The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?  (Read 15444 times)

Offline neilep

  • Withdrawnmist
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 20602
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« on: 19/06/2010 17:32:11 »
Dearest Peeps Of  Scholarly Knowledgeaby Knowing Stuff,

As a sheepy I of course am very photogenic.....I recently posed for PlaySheep magazine and their sales rocketed !....so..being an authority on photo stuff ewe'd think I know all that there is to know about mega-pixels eh ?...."yes" I hear ewe all say......well...*shock horror* there's one thing I do not know......and that is the megapixelage/resolution of my eye.

Look here's a Sony camera


A Sony Camera Yesterday*



Nice eh?..8.1megapixelsof Sony Joyness .....

Now here is my eye !



....Nice eh ?.....



But what resolution is my eye ?..how many mega-pixels is it?..I reckon it has got to be at least 4 !!


whajafink ?




Hugs and shmishes



mwah mwah mwah !!



Neil
Eye Owner...two in fact
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

*Other cameras of other brands of equal quality are also available but if SONY wish to outfit my entire home with top notch SONY kit as a freebie then I will gladly rebuke the "Other " brands statement !


 

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • Posts: 31653
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • "come fly with me"
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #1 on: 19/06/2010 20:34:35 »
I think that is a super question.. and seriously do we see in mega pixels? I was not even sure I was aware of all the facts... I knew they were dots per inch etc.. but this helped and still makes me wonder if Our eyes could even be compared in pixels??? Makes me curious...


Read this....

http://www.digital-slr-guide.com/define-megapixels.html

Trying to Define Megapixels?
   

Let me help you out: I'm going to define megapixels in a way that should clear up a lot of confusion.

Since the very first digital camera, this one term has been shrouded in mystery. It has been the defining feature on digital cameras for years and has been built up and hyped to no end.

The megapixel race has boiled down to a catch phrase: "more is better".

It makes sense why camera makers and retailers aren't falling over themselves to clearly define megapixels to consumers: a megapixel number makes it easy to compare two different cameras.

"Our camera has 10 megapixels while our competitor's only has 8. I'm sure you can tell which one is better."

And - surprise, surprise - the more megapixels a camera has, the more it costs. Of course a salesperson is going to tell you that a camera with more megapixels is going to take better photos.

But what are these megapixels really good for? In the following paragraphs, you'll find out.
In The Beginning

The foundation of megapixels is the lowly pixel.

A pixel is one dot of information in a digital photograph. Digital photos today are made up of millions of tiny dots (Mega = Million).

This means that a 10 megapixel image contains approximately 10 million pixels, while a 14 megapixel image contains 14 million pixels.

Since a photo has a rectangular shape, the dimensions of one side aren't equal to the other. If we assume that we're looking at photo in landscape orientation:

    * A 10 megapixel photo measures 3888 pixels wide by 2592 pixels high
    * A 14.5 megapixel photo measures 4672 pixels wide by 3104 pixels high

If you take the width and multiply it by the height, you get the total number of pixels that make up the digital image:

    * 3888 x 2592 = 10,077,696 pixels = 10 megapixels
    * 4672 x 3104 = 14,501,888 pixels = 14.5 megapixels

This is just the tip of the iceberg - there's a lot more information required to define megapixels.
Is More Better?

So a camera with more megapixels takes clearer photos right?

After all, if one camera is capturing 14 million pixels and another is only getting 10, then the photo with 14 million pixels should look better.

Not exactly.

While a digital photo that contains 14 million pixels is physically larger than one with only 10 million, when viewed and printed at small sizes they are hard to tell apart.

Can you tell which of these two photos has 10 megapixels and which one has 14?
canon-eos-40d-238    pentax-k20d-287

The real notable difference is not one of quality, but one of file size: 14 megapixel cameras create larger digital files than their 10 megapixel counterparts.

A larger file size means:

    * You need to purchase higher capacity memory cards (4GB or more)
    * It takes longer to transfer an image from the memory card to your computer
    * You need more hard drive space on your computer to store your photos
    * You need a more powerful computer to organize and edit your images
    * You must dramatically reduce the size of photos to send via e-mail
    * It takes longer to upload the original images to an online gallery

This leads us to ask an important question: what's the point of cameras with more megapixels if image processing takes up so much time and space?
Large Print Sizes

First, the most obvious advantage:

You can print photos with more megapixels at large sizes.

Let me define this another way: if you print an 10 megapixel photo and a 14 megapixel photo at 4x6 inches (standard print size) you'll be hard-pressed to tell which one is which (just like when you compared the small images above).

But if you print both photos at 20x30, then you will see a difference in quality.

The 10 megapixel photo won't look as clear and as sharp as the 14 megapixel photo when printed at this large size.

This table shows the most common "acceptable" print sizes based on the number of megapixels.
Number of Megapixels   Acceptable Print Size (Inches)
2.0   4 x 6 [standard]
3.0   5 x 7
4.0   8 x 10
5.0   8 x 12
6.0   9 x 12
8.0   11 x 14
10.0   12 x 16
12.0   16 x 20
14.0   18 x 24

Here's how to read the megapixel print size table:

    * With a 10 megapixel camera, any print that you make that is 12x16 or smaller will look fantastic
    * With a 6 megapixel camera, you can make high-quality prints at 9x12 or smaller

Can you print your photos larger than the acceptable size? You bet.

There's nothing stopping you from printing your 6 megapixel photos at 20x30, or even billboard size if you so desire.

But there is a catch: as you increase the size of a print above the acceptable print size, the image quality deteriorates.

A 4 megapixel photo printed at 4x6 will be perfectly clear. It will also be clear at 8x10. But a 4 megapixel photo printed at 11x14 will show a loss of image quality. The same image printed at 20x30 will show considerable loss of image quality.

BOTTOM LINE: If your goal in life is to make really large prints, then compare cameras with lots of megapixels. If you just want to print at 4x6 and e-mail photos to friends, then spending a lot on more megapixels is a bit of a waste.
More Image Cropping Options

You can now define megapixels in one way: more of them lets you make larger prints.

There is a second benefit to having a lot of megapixels in your photos: it gives you freedom to crop.

Let's say that you've taken a photo with an 8 megapixel camera - you're able to make nice 12x16 prints with this.

On a photo safari, you take a photo of an egret, but you're too far away from the bird and you don't have a telephoto lens to get up close and personal.

The primary subject of your photo is tiny. You decide to crop the shot so that the egret appears larger.

No problem...except that you can no longer print at 8x10.

You need 8 megapixels to print at 12x16 before the image starts to deteriorate. When you crop the image, you are eliminating pixels - let's say that you crop out 2 megapixels from your photo.

You wind up with a 6 megapixel photo - you can make a nice 11x14 print, but that's about it.

Now imagine that you take the same shot with a 10 megapixel camera.

With this shot, you can crop out a full 50% of the image (5 megapixels) and still make a high-quality 9x12 inch print.

But be aware that cropping and adjusting your photos takes time. In fact, it takes a lot longer to edit photos than to take them in the first place.

BOTTOM LINE: If you don't want to spend your time sitting in front of the computer editing and cropping your photos, then a camera with tons of megapixels doesn't provide you with an advantage.
Buying Tip

Let's conclude our introduction to megapixels with a quick summary of some of the reasons for and against getting a camera with more megapixels.

Get a camera with a high megapixel count if you:

    * Want to make very large prints of your digital images
    * Want to crop out large portions of your photos and still make large prints

Don't spend all your hard-earned money on lots of megapixels if:

    * You rarely make prints larger than 4x6 inches
    * You just want to upload images to an online gallery
    * You enjoy sharing photos with friends via e-mail

There you have it: the mystery of megapixels has been clarified. That wasn't so hard, was it?

Now that you know what they're about, get out there and define megapixels for others so they don't have to stay in the dark!
 

Offline neilep

  • Withdrawnmist
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 20602
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #2 on: 19/06/2010 22:16:22 »
I'm glad ewe like the kweschun Kareny Mam...and thank ewe for the oodles of information.....I just need to get my lil 'ole' brain round it. In the mean time, lets hope someone can comment on my original query.
 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #3 on: 19/06/2010 23:25:46 »
.
Through deductive reasoning the human eye has no pixels per say.

I believe the Human Body's metabolism does not process our senses digitally.
Pixel resolution relates to the digital process of a CCD.

In the human body, the sensors chemically blend together like a fluid and are not just a "hard", turn on, shut off process.

 For example, look at a small pain in the arm, you know where to approximately locate the center of the pain, also; you can not quite find exactly, the precise spot the pain ends, you do know it fades somewhere along the lines.

This is more an analog characteristic then a digital characteristic.

Knowing this, the "Pixel", realm and term, only exists in the digital world.
Here is something else look at, real film cameras, they speak of picture resolution in terms of grains not pixels.

I propose through definition that the human eye has no pixels.
.
« Last Edit: 19/06/2010 23:28:56 by tommya300 »
 

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • Posts: 31653
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • "come fly with me"
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #4 on: 20/06/2010 00:14:52 »
Kinda my line of thinking after reading about what the pixels actually are...thanks.....
 

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • Posts: 31653
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • "come fly with me"
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #5 on: 20/06/2010 00:19:06 »
I'm glad ewe like the kweschun Kareny Mam...and thank ewe for the oodles of information.....I just need to get my lil 'ole' brain round it. In the mean time, lets hope someone can comment on my original query.

Your welcome....and I agree with Tommya300!
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #6 on: 20/06/2010 06:37:49 »
Not to mention that the human eye is not a very good optical system. Our brains seem to do an enormous amount of "post processing" of the actual image that's presented to the retina (which, of course, is also upside down!)
 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #7 on: 20/06/2010 08:27:58 »
Not to mention that the human eye is not a very good optical system. Our brains seem to do an enormous amount of "post processing" of the actual image that's presented to the retina (which, of course, is also upside down!)

yepper absolutely.

Although we speak of imperfection it is amazing the speed that the brain actually processes the data and categorically separates the junk from the good stuff.
 

Offline John Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #8 on: 20/06/2010 09:36:16 »
You can't directly compare the quality of digital and analogue because there is no common framework of reference. It's a bit like comparing cats and custard!

.
In the human body, the sensors chemically blend together like a fluid and are not just a "hard", turn on, shut off process.

This is more an analog characteristic then a digital characteristic.


I think Tommy hit the nail on the head. Analogue images are particular, that is they are made out of discrete units. Whereas digital images use a continuous, non-divisable range of values. If you enlarge a digital image it becomes pixelated and granular whereas an analogue image becomes blurry and indistinct.

And Geezer's point that the majority of image perception is due to the processing power of the brain also makes it difficult to directly compare the eye with a digital camera.
 
 

Offline neilep

  • Withdrawnmist
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 20602
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #9 on: 20/06/2010 10:41:13 »
.
Through deductive reasoning the human eye has no pixels per say.

I believe the Human Body's metabolism does not process our senses digitally.
Pixel resolution relates to the digital process of a CCD.

In the human body, the sensors chemically blend together like a fluid and are not just a "hard", turn on, shut off process.

 For example, look at a small pain in the arm, you know where to approximately locate the center of the pain, also; you can not quite find exactly, the precise spot the pain ends, you do know it fades somewhere along the lines.

This is more an analog characteristic then a digital characteristic.

Knowing this, the "Pixel", realm and term, only exists in the digital world.
Here is something else look at, real film cameras, they speak of picture resolution in terms of grains not pixels.

I propose through definition that the human eye has no pixels.
.



YAYYYY !!

Thank ewe Tommy for your wonderful answer.

I "see" your point. I think we do process imagery just biologically as ewe have indicated.

I sheepose I was hoping that an indication of a digital number might be possible.....ie..if one could replicate the human image sensing in a digital format.

Thank ewe very much
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8669
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #10 on: 20/06/2010 10:42:25 »
Hang on!
The eye is digital.
The human retina has about 70 million receptor cells so it's reasonable to say that it has the equivalent of about 70Mp
John has got this bit
"I think Tommy hit the nail on the head. Analogue images are particular, that is they are made out of discrete units. Whereas digital images use a continuous, non-divisable range of values. If you enlarge a digital image it becomes pixelated and granular whereas an analogue image becomes blurry and indistinct."
pretty much totally backwards.
Digital images are particular; the particles are called pixels.
Digital images use a set of numbers to describe the intensity of a point of an image. As far as I recall the number is between 0 and 32767. That's not continuous. You can have 99 or 100 but not 99.5.

The blur you see on most analog systems if you increase the magnification is due to the finite wavelength of light and the finite size of the optical elements involved.



Tommya doesn't understand that the nerve signals from the eye to the brain are digital. (it's a form of pulse code modulation where the repetition frequency is related to the signal intensity.)
A nerve cell fires or it doesn't- that's a reasonable approximation to a digital signal in a camera.

Also, there are a finite number of rod and cone cells in the retina that receive the light. These correspond with the pixels in the camera.
There's another complication. the pixels in a camera are not just on or off, they carry intensity data as well. (That's why a 10 megapixel image file takes up much more than 10 megabits of storage space).
The information captured by a "digital" camera is, initially analog data and is digitised when it is read from the sensor.
In much the same way the eye produces analog data but it's encoded digitally.

Also, while it's true that the eye has some stupid design faults like having the blood supply in the way of the light, it's actually very good- the resolution is about a tenth of the diffraction limit. There's no way it could be as much as 10 times better.

Not only that but the quality of the optical system is a red herring, I can put a lousy lens on a digital camera- it's still digital.


I'm quite happy to look at (old fashioned) film.
The grains of silver halide are hit by light, if enough photons hit a grain then it is sensitised and forms part of the latent image. If you develop the file the grain turns from white silver halide to black metallic silver.
That's an all- or nothing response- you don't get half a grain to develop so the grains in a film can be thought of as equivalent to the pixels in the sensor of a digital camera.

The next thing to do is look at the number of grains you get.
Specialist films will resolve a thousand lines per millimetre (though they are very slow)
Typical negatives are about 20mm by 25mm so that's about 500 megapixels.
These pixels can't resolve any intensity data so the information carried is rather less than you would get from a 500 MP digital camera, but it's roughly equivalent to a digital image that takes up 500 megabits of data ie one that gives a 63Mbyte file.
It gets more complicated because most files get compressed before they are stored but I think that's still more data than any digital picture I have seen. More typical negatives with lower resolving power (like 100 lines / mm)would, of course, give fewer equivalent pixels
 

Offline neilep

  • Withdrawnmist
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 20602
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #11 on: 20/06/2010 10:47:23 »
Not to mention that the human eye is not a very good optical system. Our brains seem to do an enormous amount of "post processing" of the actual image that's presented to the retina (which, of course, is also upside down!)

Thank ewe Mr Geezer very muchly. So not only do we receive piccys upside down but our brain really does all the seeing eh ?......AH !!..This reminds me of an experiment I saw where a chappy wore a device which presented the world he viewed upside down...it was only a matter of a short time before he could view the world with no problems as his brain corrected the situation......which is nice !..brains are great eh ?.....I think we should all be encouraged to acquire brains and use them.
 

Offline neilep

  • Withdrawnmist
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 20602
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #12 on: 20/06/2010 10:56:48 »
You can't directly compare the quality of digital and analogue because there is no common framework of reference. It's a bit like comparing cats and custard!

.
In the human body, the sensors chemically blend together like a fluid and are not just a "hard", turn on, shut off process.

This is more an analog characteristic then a digital characteristic.


I think Tommy hit the nail on the head. Analogue images are particular, that is they are made out of discrete units. Whereas digital images use a continuous, non-divisable range of values. If you enlarge a digital image it becomes pixelated and granular whereas an analogue image becomes blurry and indistinct.

And Geezer's point that the majority of image perception is due to the processing power of the brain also makes it difficult to directly compare the eye with a digital camera.
 







Custard Cat Approves John !

 

Offline neilep

  • Withdrawnmist
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 20602
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #13 on: 20/06/2010 11:01:12 »
Hang on!
The eye is digital.
The human retina has about 70 million receptor cells so it's reasonable to say that it has the equivalent of about 70Mp
John has got this bit
"I think Tommy hit the nail on the head. Analogue images are particular, that is they are made out of discrete units. Whereas digital images use a continuous, non-divisable range of values. If you enlarge a digital image it becomes pixelated and granular whereas an analogue image becomes blurry and indistinct."
pretty much totally backwards.
Digital images are particular; the particles are called pixels.
Digital images use a set of numbers to describe the intensity of a point of an image. As far as I recall the number is between 0 and 32767. That's not continuous. You can have 99 or 100 but not 99.5.

The blur you see on most analog systems if you increase the magnification is due to the finite wavelength of light and the finite size of the optical elements involved.



Tommya doesn't understand that the nerve signals from the eye to the brain are digital. (it's a form of pulse code modulation where the repetition frequency is related to the signal intensity.)
A nerve cell fires or it doesn't- that's a reasonable approximation to a digital signal in a camera.

Also, there are a finite number of rod and cone cells in the retina that receive the light. These correspond with the pixels in the camera.
There's another complication. the pixels in a camera are not just on or off, they carry intensity data as well. (That's why a 10 megapixel image file takes up much more than 10 megabits of storage space).
The information captured by a "digital" camera is, initially analog data and is digitised when it is read from the sensor.
In much the same way the eye produces analog data but it's encoded digitally.

Also, while it's true that the eye has some stupid design faults like having the blood supply in the way of the light, it's actually very good- the resolution is about a tenth of the diffraction limit. There's no way it could be as much as 10 times better.

Not only that but the quality of the optical system is a red herring, I can put a lousy lens on a digital camera- it's still digital.


I'm quite happy to look at (old fashioned) film.
The grains of silver halide are hit by light, if enough photons hit a grain then it is sensitised and forms part of the latent image. If you develop the file the grain turns from white silver halide to black metallic silver.
That's an all- or nothing response- you don't get half a grain to develop so the grains in a film can be thought of as equivalent to the pixels in the sensor of a digital camera.

The next thing to do is look at the number of grains you get.
Specialist films will resolve a thousand lines per millimetre (though they are very slow)
Typical negatives are about 20mm by 25mm so that's about 500 megapixels.
These pixels can't resolve any intensity data so the information carried is rather less than you would get from a 500 MP digital camera, but it's roughly equivalent to a digital image that takes up 500 megabits of data ie one that gives a 63Mbyte file.
It gets more complicated because most files get compressed before they are stored but I think that's still more data than any digital picture I have seen. More typical negatives with lower resolving power (like 100 lines / mm)would, of course, give fewer equivalent pixels



Whoa !!


Thank ewe very much BC for your detailed specific comment which makes very interesting reading.

Gosh !...Intriguing !

It seems there are indeed direct correlations !
 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #14 on: 20/06/2010 15:40:57 »
.
Series of Q & A precipitate more deductive reasoning.
Is this a suggestion? That digital utilizes a single set amplitude, with a series of iterations of square wave forms
Is what you explained, in the form of pulse code modulation?
 The word "code", suggests a window of opportunity.
 This suggests that there is no need for multiple routes, that data needs to travel.
Than, one solid nerve can do the job using this PCM. Remote controls use this idea so the only one frequency is needed.

Amplitude modulation on the other hand needs different routes to deliver information.
 Lie detectors is sensitive to this amplitude intensity actions spike not just vibrate.
 The heart is operates by the use of the nervous system!
If this pulse code modulation is a fact, "A fibrillation" symptoms would be considered a norm and not alarming.
 
Digital realm utilizes only ones and zeros on and off that is a scientific fact.
.
Quote
A nerve cell fires or it doesn't- that's a reasonable approximation to a digital signal in a camera.

Also, there are a finite number of rod and cone cells in the retina that receive the light. These correspond with the pixels in the camera.
There's another complication. the pixels in a camera are not just on or off, they carry intensity data as well. (That's why a 10 megapixel image file takes up much more than 10 megabits of storage space).

Someone definitely has the misconception of digital electronics, it is easy to do if you never worked with it..
Digital memory pointing
Every portion of memory is utilized (mapped), to a set of specific purposes. So does the human metabolism that where the similarities end.
 
Pixel positioning in the memory of the viewing screen is in a binary word form in single or double BCD words depending on the size of the pallet, resolution etc...

Next to that position in memory is the Attribute! A BCD set, giving that pixel its characteristics. These "words" are made from Ones and Zeros!
Thing of the memory for the screen is like a miniture size checker board or a pigeon shed.
Stuffed one hole with a pixel the next hole with an attribute, cascading depending of a given digital area of the screen, dictated by software and hardware physical limits.
This will give you an idea it shows the relationship of ones and zeros at its basics. A homemade digital abacus.
It does not show a full word.

NR=1

 The series of terms are at its basic; a bit, a byte, a nibble, a word... 32 bit word, 64 bit word, etc...

http://www.learn-c.com/data_lines.htm

Note: a blurred picture in digital is done by setting its adjacent pixels color's offset in a numerical cascade, gathered from an already set electronic pallet.
There is no intensity involved it is an illusion affect. Lighting is the same utilization of the set pallet.
.
« Last Edit: 20/06/2010 17:05:00 by tommya300 »
 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #15 on: 20/06/2010 16:08:42 »
Not to mention that the human eye is not a very good optical system. Our brains seem to do an enormous amount of "post processing" of the actual image that's presented to the retina (which, of course, is also upside down!)

Thank ewe Mr Geezer very muchly. So not only do we receive piccys upside down but our brain really does all the seeing eh ?......AH !!..This reminds me of an experiment I saw where a chappy wore a device which presented the world he viewed upside down...it was only a matter of a short time before he could view the world with no problems as his brain corrected the situation......which is nice !..brains are great eh ?.....I think we should all be encouraged to acquire brains and use them.


I am still waiting in  the second line. The first time through I thought they said electric trains, I told them no thanks I have one already.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8669
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #16 on: 20/06/2010 17:20:47 »
"Series of Q & A precipitate more deductive reasoning."
This isn't Q and A ; it's me telling you that you are wrong and need to find out how nerves work.

"The word "code", suggests a window of opportunity."
No it doesn't.

"Lie detectors is sensitive to this amplitude intensity actions spike not just vibrate."
Lie detectors look at the average of a large number of nerves. That average is more analog than digital.

"The heart is run by the nervous system, if this pulse code modulation is a fact, A fibrillation symptoms would be considered a norm and not alarming. "
Just plain wrong. Fibrilation is a problem. The nerves really do use pulse modulation. Since nerve impulses all have the same amplitude they are, in that regard, digital.

"Digital realm utilizes only ones and zeros on and off that is a scientific fact."
Good, at least you understand that.
Now you need to realise that nerves also use ones and zeros.

"Someone definitely has the misconception of digital electronics, it is easy to do if you never worked with it.."
Anybody reading this is working with digital electronics; the internet isn't analog.
For what it's worth I have worked with digital electronics since the late 70s

does this "Digital memory pointing Every portion of memory is utilized, to a set specific purposes. " actually mean anything, and if so, what?

I take it that the next bit is where you try to explain digital imaging. Well, I have seen it better explained elsewhere but the fact is that it doesn't matter.
You seem to sort of understand digital imaging but you don't seem to realise that the eye is very similar.
(Incidentally, in this case nybble has a different spelling.)

Anyway, the pixels in a camera are not just ones or zeros; they do include intensity data. If they didn't then a 10 MP image would only take up 1.25 MByte and it takes a lot more than that. I already pointed this out, but it seems you didn't understand it.






 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #17 on: 20/06/2010 17:49:06 »
I am telling you that digital electronics is being misunderstood
I have produced references show me some please I want to learn more.
Nybble nibble  either or...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-controlled_helicopter

You need to show me reference your word here is not sound.
It is easy to dismiss thing you do not understand and what you wish.
I do remember a saying
If one can not find a way out a situation, look for a way in deeper.
« Last Edit: 20/06/2010 18:30:42 by tommya300 »
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #18 on: 20/06/2010 18:10:49 »
I'm not sure if anyone pointed this out already, so apologies if this is redundant:

Another important difference between your average mark 1 eyeball and the digital camera, is that the camera actually produces a rather nice image of the view that the lens creates.

The human eye doesn't seem to do that. We perceive a sort of image in our brain, but if we hold our eyes on a single spot, most of the image is really poor. Only the object that we concentrate on has much definition at all. We make up for that of course by continuously moving our eyes to alter our objective.

So, in a way, what we "see" is probably a lot more like one of those really bad movies where the camera continuously pans and zooms. It's interesting that we have learned to handle this without actually puking all the time, although this may have something to do with motion sickness.
 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #19 on: 20/06/2010 18:32:43 »
I'm not sure if anyone pointed this out already, so apologies if this is redundant:

Another important difference between your average mark 1 eyeball and the digital camera, is that the camera actually produces a rather nice image of the view that the lens creates.

The human eye doesn't seem to do that. We perceive a sort of image in our brain, but if we hold our eyes on a single spot, most of the image is really poor. Only the object that we concentrate on has much definition at all. We make up for that of course by continuously moving our eyes to alter our objective.

So, in a way, what we "see" is probably a lot more like one of those really bad movies where the camera continuously pans and zooms. It's interesting that we have learned to handle this without actually puking all the time, although this may have something to do with motion sickness.

Yea vertigo  a theme to belch to
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8669
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #20 on: 20/06/2010 19:19:12 »

You need to show me reference your word here is not sound.


Do you know what ad hom means?

Anyway, here is some information about how nerves work which might be more relevant than something about toy helicopters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_potential
« Last Edit: 20/06/2010 19:26:01 by Bored chemist »
 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #21 on: 20/06/2010 20:03:16 »

You need to show me reference your word here is not sound.

Do you know what ad hom means?

Anyway, here is some information about how nerves work which might be more relevant than something about toy helicopters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_potential


argument um ad homonym

I can see there is a bit of interesting things you do present
Still waiting on the nervous system with respect to that PCM reference.
Please I used deductive reasoning I could not find any reference to the original question
Now this is precipitating to non sense

« Last Edit: 20/06/2010 20:05:02 by tommya300 »
 

Offline Joe L. Ogan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #22 on: 20/06/2010 20:39:18 »
This sounds like a vast compilation of useless information well worth not knowing.  Thanks for information.  Joe L. Ogan
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8669
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #23 on: 20/06/2010 22:05:53 »
"Still waiting on the nervous system"
Well, I did cite that wiki page; did you look into how the nervous system works?

Did you see this bit?
"
"All-or-none" principle
The amplitude of an action potential is independent of the amount of current that produced it. In other words, larger currents do not create larger action potentials. Therefore action potentials are said to be all-or-none (or boolean), since they either occur fully or they do not occur at all. Instead, the frequency of action potentials is what encodes for the intensity of a stimulus."

and do you understand it?

If this sort of thing
"Yea vertigo  a theme to belch to"
"Now this is precipitating to non sense"
Is the best sort of response you can provide perhaps it would be better if you just gave up.

« Last Edit: 20/06/2010 22:14:50 by Bored chemist »
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #24 on: 20/06/2010 22:07:44 »
This sounds like a vast compilation of useless information well worth not knowing.

I'm glad we are able to maintain our usual standards.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

How Many Mega-pixels Is My Eye ?
« Reply #24 on: 20/06/2010 22:07:44 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums