'Virtual nose' may reduce simulator sickness (purdue.edu)

I'm not sure about "nasum virtualis" as Latin for "virtual nose". It should probably be either "nasus virtualis" or "nasum virtuale", depending on which Latin word for "nose" they want.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_declension#Third_declens...

I'll post the same thoughts I had on the thread about this on reddit - I'm unsure if this is relevant at the current FOV of consumer/developer HMDs. If I put on my DK2, and look right with my left eye, I see a black void, where my nose - and much of my vision would be.

I wonder if putting virtual glasses or goggles (for the purpose of being within the limited FOV as opposed to a nose) would have a similar effect.

I've always wondered if cutting off your nose would give you better stereoscopic vision. A huge amount of field of view is lost in each eye because of the nose. Don't really notice until you close one eye.

I always suspected this but my guess is that it would need to mimic the way that stereoscopic vision sees it. Kind of see through. It might require eye tracking to make it really work well.

Only a 2.2 second in increase in TTP[1] on the roller coaster sim, is that really statistically significant? And why don't you get sick when you are flying in your dreams? I find the area of research pretty interesting and the stories told of the development in AR goggles at Valve really humourous (in a gross sort of way) but it reading things like this it always feel like we're missing something fundamental here.

[1] Time to puke

That's great, and so simple. It would have been even more useful back when VR lagged badly. (VR, the early days: turn head, wait 1 sec for system to catch up.)

In stereo views, the nose disappears, of course, because it obscures different parts of the visual field for each eye. Cute.