emcguire@cadfx.ccad.uiowa.edu (Ed McGuire,1410 EB,,) (02/23/90)
>From article <16311@well.sf.ca.us>, by nelson_p@apollo.com: > Does anyone know what the status > is of research to try to control this problem? There was an article quite recently in Scientific American which featured remote controlled processes (such as an automobile piloted via radio link). It included a discussion of the motion sickness problem because it was relevant to systems which provided stereo video feedback to the remote operator. Sorry I can't cite the volume. I'm working on a project which makes this problem very relevant to me, but the above article is my only education thus far. As I find out more, I will share my information. I also look forward to hearing from others. peace. -- Ed
hlr@well.sf.ca.us (Howard Rheingold) (02/25/90)
nelson_p@apollo.com writes: > If this is so then it could greatly limit the applicablity > of virtual reality systems. Does anyone know what the status > is of research to try to control this problem? The status of the research should be the same as that of motion sickness in general, i.e., decorrelation of visual and vestibular inputs is often thought to cause motion sickness. One well published example is space sickness, a common example is motion sickness from riding in an automobile (car sickness). Check your library for medical/psychological journal articles on motion sickness -- much has been done.
hopper@ntmtv.UUCP (Ian Hopper) (03/04/90)
>From article <16311@well.sf.ca.us>, by nelson_p@apollo.com: > > > At SIGGRAPH '89 in Boston there was a panel discussion on > Virtual Environments in which Scott Fisher from NASA/Ames > indicated that one of the major problems that they've been > having with these experiments is motion sickness. Virtual > reality devices like videophones produce input to the human > sensory system which is at odds with what the vestibular > system indicates. The more realistic the simulation the > worse the motion sickness becomes. The problem apparently > affects a significant percentage of people using such systems. > If this is so then it could greatly limit the applicablity > of virtual reality systems. Does anyone know what the status > is of research to try to control this problem? > > ---Peter I'll attempt to speak for Scott Fisher, who apparently does not post on the net very often. As has been said, the sickness is the result of a mis-match between what the eyes are seeing versus what the balance organs of the inner-ear are "feeling". The usual problem si for those folks who are using the "ISO Track" 6-degree of freedom position sensing system. The positions it reports to your favourite computer/graphics system are often a solid fraction of a second behind the current position. The effect on the person wearing the "eye-phones" is that the "world" takes the same fraction of a second to "catch up" with your head motion. Rather like being REALLY drunk and is equally sickening. The (lack of) performance of your computer/graphics engine can add to this effect. (That is where the $100K graphics system *might not* be fast enough.) An interesting question is: How accurate do you have be in order to avoid the effect? An unsolvable version of the problem arises in flight-simulation systems, the pilot is in the middle of a virtual strong turn, but there is none of the appropriate sensation because the guy is not really sitting in an airplane. Clearly the sensation of up-side down flight is difficult to simulate without either turning the simulation platform upside down, or using your ACME anti- gravity generator. -- Ian Hopper {amdahl.com,ames.arpa,hplabs}!ntmtv!hopper Northern Telecom Inc. [Clever comment under construction.]