> On Jul 15, 2025, at 2:41, glen <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Now, I'm sensitive to the argument that all this falls under parallax, even 
> radially symmetric body types and the 9 octopus ganglia. And bi- vision, 
> hearing, etc. is a simple form of parallax: triangulation. 

When I was a kid, there was some article (maybe Sci. Am.?) that I found 
wonderful.

It had to do with owl ear asymmetries, which are produced by tufts of stiff 
feathers at unequal positions in front of whatever feather-hood (or something) 
channels sound to the ear canals.

Upshot of the articles was that owls need resolution in the vertical as well as 
the horizontal, from phase, intensity, and packet-arrival-time differences 
(including what acousticians term the “head-shaped transfer function”, as I 
learned some decades later working among the acousticians for a few years).

Article claimed (I have no way to check without a dive to see what has been 
done since) that owls and people have about the same acuity in lateral position 
of a sound’s origin, if the sound has enough shape (so, not a clarinet) to cue 
from.  But people have terrible vertical acuity.  For owls, the vertical acuity 
is ballpark-comparable to the lateral.

Eric




.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... 
--- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to