Tesseract Challange

[James Lehman]

It's totally solid and not moving with respect to itself at all. Remember this is a 4D object. All we could possibly see of it is a 3D shadow and looking at it on a screen will only show us 2D of that! It appears to change shape only because we can not see change of its orientation through its 4th dimension. It is acutually not chaging shape or size. It is only rotating in 4D.

James.

[tony220171]

here is my attempt its in red because traceit sucks and no 1 can fix it

[soforene]

I've just been checking out some shows and the laser tesseract has already been done lads.
There's a sequence near the end of the Mission Impossible show (supplied with Lasershow Designer 2000) that has a moving tesseract.
Checking the asociated docs it was done by Jay Heck at LFI.

No pics I'm afraid as I only have the Intro version which won't output to .avi so (unless you own the show) you'll have to take my word for it.

[allthatwhichis]

I've just been checking out some shows and the laser tesseract has already been done lads.
There's a sequence near the end of the Mission Impossible show (supplied with Lasershow Designer 2000) that has a moving tesseract.
Checking the asociated docs it was done by Jay Heck at LFI.

No pics I'm afraid as I only have the Intro version which won't output to .avi so (unless you own the show) you'll have to take my word for it.

That is what my avatar is...

[keeperx]

well this is not done yet.. james has the best starting point but now we need it animated.,.

[James Lehman]

I believe there is no real 3D animation of this thing. We could come up with a neat looking 3D animation, but it wouldn't really represent what a 4D object looks like in 3D space rendered to a set of 2D images.

James.

[tocket]

Well, it would be like a 3D object projected on a 2D surface. Only a harder for the viewer to construct a mental image of the 4D object. However, just like it is possible to correctly represent 3D data in 2 spatial dimensions, it's possible to do the same with 4D.

A point in 4D has 4 coordinates, right? We tend to think of the world in 3 spatial dimensions, thus only 3 coordinates should be possible to perceive. Fortunately, there are many more quantifiable attributes than just spatial coordinates. My own favorite is color. For example, on an arbitrary scale, represent the minimum value with red, the maximum by green and let the gradient between them represent the values they span. Very useful when you're trying to represent multidimensional data, say the temperature of a cube.

There is a problem with this kind of representation though; it is impossible to make for example a hypercube. Why? The reason is simple, but I'll let you think about it for a while.

As for the existence of a fourth spatial dimension, I say there isn't one. Anyone believing otherwise I deem just as crazy as religious people.

Hypercubes are mathematical constructions. They can not exist in the real world.

[keeperx]

this is what the final object should look like
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXYXuHVTS_k

[heroic]

In case anyone still needs the original:

http://www.electronpusher.org/~jasmi...rtesseract.mov

[soforene]

well this is not done yet.. ....

How are things in The Flat Earth Society?

It's done dude.
In this instance, Tinkerbell will not be your saviour.
See allthatwhichis's avatar for a representation of how it's done with a laser.

Or just pop the ole noggin back in the sand.