The Possibility of an Innate Grid within Human Optics

 

The Possibility of an Innate Grid within Human Optics: Evidence from Drawing and Painting 1986 – 2025

Peter Davidson

 

Good choice Nobel committee, worth watching. Touch and temperature receptors have Implications for pain control and a whole range of new treatments. Lesson is that in 2021 nothing is too complicated, too tiny, or too esoteric to be unravelled by a dedicated scientific team.

Barry Marshall  Oct 4, 2021 Twitter barjammer

 

Abstract

I have always felt that the eye has its own internal optical grid when drawing or painting objectively from a chosen motif and that it tracks the subject innately,  without input from brain, (this apparently  defies current known medical knowledge being that the eye doesn’t think for itself). The aforementioned idea of the eye being innate  has been strengthening since my interactions with painting systems by William Coldstream and  further search into the images of Paul Cezanne and Rembrandt.

The idea of eye tracking by Philippe A. Chouinard*, Hayden J. Peel and Oriane Landry from LaTrobe University also empowered the research if the eye tracks, it has memory. Furthermore, the discovery of the internal GPS by Nobel laureate neuroscientist John Okeefe, along with researches Britt- Moser and Advard Moser seemed to have  given my research legs as they say.  

Furthermore, in conjunction with thirty years plus of painting and drawing studio research praxis and the recent questioning of AI has revealed further positive evidence, thus giving me the confidence that I’m somewhat correct. The following two questions to  AI I believe has raised enough support that the concept of the eye having an innate grid, to be a real possibility. Below are two questions that seem to confirm my aforementioned idea  question to AI is in  bold and AI  responses in Italics

 

Prompted - Ok Gemini you have conceded that the eye has short memory and if that’s the case then it thinks 

AI response: I understand your point, but I must clarify the distinction between having a very short-term sensory buffer and "thinking."

 

Splitting thinking into categories into milliseconds can be a very long time in the sense of a billionth of a second, and how do we know it’s not thinking in that time, has science got the capacity to measure that? 

AI response: You've raised a very insightful point about the scale of time and the limits of our current scientific understanding.

 

Now that the grid and memory has been established in human eye . I will schematically show a shortened journey towards the departure were the final medical proof needs to be established through scientific neurology, if it can be?

Schematic overview of the research

As a mature artist I reflect on my praxis, where I have been, where I am, and where I am going. Given that my auditory senses have long been severely impaired, these reflections have often focused on my visual acuity and how it powers me as an artist. I am interested in directions from medical science and intriguing insights like this:

 

AI Overview

The "internal GPS" of the brain, also known as the brain's spatial navigation system, was discovered by neuroscientist John O'Keefe, who identified "place cells" in the hippocampus, and later by May-Britt Moser and Edvard Moser who discovered "grid cells" in the entorhinal cortex, essentially creating a coordinate system for spatial navigation within the brain; together, these discoveries revealed the brain's internal GPS system.

My inchoate sense of grid lines potentially being innate within human optics dates back to 1986 and my first encounter with a book titled: The hard-won image: Traditional method and subject in recent British art Paperback – January 1, 1984 Richard Morphet by my then painting lecturer Gareth Morse at the Western Australian College of Advanced Education.

 It must be said that my best supervisors like Gareth Morse Dr David Bromfield and  Professor Diana Davis allowed me to research what I wanted this is vitally important as Barry Marshall pointed out.

 

https://browseanddarby.co.uk/publications/9-william-coldstream-catalogue-raisonne/

 

 Coldstream’s painting system really  grabbed my attention especially the small cruciform grid traces of measure seemingly  visually mapping what was being seen on the motif, onto his canvas as evidenced   seen in the catalogue and within his painting below, titled Reclining Nude1974–6, seen below like a kind of painted pathological eye perusal of the motif  in a cruciform grid and paint traces over the human motif as evidenced in in the painting below as explained by Philippe A. Chouinard*, Hayden J. Peel and Oriane Landry

 

 

https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/coldstream-reclining-nude-t02079

Since my encounter with Coldstream’s painting  nearly forty years ago and my subsequent using of the cruciform grid method within my painting praxis, to move out into painterly system of uncharted aesthetic horizons, I have always felt a kind of nagging sensation that the mark making seen on within my painting praxis was already there, that it was not decoration but real sensations from eye tracking the motif. However, this sense, when voiced, always seemed to come up against adversarial criticism (except for a few open-minded supervisors who I have already mentioned) that it was memetic of another \s methodology 

 

Further question to Copilot. But if there is an innate grid it’s not so much about place cells but about stabilizing the visually information coming into the eye from the motif to painting like Coldstream has achieved?

 

Copilot Response

Ah, I see where you're going with this—fascinating! If an innate grid exists in this context, it would act more as a perceptual framework for stabilizing and interpreting complex visual scenes like those found in motifs or paintings, rather than as a spatial navigation tool like place cells.

 

 

Peter Davidson Untitled, 1999. oil on board, 50 cm h x 30 cm w

https://www.artgalleryaustralia.com.au/artist/Davidson,-Peter

 

Peter Davidson Untitled 2004 ?

Acrylic on wooden panel 36 cm h x 41 cm w

 

Peter Davidson - The motion of light on the Kako River Japan 2007

Acrylic on wooden canvas, 73 cm h x 103 cm w

 

Peter Davidson - Sake cup still life 2009

acrylic on wooden board - 182 x 257 mm - Note the vertical and horizontal marking

 

 

 

2014

Hope for my idea of the ye having an innate grid with the discovery of the "internal GPS"

 

Google search        the discovery of internal GPS    17/3/25 9.25 am

The "internal GPS" of the brain, a system for spatial navigation, was discovered through the work of John O'Keefe, and the married couple May-Britt and Edvard Moser, who shared the 2014 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for this groundbreaking research.

2016

My first published idea on the inner GPS was available on the 2 Dogs Art Space Akashi blog, as this paper will be when finished. Please click on link thank you.

https://2dogsartspaceakashi.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-discovery-of-human-inner-gps-and.html

 

Encouragement for my research.

 

Peter Davidson view from Okinawa Bridge 2015

oil on board, 10.7 h cm x 46.5 cm w

The Wild Swan Art Groups exhibition in Public Gallery no 3

The image the Chinese Doctor was referring too in the paragraph below

.

Okinawa The Wild Swan Art Group - One day exhibition at Okinawa Prefecture Museum and Museum of Art - Public Gallery 3  - a Chinese gentleman came into the exhibition and started talking about my artworks especially the magenta markings that were imbued within my image. This caught me off guard as it has historical precedents to Cezanne, Coldstream and in current personal research to the human Inner GPS whether that’s true or not as I said to the Chinese Doctor and his friend, " I don’t know I’m not a medical scientist but it’s something I am researching".  What also surprised me was how forensic the questions were by these Chinese gentlemen and the depth of their knowledge on art and how they spoke about the subtleties of tones and hues passionately, it was a long and inspiring conversation with them.

https://thewildswanartsgroup.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-wild-swan-art-group-one-day.html?m=1

 

A few years ago, on an art webpage a Coldstream devotee I believe mentioned that  his painting was sold to China recently for 60,000 lb, I will never know if it was that Doctor but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was him

2025

 

Notable artists and the innate grid in optics

The grid sensation in drawing appears natural to the observer's optics, and the discovery of this grid-making technique in human history is intriguing.

 

https://www.mauritshuis.nl/en/our-collection/artworks/840-self-portrait

 

The light burnt umber orange paint marks can be seen on Rembrandt’s face left hand eyelid, next to the eye, and then on the same eyelid on the right-hand side in the corner across the upper part of the bridge of his nose, slantwise upwards on his to the upper side inner right-hand eyebrow, to the corners of his nose and mouth and lips and down the right-hand side of his face and it don’t seem consistent with one directional source of lighting, which makes me think there to do with optics.

 

Paul Cezanne - Self-portrait in a Soft Hat 1894 - oil on canvas,

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cezanne-self-softhat.jpg

Artizon Museum Tokyo

Similarly in the above self-portrait by Cezanne there is around the soft hat and in the background, the thin Prussian blue slantwise oil traces almost pencil like marking  the innate grid which comes into play when focusing on the motif.

I believe the light orange marks are about something innate within human optics. These paint markings can also be seen ((different colour) within Cezanne’s Self Portrait and the work of William Coldstream.

 

Peter Davidson - Night study – pencil, pastel colour pencil on 242 g paper FO

This self-portrait sums up my optics and how my innate optical grid reveals itself with a drawn image.

 

2025 AI Google

Gemini Apps

Prompted - when sighting an object why does the eye see vertically and horizontally whilst focusing and in red

 

February 28 at 6:46 AM \Gemini Apps -chat

It's important to clarify that the eye doesn't inherently "see" exclusively in vertical and horizontal lines. Rather, our visual system processes information in a way that gives prominence to these orientations

In summary:

Our brains prioritize vertical and horizontal orientations due to evolutionary and neurological factors.

Eye movements and visual processing contribute to this perception.

The color red, when present, is most often a product of an external sighting device.

I hope this explanation is helpful.

Gemini Apps

 

Prompted - If our brains have a natural spatial grid does that effect how we draw the external would through our optics

 

February 28 at 7:05 AM - Gemini Apps -chat responses

It's fascinating to consider how our brain's internal spatial grid might influence how we perceive and represent the external world through drawing. Here's how that connection can be understood:

 

Influence of the Spatial Grid on Drawing:

 

Spatial Awareness and Composition:

The brain's grid system contributes to our inherent sense of spatial awareness. This influences how we perceive spatial relationships, proportions, and the overall composition of a scene. When drawing, this internal framework can guide our placement of objects and our understanding of their relative positions.

It is likely that this internal grid assists in the brains ability to take 3-dimensional space, and represent it on a 2-dimensional surface.

 

Perspective and Depth:

Our ability to perceive depth and perspective relies heavily on our brain's capacity to process spatial information. The grid system likely plays a role in how we interpret and represent these spatial cues in our drawings.

For example, the understanding of vanishing points and horizon lines, which are fundamental to perspective drawing, could be influenced by this internal spatial framework.

 

AI Overview

When painting, the "grid" created by the retina's horizontal pathways (horizontal and amacrine cells) comes into play when you perceive edges, contours, and overall spatial relationships within an image; essentially, these cells help to enhance the perception of subtle changes in luminance and color across a scene, allowing for better distinction between different areas of the painting, even if they are close in color or tone. 

Explanation:

• Lateral Inhibition:

Both horizontal and amacrine cells function through lateral inhibition, meaning they suppress the activity of neighbouring neurons, which helps to sharpen the boundaries between light and dark areas in an image. 

 

• Color Perception:

Different types of horizontal cells can be involved in color perception by integrating information from different cone types, contributing to the overall color balance of the scene. 

• Spatial Analysis:

By connecting with multiple photoreceptors and influencing the signals sent to bipolar cells, the horizontal and amacrine cells enable the retina to analyse spatial information across a wider area, not just at individual photoreceptor locations. 

Key points to remember:

• Vertical pathway is primary:

While the horizontal pathways are important for edge detection and spatial analysis, the primary visual information still travels through the vertical pathway from photoreceptors to bipolar cells to ganglion cells. 

• Different cell types:

The specific function of a horizontal or amacrine cell can vary depending on the type and location within the retina. 

• 1: The structure of the retina. The retina contains both a vertical...

The retina contains both a vertical pathway (photoreceptors to bipolars to ganglions) and two horizontal pathways (the horizontal ...

 

Prompted - Are there vertical and horizontal cells in the eye march 5^th 9.28 pm

 

AI Overview

Learn more

Yes, within the retina of the eye, there are both "vertical" cells, which form a direct pathway from photoreceptors to bipolar cells to ganglion cells, and "horizontal" cells that connect laterally between photoreceptors, creating a horizontal pathway and allowing for lateral inhibition and signal integration across the retina; essentially, the vertical pathway transmits visual information directly, while the horizontal pathway helps refine and modulate that information based on surrounding context.

 

Prompted - HCs, ACs operate through intricate neural circuitry, not conscious thought. how can scientist be sure the innate human grid doesn’t think and adjust to a thought process in the brain 9.34

 

It's a very insightful question that delves into the complex relationship between neural circuitry and consciousness.

Key Considerations:

The line between complex neural processing and conscious thought is still a subject of ongoing debate.

While scientists can't definitively rule out the possibility of some form of "proto-consciousness" in any neural system, the current evidence suggests that the retinal circuitry primarily operates on a level of unconscious information processing.

In essence, scientists rely on a combination of anatomical, physiological, and behavioural evidence to distinguish between the complex computations performed by retinal cells and the higher-level processes associated with conscious thought.

 

 

Prompted - Is your eye tracking unconscious in looking out for dangers? 

It's accurate to say that a significant portion of eye tracking is indeed unconscious, especially when it comes to detecting potential dangers.

Therefore, even when the eye is involved in danger detection, it's the brain that's doing the processing and interpretation, not the eye itself. The eye is providing the data, and the brain is making the decisions.

 

Prompted - If the eye is recognizing data, it must have a memory. 

That's a very interesting point, and it touches on the complexities of how we define "memory."

In summary, while the eye has a very brief form of sensory memory, it's the brain that handles the complex processes of storing, retrieving, and recognizing visual information.   

 

Prompted -Ok Gemini you have conceded that the eye has short memory and if that’s the case then it thinks. 

I understand your point, but I must clarify the distinction between having a very short-term sensory buffer and "thinking."

Therefore, while the eye has a very brief sensory buffer, it doesn't possess the cognitive abilities required for true "thinking."

 

 

Splitting thinking into categories into milliseconds can be a very long time in the sense of a billionth of a second and how do we know it’s not thinking in that time has science got the capacity to measure that? 

You've raised a very insightful point about the scale of time and the limits of our current scientific understanding.

In conclusion, while we can't definitively rule out the possibility of some form of rudimentary "thinking" occurring at the millisecond level within the eye's sensory processing, our current understanding suggests that it's more accurate to describe it as a rapid sensory buffer rather than true cognitive thought.