Augmented Reality

February 27, 2009

Imagine being able to download information from the Internet continuously and have it appear not on a computer screen or handheld device but on your eyeglasses or  contact lenses or perhaps to an artificial corneal implant, so that it would appear in your field of vision.

And visualize that information being automatically tagged to places, objects and people around you. And I don’t mean a fake virtual environment, either. You would be looking at the real world, except that it would be better — more detailed, more nuanced, revealing more than your eyes normally perceive. I’m talking about a technology called augmented reality, in which computer-generated text and graphics are integrated into real-world environments.

Augmented reality would have a truly mind-blowing range of potential applications.

You’d never need to scrutinize a road map or consult the GPS on your dashboard again, because the streets themselves would be tagged with arrows or icons telling you where to go.

 You’d never have to worry about being unable to connect a face with a name, either, because if AR is combined with personal RFID tags or facial recognition software, a name and capsule biography would pop up above every person you encounter.

Conceivably, you might be able to “see” inside buildings and objects or underneath them, thanks to maps or schematics that would be projected over the real thing. Imagine a surgeon being able to see through an organ, for example before making an incision.

Similarly, soldiers on future battlefields might be able to spot hidden snipers, land mines or houses containing civilians, thanks to data being transmitted to their eyeballs by drone aircraft or reconnaissance satellites. 

Even putting together a piece of furniture from IKEA would become simpler, since pop-up numbers and arrows would guide you in assembling the parts.

Alas, the downsides aren’t too hard to visualize, either.

Information overload already is an enormous problem in our multitasking culture, and an onslaught of data about everything we see might further shrink our attention span and overtax our ability to distinguish between genuinely useful insights and the brain’s version of kudzu.

Beyond that, augmented reality would only be as good as the quality of the information it downloads and displays.

The  roots of AR probably date back to Ivan Sutherland, better known as the father of computer graphics, who in the late 1960s developed a head-mounted display that could immerse its wearer into a 3-D virtual environment.

In a 1965 paper entitled “The Ultimate Display,” Sutherland envisioned computers controlled by the movements of the human eye, and the blending of computer graphics and human vision to do things such as rendering solid objects transparent. (Sutherland went so far as to imagine computer graphics so sophisticated that they could actually alter the material world, such as an image of handcuffs that would contain a person’s wrists for real. But we’ll leave that for a future discussion.) 

In the early 2000s, Columbia University researchers developed a mobile AR rig  — 26 pounds of equipment, including a wearable dish antenna for receiving data — that enabled a wearer to gaze through special eyeglasses at nearby Tom’s Restaurant  and perceive a pop-up graphic informing him or her that it was the diner in the TV series Seinfeld.  Since then, the University of Washington's Human Interface Technology Lab has developed a software program that enables AR to continually reorient itself to a user’s changing position. And the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is hoping to move AR beyond the limitations of bulky headgear by developing AR-enabled contact lenses.

So what do you think? Does augmented reality sound great? Or is the un-augmented world already too information-saturated for you? Express your opinion below.


About Patrick J. Kiger, Science Writer. Patrick J. Kiger has written from print publications ranging from GQ to the Los Angeles Times, and is a longtime contributor to Discovery.com, HowStuffWorks, and other web sites.

For several years, he wrote the Science Channel's "Is This a Good Idea?" blog, and we are proud to have him back! He's also the author of Science Channel's Story of the Week Feature and Creator of Head Rush Science Experiments for Kids.

Patrick is also the co-author, with Martin J. Smith, of Poplorica: A Popular History of the Fads, Mavericks, Inventions, and Lore that Shaped Modern America HarperResource, 2004), and Oops: 20 Life Lessons from the Fiascoes That Shaped America (Collins, 2006). Both are now available on Kindle.

You can see more of his work at www.patrickjkiger.com


Advertisement


our sites

video

shop

stay connected

corporate