Vorde
- 786
- 0
Does the fact that on 2D torus's, one dimension on the torus always has to be 'smaller' than the other dimension hold on the higher dimension versions?
The discussion revolves around the properties of toroidal structures, specifically whether the dimensions of a torus must adhere to a "smaller" and "larger" relationship in higher-dimensional analogs. Participants explore the topology of a 2D torus and its higher-dimensional counterparts, including the implications of embedding these structures in different dimensional spaces.
Participants express differing views on the necessity of dimensional relationships in toroidal structures, with no consensus reached on whether such relationships must hold in higher dimensions.
Participants discuss the implications of embedding toroidal structures in various dimensions, highlighting that the properties of the torus may change depending on the dimensional context considered.
yenchin said:I am not sure what you mean...even in 2D, you can identify the opposite sides of a *square* to have torus topology. So what do you mean by "smaller"?
Right. This limitation only comes into play when you embed the torus in three dimensions. I believe you can get around this limitation by embedding it in four dimensions instead. Or just by not embedding it at all and only dealing with the two dimensions inherent to the torus.marcus said:It is not true that one circumference or girth has to be bigger or smaller than the other. The construction works just as well with a square as with a rectangle.