File :-(, x, )
Hypercubes! Anonymous
I want one of these in rl
>> Anonymous
4th dimension?
>> Anonymous
>>241038
lawl yeah
>> Anonymous
>>241036

Interesting, a 2dimensional representation of a 3dimensional aproximation of a 4th dimensional cube... Oh my, this is flat like a loli!
>> Anonymous
>>241101
I believe you can make such an object in 3 dimensional space, so its not 4 dimensional.
>> Anonymous
>>241130
No u cannot.
>> Anonymous
spoiler: time is the fourth dimension.
>> Anonymous
>>241141
No it isn't.
>> Anonymous
No, you're all wrong.

It is a 4 dimensional object in 4 spatial dimensions.

You guys forget that mathematically you can have any numbder of spatial dimensions, denoted by Rn.

That's how they come up with things like "11 dimensional Calabi-Yau constructs", all those dimensions are spatial.

Time doesn't work that way. Time is a dimension only because it is apperant. In reality it's just the direction to entropy's arrow.

Physics FTW.
>> Anonymous
>>241171
you suck at theoretical physics, fyi

okay imagining 4d GO:
you know how you make a square in 2d, right? then you make a 3d box by "stacking" squares on their edges to go to 3d, right?
well, 4d is just 3d boxes stacked on each edge
BLOW YOUR MIND
>> Anonymous
>>241167
Actually the object is 2-D, it ricks your eyes into thinking it's 3-D
>> Anonymous
"Hypercubes" never struck me as any more than a three dimensional object with specific material requirements, and being limited to a particular transformation set. Or, at the least, only being shown in a particular transformation set where the start and complete foirms are always externally cubes and internally a "suspended cube."

You can create a boxed-off region but its interior isn't a whole new dimension; you can shift the box so that the space that was formerly below the bottom of the box becomes the enclosure - flexing and contorting the sides - and still you've been working in three dimensions.
>> Anonymous
>>241184
It's simple. Imagine that in the OP pic, every edge is the same distance. The reason some look smaller is due to perspective.
>> Anonymous
I'm glad that while there are tons of bad things happeneing all around the world there are scientists arguing about the exact same inconsequential theoratical bullshit as is being discussed right here.

theoratical physics = waste of time which could be better spent serving fries at McDonalds and fapping.
>> Anonymous
3-D Go would be impossible.
>> Anonymous
>>241189
So, wait a minute. So the interior cube is supposed to be the same size as the exterior cube and all the diagonal segments connected matching vertices have the same length as a leg of either cube?

Okay, even if my above explanation of a "hypothetical X-cube" is wrong, now you have me piqued.
>> Anonymous
>>241197

without theoretical physics a good portion of the things in your room would never have been invented
>> Anonymous
tits or gtfo
>> Anonymous
>>241036
they cost like 36 bucks
>> Anonymous
Thats called the Tesser Act Hypercube which represents 4D (up to 10 d's)
>> Anonymous
>>241244

I have a theroy that the named "anonymous" is a 14 year-old with the IQ of a cactus, this only goes to prove it.
>> Anonymous
>>241255

Thats right, only true hypercube is a dodecahedron... visualized as 5 cubes spun into the next axis of spin symmetry. Time is not "the" 4th or 5th-D either since the only definition of time there is, is relative rotation. An easier to understand view of dimension refers to how many axis of spin you're referring to. anyway tits or gtfo right.
>> Anonymous
>>241197

You're one of those human trash that are only good for bagging my groceries and poisoning yourself to a slow and painful death?
>> Anonymous
>>241138
Well, given that it was flying in zero gravity, you could manipulate the points however you wanted and that the joints were expandable and capable of being pulled through eachother, yeah, you could.

My point is, that every one of these points and lines is graphable on a 3D plane.
>> Anonymous
>>241181
though close, 4d would be extruding a cube along a side, not stacking. That would just be adding more in the 3rd dimension.
you have to imagine being able to extrude stuff in another dimension which one doesn't naturally comprehend.
>> Anonymous
An interesting study is the analogs of dimensions. A one dimensional creature (worm thing) can only see a point (0 dim). A 2 dimensional creature living on a plane can only see to its up, down, left, and right (or any combination of these) directions, which makes for a line (1 dim). A 3 dimensional creature (humans) can map out a plane from a viewpoint. It is only because we have 2 eyes that we can judge depth into a 3rd dimension. Following this trend, a 4th dimensional being can probably see all 6 sides of a cube at the same time!