Schrodinger: You need to open the box to see if its dead or alive 4D beings: *laughs*

@blank6604

5 жыл бұрын

Thor to Schrödinger: But Physiks forbidds this. [Did you get the reference?]

@That_One_Guy...

4 жыл бұрын

So 4D folks can easily do what men of culture always dreamed of 🤔😂

@fireonstars847

3 жыл бұрын

@@That_One_Guy... 🤯🤣

@yllbardh

Жыл бұрын

Schrodinger is always wrong.

Now I feel like I’m dimensionally handicapped.

Lucky that the linelanders were facing each other.

@thanhn2001

2 жыл бұрын

🤢

@sharon3858

2 жыл бұрын

@@thanhn2001 i didnt get it

@MikeTheNABI

2 жыл бұрын

You are assuming that only one end has a sensor (eye)

@Jade, I'm sure you know that depth cues aren't the only way we perceive the third dimension. We have two eyes, and while each captures a 2 D image of our environment, the optic nerve from each divides into two branches, each of which goes to the left and right hemispheres of the brain, crossing over each other at the optic chiasma, and finally ending up in the visual cortex, most of which is in the occipital lobe. The brain then stitches these two 2 D images together, inverts them and provides us with the impression of depth that we see using the angular parallax between the two points of view. Now, if the circular entity in your example of flatland had a similar mechanism, she would be able to perceive the second dimension in much the same way, assuming that two-dimensional entities can have a complex enough brain to do that!

@shivanshjha938

2 жыл бұрын

oh..i see😮

Hi. Looking Glass Universe posted this on Twitter, so I thought I'd check it out. Not bad! Thinking about flatland weirds me out. As a 3D being, I should be able to reach in and touch the insides of a 2D being... which makes me think about a 4D being reaching into me and touching my insides. WEIRD!!! (things of nightmares)

@upandatom

7 жыл бұрын

+The Science Asylum Hey! I know you! I remember watching your videos during my undergrad. Great stuff! Very entertaining and easy to understand :) I love your channel! haha I know what you mean. Hopefully there aren't any 4D beings out there (except I kinda wish there were 'cause it would be awesome). How long have you been YouTubing? You've got quite the subscriber base!

@ScienceAsylum

7 жыл бұрын

miss physics I LOVE TO HEAR THAT TEACHERS USE MY STUFF!!! I've been doing this 3.5 years now. It took a super long time to pass 10,000 subs. The nice thing is that I enjoy making videos and sharing my knowledge, so the last 3.5 years have been fun even if it hasn't become my job yet :-) As for 4D beings, I hope they would be respectful enough to ask permission first ;-)

@upandatom

7 жыл бұрын

+The Science Asylum are you planning on making KZread your job? Me too! Wow 3.5 years is a lot of time. But I guess educational channels aren't as popular as comedy and gaming etc. But that's great you're having fun. I guess that's what keeps us going :)

@ScienceAsylum

7 жыл бұрын

miss physics Well, I would like it to be my job, but I'm not going to get my hopes up. There's a lot of luck involved... plus I'm not exactly doing something that people would call "mainstream" educational content. It's possible I might only ever have a niche audience and I need to be okay with that or I'll go crazy (oh wait, too late haha). For now, it's a hobby.

@upandatom

7 жыл бұрын

***** What makes you think it's luck? Obviously you're a lot more experienced than I am, I've only been doing this a few months, but from all the tutorials I've watched about how to grow your channel it makes it sound like it's consistent work, like anything. Well I think what you're doing is great :) What do you do apart from this then?

I love these sort of things that make you sit and think about what you've always taken for granted, very well done!

It's amazing how far she's progressed in her video quality since these early videos LOL. I don't mean this as a dig but as a props for how far she's come! Love your content Jade!

@BabaBaba-mz2qc

2 ай бұрын

ikr and the jokes are so funny this is my first time watching her but omg i love her she keeps me engaged

Jade is terrific and the subject matter is hyper-interesting. I subscribed.

This is one of the best videos on KZread. Well done!

Poincaré had an interesting discussion on why we perceive space to be 3D. The main point was that our ability to move plays a big role in how we think of space. For example, when you turned the rubik's cube, its shape on the screen became a hexagon. The reason we don't think of it as being fundamentally different is that we know from experience that we can move in such a way as to reconstruct our initial perspective (the square) without deforming the cube. In other words, how we perceive space depends not only on what we see but also on how we can change (or in the language of mathematics, transform) what we can see by moving around. An interesting consequence is that if you made a robot with just a camera but no way to move itself (or touch anything), it would likely consider itself to be in a 2D world.

@poposterous236

5 жыл бұрын

I've put a lengthy post in therizing basically the same thing, man from an entire year ago. If you think of time as the fourth dimension then you can use the fourth dimension to gain a more thorough perspective on the 3D world. If you're a 3D creature locked in place for eternity, you can only see in 2D. But if you can move around thanks to time being a factor, you can use your perspective to construct a more accurate perception in your mind.

@kiopty

5 жыл бұрын

If the objects in the word around the robot are moving then it should be able to infer that its not a 2D word (Relative movement is the key)

@jpupu

5 жыл бұрын

That reminds me of how we were able to come up with the heliocentric model, despite not having space ships to move around. But now the question becomes: Would the robot be shunned by other robots unless it presented the theory of 3D world as purely a convenient mathematical model?

@williamwesner4268

5 жыл бұрын

@@poposterous236 It doesn't stop there though. Once you can visualize 3D spatial relationships, you can construct true mental images of 4D spaces and with practice become just as familiar with how 4D objects move as you are with regular cubes and spheres. Once you learn to use your mind's eye to its fullest potential, as opposed to relying so heavily on naive visual perception, there will be nothing in existence hidden from your sight.

@bengill6764

4 жыл бұрын

@@poposterous236 Thank you

6:08 Vsauce! Jade here

@prittbalagopal1105

5 жыл бұрын

Lmao

@7616lydeth

5 жыл бұрын

*background music plays (TENG!!!... TONG!!!...)

@eeezee3240

3 жыл бұрын

😆 LoL dude ...

Hi Jade, I'm a long time projection artist. What I find intensely interesting is the area between what we call 2D and 3D. The amount of permutations it exhibits is mind-boggling. You vid was way cool! Thanks for sharing that information. You made me think.

I love your videos! And was just thinking you may love maurice merleau-ponty, phenomenology of perception. The first chapters can feed many videos and even a review or a second part for this one. Thanks for your videos!

Ohmygoshhh, you're adorable. And informative! lol. I'm happy to subscribe.

@christianmarquez3143

6 жыл бұрын

Right? lol ... perfectly explained. short but sweet.

@pedrolobo1081

6 жыл бұрын

Salty Mermaid I agree...

Very interesting video.I have seen different videos of the same topic but yours for some reason have more meaning.

This is wonderful editing! What software did u use to make the pictures and stuff? Are they all digital or something?

Fantastic videos - keep up the great work~!

Great video, really educational. Truly appreciate it!

you said it all ! Thanks a lot for making us understand the concepts more easily and in better way.

One key factor that is ignored in this account is that we rarely look at anything from just one perspective. Because we have two eyes which are separated by a small distance, we see everything from two slightly separated perspectives. Using the 2-D world example given at [1:52], the square and the triangle looking at the circle would see a line of the same length with both eyes, from which they would recognize it as a circle. In contrast, the circle would see both the square and the triangle as being longer with one eye than with the other. For the square, one eye would see the square as having the same length as the triangle, while the other eye would see the square as longer (as it could see along one side), whereas for the triangle one eye would see the triangle as having the same length as the square while the other eye see it as shorter (due to seeing it at a more acute angle). This allows the shapes in a 2-D world to see directly something of the shape of other objects within that world, though full recognition of a shape may not be immediately possible. Our eyes do the same thing in the 3-D world, and you can directly experience this by looking at a stereoscope (as I have). When looking at ordinary photos we see them as flat; but when looking at two photos of the same scene taken slightly apart from each other in a stereoscope, you do not see two photos, but one image with depth of field which is clearly lacking in normal photos. A similar difference can be experienced in 3-D movies, which are popular because they do not look flat in the way that ordinary movies do. I don't know whether the best way to describe our vision is as 3-D, but easily confused (as it clearly is by optical illusions); or to introduce fractional dimensions for description of our type of vision - but what we see is more than two dimensional.

@kyleleon85

Жыл бұрын

You are taking a feature us humans have and applying it to the 2D shapes. That is not an accurate test. You are assuming the shapes have two eyes?

@tom_curtis

Жыл бұрын

@@kyleleon85, I am assuming the shapes have two eyes (for an easier analogy to humans), but I do not need to. Provided flatlanders could determine distance, they could still determine differences between shapes by changes in apparent line length with their motion. Specifically, if they maintain a constant distance from another object while moving laterally, and its apparent line length remains unaltered, they could determine it was a circle. I will note further that Up and Atom build's their argument from a simple progression which starts with the assumption that one dimensional points can be seen, and can have colour. The first is impossible, as is the second in a truly one dimensional world (which prevents the existence of light, which consists of three dimensional waves packets).

@kyleleon85

Жыл бұрын

@@tom_curtis I disagree. A circle would still look like a straight line to a 2D creature. Take a playing card or something flat and hold it with a corner pointing directly at you as close to eye level as possible. You’ll notice that it looks like a straight line. You can’t tell what shape it actually is.

@tom_curtis

Жыл бұрын

@@kyleleon85, you are not understanding what I said. Take you playing card example. A flat land observer of a playing card (rectangle with rounded corners) could look at the card and see a line. If they shuffle to either the left or the right, however, the length of the line they see would either increase, or decrease, depending on the orientation of the card. In contrast, if they were looking at a circle, no amount of sideways movement by them would change the length of the line they see (provided that sideways movement maintained a constant distance). If the flatland observer had two eyes, they could obtain the same information without moving. In either case, by sight they are obtaining more information than exists in one dimension. At least in principle, the conscious awareness of their vision could be a 2-d representation as a result.

@beepbop6697

8 ай бұрын

If we could only see in 2D, then what is the purpose of eyeglasses and corrective contact lenses? I see things perfectly (20/20), when they are at a distance. Reading this, however, I need to use reading glasses because my old eyes can't focus so well up close. Eyeballs have to focus on what they are looking at, and if you have an ocular defect, then you need to wear eyeglasses to fix the focal (depth perception) problem with your eyeballs seeing across the 3rd dimension. Eyeglasses exist, ipso facto we see in 3D -- and carrying that down, 2D beings see in 2D (they can see circles and such, not just lines).

Hi Jade! I'm a huge fan of the channel!

You are amazing I love your channel!

Reminds me a lot of a segment of Carl Sagan's Cosmos series where he shows similar interactions between citizens of different dimensions. So, so cool to imagine things like that. You're adorable, thanks for the knowledge! :)

Amazing. Best explained ever, thanks you!

The best quote I've heard in years is that our "brains live in darkness and silence".

Just got linked to your channel. You earned a new subscriber! Keep on track.

@upandatom

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you C Cuellar! I'm glad to have you here :)

Amazingly interesting video. Thank you!

Very nice. Your videos are great. This explains why Dr Who’s TARDIS is bigger on the inside, because it exists in more dimensions but on the outside we can only perceive it in our 3 D world. I also liked the infinity paradox. I had never considered that before.

love your videos, there are very easy to understand. That's the 5th one i watch in a row. Could you, please explain the dirac notation in QM, and it is used to simplfiy the calculations?

Hi Just find your channel, love it! thanks to physics girl , gran canal estoy fascinado , ademas de ligeramente intrigado por la 4 y quinta dimension

Great videos! U r a good teacher!

One of the best explainations I've heard.

You're wonderful, but that's not all. You are incredibly helpful in understanding important scientific concepts and phenomena. You do a lot of good. You do it in a way that is superficial and understandable. You're needed. Thank you for your wonderful work and congratulations.

Hi... Your videos are super cool.... I learned a lot from them and most of all, I get to enjoy it... :) Btw.. I couldn't find missphysicsfix on fb... Did u change it or something???

in line land they could see distance as a change in shade, darker shades being further away, than with see-through vision they would see in 1D Purple would see white, getting darker, than blue, getting darker, than gray going to black (a line changing in colours and shade to display information) In flat land they would also be able to identify distance, like we do. This would allow the square to see that the circle is a circle. Although the triangle, from the front looks like a line, if it did a spin, the other shapes would see it's a triangle This is 2D vision as they could see width and depth. We see depth the same way. We may not use the position of the light, but we do use other information to identify the depth But we still see in 3D These 'tricks' like the bats echo location do allow us to see in 3D.

@bosoerjadi2838

4 жыл бұрын

How does light travel in Lineland? And where would it come from?

@CatherineKimport

4 жыл бұрын

Your argument about shading holds for flatland but I think it falls apart for lineland. The reason that light attenuates with distance in 2+ dimensions, creating shading, is because it has multiple directions to disperse into. In one-dimensional space there would be nowhere for the light to spread out to, so it wouldn't attenuate, so you couldn't use shading to tell distance.

@Smulpaap123

4 жыл бұрын

@ewqxy Is depth vision the deciding factor for being able to see 3d? Seeing depth is just the result of using 2 eyes. So people with 1 eye see a dimension less? You understand how rediculous this is. You don't see in 3d, you just have two 2d visions to look somewhat around things creating that depth vision.

@Smulpaap123

4 жыл бұрын

@ewqxy oh yeah you're right, my bad. You don't completely lose depth perception with 1 eye. Though having two eyes does greatly improve depth perception. 3d movies make use of this fact.

@Smulpaap123

4 жыл бұрын

@Bartosz Wdowiak No that doesn't prove it. Your perception of depth is just another representation of the same 2d view it's not the 3rd dimension. If you had 3d vision you'd be able to see around corners. We can look up/down and left/right, but we can't look forwards and backwards. Your depth perception isn't you seeing actual depth, it's about the ability to differentiate what's close by and what's further away. It helps you understand that you're in a 3d space. You see because of photons that land on the surface of your eye, and as you know a surface is in 2D. It's like splattering paint on a canvas, the painting is your view and the paint is light itself.

Ah! What a coicidence; I just started reading hyperspace by michio kaku. Lol that creature bit really painted a picture.

You should have Billions of subscribers by now, I can watch you all day talking you about anything 😉.

pfft, I see in HD :) Jokes aside, I've seen a couple of other videos on "flatlanders" but this actually showed it from another perspective, thanks again :)

This channel should have more subscibers !

in a 2D world some level of depth could be viewed(assuming light reflects similarly to the way it does from our view) which means, that a circle/round object would be differentiable because it has an even reflectance rate(like a sphere) while pointed objects would be very hard to distiguish. a square without the 4th point would appear as a triangle, a triangle without a 3rd point would appear as just a line. when you hit 5+ points, you get to the point where youd have at least 3 verteces(for perfect shapes). bit of a tangent, this vid was posted in 2016, what am i complaining about

My mind has been severely blown

3:58 - aw, thank you for noticing. I remember hearing about flatland from Carl Sagan, but never thought about only seeing 2D in 3D space.

It takes the 4th dimension of time to be able to perceive 3 dimensions. Also, sight is not the only sense we use to explore this 3 dimensional space along the 4th dimension of time. As mentioned in the video, we can hear spatial differentiation, and we can also feel it.

Whenever I watch one of your videos, it reminds me of growing up watching the Curiosity Show.

Thank you so much i was going crazy with this idea

What about the relative phase change of the light wave that reflect from those parts of the object that's further away and at a different angle? Would that not be similar to echolocation, providing spatial info in a non-visual way? And then there's our binocular vision...

Now I finally get it! coming from a not so brilliant but curious human. Thanks young lady.

Fun thoughts. In all my perusing the topic I had not heard this approach to explain it.

Great video, most complete explanation I have seen. So, would you say we hear in 2D or 3D?

@audreyandremington5265

5 жыл бұрын

I don't think humans hear in 2D or 3D, but animals that use echo location can sense the size of an object and how far away it is, so I guess that's like hearing in 3D.

@zaugitude

5 жыл бұрын

Audrey and Remington, I disagree and actually think we have a certain level of 3D hearing. I can tell if sound has originated above me, below me, etc.. why wouldn’t this be 3D. What would you describe it as, 1D?

personally i thought this idea and searched yt.... but then i didnt got any vids... but now somehow i got a video which is very much parallel to my idea. ig the world still got some educational youtubers left lol back to this dimensions i always wanted to classify each life a specific number of dimensional sense. nice video tho :)

I have a very interesting observation on this exact subject your talking about , I can do this

Using time as the fourth dimension through which we travel, we can use it to simulate/perceive the third dimension from the first and second. So we do see in three dimensions - first, second and time. Using this perception, we can then infer a third dimension from the first two dimensions plus past experience - again using time. As we can imagine a fifth dimension of varying possibility, it is possible to imagine/visualise a four dimensional process.

Ouspenski took the subject in 1912, in his book Tertium Organum, and he also commented it on his essay The Fourth Dimension. Very interesting thinker!

Hi Jade. Question: Bats use sound as a tool to map and see in 3D, as you mentioned. Similarly, will the analysis of shadows by the human brain count as our analysis tool to see in 3D? I think so because that mapping scenario involves photons entering our eye as a receiver and the object's shadow as the transmitter. What do you think. Looking forward to your response. Thanks

@wyattscott4208

2 жыл бұрын

Bats actually don't see in 3d. While yes, they can detect the distance of the where the sound hit, they cannot detect the depth of the object they hit. Humans can also detect distance since our brain uses two 2d images but that is different than seeing 3d.

We have 2D vision with 4 variables- red green blue and depth(we do have a bit extra stuff than just RGB for stuff like lowlight and some other stuff, but generally those are the 4 most prominent)

As three-D beings, we can only move our visual field in two dimensions: up-down and left-right. You can't move your visual field backward or forward without moving your entire head. If you were a four-D being, you would be able to move your vision not only up-down and left-right, but forward and backward as well, without moving your head. I imagine it would be like changing the zoom or focus on a pair of binoculars.

now i understand the 3rd dimension i can sleep without worry. awesome explanation.

@upandatom

7 жыл бұрын

haha this made me smile :)

3:57 😭😭😭😭😭 Thank you for the kind words

Good stuff.👍

Thanks a lot!

I finally get it!! Thank you!!

Loved the video, just like I love all your videos, but two things actually; 1. About we being in 3D & seeing in 3D, can't we also think like this: since our brain works by analyzing memories ( of course, stored only as biases & wights of the neurons processing the info ) wouldn't it be nice to say we're living in a 4D ( 3D o' space + 1D time ) & hence perceive things in 3D, over time? Just saying actually - random analogy. :) 2. About the bats - I think it's not just sound actually - even with light that's possible actually, if the source of the signal analyzes it, then it'll result in the same effect ~ like that's how radar works kinda right .. :-) .... of course, with frequency shifting due to velocity, Doppler Effect & sending wave trains with different frequencies, such as a musical piece & then analyzing the reflected signal & measuring it's shift, we can get info on the objects too - even which objects due to the obvious phase difference. Right? .. :-D

Nice explanation.🤗

Hey this one is a good explanation. I only just noticed it is an older video, but what about revisiting the idea with the spin of how many dimensions do we perceive? (HINT: it ain't 3 or even 4) ;) But, then again it does depend on what you consider a dimension, especially if you only count "solidness" as being able to considered in a dimension or not.

@fuseteam

5 жыл бұрын

that's an interesting idea

"Up and at them " - Radioactive Man

I understand that this video is very old but if someone can answer my question I would be delighted. My question is, I understand we can not see 3D but since we have 2 eyes that are slightly spread apart, can we see in 2.2D or something along those lines? Thank you!

Super intéressant!

@upandatom

6 жыл бұрын

Thank you :)

Loved it. You may have slipped when you said all photons are the same - photons have different frequencies - that we may see as different colors, but i am sure that was not what you meant as you went further with this exposition

Veritassium's video from 12/31/20 (31/12/20 if that's your preference) showcases this very well.

Thanks for the great video. Have a doubt though, regarding the example of bats measuring distances.. what I understand is they just calculate the distance using the time delay of the sound travelling back.. which is similar to sonar. We can do that with light as well. So dint really understand the concept of sound carrying distance information. If it's really possible and I dint get it.. could you please explain or may be give a link to read it further.

@upandatom

6 жыл бұрын

Hey! So when I said "see" in the video I meant just our vision without using any equipment or instruments. So we can use devices to do sonar, which will give us similar senses to a bat. But we need to equipment, whereas a bat doesn't. Does that help?

Do we count time as a dimension here - if so it adds +1 to all dimensions, that probly is what helps us 'see' (perceive/extrapolate?) in 3 spacial dimensions, if something is still/ doesn't change spacially .... we have a harder time noticing whether it's 2d or 3d. Not sure if that's 'right' - but it makes sense to me

I had some problems. To start, @5:50 photons, E = hf, so different energies for different frequencies. And that is followed by @5:58, light does carry information on distance, think Hubble measuring red shifts.

As a kid, I had this book called "The Planiverse" by Alexander Dewdney. I was fascinated by it, especially how the biology of the two-dimensional beings were worked out. Ooh! Video idea!

@Phrenotopia

7 жыл бұрын

As per 5:05, a four-dimensional creature would also be able to see our internal organs, like we can see those of a two-dimensional being! Eek!

@upandatom

7 жыл бұрын

+Phrenomythic that sounds like a great video! Can't wait for it :) I know creepy to think about huh o.O

Jade, it's great how you always add something extra. IMO we can see in 3D if we close our eyes, or (heaven forbid), go blind. Without visual perspective, we have to follow the road in order to perceive the road. How would we convince a blind person that the Earth isn't flat?

I have to slightly disagree about how the flatlanders would perceive the circle. Assuming they have two eyes, they could tell that the edges of the 1D line are at a different distance and the circle is thus curved.

@no-one9299

5 жыл бұрын

I agree. Also, I'd like to ask how does using sound to see depth make bats see in 3d, but using parallax does not mean we do. I believe it's still their brains processing the time difference and translating into a distance

@forsaturn4629

5 жыл бұрын

Even if you have 1 eye or 2 or 3, 4. It doesn’t ignore the fact that 1eye see on 2D. It’s just bunch of different perspectives merging on each other. Seeing on 3D means that you see every bit of an object’s part(interior, exterior, slices) We can’t actually describe how a 4D would see because we cant see anything beyond our dimension.

@louisvictor3473

5 жыл бұрын

@@no-one9299 Echolocation also gets weird data, it is not a perfect 3D vision. For example, imagine an echo locator in a corner in a room. In this room, there is a shelf somewhere in the middle, and someone behind the shelf looking at the back wall (i.e. their backs are turned to the echo locator). The echo locator emits a sound, it hits the back wall, the person behind the shelf, then the back wall again, and then gets back to the echo locator, assuming the angles are just right. Since they're using time delay here, they won't see the person as behind the wall facing away from them. They will see the person facing them at some point beyond the back wall, unless they have some other correcting mechanisms. It is basically their version of a mirror (you'd see the same if the back wall were to be a mirror, it is more or less the same issue).

binocular vision gives space 3D. It is used by robotics to know distance. We can in fact tell (with limits) how far away an object is. Not only that, but vision is not our only sense ... so we also hear different distances and how those things interact. We see a flash of lightening, 1 second later we hear the crack of thunder. We know that sound travels about 1100 ft./sec. and know how far away the strike occurred. If we see the light, and hear the sound almost what to us as simultaneous events, we know the strike was very close

A ton of magic tricks and slight of hand take advantage of our inability to see in 3D. Flip a card horizontal and now it's just a line. Now clip it in between two fingers and it's gone!

Is there any such thing as 'photolocation'? In concept I am thinking of something similar to echolocation, where an entity/being sends flashes of light that bounce off the surroundings and return to the being's/entity's eyes giving it a more accurate picture of it's surroundings, perhaps even noticing minute multi-level refractions of light giving it some level of perception around corners and other objects that would otherwise impede its line of sight?

@chasegerlach

3 жыл бұрын

I feel like I saw something like this in a Sci-Fi movie/show at some point?

The citizens of Flatland see only lines because they only have one eye. However, if you read further into the book, you learn that with training, members of their upper classes *can* see the difference between a square and a circle, because, due to fog, parts of a shape that are further away appear more dimly, and closer parts darker, and thus with practice they can tell the difference between different shapes. (Also: they don't see purple, because color is highly illegal, due to having been part of an insurrectionist plot some centuries ago. In general, you've glossed over or outright skipped most of the content of the book.) In Spaceland we don't have fog; but we do have two eyes (and, yes, an elaborate visual cortex). We are thus able to perceive distance via parallax, up to a point. (Stars are much too far away for that, of course: out two eyes are, relative to that distance, at pretty much exactly the same place, and so there's no perceivable parallax.) We don't see through opaque objects, granted. But we see more than 2D.

i have a query..just now u told that despite being in 3D world we look at the things into 2D form.. as if we are seeing the things on a flat screen..it's just our brain that helps us measuring the distance ..depth etc. So on this basis ..if we enter 4D world..will we be able to see the Sun and the moon as the same? i mean then would we be able to actually measure the distance and the size of the sun and the moon precisely being in higher dimension..which gives the correct information..not the illusion... because as of now we see them as 2 circles on a screen...we are not aware of the actual distance and the size... hope u r getting my point precisely what i m trying to ask..... :)

We must think in polar coordinates if we try to figure out which sight we had if we were higher-dimensional than we are. We actually see two angles crossing each other at 90° in front of us with each eye. If we were 4D creatures, we would have to see 3 angles crossing each other at 90°.

What makes you think seeing in 3D automatically leads to seeing inside something? That would entirely depend on the physics of the particle transmitting information in 4d space. If the square in 2d world, has something inside it, I wouldn’t know because photons are bounced off it’s outer shell. Conversely, Magnetic Resonance can be induced and measured in a 3D object allowing me to see in side. Or an X-ray photon can be irradiated over a body and I can see bones. Our ability to see inside objects is entirely up to the physics of information transmitters. And we simply do not know what is available to us until we can test it out.

Hi, I'd like to explain an opinion of my own. 1d being: no matter what they do, they will only see a dot. 2d being: no matter what they do, they will only see a line. 3d being: no matter what they do, they will only see a flat shape. 4d being: no matter what they do, they will only see a 3 dimensional shape. You said that we see in two dimensions. But we are capable of shifting our own perception to see that a square might be a cube. We cannot see the front and back of something simultaneously. But thru the use of other senses, such as touch, we can feel front and back at the same time. You can close your eyes and touch a rough surface and feel the difference in texture. We experience the world in 3 dimensions. This would suggest that we are actually 4d beings. This would also suggest that a true 3d creature has been completely overlooked. Also, if a three-dimensional picture has been drawn, yes it can very easily fool our vision. but we are capable of walking up to the painting and realizing that the perspective has not changed as it would in reality. We could also walk up to the picture and touch it and confirm that it is only a painting. Lesser dimensional beings would have no way of confirming that.

What about parallax? For close up objects our eyes use the difference in image perceived between them to determine depth perception Doesn't that count as 3d vision?

I really like the part on echolocation. The animals are borrowing a dimension from time axis to determine the distance in the distance in the z axis

@upandatom

7 жыл бұрын

+Jia Liang Low that's a really nice way of putting it :)

So, both purple and blue line have just found themselves in an inescapable conversation for the rest of eternity, "Hey Blue, mind if i get past?" "Um, I can't..." This is going to keep me up at night.

@TimJSwan

5 жыл бұрын

LOL

@louisvictor3473

5 жыл бұрын

If a 4D spatial dimension exists, your 3D universe is just stuck in the same situation with other 3D spaces, unable to move in the 4 Dimension to pass one another and change universal neighborhoods.

@AllenKll

4 жыл бұрын

Surprise! Purple and blue are NOT lines. They are line segments. Lines are infinite. If purple was a line, there would be no room fro blue.

@waterpidez6732

3 жыл бұрын

@@louisvictor3473 thats not what he meant, 2 and 3 dimension creatures can move around each other, but 1 dimension creatures cant

@louisvictor3473

3 жыл бұрын

@@waterpidez6732 You didn't understand what I actually said. There is a reason why I said "3D universes stuck"", and not "2D/3D creatures stuck". There is a universe sized difference there.

Great video

3:58 and you are pretty incredible too!

You either die a hero or live long enough to be tempted to finally open the box.

Weird, I was JUST thinking about this a few minutes ago. Although I've been thinking about this for some weeks now. I haven't watched the video yet, but I'm assuming it discusses how we actually see the world as a 2 dimensional plane. Which is because the back of our eye where the image we see is projected is a 2D surface. Our brains just pull some clever tricks like binocular vision to trick us into thinking we can see in 3D. But if we could truly see in 3D, for example if you looked at a cube, you would be able to see all 6 faces of it at the same time looking at them all head on. Which, is about as difficult to imagine as a 4D cube (SPACIAL DIMENSIONS!).

While we may only SEE in 2D with our eyes and our brain does its thing to fill in the rest, we can visualise objects in our mind in 3D as well as change over time which is the fourth dimension. While our physical body is limited to lesser perspectives, our mind is capable of higher perspectives, as it is not constrained by physical limitations. We can also (in our minds) visualise the past, present and future. So in fact our minds can see in both 3D and 4D.

A little Edwin Abbott Abbott and Rudy Rucker! Great books!!

I read the book, Flatland, and it said that if the 2D beings can only see a line, then they have to be able to see some amount of height. Basically, without height, the Flatlanders couldn't see a line. We couldn't see a REAL line, but we can see REALLLYYYY long and skinny rectangles, that we call lines. So flatlanders must see a really small portion of the third dimension in order to be able to SEE the line. I don't think this really holds up, because in Flatland the anatomy of eyes would obviously be different, and probably could see a real line, with zero height.

@solleh84

5 жыл бұрын

View of flatland same as blind.. i guess

I would say we do see 3 dimensions ,2 spacial and distance energy intensity. Intensity can be interpreted as depth as it is normal to line of sight ?.Probably why many things are described with 4d objects in physics and maths.

Fineeeeeeee Ill subscribe

What if you already thought you saw the world in 2D in the first place, 2.5 at best if you count depth perception as half a dimension since it's an inference about information in the 3rd dimension we aren't actually seeing? And why would you think you can see in 3D in the first place?

You blew my mind!!!!!!!!!

Stereopsis is how our brains interpret vision into 3D. Basically our eyes see the world from two slightly different perspectives. Our brains then put these images together to form one 3D image from two slightly different 2D images.

@Lothyde

3 жыл бұрын

you can't make a 3D image out of 2 2D images the same way you can't make a 2D image out of 2 1D images.

Mam you are super knowledgious. Respect from India...🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳

Since we have two eyes we see 2x in 2D. Therefore, we can not only estimate depths from what we have learned but actually see. Of course this has its limits.Stars for example are so far away that our eyes see practically the same thing and therefore we cannot calculate the distance. The inhabitants of Flatland could also have two eyes to distinguish themselves. Especially when you move around, they could tell triangle from square.