Hi michael haaheim Since mind is a MQS or Multiple Quantum Superposition, it can process information at the rate of a quantum computer. Dr. Roger Clough NIST (ret.) 3/18/2013 "Coincidences are God's way of remaining anonymous." - Albert Einstein
----- Receiving the following content ----- From: michael haaheim Receiver: [email protected] Time: 2013-03-18, 06:43:49 Subject: Re: [Mind and Brain] News: How can we stlil raed words wehn tehlettres are jmbuled up? >The point of processing speed is an interesting one. I don't think it could be >a matter of overall processing speed, as I have a few friends who are >dyslexic... interestingly, they are speed readers, while I have very poor >memory retention if I read faster than natural speaking pace. >On the other hand, there has been some research suggesting that cognitive >ability might involve brain wave synchronicity. If such is the case, then a >local shift in processing rate could cause reading (and visual, in general) >processing to fall out of sync. This would fit in well with my hypothesis, as >well, if the synchronicity is responsible for relative spatial placement >recognition. > >MH > > > > > >>________________________________ >> De : Robert Karl Stonjek >>à : Mind and Brain >>Envoyé le : Lundi 18 mars 2013 1h13 >>Objet : Re: [Mind and Brain] News: How can we stlil raed words wehn teh >>lettres are jmbuled up? >> >> >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: michael >haaheim >>To: [email protected] >>Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 2:57 AM >>Subject: Re: [Mind and Brain] News: How can we stlil raed words wehn >teh lettres are jmbuled up? >> >> >>To >RKS: out of curiosity... and because it is related to some linguistics work >that >I have been doing... how are you at spotting camouflaged items? >> >>There are >hypotheses that at least some, if not most, forms of dyslexia are actually >problems in visual processing, rather than linguistic processing, per se. Some > >of the recent research in visual processing suggests that we see by >identifying >certain characteristic visual features (angles, curves, straightlines, etc), >and >building a kind of model of their collocations. In most cases, the >collocations >don't have to be exact positions (which is why we can often just ignore things > >like reversed or dropped letters, as well as even badly misspelt words... with > >collocations, you don't necessary need all the items, and some "noise" items >can >be included; it is only necessary to have a sufficient number of recognizable >features in collocation with one another). However, in cases where incorrect >positioning could lead to ambiguity, this becomes more problematic. >>In the >example in the artical, all the letters are present, and identifying the >correct >word is assisted by context. but in some conditions, such as camouflage, where > >there is an intentional effort to create ambiguitybetween the form and >background, exact placement can be important to identify the contour. >>This >leads me back to my original question. From what you have said, you do okay >when >you have sufficient context to rely on, but you have difficulties when the >words >are removed from their context. This would suggest to me that you should also >have a similar difficulty in spotting items that have low contrast with their >backgrounds. Do you find that this is the case for you? >> >>MH >> >>RKS: >>Yes, >that would be the case. Whole word addition and deletion from sentences >would be a good example of that. When my Dyslexia abated through my effort >I became fluent enough to read sentences so the dyslexia also moved up to >sentence level and some words would be added or deleted to the sentence. >The best example of this is the word 'not' that changes what a sentence means >e.g. "I was in the garden" verses "I was not in the garden". >> >>Surprisingly, as moderator of several forums I see a lot >of disputes occur because non-dyslexic people make this same error. But >for non-dyslexics it is usually the result of skimming or reading too >fast. This leads me to postulate that the main problem for dyslexics like >me is very slow processing of textual information whereby if forced to read >fast enough I imagine that non-dyslexics will start to make the same kind of >errors. >> >>As for flipping 'd' and 'p' and other letters, I never >had that problem. It is a normal part of our survival to be able to flip >the scenery around, in a mirror fashion. That is why you can walk into the >forest and the walk back and recognise the way you have to go even though all >the scenery on the way back is reversed. I assume that people who never >get lost in the bush are more likely to have d-b dyslexia than those who get >lost easily. (I do not get lost easily but I do confound 'J' and 'g' >readily...??) >> >>Thus my first assumption in the case of my dyslexia is >slower processing. If it becomes too slow then it never completes but with >self training, as in my case, it does complete but slower. One error which >I had down as dyslexia I have since removed (from my personal inventory). >That is, writing 'you' when 'your' is meant. This is probably the most >common error that members of my groups make in theory own writing and >frequently >correct that error in the text before approving their message (I have a >text-to >speech reader read the text and that error is immediately evident). >> >>I don't know if any of that makes any sense. BTW >the spell checker correct eight errors in the above paragraphs which gives >some >idea of the degree of dyslexia I currently have i.e. I have most probably >fallen >below diagnostic criteria and am now within the normal, spectrum :) >> >>Robert >> >>PS a further two errors in the last >paragraph. >> >> >> >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
