Hi,
The analogy below may be a bit dangerous:
>
> The analogy I use is that if you were
> receiving a morse code signal, it wouldn't matter to you
> whether the sender had the signal box upside down or
> right side up - it's only the code that matters. Am I
> explaining this correctly, or is the book correct?
>
because if this was the case we would not see inverted
images with a 180º goggles. That is, if one considers the
'signal box' equivalent to a 180º goggles one would see
a correct image not an iverted one.
On the other hand if one considers the ideia of a 2 1/2
template system, as explained by Marr (1982, Vision)
all is clear. I thus suggest his explanation rather
than using the 'signal box' analogy.
Bye for now.
Jorge.
--------
Dctr. Jorge Alvoeiro http://www.ip.pt/~ip276239/jorge_alvoeiro.html
(PhD, Hull, UK)
(C.Psychol., BPS, UK)
2000-119 Santarém
Portugal
