Forums IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ PhotoReading, Memory Optimizer just wondering

i am just wondering
1)who is the firstone did photoreading ?
2) how can someone have photographic memory ( suppose he has the ability to since i read in this forum that someone did )
3)before maybe 5 or 6 years a girl from russia read very very fast a book .I heard that she was the fastest reader in the world and i dont remeber the name but does anyone know about her cauz i wanna ask did she use photoreading or something else

[This message has been edited by guevara (edited April 02, 2004).]

Guevara

PRWMS don touch on photographic memory but other-than-conscious mind. Photographic memory is memory that store images and cannot process the images but the other-than-conscious mind can process the images (comprehend the images).

Olzenkhaw

Alex do u have anything to say ? ? ?
olzenkhaw do u believe that u could have photographic memory ?
for me i believe it strongly

1)Mankind was the first to photoread to the best of my knowledge. It's a skill that's been around for eons.

2) We all have photogreaphic memoriesbut fortunately out mind processes the information even faster. In a test where you have to answer 60 questions in 30 minutes you don't want to be looking at pictures to find the solution, you want answers in 20 seconds or less (10 seconds to fill in the dot) and that's cutting it close. We are born with it ans as long as we don't have a concept of words to give meaning to shapes and symbols we tend to see the picture one we have a word for circle we no longer need to see the picture for as long.

3)She obviously didn't have the skills to teach anyone else what she did.We'd know her name if she could teach it.

AlexK

Alex,

We all have photographic memories? All the salt in the world couldn't help me swallow that one.

There are people who can remember just about everything they see without the aid of trance or special techniques as easily as I can remember the spelling for the word SEE.

I do not have this ability, sorry. Otherwise, I would have made a 100% on most tests for the majority of my life. If we play with semantics we can stretch the meaning of the definition, but that amounts to answering a question that was not asked.

I thought that photoreading was not about having a photographic memory (defined as most people on the street would understand it) but improving the conscious/unconscious interface to such an extent that more information becomes available to the conscious mind more readily and appropriately and that the conscious mind can learn to get out of the way of unconscious activity so one can learn and recall more effectively...?

---------------------------------------------
olzenkhaw do u believe that u could have photographic memory ?
for me i believe it strongly
---------------------------------------------
Everyone got photographic memory. Since we born, our brain is active and our photographic memory is good when we are less than 6 yrs old as we use it a lot at this ages. After we entering primary school, because of the system of education, we seldom use our photographic memory, as a result, what we saw cannot be recalled clearly (our photographic memory become passive). There are many books talk about photographic memory. Most of these book can be found in Japan and China. These books aslo touch on the function of Right hemisphere of brain and ESP as photographic memory is located on right hemisphere of brain.

Olzenkhaw

babayada,

If you didn't have a photographic memory how do you fine your computer when you are looking for it? How do you know what's a shirt and what are your pants?

The thing is our mind works at lightning speed once we have the language to label something we no longer have to spend ages looking at the picture in our mind to know we are sitting on something called a chair. There are many different kinds of chairs but ours looks just so. We go from a memory of our experiences.

Without looking at it, what kind of sheets do you have on your bed? You know but you don't know right? The thing is you haven't exactly got a nutshell word to describe it... meaning you have to try and hold the memory longer... is knowing what colour your sheets are important? No... so you have this agreement with your mind let it go and do the stuff that is important.

It's our telling ourselves we don't have a photographic memory that hides the speed at which we have gathered our information from a memory snapshot. Details not required just give me the information so I can recognise my car in the carpark.

Alex.

Alex,

There is a difference between saying that someone has a functional visual memory and a photographic memory.

It is my belief that you can appreciate that distinction.

Tell me, can you recite for me from visual memory every word from a page from a book you had read when you were, say, ten years old? Without a trance? Some people can.

I cannot. You may believe that this incapability is a result of beliefs, self-limitation. Perhaps you are right. I would like to see the difference, physically between the brains of those who have photographic memory vs. those who have what is considered a normal visual memory. I would wager the physical differences would be found to be substantial ... but I cannot say for sure.

I know one thing, the mental activity described in The Mind of a Mnemonist is very different from my own. I do not get confused if I am eating gyro sandwich while reading Terry Pratchett, as the mnemonist would be.

I will concede that visual memory for some details is very good in the common individual. This is especially true for facial recognition, and does happen very quickly ... our brains work faster than we think (as John LaValle likes to say). But in terms of remembering the written word ... mmm ... that one is hard to believe.

Ah, the proverbial "eidetic" memory for the written word.

The interesting thing about that skill is that those people who have it often do *not* understand the message in the words so for them to be able to read it from their memory is a must. In this case reading from the visual memory is no better or faster than reading it off a page from the book.

Once you understand the meaning of the words and applied the information, the actual source or text has less value than the understanding or application you have from the information. In other words you know that 2+2=4 you no longer need the childhood images of 2 lady bugs next to 2 other lady bugs to know that you have 4. You have already processed that information from your childhood to give you faster split second answers. Why waste time calling upon an eidetic memory when our society requires us to think faster than that.

Considering the eye takes in 10,000,000 bits of information per second and you are only consciously aware of 40 bits your brain needs to do some quick elimination to get to the information you really need in a split second. A lingering picture image is unnecessary. I'll even guess that you've been with someone who seeing their car in the carpark has said something to the effect of... "crikey.. someone scratched the paintwork on my car. That wasn't there before... " If we don't have mental photographs we don't notice the difference.

Just for a laugh...
Now for the ladies wondering why the guys never notice a change in hairdo if they have photogrqaphic memories... it comes back to priority and what's too dangerous to notice or rather in their own safety not to notice. they don't know if you like the hairdo or not, they don't know whether they are supposed to like the hairdo or not. So the mind goes... hair changed, wife same, change subject... "what's for dinner?"

Yes, babayada, I do appreciate the distinction and yes I can recite word for word a couple of the books from when I was 7 to 10, and I wouldn't call that a photographic memory because the images on the pages are fuzzy, yet the words are clear in my mind as is my memory of my irritation surrounding these books.

Alex

Why is it that you have a perfect memory of these books from this early age, AlexK? I have never had any such experiences.

-CameronJ