Can Complex Shapes Be Rotated in 4D?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter LightningInAJar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Shapes
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the possibility of rotating complex shapes in four-dimensional (4D) space, particularly focusing on the generalization of 3D shapes to 4D and the implications for non-Euclidean solids. Participants explore the definitions and characteristics of "complex shapes" and the feasibility of creating 4D representations from 3D models.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question what constitutes a "complex shape," suggesting it may refer to arbitrary combinations of geometric primitives.
  • One participant explains that while cubes can be generalized to n dimensions through specific rules, arbitrary shapes may lack such generalizable rules for 4D representation.
  • Another participant proposes that a 3D model file, such as an .STL, could potentially be transformed into a 4D rotation, expressing curiosity about the appearance of more complicated objects in 4D.
  • A participant clarifies that a tesseract is not a 4D rotation but a generalization of a cube, emphasizing the challenge of generalizing arbitrary polygons to 4D shapes.
  • It is noted that while general rules for creating arbitrary shapes may not exist, embedding a 3D object in 4D space is possible by adding a fourth coordinate.
  • Participants discuss the concept of projecting a 4D shape into 3D space, with one sharing personal experience of having a 3D projection of a 4D cube.
  • There is inquiry about software options for creating animations of 4D shapes from 3D models, with skepticism expressed about the availability of free tools.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of generalizing complex shapes to 4D, with no consensus reached on the existence of a generalizable rule for arbitrary shapes. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of transforming complex 3D models into 4D representations.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of clarity on what defines a "complex shape" and the dependence on specific definitions for geometric transformations. The discussion also highlights unresolved questions about the mathematical steps involved in generalizing shapes to higher dimensions.

LightningInAJar
Messages
278
Reaction score
36
TL;DR
higher dimensional shapes. Simple and complex.
I have seen videos of a 4D rotation of a cube or tesseract. Was wondering if complex shapes can be processed into 4D rotation versions of themselves?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What do you mean by a "complex shape" in this context? Just arbitrary combinations of geometric primitives?

The point about a cube is that it's generalisable to ##n## dimensions because there's a simple rule for generating one. You just write down every possible combination of ##n## zeroes and ones and you have your corner coordinates. Connect each corner to every other corner whose coordinates are the same except for one number. Done. You can then rotate and project that into as few or as many dimensions as you like.

Similar rules generate other geometric solids (although probably not all of the standard 3d ones work in arbitrary dimensional space). But if there's no generalisable rule (which there won't be for most shapes, possibly including whatever you mean by "complex shapes"), what is the 4d equivalent?
 
By complex I mean not a Euclidean Solid which I assume have convenient characteristics. Can a .STL 3D model file be turned into a 4D rotation? I am curious what more complicated objects look like expanded.
 
A tesseract isn't a "4d rotation". It's a 4d generalisation of a cube. The problem with a general shape is that there is no generalisation to 4d because there's no generalisable rule for generating it.

Think about a square. The rule for generating it is to write down all possible combinations of two zeros and ones - (0,0), (0,1), (1,0), and (1,1) - then connect points whose coordinates differ in only one place. That exact same rule generates a cube if you change "two" to "three". Now think of an arbitrary polygon drawn on a sheet of paper. How do you generalise the rule for drawing that particular arbitrary polygon to 3d?

The same is true generalising a 3d shape to a 4d one. If you can write a general rule for creating the shape that works in an arbitrary number of dimensions then you can generalise it to a 4d equivalent. But this is not possible for arbitrary polygons.

That said, you can always embed a 3d object in 4d space, just as you can imagine a 2d object in 3d space. You simply take your (x,y,z) coordinate triples and make them (x,y,z,0). You could then rotate this and view its 3d projection. The result would be to scale the object along one of its directions, and possibly to distort it slightly if perspective effects are simulated.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
So a "3D projection" of a 4D shape within 3D space is possible?
 
Of course - I used to have a 3d projection of a 4d cube hanging in my room. And the animations you've seen are 2d projections of a 4d object.
 
Are there free softwares to create such an animation? I want to take some .stl model files and expand them out into 4D.
 
I don't know, but I doubt it. You could try searching. If you know any OpenGL or enough python to drive Blender or something like that it would be easy enough to write.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K