First we need to feed Ann enough that she has a 3rd dimension.
Posted on 03/30/2002 5:02:47 PM PST by prisoner6
March 29, 2002 08:30 CDT
A research team at the University of California in Los Angeles has devised a means of directing the molecular action of crystalline materials with properties of both solids and liquids. This advance that may do for television and computers what the transistor did for electronics.
This means that in less than a decade, consumers may be able sit back and revel in solid-looking images that literally project out from a television-like device. That's not to mention the light-driven computer that could work maybe a million times faster or store a billion times more data.
Reported in the March 13 print issue of the Journal of the American Chemical Society, the world's largest scientific society. The research increased the prospect that information and images revealed by light passing through these crystalline materials could achieve virtually any shape, or a series of shapes one right after another, and very rapidly. Parts of the crystals can be brightened, darkened or change colors nearly instantly, in billionths of a second, in the presence of electric and magnetic fields that control the three-dimensional shaping.
"We realized this could be a technological breakthrough. There are no examples that I know of solids made to behave in this way," project leader Miguel Garcia-Garibay, Ph.D., a professor in UCLA's Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry said in a statement.
"Although there are many scientists designing novel electro-optic materials, as far as we know, we are the only ones pursuing this line of work. The possible applications could be quite important -- and there are probably ones we haven¹t thought of."
In addition to the possibility of 3-D TV, the solid-crystal molecules could also be used as ultrafast switches in optical computers. Stacked in a cube several inches high, they could provide unprecedented storage potential, perhaps many billion times that of current devices. Speed of access would prove dramatically faster than is possible with current computer designs.
The crystalline materials could be eventually produced in bulk, similar in form to large plastic blocks. As more is learned, researchers expect to reduce costs and improve manufacturing efficiencies. The UCLA team is making rapid progress, Garcia-Garibay added, and holds out the prospect that commercial versions of the crystalline molecules could be available in a few years.
prisoner6
We could have 3-D Logos revolving here on Free Republic.
Nah, that would be too big of a change!!!
Click here: tech_index
I think there are several reasons. One reason is expense, another is that there aren't any shows or movies made in 3D, but I think that the main reason is that so far none of the technology has been really commercially feasible.
Look at how long HDTV is taking to catch on. By federal law, all TV stations are supposed to be transmitting HDTV signals now. Few actually are. Remember metrics? All highway sighs were supposed to be in kilometers and kph twenty years ago. A grand total of none (that I know of) were ever put up. Even big brother can't make the American public do something that 95% of them have no interest in doing.
3D hasn't led to commercial success in Hollywood, although some NASA images have been done in comic-book 3D. I can never find my color filter glasses.
Much preferred are the stereo-pair images that don't need special glasses, and, of course there are the aerial photo stereo viewers and equipment used to create topo maps. But those are technical applications, not usually considered entertainment.
Just my take on the reasons.
Stereoscopic vision.
Most of the 3-D systems I have seen (such as the shuttle vision glasses ) depend on stereoscopic vision.
Many people lose vision in one eye at some time in their lives. ( not total loss, but severe )
I lost vision in my right eye at 4 years old.
3-D glasses were always a mystery to me. Most of the 3-d viewing schemes I have seen require some sort of 3-D glasses, the aforementioned shuttle glasses, or double screens with left-right vision orientation.
I don't think these systems work well for many people.
Vision is a quirky thing, and individual perceptual adaptation may allow many of us to go through daily life without difficulty.
However, when confronted with a "specific" system of visual presentation, based on a Perfect Vison Standard, many people are disappointed with the results.
In other words, they don't see any 3-D.
Just my personal opinion.
In using the aerial photo stereo viewer, many people, with both eyes apparently functional, do not see the 3D effect. It's common. You might think that with a stereo pair entering the brain along the left and right channels like it is supposed to, everyone would get the 3D image. Not so.
Now, I can look at a stereo pair with no optics inbetween my eyes and the pictures, and see the 3D. Most people have trouble with this because it requires the eyes to focus in a different way than usual. It can be a strain.
At the same time I wonder if some people see 3D in normal going-to-the-mall life. That's just from observing other drivers who seem to lack depth perception altogether. Yet I know that those with one good eye can drive perfectly well and have an accomodation for judging distances and depth.
Worked for me in my college years...
First we need to feed Ann enough that she has a 3rd dimension.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.