Whether a 2d world is impossible or not' date=' I want to understand how it could function if it was possible. The article I'm reading about the 4th dimension requires me to understand how I would teach a 2D being the meaning of a 3D world. How I would get him or her to comprehend it even though he cannot see or understand the concept. I am compressing the 3D world into his. Once I can do that, I can apply it to try to understand the 4th dimension concept.

 

It is a kool experiment.

 

Bettina[/quote']

 

It would be much harder teaching someone from a 1D world what a 2D world was than teaching someone from a 2D world what a 3D world was.

i'd have thought that imagining a 4D world would be harder

It seems you either can or you can't. Fortunately video display equipment exists which allows the user to see 4D images (in the same way we use "2.5D" to display 3D images, one presumes).

It seems you either can or you can't [imagine a 4D world][/b']. Fortunately video display equipment exists which allows the user to see 4D images

 

iv heard of 4D graphs, where the 2D representation of a 3D graph changes with time, allowing things to be plotted in 4, for want of a better word, dimentions; and iv heard of ones which use colour to plot a 5th dimention, where 'dimention' is roughly synonomouse with 'representation of a variable' -- but actual 4D images displayed in a 3D universe? surely not? that'd be paradoxical, wouldnt it?

 

and what is 2.5D?

although having said that, i cant remember what colours they are exactly, but i think if a computer displays a red image on a blue background, the image seems to be hovering out above the blue background, thus giving a 3D image on a 2D screen, so i suppose 4D isnt so unbelievable.

 

still cant understand it tho. im happy with concepts of 0D, 1D, 2D, 3D, and 3D+time, but trying to contemplate what 4D would be makes my brain bleed.

but actual 4D images displayed in a 3D universe? surely not? that'd be paradoxical, wouldnt it?

I am not entirely certain what it looks like, but I know that JaKiri has used such a device if you want to ask him.

 

 

and what is 2.5D?

Using perspective on a 2D display to create the illusion of 3D objects. Like in Red Alert 2, etc. Afaik 4D viewers use 3D displays in the same basic fashion.

btw, in the classic "bend space " transverse jump theory, you need another dimension? or it can do with the 4 dims???

 

there are some physics saying that the quantum uncertainly is the evidence of alternate dimensions

*Ok, this comment is going to be pretty damn basic, but check it out:

 

- Look down at any table surface. (Even the computer desk in front of you.) Make sure you're looking at it straight down, no angle. This is now a 2-D object. It has length and width, but no hieght. Here's what I'm thinking: a 2 dimensional world would be like an Atari game with horrible graphics. (EXAMPLE: http://home.ptd.net/~faethor/c64class/invader.gif) - BUT THIS IS only from an overheard perspective, which if there was no hieght, wouldn't exist. SO WITH THAT SAID, I've come to this basic conclusion: a 2 dimensional world would suck lol. You wouldn't be able to see things from certain angles, because no matter WHICH dimension is absent, (length, hieght, or width,) - nothing would be fully visible at all times. In a nutshell, a 2 dimensional world could exist, but it would be horrible.

Imagining Other Dimensions

 

This is a site I was looking at recently. It talks about us imagining multiple spatial dimensions. It bases it off of the book Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions by Edwin Abbott.

 

I know the book sounds kind of dumb (A romance of many dimensions? Come on!), but it describes a square from a 2-D world visiting our 3-D world.

 

He's visited by a sphere who tries to describe his 3-D world by explaining up and down. But the square confuses this concept with back and forward.