[QUOTE=ZombieWaffle;18570998]Neat, how does it look?[/QUOTE]
Really realistic.
Lol that surprised me
500D would look fucked up.
At 4D, something as simple as a cube (shown in wireframe.) looks fucked up.
[img]http://acm.tju.edu.cn/toj/1256_cube1.gif[/img]
[editline]01:21AM[/editline]
[/nerd shit]
maybe 1000D would look good then if 500D looks shitty.
[QUOTE=paul simon;18571695]500D would look fucked up.
At 4D, something as simple as a cube (shown in wireframe.) looks fucked up.
[img]http://acm.tju.edu.cn/toj/1256_cube1.gif[/img]
[editline]01:21AM[/editline]
[/nerd shit][/QUOTE]
Actually, that would be the shadow ( if you take a 4 dimensional cube and shine a light at it, the shadow would look like that ) of the 4 dimensional cube, I am pretty sure there has been no visualisation of a real 4 dimensional object yet. I could be wrong though.
[QUOTE=Alex9325;18571070]Why was I thinking of the camera at first.[/QUOTE]
Yeah me too. Why?
oh wait I have one :smug:
[QUOTE=paul simon;18571695]500D would look fucked up.
At 4D, something as simple as a cube (shown in wireframe.) looks fucked up.
[img]http://acm.tju.edu.cn/toj/1256_cube1.gif[/img]
[editline]01:21AM[/editline]
[/nerd shit][/QUOTE]
Wouldn't the 4th dimension be time and so this graphic is simply showing the cube at two different moments.
[editline]10:04PM[/editline]
?
[QUOTE=Zatar963;18573576]It's 23D...
Not 500D.[/QUOTE]
24*
[QUOTE=Tu154M;18585648]Wouldn't the 4th dimension be time and so this graphic is simply showing the cube at two different moments.
[editline]10:04PM[/editline]
?[/QUOTE]
No, it is showing the cube at ALL moments between the start and the end.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.