h a l f b a k e r yGo ahead. Stick a fork in it.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Jim has been checking out lady gaga's glasses and thinks they could be better...
Jim figures the outer surface of the glasses should be light sensitive and the inner surface should be light emitting. In the same way a set of earbuds requires an audio sensitive outer surface and an audio generating
inner surface.
In between a signal processor filters the input and generates the output.
Now Jim is happy that the earbuds will operate correctly. The signal processor will only add in information at specific frequencies and the wearer will be able to 'hear' everything in the local environment.
Jim reckons the glasses need to operate in the same way. The glasses are required to be transparent so that the signal processor need only add or remove specific parts of the input spectrum.
...
Like this only smaller
http://www.geek.com...-sid-2010-20100527/
transparent display [madness, Feb 02 2011]
[link]
|
| |
Jim finds that the apparatus is bulky and expensive. The short battery life is the final nail in the coffin. |
|
| |
wires make things work, wires can be transparent |
|
| |
//a set of earbuds requires an audio sensitive outer surface// I never knew that. |
|
| |
Maybe it requires it in the sense that Jim thinks it should have it. |
|
| |
You won't be able to focus on the inner surface of the glasses, without some extra lenses or eye modfication. |
|
| |
Jim needs to read some cyberpunk novels. This is just a basic form of augmented reality, as discussed in detail by William Gibson et al. |
|
| |
//You won't be able to focus on the inner surface of the glasses ... |
|
| |
Your not supposed to focus on the inner surface ... a bit like those patterns with a hidden image. |
|
| |
// ... without some extra lenses or eye modfication. |
|
| |
Wow --- thats a bit harsh. |
|
| |
In normal vision, what the eyes point at, and what they focus on, is the same. With those patterns with a hidden image, the eyes are still focussed on the paper or screen, but they are diverged, in effect pointing at a spot behind the paper. That's the trick that takes some time to master. |
|
| |
I contend that a light sensitive outer surface will not be able to detect images, and a light emitting inner surface very close to the eye will only produce very blurry images in the eye, without some additional optics. |
|
| |
Ok, imagine you are wearing a pair of glasses with or without magnification/diopter. |
|
| |
If you focus on a printed page, I contend, that it is possible to erase a word on the page by white-ing out small areas on each lens. Preferrably the minimum area corresponding only to the characters of the word... |
|
| |
And conversely it is possible to add a word or additionally to change a word on the page by white-ing out or blacking in areas on each lens. |
|
| |
Your focal point and focus must not change.... |
|
| |
It is perhaps ambitious to assume that the outer surface of the glasses can be light sensitive and transparent --- although in normal light conditions it should be possible (in the same way that earbuds work). |
|
| |
There is no question of detetecting a single photon and allowing it to pass here... |
|
| |
You could cover the outside surface with tiny, highly directional light sensors, forming something equivalent to an insect's compound eye. Or you could use additional optics to produce a focussed image on a light sensitive layer. Just being light sensitive is not enough to form an image. |
|
| |
You should just get a pair of glasses, draw on the inside surface with a fine felt-tip marker, put them on, and see what you see. The marks will be easily cleaned off with denatured alcohol afterwards if necessary, before your mum finds out. (Now _that_ was a bit harsh). |
|
| |