Illusions are a natural part of consciousness
The most remarkable thing in a remarkable universe is so commonplace that it is accepted without wonder or understanding. This is the appearance of reality and solidity that surrounds us when our eyes are open, which we call simply vision. Intellectual effort is required to realize that this seeming reality is within us, distinct for each individual, but so concordant with reality and with each other, and so stable, that it is accepted without question. The explanation for this wonderful aspect of consciousness is completely unknown.
The information that allows the mind to create and maintain this appearance is collected entirely by the visual system. When the eyes are closed, the appearance vanishes. At least, it does for me. Some people may be able to create realistic pictures with their mind's eye, but I cannot. I can still imagine my environment more or less accurately, but the vivid picture is gone.
The ability to make an accurate visual model of the external world is learned, not innate. The necessary materials are there at birth, of course, but they must be trained, or programmed, before the skill is perfected. This seems to be done in the first instance by comparing the chaotic impressions of light with the solid evidence of touch, which gives the perception depth and form. The visual sense ever after shows subtle indications of its origin in touch, though it becomes completely independent of touch after perfection. The ability to acquire this skill vanishes early in mental development. A person totally blind from birth whose vision may become normal at a later age can never make sense of the visual information and arrange it in a consistent manner.
There are three links in the chain of perception. The first is external and physical: the propagation of electromagnetic waves from the object to the eye. The second is the physical visual apparatus, from eye to brain, consisting of nervous tissue, although some important preliminary processing takes place. The third, and most complex, is the interpretation of the visual stimulus and the creation of the internal model of the world that is used by the consciousness.
In the third step, the visual stimulus received from outside is combined with information from the memory to create the picture. This is the most important part of vision, and how it is done is unknown. All the really interesting parts of vision occur here. The physical visual system from eye to brain has been studied in exquisite detail, its parts examined and described, and even the nerve impulses observed and measured, but all this gives no satisfying explanation of vision. It has been established, however, that important preliminary processing takes place here, including the differencing and the coding of stimuli. Coding is necessary to reduce the flood of information to a manageable amount. The visual system has a bandwidth problem, indeed.
The world picture must be constructed from incomplete information, in fact inferred from clues. The three-dimensional world is sensed by the two- dimensional retina, emphasizing the central role of depth clues. The picture depends on the unconscious recognition of objects, so that the remembered properties of objects can be transferred to those they seem to be on the basis of visual hints. Recognition is what gives vision its reality, showing the central role of mind.
A picture so assembled on the basis of partial information must be expected to occasionally be in error. The mind will always try to match stimulus and memory to create a picture. It will make what seems to be the most likely choice, and present that to the consciousness. An illusion occurs when the choice is incorrect. If a picture is created solely from memory, without visual stimulus (or with only a minimal visual stimulus) the result is hallucination, with which we shall not be concerned here, since it is a disorder of perception, not a normal or intended part of it. Things that are not there can also appear in illusion, it must be emphasized, but here it is normal.
An illusion can arise in any of the three links of visual perception. The mirage is an example of an external illusion, created in the first, physical link of light rays. It is visually interpreted as an actual scene, though we consciously recognize it as an illusion, and understand its cause. When we stare at a brightly illuminated red disk for a time, then transfer our attention to a white paper, we see a green disk as a result of what is called rather inaccurately fatigue. The green disk is an illusion created in the second partly physical, partly mental link. When the full moon is seen at the horizon, it seems much larger than when riding high in the sky, though physically it subtends exactly the same angle at the eye. This familiar illusion occurs in the third, mental link of vision, and a satisfying explanation of it is unknown.
Illusions occurring in the third link are those most generally recognized as optical illusions. Their scientific study began with J. Oppel in Jahresberichte des physikalisches Vereins zu Frankfurt, p. 138 (1854). Much work was done later in the century, but tapered off after 1900, although the subject is still actively researched by psychologists. Recent work deals largely with color and motion illusions, not on the static, black- and-white illusions that dominated earlier work. Popular interest in optical illusions has been sustained. The books by M. Luckeish (Visual Illusions, 1920), S. Tolansky (Optical Illusions, 1964), and M. Fineman (The Nature of Visual Illusion, 1981) are evidence of the continuing fascination. Each of these books gives references to further information. All theories of optical illusion in the third link are mere jejune speculation. Feel free to create your own theories; they will be as valid as those created by many a psychologist!
Sometimes a phenomenon is called an illusion when it really is not, but is simply a true picture of an unexpected observation. An example is the searchlight illusion described by Luckeish. The beam of a bright searchlight is visible because of scattering by dust and fog in its path, so that it seems practically a physical object. When the beam is projected up into the sky, it seems to vanish abruptly while still in full glory. When you look at this apparent end of the beam, you are looking in the direction in which the beam is pointed. If the beam were parallel (as your mind expects) it would, by perspective, narrow to a point. However, a searchlight beam is actually more or less divergent, fooling this expectation. It is only one's mental interpretation that is an illusion in this case, not the observation. Stars can be pointed out to others by means of a strong laser using this effect. If you view the searchlight beam from a distance, you see it diverge and become attenuated, and perhaps penetrating the layer of dusty air.
Tricking the eye into recognizing one thing while observing another is often very useful to living things. There are three different ways to do this. First, one might mimic something dangerous or nasty-tasting, as does the fly who resembles a wasp, a brightly-colored butterfly, or an armed, uniformed policeman. Another way is to merge with the background, as do moths, stick insects, tabby cats, or wealthy people wearing old clothes in the street. An interesting way to do this is to break up a familiar outline by a contrasting pattern. Warships were painted in bold, zig-zag patterns in the First World War for this purpose. The patterns did indeed break up the outline when you were close enough to see that they were ships, but at large distances aerial perspective (blue haze) smoothed the pattern, revealing again that they were ships. The third way is to look like something else. Cylindrical snakes and lizards are dark on top and light on the bottom, contrary to the normal modelling of a cylinder, so they resemble flat objects containing no meat.
A picture drawn on a flat background is an attempt to trick the eye into perceiving a three-dimensional scene. This is very effective, since the eye must do something similar in its normal functioning, because the retina is two- dimensional. The skill of perceiving depth and perspective in a painting is learned, not innate. In moving pictures, the mind interprets the succession of static frames as continuous motion, again something it must do in its normal functioning. There must be a temporal element in sensing a changing world, which is revealed by the flicker frequency, the rate above which continuous motion is perceived instead of jumps, of about 20 to 30 Hz. We are very thankful for these illusions (if we realize what they are) and are glad to have them.
Conjurors, three-card monte men, swindlers, mediums, priests, and others interested in influencing people sometimes make effective use of visual (and other) illusion. Stage magicians who are only concerned with entertainment call themselves illusionists to make it clear what they do, and to distinguish themselves from those who ascribe their wonders to spirits or chemicals. Illusionists, and the the other sorts of entrepreneurs, mainly use other kinds of illusions, but optical illusions are not ruled out. These procedures have been perfected through centuries and even millenia of profitable use, and remain evergreen owing to the continuous copious production of fools.
Let's look at some classic static illusions created by black-and-white figures. All are third-link illusions resulting from a failure of estimation, or from the faulty comparison of distances or objects. In the bisection illusion, the vertical line is the same length as the horizontal line it bisects, though it seems about 25% longer. The illusion persists if the figure is rotated 90°, so it is not due to asymmetry of the retina, as one witless psychologist asserted. In the Müller-Lyer illusion, the line is bisected by the center arrowhead. The segment with the diverging wings appears longer, but it is not. In the annulus illusion, the area of the central disk is equal to the area of the annulus surrounding it, though it appears greater. Distance b-c in the lozenge illusion is equal to distance a-b, though appearing significantly longer. In the curvature illusion, all three arcs have exactly the same radius of curvature. Poggendorff's illusion is very famous. Line 2 is actually the continuation of the line on the left, although line 1 appears to be. This illusion is counteracted in the British Union Flag by displacing the arms of St. Patrick's cross on either side of St. George's cross so they appear to be in the same line. Greek temples were designed with deliberate distortions to make the building appear correctly. Columns were given entasis, a slight swelling in the middle, so they would look straight, and architraves were cambered up slightly in the center so they would appear straight. Modern buildings are not so sensitively designed.
There is no satisfying explanation for any of these illusions, or even of the reasons why they should exist. Depth clues are not involved in any of them, at least obviously, or ambiguous or incomplete information. They can, however, be recognized and classified, and have some practical application.
Sometimes a view may not contain enough information for the mind to make a conclusive interpretation. Where there are only two reasonable interpretations, the mind may alternate them, as if unable to make up its mind. The rate of alternation gives some idea of the length of time between reconsiderations of input data by the visual system, or of the operation of the short-term memory that is so necessary to avoid overload in the face of the flood of information bombarding the mind.
In the ambiguous figures shown, the one on the left can be interpreted either as an open book, or as a folded card with the fold towards you. The cube can be interpreted either with the diagonal line in the lower left-hand corner out of the page, or behind it. Vision is not really fooled here; there is simply insufficient depth information for a conclusive choice. Modifying the figures to give better depth clues, as shown, makes the interpretation unique. In one case, the figure was made to resemble a definite object, an open book, and in the other hidden lines were removed to make the cube appear solid.
Illusions can also arise from contrast of brightness, as the perception strives to maintain line and shade. The well-known illusion shown at the right is an example. There are gray patches at every crossing, except for the one you are looking at directly. This effect is something to avoid when designing linoleum.
Illusions of motion and color are difficult to illustrate in text, and are so extensive as to require individual study. Color can be perceived in a rotating black-and-white disc of suitable pattern, which is probably due to different fatigue characteristics of the color-sensitive proteins in the cone cells of the retina. Many color illusions are due to physical causes, because of the poor spectral resolution of the eye, and differences in illuminants and pigments. Adaptation, where the ambient illumination comes to appear as white as possible, and color constancy, where colors are interpreted similiarly under different conditions of illumination, are fundamental and useful properties of the color sense, not illusions.
An interesting recently-discovered (2005) kinetic illusion is the lilac chaser illusion, discovered (apparently by accident) and perfected by Jeremy Hinton. To view it, search for it on Wikipedia. There is a circle of fuzzy lilac spots, which are temporarily erased one by one. If you concentrate on the centre, a fuzzy green spot appears that seems to move in a circle occulting the spots, and after a short while the ring of lilac spots approaches disappearance. This seems to be a combination of fatigue (lilac and green are complementary) and Troxler fading, in which constant stimuli disappear. [Constant stimuli are regarded as retinal errors and are ignored; real stimuli move with the constant small involuntary movements of the eyes.]
Stereoscopic binocular vision is a remarkable facility that provides many interesting illusions, mostly useful and entertaining ones. When both eyes are fixated on the same nearby object, the images on the two retinas are not identical and conflict, since each eye sees the object from a different position. Detecting the conflict, the mind checks to see if the conflict can be explained by the different positions of the eyes, and if so, immediately interprets the object as located in the proper position in space. The two images are then said to have fused. Of all depth clues, the mind regards stereoscopy as superior, overriding all other clues. Stereoscopic vision is most effective in the same regions as human hands work, and must be considered predominantly as an aid to such activities. Accommodation and convergence of the axes of vision may play a part in stereoscopy, but image conflict is the primary cause, as was realized by Charles Wheatstone, the first to study stereoscopy around 1838.
When the conflicting images cannot be explained in this way, rivalry occurs instead of fusion, resulting in rejection of one image, alternation of images, or double vision. When sufficiently addled by alcohol, the mind may not feel like exerting the effort required for fusion. When the image in one eye is markedly poorer than the image in the other, it is usually suppressed, and the image from the good eye governs. If red is presented to one eye, and green to the other, rivalry results, in my perception, in an intermediate state than cannot be described as either color or any mixture of them. This allows stereoscopic views to be presented to the eyes separated by colored lenses without color conflict.
The stereoscopic illusion is the fusion of two scenes presented separately
to the two eyes into one three-dimensional scene. The feeling of three
dimensions is very strong, so that viewing such
The strength and independence of the stereoscopic facility is shown by the lately-discovered fact that it is fully effective even when an object cannot be recognized, provided only that corresponding points can be identified in the two views. A stereopair can be made with random dots, identical except for small displacements that would occur if they were located on a three- dimensional surface. Such pairs can be fused, and the shape of the imaginary surface made visible in three dimensions. This clearly shows that memory plays no essential role in stereoscopy, in contrast to the major role it plays in all other visual interpretation.
A related type of stereogram consists of cunningly arranged areas in a
single picture, often only small dots, such that each area does double duty, as
a point of an object for each eye at the same time, but on different objects.
These stereograms fuse when the optic axes are made parallel, so the areas do
their intended double duty. The picture appears only upon fusion, and cannot be
perceived in advance. The same thing happens if the optic axes are over-
converged, but the stereoscopic effect is inverted (depth is reversed). These
single-image random-dot stereograms are generally called
autostereograms. These stereograms attracted great public interest
in the early 1990's, when they were published in newspapers and books, and even
appeared in outdoor advertising. Viewing autostereograms is excellent practice
for learning how to fuse stereograms without aid, called
A curious illusion shows how the mind does its best to interpret its data. Fixate on a finger resting on a book at normal reading distance from your eyes. Now move the finger toward your eyes, keeping your fixatin on the page of the book. As soon as your finger is far enough from the page that what is obscured from the right eye is seen by the left, and vice-versa, it will become transparent, and you will see the book unobstructed by the finger. The finger is surely there, right in the way, but it is suppressed, probably because your fixation shows you are looking at the book, not the finger.
Illusions show that visual perception is much more complicated than was ever imagined in primitive views of it. One early view interpreted sight as touching by visual rays from the eye in the presence of activating rays from the source of light. More recently, the eye was perceived as a camera making a picture that was viewed somehow by the brain. The most interesting aspects of vision are, however, yet unexplained.
Composed by J. B. Calvert 1999
Last revised 14 June 2007