h a l f b a k e r yKeep out of reach of children.
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.
|
I have long been intrigued by the experiment in which the intrepid subject wears glasses which invert everything seen. Initially incapacitating, one gets used to having everything inverted over a period of continuous use; the brain rewires and all is good.
Except having everything inverted, which
is good for nothing. I propose instead glasses which split the field of view into quadrants (or maybe more than 4 - what is the word for a "quadrant" but with 6 sections?) such that the field of view is circumferential. Let the brain rewire etc etc. The wearer will get used to seeing 360 degrees and will be unsurprisable. It would be useful for bike riders, especially those fond of sudden lane changes. Desperadoes. Snipe hunters.
But:theimmediate application of this will be that the wearer can play circumferential ping pong, an idea I will describe elsewhere. I wonder though: the inverted glasses present no data not present thru normal glasses. The view expansion glasses present additional data. Will the puny brains of normal be able to handle it all? And still play pingpong?
prior art
Vision_20Angle_20Extending_20Glasses
[bs0u0155, Aug 19 2015]
[link]
|
| |
actually, this pains me to say it, but all of these "extended
field of view" ideas were beaten by the F35. The helmet on
that contains feeds from all around the aircraft allowing the
pilot to look through the floor or directly out the back, in
addition it has IR. So its extended angle, spectrum and
bypasses solid objects. Shame it doesn't work. |
|
| |
Sextant. then Octant. Both of which became the name for
navigational instruments because they used 1/6th or 1/8th
of a circle, respectively. |
|
| |
And such glasses are widely discussed, and have existed at
various times, but never really caught on. Partly because of
the loss of detail for most of the view. |
|
| |