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: leicar at q.com (Aram Langhans)
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 10:46:24 -0800
References: <mailman.995.1265131244.73134.lug@leica-users.org>

> 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.

Aram 



Replies: Reply from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] False start explained well)