What are the different types of knives and swords in a 4D Euclidean universe?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hornbein
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
In a 4D Euclidean Universe, knives and swords are categorized into three types: 1D, 2D, and 3D. A knife must be at least 2D to effectively cut, as a 1D knife cannot sever a 2D plane. 2D knives can take forms like a steel rectangleoid shaped into an acute triangle, while cheese cutters made from wire also require a 2D structure. Butter knives are classified as 3D because they interact with 3D surfaces, even though they can cut. Thrusting weapons like epees and rapiers remain 1D, making them impractical for parrying slashing attacks.
Hornbein
Gold Member
Messages
3,410
Reaction score
2,781
In a 4D Euclidean Universe knives and swords come in three types -- 1D, 2D, and 3D.

Knives have to be at least 2D, since a 1D knife can't cut anything in two. A 2D knife edge! It took days before my feeble brain could be convinced such a thing was possible. You could start with a steel rectangleoid with two large dimensions and two small, then hammer the two small into the shape of an acute triangle. The two long dimensions don't have to be the same but both have to be longer than the diameter of whatever it is you want to sever.

Even those cheese cutters made out of wire have to have 2D wire. Weird! We know this because a 1D knife separates a 2D plane. A 2D plane doesn't partition a 4D solid. The knife has to produce a 3D plane.

Butter knives are 3D, since they are spreading butter on a 3D surface. They can still cut the butter.

Epees and rapiers -- thrusting weapons -- are 1D and hence pretty much the same as in our 3D world. It is however not practical to parry a slashing blow with a 1D blade.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
jedishrfu said:
Your story reminds me a little of Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions by Edwin Abbott
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland
And dear old Flat Stanley. He was cured by his brother who 'inflated him' like a balloon.
 
We've just had an interesting thread about generation ships, but I don't think that that is the most reasonable way to colonize another planet. Fatal problems: - Crew may become chaotic and self destructive. - Crew may become so adapted to space as to be unwilling to return to a planet. - Making the planet habitable may take longer then the trip, so the ship needs to last far longer than just the journey. - Mid-flight malfunction may render the ship unable to decelerate at the destination...
I know this topic is extremely contraversial and debated, but I'm writing a book where an AI attempts to become as human as possible. Would it, eventually, especially in the far future, be possible for an AI to gain a conscious? To be clear, my definition of a consciousness being the ability to possess self-created morals, thoughts, and views, AKA a whole personality. And if this is possible (and let's just say it is for this question), about how long may it take for something to happen...
This is a question for people who know about astrophysics. It's been said that the habitable zones around red dwarf stars are so close to those stars that any planets in the zones would be tidally locked to the stars in question. With one side roasting and another side freezing almost forever, those planets wouldn't be hospitable to life. a) Could there be forms of life--whole ecologies--that first evolve in the planet's twilight zone and then extend their habitat by burrowing...
Back
Top