3 ms·
Regarding the readme, I think it's clearer if you point out that it actually doesn't even stop at a '3 dimensional perspective projection of' - it's 2 dimension
by OJFord 3y ago
Regarding the readme, I think it's clearer if you point out that it actually doesn't even stop at a '3 dimensional perspective projection of' - it's 2 dimensional with the third suggested by perspective drawing and the rotation.
Then it goes on:
> Well, imagine you're a 2D being, you live in a flat universe, in a plane, you see in 1D (a line), then you try to visualize a 3D object, so your 3D friends intersect a cube into your line of sight, but you only see an infinitesimal slice of it, you can never see it fully.
Well, we kind of are, in looking at such demos we're 'living' in a flat computer-screen universe. To me at least it's easier to grasp as 'consider how 3D things from real life need to be represented in 2D on a computer screen' than it is to 'imagine you and everything in your life and your whole experience of the universe is 2D'! I can hardly conceptualise that at all!
- 0xndavd 3y agoThat's true. Was a bit reluctant of going there, afraid it might made the topic more confusing to some. But I think I will include it, yes. Thanks. Regarding being a 2D being I must disagree :), even though we are looking at such 2D demos we have 2D vision and are able to comprehend that "2D universe" fully, therefore we're still 3D creatures.
- jimmySixDOF 3y agoThere is also the concept of Visual Reorientation Illusions (Necker Cubes being the most familiar) which give some idea of the dimensional boundary translations etc. 1<>2<>3 and some 3<>4 There is a Facebook group and this account on X is collecting VRIs https://twitter.com/VRIs_Hugh https://twitter.com/VRIs_Hugh
- sdenton4 3y ago"I can hardly conceptualise that at all!" What, never read Flatland? Truly a classic!
- 0xndavd 3y agoFlatland was the true inspiration!