+- Eyesight Improvement Forum (https://www.iblindness.org/forum)
+-- Forum: General Discussion (https://www.iblindness.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: David's Old Blog Posts (https://www.iblindness.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=16)
+--- Thread: Shifting in a Triangle (/showthread.php?tid=1981)
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - sean - 12-07-2011
All right, just realized Nancy got one of the elements already in her post above. Well done, Nancy!
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - Nini - 12-08-2011
David Wrote:You have to examine what's there instead of trying to fix the multiple images by doing anything special with your eyes.Could you please explain a bit more, how to examine what's there?
I find it even more difficult to look at multiple images without getting irritated than to look at simple blur; it's almost impssible to find a small point to look at if you don't even know, which points are the 'real' ones.
And it is frustrating to observe that the improving eyesight is - at the same time - troubled by increasing multiple images. This give a feeling of helplessness and makes it hard not to try to fix the multiple images.
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - sean - 12-08-2011
Further to my post of yesterday the text referred to is:
"But the E doesn't need to be clear. This is not about seeing either of the two spot on the E separately. This is about acknowledging thte movement of your attention between opposite sides of the letter. If you can merely distinguish that the E has a top and a bottom, you can move your attention between them. Don't expect the image to change as you do so. this is about learning to pay attention to a different point in turn despite the fact that the two points are close enough together that you can see them both at the same time."
The idea I mentioned is that if you find you can't see another point nearby then you can look at another one further away that will be clearer (and then return to the finer detail) so there is always a solution. So there's no fear there about what you have to do if things go wrong.
For some reason these two elements clicked with me. But I should now adjust this by adding that that the triangular (or similar) movement as described by David is also essential. (And there are probably other things in the post that are a great help, eg if you can't find a point just keep moving, the lack of specification of how small the point should be etc.)
I did 3 sessions today and the results were not as good as yesterday (which is a worry) but still good and I am convinced that this is the dynamic I have been looking for. Actually the chart sessions are easier now as there is a more definite plan of action to follow. I was hitting a brick wall there for a while and was starting to elaborate a theory of the blur being tied in with verbalization (oh dear). So it has saved me from that at least.
So this is the dynamic I think. And it follows logically that if you are thinking only about acknowledging that there are two points there (although you can see them at the same time) then you can't be trying to see the detail, chasing clarity. That would be another dynamic wouldn't it and you can't have TWO dynamics as it couldn't be that complicated. Easier said than done of course, but that's another day's work.
And (I must check this out if I can) if I still continue to see blur (after a short elapse of time) then it is probably down to the fact that I am still (in some subtle but neverthelss dectable?) way looking for clarity and straying from the instructions.
I see this as like riding a bike. Clear flashes up to now have been like getting on a moving bike but not moving the pedals. Once the bike slows down and the movement goes, you fall off.
Just a couple of other points that occur to me.
1 The hang-ups people have about following the instructions exactly (I know it myself only too well) is likely to be your progamming's way of messing it up. (IMHO and from my humble personal experience). While the progamming is very persistent it is also rather stupid so once you twig this it should be fairly straightforward to deal with (I hope).
2 Nancy mentioned in an earlier post that it's a mistake to try to read the chart from too far away etc. I have the same compulsion to do this. So I am going to stop that. In this chart work you need something firm to work on, something solid under your feet as it were (as David mentions). It's like giving the bike a push to get started when you are learning to ride - why make it even harder than it already is? I'm just wondering about an earlier post of David's where he said that you can place a point even in blur. I wonder how that works as to my mind the bigger shifts include the idea of seeing the bigger picture of what you are supposed to be looking at so you are looking at something 'real' not imaginary.
While I am a bit concerned that this will 'ice over' like other past successes David has promised that he will demolish every wrong idea that there is about vision, so there's nowhere to hide folks and we'll get there one way or another!
Perhaps sticking my neck out a bit with all this, I think. Has to be done!
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - Marlene - 12-09-2011
Hmm...unlike Nini, I see only multiples in 2s...usually one above the other if it's a 'horizontal image', or one to the left/right of the other if it is a 'vertical image'. One image is usually much clearer and darker compared to the other.
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - David - 12-09-2011
Nini Wrote:David Wrote:You have to examine what's there instead of trying to fix the multiple images by doing anything special with your eyes.Could you please explain a bit more, how to examine what's there?
I find it even more difficult to look at multiple images without getting irritated than to look at simple blur; it's almost impssible to find a small point to look at if you don't even know, which points are the 'real' ones.
And it is frustrating to observe that the improving eyesight is - at the same time - troubled by increasing multiple images. This give a feeling of helplessness and makes it hard not to try to fix the multiple images.
Every point is the "real" one. There doesn't need to be any distinction about which part is the better double image to look at, because it's what you see. It's being honest with yourself about what you see, instead of trying to suppress or combine or fix what you think isn't supposed to be there, as if wishing or screwing with your eyes is going to repair the image out there, when the problem causing blurry vision is you squeezing your eyes and trying to hold onto an image in the first place.
The best feedback someone can experience is when they have a flash of clear vision for a few seconds and they realize that they didn't do any forcing to cause it to happen. Their eyes did it all by themselves, and they can always do it all by themselves if you stop interfering and only look at things in the way that good vision operates. You have absolutely no direct control over whether an image is blurry or not.
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - David - 12-09-2011
sean, looking for clarity is a good thing, although maybe it depends on what you mean by that. Noticing whatever detail nearby is the most apparent, or the most solid, and looking at it, is the natural thing to do. It's a process of struggling to see, but when people fail they stop moving their eyes. So if you can't find the next apparent point very close by, you have to look farther away to something you can see, and then try again. And every time you find a point or not, you move to another point, so you never try to "hold" a point, and it's more like you're trying to release the hot potato as soon as you touch it. Every time you look at a new point, it stimulates the visual system, and when you go fast enough, which can only happen when you go softly too, the visual system gets sufficiently stimulated to actually work correctly.
The smallest, quickest movements around a small area are too quick to really keep track of, or too quick to be thinking "Ok I looked at this point, now which one will I look at?". It's more a process of just making sure the eyes don't lock into position. With each tiny shift the image the retina receives is completely different, because it's centered on a different spot. It only appears continuous because the mind is engineered to make it appear so. So behind the scenes, the constant movement actually makes a critical difference, and at some point you'll notice that constantly unlocking your gaze when you look at a small point helps vision become clearer every time if you do it right.
This is at least one reason why the long swing can have some effect. Constantly new visual data passing over the retina. On a small scale you can't be moving your head or body several times a second, so your eyes have to do it, but I don't know how much it actually matters that your eyes are the ones doing it. The reason bouncing your eyes around on a large scale doesn't work is, I think, because you have to tense your eyes up to keep moving them like that, because it isn't natural, and so it sabotages the process.
And finally, the last thing I want to say before I hit the hay is you have to at least mentally note the different sides or parts of a letter even if you don't see any part better than the others while doing so, because it's all you can do. It's prepping yourself and encouraging yourself that it's okay to look at a small point and let go of the rest (and then of course, immediately let go of the small point as well). Eventually you actually do see the part you're looking at better.
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - kalina - 12-09-2011
Hi, Dave,
I'll try to explain you in a few words how I understood your post "Shifting in a triangle" and how I tried to apply it in practice (for myself).
I saw it in the forum and read it (the original one from Dec 03 2011) a few days ago. Yesterday I had a stressful situation and felt that my vision decreased.In a single moment everything was blurry.
Then, quickly, your post came in my mind.But I had maybe understood it too literally and I became to shift in imaginary triangles........different sizes, I separated everything in front of my eyes in triangles. Just three points, between which I shifted, nothing else. Firstly, with my eyes opened, after that - closed. All this lasted about 2-3 minutes, after which my vision cleared for a while.
Today I read your original post (2011-12-03) once again.Everything was clear, I even read it from bigger distance of the computer screen than usually(without glasses or contacts, I wear contact lenses only when I drive) .
That's it.I think that understood the main idea of this post- achieving normal vision is a step -by-step process, which we don't need to understand it, it just works.But it's individual for everyone.
Thanks a lot again.
Kalina
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - Nini - 12-10-2011
Hi David
The more I try the 'triangle method', the more I find it helpful.
You wrote that one should not expect letters to clear up when you look at them this way, but they really do and I can move further down.
With the smaller letters (and smaller shifts) it is easier not to blink at every shift and the 'normal' rhythm of blinking comes naturally.
But it is not so easy to keep the concentration focussed on these small points for a long time - then I have to interrupt the practice and look elsewhere; I think my eyes need some time (and practice) to get used to this.
This practice also starts to affect my sight in other situations; when I look at a small point, my eyes start to search 2 other points to make a triangle...
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - hammer - 12-10-2011
Hello,
I lately have actually also thought about moving the eyes in a certain pattern.
I had an idea about to practice rapid shifting from point to point of a star instead, like in the picture below in for instance the order of points from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 to 5 to 1, or from 1 to 5 to 4 to 3 to 2 to 1:
...........2
.
.4...................5
.
.
.1...................3
I though never thought about practicing this on the eye chart, even if it is certainly a great help if you are a beginner.
However, when you shift the eyes really quickly from point to point one understand that
you cannot do this if you think too much or if you strain too much.
So this is exactly what many people here on this forum identifies myopia with, isn't it.
The exercise I think is good since you learn how effortless seeing feels like,
because it is impossible to move (shift) the eyes rapidly if you strain the eyes.
The only way to be able to do it is to relax the eyes before you do it, and tune in a mode of saccades.
In other words it is not the relaxation in it self that makes you see naturally, BUT the seeing process must be preceeded by relaxation.
It is the same with the memory, it is not the relaxation that makes you remember, but you remember better if preceeded by relaxation.
When you apply the same effortless shifting on other things you become very aware of that the strain in your eyes prevents the eyes to move effortlessly.
When you apply the same effortless shifting to imagination when for instance you imagine things when you palm, then the effortless feeling becomes very apparent.
I have many times thought that it is amazing how fast I can write on my computer, and it is impossible to think when you write it,
you know what I mean, it just is some predefined pattern that is memorized. Then you can still with the thought enable this predefined pattern, even if the thought have no chance to track the details of the pattern, because the details are already enfolded in the pattern, the details are part of the whole. And in some way you access a part of the whole in order to enable the saccades that is necessary to quickly see (scan) an area.
This looks promising now, feels really effortless now,
.
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - blwegrzyn - 12-12-2011
David,
You could not say it better then: "it's more like you're trying to release the hot potato as soon as you touch it." As far as I understand it correctly the points within the triangle must be very close to each other. If too far away they the whole exercise is pointless. Also, you look at the point less then half a second? And while you go through the triangle you never attempt to fix anything, just look and wait for magic to happen. And do you move only the eyes or the gaze too?
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - Sypheren - 12-12-2011
A858DE45F56D9BC9201210121742
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - Nini - 12-14-2011
blwegrzyn Wrote:And while you go through the triangle you never attempt to fix anything, just look and wait for magic to happen.It is not magic, but when I do this exercise, letters clear up (as I wrote above).
But the more I can move down in the rows, it becomes more and more difficult to keep the concentration on the triangle, my eyes always tend to widen the focus to more letters at once.
Now, I think I understand better, what David meant by 'myopic attention disorder'; this exercise will help to train keeping your concentration on small areas without automatically evading into a larger area when it starts to become difficult.
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - David - 12-14-2011
blwegrzyn Wrote:David,
You could not say it better then: "it's more like you're trying to release the hot potato as soon as you touch it." As far as I understand it correctly the points within the triangle must be very close to each other. If too far away they the whole exercise is pointless. Also, you look at the point less then half a second? And while you go through the triangle you never attempt to fix anything, just look and wait for magic to happen. And do you move only the eyes or the gaze too?
The quicker the better. Vision starts to fail as soon as you look at a point. The visual system gets all the info in the first instant when you move your eyes.
I'm not sure how you would move your eyes without your gaze. Do you mean try to see what you aren't looking at?
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - blwegrzyn - 12-14-2011
David Wrote:The quicker the better. Vision starts to fail as soon as you look at a point. The visual system gets all the info in the first instant when you move your eyes.
I'm not sure how you would move your eyes without your gaze. Do you mean try to see what you aren't looking at?
sorry , I meant the head
assuming the letters are very close to each other there is no need to move the head but only the eyes?
Re: Shifting in a Triangle - David - 12-14-2011
blwegrzyn Wrote:David Wrote:The quicker the better. Vision starts to fail as soon as you look at a point. The visual system gets all the info in the first instant when you move your eyes.
I'm not sure how you would move your eyes without your gaze. Do you mean try to see what you aren't looking at?
sorry , I meant the head
assuming the letters are very close to each other there is no need to move the head but only the eyes?
I think you'll find that you can't move your head as fast as your eyes. Also consider whether a person with normal vision moves their head each time.