shades fills you in

Are the things we see, hear, smell, feel, and taste real? Not completely, says Vox. Our brains actually create a unique, personalized “reality” for each of us. We can’t handle all the information we take in, so our brains give us a convenient approximation

If you’re curious about what this feels like, try this illusion out! It’s a video of people playing catch -- with a twist

And check out this video of a rotating mask that seems to be always facing outward

The fact that our brains approximate means our “reality” is incomplete. For example, we humans can only detect a certain spectrum of colors. But colors outside that spectrum exist, we just can’t see them!

Here’s another example, from Brainfacts: Animals can sense all kinds of “real” things that we can’t -- snakes can “see” heat with their tongues, sea turtles use electromagnetism to navigate, and mosquitoes can smell carbon dioxide

And our perception changes with our surroundings, says Greater Good Magazine -- hikers with heavy backpacks see steeper hills in front of them, while hikers with light backpacks see flatter ones

Popular Mechanics adds another wrinkle: Because of the way our brains process the world, everything you see is actually in the past (about 15 seconds ago!)

It’s reasonable to think that humans evolved to see things as they truly are -- but this isn’t true, says The Atlantic

Neuroscientist David Koffman agrees. We’ve evolved to perceive only what we need to for survival -- and what we see isn’t “reality”, it’s a fantasy designed to keep us alive

Neuroscientist Beau Lotto goes one step further -- humanity has survived *because* of our inability to perceive reality, the truth just isn’t useful for survival

Hold on, says Live Science -- if objects don’t exist unless perceived, and they change depending on who’s perceiving them, maybe there’s no such thing as objective reality?

Quantum physicists agree, a universal reality might not exist at all -- it’s totally “in the eye of the observer”

Wired asks: What if scientists are barking up the wrong tree? Maybe philosophers have a better answer -- we’re all living in a simulation