How do you chart the fourth dimension on a 3d plane?

[shawnr]

Do you just cube a variable? How does it work?

Has this been figured out yet? Any thoughts if it hasn't? Any applications if it has?

 

[Mark44]

Do you just cube a variable? How does it work?

Has this been figured out yet? Any thoughts if it hasn't? Any applications if it has?

Your question is unclear. A plane is inherently two-dimensional. A plane can be embedded in three-dimensional space, though.

What exactly do you mean by "chart the fourth dimension on a 3d plane?"

 

[shawnr]

Like z-y-x axis Cartesian plane. I'm only slightly educated.

you can map the 0th, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd on number line (or first dimension plane[excuse the term]). You can see each dimension's interpretation on other dimensions. The only difference being variables used. How does the fourth look on the third?

 

[shawnr]

If the quadratic formula represents the actions or operations of third, would cubing a variable on the third dimension be enough to suffice fourth dimensional operations

 

[Mark44]

Like z-y-x axis Cartesian plane.

The Cartesian plane is two-dimensional, so there are only two axes, typically x and y. There are not three axes.

I'm only slightly educated.

you can map the 0th, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd on number line (or first dimension plane[excuse the term]).

? I don't know what you're saying here.

You can see each dimension's interpretation on other dimensions. The only difference being variables used. How does the fourth look on the third?

Or here, either.

 

[Mark44]

If the quadratic formula represents the actions or operations of third

The Quadratic Formula is used to find the two solutions of a general quadratic equation -- ax² + bx + c = 0. Maybe you're thinking of the area of a square, A = x², or the volume of a cube, V = x³.

, would cubing a variable on the third dimension be enough to suffice fourth dimensional operations

We live in a three-dimensional world. Most of us cannot visualize a space with more than three dimensions. In mathematics there are objects with more than three dimensions, but you can't visualize the space that they belong to.

It's still not clear to me what you're asking.

 

[shawnr]

Somebody else. You're too applicable. This is a pure mathematics question.

 

[pwsnafu]

Somebody else. You're too applicable. This is a pure mathematics question.

What? How is this a pure math thread? Do you know what pure mathematics is?

 

[shawnr]

What is Theoretical Mathematics? Now can you answer mine.

 

[pwsnafu]

What is Theoretical Mathematics? Now can you answer mine.

Bringing up a synonym doesn't demonstrate you understand the concepts inherent in it.

Look, you've claimed Mark is "too applicable" (sic), and yet he's given you pure math answers. Secondly, visualization of mathematics is not mathematics. Thirdly, you're post makes no sense.

 

[shawnr]

Bringing up a synonym doesn't demonstrate you understand the concepts inherent in it.

Look, you've claimed Mark is "too applicable" (sic), and yet he's given you pure math answers. Secondly, visualization of mathematics is not mathematics. Thirdly, you're post makes no sense.

I don't know how to break down the word theoretical any farther without sounding pretentious. I will do my best: Theoretical anything is the point at which you develop frameworks for knowledge. If knowledge would be applicable then the frameworks for theoretical would be considered wisdom. So math wisdom is what we are dealing with. More precisely, while applicable allows use of gained wisdom to apply towards real-world problems, theoretical is the search for new knowledge in the hopes of breaking ground for the applicable world. The Greeks were extremely theoretical until Alexandria became the capitol of thought in the classic world.

"too applicable" is a good phrase that demonstrates my thoughts about him, and if you feel it is out of context that is due to your poor intuitive skills. Don't sic me unless you like sounding like an idiot. I use all my words intentionally and justifiably.

I don't particularly know what you mean by visualization of mathematics as I'm not particularly asking you to invent the fourth dimension... I'm asking you to use established mathematical parameters to help look beyond the applicable and see how our current knowledge applies to next-gen theoretical. I'm not sure what you're saying here.

I can't be any clearer about my post without feeling like I'm wasting my time. If you can't understand it then you need to re-read it. Perhaps take an Algebra 1 class, then a Calculus III class. Those are really the only two classes you need to understand what I'm talking about.
While there are extra postulates, these classes are the backbone of my question.

Good luck

 

[shawnr]

bump. Any commentary on the possibilities or possible uses

 

[Mark44]

@shawnr, this thread is closed. You have asked a nonsensical question, and it has been answered. Instead of insulting members of this forum who have taken time to try to make sense of your question, you should make the effort to learn some mathematics.