Visual Perception of 3D Space and Shape in Time - Part II: 3D Space Perception with Holographic Depth
Isabella BustanobyiD, Andrew J. KrupieniD, Umaima AfifaiD, Benjamin AsdelliD, Michaela BacaniiD, James Boudreau, Javier CarmonaiD, Pranav ChandrashekariD, Mark C. DiamondiD, Diego EspinoiD, Arnav GangaliD, Chandan KitturiD, Yaochi LiiD, Tanvir Mann, Christian MatamorosiD, Trevor McCarthyiD, Elizabeth MillsiD, Stephen NazarethiD, Justin NguyeniD, Kenya OchoaiD, Sophie L. RobbinsiD, Despoina SparakisiD, Brian TaiD, Kian TrengoveiD, Tyler XuiD, , K. ArisakaiD
Abstract
Visual perception plays a critical role in navigating 3D space and extracting semantic information crucial to survival. Even though visual stimulation on the retina is fundamentally 2D, we seem to perceive the world around us in vivid 3D effortlessly. This reconstructed 3D space is allocentric and faithfully represents the external 3D world. How can we recreate stable 3D visual space so promptly and reliably? To solve this mystery, we have developed new concepts MePMoS (Memory-Prediction-Motion-Sensing) and NHT (Neural Holography Tomography). These models state that visual signal processing must be primarily top-down, starting from memory and prediction. Our brains predict and construct the expected 3D space holographically using traveling alpha brainwaves. Thus, 3D space is represented by the three time signals in three directions. To test this hypothesis, we designed reaction time (RT) experiments to observe predicted space-to-time conversion, especially as a function of distance. We placed LED strips on a horizontal plane to cover distances from close up to 2.5 m or 5 m, either using a 1D or a 2D lattice. Participants were instructed to promptly report observed LED patterns at various distances. As expected, stimulation at the fixation cue location always gave the fastest RT. Additional RT delays were proportional to the distance from the cue. Furthermore, both covert attention (without eye movements) and overt attention (with eye movements) created the same RT delays, and both binocular and monocular views resulted in the same RTs. These findings strongly support our predictions, in which the observed RT-depth dependence is indicative of the spatiotemporal conversion required for constructing allocentric 3D space. After all, we perceive and measure 3D space by time as Einstein postulated a century ago.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 3
- Assay
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Visual Perception of 3D Space and Shape in Time - Part I: 2D Space Perception by 2D Linear Translation
Umaima Afifa, Javier Carmona, … K. Arisaka·bioRxiv·Mar 1, 2022
- Visual Perception of 3D Space and Shape In Time - Part IV: 3D Shape Recognition by 3D Rotation
Caominh Le, Samantha Pedersen, … K. Arisaka·bioRxiv·Mar 1, 2022
- Visual Perception of 3D Space and Shape in Time - Part III: 2D Shape Recognition by Log-Scaling
Brian Ta, Maria E. M. M. Silva, … K. Arisaka·bioRxiv·Mar 1, 2022
- Unfolding spatiotemporal representations of 3D visual perception in the human brain
Zitong Lu, Julie D. Golomb·bioRxiv·Aug 3, 2025
- Can We Really See the World in Three Dimensions? An Exploratory Study with Finger Alignment Task and Ponzo Illusion
Amrita Mukherjee, Avijit Paul, Kuntal Ghosh·bioRxiv·Oct 19, 2026
- Three-dimensional motion perception: comparing speed and speed change discrimination for looming stimuli
Abigail R. I. Lee, Justin M. Ales, Julie M. Harris·VisionPeer-reviewed·Jul 6, 2020