a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy

A note of humor:
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht
oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist
and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you
can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not
raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Prtety amzanig huh?

I did taht rsereach ... NOOOOO !!!

Its a mses, raelly

But taht is waht is fun

look at this

http://www.languagehat.com/archives/000840.php

Pretty interresting, I had almost no problem at all reading your post, which kind of prooves your point.

It reminds me of the famous 1949 study by J.S. Bruner and Leo Postman. http://www.uri-geller.com/as8.htm

The two psychologists wanted to discover exactly how people perceive and understand visual symbols.

To help them, they designed and made some special packs of playing cards. Some cards were quite normal, but others were altered in subtle ways; for instance the six of spades was turned into a red card and the four of hearts was made black.

The anomalous cards were mixed with normal cards, the pack was shuffled and test subjects were shown the cards one at a time.
At first, people were shown the test card for merely a short glimpse. Gradually they were shown each test card for a longer and longer time until they were able to recognise and identify it to the researchers.

Even with only a short glimpse, most people were able to identify all the cards shown. But the extraordinary finding was that the anomalous cards were always identified as being normal without any hesitation or puzzlement.

The people looking at them actually saw the black four of hearts as either a four of spades or as a normal four of hearts. Their perceptions were simply fitted naturally into the conceptual categories that had already been prepared by their previous experience of playing cards.

When the experimenters increased the amount of exposure to each anomalous card, people began to become aware of something wrong. One subject shown the red six of spades said: ’that’s the six of spades but there’s something wrong with it the black has a red border’.

Further increases in exposure time made subjects even more confused and hesitant, until most people finally ’saw’ what was really before their eyes. Most interesting of all, however, was that more than 10 per cent of the anomalous playing cards were never correctly identified even when exposed for forty times the average exposure needed to recognise normal cards. And many of the people taking part in the test experienced acute personal distress. One person remarked to the experimenters, ’I can’t make the suit out, whatever it is. It didn’t even look like a card that time. I don’t know what colour it is now or whether it’s a spade or a heart. I’m not even sure what a spade looks like. My God!’