Like many of my posts this is about a story I’m writing, but I won’t go into any great detail because it’s not all that relevant.
The story’s a sci-fi tale. At one point, a supporting character is tasked to assemble a device–let’s say it’s a laptop computer–from parts; he consults his technical manual, which is basically a Kindle, for the diagram. Elsewhere in the story I have established that this culture has portable 3D hologram projectors that people use in lieu of photo albums; said projectors are about the size of a ballpoint pen, can hold hundreds of high-quality pictures, and are cheap enough so that you can buy them at the Walmart.
Is the existence of the hand-held hologram projectors inconsistent with the technician using a flat-panel display? Or is there a valid reason for him to use the latter?
As far as I can tell, "3 D holographic projectors"are not possible. At least the type shown in the famous Star Wars scenes for example. But, I wouldnt let that bother you, because like warp drive, artifical gravity, sound in space, space craft that fly like airplanes, and a gazillion other sci-fi things, the concept has taken enough of a hold to not bother most sci-fi readers.
If you can do the impossible with a ball point pen, you can do it with a laptop. Actually, when it comes to “projecting” holograms, the laptop is way more techonogically correct than the ball point pen method.
I’m pretty sure they’re impossible to, but I don’t care. What I’m wondering is whether it makes sense for the tech to use the flat-panel display for his complicated wiring diagrams & blueprints when clearly he should have easy access to 3D displays. In other words, I’m not saying the tech would use the cheapie ballpoint projector that the other character uses, quite literally, for pics of family and friends. It just seems odd, upon reviewing it, that he wouldn’t have something better in his workshop, unless there were a user reason to prefer a 2D display for technical diagrams.
A 2D picture is a simplification of the 3D world; in some circumstances using the simplification helps to clearly convey what’s important.
As an analogy, hydraulic engineers will often use circuit diagrams to describe a hydraulic systyem, where standard symbols represent pumps, valves, filters, and other things that are actually relatively complex in 3D. In these cases, the exact relative positioning of components isn’t critical, so a photograph or realistic drawing (which is, of course, technically feasible right now) doesn’t add to the useful information, and might actually wind up being obfuscatory. A 3D holograph of the system would be even more overkill.
I think a good rule of thumb is to use the simplest, clearest format that completely explains the system. Given cheap holograms, I think hydraulic engineers would likely still rely on circuit drawings; conversely, Chilton car repair manuals would probably quickly go 3D.
If your technician’s assembling a an electronic device out of stock parts, working from a circuit diagram is completely blelievable.
I use AutoCAD and other such programs to create 3D models of objects all the time. They are presented to me on a 2D screen, of course, but this isn’t a problem because I can rotate the objects in “space” on the screen, and the spatial relations of the 3D models just jump right out at you. It helps with particularly complicated assemblies, and that’s a really big benefit of 3D design. But you don’t need a 3D hologram to take advantage of it. Not a very sci-fi-y answer, but what can I say? The future is now!!!
zut brings up an excellent reason to use a 2D diagram - simplification.
As one looks at the different components of a system (or site plan), it’s easy in CAD programs to ‘turn off’ the layers you aren’t concerned with at the moment, to simplify what you’re looking at. Similarly, a flat screen display could show just enough of what the tech needed without being overly complicated (as the 3D might). I think it’s ok for your plot.
Modern day laptops are built in layers, basically. A 3D view would be largely unnecessary.
Of course, printed circuits might no longer exist, depending on your future. I’m sure you can BS a decent answer regardless of anything, it just might require expanding on the precise construction of these devices.
I personally would LOVE to have a 3d Diagram, even of a simplified mechanical system spec. The added information would not necessarily have to be complex, but it would allow for the building of 3d mechanical system diagrams easily. I’m not sure if 2d diagrams would ever be replaced, but if your character were building something as complicated as a laptop I would imagine that a 3d CAD-like schematic where you could interact with each piece and “take it apart” virtually would be far more useful than a normal 3D CAD drawing.
You may want to consider something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Dc7WaVBZn4
Look at the time 5:15. If you’re interested by that, I highly recommend watching the entire series - one of the most intelligent Animes put together (They took the time to write two pages of XML for a database you see for about half a second).
There exists today a flatscreen television made by Phillips that can create a convincing 3D illusion with no special glasses or anything required. It is ridiculously expensive and has a very limited viewing angle, but the technology is real. Links: Philips 3D Autostereoscopic TV Requires No Glasses, Is Gentle On The Eyes
There was also an article in Scientific American recently about several different 3D technologies, including the Phillips TV, although I can’t seem to find it on their website.
I studied architecture, not engineering, but it seems to me that it’d be much easier to have an interactive display if it’s physical, not projected. So an engineer in THE FUTURE might still want to have an iPhone 9G around for manipulating and trying out designs. I suspect for following assembly instructions, a 3d hologram would be better, but there’s something to be said for force of habit. If he’s got the instructions on his handheld computer, would he go out of his way to get it in hologram form, or just do it from the 2d display?
To me, there isn’t much of a difference in theory between editing a design on a 2d screen or a 3d projection, except that the 3d projection gives a better feel for depth (if you’re doing a 3d CAD type thing).
Can the 3D projector also show 2D, If so just have him look at a 2D image using the projector. If your talking about assembling the circuit board I would think 2D would be fine, just showing the placement of components on the board. If your talking about actual assembly of the end product ie; cover, circuit board, base I would think that 3D would be the way to go. This would be consistent with what we do today. Assembly diagrams are 2D but are drawn in 3D to show connection points of layers.
Sometimes, they are a schematic: a symbol indicating “13mm screw goes here” can be much more clear than a picture of a 13mm screw (which you’d have to measure or it would have to be labeled anyway). Blueprints for a house contain all the information needed to build it: a 3D projection is NOT more useful for the plumbers and it is a lot messier.
Normally what’s used is several 2D pictures; these pictures can be projections of different sides (full or partial: grab a book, each of its six sides could be pictured and that picture is a projection) or they can contain different symbols (the blueprints for the plumbers and for the electricians are different).
The information isn’t about physical things. For instance, text of more than a few words is going to be easier to read in 2D. A trouble-shooting guide or really any text-heavy information is better in 2D. As Nava said, even blueprints/diagrams can be easier to read in 2D (though there also might be situations where the clearest thing would be a schematic in 3D).
The manufacturer was too cheap to spring for a full 3-D model, and only provided 2D documentation. Given how much (that is, how little) current manufacturers budget for documentation and the lack of reason to think things would change in the future, having your character bitch about cheap manuals would only add to the realism of the story (for any technical/nerd readers, anyway).
Yeah, I was thinking more in terms of a handheld touchscreen device. The information isn’t significantly less useful, and I imagine it’d be easier to make interactive than the holoprojector-pen-thingy - even if the holoprojector can track your fingers and all, being able to feel what your touching has some value.
Just a tech note for those who want more realistic tech holograms.
A hologram is like a window with memory if that makes any sense. Anything you see “holographically” can only be seen in a line of sight between your eye and that “window”. It can appear way behind that window, or way in front of the window, but the edge of the window will always define the limits of how far left, right, up, or down you see whatever it is that you see.
AFAIK, pen like holographic projectors at the very least require some rather sketchy optical tech. Now if you have something like googles (especially holographic ones), then the 3D world is yours. And there is no fundamental reason that I can think of that they could not be engineered down to nothing worse than lightweight glasses. Not that we could make something like that right now.