Three little pigs

The content of this email would suggest ifferent from the subject title.

If there are three color receptors in the eye, and the mind perceiveing
them, then what effectively could the three primary sounds be?

C, E, G?

I had this conversation with an artist on the train from paraparaumu where I
used to work and workout at a gym, and we talked crazy.

And one of the age old concepts that I feel that many of you may have had or
at least formulated before (at least,-I hope so....) was what it would be
like to perceive a definite, discrete, distinct, and totally different
color, a color different from any that had been seen before, and wasn;t a
continuous variation on what had been seen.

So, if the mind;s eye hasn;t evolved to see light timbre, and only the
fundamental, I do so wounder what the effect of neural extention would be.

Sure, we rave about artificial intelligence, but I feel that another
parallel extention would be what I think may be termed only as
"neurohacking", that is extending the sences to perceive not "like" the dog
perceives, but to smell "as" the dog smells.

I can ask, what would it be like to see light with its timbre?

Perhaps better put:

What would it be like to PERCEIVE light with a timbre.

<SNIP>So we see that
it would be really difficult to conceive of something like a "timbre" for
visual stimuli, and even if we could, we did not evolve in such a way as to
be able to see "timbrally" . . .

Synaesthesia is a completely different matter, though . . .

***Sarn says: It would be nice to see timbrally though.

Sarn Richard Ursell schrieb:
>
schnippschnapp
>
> Sure, we rave about artificial intelligence, but I feel that another
> parallel extention would be what I think may be termed only as
> "neurohacking", that is extending the sences to perceive not "like" the dog
> perceives, but to smell "as" the dog smells.

Dear Sarn,

here

http://www.deeplistening.org/pauline/

is an essay on "Quantum Improvisation" (I believe) that has a lot of
other ideas on new perception abilites grafted onto humans (a la Ray
Kurzweil), with an emphasis on multidimensional (=moving through
space) melodies (the vestibular apparatus happens to be never
mentioned when people talk about the 5 or 6 senses - so there must
be seven!).

By the way: I would be glad if I could just know about the
perceptions of fellow humans or even my own in a few hours time (or
yesterday...).

Klaus

Sarn wrote,

>It would be nice to see timbrally though.

One day it was my birthday and three friends were playing some Bach on
flute, violin, and organ. It was so beautiful and I began falling asleep.
For a moment, I _saw_ the music. It was a mountain range in the distance. I
can't explain it now, but at that moment I knew I wasn't seeing an image
associated with the music . . . I was seeing the music.

Our words are so limited, our experiences so shallow, the relation between
the two so weak and arbitrary . . . how can we hope to really communicate
such things?

Music says so much more.

Sarn, you are such an imaginitive fellow, always pushing ideas to the
extremes of abstraction and beyond. You sound to me like a person who would
make a great musician. I think you'll find that, if you really commit
yourself to it, you'll be able to express yourself so much more fully
through music than anyone ever could through words.