Tesseract

Redpill me on the tesseract & 3d pol.

Does 3d glasses really make you see things in 3d or is it just an illusion? Could 3d glasses potentially make you see a more accurate depiction of the tesseract?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/rAAeLNAfSYc
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

take your meds, bjorn

you dont see anything in 3d, glasses or not

if you don't see "things" in 3D without them you have a problem.

We see things in 2d

You can see a tesseract is connected by cubes on its sides. Wearing 3D glasses allows you to manipulate the tesseract in real time and see these for yourself.

Although it is still a pseudo representation. As you're forcing a 4D object into 3D space.

Carl Sagan on the subject:
youtu.be/rAAeLNAfSYc

If you're looking at a picture of a tesseract you're essentially looking at a 2D projection of a 3D object that is essentially the shadow of a mathematical 4 dimensional object.
However just because you can do stuff in math doesn't mean it represents reality. Just because you can calculate in 4 spatial dimensions doesn't mean a 4th spatial dimension exists in reality.
Same as the fact that even though you can calculate Pi to infinite decimals in maths yet a perfect circle cannot exist in the universe even if the universe was infinitely large because the universe has finite precision (plank length).
An interesting observation on this though is that any formula or math problem that involves Pi doesn't represent reality as the number is cannot exist in reality since it has infinite precision. But then again all calculations using Pi can only be rough estimates.

Anytime someone tells you what a 4d object looks like it is just made up. (((Theoetical physicists))) get off on this stuff but it is all just a grift and there is no way to prove it wrong or right as we cannot perceive 4 dimensions.

Right, but I'm thinking it has to be way more accurate than the 2d depiction right?

In the same way a cube is a 3d depiction in 2d, it's still way more accurate then it would be depicted in 1d.

Would this be possible with 3d glasses?

no

Yes

no

Go study mathematics then

Untrue
We have spacial understanding
It's why we can distinguish a screen from I've met people who see in 2d and it's a detriment to them

conscioushugs.com
>it's fucking dope and take as much time as you need

From reality*

That's because of different light shades.

How is this related to current events or politics? Take this shut to /x/

In the same way you can draw depth on a 2d painting by using different shades of the same color.

This painting is not a cube.

Their first album was pretty good

Yes there's actually YouTube videos of guys doing already. So you can watch them or get a pair and download the program yourself.

Accurate need not be the best word. But certainly another way of looking at a tesseract.

The only possible application I can see you for it in the future would be if it's discovered that humans have a fourth-dimensional property and that buy changing its parameters you can effect those in 3d space.

Do you think you can see depth right now? It sure looks like some things are farther away than others in this painting right, you're not actually seeing depth though. It's a 2d painting, it's not a cube 3d painting.

Does this apply to base60?

> pi in base10

To be fair it depends on how the optic nerve absorbs photons. Does it do so on a single plane or is there different depths most they're absorbed. If different depths then we see in 3d. Otherwise if it's absorbed on a single plane that our brain processes the rest. Both scenarios don't discount optical illusion

It's not any more of an optical illusion than real life.

Pretty sure it's well established we see things in 2d

Any twat that uses "well established" in a discussion on science doesn't know the history of science

So the question is does the optic nerve absorbed photons on a single plane or multiple planes? That's your answer for whether or not we see in 3d. Optical illusions will still effective both methods so using optical illusions to illustrate your point is moot.

Seeing things in 3d would mean you could see inside objects and the back plate behind the cube.

NO.
unless you are a fucking Cyclops then OK.

We don't see objects we see light bouncing off objects you Daft idiot.

I guess you could say we see in 2.5d considering we can see the depth of surfaces, unless that's just differences in lighting, idk.

But for sure we can't see things in 3d.

Seeing things in 3d would mean you would be able to see every side of a cube at the same time.

Don't you see why the Jews want to shut down coal mining operations? They are farming Jew carbon to make diamonds for the collective. The Jews want to use their own biowaste Instead of coal to join the continuum. It's all part of a group of clones created by papa john. I'll start from the beginning.

There are only two dimensions. To break through you have to become a crystalline entity. Jewels like diamonds are super compressed carbon, basically the same as human ash. The Jews were behind the holocaust to create ash to turn Jews into diamonds. Hitler recognized the Jews as the chosen people and designed the plan to make a giant Jew diamond for all the Jews to join in a mental collective transported into space by the "bell" space craft. The bell is what created the pressure via centrifugal force as it traveled through space time.

Also papa john is an alchemist and creates better atoms for his "better" ingredients. His company funded CERN to create his atoms.
Like I said we are living In a two dimensional world. How come we only see flat screens? Hitler knew this and created the bell as a centrifuges and l pressure pot to cook the Jew diamond while he traveled to the future in 1964 when the bell crashed in kecksburg. Only through meditation and starvation could the Jews transcend into the true third dimension via the crystal entity. They still continue the practice of fusing to the entity which is located at ceti. Papa john, one of the clones, funded ceti to create his ingredients but to also blast dead Jew ashes into the crystal. In return the crystal is used to power CERN mass replicator to make the ingredients.

The only man who can stop Peyton manning is Bill Belichick, who is a time traveling clone of Winston Churchill.

lol, and?

What the fuck does that matter, you can't see all sides of the cube at the same time can you?

= not 3d vision. Simple as that buddy.

What is optical science?

It feels like that you are trying to explain your entire world around object-oriented programming rather than as it is. We see light. We do not see objects. Light bounces off those objects at various angles and enters our eyes. The amount of photons absorbed allow us to calculate a picture in our head. So the question is does the optic nerve absorb all these at one plane or does it absorb them on multiple planes. What we see and how our brain calculates what we see are two different questions. That's why optical illusions still work.

...

>We see light. We do not see objects. Light bounces off those objects at various angles and enters our eyes. The amount of photons absorbed allow us to calculate a picture in our head.


Yeah well you can't perceive the light emitting from the back of an object, can you?

You can't see all sides of a cube at the same time can you?

Ergo, you don't see in 3d.

You've created your own criteria for what it means that see in 3d I can't help you. You've created your own roadblock to knowledge.

Seeing things in 3d would mean being able to observe all information in the 3d world.

In the same way when you look at a 2d picture, you can absorb all the information in the picture, because it's in 2d...

Are you retarded?

Light doesn't emit from objects generally unless it's generating a photons like a plasma. Seeing in 3D does it mean X-ray vision.

We see in 3d. We tell distance.
>we can see the depth of surfaces, unless that's just differences in lighting
Dumbass. Depth perception is a consequence of, and the reason we have, two eyes. Same thing with ears. The brain pieces it together.
>Seeing things in 3d would mean you would be able to see every side of a cube at the same time.
No you retard, that's got nothing to do with the dimensions of our senses. That's frame of reference. We perceive vertical, horizontal, and depth. That's 3d. Has nothing to do with ubiquitous frame of reference you utter retard.

You see with stereo vision of 2d objects.

Blue yellow cross > red blue Cross

>This painting is not a cube.
>It's a 2d painting, it's not a cube 3d painting.

It would mean seeing a cube like this.

You are really fucking dumb bro.

The two eyes send a pair of 2D image to the brain. From that, the brain constructs a 2D+depth model of the visual field. What we see is not light, but rather surfaces, objects, and structures that are arranged in 3-space with depth.

The reason our visual perception would not be called full 3D is because we cannot see behind objects or inside their interiors, so we do not have full access to the 3D information in front of us. We only can see those 2D surfaces that are not covered (occluded) by something else.

Can you see things in 1d?

Yes, when you look at something 1 dimensional you can gather all the information in front of you with your eyes.

Can you see things in 2d?
Yes, when you look at a painting, or a 2d object, you can see all the information available.

Can you see in 3d?
No, you can not gather all information about a cube by looking at it. You cannot see the back for example.

you have two fucking eyes, offset, giving you the ability to see things in 3D, you dumbshit

Or maybe you just have no idea what the fuck your talking about, that's always a possibility.

t. one-eyed manlet

And how does a 2-d seeing creature see a 2-d universe? That's right, he doesn't have a ubiquitous frame of reference, things can still be obscured. We see in 3d.

2d creatures see in 1d.

He sees in 2-d, he perceives in two dimensions. With that line of thought a 1-d seeing creature in a 1-d universe sees nothing at all even if he does, just because things can be obscured on a line. You're retarded.

I mean you kinda proved it yourself in this painting.

That dot cannot see the obscured shit behind the line right?

He does not have access to the information that there is a squiggly line behind it.

We can see it though, he can't.

So maybe it's because we can see 2d, and he can't?

If you can perceive depth, then you're observing a three dimensional universe.

We can see all the information of his world, and he can't, explain why.

Read

I mean it's a 2d picture.

We don't see it in 3d. We see it in 2d, and we can see all of it, and he can't. Explain why.

Plank length is arbitrarily defined.

There is no "smallest" unit of measurement but what we decide we want it to be.

Why can we, who see this 2dimensional picture, absorb all the information of his world, and he can't?

We are not using our 3d vision to look at this 2d picture, right?

So why can we see it and he can't?

interstellar is a documentary

...

what the fuck is this faggoty shit and why does it have so many repleyes?

sage

If he's a fucking dot, living on paper, he will obviously just see a line, not up or down, are u dumb?