Secret Senses

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mono

this, I believe, makes the sense of balance and hearing nearly synonymous.

---

I wouldn’t want to argue with such an impressive list of ‘ologies’ but I agree with PeterL. I don’t really understand what you mean by ‘nearly synonymous’ in this context, anyway. Nor can I see the point you are making. My point, in case you missed it, is that there are already more than five senses and these are more than sufficiently amazing for me to ponder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

Bats have radar,

---

Bats use echolocation, the human equivalent of which is sonar not radar. While we are on the subject of bats, you should read up about the bat’s ear. Richard Dawkins picked it as one of his Seven Wonders of the World.

“An insect eating bat can chuckle at staggeringly fast speeds at such high pitch that if a perfect protective system had not been devised, the sounds it emits could damage its own ears. This problem is resolved by the creation of the stapedius muscle in the middle ear attached to three tiny bones, the malleus, the incus and the stapes, which are responsible for transmitting the sound waves to the internal ear. At each click the bat emits, this muscle pulls aside the stapes which touches the eardrum; hence, no sound of the click is directly transmitted to the internal ear. The frequency of clicks and such momentary breaks of contact is a make and break system which never fails despite its high frequency. Such bats are known to emit these sounds more than 200 times per second and this muscle can keep pace with these rapid variations. Yet when the sound strikes against a solid object and returns to the ear, the contact of the bone with the drum is immediately renewed so that no echo is ever missed by the bat during the innumerable intervals of disconnection. How it can perform this magic beats comprehension. Imagine, 200 sounds per second with not a ripple transmitted to the internal ear and yet it connects 200 times again in order not to miss a single echo of the returning sound signals. The bat's ear does it in an amazingly complex world of sound and echoes which are delivered in different pitches with different frequencies.”

I find that more amazing than any idea of some supernatural sixth sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Unnamable

"How it can perform this magic beats comprehension. Imagine, 200 sounds per second with not a ripple transmitted to the internal ear and yet it connects 200 times again in order not to miss a single echo of the returning sound signals. The bat's ear does it in an amazingly complex world of sound and echoes which are delivered in different pitches with different frequencies.”

I find that more amazing than any idea of some supernatural sixth sense.

---

That is surprising, and I noted the author described it as 'magic'. We just don't know what it is but people use words like magic, mysterious, ghostly, supernatural. Once the magician has revealed his trick, its nolonger called magic. Looking at "Edgar Allan Poe", I don't know if he believed in ghosts and prophets or not, but he did assume something - when he was writing at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

We have five senses in which we glory and which we recognize and celebrate, senses that constitute the sensible world for us. But there are other senses - secret senses, sixth senses, if you will - equally vital, but unrecognized, and unlauded.
Oliver Sacks

I come across this quote which seems sensible enough, and made me tick off five senses to be sure I remembered what they were. I had a problem when it continued, "..there are other senses - secret senses..". Sounds like an area of general interest to everyone:

What is a secret sense?

---

I think it might be good to point out that that Oliver Sacks is a neurologist that has written books on neuropsychology. I do not remember where exactly that quote is from, but it might be from "The man who mistook his wife for a hat. " So the quote is not a religious statement. Of course anyone is free to believe in a sixth sense of the paranormal kind, but that is not what Sacks is referring to.

Sacks is probably using the word secret for the poetic value, his writings are about processes that we normally do not recognize but become aware of when they are gone.


Mono, although much of what you write is of course correct what Sacks means is amongst other things balance and prioperception - the sense of the position of our bodies. (small info on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prioperception) Balance is starting to be counted as a sense of it´s own in neurology. Although is seems to be a summary of various senses or influenced by other senses (like taste is influenced by smell) there have been some that argues that it might be a sense of its own. just to take a small exemple people that have a lost parts of their balance might bnot at all have damaged hearing, and people that can´t hear doesn´t have to have less balance. The latest research I read on the subject stresses the sense of touch, although sight has been very popular contribution - for exemple it explains why you get dizzy in the amusement parks where they have rooms with walls that circles while you stand still (I hope you udnerstand what i am referring to?) . The ear does not move, and is therefor not involved. But still we feel dizzy and might loose our sense of balance. Likewise if a small pressure of air is directed at our finger tip we can balance better, standing on one leg. Anyone having tried balancing and just barely touching a friend knows this, but it has just gotten interesting in research. The idea is that it is the slight sense of touch, more than any kind of support that helps us keep our balance. The pressure of air is no support, but it helps the body find stability on it´s own.

Sorry about the rant. I hope you find this as interesting as I do, Mono.
I might be able to find some references to this, I got them from swedish research journals but I think the research is done in USA.

And yes, Unnamable, I too find these things much more fantastic than any paranormal sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

Once the magician has revealed his trick, its nolonger called magic.

---

I disagree in the case of the bat’s ear. Even though I understand what happens and how it happens, I still find it staggering. It would certainly go on my list of Seven Wonders. There’s a thread for anyone itching to post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

Bats have radar, do you think humans have a very limited radar that comes into use when practiced, gets stronger because of the need for it? Interesting that radar came from a bat's need to move around in the dark, which points again at nature's ability to reshape/combine those first five senses and turn them into something else, useful.

---

Bats use high frequency sound, not radio frequency electromagnetic radiation.

Is there an echo in here? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Unnamable

I disagree in the case of the bat’s ear. Even though I understand what happens and how it happens, I still find it staggering. It would certainly go on my list of Seven Wonders. There’s a thread for anyone itching to post.

---

Okay guys, string me up, I realize its not radar - my head was into Lancaster Bombers. I will do my best to use the correct words. :p You see, while I agree with you that it is staggering, amazing, etc, the point I am making is, things like this, that have not yet been explained are still called 'supernatural', simply because people do not understand it, and pointing out that everything we do not understand might wait an answer, rather than being declared 'supernatural', or 'magic'. Richard Dawkins describes it, great, everyone now becomes educated to the fact, its not 'supernatural' anymore.

Do you think humans have the same thing bats have, just way less developed? :brow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

Do you think humans have the same thing bats have, just way less developed? :brow:

---

It is possible that humans subconsciously are aware of high frequency sound, but there is no evidence of that. Infants can hear frequencies up to about 24,000 hertz (the range of dog whistles), but bats use frequencies up to 100,000. It is also possible that extremely low frequency waves are felt. Actually, it is known that people can sometimes feel pressure waves that can't be heard. Whether those waves carry information is something that I don't know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

It is possible that humans subconsciously are aware of high frequency sound, but there is no evidence of that. Infants can hear frequencies up to about 24,000 hertz (the range of dog whistles), but bats use frequencies up to 100,000. It is also possible that extremely low frequency waves are felt. Actually, it is known that people can sometimes feel pressure waves that can't be heard. Whether those waves carry information is something that I don't know.

---

Those sound waves would hit both the dog and the human. When, as you showed, "a dog can hear a whistle that a human ear may not hear", it does not mean the human did not receive it, only that the human did not acknowledge/respond to it. So, whether we recognize it as 'information' or not, it may go somewhere into us (memory), and in this example its useful to a bat that uses it immediately.

Stones also absorb/collect a memory of sort too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

Those sound waves would hit both the dog and the human. When, as you showed, "a dog can hear a whistle that a human ear may not hear", it does not mean the human did not receive it, only that the human did not acknowledge/respond to it. So, whether we recognize it as 'information' or not, it may go somewhere into us (memory), and in this example its useful to a bat that uses it immediately.

Stones also absorb/collect a memory of sort too.

---

It is true that the high frequency sound hits human bodies, but humans don't have apparatus for converting the sound waves into something that our brains can work with. The structures that convert sound into neural signals are tiny hairs in the inner ear. At birth there are sets of hairs that can convert sound up to about 22,000 hertz. The high frequencies are processed with the finest hairs, which are also the ones that are most fragile. Over time those tiny hairs break and are not replaced, so the upper ranges are no longer available for conversion into neural pulses. Or, to be more succinct, the highest frequencies don't get into the brain at all; they are not processed or remembered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

It is true that the high frequency sound hits human bodies, but humans don't have apparatus for converting the sound waves into something that our brains can work with. The structures that convert sound into neural signals are tiny hairs in the inner ear. At birth there are sets of hairs that can convert sound up to about 22,000 hertz. The high frequencies are processed with the finest hairs, which are also the ones that are most fragile. Over time those tiny hairs break and are not replaced, so the upper ranges are no longer available for conversion into neural pulses. Or, to be more succinct, the highest frequencies don't get into the brain at all; they are not processed or remembered.

---

I am only building a supposition. Lets say, the human does only receive at lower frequencies, remembers and does not utilize everything. Where I am going is, there is a lot of redundant information, regardless, like background noise. It sits there in memory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

I am only building a supposition. Lets say, the human does only receive at lower frequencies, remembers and does not utilize everything. Where I am going is, there is a lot of redundant information, regardless, like background noise. It sits there in memory.

---

You could be right. There is no way to know for sure with the present state of technology, but there is no sign that extremely high or the very lowest frequencies of sound are introduced into any neural pathway. New evidence may emerge that will make that datum obsolete.

All good poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings: it takes its origin from emotion recollected in tranquillity.

- William Wordsworth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

All good poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings: it takes its origin from emotion recollected in tranquillity.

- William Wordsworth

---

I’m not sure why you posted this but I think you have missed the important bit that Wordsworth wrote before the part you quote:

“For all good poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings: but though this be true, Poems to which any value can be attached, were never produced on any variety of subjects but by a man, who being possessed of more than usual organic sensibility, had also thought long and deeply.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Unnamable

I’m not sure why you posted this but I think you have missed the important bit that Wordsworth wrote before the part you quote:

“For all good poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings: but though this be true, Poems to which any value can be attached, were never produced on any variety of subjects but by a man, who being possessed of more than usual organic sensibility, had also thought long and deeply.”

---

Thanks for that. I found the clip and felt it aligned the thread - for me at least. Your help has reinforced it. I like how he writes, "possessed". :nod: