At 02:03 AM 1/3/99 -0500, Tim Gray wrote: >a friend of mine only caught >.1ms of eye exposure to a uv cutting laser (tracking across a table and a >reflection hit him).. he is now basically blind in that eye due to the >lens changing it's chemical composition. this is extreme power compared to >the eye display, but it's really a crap shoot wither subject A can have no >damage while subject B will run around screaming "my eye my eye!" "Warning: do not look into the laser with your remaining eye." >as for a laser scanning system into the eye, the intensity wouldnt have to >be any greater than a night light. although I see problems with data being >lost as the eye contracts due to high amounts of ambient light. that is >alot of movement from total darkness to a sunny snow covered slope. Plus the problems associated with the eye being a mobile thing in the first place. The user of such a display is going to be moving his eyes all the time during use, and the display system will need some clever arrangement to keep the lasers going through the pupil at the right angles. Think about it- how would such a display let you look into the corners of the viewing area? The direction of the eye's gaze is a cue to the system as to which part of the "screen" the user wants to center on his detailed viewing area, right? The tracking which controls how the data presents itself had better be pretty smooth, otherwise the screen is going to lag or jitter as the user changes what he's looking at. John Flanagan -- Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" toWear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.ml.org
From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty
Archive created with babymail