/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.6338056]

>tfw you will never fully grasp the hypercube

[Anonymous No.6338062]

Why won't you?

[Anonymous No.6338066]

>>6338062

Because we live in only three dimensions.

[Anonymous No.6338067]

>>6338056
>yfw a 3D shadow is still 3D

[Anonymous No.6338069]

a representation of a cube in 2D gets the idea across.
so representing a hypercube on a screen would probably be better with stereoscopic images to view it in 3D.

[Anonymous No.6338070]

>>6338069
yes but you will never fully be able to understand it like you understand that something that looks like a lot of squares rotating in a plane is actually a 3D cube you understand

[Anonymous No.6338072]

Draw a cube on a paper. Now have a book where on every page there is drawn a cube.
Each piece of paper represents the 3D space.
But since your book is thick, you get 4D.
You get your tesseract.

[Anonymous No.6338073]

>>6338072
if the books pages were 3D, it would be a perfect analogy

[Anonymous No.6338080]

[Anonymous No.6338085]

4D objects are easy, just make use of your intuition of time. Picture it existing for a unit of time. Each instant is a "cross section." Then just keep in mind that it is "all at once."

[Anonymous No.6338103]

>>6338070
i never said that.
i was just implying that representing a 4D object in 2D is plain retarded.
3D would at least improve it

[Anonymous No.6338106]

>>6338103
ah, yeah thats true

[Anonymous No.6338109]

>>6338066
So?
You don't live on mars, but you can still imagine mars can't you?

[Anonymous No.6338116]

>>6338103
How can you honestly state a graphic course with only knowledge of the 3D?

[Anonymous No.6338117]

>>6338085

It's just a cube that's ever-changing.

[Anonymous No.6338121]

>>6338116
dude shut the fuck up, people like on on /sci piss me off