I believe latency would not be acceptable with current wireless technology.
I've been casually following Carmack & Occulus for a while; recurring theme is "X ms delay is too long". IIRC (corrections please?), wasn't until latency got down to 20ms that the nausea etc subsided. That doesn't leave much room to both render a high-res complex image and display it by anything more than the shortest transmission time conceivable.
You're also assuming a highly customized/optimized scenario for the wireless hop, nigh unto a straight analog signal. Digital processing will extend that, likely adding at least one full frame delay - again, something Carmack severely objected to and fought mightily against.
[1] http://www.roadtovr.com/samsung-gear-vr-official-specificati...
> so 1ms wouldn't be a big deal
Even if it's 1ms, that means that you only have 19ms left for all of the processing / rendering, including to the I/O delay of getting motion data from the input.
Also, consider that you might allow for a small window for when things don't go as planned. So, 15ms to do the computations, for example.
That seems a good trade-off versus being tethered, you could for instance make up for that by letting the rest of the pipeline generate an image that is slightly worse to achieve the same framerate in an untethered situation.
Of course any latency increase will always come at some price the question is whether or not that is an acceptable price for the improvement you get along another dimension all this assuming that's an upper bound.
(And maybe there is higher end gear that I'm not aware of)
Not that a few milliseconds of latency really matter, but if you don't care about 2 milliseconds here and another 2 there, they start adding up. It's much better to try your best to have the lowest possible latency.
Noticing a flash of light can go into the 1000 fps territory.
Measuring ERGs (electro-retinogrammes) indicates that our photoreceptors can't really resolve luminance fluctuations above, at the very limit, 70-80Hz. Even Drosophila's high speed cascade doesn't really modulate beyond 200-250Hz. I'm really doubtful about those claims.
There's no circumstance in which increasing the frame rate causes nausea. In fact, it tends to decrease latency and reduce nausea. In the limit, reality has an essentially-infinite frame rate and doesn't cause nausea.
When low frame rates seem choppy, that's normally because there's a mismatch between frame rate and display refresh. GSync/freesync fix that to make things smooth even when the frame rate drops. Choppiness can also be due to the impulse response; technologies with a bright and short apparent pulse (CRT, Plasma, some OLED) will show better 'motion' than those that display and hold (LCD, some OLED).