While most video screens such as those on our phones, TVs, and stadium jumbotrons seem to improve in resolution on a monthly basis, there has been an issue in improving the resolution of the tiny screens required in virtual reality apps. The problem is that as the screen moves closer to the human eye, the pixels that comprise it need to get smaller and smaller. Yet, if pixels get too small, their function starts to degrade and the image suffers. On a micro-LED screen, for example, pixels can’t get much smaller than one micrometer wide before losing their ability to render a clear, crisp image.

So instead of relying on pixels, researchers from Chalmers University of Technology, the University of Gothenburg and Uppsala University in Sweden turned to a different technique. They created what they’ve termed “metapixels” out of tungsten oxide, a material that can switch from being an insulator to a metal based on its electrical state. The metapixels reflect light differently based on their size and how they’re arranged, and can be manipulated by an electrical current. In a way, they function much like the pigments in bird’s feathers, which can take on different colors based on how the light is hitting them.

The fact that metapixels don’t need a light source eliminates the problems that video pixels take on when they get too small such as color bleeding and issues with uniformity.

!remindme 30 years

It’s cool tech, but if it could actually replace displays, get ready for the patents to be bought up and buried so we can keep selling glowing rectangles with tons of e-waste, as god intended.

  • scintilla@crust.piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    This means that each pixel roughly corresponds to a single photoreceptor in the eye, i.e. the nerve cells in the retina that convert light into biological signals," adds Andreas Dahlin, Professor at the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering at Chalmers. “Humans cannot perceive a higher resolution than this.”

    This is the paragraph literally right above the one you quoted. Do you understand what they mean by “perfect” now? They are saying you literally could not precive a differece in resolution from the image and real life.

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Again, no, because that’s not a resolution, that’s a pixel density at a set distance.