Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Necker cube

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 4 years ago by 49.177.107.107 in topic In popular culture

Reference Titles

[edit]

The last two articles have the same title. The last one should be "The Viewing-from-Above Bias and the Silhouette Illusion" if you follow the link. I have not edited because not certain this was indeed meant to be the article.  Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.38.249.160 (talk) 07:24, 5 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Left to right is natural?

[edit]

"Another reason behind this may be due to the brain's natural preference of viewing things from left to right"

I skimmed through the referenced article, and I don't see that it says anything about a "natural preference" for left to right. The article does talk about handedness, which isn't the same thing. Another possibility to consider is reading direction; literature should be reviewed for Necker cube experiments with people who natively read right to left or top to bottom, along with 90°/270° rotations of the cube.

Scott McNay (talk) 16:55, 19 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

I discovered the comment archive,which already has a discussion on this. I am removing the sentence. Not sure what to do with the reference; I'll leave it attached to the previous sentence. Scott McNay (talk) 17:01, 19 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Both aspects

[edit]

It's possible to see both aspects and to see the spinning dancer spin both ways (the way I saw it originally, which confused me quite a bit; although the standard common seems to have a flaw that makes one rotation direction physiologically absurd). The article doesn't indicate that this is a piece of embellishment in Blindsight, or if humans are actually not supposed to be able to do that. John Moser (talk) 05:39, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

[edit]

The unsourced trivia removed here, was originally added by someone 18:37, 16 June 2021‎ Maybe if patrollers of recent changes noticed the rubbish when it was first inserted, rather than jumping onto the always-suspect edits from random poor sap IP users innocently thinking, "Oh, that's a little fix that could do with some attention", WP would retain more editors: RWTP? SoTS 49.177.107.107 (talk) 15:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply