Optimised hardware compression, The eyes have it.

_{Mark

February 11, 2011

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Image processing is but one of the many very clever design features in our eyes. Mores the pity that many who are focused on the blind spot cannot understand eyes to be Intelligently Designed.

The fovea of the eye captures the small section of our visual field where we are looking directly. It is richly replete with colour sensing cones. It requires more light but has very high precision. When we look directly at someone or something in good light, that is where we get the detail from.

In contrast to a TV screen and a video camera, which have the same detail all over the screen, the eyes economically concentrate on our point of direct interest, and scan the remaining areas with a lower resolution. This constitutes one type of hardware compression.

Further along the visual processing pathways there are many additional levels of hardware and software compression.

A Current Biology paper describes one of these compression processes. The ScienceDaily writer says that the human visual processing system is “the best compression algorithm around”.

Comments

Count me as a skeptic. We design digital cameras, and process images that they form. Then, by analogy, we jump to the conclusion that human vision works the same way. To me, this seems very unlikely. I am inclined to prefer J.J. Gibson's theory of direct perception, according to which there is no image processing and no image compression, for the simple reason that there are no images. The problem that our vision system needs to solve is very different from the problem solved by image processors.Neil Rickert_{February 11, 2011
February
02
Feb
11
11
2011
06:40 AM
6
06
40
AM
PDT}

What astonishes me is that evolutionists are so easily led astray by the dubious bad design argument when the staggeringly level of complexity is so readily apparent: The eye is infinitely more complex than any man-made camera. It can handle 1.5 million simultaneous messages, and gathers 80% of all the knowledge absorbed by the brain. The retina covers less than a square inch, and contains 137 million light-sensitive receptor cells, 130 million rods (allowing the eye to see in black and white), and 7 million cones (allowing the eye to see in full color). In an average day, the eye moves about 100,000 times, using muscles that, milligram for milligram, are among the body’s strongest. The body would have to walk 50 miles to exercise the leg muscles an equal amount. The eye is self-cleaning. Lacrimal glands produce secretions (e.g., tears) to flush away dust and other foreign materials. Eyelids act as windshield washers. The blinking process (3-6 times a minute) keeps the sensitive cornea moist and clean. And, tears contain a potent microbe-killer (lysozyme) which guards the eyes against bacterial infection. During times of stress, one eye will “rest” while the other does 90% of the work; then the process is reversed, allowing both eyes equal amounts of rest. The brain receives millions of simultaneous reports from the eyes. When its designated wavelength of light is present, each rod or cone triggers an electrical response to the brain, which then absorbs a composite set of yes-or-no messages from all the rods and cones. There are about seven-million shades of color the human eye can detect. It takes 200 million billionths of a second for the retina to create vision from light. The eye is so sensitive it can detect a candle one mile away. One type of light sensitive cell, the rod, can detect a single photon. For visible light the energy carried by a single photon would be around a tiny 4 x 10-19 Joules; this energy is just sufficient to excite a single molecule in a photoreceptor cell of an eye. There is a biological computer in the retina which processes and compresses the information from those millions of light sensitive cells before sending it to the visual cortex where the complex stream of information is then decompressed. While today's digital hardware is extremely impressive, it is clear that the human retina's real-time performance goes unchallenged. To actually simulate 10 milliseconds of the complete processing of even a single nerve cell from the retina would require the solution of about 500 simultaneous nonlinear differential equations 100 times and would take at least several minutes of processing time on a Cray supercomputer. Keeping in mind that there are 10 million or more such cells interacting with each other in complex ways, it would take a minimum of 100 years of Cray time to simulate what takes place in your eye many times every second. The human is the only species known to shed tears when they are sad. In spite of this stunning evidence evolutionists use a very dubious and philosophically based "bad design" argument to try to undermine the obvious Theological implications. Something tells me evolutionists are not being fair with the evidence. And all this begs the question for the evolutionists; Can an evolutionists go into his laboratory and design a better eye by random mutations? Can he design any eye whatsoever from scratch? Evolution Vs. The Miracle Of The Eye - Molecular Animation http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4189562/ Now the inverted retina, which evolutionists had insisted was "bad design", is now found to be a 'optimal design: Retinal Glial Cells Enhance Human Vision Acuity A. M. Labin and E. N. Ribak Physical Review Letters, 104, 158102 (April 2010) Excerpt: The retina is revealed as an optimal structure designed for improving the sharpness of images. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/why-ken-miller-is-right-about-our-backward-retina/#comment-354274 What has always been an interesting question for me is 'what part of us is actually doing the 'seeing' in the brain since it it seems fairly ridiculous to believe that matter is self conscious of itself? That is why this next study, though surprising, makes sense as to adequately explaining what is 'seeing' in us: Kenneth Ring and Sharon Cooper (1997) conducted a study of 31 blind people, many of who reported vision during their Near Death Experiences (NDEs). 21 of these people had had an NDE while the remaining 10 had had an out-of-body experience (OBE), but no NDE. It was found that in the NDE sample, about half had been blind from birth. (of note: This 'anomaly' is also found for deaf people who can hear sound during their Near Death Experiences(NDEs).) http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2320/is_1_64/ai_65076875/ Blind Woman Can See During Near Death Experience (NDE) - Pim von Lommel - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3994599/ Coast to Coast - Blind since Birth - Vicki's NDE - Part 1 of 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e65KhcCS5-Y further note: It is also very interesting to point out that the 'light at the end of the tunnel', reported in many Near Death Experiences(NDEs), like Vicky's in the preceding Coast to Coast interview is also corroborated by Special Relativity when considering the optical effects for traveling at the speed of light. Please compare the similarity of the optical effect, noted at the 3:22 minute mark of the following video, when the 3-Dimensional world 'folds and collapses' into a tunnel shape around the direction of travel towards the speed of light, with the 'light at the end of the tunnel' reported in very many NDEs: Traveling At The Speed Of Light - Optical Effects - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5733303/ further note: It is also interesting to note that the best evidence we have suggests that complex eyes appeared abruptly in the fossil record. Evolution vs. The Trilobite Eye - Prof. Andy McIntosh - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4032589 The Optimal Engineering Of The Trilobite Eye - Dr. Don Johnson https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1TiZcs0eginyh6rijCGd3kwC3CeawjQV1AsC6Xvvnx44bornagain77_{February 11, 2011
February
02
Feb
11
11
2011
03:54 AM
3
03
54
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply