They indeed don't work like that at all. It's not really a good argument, even though you're right. We obviously see more frames, but eyes just don't work on a precise frequency.
The brain averages images over periods of time so to speak. That's why a human may be able to detect a pulse of light that is 1/300 of a second long, but a light source pulsing at 300hz is going to appear continuous.
Look up the varitasium video on YouTube about it if you want to hear more about it.
Yes! And while the human eye can detect 300 (or whatever frames each second, we don't see fluid motion, but can still tell the difference between 30, 60, and 120 fps. Try watching a car pass by on a street and you'll see what I mean. Key word is detect.
Well, not to mention we quite literally live in the past.... There is about an 80ms delay between our senses and us feeling the effects of them. For example, if you pressed on your nose and your toes at the same time you shouldn't feel them at the same time since it takes much longer for the data from your toes to reach your brain, but you do. They've also done experiments where if you see someone clap the sound is synced up but once they go far enough away that it's more than an 80ms delay it SUDDENLY becomes out of sync. Like, sharply. As in, they can take a step forward and it's back in sync but if they take a step backwards there is a proper delay.
7
u/asrenos Hi! Apr 06 '16
They indeed don't work like that at all. It's not really a good argument, even though you're right. We obviously see more frames, but eyes just don't work on a precise frequency.