elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
...
1. I don't think that an empirical test showing that the two bins being compared (8x42 vs. 8x32 of the same series) measure the same or nearly the same DOF invalidates Lulubelle's or anyone's perception of lesser of depth in the midsized version.
2. Something goes on between the bin and the observer that can produce different perceptions of depth, and reports of this are too widespread to be discounted.
3. I've mentioned some external reasons why midsized roofs in general could give a lesser perception of depth than their 8x42 counterparts, but my gut feeling is that where the actual difference resides is in the depths or shallows of our brain's convolutions as explained in this short article:
Hello Brock,
Thanks for your many interesting thoughts, this being no less engaging than most. I mean that.
In responding to the first point, my position is that one never proves that there is no difference between two things, be they experimental treatments, performance of binoculars with different glass types, coatings, ...whatever. Why? Because 'no difference' is the null hypothesis, which in my religion of science is only accepted through lack of sufficient evidence to reject it. So, the ultimate question is not whether there is a difference if one looks hard enough, but whether the difference is large enough to be significant. This is the basis of statistical decision theory (of the Neyman-Pearson type.)
Perceptions of stereo depth, can be triggered by a great many visual stimuli and vary considerably between individuals. The real question is whether some of the variability is accountable to instrument parameters other than the ones I mentioned earlier. Lots of people draw incorrect conclusions from scant evidence, which is OK by me. I gave up on religious evangelism when I reached middle age. At that point I figured out that arrogance was a far better approach. LOL
With all due respect to the author, that short article was way, way, way too short, and not quite ... accurate. But I do think your gut feelings are relevant as much of our understanding points to the enormous capacity of the brain, which is not fully understood by any means.
Thanks again,
Ed