I had an idea for how nausea could be solved in virtual reality, can /sci/ tell me if my logic behind human vision makes sense?

If only the edges of your vision match your acceleration but the centre doesn't (e.g. playing a non-VR 3D game) you're fine.
If the centre of your vision matches your acceleration but the edges don't (e.g. looking through a small window of something moving, or just using your hands to hide the edges of your vision) you're fine.
It's when the centre and the edges of your vision both mismatch your acceleration that you may have issues. A windowless elevator, reading in a car on a winding road, or a VR headset.

So, what if there was actually a mismatch between the centre and edges of your vision when wearing a VR headset? If your camera moves without your head moving, the centre is instantly updated, but the closer a pixel is towards the edge the more lag it has with the camera acceleration.
This way, if you instantly accelerate from stationary to moving forwards at a constant speed in-game but not IRL:
>First the centre of your vision is wrong (says you've accelerated) but the edges are fine (says you haven't started moving)
>Then the centre is fine (says your speed is constant) but the edges are wrong (says you're accelerating)
>Then the centre and edges are fine (both say your speed is constant)
The whole process could take a few hundred milliseconds or less, it's hard to know without testing.
Slow accelerations would still suck, but near-instant accelerations to sustained speed are more common and also worse.