*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by theali.

Ok so, Judge me with your opinions here...
But, I knew all this, intuitively.

I knew what was happening. I understood the persistence of vision as a given phenomenon. I can actually induce this persistence of vision on things as I look at them. Slowing down and increasing this persistence. Not a great amount, but I can do it enough to observe it. This means I can look at any normal object and move my head slowly to the side and watch the image degrade on my retina as I move my direction of vision to the side.

Now Destin, immediately saw this as a trick that fooled the mind into believing the image was a solid. But I wasn't fooled. Why wasn't I fooled? HAve I just been exposed to this before, and my mind is telling me the truth, thus negating the illusion?

I've seen similar tricks like this before, like on a wheel, to create an image, but if I concentrate I can see and immediately comprehend what is happening. I can stare long enough to break up the image and loose the illusion, and then have it come back.

I hope I'm making sense here.
So what I want to know, is, "does everyone have or not have, see or not see as I do?" I assumed we all did. So much so, that I've never had a question in my mind as to how this worked or that it was a trick.

Tell me I'm crazy, that's fine. But I'm interested in what other people are perceiving.

I don't think the purpose here was really about being tricked or not. These are illusions, people know their eye/brain are being tricked.

He just wanted a deeper understanding of "Why?" the eye is tricked, which far less people would be aware of.

The spinning thingy you may be able to "see the trick" because it's a rather raw implementation. I don't think you can say you can "see the trick" of a normal movie, you just know it's made of still images in quick succession.

The Professor does say the eye has the ability to tweak the parameters, so perhaps this is what your experiencing but I don't believe it goes as far as you being able to just stop your eyes from being eyes.

Or maybe you've got super powers?

Hate to tell little LED fan guy this, but this exact thing has been used on vehicle wheels for years...

PIMPStars yo!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb3THwZjnHY

I've always said the word genius is bandied around way too much, and this video is a fine example. CRT screens/tvs follow the same idea - individual lights illuminate in sequence quickly enough to form a static picture, each pixel changes very slightly 100 times per second (refresh rate) to give the illusion of the original picture in motion. The CRT beam scans ("rasters") from top left to bottom right (for example) in exactly the same way that the device in the video spins (it rasters in a circle) and however many times it spins per second is the refresh rate.

It's a cool project and his PCB work is nice, and he's done a good job of translating a picture into a timed set of lights. The videographer uses the term genius because he was not previously aware of the long history of rasters. This would be a useful tool for teaching children about the process - CRTs might not be popular anymore, but CCDs are fundamental to (astro)physics, and the principles behind both cover a huge range of potential teaching topics.

There have been clocks that do this kind of thing for a long time now. Also, the inverted color image thing was in a video on the sift very recently.