Unfortunately, what you said doesn&#x27;t make much sense to me. In fact, it&#x27;s to the extent where it almost completely hampers what you&#x27;re saying. So much of education is teaching&#x2F;explaining these abstract concepts -- otherwise every day at school would be &quot;movie day&quot; -- so most of education probably cannot benefit from VR (unless you&#x27;re talking about some sort of telepresence where you&#x27;re in a virtual 3D MOOC democratizing access to a Harvard professor&#x27;s lectures).<p>I need an operational definition here. How do you &quot;show&quot; an abstract concept? What is a &quot;boundary free VR world&quot;? The biology one is a good example but it&#x27;s low hanging fruit because it&#x27;s so tangible.<p>For example, if I crack open Unity right now, what do I build to teach someone what, say, Hilbert space is using VR? How do I teach someone the intermediate value theorem? How does VR add anything to the explanation more than a whiteboard would?<p>Even still, how do you demonstrate that someone will learn more&#x2F;better with the VR? How convinced are you that it will be the case?<p>Lastly, given that VR is just a game with stereoscopic display and more limited UI&#x2F;UX possibilities, why doesn&#x27;t there yet exist the non-stereoscopic panacea computer game of education? Does depth perception REALLY add all that much?