Immersive environments—broadly defined as multisensory installations designed to elicit embodied and sensory responses from their inhabitants—are commonly employed in the industries of war. Their taxonomy covers a diverse range of physical and digital spatialities, from the construction of 1:1 scale ‘Potemkin villages’ on the home front for urban combat training, to the design of elaborate schemas of camouflage and deception in conflict zones, to systemic mixed reality simulators that blend vehicular hardware, tactical scenarios modelled in digital engines, and real-time, command-level data. Since the advent in the 1990s of supercomputers, bodily control interfaces and graphics processing units (GPUs) capable of a threshold level of representational reality, Western militaries in particular have made extensive use of immersive, full-body simulators and head-mounted displays in both the training of military personnel and the development of human – machine interfaces. These have traditionally been seen as low-risk and inexpensive supplements to field exercises, with which learnt knowledge can be applied to real-world scenarios in controlled environments designed to mimic operational conditions. These immersive training programs result in the development of habituated and embodied memory in participants—forms of memory that are not only encoded through physical engagement but can be replicated in subsequent behaviour. As Seimeng Lai and Scott Sharpe argue in their study of tank combat simulators, ‘the military is not only able to bring about bodily or perceptual habits, but to produce the very disposition and tendencies of the soldier. Soldiers not only change what they do but change what they become’. In this example, the transformational ‘becoming’ experienced by the soldiers is contingent on their sense-making within an alternate reality. It showcases precisely the form in which immersive aesthetics were originally conceived through the paradigm of computer science engineering, which defined their mechanics through two co-dependent parameters: immersion and presence. Immersion can be gauged by the technological capability of hardware and software platforms to produce compelling visual, aural and biomechanical stimuli that mimic human

中文翻译：

---

超映射冲突：战争、艺术和沉浸式美学

沉浸式环境——广义上定义为旨在引起居民身体和感官反应的多感官装置——通常用于战争行业。他们的分类涵盖了各种物理和数字空间，从在前线为城市作战训练建造 1:1 比例的“波将金村庄”，到在冲突地区设计复杂的伪装和欺骗模式，再到系统性混合现实模拟器融合了车载硬件、在数字引擎中建模的战术场景以及实时的命令级数据。自 1990 年代超级计算机、身体控制接口和图形处理单元 (GPU) 出现以来，能够达到阈值水平的再现现实，西方军队尤其广泛使用了沉浸式、全身模拟器和头戴式显示器用于军事人员的培训和人机界面的开发。这些传统上被视为实地练习的低风险和廉价补充，通过这些知识可以将学到的知识应用于旨在模拟操作条件的受控环境中的真实世界场景。这些身临其境的培训计划导致参与者习惯性和具身性记忆的发展——这种记忆形式不仅通过身体参与编码，而且可以在随后的行为中复制。正如 Seimeng Lai 和 Scott Sharpe 在他们对坦克作战模拟器的研究中所说的那样，“军队不仅能够带来身体或感知习惯，而且能够产生士兵的性格和倾向。士兵不仅改变了他们的行为，而且改变了他们成为的人”。在这个例子中，士兵所经历的转变“成为”取决于他们在另一个现实中的意义构建。它准确地展示了沉浸式美学最初通过计算机科学工程范式构想的形式，该范式通过两个相互依赖的参数定义了它们的机制：沉浸式和临场感。沉浸感可以通过硬件和软件平台的技术能力来衡量，以产生模仿人类的引人注目的视觉、听觉和生物力学刺激 它准确地展示了沉浸式美学最初通过计算机科学工程范式构想的形式，该范式通过两个相互依赖的参数定义了它们的机制：沉浸式和临场感。沉浸感可以通过硬件和软件平台的技术能力来衡量，以产生模仿人类的引人注目的视觉、听觉和生物力学刺激 它准确地展示了沉浸式美学最初通过计算机科学工程范式构想的形式，该范式通过两个相互依赖的参数定义了它们的机制：沉浸式和临场感。沉浸感可以通过硬件和软件平台的技术能力来衡量，以产生模仿人类的引人注目的视觉、听觉和生物力学刺激