Hacker News Reader

Comment by Vox_Leone | Hacker News Reader

Real holographic display:

To create an aerial hologram [or a 3d image in space if you will], you need something that will emit light at precise locations throughout a given volume.

I'm investigating the use of Moller electron scattering[0] to create voxels in a 3d coordinate system.

Two electron beams crossing and colliding will emit photons [voxels]. If you can orchestrate collisions in a very fast fashion at various 3d coordinates in an vacuum chamber you could generate a complete image.

I'm working on an article discussing the idea in full, to be published on my blog. My goal is to establish prior art, so this idea cannot be patented.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%B8ller_scattering

View on HN

I’m ready for a comeback of CRTs in the form of a crazy double electron gun hologram display. Bring it on

Nitpick: not a real hologram.

Additionally, it sounds like a massively power intensive way to do volumetric display. I don't know the total conversion efficiency to photons, but it can't be that high.

More recent techniques like stacked panels might be a better way forward for this.

So what is the definition of a real hologram? Lots of points of light in 3D outside of the media projecting it seems like exactly what I’d expect for a hologram.

For it to be a hologram, you'd need to be able to reproduce arbitrary wavefronts in real time. This gives you the ability to have features like occlusion, which you don't have with a "points of light" display. I.e., everything will appear translucent.

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.

Excuse 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

I wonder what’s the use case would be for this technology?

the use case is patent squatting

Reply on news.ycombinator.com