/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3371853]

Can someone explain the hypercube to me? Or tesseract, whatever you'd like to call it. Not sure if there's a difference. I've spent all day reading on it, but I'm not exactly sure if I understand it.

Pls halp; Pic related

[Anonymous No.3371857]

bump for curiosity.

[Anonymous No.3371860]

0d: point
1d: clone 0d and join up, line
2d: clone 1d and join up, square
3d: clone 2d and join up, cube

Y U NO SEE WHERE THIS GOING

[Anonymous No.3371865]

It is essentially the representation of a fourth dimensional object in the three dimensions we are in. It works in familiar fashion to the shadow of an object, which would be a third dimensional object being represented in two dimensions.

[Anonymous No.3371867]

Your picture: its only a moving three dimensional projection of a 4-dimensional hypercube. We cannot perceive four dimensions and therefore cannot fully visualize a hypercube. Other than that, there is very little i can tell you about it. Just thought you'd find that interesting

[Anonymous No.3371871]

>>3371865
if you don't know what you're talking about plz shut up. hypercubes are not representations of anything.

[Anonymous No.3371873]

>>3371853
It's a 4D shape rotating and intersecting in 3D space..think of it like that.

[Anonymous No.3371886]

>>3371871
It's the fourth dimensional analog of the cube. Please, go read something.

[Anonymous No.3371889]

>>3371886
and analogue means 'representation', does it? please go learn the english language.

[Anonymous No.3371911]

>>3371889
The words are, ironically, fairly analogous. They may not be perfect synonyms, but only belligerent people such as yourself care. The basic meaning is the same either way.

[Anonymous No.3371917]

Haha, This is what I ended up with talking with anyone else, alot of differing views on what this thing is.
I'll just keep looking I 'spose

[Anonymous No.3371919]

>>3371911
> implying a tree is a representation of a tree

> in 2011..?

[Anonymous No.3371929]

LOL OP, Did you find out about this thing on Stick RPG 2? That's where I did, and apparently a few of my friends did too. None of us know wtf it is since the description said google it.

[Anonymous No.3371931]

Your mind is the 4th dimension. think about it man...

[Anonymous No.3371939]

>>3371865

There was a Sagan video explaining this on YouTube.

[Anonymous No.3371940]

It's what a shadow of a 4 dimensional object would look like.

[Anonymous No.3371937]

A 2d model can project the shadow of a 3d object
A 3d model can project the shadow of a 4d object

This drawing is 2d but it moves over time. However it does not change as if moving around it in 3d as if to show all sides of a static 3 dimensional model, it physically morphs. It should be possible to display a shadow of a 4 cube with a 3d model that does not move or morph. But that shape should look exactly like a 3d object when viewed in 2d since 2 dimensions cannot shadow 4. I can think of no 3d geometric shape for which this is the case. Is it possible to build a static 3d model of a 4 cube?

[Anonymous No.3371936]

>>3371917
bro it's not hard really.
it's a four dimensional cube.
a unit square is described by the vectors (1,0) and (0,1)
a unit hypercube is described by the vectors (1,0,0,0), (0,1,0,0), (0,0,1,0), (0,0,0,1)

[Anonymous No.3371942]

I thought the fourth dimension was time.

This represents time?

[Anonymous No.3371950]

>>3371939
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0
deliver'd

[Anonymous No.3371957]

>>3371919
You don't know what an analog is in this sense, do you?

Dictionary.com first definition:

> "1. a. a physical object or quantity, such as a pointer on a dial or a voltage, used to measure or represent another quantity"

Fuck, represent is even fucking in it.

[Anonymous No.3371969]

>>3371950
THERE COULD BE LIFE FORMS LIVING IN A 4TH DIMENSION THAT WE CAN NOT PERCEIVE!!!

[Anonymous No.3371973]

>>3371942
The fourth spacial dimension.

[Anonymous No.3371980]

>>3371957
Typical/10.
yet another fucking fuckwit lacking any kind of formal education, but a few hours spent browsing wikipedia (understanding nothing), access to dictionary.com, and fuck tonnes of arrogance and condescension

no, analogue in THIS SENSE is not definition 1. a hypercube is not a fucking physical quantity used to measure another fucking physical quantity, YOU IDIOT.

analogue in THIS sense, this totally fucking easy to understand for anybody with any fucking clue about mathematics sense, is an extrapolation of an established pattern.

i've had it with you morons on /sci/

[Anonymous No.3371989]

I don't get how people think a 4th dimension exists. It's just an optical illusion. it's a 3D cube within a 3D cube,nothing too special about that.
As disappointing as it may be, 3D is max that exists. Nothing else makes sense beyond that.
We're it.
But I'm ok with it as long as I get my 2D waifu.

[Anonymous No.3371999]

>>3371989
[Citation Needed]

[Anonymous No.3372000]

>>3371980
First of all, learn to write intelligently and not like a foolish kid getting mad for no reason, completely avoiding any and all attempts at sentence structure.

Read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogical_models

The only reason the hypercube was designed was to attempt to take a fourth dimensional object and make it somewhat understandable to the human mind, which can obviously not comprehend a true four dimensional hypercube. The hypercube that we see, in our three dimensions, is indeed, obviously not the same thing. It's our attempt at comprehending it, though.

[Anonymous No.3372008]

>>3372000
hhhhollllllllyyyyyyyyy sssshhhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiit hhheeeeeeeee'sssss sssssssstaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrteddddddd taaaallllllllkiiiiiiiiinnnnnnggggggg aaaaaaabssssssollllllluuuuuuuuuute crrrrrrraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaappppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp

[Anonymous No.3372011]

>>3372000
...dude, you clearly have no clue now what you are talking about. Please stop.

[Anonymous No.3372017]

I am the hypercube.

[Anonymous No.3372058]

>>3371871

I'm not sure which one of you fags is which anymore because the arguments has boiled down to namecalling and grammar but whoever this one is needs to stop posting.

[Anonymous No.3372120]

>>3371853

Geometrically the tessaract as it's drawn there represents the analog of a 4d cube except for a few important things.

First of all notice that when you go up in dimensions you gain a lot more of something that you had in the previous dimensions, when you go from a line to a box you gain 4 lines and one 2d face. When you go from a square to a box you gain 5 more 2d faces, 8 more lines and one 3 cell. From 3d to 4d you gain 20 more lines, a ton of 2d faces i'm not going to count them but w/e is contained inside of 4 lines would give you a square in a 4th dimension but we can't draw that. Also there is the 3 space cell of your original cube, the outside cube and the 6 other cells adjoining them, you either have to double count the outside cube one, as its currently occupied with the spaces of the other cels or just count the outside as it. All of these cells should be cubic in size and identical but sitting in 4d space if I recall correctly. Of course there is a 4 cell as well.

You may think this doesn't make sense but if you think about it long enough it kinda does, if it helps think about cut sections of the cube, it results in squares of the same size so cuts of this will result in cubes of the same size.

Also something that's interesting is that we can keep generalizing this idea, in fact you can find a formula for constructing such objects with their increasing number of points, lines, faces, cells and higher dimensional spaces and talk about anything that is relevant to the actual thing without even having the slighest clue of how higher dimensional spaces would even look like.