Holographics : New tech or Advancements in old tech ?

[Elite Peon]

I was thinking about technology today and what makes in my mind the future versus the ideal future . In almost all ideal futures we have holographic technology and yet even in 2014 it's not even a remotely viable concept . We are no closer to holographic displays then in the 80's so to speak ...and what do I mean by that ?? Well one Viable solution to holographic technology would be an eye over rendered display . What I mean is either glasses or contacts that would render a 3d display in the visual acuity but this sort of technology is years in the future . Google glass has showed maybe a slight gimps of what might be possible but as far as true 3d holographics the future is not so bright right now .....

What do you guys think ?

[Ticj]

Uhh actually they have made something pretty similar to holographics already.




Edit: Here's a video actually http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the...sci-fi-anymore

[Reeve]

If holograms aren't real, I want to know how Tupac Shakur came back from the dead.

[Soisoisoi]

Like Ticj linked, the video halfway down the page. Direct link though - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGbrFmPBV0Y

They use that sort of thing for anime-type characters (wrong use probably, don't hate. Stereotypes ftw.) concerts etc in Asian places. e.g. http://youtu.be/LDMmcsH0fo8

[Deleted]

Are true holograms even possible? As in projected in the air, not in some glass box with reflective surfaces and without using mirrors. So the concept basically expects air to reflect light where necessary even when there isn't really anything there that can reflect it?

- - - Updated - - -

If holograms aren't real, I want to know how Tupac Shakur came back from the dead.

They had a special stage with huge mirror set at an angle at the back of it. It wasn't a real hologram and needed a special stage and correct viewing angle to work.

[Reeve]

Are true holograms even possible? As in projected in the air, not in some glass box with reflective surfaces and without using mirrors. So the concept basically expects air to reflect light where necessary even when there isn't really anything there that can reflect it?

- - - Updated - - -



They had a special stage with huge mirror set at an angle at the back of it. It wasn't a real hologram and needed a special stage and correct viewing angle to work.

So what? How does that disqualify it? Like saying an airplane isn't really flying because it requires wings.

[Deleted]

So what? How does that disqualify it? Like saying an airplane isn't really flying because it requires wings.

No it's like saying an airplane isnt a real flying machine if it can only fly when it's suspended in air using ropes and needs a huge crane to move it around.

[SirPiken]

So what? How does that disqualify it? Like saying an airplane isn't really flying because it requires wings.

More like saying an airplane isn't really an airplane if it just glides.

- - - Updated - - -

True Holograms aren't possible until they can develop a way to temporarily make air non transparent. You cant see light till it is reflected/refracted.

Also I don't think this was an attack on the "current holograms" because they are undeniably still very cool.

[Deleted]

If holograms aren't real, I want to know how Tupac Shakur came back from the dead.

Basicly it was a satanic ritual involving child-sacrifice, so its pretty obvious as to why they said it was done with science.

[Deleted]

I don't think holograms will ever be possible as we see it in Scifi flicks. Light cannot emit out of nowhere and projected light can't bounce back on nothing. However, as nanorobotics advance further we will most likely see physical "holograms" that we can touch and feel. Tiny little robots that act as individual pixels/atoms that can be arranged to act as a physical model of a person or object. It's better than holograms.

[Deleted]

I don't think holograms will ever be possible as we see it in Scifi flicks. Light cannot emit out of nowhere and projected light can't bounce back on nothing. However, as nanorobotics advance further we will most likely see physical "holograms" that we can touch and feel. Tiny little robots that act as individual pixels/atoms that can be arranged to act as a physical model of a person or object. It's better than holograms.

Another way of doing it is just spraying mist or or tiny drops of water in the air and have the light reflect off those.

[belfpala]

True Holograms aren't possible until they can develop a way to temporarily make air non transparent. You cant see light till it is reflected/refracted.

Fog machine. Laser effects. Haven't you ever been to a concert or club? :P

- - - Updated - - -

What I mean is either glasses or contacts that would render a 3d display in the visual acuity but this sort of technology is years in the future . Google glass has showed maybe a slight gimps of what might be possible but as far as true 3d holographics the future is not so bright right now .....

There's this... http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/17/technology/innovation/google-contacts/

But yes, I think more likely for a sci-fi style holographic display we'll need to wear some sort of glasses or contacts that display in virtual 3d.

Maybe like... http://www.oculusvr.com/ but not so dorky looking.

[Ravenblade]

A real holographic display as usually shown in sci-fi shows needs to work in total vacuum as well. So it gets even more tricky.

[belfpala]

A real holographic display as usually shown in sci-fi shows needs to work in total vacuum as well. So it gets even more tricky.

In that case, just have the mask for your helmet translate it to virtual 3d. Or, even better, the device (say, on your wrist), is really just a motion detector, and your visor is what's actually creating the image; it just makes it look like your device is projecting something.

[Deleted]

In that case, just have the mask for your helmet translate it to virtual 3d. Or, even better, the device (say, on your wrist), is really just a motion detector, and your visor is what's actually creating the image; it just makes it look like your device is projecting something.

That's called virtual reality. No need for a motion detector, you only need something that can be used as a reference point and a camera.

[belfpala]

That's called virtual reality. No need for a motion detector, you only need something that can be used as a reference point and a camera.

Motion detector so you can manipulate it and use it as a UI. I suppose the motion detector could be on the helmet as well...

[Themerlin]

I was thinking about technology today and what makes in my mind the future versus the ideal future . In almost all ideal futures we have holographic technology and yet even in 2014 it's not even a remotely viable concept . We are no closer to holographic displays then in the 80's so to speak ...and what do I mean by that ?? Well one Viable solution to holographic technology would be an eye over rendered display . What I mean is either glasses or contacts that would render a 3d display in the visual acuity but this sort of technology is years in the future . Google glass has showed maybe a slight gimps of what might be possible but as far as true 3d holographics the future is not so bright right now .....

What do you guys think ?

I think holographic technology is relatively new and quite expensive, but it does exist.

[PACOX]

They had a special stage with huge mirror set at an angle at the back of it. It wasn't a real hologram and needed a special stage and correct viewing angle to work.

Still a holo in my book. Just because the parts are bigger and its not as compartmentalized as what we see in movies doesn't mean that its not a holo, just saying.

[Christan]

why are people trying to compare holography with VR?

VR can put those images in thin air, a good enough VR(brain connections) can give smells tastes as well as "holographic" projections people talking about here...in vacuum...heh...

a hologram is just that...a hologram. gimme some true VR anyday compared to an image i can wave my hand through.

[Kulanae]

You're in one.

http://www.nature.com/news/simulatio...logram-1.14328