×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ready for a CyberWalk?

ScuttleMonkey posted about 6 years ago | from the holodeck-tech dept.

Input Devices 69

Roland Piquepaille writes "Even with recent improvements in virtual reality technology, it's still almost impossible to physically walk through virtual environments. Now, European researchers have started a project named CyberWalk and they'll demonstrate next week their omni-directional treadmill, named CyberCarpet. According to ICT Results, the researchers 'had to address five key issues: providing a surface to walk on, controlling the surface in a way that minimized forces on the user, developing a non-intrusive tracking system, displaying a high-quality visualization, and ensuring a natural human perception of the virtual environment.' The researchers think that their new virtual environments would be used by architects and the gaming industry." Additional details are also available via the project website.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

69 comments

Get a VR set for my dog (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23041470)

and then he'll never need to go outside. He'll get some good exercise too if I can simulate some cats running away.

Re:Get a VR set for my dog (4, Insightful)

SoupIsGoodFood_42 (521389) | about 6 years ago | (#23041658)

Unless it can simulate smell, I think your dog will find the VR world quite lacking.

Re:Get a VR set for my dog (1)

psychicsword (1036852) | about 6 years ago | (#23042824)

My dog actually will run on my treadmill and loves it! unfortunately there isn't enough room for both of us at the same time(he is a 75lbs lab).

Re:Get a VR set for my dog (1)

MrSteveSD (801820) | about 6 years ago | (#23043098)

Oh I don't know. I am sure dogs would love to play VR games such as "Slow Limping Cats 2".

Re:Get a VR set for my dog (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23043842)

I worked on a project with Rediffusion Simulation on putting smell into a simulation like that. It turns out to be very easy to produce a wide variety of smells from a few basic liquid ingredients and to have a computer drive them appropriately.

The trouble is that the vaporised scents don't fade away very easily and you need a lot of airflow in order to remove one scent and replace it with another. Worse still - because you aren't really moving around in a large space - the scents build up in the very fabric of the room you are in - and pretty soon it smells of everything all the time.

I think you need some kind of mask into which to inject the stuff - that way you only need to use very little of it and you can recycle that small volume of air very rapidly. The problem is that the mask isn't going to feel much like reality in most cases.

Re:Get a VR set for my dog (1)

killmofasta (460565) | about 6 years ago | (#23044694)

Pfft. Dude! You virtual-farted!

Coming soon: Smellavision, bringing scratch and sniff to a new level!

holodeck time! (1)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | about 6 years ago | (#23041478)

Yay, now we finally have the final key to making a holodeck! Oh wait, we need holographic projects too, darn! *puts down his actual +2 claymore* Actually I'm pretty sure there's no way for this to convince someone it's real. You know that the ground is moving under you when you take a step so you'll always know you're not really going anywhere. Plus, people can sense acceleration. If this thing was to work at a full run plus jumping and quick corners like virtual basketball or something, it would simply trip the user as soon as it rapidly changed directions.
Oh yeah and Roland is a douchebag

Can fool accelleration sensors. (5, Interesting)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | about 6 years ago | (#23041642)

Actually I'm pretty sure there's no way for this to convince someone it's real. You know that the ground is moving under you when you take a step so you'll always know you're not really going anywhere. Plus, people can sense acceleration.

Which is mostly done in the inner ear: Three "rate gyros" per ear (the semicircular canals) plus three linear accelleration sensors ditto (nerve cells with calcified masses on the ends).

But it turns out these can be fooled by elecrtostimulus from varying magnetic fields generated by coils mounted on a headpiece near them.

There has been at least one slashdot article on these - including adding them to a headpiece to mimic the head acceleration that would match a moving screen image to reduce "barfogenisis" and improve simulation game experience. Adding them to a 3-D VR simulation would be the next logical step.

With wall screens and projection onto the moving floor you could create the necessary visual illusion.

Gettin' there ... gettin' there ...

Re:Can fool accelleration sensors. (1)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | about 6 years ago | (#23041914)

yeah, I was thinking about matching it with the opposite signal in the ear/brain but I kid you not, the first thing I thought was well that's not how they do it on Star Trek cuz some alien species don't have the same inner ear structure.

Re:Can fool accelleration sensors. (1)

GrievousMistake (880829) | about 6 years ago | (#23042168)

Fucking with the ear gyros is probably best done while sitting down.
It'd be even worse if you want several users on at once, which seems reasonable given the size of the thing. When your friend started walking, you'd start accelerating, which would either be pretty grating or, if you supressed your motion sensors, would cause you to fall down.
I guess one of the reasons for the 'bigger is better' thing is that you can use the extra leeway to get smoother acceleration.

Re:Can fool accelleration sensors. (3, Interesting)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 6 years ago | (#23042204)

Actually I'm pretty sure there's no way for this to convince someone it's real. You know that the ground is moving under you when you take a step so you'll always know you're not really going anywhere. Plus, people can sense acceleration.


Which is mostly done in the inner ear: Three "rate gyros" per ear (the semicircular canals) plus three linear accelleration sensors ditto (nerve cells with calcified masses on the ends).

But it turns out these can be fooled by elecrtostimulus from varying magnetic fields generated by coils mounted on a headpiece near them.


Actually, you can fool them quite easily, as any pilot knows. "Spatial disorientation" has downed many aircraft, usually because the pilot thinks the aircraft is doing one thing (flying straight and level), when it's really doing something else (descending/turning, or ascending/turning leading to stall).

One trick done during training is having the instructor do a maneuver like a turn continually for a minute or two, then ask the pilot to level the aircraft (by feel). The end result is quite... interesting. Let it continue for a minute, and the aircraft will be in a very strange attitude. Another thing is to simply let the pilot fly blind, by feel, and see what trouble it leads into.

It's why IFR pilots must trust their instruments and not their gut feel.

I don't see why you can't apply similar tricks into this to make it realistic. After all, those simulator rides feel pretty damn real even though the cabin only moves a few feet each way.

Re:Can fool accelleration sensors. (1)

Bug-Man (83169) | about 6 years ago | (#23045382)

Also if you've ever pulled up at the traffic lights next to a car that's creeping forwards next to you, it can sometimes feel like your car is creeping backwards depending on where you're concentrating.

On the London Underground, if two trains are right next to each other and stationery, and the other train begins moving, it often feels like your train is the one actually moving. You usually figure it all out after a second or two when you realise you can't feel anything that you usually associate with movement, such as the feel of acceleration or the jolting of the carriage as it moves.

Re:Can fool accelleration sensors. (1)

Julie188 (991243) | about 6 years ago | (#23042606)

Seems like an awful lot of trouble to help people avoid something they do easily and naturally -- walking. I mean, maybe it's great for people stuck in prison ... or those who can't walk for physical reasons. But I, personally, like to be outside. I don't need VR to mimic reality all that much because I actually HAVE reality around when I want to be part of it. When I go into VR, I'd rather fly or swim or use my superpowers.

Re:Can fool accelleration sensors. (1)

naam00 (1145163) | about 6 years ago | (#23046414)

hmmmm, how about tilting the treadmill as you walk into a certain direction? Like how they simulate accelleration in flight simulators? Gravity is simply an accelleration itself, after all.

I am sure I didn't think this tilting roll-anywhere treadmill through thoroughly enough, still, why wouldn't it work?

Re:holodeck time! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23041730)

Damn momentum! Apparently Star Trek had some inertial dampeners so perhaps they had the technology to be able to perform an accurate simulation (as well as not being flattened when they used their high power sublight impulse drives). Until you can solve the linear and angular momentum problem, these holodecks will continue to be fiction.

CyberCarpet (2, Interesting)

vrmlguy (120854) | about 6 years ago | (#23041544)

I'm interested in their omni-directional treadmill, CyberCarpet. I've tried to design something like this, but I inevitably wind up with a ten-foot (three meter, for our foreign friends) sphere that the user walks upon/within.

Re:CyberCarpet (4, Interesting)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | about 6 years ago | (#23041670)

There was a science fiction short story involving just such a reverse trackball - though larger than ten feet - being used to trap a victim. Once on the ball, feedback rotated the ball to bring him to the center and keep him there, no matter how he ran, jumped, or dodged.

Re:CyberCarpet (1)

steelfood (895457) | about 6 years ago | (#23042318)

This would be highly unlikely without a large enough ball.

In order to "escape," you would need to jump the distance from the center to the edge. Or, effectively run with long leaping strides faster than the ball can roll. Since there's no friction between you and the surface while you are in the air, the only time the ball can return to the center is when the person has landed. If you immediately jump forward again, then either you will eventually get to the edge of the ball.

If the ball's movement is dependent on where you land with respect to the center, then you would have to leap slightly to the side every time, and effectively spiral outwards.

Or, if the rotation is faster than you can jump, you can get the ball to do the work for you through momentum and timing by landing farther with each successive jump.

Re:CyberCarpet (1)

fbjon (692006) | about 6 years ago | (#23042852)

No, I think the point is that no matter how you move, your center of gravity is kept above the center of the sphere at all times. If you jump to the side, the ball will simply move with your feet, cancelling out horizontal vectors, and making you go straight up and down. In other words, the ball is already moving before you leave the "ground". With perfect feedback and measurement, and very speedy rotation, you'll be trapped on top of the ball. Pretty scary, actually.

Re:CyberCarpet is small spheres? (2)

euri.ca (984408) | about 6 years ago | (#23041760)

Since the video is "Coming Soon", does anyone know if this is a carpet of small spheres then?

That also works, and would explain why the hard part was keeping track of which way you were walking.

Re:CyberCarpet is small spheres? (2, Informative)

luder (923306) | about 6 years ago | (#23042296)

There are videos of prototypes in youtube:

Omni-Directional Treadmill, June 28, 2007 [youtube.com] (not sure if it is from the same project)
Cyberwalk Project, December 20, 2007 [youtube.com]

Re:CyberCarpet is small spheres? (1)

iamhassi (659463) | about 6 years ago | (#23043820)

i can't believe the best method anyone's found of creating a "cyberwalk" is a dozen small treadmills wrapped around another giant treadmill.

Guess I won't be seeing one of these hooked to my Wii anytime soon.

Re:CyberCarpet (1)

megaditto (982598) | about 6 years ago | (#23042276)

How about a giant hamster ball with the user inside? No need to maintain dynamic equillibrium, so much easier to control one would think.

But even better than that would be to tie your user's feet to 3-d force feedback actuators: pretty much model it after an elliptical trainer, but with an independent drive for each leg with an added ability to perform lateral translations.

sphere = infinite plane (1)

Arthur B. (806360) | about 6 years ago | (#23041556)

While this is definitely cool, I prefer the simple and elegant solution of walking inside a sphere.

Re:sphere = infinite plane (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23041574)

I tried one of those hollow sphere virtual reality projects once at a video game convention, it was the most unintuitive and disorienting thing I've ever used, I'm lucky I got out in one piece.

Re:sphere = infinite plane (1)

4D6963 (933028) | about 6 years ago | (#23042248)

While this is definitely cool, I prefer the simple and elegant solution of walking inside a sphere.

Yeah, cause walking on a curved surface feels exactly like walking on a plane. Makes me wonder why I don't take walks in that giant hamster ball whenever it's raining outside..

Re:sphere = infinite plane (1)

Zerth (26112) | about 6 years ago | (#23042586)

>Yeah, cause walking on a curved surface feels
>exactly like walking on a plane

Remind me, what shape is the world again?

Re:sphere = infinite plane (1)

Nullav (1053766) | about 6 years ago | (#23045972)

Convex =/= Concave
Also, the Earth is bloody huge compared to a car-sized hamster ball. The curvature quickly becomes quite obvious.

Not new (2, Interesting)

nodrogluap (165820) | about 6 years ago | (#23041568)

We have a CAVE at our work, and the company that does the maintenance told me about and showed pictures of a 6 meter omnidirectional rolling carpet with VR display they built for the U.S. military. They were even trying to get wind and dust in the environment, but it would gunk up the works. It was probably a one-off though, whereas this new stuff seems to be going towards "commodity" vr.

Re:Not new (1)

nodrogluap (165820) | about 6 years ago | (#23042350)

I should mention, this was 5 years ago.

Re:Not new (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23042726)

Well, 14 years ago, there was a movie with Michael Douglas and Demi Moore ("Disclosure"-1994). One of the things in it was a virtual reality database dubbed "The Corridor". You'd step onto an omnidirectional treadmill, don a headmounted display, get a 3d laser scan and presto you're in the corridor environment. Seems like all the best technology comes out of Hollywood these days.

Wii 2? (2, Interesting)

billy901 (1158761) | about 6 years ago | (#23041720)

The minds at Nintendo will quickly pick this up and expand on their Wii. People thought that the Wii was far away and would cost thousands of dollars. I'm sure we're on a pathway to playing ruining our fancy new plasma televisions by running into them! How will we create a safety strap for this one?

Re:Wii 2? (1)

timmarhy (659436) | about 6 years ago | (#23042862)

the wii's motion tracking isn't anything special, fuck the playstation 2 had an addon for it.

Re:Wii 2? (1)

Original Replica (908688) | about 6 years ago | (#23042996)

treadmills and trackballs aren't exactly new or special either. it's all about making their use intuitive and fun. which is something the makers of the wii seem to have succeeded at while the ps2 add-on faded into obscurity.

FPS use (1)

steveha (103154) | about 6 years ago | (#23041748)

Oh man this would be sweet for first person shooters. Want to spend the entire level running? Better be in shape.

Next we need to add heavy custom controllers: the "rocket launcher" accessory should be made of real metal (or cheap plastic with lead weights built in). For rocket ammo, they will sell little "ammo packs" that each weigh almost as much as the rocket launcher.

Of course, some people will not play fair.

"He's using the wall-shelf hack!" (putting the ammo on a shelf instead of carrying it)

P.S. For a while I was looking for a good first-person tank combat game. Then I realized that your typical first-person shooter game is effectively a tank game. You are armored like a tank, and you can often carry a rocket launcher plus 99 rounds of ammo, plus some kind of heavy machine gun, plus railgun, particle beam, sack full of grenades, etc. etc.

Which is one reason why I like CounterStrike so much. One rifle, one handgun, a couple grenades, and you are fully loaded. You can still run full-tilt all over the map without ever getting tired or even out of breath, but what the heck.

steveha

Re:FPS use (1)

jdigriz (676802) | about 6 years ago | (#23041826)

First person shooter, running around the whole level IRL, sounds like Lazer Tag. And yeah, done properly it's quite a workout for the sedentary. I know I'm hot, sweaty and out of breath after a few rounds.

it will be (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23041788)

WoW Compatible ?

Re:it will be (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about 6 years ago | (#23042256)

WoW Compatible ?

I think its more likely to work with Duke Nukem Forever, considering how very little material of any substance they had on their website.

Forget CyberWalk- how about CyberMeet? (4, Insightful)

RyoShin (610051) | about 6 years ago | (#23042020)

The article seems to have undergone the /. effect, so I can't tell if this treadmill will do things for elevation change. Steps might be too much at this point, but what about hills?

Anyway, while going through a virtual world as if I were really there sounds cool, especially in the realm of video games, I think virtualization technology better fits the office, though it might see harder adoption.

How many people need to be in an office building for a meeting? (Nevermind how useful the meeting actually is.) How many people travel thousands of miles to give one presentation, then fly back?

Why not move phone conferencing to the virtual age? Obviously, having everyone represented by an avatar would make the meeting a bit ludicrous for those not used to it. So, why not take a page from the movie industry and go blue screen?

The way I see it is that at various locations around the globe, there is a building full of meeting rooms. Large tables, nice chairs, but no decoration and it's all one color (say, blue). When people enter, they don a set of VR goggles. Cameras in both their goggles and around the room record people and project that real world scenario into this virtual world, then seen through the VR goggles. Then, whoever is "hosting" the meeting can set up or choose from various themes to decorate the virtual rooms. Various tools allow people to project into this virtual world, to get up and walk around, hell even virtual notes.

Obviously, something would need to be done about the goggles such that either they were more like sunglasses or they were somehow removed in the digital projection. And it would take some serious hardware to do a good projection as well as including real-time video. But I believe that this kind of thing would be a big boon for international visits- now you only have to worry about time zones, not planes, hotels, and car rides. Fuel savings, cost savings (once the tech gets there), time savings. If done well enough, there would be no difference than if you were in person. Handshake aside, do you often make physical contact with the people you meet with? No dinner afterwards, unfortunately.

You could have a meeting with potential clients in Japan and be home in an hour.

Re:Forget CyberWalk- how about CyberMeet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23042348)

Obviously, something would need to be done about the goggles
Why not do something like a profile where when you create your account, you do a 3D mapping of your facial features. Then you could choose what clothes to appear to be wearing, with your face/head.

Re:Forget CyberWalk- how about CyberMeet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23042554)

Hrm. Your comment about stairs makes me think that a better idea would be some sort of ski boot-style walking gear, with appropriate feedback mechanisms.

Hollow Pursuits (Arbitrary Horizontal Motion) (1)

NetSettler (460623) | about 6 years ago | (#23042614)

The article seems to have undergone the /. effect, so I can't tell if this treadmill will do things for elevation change. Steps might be too much at this point, but what about hills?

It looked pretty flat in the one vague picture it showed when I finally got through.

From what I've heard of some of these VR systems and their typical uses, it would seem like they couldn't get away without emulating, at minimum, the one or two foot elevation shift onto a soft platform (say, a bed) and then the arbitrarily varied directions one might find oneself rolling from there... The picture gave the impression the technology was a ways off from that.

If done well enough, there would be no difference than if you were in person. Handshake aside, do you often make physical contact with the people you meet with?

For just the reason you allude to, is it obvious this needs to be done by VR? I mean, I'd think a mere camera would be fine for that. How often do you need to see the people you're meeting (or have them see you) other than from some particular angle? People use this information in meetings mostly to judge attention, focus, and interest. Most of that will come across in flat display. Indeed, if you're seeing someone focused at you in VR, you can't be sure they're seeing you. You might think they're looking at their notes, but it might be a virtual crossword puzzle so reading excess information into what you see is of marginal value, and might even deceive you. I think it's a mistake to think the business world needs this per se; the telephone is still adequate for many things, and where it's not, a realtime video display, even flat and in black&white, would cover most of the rest of the need.

I'm not saying there aren't reasons to want to move in and out of data and other presentation material you see in meetings. I'm just saying the membership of the meetings having to move with you in a VR way attaches an additional constraint that will work against that. Either the person can or can't move freely among the data; if they can, then if they take others with them, then those people are moving not of their own will but at the will of someone else (which is not VR). If the others move of their own will, then they are not synchronized as to what they're looking at and have no common frame of reference in a meeting. The situation is easily overconstrained and not to any good end by focusing on the people rather than the data in a meeting, at least without a very definite (and in this forum unarticulated) theory of why you'd be worrying about VR.

Nor am I saying there aren't gaming reasons for wanting to be able to peruse and physically engage people you're with. I'm just saying I'm not sure they generalize to business, except as a luxury. Among other things, it will be additional years before the general populace can have this, so the only businesses who can use this are those that don't mind losing the business of anyone who can't afford this...

No dinner afterwards, unfortunately.

That's the one actual reason for VR--to engage in a social venues, where the rules of interaction might be more complicated. And still the one actual reason to travel. The meeting could take place in email or online most of the time. Personal relationships are hard to build up in meetings, but not because of the technology--because of the rules of engagement. Building trust has to involve risking trust and testing it. Conventional meeting protocol is designed to avoid that issue to the best degree possible.

Re:Hollow Pursuits (Arbitrary Horizontal Motion) (1)

RyoShin (610051) | about 6 years ago | (#23043134)

For just the reason you allude to, is it obvious this needs to be done by VR? I mean, I'd think a mere camera would be fine for that. How often do you need to see the people you're meeting (or have them see you) other than from some particular angle?
I suppose that's true. The thought is that with a video monitor, no matter how big, you're still generally stuck at one angle from one level. If someone had, say, a highly-detailed model they wanted to show, it would be hard to do that with the video monitor without a lot of extra hassle. There are some other things I can think of, like instant changes to "handouts", but that could be done with the use of a few Kindles and a fat pipe.

But then I suppose the added benefit of that wouldn't outweigh the cost involved in such a set up when it's basically a glorified 3D camera. Perhaps once things like texture feedback is "perfected" and put to use it would make more sense. Ah well, I'm sure we'll see this in the far future but with holograms instead of goggles.

I'd settle for a decent Head Mounted Display (2, Insightful)

MrSteveSD (801820) | about 6 years ago | (#23042110)

I've been waiting for one with full human field of view (or as near as possible) with good resolution for the last 20 years. I still can't go to the shops and buy one. Even the ones that cost $20,000 are not that great in terms of Field of view. We have the computer power for some very impressive virtual environments yet the visual hardware is completely lacking. I only hope the popularity of mobile video spurs the development of better video glasses technology. Immersive (at least visually) virtual reality is long overdue now.

Re:I'd settle for a decent Head Mounted Display (1)

timmarhy (659436) | about 6 years ago | (#23042818)

I hear you there. we have full HD displays on LCOS that are the size of a postage stamp, why can't they mount those kinds of displays in a set of glasses light enough that it doesn't break my neck?

Re:I'd settle for a decent Head Mounted Display (1)

MrSteveSD (801820) | about 6 years ago | (#23043072)

Up until now, the only reason to develop them for the home market has been VR games, and none of the manufacturers seem to have been interested. Now mobile video is taking off, it may lead to better video glasses. The indicube [indicube.com] should be released soon which is a mobile video player with video glasses. They have a resolution of 800x600 and a field of view about equivalent to a 17 inch monitor on your desk. It's not great but I think it may get the public excited about video glasses and prompt the creation of better HMDs. That's what I'm hoping anyway.

Field of view is in many ways more important for immersion that stereovision, because your 3D vision breaks down quite quickly over distance. So its the field of view I really want to see improved. There's little point in having a VR headset if you're just going to get tunnel vision. I look forward to the day when I can walk around some virtual environment and actually look up at a tall building by tilting my head back. Simple things like that will make you feel small, like you are really there. I think it's crazy that with all the processing power we have today, our virtual environments are still stuck behind a little screen.

David Brin's "Natulife". (1)

argent (18001) | about 6 years ago | (#23042500)

This is similar to the premise of David Brin's short story "Natulife (R)" in the collection "Otherness".

Already been done... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23042812)

Anyone remember that Jamiroquai music video? :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJmX1z1NY2c

and they thought the internet was addictive (1)

kris.montpetit (1265946) | about 6 years ago | (#23042884)

soon we'll see people addicted to VR, wasting away in front of their new reality. People insisting they've been to Paris but forgetting they've only been there in VR...Or at least thats what sci fi tells us XD. I guess if they try and accomodate things like walking rather than trying to simulate them psychosomnatically, we'll all at least get some excersize

Roland the Plogger, again (1)

Animats (122034) | about 6 years ago | (#23043562)

It's a Roland the Plogger story, so you know there has to be something wrong with it.

There have been a few previous attempts at 2D treadmills. They're usually just a big endless chain of belt-type treadmills, like this one. The problem is that the things are big, heavy, expensive, and may have pinch points.

Here's a paper [utah.edu] which lists most of the previous omnidirectional treadmills. The Darken Omnidirectional Treadmill (1997) was a belt made of rollers. The Torus Treadmill [tsukuba.ac.jp] was an array of 12 small treadmills on an endless chain. This new treadmill looks like a bigger version of the Torus Treadmill.

The Sarcos Treadport is a more aggressive approach to the problem. It's only a 1D treadmill, but it's on a tilt base, so it can simulate hills. The user is in a suspended harness which can yank the user around to simulate collision with an obstacle. (Now there's force feedback.)

So this isn't that novel; it's just a bit bigger. Typical Roland the Plogger; press release goes in, blogspam comes out.

Inertia is what kills you. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23043788)

You are walking along at a uniform speed and you stop dead.

In the real world - you feel an accelleration on your body - which you have to cancel by pushing backwards a bit harder on your last step.

In the virtual world, you were never really moving - so when you stop moving you don't need to do anything to counteract the accelleration.

But because we have a bazillion years of evolution and a few decades of practice - we'll do it anyway - and (in all likelyhood) either fall over or feel ill. In any event, it'll be EASILY distinguishable from reality.

I don't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23046720)

How can three people walk on it in different directions, as in the first image of TFA?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...