Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/02/02

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] False start explained well
From: steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour)
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 10:46:54 -0800
References: <mailman.995.1265131244.73134.lug@leica-users.org> <SNT121-DS25CAC2FB24212177615F67D4570@phx.gbl>

On Feb 2, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Aram Langhans wrote:

>> From: "wildlightphoto at earthlink.net" <wildlightphoto at earthlink.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] False start explained well
>> To: lug at leica-users.org
>> Message-ID: <380-2201022216297453 at M2W121.mail2web.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>> 
>> 
>> The problem I have with the 0.10 second assumption is that it assumes a
>> cognitive reaction to aural stimulus.  Has a reflex arc been ruled out?
>> 
>> Doug Herr
>> Birdman of Sacramento
>> http://www.wildlightphoto.com
>> 
>> 
> 
> Doug.  I have never heard of that suspicion.  As for the reflex arc, I'll 
> ask: from where to where?  From my understanding of the reflex arc, the 
> stimulus must occur somewhere along the same nerve pathway as the 
> response, like the knee to the spinal cord and back to the muscles that 
> move the knee. Or the fingertips to the spinal cord and back to the finger 
> muscles in the case of the way I would try to measure reaction time.  From 
> eye or ear to muscles in legs or arms as far as I know is not a reflex.  
> And this really shows up in my experiment I would have the kids do for 
> measuring reaction time.

can one through vigorous training, create a reflex arc of this sort, if one 
is not there initially...?

Steve


> 
> Aram 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from leicar at q.com (Aram Langhans) ([Leica] False start explained well)