Using Fractal Interconnects To Improve Electronic Eyes 73
An anonymous reader writes "Electronic eyes today remind me of Frankenstein with the way they jab electrodes from each pixel into the optic nerve and hope for the best. Some researchers claim to have solved this problem by growing fractal electrodes that mimic the way real eyes connect retinal cells to the optic nerve. If they are right — and their research will find out over the next year — then next-generation eEyes could enable the blind to not just detect objects, but to see again normally."
Resistance is futile (Score:3, Interesting)
I want my eyes with enhanced reality... can I have them?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Apparently you are not the only one thinking of enhanced vision. Did you see the funders?
U.S. Navy and Air Force.
Re:Resistance is futile (Score:5, Funny)
I feel like we're only 20-50 years away from the stuff you can attach to your body being better in most ways than the originals. The only problem is a I feel like bionic limb replacements are going to cost an arm and a leg.
Re:Resistance is futile (Score:4, Funny)
The only problem is a I feel like bionic limb replacements are going to cost an arm and a leg.
We take lungs now, gills come next week.
Re: (Score:2)
Full quote, if you'd like to read it. :-)
Fry: Now that you mention it, I do have trouble breathing underwater sometimes. I'll take the gills.
Shady Guy: Yes, gills. Then, uh, you don't need lungs anymore, is right?
Fry: Can't imagine why I would.
Shady Guy: Lie down on table. I take lungs now, gills come next week.
Re: (Score:3)
I would give my big toe for a super balancing foot.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah chummer, Doc in Chiba hook you up real nice for cheap even.
Only set you back a few hundred New Yen, cheaper if ya catch a sale.
Re: (Score:2)
You joke, but yeah.
Anyone interested in cybernetic eye replacements? I used to think it'd be awesome, and then I read the surgery story in Renraku Shutdown. *cringe*. I wish I could find a legit version on the web to link, as it does a really good job of de-glamorizing the idea of having your eyes taken out and replaced with "better" ones.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Upgrades are painful. That is the main thing about cyber implants. Sure they are cool for the short term but in a few years they are out of date and you either need to go threw surgery again to get new ones or just stay with the out dated model. Yea I should have waited for the VGA enhanced reality, but I am stuck with CGA display.
Re: (Score:2)
Upgrades are painful.
Zydrate comes in a little glass vial...
a Little glass vial? ...a little glass vial (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The only way to "natively" gain a wider visual range would be to have that added to your retinas at birth, so that your brain wires itself to appropriately interpret them.
This doesn't sound right. The article intimates that the brain of any recipient already needs to relearn how to see based on the new input from the artificial retinas. They specifically mention that it is the plasticity of the visual cortex that allows the patient to be able to 'learn' to see using the implants. So why would it not be able to learn an added chromatic option. The human brain is capable of doing this. Some women have an added cone in their retinas making them able to see four colours as oppos
Re: (Score:2)
We can't do a HUD yet because that requires computer image recognition at a level we don't have yet, and a MUCH higher resolution implant than we have now. The image recognition would have to be almost as good as what our brain normally does - piecing together our 3D world based on the little slice the camera is seeing as it turns and moves, so that it knows where everything is and WHAT everything is, so that it can add the labels as we look at those things.
Implanted HUDs are wrong, wrong, WRONG and that's just all there is to it. A HUD is a bottleneck created by the necessity of presenting information to the human senses: capable of processing visual and auditory stimuli (well, those are the ones that the HUD would be targeted to). The whole purpose of an implant is to bypass the information bottlenecks created by our physical senses; there's no reason to artificially re-impose them. Because as you said, all you're really doing is out-sourcing a whole lot of
Re: (Score:2)
Fractal interconnects? It sounds like Star Trek techno-babble.
The link says - "fractals generally representing recursive geometric shapes that cannot be deciphered through traditional Euclidean geometric language"
That part of the link is actually real techno babble, possibly one of the writers got it from the CGI guys since one of the Star Trek movies (Khan?) was the first movie to use fractals to generate special effects.
That would suck. (Score:4, Funny)
Imagine only being able to see fractals everywhere you look. I think I'd go crazy!
Re: (Score:1)
You never tried LSD did you?
(Me neither... but I guess it should be similar)
Re: (Score:2)
LSD messes with your mind, not with your vision.
(Don't ask me how I know this.)
Re: (Score:2)
Take more acid (at once). Trust me, it eventually affects your vision.
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine only being able to see fractals everywhere you look. I think I'd go crazy!
I think you may be on to something. Outside the straight lined environment of the basement is a world full of fractals and crazy people.
Re: (Score:1)
1. Define fractal.
2. Define algorithm.
3. Define nature.
4. Define computer.
5. Don't make any connections between the above steps.
6. Make more ignorant comments.
Re: (Score:1)
Algorithm: a set of rules for solving a problem in a finite number of steps
Biological growth (trees are biological, in case you didn't know) has a set of rules and occurs in a finite number of steps. Repetition of a process does not make the steps of that process infinite.
Re: (Score:2)
3. Define nature.
Everything not man-made.
Man isn't part of nature? What makes us so damned special that we're an unnatural force? If nature is a computer and man is a product of nature, then how is man somehow not a force of nature?
DO YOU understand anything the Creationists don't?
Re: (Score:2)
"Trees don't grow by an algorithm. If you believe this, you don't understand anything the Creationists don't."
Not only fractal growth but also Darwinian evolution by natural selection is algorithmic (see for example "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" by Dan Dennett). Please note that many creationists understand this quite well (without buying into the concept that Darwinian evolution is responsible for the speciation on earth).
Another step towards star-trek. - VISOR - (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"The VISOR detected electromagnetic signals across the entire EM spectrum between 1 Hz and 100,000 THz"
As much as I thought the VISOR was a cool concept (which got me interested in multispectral imaging back when I was a kid), unless I'm doing the math wrong, I think someone just made those numbers up (and I don't mean the Star Trek scriptwriters). 100,000 THz (100 PHz, right?) doesn't even get you all of the way through X-rays, let alone into gamma territory.
Also, is it even possible for something that sma
Re: (Score:2)
Get back to me when you can make it out of an air filter.
It's Alive! (Score:2)
"Electronic eyes today remind me of Frankenstein with the way they jab electrodes from each pixel into the optic nerve and hope for the best. Some researchers claim to have solved this problem by growing fractal electrodes that mimic the way real eyes connect retinal cells to the optic nerve."
The latter would seem to be far more Frankensteinian.
Obviously... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
near/short infrared(0.75-3 m) is the kind of light used in remotes and cameras that only need filters Vs. mid/long infrared(3–15 m) which heat-seeking missiles and cameras that need cooling use.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Those born blind wouldn't know what they're missing but I imagine they would be persuaded by the people who would jump at a chance of being able to see, namely people who have been rendered blind.
As for seeing through time I've read Dune and frankly I don't think I want the gift of prescience, not unless I can turn it off when I want to à la Mrs Cake.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah but can it run Android?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I think in a way it's the same as the situation regarding Cochlear Implants (CI) for profound hearing loss. CI are good for adults that lost their hearing at an advanced age, or for babies that are hearing impaired from birth, provided the CI are implanted at a young age (usually before the age of 6-12 mo). The reason is that every sense in our body has both a receptor part (eye, ear, nose, etc.) and an area of the brain tasked with processing the information*. The area in the brain is developed by being st
Re: (Score:2)
neuroplasticity would allow some semblance of vision.
experiments have been done where a person was able to see images through a rig strapped to their back that applied pressure to a large patch of skin divided into "pixels".
if there's data coming in, the brain will try to use it for something.
Not that simple (Score:4, Interesting)
It is not just about replacing the retina - you have to learn to see and this involves higher cortical function. If you have gone without site for a very long time then learning to see isn't neccessarily that easy and can cause considerable distress and disorientation. Sure, for those who have seen and lost sight for a short period of time then lets hope this works out. But it isn't the solution to everyone's problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah fuck all this learning shit, I want to be blind!
Re: (Score:1)
LMAO!
Re: (Score:1)
I can't find a link, but I remember a story I head on NPR years ago about a man who got the implant and had to not only learn how to understand spoken English, but also learn how to tune out all the environmental sounds that he had never experienced before. The latter is something those of us with hearing probably take for granted, but it was making it impossible for him to concentrate o
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why stop there? (Score:2)
>then next-generation eEyes could enable the blind to not just detect objects, but to see again normally.
Why stop at normally? Full zoom, magnifications, color-filtering, recording mode... All the stuff up front is nigh-trivial compared to the interface they are working on. Once you have an interface, the world is your oyster.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>then next-generation eEyes could enable the blind to not just detect objects, but to see again normally.
Why stop at normally? Full zoom, magnifications, color-filtering, recording mode... All the stuff up front is nigh-trivial compared to the interface they are working on. Once you have an interface, the world is your oyster.
Hell, I've given this some thought -- why stop at recording / filtering mode? Enable Playback too!
Also, let's have wireless streaming video from the eye into my computer. Oh, playback? Why can't that work both ways? Send optical data from the computer straight into the eye (MPAA would really like this -- DRM to the brain, but it can be used for good too).
We're starting to create limbs that can be operated by brain waves / nerve impulses, and patients train using a computer simulation -- hell, coupl
Probably Not That Trivial (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Most science fiction featuring artificial eyes has one's sight adjusted by combinations of eye movenents and blinking rather than feedback from the optic nerve. Controlling it with the voluntary muscle movements associated with sight sounds plausible, but who knows whether this would be practical in actual electronic eyes...
eEyes? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Implications for "seeing with sound" systems? (Score:2)
I always wondered why those research systems that try to convert visible images into audio signals used a cartesian coordinate system. Seemed to me like a polar coordinate system would be a more logical choice. I wonder what a "fractal" coordinate system for such a system would look like.
Re: (Score:1)
You'd have as much success by sending pictures to an opera singer then having him call you with a description in song.
Isn't it just the shape of a Banana Clip? (Score:1)
*sigh* ./ (Score:1)