If the human eye can see 576 megapixels, then consider that a man-made digital camera which has the capability of 580 megapixels or higher (in future, technology isn't that far from that), then how would the human eye view the image captured in that camera? I'd like to hear your opinions

Evolution...or artificial evolution. In 500 years you Will be able to buy upgrades to your body.

Regarding the megapixel. All technical improves are not the endgame for a technique but away to get to next level of tech and that might be useful for you or your eyes later, or even your children's eyes in the future.

Pretty much the same as a picture taken with a today's 6 Mpix camera: you won't be able to see the individual pixels unless you zoom in close enough.

It's not all about megapixels you know.

I still did not get a clear simple answer..

Just like this 648 MPixel photo:
http://http://galaxy.phy.cmich.edu/~axel/mwpan2/

It would sub-sample and bio-dither.....

Is this a serious question?

Hint: magnify your 567mp image to a size where each pixel is 5 inches wide. Then sit close to it, maybe just far enough you cannot touch it. What does your human eye see?

I, on the other hand would really like to know how did you arrive to the figure 576MP? (and before you say "I looked it up the net" be warned, that is not the right answer)
The eye is not really anything like a digital camera, heck it's not even anything near an analog camera really

Physiologically, a human eye is all of the following;

• it contains several different type of photosensitive sensors
• the distribution and geometrical density of sensor elements varies widely in different parts of the eye
• the physical shape of each sensor element is not planar, it's a complex 3-dimensional stucture suspended in semi-permeable liquid. furthermore, the elements can bend, stretch and change shape
• the connections from each sensor element are not one-to-one to the visual processing cortex, the retinal layer contains lot of "circuity" (okay, let's say wetware) that preprocesses the image in-place
• the sensitivity of each element varies as function of time, there's AGC-like functionality that is both chemical and computational.
• there is no central clocking of the sensor elements, instead each local group of elements implements its own independent synchronization
• the lens element has high aberrtion and irregularities unlike any commercially available designs
• the transfer medium inside the eye is optically irregular
• The shape of the eye is far from ideal, and in reality the image projected by the lens on the retinal surface is blurry, stretched, torn and unclear
• this is further complicated by the fact that the optical nerves and blood vessels feeding the retinal tissue are on the front-side of the optical plane.

Furthermore, only really really tiny part of the retina has the highest areal density of sensing elements. Most of the area can only sense vague shapes and movements

In reality, when you look around, an any one moment you see only the size of a coin held at arms length at a time, like looking through a long narrow pipe. Everything else, the "image" you see around you is a construct of the mind, it's your brain making up the image from small glimpses of reality it gets, most of it is "made up", your visual cortex is guessing what's around and showing it to you.

You could think of the eye-brain combination of being nearly worst web-camera ever but having such a computational engine enhancement behind it it's impossible to come even near with todays technology.

Would it be possible to take a hawk eye and connect it to a human? That would increase your vision.

I know lots athletes and sportsmen who is practicing eye training once a week to get faster reaction and to see and register more. Not sure if you can improve your pixel vision though.

It would certainly make it a bit different, but the same things apply; it's not just the eye, it's the whole package, the image processing and cognition based on it.

And if you really integrated both a hawk's eye and (at least a part of) a hawk's visual cortex to your system you would most certainly lose some things usually important for a human being; ability to read, ability to recognize other humans and useful inanimate objects, ability to see angular shapes and navigate in our daily world.

And to top it off you'd find it impossible not to notice small rodents squirreling aroung the peripheral vision... not to say getting a healthy appetite for them