From: edlantz@aol.com (Edlantz)
Subject: Re: TECH: Virtual worlds with alternative physics and/or
Date: 5 Apr 1996 19:27:19 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


From: edlantz@aol.com (Edlantz)

Jorge Alvoeiro <J.Alvoeiro@psy.hull.ac.uk> writes:
[snip]
>>                                       But I have to believe that many
>> VR systems of the future will depart altogether from attempting to
>> simulate the physical world and would better be described as
>> "alternate reality" or "virtual fantasy" systems rather than virtual
>> reality systems.  I believe there are artistic, educational,
>> practical, and perhaps even (gasp) metaphysical reasons to do this.

> I hope that we become more 'REAL' rather than the above. This sort of
>ideal seems to be very 'one-self' rather than thinking about people in
>general.  Of course there are individual differences which one should
>always take into consideration because of the way the brain has being
>wired due the backgound one comes from. Also I don't mind having my
>brain medula connected to a computer link if the lower part of my body
>does not exists but I still want to live in a world were I can still
>receive sensory input from the physical environment where I am now or
>in the future.

Jorge, I am not arguing that we should not persue
simulating/stimulating all sensory modalities.  I only make the point
that relaxing or "violating" strict physical laws can be a powerful
device for user interfaces.  Why not represent tactile information
aurally?  Or represent aural information visually?  If we constrain
ourselves too rigidly to an accurate representation of our physical
reality, we are missing out on one of the primary advantages of
virtual worlds... the transcendence of physical limitations.  Of
course, without a sensory representation to begin with, one can hardly
violate the physics of it.

Certainly there are hard-wired perceptual mechanisms in our brains
which must be exploited.  The representation of depth, for instance,
can be represented by stereopsis, motion parallax, shading, and other
cues.  The accurate representation of distance and depth is a separate
issue from how we exploit distance and depth.  In the physical world,
the farther an object, the longer it takes to approach it given
practical limitations on velocity.  In a virtual world, such
limitations amount to a line of code which can be easily altered to
serve some practical end.  My point may seem obvious, but I feel that
it has not yet fully dawned on all VE designers yet.  Granted, many
are still busy simulating the physics that I would eagerly violate....

Perhaps the best way to communicate my view is to draw this analogy:  A
virtual environment is akin to dreaming.  What happens is a greater
function of what we want to happen.  We are subject to the limitations of
our VR system rather than the laws of physics.  And fortunately, the
limitations of VR systems are subject to rapid improvement in our
lifetimes.  The limitations of physics take a bit longer to overcome. If
physics is bothering us, we can change it or make it go away in a VE...
that is, if the programmer has afforded us this luxury.

- Ed