yuri(RR): harald mayer, gerd trautner, alexander barth

intimicy : control

the daily teleperception via modern means of communication and media in real time is carried to an extreme here. We ask for the consequences of a total teleperception: What ist happening to the intimicy of the active person (person 1)?

  • Does he/she feel observed or does he/she see a chance to control or manipulate the perception of person 2? [this point is connected to the duration of the experiment]

Person 2 is controlled, he/she is at the mercy of the signals of the real time transmission. He/she doesn`t has the possibility to take flight of the perception of the other person (unlike TV): he/she can`t leave the chair, audio and video are penetrating the senses and the orientation is eleminated through the moving chair.

  • How can the controlled person nevertheless influence his/her own perception?
virtuality : reality

teleperception uses a man - machine interface that resembles an interface for creating a synthetic virtual reality. The dirfference is taht in this project the VR is not created by a machine, but comes from the real perception of person 1.# The most pronounced sense, sight, is absolutly synchronized: both persons see the enviroment of person 1 in an hmd. It`s not a breaking of one person into another`s perception but a common reality

  • How is this common reality handled?

The most naturalistic projection of a persons perception to the other person is not essential for this project. The reliability of the simulation does not depend on the detailed reconstruction of person 1`s reality but on the simultaneous stimulation of various sense and elimintation of others at the same time. Important is a high level of synchronity between the different interfaces (audio, video, trackerdata). (-> Stanislav Lem)

  • Are the planned sabotages of the senses strong enough?
  • How long does it take until the person gets used to the new kind of perception?