[I]What is Dark Matter? [/I]
A boost trail in Rocket League came into mind.
sassy Bill is the best
"u free for dinner"
"Often"
Me too Bill.. Me too..
The 4th dimension isn't time aaaaaaaaaaaa Bill please
[editline]20th April 2017[/editline]
[t]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Schlegel_wireframe_8-cell.png[/t]
This is a 4th dimensional shape. No time involved.
[editline]20th April 2017[/editline]
This video may (or may not) help:
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rG6aIVGquOg[/media]
[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;52128182]The 4th dimension isn't time aaaaaaaaaaaa Bill please
[editline]20th April 2017[/editline]
[t]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Schlegel_wireframe_8-cell.png[/t]
This is a 4th dimensional shape. No time involved.
[editline]20th April 2017[/editline]
This video may (or may not) help:
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rG6aIVGquOg[/media][/QUOTE]
that's a two dimensional representation of a three dimensional 'shadow' of a 4d object
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;52128216]that's a two dimensional representation of a three dimensional 'shadow' of a 4d object[/QUOTE]
but that doesnt mean its not true?
time isn't a spatial dimension but he probably didn't wanna get into it
[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;52128182]The 4th dimension isn't time aaaaaaaaaaaa Bill please
[editline]20th April 2017[/editline]
[t]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Schlegel_wireframe_8-cell.png[/t]
This is a 4th dimensional shape. No time involved.[/QUOTE]
I suspect Bill was referring to physical dimensions, not mathematical dimensions.
There is a difference, however pedantic a difference it may be.
I want to ffeed him eggs
hot and cold
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52128261]I suspect Bill was referring to physical dimensions, not mathematical dimensions.
There is a difference, however pedantic a difference it may be.[/QUOTE]
Time isn't 'physical' either. All objects on the first three planes transition using time, so how can time be a separate dimension if it's already present in the first three? Time is just a description of change in a system.
[editline]20th April 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;52128216]that's a two dimensional representation of a three dimensional 'shadow' of a 4d object[/QUOTE]
This is... correct, I mean, if you want to be pedantic. I think it's fairly obvious that I can't literally show you a 4d object on a 2d screen in a 3d plane, it's just a frame of reference to illustrate my point.
This is like getting mad when your buddy says 'this teacher sucks' because the teacher isn't performing the same action a vacuum would at that point in time.
[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;52128379]Time isn't 'physical' either. All objects on the first three planes transition using time, so how can time be a separate dimension if it's already present in the first three? Time is just a description of change in a system.[/QUOTE]
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime]In physics, the fourth dimension refers to Spacetime.[/url]
[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;52128379]Time isn't 'physical' either. All objects on the first three planes transition using time, so how can time be a separate dimension if it's already present in the first three? Time is just a description of change in a system.[/QUOTE]
A physical dimension is something that can be discreetly measured. Time can be discreetly measured.
A mathematical dimension is simply a representation of independent variables in a system.
By necessity, all physical dimensions are mathematical dimensions, but not vice-versa. For example, you can express the four physical dimensions as representing the four independent variables X, Y, Z, and T.
But I can also make a mathematically nine-dimensional system, for example, using the variables X, Y, Z, W, V, T, I, J, and K. This nine-dimensional space has no physical analogue (at least, so far as I am aware of), because the variables W, V, I, J, and K don't relate to anything that can be discreetly measured. They're just abstract variables.
That being said, I've heard that string theory introduces a total of 10 physical dimensions, but I don't know enough about that to say anything about it.
I'm not a physics major, just a math one, so I can see how I can be wrong there. Also, from what I hear of string theory, it makes a lot of sense. Maybe that's just my brain. Anyway, you have convinced me to get off my ass and read about it so I don't sound dumb in the future, I'm currently ignorant of other fields :v:
[editline]20th April 2017[/editline]
Oh, made a mistake with the picture?
Physically speaking nothing can occupy the same space, but in time, 2 things over time can occupy the same space, so if that shit got translated into our physical world it'd look like they're clipping through each other but they're not.
Wasn't someone making a game that utilized the 4th dimension? Though I don't think it was time (or maybe it was and I'm just not understanding how time works as a dimension). It played like Fez with using your perception but it was extremely confusing since the developer explained how it worked
why are his legs tiny
Couldn't you say that any independent physical variable could be seen as a dimension?
Length, width, height, time, frequency, pressure, temperature, voltage, etc etc?
As long as an event is defined by specific values of all the variables, you could represent it as a point in N dimensions.
Like, there is probably some fancy engineering system of measurement where it makes sense to say "the electron orbitals of molecule 1 are at (0 m, 0m, 0m, 5 Hz) and the electron released by a reaction of melecule 2 is at (0m, 0m, 1cm, 10 Hz) so the two events are 0.02 meter-Hertz apart so science science magic rainbows chemistry happens"
That would be a 4-dimensional coordinate system, since all four variables are independent from one another, and you can have two different things exist at the same X,Y and Z but at different frequency.
I thought the whole thing was that we were 3 Dimensional beings living in a curved 4 dimensional universe, so even though we perceive time in separate moments (much like like a 2 dimensional being can only perceive a 3 dimensional being in 2 dimensional pieces) time is still a spatial dimension.
Or was that all just science fiction mumbo jumbo that I read somewhere? I don't know, I'm currently failing my physics class so...
[QUOTE=ChicagoMobster;52129404]Wasn't someone making a game that utilized the 4th dimension? Though I don't think it was time (or maybe it was and I'm just not understanding how time works as a dimension). It played like Fez with using your perception but it was extremely confusing since the developer explained how it worked[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yW--eQaA2I[/url]
This one?
The Z axis is up. You heard it here first, folks.
[QUOTE=Ott;52129982]The Z axis is up. You heard it here first, folks.[/QUOTE]
Games that make the Y-axis the vertical/height axis are reserved a special place in hell...
[QUOTE=Revenge282;52132194]Games that make the Y-axis the vertical/height axis are reserved a special place in hell...[/QUOTE]
makes sense from a physics perspective though, just not necessarily a game developer perspective.
in physics x is always referred to students as length and y as height. this is because in 2D problems we mostly observe from the side rather than top-down as most simpler problems take into account gravity. because of that, when you add z the logical name for it in this case would be depth or forward/backwards.
so when someone does that coordinate system hell in a video game it's probably because they have a physics background.
that being said i understand both coordinate systems, but I prefer the one where Z is height specifically if it's a video game.
[QUOTE=Octopod;52133704]
so when someone does that coordinate system hell in a video game it's probably because they have a physics background.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, I think it's more related to the evolution of graphics APIs. Traditionally, x was across your screen, and y was up and down. So, when they designed 3D APIs like OpenGL and DirectX, they made the depth into the screen as z. This is why the depth-buffer is often referred to as the z-buffer.
Games based on id software engines (doom, quake, ect...) use Z as up and down because Doom was primarily a 2D game, with a third dimension tacked on. It would make sense that John Carmack simply continued using the same coordinate system in his future games out of familiarity.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
