Senses saturate.

The sense of smell saturates fastest. I’ve heard in joking someone say that the length of time a woman smells her perfume after she puts it on is measured in milliseconds.

The sense of sight saturates. That’s what gives us afterimages in reverse colour. And the sense of night sight takes half an hour to recover after saturation.

The sense of taste saturates.

The sense of hearing saturates. This is observable through temporary hearing loss, and also in the way that background noise makes hearing wanted sounds more difficult.

But does the sense of touch saturate? And if so, how?

And does this explain why we wear clothes?

Note: I am not an expert, everything below could be wrong.

“But does the sense of touch saturate?”

Yes

“And if so, how?”

What you are calling “saturation” is known as neural adaptation or sensory adaptation.

The activity of senses is broken in to two distinct categories, “sensation”(sometimes called “reception”) and “perception.”

Sensation occurs when an external input causes a change in the electrical potential of the membranes of cells which are specialized receptors. This change in potential sends an electrical signal to the specific areas of the central nervous system (for touch, this area is the somatosensory cortex) which processes the signal and creates a perception of that external input. The neurons in the CNS have action potentials (known as spikes) which encode specific information in the neuron and send that information to other neurons by varying the frequency and pattern of these spikes. When a neuron is activated by sensation the relevant neurons become excited and have a high frequency of spikes, but if the input causing this excitation continues the frequency of spikes begins to drop. It is currently a matter of investigation as to why this happens, AFAIK, and the partial explanations available are a bit beyond my ken.

As the frequency of spikes drops the perception of the sensation which is activated goes away.

“And does this explain why we wear clothes?”

No, I shouldn’t think so.

complex subject is my initial impression, but i’d question if saturate is the right way to see it, or the most important aspect of what you’re probably talking about

i’d see it that the centre point or reference position shifts, that the senses more null, which i’d expect is a different thing to saturate, though I couldn’t be sure

I’m pretty sure pain receptors can saturate.

esselte said:

Note: I am not an expert, everything below could be wrong.

“But does the sense of touch saturate?”

Yes

“And if so, how?”

What you are calling “saturation” is known as neural adaptation or sensory adaptation.

The activity of senses is broken in to two distinct categories, “sensation”(sometimes called “reception”) and “perception.”

Sensation occurs when an external input causes a change in the electrical potential of the membranes of cells which are specialized receptors. This change in potential sends an electrical signal to the specific areas of the central nervous system (for touch, this area is the somatosensory cortex) which processes the signal and creates a perception of that external input. The neurons in the CNS have action potentials (known as spikes) which encode specific information in the neuron and send that information to other neurons by varying the frequency and pattern of these spikes. When a neuron is activated by sensation the relevant neurons become excited and have a high frequency of spikes, but if the input causing this excitation continues the frequency of spikes begins to drop. It is currently a matter of investigation as to why this happens, AFAIK, and the partial explanations available are a bit beyond my ken.

As the frequency of spikes drops the perception of the sensation which is activated goes away.

“And does this explain why we wear clothes?”

No, I shouldn’t think so.

> And does this explain why we wear clothes

What I had in mind here is the question of whether wearing clothes activates the reward/addiction centres of the brain that in other animals may be triggered by the sensation of hairy touch.

Or alternatively whether wearing of clothes reduces the risk of being tickled.

certainly the skin is a sense organ, you can sense evaporation for example, the sun on it, things related comfort levels, probably homeostatic mechanisms involved

there are definitely mechanisms that null to normalize (the experience of), within whatever range

mollwollfumble said:

> And does this explain why we wear clothes

What I had in mind here is the question of whether wearing clothes activates the reward/addiction centres of the brain that in other animals may be triggered by the sensation of hairy touch.

Or alternatively whether wearing of clothes reduces the risk of being tickled.

I don’t think there is any evidence that physical contact between an agent (human, dog etc) and an object (ordinary clothing) increases oxytocin levels produced in the same way that there is evidence physical contact between agents (2 humans, human and animal) increases those levels in both agents. Studies have shown increased oxytocin levels in both mother and child during skin to skin contact but lesser or non-existent increases if either of the parties are wearing clothing during the contact. It was proposed that the clothing acted as an insulator, decreasing the sensation of warmth that skin to skin contact entails, could account for the differences observed. Thus, it is not just the touch-sensitive mechanoreceptors that initiate oxytocin production but also heat sensitive, (and possibly) pressure sensitive and vibration sensitive receptors all acting in concert which give the result.

There is some evidence that using weighted blankets whilst sleeping can increase oxytocin levels, with weighted blanket manufacturers advertising with phrases like “the feeling of a weighted blanket is like being held in a gentle hug”. Hugs and weighted blankets both cause of a phenomenon called deep pressure stimulation. Clothing is marketed as deep pressure stimulation products, but it is not ordinary clothing – more like vests that can be pumped up with air by the wearer to increase the pressure that the clothing applies to their body or compression clothing, made of material similar to compression bandages or, as with the blankets, weighted clothing.

esselte said:

mollwollfumble said:

> And does this explain why we wear clothes

What I had in mind here is the question of whether wearing clothes activates the reward/addiction centres of the brain that in other animals may be triggered by the sensation of hairy touch.

Or alternatively whether wearing of clothes reduces the risk of being tickled.

I don’t think there is any evidence that physical contact between an agent (human, dog etc) and an object (ordinary clothing) increases oxytocin levels produced in the same way that there is evidence physical contact between agents (2 humans, human and animal) increases those levels in both agents. Studies have shown increased oxytocin levels in both mother and child during skin to skin contact but lesser or non-existent increases if either of the parties are wearing clothing during the contact. It was proposed that the clothing acted as an insulator, decreasing the sensation of warmth that skin to skin contact entails, could account for the differences observed. Thus, it is not just the touch-sensitive mechanoreceptors that initiate oxytocin production but also heat sensitive, (and possibly) pressure sensitive and vibration sensitive receptors all acting in concert which give the result.

There is some evidence that using weighted blankets whilst sleeping can increase oxytocin levels, with weighted blanket manufacturers advertising with phrases like “the feeling of a weighted blanket is like being held in a gentle hug”. Hugs and weighted blankets both cause of a phenomenon called deep pressure stimulation. Clothing is marketed as deep pressure stimulation products, but it is not ordinary clothing – more like vests that can be pumped up with air by the wearer to increase the pressure that the clothing applies to their body or compression clothing, made of material similar to compression bandages or, as with the blankets, weighted clothing.

I like heaps of blankets on me, sometimes, I use to get the lady to lay on me (don’t take that the wrong way), to go to sleep in a hurry, but she’s got too many discomforts, anyway partly the blanket thing is insulation, your body doesn’t have to produce much heat, it relaxes, blood flow probably slows down, white blood cells etc aren’t fighting a haematic storm while hunting down the bad guys.

anyway i’m someway off making a cuddle machine like temple grandin was it, may have