Control of the Minicomputer Touchpad

© 2009 James R. Batek

A. the difference between uch and touch is discovered

1. clicking on the touchpad is softwared to key to the shortness of the duration

between leading and trailing edge of contact, not to the shortness of
duration of the leading edge. it is evident, therefore, that clicking is
contained in a broad field of considerations regarding the contact of the
finger with the pad.

2. the sensitivity of the touchpad is at least equal to the lower limit of human
skin, suggesting that it is even lower.

3. the default sensitivity used in control functions by the hand is set

to slightly above the limit of sensitivity. this does not suit the
touchpad, as all action above the limit of software sensitivity adds
proportionately or more to the amount of data being processed by the
software to discriminate actions, and thus increases the probability of a
mismatch between the user's intentions and the software's decisions.
tweaking the default level is not going to work. there has to be a level
enhancement in anticipation, at or very near the limit of sensitivity.
anticipation is altered only by an investment of organization and
terminology, such as the term uch for touching at the limit of skin
sensitivity.

4. a word for touching the touchpad at the limit of human skin's sensitivity:
uch (touch, minus the t sound)

5. the term "touch" is found through scientific examination of use of the

computer touchpad to be totally inadequate for that particular use.

6. lacking a specification by the manufacturer of the exact physical

phenomena in the nature of contact with the touchpad which constitute a
datum for the computer, i am in need of specifying those phenomena which
i consider possibilities. these are, der, ..i. pressure ..i. heat ..i. electrical
resistance ..i. electrical capacitance

B. the relationship between uch and touch is explored, and uch by itself

1. the first principle of uch interface is that the computer has absolutely no
need to move and the finger skin's motion is a data stream for both
computer and brain, registered by both as absolutely nat in contact
or absolutely not in contact.

2. there is in the action of uching the touchpad a simultaneous tracking in the

mind of what presumably the software is reading from the uch, but based on
 the interpretation of the human senses rather than the interpretation of the
computer senses. this tracking assumes that the two derivative effects of
the phenomenon of the finger on the pad, namely, the output to the
computer and the output to the brain, are substantially homomorphic, so
that the interpretation as a particular assignment effect, click or move
cursor and so on, is reliably equal in both cases. the state of affairs of
proceeding apace under the assumption of reliable equality, and the irk of
seeing a failure of equal output and interpretation at some frequency
greater than zero, is not a process that assures a solution to the
problem of finding a method of uch that will be reliable in equality
between computer and brain in assignment of interpretation.

3. orthogonal component, duration range, and uch qualification are at present

state of investigation a necessary and sufficient set for achieving
equality of computer and human assignment of interpretation of
contact of the finger with the touchpad. update to state of investigation:
there seems also to be in such a set the phenomenon of shape of the
contact, both spatially and temporally, so that certain shapes qualify for
assignment and others do not. whether there is in this criterion some intent
to capture the ideal human finger in the act of imprint or whether there is as
well some standard of mental control of such an ideal, is hard to say at this
time but both need to be considered in advancing the investigation here
begun.

4. the discrimination between uch and touch may be made either upward
from zero contact toward the point of demarcation, or downward
from some arbitrary aggressive impact toward that point. once one
has tried the former and seen how startling is the ability of the computer to
recognize uch, he will probably never be happy with touch again, and that
means anything other than uch. i suggest you try it. see if you can get the
computer to click without even touching (or uching) the pad.

C. control of uch begun

1. the recognition of the distinction, between an uch that is tangential to

the surface of the touchpad and an uch that is normal to it, is within
the powers of the computer and can be assumed to occur whenever the
data allow it.

2. it is noticed that the sheer demarcation of a link topography currently

induces a different human tangential sensitivity than the flat demarcation of
non link topography regardless of its appearance. it is natural to infer that
this difference is learned, the inference being reflective of a sense that no
decision is made to distinguish the two cases and further, it is not possible
to avoid it. it is fair to suggest that this distinction in control is
dysfunctional within the uch regime as it detracts discriminatingly from
the freedom of movement and control over the screen that would be a
precondition to development of a durable faculty of uch equal, or perhaps
 nearly equal is all that can be expected, to the limit of sensitivity and
assignment of the computer.

3. i need a reference frame to comprise both large movements across

the pad and the movement of clicking. it must be general enough to
sustain operation over extremely varied fields of screen topography
characterized by sheer distinctions of text and hypertext, plus all the
different graphical features. it is possible no general method exists.

D. opening up the control of uch

1. uch cannot be steered unless touch is put somewhere harmless.

2. the behavior of uch is always hosted by a residual motility of touch which

has been demobilized in one or more places, and this hosting is like a
blindness in that it is a sense which has been nullified. if touch escapes
this blindness uch is effectively disengaged. the blindness is necessary for
hosting to occur. the extent of this blindness into the body is clear into the
mind, as it is there where demobilization is created and maintained.
therefore the impact of uch on the body is general as well as specific,
because the mind cannot let its other duties be sacrificed for a moment,
and so these duties must be rearranged to permit uch but yet not suffer
from the addition of so different a task.

3. the blindness of the mind that enables uch regularity is replete with other
cultural implications than it sees on the touchpad and these degenerate
it virulently.

4. the attention span of the human body allows for a certain amount of
stability of its own reference point within the physical world. that
amount is less than the stability of the data which the computer
uses to establish its assignment of interpretation of uch. consequently, over
time the human body strays from any single successful action of uch. the
general awareness is somewhat cognizant of this effect and may attempt to
steer the body's stability across an extended duration of operation of the
computer, however, this steering is itself part of the human body's stability
and so is not able to meet the computer's demands, although it may get a
few successes none of which amount to a stabilizing potential and so
touchpad uch operation is an unrealized durable faculty.

5. distribution of incidents of using the touchpad into textbook effective

and accidental ineffective are not haphazard but occur as such for definite
reasons.

6. it is possible to sense both touch and uch in one movement. this is not
as good an action as keeping it an uch. the touch is ignored, if the combined
movement is successful, and adds less to the record of success than a pure
uch would, the record being the primary way we learn, by watching and
 remembering our success and failure.

7. the dominant mark is uch, not touch bracketed by it, and while a
touch may last short enough to qualify in duration as a click, it is the uches
around it that trigger the measuring of duration in preference to touch, and
so the registered duration may easily be the longer one and fail to be
assigned the interpretation of click.

8. another common pattern is for touch to steer uch into contact. this is
less preferable than placing the steerage directly into the reference point of
the uch.

E. computer considerations

1. in contact solidly in the uch range, the data will be subjected to a greater
extent of analysis per unit data than for uch contact more towards
bordering on touch. evidently the computer devotes an equal amount of
analysis to every incident, or perhaps to every equal duration in time.

2. the small amount of data from the finger contact which is sufficient for a
consistent application of assignment of interpretation by the computer
enables the computer to analyze meaningfully a very small sample of
skin, much smaller than the person is accustomed to register with any
precision such as the computer's. thus while we may think a contact
incident should qualify as a click our estimation of the data we put out may
be in error for just this reason.

3. if the computer industry were attached to this bureau, i would suggest that
it provide users with a graphical display, with memory, of an enlarged
trace, with coordinates given, of the shape and movement of each
registered uch.