an improvement if CD-quality sound could be fed
 >directly...

So true, so true.  I take it further though and believe that some of
the really interesting things are things like "seeing" at different
frequencies.  Head mounted microwave receivers feeding into the
optical system.  Mapping sensory input.  "hearing" light...  Sure we
can still use the indigenous sensors but there is more out there. 

Another interesting tack is multiple inputs to the same "sense".  Use
microwave and visible band "vision" concurrently.  Perhaps connected
to different parts (the unused bits?) of the brain.  Maybe if we
increase the bandwidth we can get more grey matter utilization.  It
may even create "new" senses.
--
ato de, |m        -- Humpty-Dumpty met the challenge of the wall with
                     a spectacular collapse.                - M. McLuhan