This article suggests that going from room to room causes us to forget things: http://newsinfo.nd.edu/news/27...-new-research-shows/
Yet super-memory folks use what's called a "memory palace" in which they store memories: http://www.npr.org/2011/02/23/...alking-With-Einstein
How do we reconcile these two findings?

Uhh - what was it I just asked???

The Art of Memory is a great book by Frances Yates. Read it.

I once read (though I can't remember where and don't have my library to hand in China to find out) a fascinating paper on another aspect of memory. It was about when we do something that is regular, but largely inactive, such as commuting to work on the train. Unless something unusual happens directly to us (such as meeting an old friend we haven't seen for many years) we "shut down" so that we have little or no recollection of the journey at all.

Many times I used to arrive at work with virtually no rcollection of anything after leaving the house. I had been so occupied in the world inside my head that I had not noticed anything around me while I was on auto-pilot.

And my event boundary seems to be blinking my eyes.
I can drink from my coffee cup, put it on the table, blink and discover that I've lost it.

I will read your book, z.

I have never thought using cutesy things, like mnemonics or the like, are that helpful. It might be individualistic, though.
[edit: changed "I" to "It"]

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

Besides the loci method mentioned above, there is something called the mnemonic major system (link). It associates consonants with the digits 0-9. That way you can have an ordered list of words and recover the number of their order from the word. Those words then are associated with the words or things to be remembered. So, MeTeoR (i.e., MTR, ignore the vowels and a few rare consonants) maps to 314. The 314th item in the list. See the Wikipedia link above for more detail. I learned about it years ago, but never got around to using it. I have, half-heartedly tried the loci method.

Perhaps I am not understanding the loci method, because I don't get this, from that Wikipedia article:

quote:

A different memory system, the method of loci was taught to schoolchildren for centuries, at least until 1584, "when Puritan reformers declared it unholy for encouraging bizarre and irreverent images."[3] The same objection can be made over the major system, with or without the method of loci. Mental images may be easier to remember if they are insulting, violent, or obscene (see Von Restorff effect).

How are mental images related to the number system you describe? Maybe I'm just up too late.

How are mental images related to the number system you describe?

The loci method is different from the mnemonic major system that I described in the my last post. In the loci method, you have a mental map of someplace, the original was of a temple with niches all around with different statues of gods and goddesses. You placed images of things you wanted to remember in those niches and then associated those words with the statues or the divinities. The more strange or bizarre the juxtaposition of the two images, the better the chance to remember it, or such was the advice given to those schoolchildren.

Ah, makes sense. I do need to read your book, though.

I came across this TED talk with a connection to this thread. It also involves a surprise at the end of the talk and some discussion at midpoint about the language of memory.Link