This morning I was thinking about how to illustrate a virtual world used for Immersive Intelligence. It was a familiar topic that usually gets lost in a blizzard of details. However, it occurred to me that the first design choice is to define the nature of the virtual space. This definition then determines the dimensions used in the initial scene. In other words, the space is like the canvas upon which the data (info-objects) will be painted (rendered). Hence, we will refer to this initial scene as the “canvas”.
Here is a list of possible choices:
- Plain terrain: A vast featureless plain with flat Euclidean geometry and downward gravity. Avatars can walk freely on the ground in the X and Z dimensions. There is a definite Y dimension (for the vertical “UP”). The ground level (Y=0) displays the base (or atomic) data, while the upward vertical contains various analytics derived from the base data, such as descriptive statistics, groupings, and clustering. [What would negative Y would imply? Some kind of “drill-down”.]
- Free space: A vast featureless space in all three dimensions, with flat geometry but no gravity. Avatars float with rotation, so that there is no definite vertical. Useful for complex 3D structures (like molecules, star clusters) where the camera perspective is critical for viewing specific behavior.
- Flowing Time: The analogy is like a river of time. Avatars flow along with time, which is attached to one of the three dimensions in either Plain Terrain or Free Space.
- Stretchy Dimension: Similar to Open Terrain, except one or more of XYZ dimensions are not linear scales. For instance, the X dimension could be logarithmic, so that you could compare the very small with the very large. [How could ordinal and interval scales (as opposed to the usual ratio scale) be rendered differently?]
- Closed Elliptical: This canvas is like creating info-objects on a sphere, although it could be any enclosed volume whose slices form ellipses. The sum of angles of any triangle drawn on its surface is greater than 180°. An example of this canvas is the primary perspective used in the TeraViz project by FragileEarthStudios.
- Open Hyperbolic: In contrast to Closed Elliptical canvas, the Open Hyperbolic canvas is like a saddle between two mountain peaks, where the sum of angles of any triangle drawn on its surface is less than 180°. Avatars walking in any direction would continue forever, not returning to a previous place.
- Spacetime: This canvas is an imitation of Einstein’s special relativity that combines space with time. One approach is to render info-objects that automatically flow with time (like the Flowing Time), like an animated weather maps but in 3D. Another approach is to momentarily assigned one XYZ dimension to time so that info-objects are positioned according to time, but with the ability to quickly interchange time with another XYZ dimension. And yet another approach would be to concurrently display the four possible configurations (XYZ, XYT, XTZ, TYZ) in close proximity for easy comparison.
- Higher Dimension: This canvas is a challenge to design! The situation is a data set whose entities have many (thousands!) of attributes. Through dimension-reducing analytics (like cluster analysis), many attributes would be collapsed into a single scene dimension. The usefulness may not be the final result, but the intermediate processing showing the behavior of clustering similar entities.
To provide orientation experience for users of the virtual world, an initial scene should have a Viewing Platform where avatars initially “rez” and can easily return to as their home. For example, the NASA Victoria Crater rendition in SecondLife had a platform structure with information boards. The Viewing Platform could also contain Viewing Vehicles where one or more avatars could tour various highlights of the world.
This blog is obvious a discussion piece. So, please comment and share your ideas.
