Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Was bedeutet Sichtbarkeit, betrachtet in ihrer je spezifischen Beziehung zu ihrem Gegenteil, der Unsichtbarkeit? Der vorliegende Band nimmt in neun Beiträgen diese verwickelte Relation auf dem Gebiet der drei maßgeblichen Diskurse – Wissenschaft, Literatur und Kunst – um 1800 in den Blick. Um 1800 werden die später grundlegenden und wirkmächtigen Ausarbeitungen des Gegensatzes von Sichtbarkeit und Unsichtbarkeit konzipiert, theoretisch ausformuliert oder praktisch umgesetzt. Die Einzeluntersuchungen nehmen ihren Ausgangspunkt von zwei logisch-fundamentalen Grundkonstellationen des Gegensatzpaars »sichtbar/unsichtbar«: Die eine fasst das Verhältnis als komplementär-inklusiv auf, die andere spitzt es auf einen kontradiktorisch-exklusiven Gegensatz zu.

Visibility. --- Invisibility. --- Visual perception. --- Visibility in art. --- Invisibility in art. --- Arts, Modern --- Arts and society --- History

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

111.8 --- 111.8 Metafysica: transcendentele zijnsbestemming; transcendentie --- Metafysica: transcendentele zijnsbestemming; transcendentie --- Invisibility --- Invisibility in art --- Invisibilité --- Invisibilité dans l'art --- Religious aspects --- Aspect religieux

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Fear of Seeing traces the new wave of Chinese science fiction's origin and development over the past three decades, exploring the core concerns and literary strategies that make it so distinctive and vital.

Chinese fiction --- Invisibility in literature. --- Science fiction, Chinese --- History and criticism.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

To what level are invisible stimuli processed by the brain in the absence of conscious awareness? It is widely accepted that simple visual properties of invisible stimuli are processed; however, the existence of higher-level unconscious processing (e.g., involving semantic or executive functions) remains a matter of debate. Three major factors may underlie the discrepancies found in the literature: 1) different levels of conservativeness in the definition of “unconscious;” 2) different dependent measures of unconscious processing; and 3) inherent differences in the amount of information let through by different suppression techniques. In this research topic we are particularly interested in the third factor.Researchers using visual masking and researchers using interocular suppression disagree on the extent of unconscious processing as measured by priming effects. On the one hand, the community of researchers using visual masking seems to have reached the consensus that “subliminal priming has now been convincingly demonstrated at visual, semantic, and motor levels” (Dehaene and Changeux). On the other hand, in an influential review, Blake and Logothetis claimed that for high-level cognitive processes, “[interocular] suppression renders normally effective priming stimuli impotent“. Stein and Sterzer came to similar conclusions in a more recent contribution. However, these claims are challenged by empirical evidence for unconscious processing under interocular suppression using other dependent variables, e.g., conditioning and perceptual learning. Hence, the picture is not as clear cut as priming studies may suggest.Neuroimaging studies (e.g., functional MRI) offer another window on the extent of unconscious processing. Kouider et al. found that faces masked with a combination of forward and backward pattern masks elicited a BOLD response in the Fusiform Face Area (FFA). Jiang and He also reported that the fusiform face area (FFA) was active in response to faces rendered invisible by continuous flash suppression. Though Sterzer, Haynes and Rees did not replicate this finding with univariate analyses, they could discriminate invisible faces from invisible houses in the fusiform face area using multivariate pattern analysis. Thus it appears that there is unconscious processing of invisible faces in the FFA whether visual masking or interocular suppression is used; the amount of processing may differ between the two techniques, as suggested by the necessity of performing decoding when interocular suppression is used.In the same conditions of well-controlled, conservatively established subjective invisibility, can we show that some of the techniques in the “psychophysical magic” arsenal (e.g., masking, but also visual crowding, attentional blink, etc.) reliably lead to higher-level unconscious processing than others (e.g., interocular suppression)? Some authors have started investigating this question, using multiple techniques in similar settings . We argue that this approach should be extended. Indeed, in order to delineate the frontiers of the unconscious mind using a contrastive method, one has to disentangle the limits attributable to unawareness itself, and those attributable to the technique inducing unawareness. The scope of this research topic is to provide a platform for scientists to contribute insights and further experiments addressing this fundamental question.

Subconsciousness. --- Unconscious (Psychology) --- Unconsciousness --- Psychology --- Continuous Flash Suppression (CFS) --- psychophysical magic --- unconscious processing --- visual crowding --- backward masking --- measures of consciousness --- interocular suppression --- invisibility

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Arthur C. Clarke famously wrote that, "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." These words most certainly ring true with respect to invisibility cloaking devices. At work is the magic of science, of course. The technology to make an object simply disappear from view is now a reality. There is both great fear and great desire in the thought of invisibility. Indeed, for thousands of years, authors have grappled with the idea. Power, devilry, secrecy, ethical dilemma, and moral corruption - invisibility has it all. And yet, our waking world is full of familiar invisible phenomena. Electricity flowing along a metal wire, the gravity that keeps us grounded, the air we breathe, the bacteria and viruses that make us ill, the X-rays that reveal our broken bones - all are invisible to our eyes. They surround and envelop us, and we don't give them a second thought. Nature long ago learned how to play tricks with light rays, enriching the world with rainbows, mirages, and animal camouflage. The new physics of invisibility simply aims to take these tricks of nature a few steps further. Indeed, by learning what light is and how it interacts with matter, physicists have begun to take control of light - with metamaterials, which, manmade, can be precisely melded, warped, twisted, transformed, and even time-edited. In this book the ancient and modern story of light and invisibility is revealed, from early Greek speculations to the remarkable works of James Clerk Maxwell. The new and burgeoning field of transformation optics is also explored, and the story behind the development of the first fully functional invisibility cloak is charted. What will they be used for and how will they change things? Find out here.

Invisibility. --- Light. --- Physics -- Miscellanea. --- Science -- History. --- Invisibility --- Light --- Physics --- Science --- Physical Sciences & Mathematics --- Light & Optics --- Electricity & Magnetism --- Miscellanea --- History --- Optics. --- Magic tricks. --- Conjuring --- Legerdemain --- Parlor magic --- Prestidigitation --- Sleight of hand --- Physics. --- Electrodynamics. --- Popular works. --- Optical materials. --- Electronic materials. --- Optics and Electrodynamics. --- Popular Science, general. --- Optical and Electronic Materials. --- Tricks --- Optics --- Science (General). --- Classical Electrodynamics. --- Materials --- Electronic materials --- Dynamics