If we increased the amount of frames the human eye can process would the world around us slow? Correct me if I’m wrong, the human eye can see about 30 fps, so if we increased the amount to 90 fps would time seem to go by 300% slower?
Spin a coin. How would that coin appear if you could see every movement of it? Would it spin slowly?
Discuss.
depends entirely on your brain 
Expand on this a bit.
No, as long as the processing power of the brain increased to handle this extra data, you probably wouldn’t notice anything apart from cars being a little less blurred when moving past your fast. It’s the processing time within the brain that’s important, our eye/brain link already filters out a lot of useless junk (e.g. think about when you concentrate on something in your peripheral vision and identify it, it was already there you just hadn;'t done anything with the information).
Increasing the flow of information wouldn’t mean an increase in the perception of that flow, so the speed at which you view the world would remain the same.
What I meant was to keep our current brain processing power and to just increase our fps.
I’m not sure that you could increase fps without increasing brain power.
Our so called frame rate (which isn’t really that useful a way to look at human vision but we’ll stick with it for now) is a result of the brain being able to process the images coming into it from the eye as seperate things. We don’t actually see at a specific frame rate - its just that our central nervous system cannot process such short duration events into seperate distinct events.
If we could process shorter duration events seperately we wouldn’t live in a bonny-and-clyde-final-shootout type perception. We would simply be able to perceive, as distinct events, shorter duration things. For example, if our visual frame rate was 60 fps we would be able to see LEDs blinking on and off, like your video camera can.
Another limitation on our perception is the speed at which neurons and photoreceptors can de- and re-polarise in the eye and CNS.
remember that even though I’ve used the term frame rate in this post it is not the most useful way to think about the brain because visual perception is not the same as a camera.
cheers,
gemty
Because neurons in community fall into a local harmony; i think it does make sense to talk about fps when talking about human visual perception.
When you talk about increasing fps while leaving processing power the same, you’re really talking about increasing the processing power of the visual cortex while leaveing the rest of the brain unchanged.
I bet you could remember things more slowly; but you would perceive real time at… real time. That’s a small bet, like a case of beer or something like that; a mug or a hat… you know.
no, you see… your brain only uses whatever information it thinks is relevant at any given time
if you feed it twice as much visual information, it’ll probably just filter out half of it
Your brain (no matter what your visual “framerate” is) has a functional imperative to be able to percieve things roughly in real time.
That said, increasing “framerate” would require an increase in brain power - the cones in your eye are being bombarded with patterns of photos that change a nearly infinite number of times per second - you have enough information hitting you; your brain structure just limits how quickly you can use that information.
My thought is that, if your visual “framerate” was increased, you would percieve things in real time but with greater clarity and accuracy.