• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

'Mythbusters' and their 'Blindfolded walking in a straight line' test...A question..

De_Bunk

Scourge of the Believer
De_Bunk
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
5,523
Adam and Jamie put blindfolds on and tried to walk in a straight line across a field...

Both ended up just walking in large circles...and both believed that they were walking in a dead straight line...

My question is..Would a 'born blind' adult do the same?

DB
 
Last edited:
I wondered the same in my thread on this.

A new thought of mine would be whether their results would improve if they were running?
 
Travis said:
A new thought of mine would be whether their results would improve if they were running?
Click to expand...
I doubt it. They tried a wide variety of things (including swimming and driving) with no change in the end result. Why would running be fundamentally different?
 
What I was left wondering was if, with enough practice, they could learn to walk straight. Or if, with enough repetitions, they would get better.

Imagine a very long corridor just slightly wider than you. You walk down it blindfold and get immediate feedback when you go right or left by bumping the wall. Could you learn what going straight "feels like" or develop some trick of balance to keep you aligned?
 
Last edited:
Remember, they were not merely blindfolded. They were also wearing headphones. The point was that they had no other sensory input other than their sense of balance and direction. I would expect a blind adult who can hear would do much better.
 
Insane Duck said:
I doubt it. They tried a wide variety of things (including swimming and driving) with no change in the end result. Why would running be fundamentally different?
Click to expand...

My thinking is that you will take fewer steps to cross the same distance thereby minimizing whatever influence it is that trips things up with each step. Then there is inertial force to perhaps help keep them going straight.
 
I think they should combine it with one of their drinking tests to see if it would make them walk perfectly straight.
 
Nobody is going to walk straight without some kind of cue. The sensory system responsible for balance has zero output unless you're undergoing a bit more than zero accileration, and very quickly adapts to a small accileration in one direction or another. It's the same problem as the "death spiral" in flying in the dark without knowing how to use instruments.

But if there was any sound coming from the distance, that would totally blow the whole thing, and people could adjust pronto to that cue.
 
My understanding from a number of military orienteering schools is everyone has one side of their body that is stronger than the the other. You tend to push off slightly more on that side and this incrementally makes you walk in circles. With experience you can learn to compensate for this drift by intentionally offsetting it. Walk 100m blindfold and see the direction and distance you are off a straight line. When you walk though the woods, intentionally take that many steps to that side per 100 meters (you should also know how many paces you take in 10mm to keep an accurate pace count).

An easier version is if you are following a compass azimuth and you drift "right," when you intersect an obstacle (e.g. tree) always go around it to the "left." Theoretically this will equal out.
 
jj...

Nobody is going to walk straight without some kind of cue. The sensory system responsible for balance has zero output unless you're undergoing a bit more than zero accileration, and very quickly adapts to a small accileration in one direction or another. It's the same problem as the "death spiral" in flying in the dark without knowing how to use instruments.

But if there was any sound coming from the distance, that would totally blow the whole thing, and people could adjust pronto to that cue.
Click to expand...

I think you posted the answer...especially with the 'flying in the dark' statement..

DB
 
Last edited:
In all it was one of the more fascinating Mythbusters segments that they've done lately. I know I couldn't help but wonder how I would do.
 
If you watch people walking, it's pretty obvious that "straight" is something that requires a lot of input. People tend to "pronate" rather differently; you see everything from feet-straight-ahead to feet rather widely splayed out to the sides.
As well, knees, hips, etc tend deviate considerably from the straight up-and-down we imagine we all have.
Without our eyes to fix on a goal, wandering from one side to the other seems almost a given.
 
Travis said:
In all it was one of the more fascinating Mythbusters segments that they've done lately. I know I couldn't help but wonder how I would do.
Click to expand...

The last section in the forest was especially interesting, demonstrating how easy it was to get lost if your visual cues are limited, and the difference a little proper training makes.
 
Robrob said:
My understanding from a number of military orienteering schools is everyone has one side of their body that is stronger than the the other. You tend to push off slightly more on that side and this incrementally makes you walk in circles.
Click to expand...

Except that they repeated the experiment and didn't show a preference for a particular side.

Steve S
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom