I believe earth and other PLANE(t)S are 3D representations of 4+D objects.
They are flat when you are on them and when you're looking at them from a significant distance they appear round and to rotate because that's the only way we can comprehend a plane "scrolling" through 3dimensions from the 4th.
Pic related, but a "sphere" instead
>Flat earth isn't wrong but globe earth isn't right
I can see this
>tfw to intelligent for more than 2 dimensions
This makes more sense than I'm willing to admit right now
Yep, for sure only planets... There is field in wich waves forms waves in another fields, ouch nooo, my world is doomed.
>Yep, for sure only planets
Please enlighten me.
Is everything 4+D?
Are we just a 3dimensional projection of a 4+D dataset?
Its actually more than just plain tesserect, as those things collide even hard things like protons appear out of nowhere but they are very unstable... It's noisy.
Honestly, this isn't interesting. Any interest in optics?
I just used the tessaract as an example because I can't possibly fathom what a 4dimensional sphere would look like
4D array of property instead 3D array of property?
so why do you end up at the point you started if you keep going into the same direction?
4D space wraps around in 3 dimensions. Like when you reach the end of the board in Pacman.
also by posting this picture I think I just figured out what a circle looks like in 4 dimensions
It have more than one 3D look when we apply forth.
oOOOOooooohh shit now I have to think some more
Yes In a sense that's correct. A 4d point distortion in space-time will create a 3d sphere of influence.
If there is a 4th spatial dimension, it is not interacting with the 3d if it was the case, things would appear to be overlapping, collapsing on themselves.
I don't think the 4th (and beyond) dimensions are interacting with the 3rd as much as the 3rd dimension is just a bisection of the 4th
What if there is an empty slice few days ahead?
Is there an empty space on a mobius strip?
If as op is saying, 3d objects are the representation of 4d objects, 4d must interact with 3d, like when 3d projects on 2d, what i was saying is, if that is the case, things would appear to be collapsing on themeselves, the way it happens with a hypercube
>if that is the case, things would appear to be collapsing on themeselves
Wave form colllaaaaapppsseee
>hay guise i believe in the 4th dimension
>tesseract.gif
Its called time, dipshit
>Its called time, dipshit
You think you're being clever but you're not.
A hyperplane in 4D would not form a sphere in 3D space. In fact you would just get a plane. Just like how a circle is a cross section of a sphere, a sphere is a cross section of a hypersphere...
In 3D, if you project a plane edge on, onto the 2D space, you would get a straight line. If you project the plane any other way, you just get the whole 2D space. An analogous thing would happen with a hyperplane in 4D space.
Your matrilinear ancestors were flat.
You are talking about projecting 2D entities over one another in 3D space, is not the same as projecting 3D onto 2D, nor the same as 4D to 3D, thats my thought, i might be wrong
If you can open a seam in spacetime at a point where a fourth dimensional plane is perpendicular to where we can physically see its real parts (the 4th dimensional beings in the fourth dimensional space through the opening)
But we might be limited to seeing anything, also there would also be a complex imaginary part where humans cannot physically interact or see.
Is that any good?
What about the wave function collapse?
>using the fact that earth appears flat at the surface but round in space
So what, if I zoom in on this orange and see that it appears flat, does that make it 4 dimensional?