Why do we see things out of the corners of our eyes? I get that

>hallucinations
>pattern recognization
>eye fatigue
>after images
>astigmatism
>floaters

Not everything is spoopy, anon

>>18151613
Shadow people

A more paranormal question would be why we can sense when someone is looking at us.

Or why people turn their heads if you stare intently at them.

>>18151613
You don't really see everything you think you see, your visual cortex fills in a lot of detail based on what it expects. Sometimes it misfires, especially when you're tired.

>>18151613
Wait til you meet the spots. Eclipses? Elipses? Eddies?
You need your sleep.
Have you tried 3rd person?
Ever had a dream that sort of leaked over into reality maybe when you had a lay in?
Tried sensory deprivation like with the the ping pong balls taped over your eyes?
Have you ever had a go second guessing peoples next words and actions before they happen?
Did you ever meet someone you were sure you had met before, but they were very far away in the background and as soon as you saw them you felt like calling out to them in internal monologue?

File: rod cone distribution.jpg (16KB, 591x221px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 591x221px

>>18151613
>I get that our vision isn't so good when looking to the side
That's wrong. Your peripheral vision is better at picking up movement.

>>18151637
/thread
I wish we had competent janitors removing shitty threads started by some uneducated underage fags

>>18151613
>I get that our vision isn't so good when looking to the side

Speak for yourself, nigga. I scored 100% on the peripheral vision test during my last eye exam.

>>18151922
Calm down there, keyboard warrior. OP just asked why, never assumed it was paranormal.

>>18151733
Because of our inherent and primal instincts to safeguard us from predators.

>>18151922
But then there would be no post

>>18151742
this
u see with your brain, not your eyes
yes, seriously

You hallucinate a lot more than you might think

>>18151613
That could be every thing from your imagination to sclerosis!

>>18151613
>but how could that manifest things for us to see?
It doesn't, our periferal vision is just extra sensitive to movement.

>>18151922
>>18152053
You guys act like this is /sci/. I only come here because the nonsense makes me laugh, and nonsense is the purpose of this board. lel

File: vue-du-bateau[1].jpg (71KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 600x450px

>>18151613
Floaters are a likely candidate. I have a big, black chunky floater that always floats on the side of my right eye. When your eyes are still, the floaters tend to fall down to the bottom of your eyeballs (compare to gold shavings in a bottle of Goldenschlager after you shake it), so there always looks like a black demon orb crawling down the wall of my bedroom but it's just my floater.

The cool thing is you now have the option to have them surgically removed. Don't know if insurance would cover it though. Either way the procedure isn't nearly as expensive as say orthodontics.

>>18151613

First, you need to understand something very fundamental about vision: we do not see exactly what is around us.

Now I don't mean any hippy shit where there's a hidden world or any of that bollocks. I mean actually experiencing the world around us is subjective to a degree. Light enters our eyes (and gets flipped upside-down on our retina), and then countless rod cells (there for basic light vision but not colour, which is why you see everything as grey in a dark room) and cone cells (three different types that absorb different wavelengths of light, specifically red, green and blue) absorb the light which is used to produce chemical signals and sent to our brain. There's no image actually being sent. No light travelling into our brains. It's just the firing of chemical processes triggering different reactions for us. And, as I said above, we only see THREE different colours. Everything we see is just various blends of those 3 colours. You aren't seeing orange, you're seeing the mix of cone cells firing simultaneously.

So we end up with a rough "picture" of what's around us. Our eyes take in the light, which causes a reaction, which sends signals to our brains, and our brains process it in whatever way it happens to. We cannot know for certain that what you happen to see is also what everyone else sees. All we know is that we share common reference points. But what now that our brain has incredibly produced an image in our heads for us to "see"? Well, it doesn't work like snapshots either.

We don't see in "frames", like cameras do. We see in constant streams of signals being converted into almost a hologram in our minds of what it is like around us. There are certainly speeds which are beyond what we can actually register (wave your hand in front of your monitor quickly and you will see multiple blurry hands all overlapping themselves). It may seem like frames, but that's just the slowness of our own minds processing visual information.

>>18154978

But we're still missing something: focus. We can truly "see" with the middle of our field of vision. It gives us details and focus, which our peripheral vision doesn't. We cannot move that focus fluidly without actually having something to fix on. Try looking from side to side across your room and you will notice your eyes "jump" from point to point. But focus on your finger tip and move it from side to side and you don't get the jump at all.

I've basically lost interest halfway through this post but the long and the short of it is:

>brain uses chemical reactions to interpret chemical reactions
>we only see 3 colours and yet we have a wider spectrum available
>our brains fill in the gaps in our vision and make us "see" things that aren't there

>>18152280
If it's so, by what means do we get the information that somebody is watching us? The thing is, the one who watches doesn't interact with our senses whatsoever. How does it work? Energy?

>>18151742

Look up the global consciousness project. Althoough a more "sweeping" of consciousness effects on RNG's. But barring physiological mundane explanations, I'd assume directed consciousness has influence on material processes.

>>18155016
Say we have instincts that allow our subconscious to dynamically assess the current environment and identify areas where we may be vulnerable and predators may be hiding. Perhaps when you feel that "sense" it's actually your subconscious telling you there could be something over there based on where you are in context to the local area, but it expresses itself as a "you are being watched" to make you look in the first place.

How many times do we fell like we're being watched, but we can't find anything if we start looking? It's easy to keep track of all the times you catch someone looking at you, but none of the times we feel someone watching us but find nothing. That's what you call convenience sampling and it isn't particularly accurate in the context of this phenomenon.

>>18156470
TL;DR: Perhaps our subconscious mind gleans more information from our local environment than we expect, which stimulates a series of "feels" designed to provoke caution in the host.