It was not long ago that CNN made a bold leap forward and displayed a real hologram image in tv! If you have not heard about this new thing, check it e.g. here. Whether or not the technology works in real world is yet to be seen but we'll wait patiently for more.
Help us, Oba rack Man! You are our only hope!
Issue:
Now, the predicament of this post is that CNN used the word 'beam' in context with hologram image and this has caused a really huge uproar of the right usage of the word beam.
Read it here: CNN uses the word 'beam' wrong! (from Look Elsewhere's blog)
To sum it up I quote:
"Beaming is a word for transporting physical mass from one location to another. So if you beam my dog from the couch next to me to where ever you are right now, you could actually touch her. This is not possible with a hologram where you get only a 3D image of the dog."Now, my opposing view:
With transporting physical mass from one location to another we are dealing with quantum mechanics. The correct word in quantum mechanics that describes this phenomenon is to teleport. (Teleportation is a process where entanglement is used to store quantum information which is then send to location B. In the receiving end a quantum repeater will read the information in the entanglement and decode it. Thus, we have moved one item/thing etc. from place A to place B. -I hope I got this correctly.)
The Resolution:
With this established 'beaming' can then quite correctly used with hologram images since the actual term with physical transportation is teleportation. And, with the lack of better expression or verb beaming holograms seems to be the only plausible way to express the process.
However:
I do partially agree with Lookelsewhere on the issue that Trek fans should have ranted about this matter, since in Star Trek beaming has been exclusively used in context with physical transportation. Therefore, it is quite rude that this concept has been stolen to all-around-usage.
All fault goes to silent Trek & SWars fans!
No comments:
Post a Comment