Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Wearble computing

  1. May 3, 2007 #1
    If the vision for aeronautical engineering is like this:

    Anyone, anything, anytime, anywhere

    what would be the vision for wearable computing?

    Any task, any enviornment, anyone, all the time

    something like this?
  2. jcsd
  3. May 3, 2007 #2
    What the hell are you talking about?


    Are you talking about jackets that do your taxes for you?

    I would like to purchase such a jacket.
  4. May 6, 2007 #3
    Really? How much would you pay for said jacket? *Fires up sewing machine and grabs old 1990 Mac laptop*
  5. May 7, 2007 #4
    I would pay top penny.
  6. May 9, 2007 #5


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    As a matter of fact, it is happening.
  7. May 9, 2007 #6
    I sometimes wish I could have my data etched onto my skin so I couldn't lose it.
    Last edited: May 9, 2007
  8. May 9, 2007 #7
    no thanks, normal people don't like looking like the borg.
  9. May 9, 2007 #8
    Resistence is futile!
  10. May 9, 2007 #9
    I protest your definition of "normal". I'd rather look like the Borg than look likie everyone else. But I guess I'm biased, since I'd rather look like the Borg than, say, anything.
  11. May 9, 2007 #10
    http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts/generic/8a5b/" [Broken]

    It may no be very practical, but hey, it's a start.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2017
  12. May 10, 2007 #11
    I want to be like inspector gadget. Where might I get one of those jackets?
  13. May 10, 2007 #12
    I'm not talking about jackets.. maybe they will use useful for collecting power via a solar cell that can be 'printed' onto fabric.

    probably HMDs, ubuiqutous internet access, computer vision/machine learning algorithms and a good quality camera all coupled together will culminate in a practical and highly useful augmented reality device...the next big thing in popular consumer electronics

    Englebert's dream..might be closer to fulfillment.
    Last edited: May 10, 2007
  14. May 11, 2007 #13
    HMD's failed with the general public because they aren't comfortable, especially for long periods of time. What might be a cool thought would be 3d computing, where two slightly different images are displayed to each different eye to give a 3d appearance. I think it could be done with computers today, they're powerful enough.

    As for ubiquitous internet access, do you mean that people would carry a device that acts as an accesspoint? Kind of like the "http://laptop.org" [Broken]" laptops?

    What do you mean by computer vision/machine learning algorithms? Am I in the matrix?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2017
  15. May 11, 2007 #14
    hmm..depends on the HMD... with minaturisation and novel ways (such as projecting directly onto iris) the concept can still be revived...ok so then it isn't a H.M.D but its still serving the same function which is the important thing.

    ubiquitous internet acesss..with sufficient network infrastructure..via base stations, satellites etc... i'm sure it is possible to get to this status eventually..the device would just access the network just like a cell phone.

    Machine learning is getting computers to make sense of information and work out patterns... see artificial neural networks...

    Computer vision is doing the same type of thing except that you are dealing with images... well there is much more to it and probably these are not adequate definitions but something along these lines..

    I'm not sure if there are security cameras that employ these technologies but there might be already. Perhaps speech recognition techs also use this...so its not sci-fi..its real.
  16. May 12, 2007 #15
    LOL. Computers have been powerful enough to display two images for a long time.

    The problem is that that's not comfortable either. Your stereoscopic vision focuses far away, but your lenses have to focus close up. This causes eyestrain (your eyes were designed to focus the lens to the same distance being focussed stereoscopically). It makes your eyes literally hurt. Try crossing your eyes right now, and hold them that way for a few seconds. That's kind of what stereoscopic goggles feel like.
  17. May 14, 2007 #16
    I meant for an operating system to create these images for everything supported, including such complex things as gaming and still actually look good. 3d glasses could be involved to get around some of the problem with stereoscopic goggles.

    Also, I think you are confusing "two images" with "stereoscopic images," which requires a much higher amount of processing to develop, especially in real-time. I've had dual monitors for 10 years now since I built my first computer.

    I think it'd be pretty interesting to have depth in my desktop, 3d shooters, 3d icons, 3d windows, and animations in chat programs, forums, or wherever that are more lifelike. Computers were not powerful enough for this sort of thing before 64-bit processors and more advanced graphics cards (at least, not powerful enough to do it in a very realistic way.. I'm not speaking about paper cutouts seeming to pop out at me.) Another application of this that would be interesting would be a webcam that uses 2 lenses spaced apart to hold 3d teleconferences.
    Last edited: May 14, 2007
  18. May 15, 2007 #17
    Can you elaborate? If there's a comfortable way to do stereo vision, I'd love to know about it.

    Why do you say this? Stereoscoping images are just two images from slightly different vantage points in the 3D world. If each image has half as many pixels, I'd bet the processing load would be about the same as for a single, large 3D image generated from just one vantage point.

    Yeah, it would be interesting to have a 3D OS interface (though I can imagine some problems), but it doesn't require stereo vision. I believe there were experiments in 3D OSes back in the day.

    I don't have a 64-bit processor; they are very new for PCs. I'm curious to know what your standards are for realism. Apparently you feel that things like Quake were not realistic.

    Good luck telling someone their conference just won't be realistic without multi-thousand dollar stereoscopics!
  19. May 17, 2007 #18
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook