Talk:Multistable perception

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Misleading statement

I have removed the following sentence: "In the 1980s, multistable visual patterns caught the attention of philosophers, psychologists, and neuroscientists". This statement both contradicts other comments made in the article and is, to be frank, of little merit. Multistable perception has interested philosophers, psychologists, artists and many others throughout history, and is far from confined to the 1980s. The Penrose's and Escher were active in the 1950s and '60s. Louis Albert Necker was conducting research in the 1820s and '30s, I guess you can all see where I am going with this... Rje 00:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] the third of the three illusions

The third of the three illusions isn't doing anything for me. Doesn't seem to be multistable at all. In fact I can't even tell what the point is supposed to be. It just looks two-dimensional. Remove it?

I get an effect where either the arrowheads are on a plane and the lines converge in the distance, or the cross is in the foreground and the "wings" of the arrowheads point away. — Gwalla | Talk 06:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the third example should be removed, the line don't seem to converge in the distance because they don't reduce in thickness, it really is just two dimensional.

I too think the third example is less good than the others, but I suspect the intended ambiguity is as to which double arrow is in front and which one behind. At least, I am able to produce such a swich in perception.--Niels Ø (noe) 15:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)