Evenings
were brightening in January 2001, so I arrived home from work before my
outdoor lights turn themselves on. They are screw-in fluorescents inside
a 1-foot globe of white plastic, activated when a photoresistor inside
the globe says it is getting dark out there. If I am a little late for
dinner, I see them in the first 10 minutes or so of operation, when their
own light still tends to turn them back off. The appearance of the globe
is really strange. It seems covered with vaguely patterned purple blotches
that shift and flicker, separated by yellow worms like electrical discharges
that squirm around. They seem finer-grained nearer the center of my visual
field. All are hard to describe, like convection patterns on the surface
of the Sun or maybe more like fibrillation on heart muscle in that they
change faster than you can identify them. How fast is that? I suppose no
faster than the time scale of cerebral processing for awareness, something
like 50-100 msec. And how big are these purple blotches? No identifiable
size: I think they get finer more centrally. They look big from a distance,
but small close up. Very roughly, they subtend about the same range of
angular diameters from any distance. I'd say the foveal ones are in the
range of 1/4 degree across (1/4 little-finger width at arm's length), which
means about 1/8 mm on my fovea, 25 mm from the lens, and half that distance
on my primary visual cortex, occipital area V1 at the back of the head.
This 1/16 mm is getting close to the dimensions of cells (or of receptive
fields?). You see what I am getting at: maybe these purple blotches are
not
on the lamp, but only in my brain, and maybe they reflect the spatial
scale of propagation across functional units in the brain when tickled
at high frequency.
This presents a conundrum.
How do you investigate, how do you communicate to others, and how do you
describe without pictures, something that has no "objective" existence?
Well, what does "objective" mean? I think it means that if others do the
same thing they will get the same sensations. But I wish it could mean
more than that. I would like it to mean that I can photograph the phenomenon
and compare it quantitatively to similar instances. I can't. Can one do
science without quantification? Well, let's try. This evidently starts
with bringing others to observe the same, so this topic seem a natural
for this public forum.
If anyone can be troubled
to screw a fluorescent bulb into a light-controlled socket and put it behind
a diffuser screen, I would be happy to know what you see when the ambient
light is just low enough to barely turn on the fluorescent. You can fake
it with a flashlight: in a dark room: shine the flashlight on the photodetector
until the fluorescent turns off, then back off a little. It begins to turn
back on, but immediately has trouble as its own light hits the photodetector
and tends to turn it back off. You can magnify this feedback by placing
a white reflector or even a mirror to bounce more fluorescent light into
its controlling eye. This does not work with all incandescent lamps, I
presume because of their thermal inertia: some bulbs just steadily fadeout
as the flashlight brightens the eye, then switch off. But it does work
with some. "Lifting the hood" to observe the bulb directly while flickering
in response to feedback from a nearby mirror, I have the impression that
the physical light source has uniform intensity: the mottled texture is
invented by eye and brain.
I tried another thing. I brought
home an oscilloscope, in the form of Velleman's PCO64i circuit board
and WinDSO software that makes my Win98 laptop into a digital recording
oscilloscope. To the circuit board's serial input I attach a 1.5 volt AA
cell in series with a 2200 ohm resistor and a 12kohm CdS photoresistor,
and send the voltage across either resistor to the oscilloscope. With the
oscilloscope computing Fast Fourier Transforms to present a spectrum, here
is what I see in sufficient darkness (left panel; if I remember right,
the vertical scale is linear, not logarithmic, in signal power):
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Make your screen display window wide enough to accomodate
the two panels left and right
I expected fluorescent light
pulses 120 times per second, plus harmonics of its non-sinusoidal waveform,
further distorted through the CdS photoresistor. But we have instead multiples
of 60 Hz, I don't know why. Anyway it looks to the eye like ordinary fluorescent
light, only vaguely flickering in peripheral vision. Also notice on the
left the unexpected 30 Hz peak lurking inconspicuously just above noise
level...
Then with flashlight almost
turning off the fluorescent, purple blotches begin flickering all over
the white globe. The oscilloscope's FFT shows (right panel) what
has changed about the light, integrated over the globe: Its frequency has
gone through a classical period-doubling bifurcation to 30 Hz, that was
maybe incipient in the left panel.
Below you see on the right
the corresponding voltage(time) trace during half a second of "purple
blotches light" with a peak every 17 msec. This represents the 60 Hz AC
output from the lamp. But these flashes are alternately big and little,
introducing a 30 Hz component. In contrast, on the left I back off with
the flashlight again, so normal fluorescent glow resumes without (much)
alternation
xxxxx
Make your screen display window wide enough to accomodate
the two panels left and right
The doubled-period flicker
is far from sinusoidal. Being so angular, it has plenty of harmonics, the
first adding to the 60 Hz peak above, then a new one at 90 Hz as you see
in the FFT prior figure's right panel, then the old 120 Hz peak is augmented,
then another new one at 150 Hz, and so on.
Conjecture: what brings
out the purple blotches is not any patchiness of light on the globe, but
simply its lower-frequency flicker at 30 Hz.
Test: get a strobe
flashing xenon light inside the globe or on a white wall, and gradually
dial down its frequency from 100 Hz or so.
Result: Nothing special
happens until 30 Hz. Then in the range 30-18 Hz (33-55 msec cycles), purple
blotches and yellow worms squirm all over the globe or wall! Their apparent
size seems roughly proportional to my distance, as observed outdoors with
the fluorescent-lamp globe.
Check: A nearby graduate
student, unaware of what the professor is up to, has the same experience
in the same range.
If this represents some kind
of interaction between adjacent regions of the brain when tickled at 30
Hz, and those units appear to be about 1/4 degree apart, so 1/16 mm on
the cortex, then we are talking about some electrical disturbance propagating
at 1/16 mm / 1/30 sec = 2 mm/sec, slower even than migraine scotomas, spreading
depression, or Jacksonian epilepsy across the cortex. Maybe it happens
elsewhere, e.g., in the retina or the lateral geniculate nucleus of the
thalamus, where I don't know the distance scale.
Rummaging libraries, I did
find one description of peculiar visual patterns induced by flicker in
the range 4-25 Hz, by J.R. Smythies in 1959, reported in General Psychology
50,
305-324 under the title "The Stroboscopic Patterns".
Was there any decisive follow-up?
It may be noteworthy that
this 30Hz is in the famous "gamma" band, broadly around 40Hz, thought to
be essential for integration of conscious attention throughout the cortex.
How might that idea be tested? I guess one would want to tickle
the brain at 40 Hz and see something about attention and consciousness
go wrong. Can 40 Hz even get into the CNS? One might expect not,
if this band is reserved for internal synchronization to organize perceptions.
There should be something like a "blood-brain barier" to exclude such interference
from housekeeping routines. Are human senses in fact arranged, to keep
it out interference? This might seem hardly necessary: natural selection
of our genes would have made no such barriers unless high-frequency periodic
stimuli were a common hazard during most of human evolution. In fact hearing
does not seem protected: we sense tones up to at least 2000
Hz by sending 1:1 report of acoustic pulses into the brain. What about
the sense of touch? Electromechanical massage vibrators, be they plugged
into the AC line or operated from batteries, typically buzz at 60 Hz, or
anyhow so I infer from watching as the strobe freezes their motion near
60 Hz and also at half that frequency (presumably illuminating every second
motion). Is this an engineered optimum for something? Are such high frequencies
actually getting into the CNS? If so, is this connected with the peculiar
effect, comparable to epileptic seizure in some respects, for which vibrators
are so cherished, viz. sexual orgasm? Or is the frequency unimportant and
in any case not delivered into the CNS? Maybe the effect depends only on
Pacinian corpuscles and Meissner bodies in the skin being most sensitive
in that range (I think 50-400 Hz). I believe that touch receptors and hair
cells of the inner ear do respond in a phase-locked way, individually perhaps
not on every cycle, but collectively sending to the CNS a volley of action
potentials at the intervals of the sensory vibration. Does it get into
the CNS as such, or does something like frequency demultiplication strip
it down to a mere place-coded indicator of tone or mechanical vibration?
Another trail head for an Adventure in Discovery ...
Is our visual flicker fusion
frequency below this gamma band? I confidently expected so, but anyway
I took the trouble to measure it for myself. Surprise! Human flicker fusion
cutoff is 20-60 Hz, the higher frequencies pertaining to brighter and more
uniform light, especially in peripheral vision. Undergraduates in a lab
exercise in my university typically report about 40 Hz cutoff for bright
LEDs in central vision. I tried the following trick: I tinkered
a feedback circuit using a BA728 dual operational amplifier chip to symmetrically
drive two LEDs in alternation, both of them bright green:
You can build it using the
techniques so clearly presented in Paul
Dito's columns.
Spacing the bright green LEDs
3" apart on black paper, I drive my two eyes in alternation. Each eye separately
(keeping the other eye shut or its LED covered) develops blobs, patterns,
and waves in the 17-40 Hz range, then flicker fusion intervenes at about
41 Hz. Using both eyes and converging to click the two LEDs into one stereo
image halfway between my eyes and the paper, I
see exactly the same thing. So this fused LED is flickering
as fast as 80 Hz, and presumably so is the lateral geniculate nucleus of
my hypothalamus and so are my cortical vision areas by the time flicker
fusion in each eye finally makes the green look steady. So it seems entirely
possible
to subject the brain to interference in the gamma band supposed crucial
for conscious attention. And nothing peculiar happened
(except for
the 18-30 Hz wavy patterns.)
What does this mean? First of all, I suppose it means that the brain
can keep up with faster flicker than the eye can, and that flicker fusion
is a retinal, not cortical, phenomenon. I am assuming that the perception
of flicker corresponds, not just to a report that "there is something flickering,"
but also to a signal at that frequency in the visual areas of the brain.
If the injected stimulus ranges across the whole gamma band as I dial the
LED frequency, yet it upsets no perception, then is it plausible that gamma
band synchronization is crucial for perception? I thought not --- that
was the point of trying this experiment --- but maybe a critic would
argue that input along visual channels is strictly segregated, so this
input interferes with nothing else. So what peculiarities do we observe
in vision alone? Purple blobs and yellow patterns, but only well below
gamma range, as noted above. Within the gamma range, nothing peculiar:
maybe the gamma input merely accentuates attention to the diodes? I don't
know what to make of it.
Here is another trail head for an Adventure in Discovery.
But this is a trail you might
not want to follow toward the low end of this interesting frequency band.
It is peculiar that visual red/blue flicker at 12 Hz or so (24 frames per
second) can induce epileptic seizures in about one person in 4000, e.g.,
in 600 Japanese children watching Pokemon on
TV, 17 December 1997. There is even a report of one woman habitually exposing
herself to such flicker (waving fingers of outstretched hand before the
Sun) because it induces orgasm. Lesser effects in the 8-16 Hz band
were explored in Tony Conrad's movie "Flicker" (1966).
You might
be one of the susceptible individuals, so you would not want to play around
with this at all, especially in a place where your difficulties would pass
un-noticed.
But here is something you
can do at no risk I know of. I have seen nothing about this in the published
literature, but have observed it all my life, and I suppose that others
might also:
When you first get up in the
morning to stand before the brightness of daylight at the window, shift
your gaze back to indoor darkness or a sheet of black velvety crepe. Do
you observe a rapid flickering? Whatever could that be? Too fast to be
the circular muscle of the iris overshooting around a new widened steady-state.
Anyway, it is not uniform across the visual field, but looks richly structured,
like complicated wave propagation. Does it happen independently in each
eye (and connected visual cortex)? Mine does. What is the rate, roughly?
You might be interested to compare your observations with mine in the next
column.