• BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    No. He shows how non euclidean (spherical) space translates to euclidean (flat) space. Description is bullshit.

    • Soup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      There is the cool idea of showing how different dimensions, in our situation where fully visualizing a fourth dimension is fundamentally impossible, could potentially look. Like, yes this is obviously not going to show us a fourth dimension but looking at how a 2D plane can actually be a 3D space if you have the capacity to see it is kinda neat. It’s as close as most people are going to get to visualizing a fourth dimension.

      You’re so focused on how this isn’t a literal representation of something fundamentally impossible to represent that you forgot to exercise your imagination even a little bit.

  • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Seems to me like it’s demonstrating the projection of a complex three dimensional shape which produces a simple pattern on a two dimensional plane.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      It’s worse. It’s the projection of a 3d shape onto a 2d shape, which is then captured on a different 2d shape to be displayed to us.

      It also has a brief 4d dimension, sliced at the second the picture was taken.

  • 58008@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    This is like me laying naked on my back with an erection and saying the shadow cast by the sun is a complex timekeeping device.