Can 4-D Figures be Represented on a 3-D Surface?

Lewis
If one can draw (or represent) a 3 dimensional figure on a 2 dimensional surface (ie-a cube on a blackboard), is it possible to "draw" (or represent) a 4 dimensional "figure" on a 3 dimensional "surface"?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Yes; however, just as in two-dimensional representations of three-dimensional objects, you can only see one view of the object. Also, because we have no experience with four-dimensional objects and because our eyes are limited to a planar visionscape, it would be much more difficult to intuitively grasp a four-dimensional object's representation than it is that of a three-dimensional one.
 
Thanks a lot for the replies, they both make quite a bit of sense.

robphy- I have seen the animated Necker cube before, but had forgotten about it. Thanks for the link, it's really neat.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top