Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Equation of Motion: General Plane motion01:22

Equation of Motion: General Plane motion

575
In the context of a rigid body's movement within a general plane, it is important to understand that this motion is typically triggered by external forces or couple moments exerted onto it. This principle can be explained through Newton's second law, which stipulates the translational motion of the body's center of mass along each axis.
Moreover, the body's center of mass experiences a rotational effect as a result of these couple moments. This rotation can be articulated as the...
575
Absolute Motion Analysis- General Plane Motion01:24

Absolute Motion Analysis- General Plane Motion

563
Visualize a drone, with its propellers spinning rapidly, hovering mid-air. The fascinating movements and operations of this drone can be comprehended by applying the principle of general plane motion.
As the drone's propellers rotate, an upward force is generated that counteracts the force of gravity, enabling the drone to lift off from the ground. This initial movement of the drone is along a straight path, representing a form of translational motion. In this phase, every point on the...
563
Equation of Motion: General Plane motion - Problem Solving01:16

Equation of Motion: General Plane motion - Problem Solving

505
Consider a lawn roller with a mass of 100 kg, a radius of 0.2 meters, and a radius of gyration of 0.15 meters. A force of 200 N is applied to this roller, angled at 60 degrees from the horizontal plane. What will be the angular acceleration of the lawn roller?
The friction between the roller and the ground is characterized by two coefficients. The static friction coefficient is 0.15, while the kinetic friction coefficient is 0.1. These values are crucial in understanding the interaction between...
505
Projectile Motion: Example01:18

Projectile Motion: Example

12.8K
The theory of projectile motion is very useful for players of several sports to improve their performance. For example, a javelin thrower needs to throw their javelin in such a way that it travels as far as possible. The javelin thrower takes a short run-up to increase the initial speed of the javelin. The range of a projectile is at its maximum at a 45° angle so javelin throwers try to angle their throw as close to 45° as possible.
When we speak of the range (R) of a projectile on...
12.8K
Simple Harmonic Motion and Uniform Circular Motion01:42

Simple Harmonic Motion and Uniform Circular Motion

5.6K
While simple harmonic motion and uniform circular motion may be two separate concepts, they correlate and interlink with each other. Simple harmonic motion is an oscillatory motion in a system where the net force can be described by Hooke's law, while uniform circular motion is the motion of an object in a circular path at constant speed.
There is an easy way to produce simple harmonic motion by using uniform circular motion. For instance, consider a ball attached to a uniformly rotating...
5.6K
Magnetic Field due to Moving Charges01:23

Magnetic Field due to Moving Charges

11.6K
A stationary charge creates and interacts with the electric field, while a moving charge creates a magnetic field.
Consider a point charge moving with a constant velocity. Like the electric field, the magnetic field at any point is directly proportional to the magnitude of the charge and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the source point and the field point. However, unlike the electric field, the magnetic field is always perpendicular to the plane containing the line...
11.6K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The bookend effect.

i-Perception·2026
Same author

Me and my shadow: Elongated sunset shadows disrupt size constancy.

i-Perception·2026
Same author

Ambiguous apparent motion in exchanging disks.

i-Perception·2025
Same author

Perceptual grouping and the bounce-stream illusion.

i-Perception·2025
Same author

Illusory shrinkage of objects under backward masking.

i-Perception·2024
Same author

Pink illusions and white shifts.

i-Perception·2024
Same journal

Pseudo-slimy: A novel phenomenon to evoke stickiness perception.

i-Perception·2026
Same journal

Predictive visual uncertainty around moving trajectories influences causality judgments in launching displays.

i-Perception·2026
Same journal

Light and shape in the work of Robert Fones.

i-Perception·2026
Same journal

Sensorimotor numerosity uniquely supports arithmetic development in children.

i-Perception·2026
Same journal

In praise of anaglyphs.

i-Perception·2026
Same journal

Is number a primary perceptual attribute?

i-Perception·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 31, 2026

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation
06:53

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation

Published on: March 1, 2017

13.8K

Motion Aftereffects From Moving Illusions.

Stuart Anstis1

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.

I-Perception
|January 11, 2019
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

After adapting to visual illusions, motion aftereffects matched perceived, not actual, orientations. This suggests our brains process illusory motion based on how we see it, not its physical reality.

Keywords:
aftereffectillusionmotion

More Related Videos

The Crossmodal Congruency Task as a Means to Obtain an Objective Behavioral Measure in the Rubber Hand Illusion Paradigm
06:43

The Crossmodal Congruency Task as a Means to Obtain an Objective Behavioral Measure in the Rubber Hand Illusion Paradigm

Published on: July 26, 2013

16.6K
Testing Visual Sensitivity to the Speed and Direction of Motion in Lizards
12:30

Testing Visual Sensitivity to the Speed and Direction of Motion in Lizards

Published on: December 14, 2006

12.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 31, 2026

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation
06:53

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation

Published on: March 1, 2017

13.8K
The Crossmodal Congruency Task as a Means to Obtain an Objective Behavioral Measure in the Rubber Hand Illusion Paradigm
06:43

The Crossmodal Congruency Task as a Means to Obtain an Objective Behavioral Measure in the Rubber Hand Illusion Paradigm

Published on: July 26, 2013

16.6K
Testing Visual Sensitivity to the Speed and Direction of Motion in Lizards
12:30

Testing Visual Sensitivity to the Speed and Direction of Motion in Lizards

Published on: December 14, 2006

12.0K

Area of Science:

  • Visual perception science
  • Neuroscience of motion processing
  • Computational vision

Background:

  • The café wall illusion and furrow illusion demonstrate how visual perception can deviate from physical reality.
  • These illusions involve misperceptions of orientation and motion, respectively.
  • Understanding how the brain adapts to and corrects for such perceptual distortions is crucial.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate whether motion aftereffects (MAEs) resulting from adaptation to illusory motion align with the perceived or physical orientation of the motion.
  • To determine if the brain's adaptation mechanisms are sensitive to the veridical physical properties or the subjective perceptual experience of motion.

Main Methods:

  • Participants adapted to dynamic versions of the café wall and furrow illusions, which involve illusory tilted lines and motion trajectories.
  • Motion aftereffects (MAEs) were measured after adaptation to assess the changes in perceived orientation and motion direction.
  • The physical orientations and motion directions were precisely controlled and compared with the participants' subjective perceptual reports.

Main Results:

  • MAEs following adaptation to the illusory motion of the café wall and furrow illusions corresponded to the perceived orientations, not the actual physical orientations.
  • This indicates that the neural mechanisms underlying motion adaptation are tuned to the brain's interpretation of the visual input, even when it is illusory.

Conclusions:

  • The brain's adaptation to motion is based on perceptual experience rather than physical reality.
  • This finding has implications for understanding how the visual system constructs our perception of the world and corrects for distortions.