Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T06:25:00.802Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

XXIV.—On the Law of Visible Position in Single and Binocular Vision, and on the representation of Solid Figures by the union of dissimilar Plane Pictures on the Retina

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2013

David Brewster
Affiliation:
St Leonard's College, St Andrews

Extract

In the course of an examination of Bishop Berkeley's “New Theory of Vision,” the foundation of the Ideal Philosophy, I have found it necessary to repeat many old experiments, and to make many new ones, in reference to the functions of the eye as an optical instrument. I had imagined that many points in the physiology of vision were irrevocably fixed, and placed beyond the reach of controversy; but though this supposition may still be true in the estimation of that very limited class of philosophers who have really studied the subject, yet it is mortifying to find that the laws of vision, as established by experiment and observation, are as little understood as they were in the days of Locke and Berkeley. Metaphysicians and physiologists have combined their efforts in substituting unfounded speculation for physical truth; and even substantial discoveries have been prematurely placed in opposition to opinions of which they are the necessary result.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1844

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 349 note * Phil. Trans. 1838, p. 371.

page 350 note * Opuscules Mathematiques, Tom. I. Mem. ix. p. 266.

page 351 note * The two screens S, S′ may be the opposite edges fo a triangular notch in a card held in the hand.

page 353 note * Opuscules Mathematiques, Tom. I. Mem. ix. § iv. p. 273–4.

page 354 note * Phil. Trans. 1838, p. 388.

page 354 note † June 1842, vol. li. p. 830.

page 359 note * The fact of objects seen obliquely not being double, is ascribed by Mr Wheatstone to the coalescence of the images of different magnitudes given by each eye.

page 359 note † Phil. Trans. 1838, p.386, § 14.

page 359 note ‡ Letters on Natural Magic, p. 54.

page 360 note * See Letters on Natural Magic. Lett. III., p. 54.

page 361 note * Several curious facts establishing this result have been given by Dr Smith in his Compleat System of Optics, vol. ii. 387–389; and Remarks, § 526–527.

page 365 note * This account was published anonymously in the Edinburgh Journal of Science for January 1826, No. VII. vol iv. p. 97; and a popular abstract of it afterwards appeared in my Letters on Natural Magic, Letter V. p. 98.

page 365 note † Phil. Trans. 1838, p. 383.

page 365 note ‡ This is true only when they are not seen obliquely.—D. B.

page 365 note § Phil. Trans. 1838, p. 384.

page 366 noten * When the cameo and intaglio are viewed very obliquely, one of the causes of deception disappears. In the case of a cameo appearing depressed, the depression disappears the instant that the shadow of the cameo encroaches distinctly upon the plane surface from which it is raised, because an intaglio never can, however obliquely viewed, throw a shadow upon the plane surface out of which it is excavated. For the same reason, an intaglio seen very obliquely will not rise into a cameo, because the shadow on the plane surface is wanting.

page 366 note † Journal of the Rev. Joseph Wolff, 1839, p. 189.

page 366 note ‡ Vol. i. p. 334.

page 368 note * Such as the magnified teeth of a saw, as in fig. 14, or a thin section of a hexagonal prism whose axis is parallel to a line joining the eyes.

page 368 note † In order to produce simultaneously this double effect, the lines of the pyramid, for example, which are to give the converse of relief, should be fainter than the other lines, or in different and feebler colours.