/sci/ - Science & Math

You best start visualizing a 4d space Anon. You're in one.

>>11354427
Don't worry, you're not doing anything wrong. There are only 3 dimensions. Time is not a dimension, nor is it physical.

>>11354427
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OvltlOA8XE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fePQdJNVF9g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZspAmawIpc

>>11354556
>Time is not a dimension, nor is it physical.
When people talk about visualizing 4D space they mean 4 spatial dimensions.
>>11354427
Have you tried Hinton cubes?

>>11354427
There are tricks to reasoning in higher dimensions besides the futile attempt to visualize four orthogonal lines.
A dimension is really just an independent parameter, so you can make the parameter whatever you want it to be. You could imagine a fourth dimension as color, where the difference in color of two objects contributes to the overall distance between them, and two objects can overlap in 3d space if they have different colors. Or you could imagine time as a fourth parameter. Or temperature. Get creative.
As a fun exercise, try to imagine what it would look like to rotate 3d shapes by 90 degrees in these spaces

>>11354556
NOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T SAY THAT!!!!!!!!!!!
EXTRA DIMENSIONS EXIST I LEARNED ABOUT IT ON JOE ROGAN EXPERIENCE!!!!

>>11354427
4D space doesn't exist. It's not meant to be visualized.

>>11354556
>>11354834
Nice cope. If you can't visualize abstract objects in your head it means your're IQ is too low

>>11354556
Time is just a lie made up by the gouvernment

>>11354427
imagine n dimensional space first, and then set n=4

>>11354824
THERES MORE THAN ONE FUCKEN HILL IN TASMANIA

>>11354427
lmao brainlet, not gonna make it, even my little sister thinks in 4d

>>11354427
It doesn’t matter

>>11354427
Haha, clamped.

>>11354842
>your're

>>11354427
Just break it into 2 spaces. A 3d space and then a line. Every point into your 3d space is also somewhere on your line.

>>11354427
Visualizing a room with a clock or something/smbd moving inside is out of your reach? Or a room with varying temperature or what have you

>Trying to visualize infinite dimensional vector spaces

>>11354427
Can you visualize in 1d or 2d only? You can't either.

>>11355304
it's pretty easy to visualize a line and even easier to visualize just a plane and a square on it though

>>11354874
based

OP I can. It can be taught. Im working on a software to do it.

>>11354427
That's because you haven't learned the relevant math. You're supposed to define a topology that reduces the dimensions.

>>11354791
I always used colour and shades to visualise it

>>11354560
>KECK Observatory
for real?

>>11355684
Did you learn the relevant math of 2D <-> 3D transforms in order to build a 3D model in your head to navigate the world through?
No.
Shut up when you have not yourself achieved what OP is trying to do.

OP without my software, the best I can give you for now is this gif and the next. Its the first thing that gave me a glimpse of the 4th.

Stare at this one for awhile and think about it. This is 3D -> 2D -> 3D as you are used to. The trick to 4D vis is to teach your brain to understand there is another layer involved. 4D -> 3D -> 2D -> 3D -> 4D
The first part, from 4D to 2D is already what the animation is, so all you really need to do is learn to interpret 3D information into 4D similar to how you do 2D into 3D.

By staring at this the idea is you examine what your brain is doing in order to turn this 2D image of a deforming trapezoid folding in on itself into a 3D image of a rotating plane. By understanding this better you will be able to look for the same indicators, but framed in 3D with reference to a 4D object.

>>11355779
Now that you understand your own current ability to transform a 2D image into 3D you can focus on applying it to 3D->4D.

Pic related is functionally the same thing as previous, its the 3D form of a plane, a cube, undergoing the exact same rotation. Because you are familiar with taking in 3D information at face value, it appears as a cube being deformed in on itself. But the 2D plane did just the same.
All you have to do now is keep glancing between these and thinking about why you can so effortlessly understand 2D as 3D but not 3D as 4D. Soon enough you will see it. A hint that might help is to focus on the idea that far=small near=big. But Im sure you already knew that. What you really need is to just stare at these long enough while thinking about that.

Once you get it, it probably will not last. Our brains evolved to be great at 2D -> 3D because thats how our eyes work. Luckily we also are good enough at general learning that this IS possible, its just difficult. So if you only get a few seconds at a time, be proud of that. You'll know it when you see it. The cube stays a cube. Its just rotation.

>>11355799
Woops forgot pic