McCollough's paper has sparked hundreds of other scientific papers. Explanations appear to fall into three camps.
McCollough indicated color adaptation of edge sensitive neurons in lower, monocular regions of the visual cortex.
A functional explanation of MEs has been posited in the form of an error-correcting device (ECD) whose purpose is to maintain an accurate internal
representation of the external world. Consistent pairings of color and oriented lines are not found frequently in natural environments, thus
consistent pairing may indicate pathology of the eye. An ECD might compensate for such pathology by adjusting the appropriate neurons to a neutral
point in adaptation to orientation contingent color.
A third explanation points to the contribution of classical conditioning to normal homeostatic regulation. MEs are explained by the same mechanisms as
pharmacological withdrawal symptoms, thus the "pharmacological CR is expressed as pharmacological adaptation (tolerance) in the presence of the drug,
and withdrawal symptoms in the absence of the drug" and the "chromatic CR is expressed as chromatic adaptation in the presence of colour, and the ME
in the absence of colour". By this account MEs are of no adaptive value, but have been selected for as a domain-general ability to anticipate
events. This is related to opponent-process theory.
It is worth noting that these theories are not targeted toward the anti-McCullough effect.
Neurophysiological explanations of the effect have variously pointed to the adaptation of cells in the lateral geniculate nucleus designed to correct
for chromatic aberration of the eye, to adaptation of cells in the visual cortex jointly responsive to color and orientation (this was McCollough's
explanation) such as monocular areas of cortical hypercolumns, to processing within higher centers of the brain (including the frontal lobes), and
to learning and memory. In 2006, the explanation of the effect was still the subject of debate, although there was a consensus in favor of
McCollough's original explanation.
MEs do not transfer interocularly and from this it seems reasonable to deduce that the effect occurs in an area of the visual system prior to
V1-4B, where binocular cells first occur.
Kinda scary and I wonder If anyone could use this effect for evil .
Anyhow just thought it may interest some .
edit on 26-9-2016 by TheKnightofDoom because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-9-2016 by TheKnightofDoom because: (no reason
It was so hard to play the video in the background. I wanted to look but then I heard him say for up to 3 months you could see color in any gratings
anywhere...... Agh no thank you. My brain and eyes are whacky enough. I think I experience enough subtle optical hallucinations on my own without
damaging myself further.
I bet it is his wallpaper at his home or If it isn't we could make it so! mahahahahahaha.
Reading about The anti-McCollough effect which can cure The Mcollough effect found a cure here for those idiotic like me to look at it for a while.
(WARNING I SAY CURE BUT CAN NOT SAY T CURES 100% OH AND DON'T WATCH IF NOT ALREADY EFFECTED IT STILL HARMS BRAIN).
It's been a good few minutes now and I can still see the lines, I've worked out a few things that has a high chance of giving migraines (for me) but
that's taking the biscuit... I imagine it could easily set off epilepsy too.
I just had to look didn't I I'll probably be back and do it again in a few days too but for now I'm gonna go sit an a dark room and have a few
words with myself.
This thread is going to effect the membership of ATS like no other Mahahahah part of my plan of doom.
btw If you do look at it for 15 mins and watch the debate tonight you will see what is truly on the stage or so my agents of Doom tell me.
Nah only messing I thought it started at 10 gmt and started on my scotch early.
But as the night progresses I bet I have a go looking at it and then watching the cure.
In the name of drunken science!.
Last night I dropped a small high intensity LED flashlight (a cheapy from china) on the concrete floor.
I wanted to see if any of the LEDs had "fritzed out" during the impact. So, I switched it on and looked at it for only a split second.
The image of the light stayed in my vision for about 3 to 5 minutes.
The image was not an exact copy,
it was a red circle with light pink dots in place of the LEDs.
So based on that episode and the OPs and videos warning I won't be experimenting with this "Effect"!
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.