4D toys • Hacker News Board

Re: 4D toys

#81

Post by PhasmaFelis » Sat, Aug 04, 2018, 7:10 PM UTC

dsnuh wrote: post #76

sulam wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW this is really not true. (The bit about stereo vision being required to see 3D.) When I was in college I was fairly decent on the ping pong table, call it high amateur. I also have very very bad vision - -5 diopters in one eye and -6 in the other. At the time I wore contacts and I was also really really poor. At some point I lost one of my contacts and for six months I was effectively blind in one eye for the pu…

Did you play with only one eye open, or just one contact lens? I have worse vision than you (-8.0, -7.50), and I know that I can still function with just one lens in of needed. You definitely still have stereo vision even if one input is blurred. Your brain does quite a bit of compensation, and I can imagine if you operated this way for months that your brain would be even better at assimilating the noisy information…

Sulam is basically correct. I was born with strabismus (my eyes don't focus on the same point). To avoid perpetual double vision, my brain compensates by basically only using one eye at a time. It switches automatically when I'm looking to the side, and I can also switch consciously. (My color perception is very slightly different in each eye, it's weird.)

It turns out that stereovision is the least important of several depth cues humans use, and is only really effective out maybe 10 feet or so--beyond that the parallax is too small to give much useful info, and we rely on apparent size, relative motion, surrounding context, etc. I can catch a ball just fine, as an adult.

It's really only an issue within arm's reach, and then only when I'm distracted. Occasionally I'll reach for something without paying attention and miss by, like, a foot. Also, I can't use 3D glasses. (With the new polarized kind I can at least wear them and see a normal 2D movie. With the old red/blue kind, everything would be either red or blue, depending on which eye I was using.)

Re: 4D toys

#82

Post by ozzmotik » Sat, Aug 04, 2018, 7:11 PM UTC

myfonj wrote: post #26

joshumax wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, it's not as simple as that (although I wish it were). While you could generate a 3D perspective on each 2D "slice" of a 3D viewport, it wouldn't be that much more different than what's going on in here. The main issue arises from trying to render a 4-polytope in a universe where we ourselves can only sense 3 dimensions "natively."

Sad thing is that what we sense (see) is in fact just a poor projection into 2D (aka perspective) with some largely learnt concept of depth. If only we could sense space entirely with nothing "behind", not just from single point...

i think it's great that you represent it as a projection because that is exactly what it is: a representation of another, perhaps more "objective" (though I'm not sure at that level that attributes like that apply) data set. I think it's super easy for us to assume what we visually perceive has a 1:1 correspondence with the intrinsic nature of the data it is constructed from. and i think it's also important to realize that that construct is also informed by other avenues of sensory input and that extra context tends to take it even further away from the nature of the raw data it is constructed from

Re: 4D toys

#83

Post by dsnuh » Sat, Aug 04, 2018, 7:25 PM UTC

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #81

dsnuh wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you play with only one eye open, or just one contact lens? I have worse vision than you (-8.0, -7.50), and I know that I can still function with just one lens in of needed. You definitely still have stereo vision even if one input is blurred. Your brain does quite a bit of compensation, and I can imagine if you operated this way for months that your brain would be even better at assimilating the noisy information…

Sulam is basically correct. I was born with strabismus (my eyes don't focus on the same point). To avoid perpetual double vision, my brain compensates by basically only using one eye at a time. It switches automatically when I'm looking to the side, and I can also switch consciously. (My color perception is very slightly different in each eye, it's weird.) It turns out that stereovision is the least important of seve…

I was trying to make the same point, I think? I was just trying to note that I have done the single contact lens thing as well, and even after just a few hours, your brain starts compensating for it.

Re: 4D toys

#84

Post by weaksauce » Sat, Aug 04, 2018, 7:52 PM UTC

scrollaway wrote: post #28

simias wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that while everything you see on your (2D) monitor is effectively 2D our brain is good at taking 3D cues (shadows, perspective, parallax etc...) to reconstitute 3D "data" from it. For instance look at 3D rotating cube on your monitor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5E10zYKln3g Even though there's no shading, a bad resolution and zero context anchoring it in a familiar setting you immediately see it as…

> Could we teach our brain to "think in 4D" and interpret these cues differently? To a certain extent probably, maybe if you spent hours and hours and hours in a VR simulation with 4D objects you'd starting getting a feel for it. I doubt you'd ever get as good as with 3D objects since we've been exposed to these literally every waking moment since we're born.* Good lord! Has anyone tried? This reminds me of the backw…

That was a fascinating video. I wonder if the clicking in the brain is similar to the eye crossing effect of those 3d from noisy pictures.

Re: 4D toys

#85

Post by GuB-42 » Sat, Aug 04, 2018, 8:13 PM UTC

MrEldritch wrote: post #9

shinryuu wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been waiting for that game for more than 5 years now I think.. It'll probably stay in development for another 2 years or so.

It's getting really close, though. Puzzles, mechanics, dialogue, effects, all finished. At this point, according to the dev, all that's really left for him to do is "small things like fix collision bugs, and I will keep placing props in levels and program the occasional cool 4D thing. We still need a bunch of 3D modelling done." I'd give a 50% shot it lands on Steam before the end of 2019. (35% it doesn't make 2019 b…

90% done. It means we are halfway there :p

My gut feeling is that we are not there yet, and that 4D toys is an attempt by the author to monetize his development tools in order to be able to complete the main project. I hope it turns out well, Miegakure is definitely in my watch list.

Re: 4D toys

#86

Post by pgrad3 » Sat, Aug 04, 2018, 8:19 PM UTC

gonehome wrote: post #69

simias wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that while everything you see on your (2D) monitor is effectively 2D our brain is good at taking 3D cues (shadows, perspective, parallax etc...) to reconstitute 3D "data" from it. For instance look at 3D rotating cube on your monitor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5E10zYKln3g Even though there's no shading, a bad resolution and zero context anchoring it in a familiar setting you immediately see it as…

For your question about 3D being hard coded or learned, I think I remember reading that it’s learned. This is an old philosophy debate about wheather if I blind person could suddenly see if they’d understand that a sphere is round just by looking at it. When some people that had had cataracts for 50 years were treated they not only couldn’t tell that a sphere was round, they couldn’t understand shadows or depth of fi…

The article describing blind people getting vision again: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newyorker.com/tech/elements...

Re: 4D toys

#87

Post by nikanj » Sat, Aug 04, 2018, 9:07 PM UTC

rzwitserloot wrote: post #12

Here's a thought I had watching the bit with 2D man: Actually, the 3D view that 2D man does not understand but which we do understand is... still 2D. My screen is flat. You can use a 2D viewport to render a 3D scene in a way that is natural and easy to understand for us humans: A human watching the 2D scene can very quickly surmise from a glance at the viewport: Which objects are in the scene, and where are they loca…

If you use time for 4th dimension, you can easily do a 4d-scene on a 2d-screen

Re: 4D toys

#88

Post by lostlogin » Sat, Aug 04, 2018, 9:16 PM UTC

bunderbunder wrote: post #46

dan_mctree wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you can't. The problem is that we don't actually see 3D, we basically see 2D twice. This gives our senses enough info to reconstruct a 3D mental image, but the information we gain isn't truly 3D. Actual 3D-sight might include us seeing the inside of objects, what's behind them, etc. We're aided in converting our 2x 2D sight into 3D mental models through the use of color and parallax. In projections on images,…

> The problem is that we don't actually see 3D, we basically see 2D twice. Most of us do. But people who only have sight in one eye have no difficulty perceiving three dimensions. And some fairly large percentage of people with binocular vision are stereoblind, typically without even realizing it. If anything, I'd say it's not that > We're aided in converting our 2x 2D sight into 3D mental models through the use of c…

As you mention, binocular vision is lacking in a surprising number of people and until recently this was thought to be uncorrectable if not treated while the child was still young. That turned out to be not entirely accurate.

Those without binocular vision can have a fairly large range of non-specific symptoms and perception problems. There is an interesting discussion of the change in understanding in this link. http://www.strabismus.org/all_about_strabismus.html

Re: 4D toys

#89

Post by TheSpiceIsLife » Sat, Aug 04, 2018, 9:24 PM UTC

scrollaway wrote: post #28

simias wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that while everything you see on your (2D) monitor is effectively 2D our brain is good at taking 3D cues (shadows, perspective, parallax etc...) to reconstitute 3D "data" from it. For instance look at 3D rotating cube on your monitor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5E10zYKln3g Even though there's no shading, a bad resolution and zero context anchoring it in a familiar setting you immediately see it as…

> Could we teach our brain to "think in 4D" and interpret these cues differently? To a certain extent probably, maybe if you spent hours and hours and hours in a VR simulation with 4D objects you'd starting getting a feel for it. I doubt you'd ever get as good as with 3D objects since we've been exposed to these literally every waking moment since we're born.* Good lord! Has anyone tried? This reminds me of the backw…

In the YouTube video he says:

"So here's why I did. It was a personal challenge. I stayed out here in this driveway and I practiced about 5 minutes every day. ... after 8 month it happened ... in two weeks he (the son) did something that took me 8 months to do".

Well, if you were serious about learning a skill you wouldn't just do one 5 minute session per day for eight months.

A more appropriate training regime would be way more intensive than one 5 minute session per day. Are we to believe he limited his son to one 5 minute session a day?

Do children really learn languages quicker than adults? By age 3, children will probably have words for almost everything. Babies might even say mama and dada by 6 months of age.

Children have several language learning advantages over adults: complete immersion; it is imperative they learn; effectively unlimited time; no responsibilities.

But, it takes them years to learn their native language to basic competency.

Compare: an English speaker can learn Afrikaans, Danish, Dutch, French, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Romanian, Spanish, or Swedish to General Professional Proficiency in Speaking and Reading in 600 hours carried out over 24 weeks (25hrs per week). Cantonese, Mandarin, Japanese, Korean, or Arabic will take 2200 hours over 88 weeks (25hrs per week).[1]

Is it easier for a child? Yeah probably, they don't even have to look after themselves.

If I could live as a child in a foreign language house in a foreign language city, with only two tasks: learn to speak and read the language to basic competency, and learn to ride a backwards bicycle, I'm firmly of the believe I could out pace the 95th percentile of children at both tasks.

As an aside, he says his son is the closest person to him genetically, but aren't his parents both equally as close to him genetically as his son?

1. http://www.effectivelanguagelearning.com/language-guide/lang...

Re: 4D toys

#90

Post by lostlogin » Sat, Aug 04, 2018, 9:39 PM UTC

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #81

dsnuh wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you play with only one eye open, or just one contact lens? I have worse vision than you (-8.0, -7.50), and I know that I can still function with just one lens in of needed. You definitely still have stereo vision even if one input is blurred. Your brain does quite a bit of compensation, and I can imagine if you operated this way for months that your brain would be even better at assimilating the noisy information…

Sulam is basically correct. I was born with strabismus (my eyes don't focus on the same point). To avoid perpetual double vision, my brain compensates by basically only using one eye at a time. It switches automatically when I'm looking to the side, and I can also switch consciously. (My color perception is very slightly different in each eye, it's weird.) It turns out that stereovision is the least important of seve…

It isn’t just depth perception that is improved with binocular vision, there is binocular summation, which helps improve acuity. Two is better than one. However as you say, stereopsis seems to be one of the least important parts of sight.

You might have an advantage with not being able to watch some 3D movies - you can tell your friends/family that a medical condition prevents you going to them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereopsis

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binocular_summation