[Lao Wang's fallacy of brain science] Why do blind people "seem" to be more "sensitive" than normal people?

Welcome to subscribe to 【 Lao Wang's brain fallacy 】 special column , Learn more based on “ Lao Wang's fallacy ” Analysis and conjecture on the working principle of the brain .

Preface ： The dilemma of life science

The core element of the modern scientific system is experiment , And the experiment includes Objectivity 、 Repeatability And other core elements . Well known , Modern science based on experiments is in physics 、 Chemistry and many other fields have made unprecedented achievements . But in the field of Life Sciences , By contrast , The overall level of development can be said to be far behind other fields . Although a large number of theories and advanced technologies have been born , However, human beings' cognition of the essence of life, various phenomena and functional principles is still in an extremely preliminary and vague state , Even “ life ” The definition of the word is still extremely vague in all textbooks and papers . The reason is , Compared with other fields , There are too many constraints in front of the core element of experiment . Take memory related phenomena as an example , They have a remarkable ： Fuzziness 、 Subjectivity 、 Concealment 、 Instability 、 Individual differences ; There are also some phenomena with long periodicity （ such as ： Related phenomena of long-term memory ）; Many phenomena themselves are not repeatable （ for example ： Near death 、 Both visual sense and so on ）; There are even some phenomena related to ethics and law . These constraints make life sciences face “ experiment ” There are too many unique shackles and helplessness . Many life phenomena , We go through “ common sense ” and “ Experience ” It can be recognized （ At least not absolutely deny ）, However, due to the above constraints , They are very difficult （ Not even ） Be recognized and used in experiments , So it's hard （ Not even ） Embody value in Science . This article will not discuss how to improve the research methods of life science , Only with “ Lao Wang's fallacy ” Based on , Try to explain a very “ Fuzzy ” Of “ Memory phenomenon ”.

One “ Fuzzy ” Of “ Memory phenomenon ”： Why is the hearing of the blind “ Seems to be ” More than normal “ sensitive ”？

Before reading the following , I hope you have a general understanding of 【 Lao Wang's brain fallacy 】 In the column “ Lao Wang's fallacy ”

Although this statement is not uncommon , But this “ The phenomenon ” With many of the above “ Constraints ”, So whether there is such a phenomenon in fact , In itself, it is difficult to determine the nature by experiment （ To prove true or false ）. Since there is no conclusive evidence to prove the falsification , So this paper assumes that this phenomenon exists in fact , I want to “ Lao Wang's fallacy ” Based on , Try “ explain ” Let's look at this phenomenon “ principle ”.

Of course, because of the fuzziness of this phenomenon , Its explanation may not be unique , Readers are welcome to put forward other methods of explanation and debate with Lao Wang .

Wang Baoqiang is 《 Plot against 》 And 《 Listen to the wind 》 A Bing, the blind man played in the chapter, has an extraordinary “ sensitive ” hearing . Naturally, the characters in the film and television play cannot be used as arguments , But this story does not contradict our experience at least .

Why is this a “ Memory phenomenon ”？

Some friends agree that this phenomenon exists , But I still ask ： Why is this a “ Memory phenomenon ”？ Generally speaking, we will explain this phenomenon as ： Blind people cannot see with their eyes , Rely more on hearing （ It also includes smell 、 Sense of touch, etc , But the principle is the same ） After a long time, ears （ sense organ ） Naturally become sensitive , It has nothing to do with memory ？

It's not , Just ears （ sense organ ） Being sensitive doesn't make the whole auditory function more sensitive .“ sensitive ” On the one hand, the word means Fast ; On the other hand, it means ： “ The resolution of the ” high . This article focuses on “ The resolution of the ” , Take hearing as an example “ Can hear the subtle differences between sounds ” .

We'll take 《 Listen to the wind 》 For example ： The investigators asked ah Bing to listen to many groups of transmitters “ Tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick ” The sound of sending a message , Suddenly a Bing pointed out the group he was hearing “ Tick tock ” Before the sound , It can even be pointed out that it is the same as the previous groups . This behavior surprised the audience .

Let's analyze this “ Listen to me ” The process of . If a Bing is just an ear “ The resolution of the ” high , And for the memory of sound “ The resolution of the ” No different from ordinary people . So even if the ears “ I heard it ” The difference in sound , In my memory, I will still remember them as simple and vague as ordinary people “ Tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick ”. When the same “ Tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick ”, He has no reason to point out “ Heard before ” Not to mention the group .

Another similar example ： If we compare a photo scanner to an ear , Store in SD The picture in the card is compared to a memory message . No matter how high the resolution of the scanner , If the resolution of each photo can only be 100x100 Pixels , Then the resolution of the whole system is only 100x100 Pixels .

So Lao Wang thought “ Memory resolution ” Also decide “ Auditory resolution ” An important factor in .

be based on “ Lao Wang's fallacy ” The explanation of

Assuming the previous derivation is correct , So in “ Lao Wang's fallacy ” in “ Memory resolution ” How to improve it ？

You can review “ Lao Wang's fallacy ” For the storage of memory . The following is only a brief description .

stay “ Lao Wang's fallacy ” The visual memory of normal people occupies the visible light band “ original ” Storage in the ground , The non visible light band is used to store other forms of memory information . The blind do not need to store visual memory , Naturally, a wider band is available for storing other forms of memory such as hearing , natural “ Memory resolution ” It's improved .

So-called “ almost ” No coding and “ original ”
The original information form of memory is continuous （ simulation ） In the form of signals .
According to macromolecular coding ： Memory needs to be sampled , And will continue （ simulation ） The signal is converted to discrete （ Numbers ） The signal , And there must be a complex and uniform coding rule , To ensure that the memory information can be decoded and recognized ;
According to Lao Wang's theory ： Memorize information in a continuous way （ Pattern ） Signals exist in the form of , Even when electricity is needed / Different physical carriers such as light （ medium ） The transformation between is just a simple linear mapping relationship , So it is called basic “ almost ” No coding , Or original .

It should be noted that ：“ Lao Wang's fallacy ” The resolution improvement process in does not need to be changed “ Encoding rules ”（ Because there is no coding at all ）, And it's a gradable process .

be based on “ Macromolecular coding theory ” The explanation of

As mentioned in the above quotation , Of any kind “ Macromolecular coding theory ” Memory stored procedures are better than “ Lao Wang's fallacy ” Too much complexity （ And it is only speculation at present ）. If you use “ Macromolecular coding theory ” To explain , So the memory storage of the blind , It seems that there should be different coding rules from ordinary people ？ And if you are blind after tomorrow , His hearing sensitivity should be gradually improved , Is it necessary to constantly modify the coding rules ？ You know, this is an extremely complex and huge project . If a blind man has recovered his sight after treatment , Will he restore the previous coding rules ？ And the change of coding rules , It should be a “ mutation ” The process of , When does this process happen ？ All in all “ Macromolecular coding theory ” Because of its extreme complexity , When explaining some complex and changeable memory behaviors , It can be said that there are thorns everywhere .

“ Macromolecular coding theory ” At a time when the supporters of , Always willing to place the answer on an infinite complex system . But complexity may not solve all problems , On the contrary, it will bring new problems . Welcome to read another blog post by Lao Wang 《 From the perspective of evolution, talk about macromolecular coding theory and Lao Wang's fallacy 》

About blindness after tomorrow

There is a blind spot in the above explanation , That's it ： If a person is blind after having a visual memory , That is, the day after tomorrow . Will his visual memory before blindness conflict with other memories that occupy the visual frequency band after blindness ？ And what is the relationship between the memory before and after ？

First answer the first question ： There is no conflict between front and back memory , The linear queue of memory scenes is still endless and “ original ” To the memory space , Previous visual memory is still “ original ” Ground existence , It's just Gradually, Non visual memory has a wider frequency band . This is why blind people who become blind after the day after tomorrow will be able to see again , Their visual memory can still be recalled .

Answer the second question （ Now that you have read this , Please allow Lao Wang to explain again （ guess ） once ）： “ Lao Wang's fallacy ” Chinese vs “ Memory space X” And the speculation of memory storage is very preliminary . Further talk ：“ Memory space X” Memorizing information is more than just storing , There must be a processing process . Mainstream memory theory also agrees “ Memory processing ”, The difference is that Lao Wang guesses that the memory information is just “ The way ” Cerebral cortex , The key position of memory processing is “ Memory space X”. The processing of memory can even take the information with a long interval between before and after, or even different senses “ contact ” get up . I always think , In literary rhetoric “ synesthesia ”, Whether its essence lies in this ？

There is even a more common and common phenomenon （ Of course , It's fuzzy, too ）, such as ： A composer friend listens to his new music for you （ Be careful ： This is a brand new piece of music that you have never heard of ）, You closed your eyes and enjoyed it for a while and asked him ： Very melodious ！ This song reminds me of the idyllic scenery in the sunny spring days of my childhood . Lao Wang thinks this phenomenon is also a kind of “ synesthesia ”.

Summary ： Is there a better explanation ？

This article is based on “ Lao Wang's fallacy ” Tried to explain a perhaps nonexistent “ Fuzzy ” The phenomenon . Next, I would like to ask readers two questions ：

• Is there any research and experiment to prove the existence or non existence of this phenomenon ？
• If it exists, is there a better theory to explain it ？