Video of the Blindfolded WR

[pjk]

Matyas, do you believe a photographic memory exists?

 

[Lofty]

wow this has definitely inspired me to want to learn how to BLD solve.
Ok so what about savants, people like Kim Peek? Is his memory not as good as I have heard in the documenteries about him? I think a photographic memory does exist. Some people are just born smarter than others...that should not insult either those born with it nor those who got there from practice, both are incredible.

 

[aznblur]

Something awesome my friend said 2 years ago.

"Everyone has photographic memory, its just that some people actually have film"

 

[Stefan]

I guess that's true [that it's possible to memorize 50 words in 10 seconds]

I take that back. When I said that, I somehow had reading books (or this forum) in mind. But here's what 50 words might look like if you don't impose the artificial restriction of meaningfulness:

however for toys grace hold opening pinion processing gnash thickened avail illustrations accommodation collided vision torturing unalteredly intersystem spurs specfies ask inquire That goggle restaurants skulk That municipality sport heat bursting dimensioning the turn throw mushroom aids distributed copies bitter nonentities wades rape festers can astronaut desponded discrimination ankle describing

I don't think anybody can memorize that in 10 seconds.

 

[pjk]

The WR for 1 second is 19 digits. 5 words a second seems possible, and for sure if you have a PM .

 

[Johannes91]

5 words a second seems possible

5 words in 1 second is not the same as 50 words in 10 seconds.

 

[tim]

Memorizing digits is "easy" compared to memorizing words. You have a couple of images for each number from (usally) 1 to 99. But you can't have images for each word .

 

[ExoCorsair]

Cohesion is necessary for quick/easy memorization... Like chess (as Arnaud already pulled the quote out).

 

[pjk]

5 words in 1 second is not the same as 50 words in 10 seconds.

Johannes, you never replied to my last reply to your post. Please explain when you post, as I am unsure what you needed help understanding, and what you mean here.

Of course it isn't the same, but it is a similar rate to keep the same amount of memo over that period. That is obvious. What was your point?

Memorizing digits is "easy" compared to memorizing words.

Definitely an opinion there.

You have a couple of images for each number from (usally) 1 to 99. But you can't have images for each word

Who says you have to use images?

 

[cmhardw]

I've been following this thread and wanted to post that I also don't beleive that anyone with a photographic memory exists. The definition of photographic memory that I have heard as the ability to remember every stimulus and sensory input you receive and have ever received. I think there are people like Kim Peek and Daniel Tammet with an extraordinary ability to remember more than most people, but I don't think they remember everything.

I do think different people have different natural abilities, especially when it comes to memory and just general intelligence. I like to think it's possible for someone even of average ability to train/learn enough to equal or at least come close to those with natural ability.

I think there is a barrier though. I mean look at the 100 meter dash as just one example, and yes I know this was already brought up but I like to use it too. There are people who simply have the right physique/body style and the training and the drive to succeed which is a powerful combination. I think at some point you can't catch up to someone who has natural ability and training in combination. That is just my opinion, but based on the olympics and other sports where people of different heights/physiques can excel in ways that others can't it seems at least possible that some people's brains are just able to think/learn much better than others. Give someone like that a drive to succeed too and I think there is a point where someone without that natural ability just can't catch up, even with the same or greater amount of training.

Chris

 

[pjk]

Hey Chris, I was curious about what you thought on this, glad you posted.

The definition of photographic memory that I have heard as the ability to remember every stimulus and sensory input you receive and have ever received.

Well, if that is the case, I would say it doesn't exist either. That definition is certainly not my understanding of a PM.

I think there are people like Kim Peek and Daniel Tammet with an extraordinary ability to remember more than most people, but I don't think they remember everything.

Well, of course. I'd have to agree. But if they naturally can remember an enormous amount info/images/data (with little or no practice), then I believe they have a PM, from my understanding of a PM. A PM in my mind is someone who can naturally see, remember and recall large amounts of data with little or no practice. I'd have to define the word "large", but I am basically talking about data close or beyond what many the best memory champions can do (in that sense, it doesn't have to be digits and whatnot).

I do think different people have different natural abilities, especially when it comes to memory and just general intelligence. I like to think it's possible for someone even of average ability to train/learn enough to equal or at least come close to those with natural ability.

I totally agree.

Overall on this matter, I think our views are really based off what a PM memory is. Just as an example, I totally agree with Chris based off what he said. There are 2 discrepancies though::
1) his understanding of a PM vs. my understanding of a PM
2) he believes a PM does not exist while I believe it does exist

 

[Johannes91]

Johannes, you never replied to my last reply to your post. Please explain when you post, as I am unsure what you needed help understanding

Because I was in a big blitz tournament last weekend and didn't have time to reply (I won 21 games in a row, btw).

I don't understand they way you think in some of your posts. Just an example, Stefan said:

Suggesting that someone has photographic memory is an insult. Because it suggests that the person got his/her skill for free instead of having earned it by working for it.

This is plain obvious to me and, of course, I agree. But you didn't get it, compared it to calling someone a genius, etc.. I didn't understand your point at all. If you only spend 3 minutes to write these posts, then I understand that you don't really think about what you (and others) are saying.

and what you mean here. Of course it isn't the same, but it is a similar rate to keep the same amount of memo over that period.

But that period is 10 times longer, and that was my point. I can memorize 13-14 digits in 1 second, but I can't memorize 16 in 2 seconds or 20 in 3 seconds.

 

[Stefan]

Of course it isn't the same, but it is a similar rate to keep the same amount of memo over that period.

Can Asafa Powell and Justin Gatlin run a marathon in 69 minutes?

I can memorize 13-14 digits in 1 second, but I can't memorize 16 in 2 seconds or 20 in 3 seconds.

Dude, check your math. With 13 digits in 1 second you're not supposed to memorize 16 in 2, or 20 in 3. You're supposed to memorize 26 in 2 and 39 in 3.

 

[hait2]

all of these memorization records etc.. how does this work exactly? I'm particularly interested in that 19digits in 1 sec record. what is the time between memorization and recall? unless it's a significant amount (a few days, maybe a week), then i don't see how you can claim you have memorized it, if you're only forced to recall it maybe a mere 10 minutes later

edit: also the recall, how is this done? if it's just a mere reciting of the numbers, that's far less impressive than answering "what is the 12th number?" "what is the 4th number?" etc in no particular order.

anyone shed light on this?

 

[pjk]

Because I was in a big blitz tournament last weekend and didn't have time to reply (I won 21 games in a row, btw).

Ah, okay, no problem. Just was curious since you had replied to this post again prior to replying to my reply. Congrats on the 21 btw.

-Suggesting that someone has photographic memory is an insult. Because it suggests that the person got his/her skill for free instead of having earned it by working for it.

This is plain obvious to me and, of course, I agree. But you didn't get it, compared it to calling someone a genius, etc.. I didn't understand your point at all.

Saying something is an insult is really based off who you are saying it to, how it was expressed, etc. You can't say it is an insult, because to some people it isn't. If you are referring to yourself as taking it as an insult, that is understandable.

If you only spend 3 minutes to write these posts, then I understand that you don't really think about what you (and others) are saying.

Notice I said it takes me 3 minutes to write. Eventhough this is unrelated, I do indeed read all the posts and if you need more help understanding, just ask. I don't think Stefan had a hard time, but either way, he didn't ask for help (assuming he understood).

But that period is 10 times longer, and that was my point. I can memorize 13-14 digits in 1 second, but I can't memorize 16 in 2 seconds or 20 in 3 seconds.

I see what you're saying. I should have rephrased my statement there, as it was incorrect.

Can Asafa Powell and Justin Gatlin run a marathon in 69 minutes?

Not sure who either of them are, but you are comparing a muscle attribute to a mind. As I described before, I don't think those are comparable for this matter. Physically running is totally different from memory (mind).

 

[Stefan]

Not sure who either of them are

Only the world record holders for running 100 meters.

I don't think those are comparable for this matter. Physically running is totally different from memory (mind).

Try to abstract and see the underlying general scalabilty issue.

Two forum suggestions:
- Please don't omit the message authors/numbers when you quote. I do want to see who wrote the quote and I do want the possibility to jump to the original message. At least as long as this is necessary because of:
- Please turn nested quoting on (or can I do this myself somehow?). I know perfectly well what to quote and what not to quote, but the system treats me like a baby and doesn't let me.

 

[ExoCorsair]

Please turn nested quoting on (or can I do this myself somehow?). I know perfectly well what to quote and what not to quote, but the system treats me like a baby and doesn't let me.

quote in a quote.

quote in a quote in a quote.

etc.

I believe it does work. But you have type it in manually.

 

[pjk]

Okay Stefan, I will put the name in from now on for you.

Try to abstract and see the underlying general scalabilty issue.

I know what you are getting at, but it doesn't work. As I have mentioned before, you don't necessarily have to exercise your mind to make it powerful. Some people naturally have a very "strong" brain. Muscles have to be worked to become "strong". That is the reason why you can't compare, but PM is a natural thing, in my mind.

 

[Mátyás Kuti(shaipo)]

Will stop now.

You didn't stop.

 

[Karthik]

Matyas: Not only your memo,but your execution is also superfast.Can you please list the algs you use.I know the list must be pretty exhaustive, but still can you list atleast a few "good" ones.