I've been approved a prime candidate for eye surgery to correct my vision.
Went to London for my eye checkup. I predicted full eligibility for the procedure.
*************
In the opinion of the optometrist, I am a prime candidate for eye surgery. I have plenty of thickness in my cornea for the laser to vaporise away to the desired curvature, and I have little aberration in my right eye and zero aberration in my left eye - which surprised one of the nurses who tested me. Aberrations are tiny imperfections in the structure of the frontal cornea. Apparently not common to be free of them.
Aberrations are one cause for halos or that 'starry' effect around bright lights at night, and other artifacts from light sources during the day. They can cause problems during healing, and other subtle effects that diminish the potential maximum quality level of vision.
Was surprised to discover that I had a very slight astigmatism in both eyes, but I learned that this is in fact nothing to be worried or surprised about. I asked the nurse and she said no patient she has tested has had absolutely space-telescope perfect spherical eyeballs.
Another thing I learned. My pupils are smaller than average i.e. in the same light levels as everyone else, on average, my pupils are smaller. Which is apparently a good thing and an indicator of performance in low light levels. That is to say, I need less light allowed into the eyeball than the average person for visual function. For anyone with rudimentary knowledge of optics and camera work, the principle of the pinhole camera applies. The smaller the hole, the sharper the image.
Post-operation, there is sometimes a degradation of night-vision. With the above, this is likely to be minimal.
*********
Oh and the optometrist? She was a lass from birmingham. OMIGAWD she was cute!!! She had this wonderful face and she was short (double yay!).
*********
I just realised this morning that my full date of birth May 3rd 1977, covers all the odd numbers between 0 and 10.
1, 3, 5, 7, and 9. Wonder if it means anything......? (5 as in the 5th month)
Also, I saw both a 17 and a 23 as test numbers for one of my lecturer's example functions in a lecture.
17 = 8 x 2 + 1
and
23 = 8 x 3 - 1
which are very useful when testing the stability of code that handles Octal numbers. That is numbers with a base 8 system where the digits go from 0 to 7.
Example:
23 in Binary, a base 2 system = 10111
(1x2^4)+(0x2^3)+(1x2^2)+(1x2^1)+(1x2^0)
=
(1x16)+(0x8)+(1x4)+(1x2)+(1x1)
=
16+4+2+1 = 23.
----
23 in Hexadecimal, a base 16 system.
0 to 9, A to F (which represent 10 to 15).
= 17 (!!!!Synchronicity!!!)
= (1x16^1)+(7x16^0)
= (1x16)+(7x1)
= 16 + 7 = 23
-------
Therefore, in Octal, base 8, 23 = 27
= (2x8^1)+(7x8^0)
= (2x8) + (7x1) = 16 + 7 = 23
while 17 = 21 =
(2x16^1)+(1x16^0) = 16 + 1 = 17
In Octal terms, '7' represents the upper limit of each octal place in a multi-digit expression. i.e. just like a decimal place for the '1s', '10s', '100s' etc. And it's important to see that a function that manipulates octals will transition correctly to the next higher octal place when necessary OR go back to zero.
In Octal, 24 = 30
= (3x8)+(0x1).
Hope that was more fascinating rather than boring....I certainly find it really fascinating. All these intricate numerical relationships out of a system of counting humans generally credit themselves with "inventing". Like any human being "invented" Prime numbers, or the fibonacci sequence, or the fact that ANY multiple of 9 can be added to it's own elements to get it back to one digit and it will ALWAYS reduce back to 9.
Example: 9x2 = 18; 8+1 = 9
9x56 = 504; 5+0+4 = 9
9x16 = 144; 1+4+4 = 9
9x720 = 6480; 6+4+8+0 = 18; 1+8 = 9
I mean think about. REALLY think about it. Counting started with counting how many deer got killed for the village, or how many bushels of wheat were harvested....and the numbers already had their magickal qualities.
Went to London for my eye checkup. I predicted full eligibility for the procedure.
*************
In the opinion of the optometrist, I am a prime candidate for eye surgery. I have plenty of thickness in my cornea for the laser to vaporise away to the desired curvature, and I have little aberration in my right eye and zero aberration in my left eye - which surprised one of the nurses who tested me. Aberrations are tiny imperfections in the structure of the frontal cornea. Apparently not common to be free of them.
Aberrations are one cause for halos or that 'starry' effect around bright lights at night, and other artifacts from light sources during the day. They can cause problems during healing, and other subtle effects that diminish the potential maximum quality level of vision.
Was surprised to discover that I had a very slight astigmatism in both eyes, but I learned that this is in fact nothing to be worried or surprised about. I asked the nurse and she said no patient she has tested has had absolutely space-telescope perfect spherical eyeballs.
Another thing I learned. My pupils are smaller than average i.e. in the same light levels as everyone else, on average, my pupils are smaller. Which is apparently a good thing and an indicator of performance in low light levels. That is to say, I need less light allowed into the eyeball than the average person for visual function. For anyone with rudimentary knowledge of optics and camera work, the principle of the pinhole camera applies. The smaller the hole, the sharper the image.
Post-operation, there is sometimes a degradation of night-vision. With the above, this is likely to be minimal.
*********
Oh and the optometrist? She was a lass from birmingham. OMIGAWD she was cute!!! She had this wonderful face and she was short (double yay!).
*********
I just realised this morning that my full date of birth May 3rd 1977, covers all the odd numbers between 0 and 10.
1, 3, 5, 7, and 9. Wonder if it means anything......? (5 as in the 5th month)
Also, I saw both a 17 and a 23 as test numbers for one of my lecturer's example functions in a lecture.
17 = 8 x 2 + 1
and
23 = 8 x 3 - 1
which are very useful when testing the stability of code that handles Octal numbers. That is numbers with a base 8 system where the digits go from 0 to 7.
Example:
23 in Binary, a base 2 system = 10111
(1x2^4)+(0x2^3)+(1x2^2)+(1x2^1)+(1x2^0)
=
(1x16)+(0x8)+(1x4)+(1x2)+(1x1)
=
16+4+2+1 = 23.
----
23 in Hexadecimal, a base 16 system.
0 to 9, A to F (which represent 10 to 15).
= 17 (!!!!Synchronicity!!!)
= (1x16^1)+(7x16^0)
= (1x16)+(7x1)
= 16 + 7 = 23
-------
Therefore, in Octal, base 8, 23 = 27
= (2x8^1)+(7x8^0)
= (2x8) + (7x1) = 16 + 7 = 23
while 17 = 21 =
(2x16^1)+(1x16^0) = 16 + 1 = 17
In Octal terms, '7' represents the upper limit of each octal place in a multi-digit expression. i.e. just like a decimal place for the '1s', '10s', '100s' etc. And it's important to see that a function that manipulates octals will transition correctly to the next higher octal place when necessary OR go back to zero.
In Octal, 24 = 30
= (3x8)+(0x1).
Hope that was more fascinating rather than boring....I certainly find it really fascinating. All these intricate numerical relationships out of a system of counting humans generally credit themselves with "inventing". Like any human being "invented" Prime numbers, or the fibonacci sequence, or the fact that ANY multiple of 9 can be added to it's own elements to get it back to one digit and it will ALWAYS reduce back to 9.
Example: 9x2 = 18; 8+1 = 9
9x56 = 504; 5+0+4 = 9
9x16 = 144; 1+4+4 = 9
9x720 = 6480; 6+4+8+0 = 18; 1+8 = 9
I mean think about. REALLY think about it. Counting started with counting how many deer got killed for the village, or how many bushels of wheat were harvested....and the numbers already had their magickal qualities.
VIEW 10 of 10 COMMENTS
You are studying some really interesting stuff. I had to work on some basic A.I. stuff in college. I don't know about you but I think all that A.I. stuff could eventually lead to our demise.
i downloaded some hemisync mp3s a while back. haven't had much chance to play with them, though. what do you think so far?