4D.

[Bullet Magnet]

I've already seen 4-D PC mouses for sale and thought "...wtf?!".

Four dimensional mice? They haven't even got three dimensional mice done right!

Sex appeal.

Peppermint

Thaumatic resons FTW. High five!

[Patrick Vykkers]

Maybe its cowbell.

[Facsimile]

Abeguy: Iam not confused at all, for I can actually visualise simplices, hypercubes, crosspoly4topes etc.

No. You. Can't.

God this thread is dumb.

[Adder]

Facsimile, from that site I can easily think up to dimension 6 {all time lines and possibilies within this universe}. I can think of 3 other smaller dimensions {rotations around points}.

Just because you can't doesn't mean other people can't. I can look at 3 2-D images and comprehend a complete 3-D image, the same way I can look at 2 1-D images and see a 2-D shape, or a point in a 2-D plane.

[Wil]

This thread is a joyous entanglement of quantum physics, tomfoolery and bullshit, the calibre of which I’ve never come across before. I want to thank you all so much.

I really rather doubt anyone here can genuinely visualise four‐dimensional space, but I suppose it’s not an impossibility.

[Adder]

4D space is generaly the idea of anything moving in space. It's x,y,z coordinates change with time {a 4th dimension/"thing to measure against"}. Ignoring time... it gets really hard/impractical/pointless to think of a 4th.

I really enjoy this thread, exept for the game part of it and the BS.

[Nate]

I really rather doubt anyone here can genuinely visualise four‐dimensional space, but I suppose it’s not an impossibility.

May I suggest we replace the worde 'visualise' with 'conceptualise'? Because, for humans, 'visualise' necessarily implies three dimensions.

[Strike Witch]

Look.

You can't put a 4 or 5 or 6 dimensional thing into a game because Humans cannot comprehend it. Why? because to make it viewable it becomes 3D!


Morons. every image you make won't be viewable because all you'll see is the 3 dimensions we know.

[Adder]

Actualy, all you see is a 2-D image rendered to appear 3-D.

With more than one view, you could comprehend a 4th dimension {or with some other variable such as spectral/colour shift}.

[Wil]

May I suggest we replace the worde 'visualise' with 'conceptualise'? Because, for humans, 'visualise' necessarily implies three dimensions.

I don’t think it implies a three dimensional image any more than it implies an image at all. It could refer to running a situation through your head.

I can conceptualise four‐dimensional space in that I can imagine the concept, but I can’t visualise it.

With more than one view, you could comprehend a 4th dimension {or with some other variable such as spectral/colour shift}.

Theoretically, but you’d have to have two three‐dimensional images focusing on the same point in 4D space. I personally can’t see in three dimensions, merely perceive a third by interpreting two off‐kilter two‐dimensional images detected by my retinas.

[Nate]

Okay, in the interests of precision I will state that I mean 'visualise' in terms of the definition "To make visual or visible" rather than "To make perceptible to the mind or imagination" which is what I presume you meant.

I can conceptualise four‐dimensional space in that I can imagine the concept, but I can’t visualise it.

That's what I was trying to say.

[Strike Witch]

Exactleh.

This thread is bogus because even if you could create such a thing nobody would be able to use it or even look at it.

[ZANGG]

I'm sure he could do it. Side effects may include the universe exploding.

[magic9mushroom]

Okay, a computer screen is 2D, right? To create 3D games, you have a control that moves perpendicular to the screen. To create a 4D game, you'd do another control.

NDW: I can actually visualise simple 4D shapes. It may be a side effect of my extremely strange mental structure.

Fascimile: OK, you can't visualise 4D, and you're in good company, but that doesn't mean noone can visualise it.

ZANGG: Yeah, I was actually planning to put 4D supernovae in.

Ghost: plz do not call me a moron.

Everyone else: yeah, colour is a good way to put an extra dimension in.

[Adder]

Can someone link to the theory behind a 4D hypercube? From looking at the 2-D plan, it looks like you're trying to create a shape with 32 square faces. The problem is I can only jump to 3D from 2D... and I'm pretty sure it doesn't make sence. I'm reminded of the old perspective problems of oblique drawings of perpetualy falling water.

[Bullet Magnet]

It's like trying to represent a cube in one dimension. You just can't do it.

[magic9mushroom]

Okay, it's easier to represent in 3D, but unfortunately, the computer screen is 2D.

EDIT: 500 posts YAY!!!!

[Strike Witch]

Let me point this out to you.

3 dimensions of space. they cover every plane humans can move across. What you are describing is a 3D game. End Of Story. you can't tack another axis after X Y and Z because those three already cover every way.
and the Fourth known Dimension is Time, which is included with the others. Nobody even knows WHAT the others are. if you do, and have a video on Youtube or whatever explaining them, please show.

[magic9mushroom]

Correct. Our universe is 3D. This is completely and utterly true. However, it is not impossible to have a 4D universe. That is what I am suggesting here. A 4D game, or a game with 3-space as the main battle field, but with 4-space to jump across or move between membranes etc. It is possible.

[Strike Witch]

( twitches)

BUT IT CANT EXIST IN THIS UNIVERSE.


So stop fiddling with shapes and start ripping holes in the fabric of space-time!

[magic9mushroom]

Who says a game has to obey the laws of physics of this universe?

[Strike Witch]

You know what? you can be a whackjob by yourself, the debate ended when you pulled out the Who says line.

Do what the hell you want, but try not to disturb the Hounds Of Tindalos.

[Bullet Magnet]

Nobody even knows WHAT the others are. if you do, and have a video on Youtube or whatever explaining them, please show.

I posted one on the first page.

[Goresplatter]

I think the fact is it would be impossible to make a 4D game. Incoming essay.

Right, the 4th Dimension - assuming it's a direction, which it should technically be, because 'dimension' suggests that you can move in that way. But we can't, because we're 3D ourselves. Our brain can only see three dimensions, and comprehend three dimensions, so therefore no matter how much we discuss it, we'll never be able to have an idea what it is unless the human brain evolves to cope with another dimension. If two dimensional people existed, they wouldn't be able to see us, but we would be able to see them, in the same way we can see other two dimension objects.

Due to their lack of depth, however, we wouldn't be able to touch them. We could also see something in the first dimension, but again, we wouldn't be able to touch it. This opens up the option that four dimensional people would exist and be able to see us, yet not touch us in a similar manner. They must also be able to move in a different direction to us (which is impossible to imagine to us).

Also, if they can't touch us, they cannot touch our world, which is also in the third dimension, so if their are four dimensional people (which, to be honest, there probably are somewhere ) they must live on a four dimensional world.

And so... a 4D game is impossible to create with the human race. Also, according to my personal logic-based theory, because we cannot percieve the fourth dimension at all, it's likely not to worth guessing at what direction the forth dimension is. Also, Adder, could you C + P or link some info where Einstein worked out 10 or 26 dimensions? Sounds interesting!

There's my waffle.

[magic9mushroom]

You said 4D is impossible to imagine. You are wrong. I know that we can't build 4D objects, but we can make a game set in hyperspace.

[Goresplatter]

You could say that, but then, what other direction would the character move in? It has to be a direction, imo, not colour or time or what have you - because that's moving in time and spectrum. You got any ideas what direction it is? Even if you did, it would be impossible to describe or portray, it'd be like trying to explain a colour to a completely blind person who has never seen colour before.

[magic9mushroom]

Let's say, you let me make the game, then I'll let you play it and see for yourself.

[Nate]

Sounds like a good compromise.

Now let's close this drivel until you realise you're attempting the impossible and return to apologise profusely.

[Mojo]

Facsimile, from that site I can easily think up to dimension 6 {all time lines and possibilies within this universe}. I can think of 3 other smaller dimensions {rotations around points}.

Just because you can't doesn't mean other people can't. I can look at 3 2-D images and comprehend a complete 3-D image, the same way I can look at 2 1-D images and see a 2-D shape, or a point in a 2-D plane.

Actually, you can't possibly see a 1-D image. a 1-D image has no surface.

Even the smallest and thinnest line has a surface. And we all know a surface is made by multiplying the width by the height (well, that goes for rectangles). Which is 2 dimensions, and thus, 2-D.

[magic9mushroom]

Sounds like a good compromise.

Now let's close this drivel until you realise you're attempting the impossible and return to apologise profusely.

Fine. The last part won't happen though.