3 ms·
That last point is quite interesting. I'm having some trouble extrapolating that up into higher dimensions, identifying what limits of the human body would be e
by causality0 4y ago
That last point is quite interesting. I'm having some trouble extrapolating that up into higher dimensions, identifying what limits of the human body would be eliminated by a fourth spatial dimension.
Edit: For some reason using a whole comment to say this got me muted from commenting at all, so I'll put it in an edit: Damn, that shoelace thing is really cool.
- macrolocal 4y agoYou couldn’t tie your shoelaces in 4D because the laces would just slip around each other.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Filligree 4y agoAren’t some organic molecules effectively knots? Though I imagine there are plenty of alternatives.
- OscarCunningham 4y agoYou can't knot 1-dimensional curves in 4-dimensions, but you can knot 2-dimensional surfaces.
- rbanffy 4y agoTherefore, a 5D being ties their shoes with 3D universes.
- FartyMcFarter 4y agoNew twist on the simulation argument: we're living in the shoelaces of someone's high-tech shoes.
- macrolocal 4y agoA 6D being even! We live from aglet to aglet.
- jacquesm 4y ago> I'm having some trouble extrapolating that up into higher dimensions, identifying what limits of the human body would be eliminated by a fourth spatial dimension. That's precisely why Flatland and the Planiverse are such interesting books. Making the step from 2D observing from 3D gives you a little bit of an intuition of how a 4D being would look at us as well as to how a 3D being would look at a 4D one.