3 ms·
I'm curious if you've seen the work coming from Dr. Smalley's lab in Texas (don't remember which school ATM). They're using cellulose with light trapping techni
by chabad360 4y ago
I'm curious if you've seen the work coming from Dr. Smalley's lab in Texas (don't remember which school ATM). They're using cellulose with light trapping techniques to simply move particles in the air and reflect light off of that.
I don't have any links on me at the moment but it shouldn't be too hard to find details on Google.
- Vox_Leone 4y agoExcuse the delayed reply. No, my friend. No relationship. I vaguely remember hearing about that approach. Dr. Smalleys seems to be on the right track, since he implicitly recognizes that voxels must be created in 3d coordinates. My proposal [yes, about a real image in space, not a hologram - posters are right to correct me] is simpler. It leverages a recognized physical principle, the aforementioned Moller scattering. The problem, as pointed out by others in this child branch, is that having electrons collide is difficult, on account of their very small cross section. But it is doable. Somebody evoked a CRT. Exactly. The first prototype could be achieved, as far as a proof of concept goes, with only two orthogonal beams, generating exactly one voxel at the precise location where they cross. Granted, in the beginning of development the device will be ugly, heavy and energy hungry. Use cases: automotive, aeronautical industries, architecture, physics, logistics, etc, etc. With time, home entertainment and the metaverse. Without generating 3d-localized voxels it is impossible to construct a 3d display. Holograms only go so far. Regards