The Same Color Illusion = Mind Fuck

greyillusion_wikipedia_big
APOD

Explanation: Are square A and B the same color? They are. Are too. To verify this, click here to see them connected. The above illusion, called the same color illusion, illustrates that purely human observations in science may be ambiguous or inaccurate. Even such a seemingly direct perception as relative color. Similar illusions exist on the sky, such as the size of the Moon near the horizon, or the apparent shapes of astronomical objects. The advent of automated, reproducible, measuring devices such as CCDs have made science in general and astronomy in particular less prone to, but not free of, human-biased illusions.

I didn’t know our brain messed with us like this until this was posted.

  • Leave a comment ?

    30 Responses to The Same Color Illusion = Mind Fuck

    1. I can ALMOST make the two square’s colors match if I make my eyes go out of focus.

      This is weird.

      Reply

    2. Use your hands (or some paper) to cover all but the two squares and you’ll suddenly see them as the same shade of gray. If you start to uncover the light square next to A, it’ll start to look darker. If you start to uncover the dark square next to B, it’ll start to look lighter.

      Reply

    3. NO.

      THIS IS BULLSHIT.

      NOOOOO

      Reply

    4. If you take it into mspaint and cut one of the boxes and drag it you can see easily.

      Reply

    5. Hard to see, unless you go to the second image with them connected. And even then I have to block out the green tower to get it right.

      Reply

    6. MY MIND HAS TRULY BEEN FUCKED

      It’s going to go have a cigarette, now.

      Reply

    7. This really doesn’t have anything to do with the scientific method at all, and everything to do with human cognition. That’s why science is meticulous, peer-reviewed, and methods-based. Very little science is “I looked at this with my naked eye and this is what I saw”, it’s “I ran these measurements, correlations, and statistical tests and these were the results and subsequently scrutinized, published, and scrutinized again”.

      Reply

      • Do you realize that you’re the only person here talking about the scientific method? But now that you mention it: yes, for millenia, Astronomy has been “I looked at this with my [telescopically-enhanced] naked eye,” and then all the measurements, correlations, and statistical tests are based on those observations. Tycho Brahe mad observations… with his eyes… that led to Kepler’s laws of planetary motion. Now technology helps us do that kind of thing better.

        What we’re talking about is over here —–>

        <—– And you're way over here, trying to be contradictory

        Reply

      • You’re the only one here talking about the scientific method…

        But since you put it up there, I’ll bite. “I looked at this with my naked eye and this is what I say” is absolutely a part of all science, but the thing that makes it science is that it’s *followed up* by measurements, correlations, and statistical tests, along with loads of scrutiny. This is, as they suggest, especially true in astronomy: Tycho Brahe made observations with (telescopically-enhanced) naked eyes which provided the basis for Kepler’s laws of planetary motion, and I haven’t heard anybody recently say that wasn’t science or that it can’t stand up to scrutiny.

        Really, what we’re talking about is over here —>

        <—– And way over here is what you're talking about

        Reply

      • You’re the only one here talking about the scientific method…

        But since you put it up there, I’ll bite. “I looked at this with my naked eye and this is what I say” is absolutely a part of all science, but the thing that makes it science is that it’s *followed up* by measurements, correlations, and statistical tests, along with loads of scrutiny. This is, as they suggest, especially true in astronomy: Tycho Brahe made observations with (telescopically-enhanced) naked eyes which provided the basis for Kepler’s laws of planetary motion, and I haven’t heard anybody recently say that wasn’t science or that it can’t stand up to scrutiny. The only difference is that technology now lets us do this better.

        What you’re talking about and what’s happening here are entirely separate discussions.

        Reply

    8. I FUCKING KNEW IT! Science is a lie! Long live Creationism!

      Reply

    9. I wonder what such a chessboard would do for a chess match

      Reply

    10. that link makes it look like a slight gradient – i don’t believe it

      Reply

    11. @Corman (since this isn’t posting my replies)

      You’re the only one here talking about the scientific method…

      But since you put it up there, I’ll bite. “I looked at this with my naked eye and this is what I say” is absolutely a part of all science, but the thing that makes it science is that it’s *followed up* by measurements, correlations, and statistical tests, along with loads of scrutiny. This is, as they suggest, especially true in astronomy: Tycho Brahe made observations with (telescopically-enhanced) naked eyes which provided the basis for Kepler’s laws of planetary motion, and I haven’t heard anybody recently say that wasn’t science or that it can’t stand up to scrutiny. The only difference is that technology now lets us do this better.

      Really, what we’re talking about is over here —>

      <—– And way over here is what you're talking about

      Reply

    12. This is wrong. The question is: “Are square A and B the same color?” Thinking scientifically and answering that question, the correct answer is: No, they are not the same color.The original question is what’s wrong in order to say that they are the same color.

      The correct question should be: “Do squares A and B appear to be the same color?”

      Reply

    13. After this, whats next?
      The bible is /not/ the inerrant word of god?
      For this reason, the two colors CANNOT be the same.
      If you think they ARE the same, you reject god, you have no morals,
      and you probably are a murderer and fuck in the street like an animal.

      Reply

    14. No
      No
      No.

      No.

      No they aren’t.

      No.

      No way.

      No.

      I don’t care if I’m posting a month late – no.

      No
      No
      No

      No.
      No way.

      No way OMG I CHECKED IN PAINT AND THEY ARE HOW THE FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!!!!111111!!111ONEOMGLOLZORS!!111

      Sorry.

      Reply

    Leave a Comment




    Advertisements Alcohol Animated Images Art Awesome Things Batman Cars Comic Books Computers Cosplay Cute As Hell Animals Dark Humor Donald Trump Fantasy - Science Fiction Fashion Food Forum Fodder Gaming Humor Interesting LOLcats Military Movie Posters Movies Music Nature NeSFW Politics Religion Sad :( Science! Sexy Space Sports Star Trek Star Wars Technology Television Vertical Wallpaper Visual Tricks Wallpaper Weapons Women WTF X-Mas