kilian@poplar.cray.com (Alan Kilian) (05/01/91)
>From: jdb9608@ultb.isc.rit.edu (J.D. Beutel) >>>For example if one is in >>>VR and is constantly given the ability to see magnetic fields, >>>once he removes the goggles will his senses pick up on this >>>ability and be able to see the fields in reality? >> >>No. The human eye is not sensitive to normal strength magnetic fields. >>Sorry. > >Seeing is more than meets the eye. > >Sometimes you see what you expect to see, even tho (sic) it's not really >there. And then there are things right in front of you which you might >never notice. > >Imagine a eyephone/camera/computer which can (somehow) identify hidden >weapons (like an experienced police officer) by suspicious bulges in >clothing. A rookie could use this visual cue to learn what to look >for. With experience the rookie could see what s/he could not see >before, but would learn faster with the cueing. True. THe human eye can see bumps in clothing and can therefore be trained to recognize these bumps more quickly. >How about a similar system for engineers, with input from stress >sensors (inside bridges, buildings, or machines)? The VR cues >presented in conjunction with the engineer's own senses may allow >him/her to learn what to look for. The engineer may begin to be able >to see the stressed areas without any input from internal sensors. No, The human eye cannot detect the stress in structural members of bridges. And cannot be trained to recognize these stresses. >I expect those wouldn't be the strangest changes in perception. Oh? I think that beginning to see stress or magnetic fields would be sort of a MAJOR change in perception. >Many suprising (sic) discoveries have been made about human perception, so >far. >VR can be a new tool in experimental psychology, and it may lead >to new discoveries Yes VR might be a great tool for physiology experiments. >results we could never have imagined because we are >so deeply entrenched in the reality we have adapted for ourselves. Speak for yourself please. -Alan Kilian kilian@cray.com 612.683.5499 Cray Research, Inc. | Getting up early is an absolute drag, 655 F Lone Oak Drive | at least I should suppose it would be. Eagan MN, 55121 | -James S. Kunen _The Strawberry Statement_
deadman@garnet.berkeley.edu (Ben Haller) (05/05/91)
In article <1991May1.014938.15819@milton.u.washington.edu> kilian@poplar.cray.co m (Alan Kilian) writes: >>Imagine a eyephone/camera/computer which can (somehow) identify hidden >>weapons (like an experienced police officer) by suspicious bulges in >>clothing. A rookie could use this visual cue to learn what to look >>for. With experience the rookie could see what s/he could not see >>before, but would learn faster with the cueing. > >True. THe human eye can see bumps in clothing and can therefore be trained >to recognize these bumps more quickly. > >>How about a similar system for engineers, with input from stress >>sensors (inside bridges, buildings, or machines)? The VR cues >>presented in conjunction with the engineer's own senses may allow >>him/her to learn what to look for. The engineer may begin to be able >>to see the stressed areas without any input from internal sensors. > >No, The human eye cannot detect the stress in structural members of bridges. >And cannot be trained to recognize these stresses. > >>I expect those wouldn't be the strangest changes in perception. > >Oh? I think that beginning to see stress or magnetic fields would be >sort of a MAJOR change in perception. I don't know if this is what the original poster meant, but: certainly, the human eye cannot directly observe stresses in structural members of bridges. But it seems quite plausible that the human *mind* could learn to "see" those stresses, in some sense, after being trained by a VR system. I know that, as a computer programmer, I can now "see" logic and structure when looking at a program, whereas a person who doesn't know how to program would see only meaningless words and letters arranged in hierarchical patterns. My ability to "see" those things came from programming for a long time, until my mind became so accustomed to programming that the interpretation of a program became a somewhat unconscious process, performed automatically by my brain whenever I see code. It's similar to when I first learned to read. At first, of course, it was a struggle, but eventually I crossed a line and it became almost like "living" the book. I remember many times when I would forget that I was reading, and not even be conscious of seeing words in front of me: my brain had become good enough at reading that the words were automatically transformed into a visual and auditory experience before my conscious mind even realised that they were there. Unfortunately, nowadays my critical faculties have become so developed (overdeveloped?) that it takes a *really* good book to do this to me; but that's another story. Given this sort of thing, is it really completely implausible that engineers could "see" structural flaws, stresses, etc? I don't know, maybe the better ones already do! It wouldn't really surprise me at all. Magnetic fields seems a bit more out-to-lunch, since they're not as easy to guess from straight sensory data of other kinds, but perhaps, in some contexts, it would be possible. I think that this kind of thing is really quite interesting, and doesn't deserve to be jumped on so aggressively by the previous poster. -Ben Haller (deadman@garnet.berkley.edu) "See me...feel me...touch me..." - The Who
jdb9608@ultb.isc.rit.edu (J.D. Beutel) (05/05/91)
I think I may not have explained my meaning well enuf. I'm not suggesting that VR training will add new sensory modalities; I'm suggesting that it will change the ones we have now. Our perception is changing all the time, but VR may allow us to change it faster, more profoundly, or in ways we were never able to before. I'm not trying to defend the magnetic field or material stress examples; they may be wrong in particular. My point was, in general, that people do not simply see what is there, like a video camera. What people see depends on what they have been trained to see--it depends on their higher-level knowledge. Let me give you another example, from Mr. Kilian's article itself: In article <1991May1.014938.15819@milton.u.washington.edu> kilian@poplar.cray.co m (Alan Kilian) writes: >>From: jdb9608@ultb.isc.rit.edu (J.D. Beutel) >> >>Sometimes you see what you expect to see, even tho (sic) it's not really >> >>Many suprising (sic) discoveries have been made about human perception, so Mr. Kilian has seen my spelling errors. Adding the "(sic)" editorial comment is not necessary because most people reading this know that the newsreader program copies the quoted article--they would not attribute the spelling error to a typo by Mr. Kilian. But, he added the "(sic)"s anyway. Those spelling errors must have really stood out to him, distracting him from my article. At the very least, he noticed them. I'm sure he didn't say to himself, "hmmmm, let me see what spelling errors David has made," nor run my article thru a spell-checker. They just stood out; he simply saw them. This is a wonderful example of the subjectivity of perception. Thanks to training, Mr. Kilian can see my spelling mistakes. On the other hand, I cannot see my spelling mistakes. (Well, okay, the "tho" was intentional, but the "suprising" was not.) I know many people similar to me who cannot see spelling errors like this; and, I know many who can. Obviously we are all looking at the same words, but what we "see" is different. With training (e.g., a text editor which highlights spelling errors) I might learn to see spelling mistakes like Mr. Kilian does. My perception would be changed thru training assistance from a computer program. Learning to see magnetic fields or material stress points may be impossible (or at least much more difficult). But, for many cases like this we won't really know it's impossible until we try it. We can't just say, "well, nobody's ever seen it, so therefore it can't be seen." With VR we're talking about new ways of seeing. People involved with VR will have to keep in mind not only how the users perceive the VR, but also how that perception itself will be changed by the VR. > -Alan Kilian kilian@cray.com 612.683.5499 > Cray Research, Inc. | Getting up early is an absolute drag, > 655 F Lone Oak Drive | at least I should suppose it would be. > Eagan MN, 55121 | -James S. Kunen _The Strawberry Statement_ -- -- J. David Beutel 11011011 jdb9608@cs.rit.edu "I am, therefore I am."