I read in a book that vision is possible because our eyes are constantly moving, in minuscule movements, and that if your eyes were fully fixated on something, you wouldn't be able to see. That's all ok, but what about in stories when someone's totally frozen, and yet they can still all see? What's up with that? Considering all stories never seem to have stuff that contradicts reality
I thought vision was possible because light keeps hitting our eyes... whether your focused on something..your eyes might go blurry (happens to me) but you won't go blind... Some stories do have stuff that contradicts reality, but that is just kinda weird xD
Actually, "microsaccades" is what the OP is referring to. It's a flickering, involuntary eye movement that occurs when the eye is staring at the same image for more than a couple of seconds (though it can vary). It's suspected that it's like refreshing the page, for lack of a better way to explain it, and sends new info to the brain, like a scanner, so you keep a clear picture. EDIT: And to clarify, it's not that you will go blind, per se, although I have seen some things that say that in passing, but stationary objects would disappear from your view. Think about it, if the object isn't moving, and your eye isn't moving, what is the light reflecting off of to give you an image?
What's completely freezing them? Maybe it's just a television thing where they leave the eyes unfrozen as a signal that the person is still aware. Complete freezing would probably also effect the chemical processes of the brain. Honestly, it's going to take a hard-core geek to be bothered by the lack of retinal clearing.
I also wanted to point out that books DO sometimes have things in them that contradict reality. Often, actually. It depends on the genre. And yes, what Smoke said.
There are quite of few contradictions used since Plato got his laptop, however I can not help but wonder if an adherence to an 'ultra realistic' attitude will not result in antiseptic feel....I am always tickled by writer X chastizing writer Z for a less than real eye blink when the half man/half camaro main character fires his Delaptri missles at the invaders from Planet Octaroon
So, Patrick, what is it exactly that you need to know? I assume this is for a book since it's in the research section, but I get the feeling you're asking about someone else's book?
That's basically correct. Quite rapid blinking would also work, though. The thing is, these movements happen automatically, without you controlling them. When you stare at an object fixedly for a long time, these movements are still going on regardless. What exactly do you mean with frozen? Frozen, as in completely immobile? Well, that should stop their lungs and their hearts as well. Or just frozen, as in standing quite still? The eyes will still be moving fine.
Even the body moves a little when someone is "completely frozen". It's impossible for a human being to stand completely still - our muscles are not that precise. Try holding a sheet of paper on your up-turned fingertips. The sheet magnifies the small, unconscious movements in your fingers.
The more I think about it, the more nonsensical this sounds. Maybe I'm missing something. Are you trying to say that a stationary object doesn't reflect light? Because that's, you know... wrong.
What exactly do you mean by "frozen." Frozen as in they have ingested a neurotoxin that does not allow them to move? Or are we talking "frozen" as in Parkinson's disease? I think that if it's the first suggestion, then you should first figure out what the heck they've swallowed/been injected with and how it affects the body medically. If it's the second scenario, a person can most certainly be affected physically without being affected mentally. A person with Parkinson's can often see in their stationary state and process information without being able to physically move their arms or legs.
I'm not sure if that's what Trish was saying, of course a stationary object gives off light. What I think she's saying if that if an object, light source etc. is stationary and the human eye watching it is completely stationary, the receptors in the eye may eventually become saturated with the received image and the eye will lose its vision, until something in the setup changes. This is also sort of the explanation why many animals see moving things sharper and more well-defined than stationary things. New receptors in the eyes come into play, and can send a sharper signal to the brain. In principle, a CCD chip works much the same way, which is why it is routinely "flushed" so to speak, so that the image can be refreshed.
As someone else said, if a person is totally frozen, his heart's going to stop beating, his lungs will stop pumping, and he'll be dead long before his vision becomes an issue. If he's somehow alive while frozen this way, we're already into some sort of "magic", so extending that magic to allowing him to see doesn't seem like any more of a stretch. There was the famous (true, not fictional) behaviorism experiment where someone injected themselves with curare to prove that thought can exist in the absence of behavior. In that case, artificial respiration was used. I'm a little puzzled about how blood circulation was handled, or if "artificial respiration" includes both breathing and blood flow. If you want to use the 'frozen' concept, you could perhaps assume that voluntary movements are suppressed, and investigate whether these small movements of the eye are involuntary.
Well, when I was laying down my time travel stories' plans, a lot of members went as far as saying they wouldn't read that type of books if the theories were unrealistic. So I thought it was odd what I said in my OP. And I meant frozen as in in fantasy stories etc where a character is magically frozen for an extended period of time And no, I'm not a science bitch
Okay well microsaccades are small involuntary movements of the eye, to answer ChickenFreak's question and I suppose it would depend on how you were frozen. To expand on it a bit. Species that have fovea centralis (responsible for sharp central vision such as needed for driving, watching tv, or anything where detail is needed) in their retinas (such as humans, cats, owls, rabbits, primates) also have something called fixational eye movement, which refers to three different types of involuntary eye movement (microsaccades, ocular drift, and ocular microtremors -though they can be known by other names). These fixational eye movements are all involuntary and assist with clear vision when fixating on an object. Even if you stare directly into someones eyes (think staring contest when you were a kid) you won't see them, though they are there. If it helps you understand, microtremors are sometimes used to help determine brain death in coma patients, because if your brain is alive, they are present. The degree to which they fade in a comatose patient can help doctors determine prognosis. Now this does NOT mean that the coma patient can SEE. What it does mean is that your eyes will keep moving even when you can't.
