Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!dali.cs.montana.edu!milton!noble@shumv1.ncsu.edu
From: noble@shumv1.ncsu.edu (Patrick Brewer)
Newsgroups: sci.virtual-worlds
Subject: Re: Who says what to whom (was Re: VR Protocols.)
Message-ID: <8079@milton.u.washington.edu>
Date: 25 Sep 90 04:38:11 GMT
References: <31304@unix.cis.pitt.edu> <7507@milton.u.washington.edu> <7801@milto
Sender: hlab@milton.u.washington.edu
Organization: NCSU Computing Center
Lines: 46
Approved: hitl@hardy.u.washington.edu



In article <1990Sep21.192518.6956@watserv1.waterloo.edu> broehl@watserv1.waterlo
o.edu (Bernie Roehl) writes:

>>   [re gravity:] a Newtonian model is not necessarily what we want.  If I
>>   were designing reality, I might well choose not to implement gravity
>>   (even if doing so were easy, which it's not).  "Collisions" are often a
>>   *bad* thing. 
>>
>>True, we might choose a relativistic model where gravity is a property of
>>the space in which the objects interact.
>
>Or even dispense with these complexities altogether (which was the original
>intent of my statement).  A world in which I can simply float around,
>perhaps by swimming through the ether, is immensely easier to model.

        Not to mention, swimming through the ether would be much more
fun from a user point of view. I have no experiance in VR research, but I
find it disturbing that people keep talking about ways to duplicate this
universe. 
        For two reasons I think it is important that the VR appears like 
this universe only in ways that are necessary. IE. 3-D. 
1.      To make it saleable: No one would spend many thousands of their
own or their companies money on a VR duplicate of this universe. Think
about it: You walk into your office strap on your 3-D goggles and put 
on the gloves, earphones, and are magically transported into an duplicate
of the same mundane office. 
2.      For it to have an advantage over "staying in this reality" the VR
must be diffeeren. Some fundamental difference must provide an advantage 
that allows the user to get his work done faster. It should make MORE 
information, MORE EASILY understood. 

        I have read postings to this group about how to display text
on a 3-d display. I don't know, and probably more importantly I don't
care! Text is a 2-D way of communication.. If I wnt to read something 
I will use a regular flat screen (read 2-D) display. Remember the quote
"A picture is worth a thousand words."? Well how many words is a 3-D
model that can be viewed from any angle (and moved into, and can work 
interactively) worth? I'm willing to bet much more than a thousand. :-)

Thanks for listening.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick W. Brewer          President of CATT Program at NCSU 
noble@shumv1.ncsu.edu