Slashdot Mirror
Real-Time Holograms Beam Closer To Reality
sciencehabit writes "It's not quite the flickering blue projection of Princess Leia begging, 'Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope!' from the classic sci-fi movie Star Wars, but holographic projection has just beamed a bit closer to reality. Researchers in Arizona have devised a novel plastic film that can be used to generate holographic 3D images sent electronically from one location to another. The technology opens the door for everything from holographic surgery to movies that literally surround the viewer."
...to movies that literally surround the viewer.
Why on earth would I want that? I have a hard enough time taking everything in with 3D movies!
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
for me to not buy a 3D TV. saving up for basement holodeck...
He's Arnold, Arnold, Arnold Rimmer
Without him life would be much dimmer
He's handsome, brave, and no one's slimmer
He will never use a Zimmer.
(Let's just say that's one smeghead I never want to see again!)
I am officially gone from
How's a hologram going to take my appendix out?
Oh...
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
I wonder if this technology can help further holographic storage. Holographic storage has been hovering at the edges for a while now, and maybe this might be the impetus that drives this mainstream.
Of course, it wouldn't be memristor fast, nor compete with SSDS, but as a medium to replace tapes or WORM optical storage for low speed, high capacity, it would be ideal, assuming the archival life of bits stored in 3D is up to par.
Is it available yet?
Therrrrre isssss nooooooo saaaanctuaryyyyy
So this thing updates every 2 seconds [with a 100x one in the works]... compared to typical games running at 30-60 times per second? But another interesting question-- exclusive of processing power, is the refresh rate limited by size, or can it scale up pretty much indefinitely?...and CAN it be large? The image makes it look like it's difficult to maintain.
The technology opens the door for everything from holographic surgery to movies that literally surround the viewer."
Say it with me everyone! HOLODECK!
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
Sort of interesting, but the video doesn't really show the image being updated - it just goes from a blank bit of plastic to one with the hologram etched inside. The article also doesn't really make it clear if the same bit of plastic can be re-used fro the next image, which it seems would be a requirement to show video; if that's the case, why don't they show the image being changed? It's great that they can make the image in 2.15 seconds, but how long does it take to erase and write the next one?
That's my bet.
So what? They've had this on CNN for at least 2 years now.
And man, it's made their news reporting so much better.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
We see things because light either comes from, through or bounces off of the things we see. The problem with our concept of projected holograms is that we need to get the light to do something special in the air. Either we cause light to be generated in the air or somehow cause a reaction with particles in the air at specified points. Projecting onto mist and smoke in the air has been successful. We know how to bounce things off of solid objects, even when those solid objects are in the form of tiny particles.
So just as most people are WAY off in thinking that we can make lightsabers and blasters with laser beams, most are way off in thinking we can project light beams to create a hologram.
It may never be possible until we start working out how we can teleport antimatter streams into patterns into 3D spaces occupied by existing matter. A matter+antimatter reaction in tiny amounts in air just might create the points of light needed to create holographic images in the air. Even that would not be sustainable for a video stream, I fear, as all sorts of things are likely to go awry while antimatter reacts with the matter particles in the air.
Projecting light onto a plastic film is a LONG way from creating a hologram in the air and it is probably moving in the wrong direction even to try.
But I'll rather take a Lightsaber any day.
in the Nature abstract, but there certainly is on their group's website!
Also, it's rad that they mentioned Star Wars in a Nature article; although it would have been better if they'd actually referenced A New Hope.
So if this is the future...where's my jet pack?
Perhaps I am missing something, but this technology doesn't seem like a holograph at all. It seems like it's a dynamic hologram. While that is interesting, it still requires a custom display sheet upon which to project the image. So I would still have to carry around a square of material in order to view my electronic hologram message, or whatever. When I think holograph, I think about a three-dimensional figure of light being projected onto a table top. I don't think of a moving hologram. In other words, it's not a holograph until there is no display to truck around anymore. Combine this dynamic hologram technology with a projector that constructs a life-size (scalable of course) light-only version of an object, and then you've got a holograph. I am waiting. =)
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
Thank you summary, I was unaware of where that quote came from. It is only due to your diligence that I am now informed of that piece of movie trivia.
We wouldn't want someone to confuse Star Wars (the classic sci-fi movie) with Star Wars (the contemporary adult-midget porno flick). Of course, the famous quote from the latter is "Penetrate me O-B-its-Long Ushorty, you are my only poke." How the two could be confused I have no idea.
Authority questions you. Return the favor.
You know something is ancient news when Telstra has done it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBxGzfc9wL4
I'm not sure if these two forms of holograph are related, but I watched an interesting documentary about holographs recently.
Doctor Laser: Inside the Wondrous Lab of One of the World's Last Holographers.
Learn some neat facts about this lost/dying art.
My page.
This is a common misconception about holograms which has come about because of movie special effects.
A real hologram can show the illusion of something floating in front of you, but only so long as your gaze is directed *at* the hologram. Thus, a hologram "picture" hanging on the wall can only show an object while you're looking at the picture, but direct your gaze to the wall left or right and you see the wall. You can see a little bit around the object, but you can't walk around and see behind it because then you would be looking away from the hologram.
For a complete 3-d image you need a "band" of hologram that goes all around the room. Now, wherever you look you are looking into the hologram, and will see the image at the corresponding angle. The requirement to be looking at the hologram is still there - you can't look down through the object to the floor.
If the hologram covered every surface of the room you could have a the illusion of a complete 3-d representation of an object. In this case you could walk around it and view it from any angle, including from below and from above.
However, if another person were in the room with you, you could not see the object if they were between you and the wall. If they are opposite the image from you then you will see them, not the object. If you and they are at 90 degrees to the object, then you can see the object... but you can only walk around it to the point where the other person obscures your view of the wall.
Holograms don't cause light to change direction in mid air. It's just an optical effect that 'kinda reverses the focus in a way that tricks your eyes into thinking there's an object there.
Husband away on business, on phone to wife at home, "How was that for you Babe?" Wife, "didn't feel a thing but heard the woman in room next to me moaning rather a lot." Husband, "Shit...I'm gonna sue those fucking Hollogramaticsex bastards!
A closed mouth gathers no foot.