🚀 go-pugleaf

in article 1130632469.454161.195380@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com,
StpNrrs@aol.com at StpNrrs@aol.com wrote on 10/29/2005 20:34:

> 
> robert bristow-johnson wrote:
>> in article 1130629424.117822.102680@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com,
>> maestro@ultrapiano.com at StpNrrs@aol.com wrote on 10/29/2005 19:43:
>> 
>>> A sort of statistical neurodynamics of noise transmission, I suppose.
>>> What practical use is your friend's (Bob Adams) theory?  Does it
>>> explain the brain's equivalent to Brownian motion - those odd sudden
>>> jolts and tics that one sometimes experiences when half-asleep?
>> 
>> he was able to explain, using the audio engineering concept of
>> noise-shaping, how it is that we hear sound so well, to such a "fidelity"
>> that using silicon-based systems (44100*16 bits per second in one ear),
>> through this known neural bottleneck of our auditory nervous system.
> 
> "this known neural bottleneck".  Do you mean the disparity in the
> amount of information that the ear sends the brain, at most a few
> thousand haircells firing ten times per second, compared to the
> 44100*16 bits per second required for high-fidelity digital audio
> sound?

yup.  that's just about right.  Bob Adams's paper deals with this in an
elegant and quite believable manner.  i'm not saying that is error free or
has considered every issue, but it's pretty good.

>  The same 'known neural bottleneck' occurs in the eyes - about
> 1000000*3*25 bits per second when your're looking at your computer
> monitor.

that may be.  i was only thinking about the audiology part of "the
computational neurophysics of perception".

-- 

r b-j                  rbj@audioimagination.com

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."