Thinking about the key properties of Games and Collaborating Software,
i.e. MIdAS = Multiuser capable Interactivity driven Animation and Simulation.
Please distribute your 15 Points, e.g.
Please write to the comments
Yours Christoph
I think I should pass this on now:
in 2000 I learned two sentences from 2 “angels” that I only understood a few weeks ago:
I now think that this has something to do with the tandem operation of RADAR stations.
Dear Friends of Realtime 3D Graphics, 3D Web, Enternet, Metaverses and similar topics!
I am not sure, whether it is important, but during the last weeks and months I have sent some signals via this Blog that could eventually lead to serious misconceptions.
First, and most important: the statements given in following blog posting are still valid!!!
That is, in detail:
This “Decision for Plan C” was made public on my Facebook account.
Anyway: if I stumble over some reliable indication that tells me something equivalent to my “Plan A” has been started somewhere within the industry, then I will “officially start” my project “Fiat-A” as an “encoded hint bit” for the Web3D community. This statement is still true, although I have officially abandoned my “personal Plan A”.
The above statement about the project “Fiat-A” is independent of an optional foundation of a “Society for Lifelong Collaborating”, which might happen any time without any implication, and it is independent of the S&P-ARK project, which has been started in spring 2022 without any reason.
I think, I could have caused some confusion with those two initiatives.
The following blog posting indicated the start of the DIGITS/S&P-ARK/ALPES project. I am still not sure, and I will have to define, whether this project is still a “template” project (i.e. not a REAL project, but a project, which I use to report my opinion about projects that *should* be started by the community) or not.
The following blog posting should be completely ignored, discussion is not yet closed.
Have a nice week
Yours Christoph
Dear All,
Please don’t be shocked. This posting will be about some philosophy.
This is not a blog posting about science of nature, nor about science of technology, it could even be interpreted as a religious posting.
Hence, this posting is a temporary contradiction (let’s say an exception according to Heisenberg) to my principle about keeping this blog an agnostic blog.
If you cannot accept this, then please ignore this posting 🙂 .
In my latest posting about the “eight layers of the universe” (please refer to https://areasharpa.blog/2022/08/26/the-eight-four-layers-of-the-universe/ for details),
I have tried to explain that the identity of an object cannot be strictly derived by physical laws.
No, the identity of the objects is created by the physicists, when they do, what we call “modelling”.
The questions e.g. “what is an electron?”, “what is a positron?” are not physical questions per se. They are questions that are answered during the process of modelling, BEFORE we create the mathematical laws of physics, which then in turn describe the interactions of the objects.
Now one could ask: “How can we dare to think the universe IS a GROUPING OF OBJECTS AND INTERACTIONS?”
We think to know the universe is rendered by the phenomena of matter / energy and of spacetime, but what the hell gives us the right to split matter / energy and spacetime into “objects and interactions”?
Well, it’s OUR way of how we see the universe, how we PERCEIVE the universe, and this way was successful in the past. This or a similar answer would be given by a biologist, who applies the wisdom of theory of evolution.
And as we expect that one individual person would not find answers that are completely contradictive to all that, what has been found by mankind before, it actually happened to me that I found the same – or at least similar – answers, when I dealt with the implementation of the experimental SMUOS Framework.
Now you might ask: “What has the implementation of a 3D Multiuser Framework in common with the thinking about epistemology?”
Well, a lot. Which I’d like to explain in the present posting.
Well, let me start with an explanation of the acronym SMS = Simple Multiuser Scene.
My intention was, to set a counter point to the term of MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game).
The term “Simple” should indicate: SMS are intended to be used by small(!) groups of people (e.g. five or ten people). This does not preclude to re-use the same scene for several or many groups of people, but only small groups, a few people each group, would actually “meet” in the scene.
Furthermore, the term “Simple” should indicate, we would only use stable, rather old, but commonly and freely available techniques of rendering (e.g. by employing the X3D/VRML standards).
Now, what is the basic idea of the SMS Framework?
The SMS Framework should/will be an intermediate layer, which implements functions that are not (yet) available in the X3D/VRML standards, but need to be available in each and every multiuser scene.
Thus the SMS Framework should help the authors of multiuser scenes to save common efforts.
When we come back to the example of “Indirect Reality”, how would it look like?
Well, when we remember our example of the robot that is controlled via a VR headset and VR controllers,
then we could generalize the robot into a robot that needs more than one person, who control the robot (e.g. a submarine that is controlled by Alice, Bob and Charlie):
What can we see in Figure 2:
Well, in our example the “Common Scene” (red colour) has been downloaded from some common server.
Cannot we take this as a metaphor for our “common model of the universe” (i.e. for our science), which we have “downloaded” during our education from school and university?
The “Common Scene” defines, which aspects of the submarine and its surroundings can be perceived by Alice, Bob and Charlie. Additionally, each user has a “Personal Scene Instance” (PSI), i.e. a computer, some headset and so on, that specifically influences the perceived reality during perception.
Cannot we take this as a metaphor for our personal “Model of the Universe (MotU)”, which we “carry” in our mind and which influences the way, we can perceive the universe?
These considerations led me to think about epistemology during the years of 2014 to 2018 and write a few “religious booklets” in German language.
The “13th religious booklet” is a summary. It is written in English language and can be found here: https://letztersein.com/kleine-religiose-buchlein.
Have a nice week
Yours Christoph
P.S.: now this Blog will be agnostic again, from now on 🙂
Dear All,
Please don’t be shocked. This posting will be about some philosophy.
This is not a blog posting about science of nature, nor about science of technology, it could even be interpreted as a religious posting.
Hence, this posting is a temporary contradiction (let’s say an exception according to Heisenberg) to my principle about keeping this blog an agnostic blog.
If you cannot accept this, then please ignore this posting 🙂 .
Perhaps this blog is not the right place for a discussion about soul/body/mind/spirit, but I have to say that I’m a programmer and therefore I am keen to layer any system – from top to bottom – it’s an occupational disease of us programmers.
Since we already learn in basic training that the Internet is broken down into 5 layers, namely in
and because I was a bit concerned with virtual worlds in my hobby, one day it “happened” to me that I had the following thoughts:
That is why I have drawn four entities in figure 1.
First, there is the person who has inherited and learned their “mind” and their “senses and skills” (SaSk) throughout life and thus now “understands” and “grasps” the universe.
The Real Life Avatar (RLA) and the Personal Scene Instance (PSI) are the second and the third entity in this figure. They will provide the person with “Remote Senses and Skills” (rSaSk) via the “User Interface” (UI).
Only distinct rSaSk will be possible via distinct RLA and distinct PSI (the rSaSk are “restricted” by those entities) and also the person will have to learn new SaSk (e.g. “controlling the distinct RLA via the distinct UI”).
Since person+PSI and RLA are sometimes located in far away places, the Internet is usually in between.
This repetition serves to make it credible that the idea of ​​”Layer -1″ (see the tenth booklet “Vom Leben” at https://letztersein.com/kleine-religiose-buchlein – German language),
which I will come back to in a moment, was not “brain-born” but came about “naturally”.
We explained that the concept of “identity” does not necessarily result from physical laws.
Consequently, “Layer 0” in Figure 1 is – provisionally – drawn as a continuous layer without boundaries between the entities.
On the contrary, we know from the concept of “modeling” that people intuitively draw the limits of the system and limits in the system before they begin to formulate physical laws.
Is this demarcation arbitrary, or is there something like a preferred demarcation? So can one say that one model is “more correct” than another?
The fact that through discussion and persuasion – without using violence – we always find models that are (almost) universally recognized throughout humanity, and also the fact that we dare to do science and technology at all suggests that there are preferred demarcations in physics and in nature, at least in relation to humanity.
So we define a “Layer -1” in which we settle the thing-in-itself according to Immanuel Kant and also the essence or the soul of people.
So in this “Layer -1” the division of the universe into physical objects (and subjects) happens and that’s where everything happens that really, actually, truthfully happens.
So the physics in this PICTURE (and it’s just a PICTURE) is already an INTERPRETATION of reality, it doesn’t describe reality IN ITSELF.
So we now draw our 4 entities from the example (the person, the PSI, the internet (here a cable) and the RLA) in 8 layers:
HW means hardware
TII means thing-in-itself (according to Immanuel Kant)
In the next posting, I will try to combine this “theory of SMS (Simple Multiuser Scenes)” – see above – with my “Small religious booklet No. 13” (see https://letztersein.com/kleine-religiose-buchlein), which is called “Models of the Reality” (written in English language).
Have a nice week
Yours Christoph
P.S.: (this text has been taken from the 12th booklet “Geist – Sinne – Körper – Seele” at https://letztersein.com/kleine-religiose-buchlein – German language – and then translated by Google translate)
Yesterday, I had an intriguing discussion with my friend Markus S., about an old dilemma of my X3D hobby projects: what comes first? The chicken or the egg?
This dilemma has haunted me since I wrote the following email in 2011, at the x3d-public mailing list:
http://www.web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2011-February/001427.html
In that e-mail I compared the “elaborated network sensor concept” of the Web3D Consortium with the egg and the “interest from the telecom industry” with the chicken.
Well, Markus corrected me:
Yours
Christoph Peter
P.S.: the e-mail thread started with:
http://www.web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2011-January/001401.html
Well, I told you that ALPES, the “Experimental Setup of the ALP” is the only planned content of the S&P-ARK project, currently.
We want to perform experiments with an “Application Layer Protocol (ALP)” for the Web3D Network Sensor.
Therefore we plan to implement an “Experimental Login Server Application (ELSA)”.
Last weekend I found the time to draw a little drawing about the architecture of ELSA and I added it to the WIKI page “ELSA” of the S&P-ARK WIKI: https://github.com/christoph-v/spark/wiki/ELSA
Here the picture as a shortcut (without explanation):
Have a nice week
Yours Christoph
P.S.: in case of any questions, comments, improvement opportunities and so on, please feel free to add a comment. Your e-mail address will never be published.
Last weekend, I felt free to rename the S&P-ARK project.
Now I am calling it DIGITS/S&P-ARK/ALPES.
This long name will make it clear, that
*) ALPES = Application Layer Protocol, Experimental Setup
Probably, we will call the project by its short name, ALPES, in the future.
Nevertheless, we will continue to use the S&P-ARK repository: https://github.com/christoph-v/spark, where we also felt free to “define” our vision for reference.
Have a nice week,
Yours Christoph
Dear all,
At my latest posting, I told you that I had closed the work on the narration “The third child” by 2022-04-15.
Today, 2022-05-14, I can tell you: I have also updated the English translation of the narration for version 1.7 (mostly, I have removed the unnecessary “frame story” and updated the version number).
Narration The Third Child (ttc_v1.7_20220514.pdf)
German version: Das dritte Kind (Drehbuchseite)
This makes me free to focus on the S&P-ARK project.
Yours,
Christoph
This time I have got two chunks of information for you.
I told you that I planned to finish version 1.7 of the narrative “The third child” by 2022, with the posting DIGITS#17 (https://areasharpa.blog/2020/09/03/digits17-the-true-enemy/)
Well, it has not really been finished, but all scenes of the script have been defined and at least been explained by two or three paragraphs of text each:
https://letztersein.com/drehbuchseite/
The S&P-ARK project has been started.
https://github.com/christoph-v/spark
Have a nice week
CP/V
for the “Establishment (Errichtung)” of “The Society”.
Well, I have prepared the statutes (https://areasharpa.blog/2022/02/23/statutes-for-the-society/) and I have asked two friends, whether they would like to support “The Society” as chairman, secretary or cashier.
However, currently there is not enough interest.
Have a nice week,
Yours Christoph
Area #A 