this post was submitted on
64 points (73% like it)
101 up votes 37 down votes

gifs

unsubscribe333,648 readers

704 users here now

Kiva

Links to amusing, interesting, or funny .gifs from the web! .gif format submissions only, please!

How to make your own animated gifs?

Please try not to repost and post reaction gifs in /r/reactiongifs.

Direct image links preferred! Avoid pages that have other extraneous material besides the gif like headers, banners, ads, etc. And please, no blogspam. URL-shorteners are NOT allowed!

Witty titles optional. nsfw when necessary; this implies the comments within will be too.

NUDITY GOES IN /r/nsfw_gifs

MARK SEXY GIFS AND SERIOUS INJURIES NSFW
FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL NOW BE REMOVED

a community for

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

all 18 comments

[–]wyntor 8 points9 points ago

From memory this is what a 4 dimensional cube's shadow in our 3 dimension would look like.

[–]IMakeIce 6 points7 points ago

Yep. In 4 dimensions, all of the edges are equal lengths, and all of the angles meet at 90 degrees.

And here is the soothing voice of Carl Sagan to explain it further.

[–]mikek3 0 points1 point ago

It's an awesome video; he explains it extremely well.

What we're seeing with this tesseract is similar to if you drew a cube on paper. You know it's just a 2-d representation of a 3-d object. That's what this thing is: a projection of a 4d object.

No one knows what an actual tesseract looks like.

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]Ghostwoods 1 point2 points ago

If you absolutely have to include time in the count of spatial dimensions, then for pity's sake, make it 0.

[–]mikek3 0 points1 point ago

If I understand correctly, time does not necessarily have to be the 4th dimension. But, yes, it is defined as time in a Minkowski continuum called spacetime.

In Euclidian geometry, time isn't the 4th dimension. It's whatever it is that creates that box thingy.

reference

[–]esoteric23 0 points1 point ago

Strictly, there can be geometries with fourth (or higher!) dimensions without any time-like properties at all.

[–]AngryEnt 5 points6 points ago

Great, now if I can emulate that, then I will have unlimited sources of energy.

[–]Tewcool2000 3 points4 points ago

Downvote for shitty title.

[–]lookieausername 1 point2 points ago

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA- (BLAM!)

[–]0rangeGuy 1 point2 points ago

It's only a theory that the 4th dimension even exists.

[–]philcannotdance 7 points8 points ago

Just like gravity.

[–]esoteric23 1 point2 points ago

Higher-dimensional geometries are valid mathematical constructs even if they bear no relation to actual physical reality.

[–]Claxxamatic 0 points1 point ago

I'm confused. Is the 4th dimension not time (duration)? How could this be accurate

[–]ICEverfrost 0 points1 point ago

I used to get into so many arguments that this an object fitting this description (I never new it was called a tesseract) was actually the 4th dimension, and it was not time.

I actually developed a mathematical "proof" showing that geometrically, an object (I now know to be the tesseract) is the only possible way that we could attempt to comprehend the 4th dimension without just saying "oh it's time because that's what everyone says it is."

I hated having teachers just say, "shut up and sit down, your getting an A so don't worry about it anymore."

[–]uaca-uaca -1 points0 points ago

Ceci n'est pas un tesseract.