/sci/ - Science & Math

3d representation of a 4d cube?

Agree. Hypercube, tesseract in 3d.

>>1161067
Surely it's a 2d image of a 3d representation of a 4d cube?

We can't really comprehend a 4d cube, so we do the best we can in 3d, then translate that easily enough to 2d.

Sorry for being a pedant.

4cube, also known as hypercube or tesserract in 3-space.

>>1161058

remo ve y our il leg al clo ne moota rd www.anonjalk.se except t instead of j in the mid dle be cause po olar bear is a psyc ho thi ef a42758ceea4ade061c91a11da4f244ab

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhBoY6s-Fhw

Anyone seen this yet?

>>1161060
Why that thars a tesseract

>>1161117
DJENTLEMEN!

>>1161127
Fuckin love you man.

>>1161108
Seriously /sci/, I link you a video of a 4d videogame and you don't ever care?

Israelcube

>>1161887
Without looking: Miegakure?

>>1161887
That's not 4D, that's just 2 separate 3D spaces.
That's like drawing 2 lines and saying it's 3D.

>>1161897
Yup.

>>1161902
Or like drawing 6 lines and saying you've represented a 3 dimensional object on a 2 dimensional plane?

>>1161108
PPFFFFTTT, that's small time.
http://www.superliminal.com/cube/cube.htm

>>1161914
While I admit that's technically better, does anyone actualy enjoy attempting to play it beyond marveling at how complicated it is?

A 2D representation of a tesseract, the 4D analogue of the square or cube

fucking hypercubes

how do they work

It's the projection of a 4d cube onto the the third dimension. It's kind of like drawing a cube on paper.

>>1161921
I tried to play it but I still don't get how it turns. And at times I think I get it then expect a move to do something and I realize I don't.
Can't wrap my head around it.

>>1161931
Your computer screen is 3d? Do tell, good sah.

>>1161947
Yep, you've got it, that's pretty much how a 3D brain copes with the fourth dimension.

here's one of the rotations of the tesseract

>>1161914

Is it strange I think I know how it works?

I dont get it. its just a shape.

>>1162001
No you dumb ass its a shape from a higher spatial dimension.

The closest we can get to truly seeing it, is seeing it's shadow because it loses a dimension.

>>1161992
You THINK you know how it works or you KNOW how it works?

There's a big difference, if you can predict the movement of all the parts with any precision, that's suprising.

>>1161992
All you have to do to tell how it works is looking at it for a while.

>>1161983
Same poster as quote;
You can see that the cube inside the bigger cube is actually vaccum, that it contains nothing.
That's exactly how our universe works. When "black holes" open, and you venture into one, what really happens is that you travel in-between dimensions. Our bodies cannot survive the energy that a "black hole" contains, but that's what would happen.
Our universe is four-dimensional, but we live in a third dimension.
Also, if you would travel in one direction, let's say "up". In the end, you would return to the exact same position, if you we're travelling in one direction only.

>>1162006
>I didn't even try to interact with it

>>1162004
THINK

I would never say I know how a 4 dimensional shape operates until I'm absolutely positive with 100% accuracy at predicting.

Also I've been drinking so I'm most likely wrong.

>>1162013
What I wanted to say is that black holes are the "nothingness" that contains inside a 4-dimensional object, meaning the universe.
Black Holes is what makes our universe 4-dimensional.

>>1162021
Me too.

It FEELS intuitive on a certain level, but once you start trying to predict where things will move, you'll see you don't really understand it at all per se.

>Black Holes is what makes our universe 4-dimensional.

>>1162031
Yeah I realised I hadn't a clue as soon as I realised

There's green shit out of view.

Ziltoid the omniscient captures my reaction.

>>1162031
>per se.

Good grief, you must be some bucktoothed ackward idiotic stereotypical nerd

>>1162085
Wow, nice spelling there champ.

Yes, I am one of those nerds who uses words you don't, and can also spell.

But HEY! You can use a computer, good for you!

>>1162091

looks like i hit a nerve

>>1161108
>>1161108
>>1161108
>>1161108
>>1161108
Where can I get this?

>>1162115
I don't think it's out yet, I'm looking forward to it too, I like having my spatial perception twisted.

>>1162106
Yes, you trolled me good.

2d representation of a 3d shadow of a 4d cube.

>>1161108

>>1162073


Devin is king

>>1162147
For you since you are amongst kings of men.

>>1161902

I don't think you understand 4-D. I'll show you a diagram.

A fourth dimension can be any number of variables; in this case, I'll let it be colours. Imagine lots of 3Ds stacked on top of eachother, pretty much. This is (1). In (2), I have a simple example of a knot. It's just a trefoil, nothing special about it, except this knot can travel through the 4th dimension. So you take an arbitrary crossing, and pull one of the lengths "up" through the 4th dimension to give you (3). Now, since these 2 lengths are in completely different spaces, they don't interact with eachother, so you can pull the top crossing down under the bottom one to give you (4). Bring it back into the space the rest of the knot is occupying, and you now have an unknot. Ta dah. All knots are unknots in the 4th dimension.

>>1162261
You seem pretty clued in on this 4D stuff.

>>1161983
Should/Does the length of each connection change in our percetion/our interpritation of a hypercube? I know that in 4D space, each line will be the same length, but would a hyper cude appear to morph as it rotated or what?

>>1162762
Bumping in hopes of alternate input from nutjobs.