Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
I CAN HAZ CROISSANTZ?

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                           

20:3 vision with laser edging

a computer edge traces everything you view with lasers, then beams a reference beam at your eye cause microfine linear perfect focus versions of the edge tracings at the retina
 
(+2, -2)
  [vote for,
against]

holograms use a reference beam as well as a reflected beam. I think that the shape variations of the ocular lens could be mostly gotten around if a computer guided laser were to

rather outrageously edge trace everything at your general vicinity (raster might also work)

then use a phase additive beam on the retina causing the edgetrace photon with reference beam to make bright microshapes at the retina

thus changing the resolution of human vision from the lens to the retina. Ive read the human retina responds to one or two photons so thats some very high resolution vision. Possibly better than seeing things 20 ft away as if they were 3 ft away.

Theres another idea on here where I note that laser speckle works regardless of focus, thus suggest a baby toy that makes perfect shapes even prefocus ability. Kind of similar.

beanangel, Jun 26 2011

Saccade Mirror 3 https://www.google....="saccade+mirror+3"
Re: [Alterother]'s complaint [notexactly, Dec 06 2018]

[link]






       Could your brain process more information from the retina? Regardless, I have read that the retina actually has a fairly low res and your brain is already doing most of the work, so to get more info to the brain you would need to bypass the eye entirely.
DIYMatt, Jun 26 2011
  

       //the retina actually has a fairly low res ... brain is already doing most of the work// True of peripheral vision, but at the fovea, resolution's 1.3 arcminutes[1].   

       However, the lens reduces this to about 3 arcminutes [1]. Visual physiologists bypass that limitation by using lasers to make interference fringes directly on the retina [2]. Hence this idea.   

       [1] Wikipedia
[2] told to me, by one such, years ago
mouseposture, Jun 27 2011
  

       //Ive read the human retina responds to one or two photons so thats some very high resolution vision. Possibly better than seeing things 20 ft away as if they were 3 ft away.//   

       That's hardly a pair of hand-held pruning shears.
spidermother, Jun 27 2011
  

       There would be a conflict between whatever imaging device the computer uses and the mechanism of human vision: cameras track smoothly and continuously, where as our eyes 'saccade,' or flit minutely from one focal point to another as we look around. It happens so rapidly that you can't catch yourself doing it. Unless the computer were somehow able to predict exactly where the eye would fall while panning from one spot to another and keep up with it in realtime, there would be a nausea-and-migraine - inducing split-second lag while the reference laser caught up to whatever you were trying to focus on.
Alterother, Jun 27 2011
  

       <sigh> could somebody dumb this down a notch or five ?
FlyingToaster, Jun 27 2011
  

       Photonic response (quantum efficiency) and resolution are two completely different things. Resolution is dependent on optics, mangification, and sensor density.   

       Quantum efficiency (QE) is dependent solely on how much signal the sensor response puts out with respect to the number of photons impinging on it. Note that this is usually very depndent on the frequency of the incoming light. In the human eye, the black and white receptors (rods) have a QE approaching one and the color receptors run closer to .01.   

       In other words the human eye might put out a signal from a single photon, but resolution depends on those photons hitting the correct optic nerve in the first place. Since multiple rods connect to a single nerve, the resolution is even lower than normal.
MechE, Jun 27 2011
  

       [MechE] That's what I obfuscated.   

       Also, of course, the ability to respond to small numbers of photons is only present at extremely low light levels. The response is logarithmic, so at ordinary light levels it takes billions of photons to make a difference.
spidermother, Jun 27 2011
  

       Ah yes.. the highly technical step by step that just assumes you know the end game
AutoMcDonough, Jun 27 2011
  

       Wow, you guys have been blowing me right out of the water lately. Must be the pain pills.   

       Or maybe I'm just an idiot. It might be that.
Alterother, Jun 27 2011
  

       Sorry, I kind of want to bun it. Still trying to figure out what it's supposed to do though.
AutoMcDonough, Jun 27 2011
  

       [AutoMcDonough] Among uses it gives people hypervision with doing anything to the eye, just smart glasses or contact lenses.
beanangel, Dec 02 2018
  

       //Resolution is dependent on optics, mangification, and sensor density.//   

       So ... if you look mangy, you'd better be resolute.
pertinax, Dec 06 2018
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle