| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Optics Forum » Computer displays that correct vision possible?
Page 1 of 3 Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| Amir Michail |
 Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 3:34 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Zetsu |
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 3:47 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 3 May, 14:34, Amir Michail <amich...@gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir
What sort of 3D displays do you mean?
Like, holographic technology? I was looking at holographic technology
on the net so it's already been made but it still needs to be
developed and refined and stuff until it can enter the mainstream
market. So probably there is a long way to go.
Right now the coolest thing out is OLED, organic light emitting diode.
Have you heard of that? It's so thin! I want to buy a TV built with
that but they are really expensive. Totally next gen though! Imagine
just sticking it to the wall like you would with any poster or
painting. Except... it moves! Kind of like the pictures in Harry
Potter. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| zzbunker@netscape.net |
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 4:01 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 3, 9:34 am, Amir Michail <amich...@gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
Quite impossible. Since laptops were invented by
people who need both corrective eyeglasses and
corrective batteries.
Quote:
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Zetsu |
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 4:05 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 3 May, 15:01, "zzbun...@netscape.net" <zzbun...@netscape.net>
wrote:
Quote: On May 3, 9:34 am, Amir Michail <amich...@gmail.com> wrote:
Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
Quite impossible. Since laptops were invented by
people who need both corrective eyeglasses and
corrective batteries.
Well, owing to the amount of minute electronics and silicon chips and
what not that go into a laptop and are needed to be handled with
extreme and fine care, I quite doubt that the people who invented them
would wear corrective lenses. It's more likely that they have very
good eyesight indeed. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| zzbunker@netscape.net |
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 7:01 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 3, 10:05 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On 3 May, 15:01, "zzbun...@netscape.net" <zzbun...@netscape.net
wrote:
On May 3, 9:34 am, Amir Michail <amich...@gmail.com> wrote:
Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
Quite impossible. Since laptops were invented by
people who need both corrective eyeglasses and
corrective batteries.
Well, owing to the amount of minute electronics and silicon chips and
what not that go into a laptop and are needed to be handled with
extreme and fine care, I quite doubt that the people who invented them
would wear corrective lenses. It's more likely that they have very
good eyesight indeed.
Well, just about everybody with good eyes starts that way
with computers.
Until you start running into 16-hour eye strain and jerks with
lasers and
tickets to the Met.
Which is why the people who understand computer networks
invented robots, mini-cams, ipods, USB, gps, PV cells, fiber
optics,
Optical Computers, 7-11, internet, backspin, realprint, and
Cruise Missiles for the tax-em-til-they-drop Fascist cranks. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| CWatters |
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 11:59 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Amir Michail" <amichail@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5527a1b-d89b-4767-bcbf-2bc88cadfe33@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Quote: Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir
I don't think so... People who need glasses don't have a problem seeing
things at the wrong distance - so correcting the apparent distance using a
3D effect doesn't help. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Matthew Lybanon... |
| Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:48 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article
<f5527a1b-d89b-4767-bcbf-2bc88cadfe33 at (no spam) d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Amir Michail <amichail at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir
Glasses correct for a variety of conditions. So, if what you suggest
were possible, your computer would have to be set according to your
"prescription." And then it would be wrong for (almost) everyone else. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| nuny at (no spam) bid.nes... |
| Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 5:10 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 3, 9:59 am, "CWatters"
<colin.watt... at (no spam) NOturnersoakSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
Quote: "Amir Michail" <amich... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5527a1b-d89b-4767-bcbf-2bc88cadfe33 at (no spam) d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir
I don't think so... People who need glasses don't have a problem seeing
things at the wrong distance - so correcting the apparent distance using a
3D effect doesn't help.
Beg pardon? I am "nearsighted". Guess what the term means.
Mark L. Fergerson |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Gene S. Berkowitz... |
| Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 9:55 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <lybanon-76BC9C.14483804052008 at (no spam) earthlink.vsrv-
sjc.supernews.net>, lybanon at (no spam) earthlink.net says...
Quote: In article
f5527a1b-d89b-4767-bcbf-2bc88cadfe33 at (no spam) d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Amir Michail <amichail at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir
Glasses correct for a variety of conditions. So, if what you suggest
were possible, your computer would have to be set according to your
"prescription." And then it would be wrong for (almost) everyone else.
....which, given the nosiness of other people, on planes and in coffee
shops, would make it an asset.
--Gene |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Zetsu... |
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 12:24 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 5 May, 04:10, "n... at (no spam) bid.nes" <Alien8... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On May 3, 9:59 am, "CWatters"
colin.watt... at (no spam) NOturnersoakSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
"Amir Michail" <amich... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5527a1b-d89b-4767-bcbf-2bc88cadfe33 at (no spam) d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir
I don't think so... People who need glasses don't have a problem seeing
things at the wrong distance - so correcting the apparent distance using a
3D effect doesn't help.
Beg pardon? I am "nearsighted". Guess what the term means.
Mark L. Fergerson
"Near-sighted" refers to the ocular defect where there is trouble in
distance viewing, however I think what the earlier poster was pointing
out is that having a 3D model would be no different than the normal
flat screen, "2D screen" that we have of today. For example, using a
3D model to mitigate the effect of distance bluriness would be no more
effective than simply bringing one's face closer to the conventional
type screen in order to see objects clearly. The thing I am curious
about here though is precisely what kind of 3D technology the original
poster was hypothesizing should be utilized for this idea? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 11:05 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In sci.physics Zetsu <absolutelyinvincible at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On 5 May, 04:10, "n... at (no spam) bid.nes" <Alien8... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On May 3, 9:59 am, "CWatters"
colin.watt... at (no spam) NOturnersoakSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
"Amir Michail" <amich... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5527a1b-d89b-4767-bcbf-2bc88cadfe33 at (no spam) d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir
I don't think so... People who need glasses don't have a problem seeing
things at the wrong distance - so correcting the apparent distance using a
3D effect doesn't help.
Beg pardon? I am "nearsighted". Guess what the term means.
Mark L. Fergerson
"Near-sighted" refers to the ocular defect where there is trouble in
distance viewing, however I think what the earlier poster was pointing
out is that having a 3D model would be no different than the normal
flat screen, "2D screen" that we have of today. For example, using a
3D model to mitigate the effect of distance bluriness would be no more
effective than simply bringing one's face closer to the conventional
type screen in order to see objects clearly. The thing I am curious
about here though is precisely what kind of 3D technology the original
poster was hypothesizing should be utilized for this idea?
Vision problems are a result of the eye's lens being unable to focus
an image on the retina.
There is nothing that can be done about that other than to put a
corrective lens (called glasses) in the system.
Arm waving about "apparent distance" is babble unless there is a
separate lens involved.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| nuny at (no spam) bid.nes... |
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 11:23 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 5, 9:05 am, j... at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Quote: In sci.physics Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
On 5 May, 04:10, "n... at (no spam) bid.nes" <Alien8... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On May 3, 9:59 am, "CWatters"
colin.watt... at (no spam) NOturnersoakSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
"Amir Michail" <amich... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5527a1b-d89b-4767-bcbf-2bc88cadfe33 at (no spam) d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir
I don't think so... People who need glasses don't have a problem seeing
things at the wrong distance - so correcting the apparent distance using a
3D effect doesn't help.
Beg pardon? I am "nearsighted". Guess what the term means.
Mark L. Fergerson
"Near-sighted" refers to the ocular defect where there is trouble in
distance viewing, however I think what the earlier poster was pointing
out is that having a 3D model would be no different than the normal
flat screen, "2D screen" that we have of today. For example, using a
3D model to mitigate the effect of distance bluriness would be no more
effective than simply bringing one's face closer to the conventional
type screen in order to see objects clearly. The thing I am curious
about here though is precisely what kind of 3D technology the original
poster was hypothesizing should be utilized for this idea?
Vision problems are a result of the eye's lens being unable to focus
an image on the retina.
Correct. I was sorely confused at C. Watters' phrasing: "People who
need glasses don't have a problem seeing
things at the wrong distance".
Quote: There is nothing that can be done about that other than to put a
corrective lens (called glasses) in the system.
Arm waving about "apparent distance" is babble unless there is a
separate lens involved.
I'm not entirely sure of that re: holography. As far as other so-
called 3D display technologies (polarization, blink, etc.) are
concerned I agree with you completely. However I know of no a priori
reason a hologram cannot produce an image that my unaided eyes could
see clearly (at a distance beyond my unaided maximum sharp focus
distance) but "normal" eyes would see as blurred at the same distance.
Not that I know that much about holograms (IOW I'm speaking from
ignorance above). So, any holography experts available? A quick Google
yields nothing relevant.
Mark L. Fergerson |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 5:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In sci.physics nuny at (no spam) bid.nes <Alien8752 at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On May 5, 9:05 am, j... at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
In sci.physics Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
On 5 May, 04:10, "n... at (no spam) bid.nes" <Alien8... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On May 3, 9:59 am, "CWatters"
colin.watt... at (no spam) NOturnersoakSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
"Amir Michail" <amich... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5527a1b-d89b-4767-bcbf-2bc88cadfe33 at (no spam) d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Imagine using a laptop without having to wear corrective
eyeglasses.
I know that 3D displays exist that don't require special glasses.
So maybe this is possible as well?
Amir
I don't think so... People who need glasses don't have a problem seeing
things at the wrong distance - so correcting the apparent distance using a
3D effect doesn't help.
Beg pardon? I am "nearsighted". Guess what the term means.
Mark L. Fergerson
"Near-sighted" refers to the ocular defect where there is trouble in
distance viewing, however I think what the earlier poster was pointing
out is that having a 3D model would be no different than the normal
flat screen, "2D screen" that we have of today. For example, using a
3D model to mitigate the effect of distance bluriness would be no more
effective than simply bringing one's face closer to the conventional
type screen in order to see objects clearly. The thing I am curious
about here though is precisely what kind of 3D technology the original
poster was hypothesizing should be utilized for this idea?
Vision problems are a result of the eye's lens being unable to focus
an image on the retina.
Correct. I was sorely confused at C. Watters' phrasing: "People who
need glasses don't have a problem seeing
things at the wrong distance".
There is nothing that can be done about that other than to put a
corrective lens (called glasses) in the system.
Arm waving about "apparent distance" is babble unless there is a
separate lens involved.
I'm not entirely sure of that re: holography. As far as other so-
called 3D display technologies (polarization, blink, etc.) are
concerned I agree with you completely. However I know of no a priori
reason a hologram cannot produce an image that my unaided eyes could
see clearly (at a distance beyond my unaided maximum sharp focus
distance) but "normal" eyes would see as blurred at the same distance.
How about basic optics as a good reason?
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Skywise... |
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 9:50 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"nuny at (no spam) bid.nes" <Alien8752 at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in
news:1ebbff3c-5d59-441e-a4a7-fcf8a6f66d35 at (no spam) s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com:
<Snipola>
Quote: an image on the retina.
<Snipola>
Quote: I'm not entirely sure of that re: holography.
I have no experience making holograms, and as such, I don't see
why making a hologram "out of focus" in such a way that requires
a lens to view that is equal to one's prescription wouldn't work.
Actually, I think if you shot the image through your glasses
would work.
But as I said, I've never made a holo.
Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 12:25 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In sci.physics Skywise <into at (no spam) oblivion.nothing.com> wrote:
Quote: "nuny at (no spam) bid.nes" <Alien8752 at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in
news:1ebbff3c-5d59-441e-a4a7-fcf8a6f66d35 at (no spam) s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com:
Snipola
an image on the retina.
Snipola
I'm not entirely sure of that re: holography.
I have no experience making holograms, and as such, I don't see
why making a hologram "out of focus" in such a way that requires
a lens to view that is equal to one's prescription wouldn't work.
Actually, I think if you shot the image through your glasses
would work.
Neither will work.
Visualize a spot just big enough to see.
If the eye doesn't focus properly, the spot image spreads into a fuzzy
ball on the retina.
Spreading the original spot just makes the fuzzy ball image on the
retina bigger.
You can't make the spot smaller than just big enough to see.
The ONLY way to bring the spot into focus is with another lens.
This is basic optics.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 1 of 3 Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:02 am
|
|