Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vector]

You are confusing being able to understand and actually being able to navigate.
A 4d space you can imagine as many different layers of 3d spaces you can jump through, with 5d you gotta imagine additional 4d worlds.
At least in my mind it creates so many additional layers that I wouldnt be able to navigate at all. Even less so with no display.

Exactly!  This is what I've been trying to say.  4D is quite maneuverable, but 5D is probably not going to work.  There's probably a theorem somewhere about representability of an n-dimensional object in a minimum of n-1-dimensional space, but I don't know about it if it exists... that's just conjecture, at this point.

[cerapa]

That theorem if it exists, only counts if the viewer can see the extra dimension, if you were to fit a 4d thing in a 3d hologram or something, you would just think it looks weird, and not be able to see the connections between them.
Think of looking at a 2d image of a ball, if you have only seen 2d circles, you would think its just a circle.

But this is just excluding the "elegant" approach of seeing extra dimensions.

EDIT: I just realized that this is a bit similar to the 3d in dwarf fortress, just a bunch of 2d layers stuck together.

[Armok]

a large number of dimensions would be manageable if most of them either doesn't interact much, or are very regular so a single slice gives you all the information you need about them. You can also use things like say colours to represent position in some dimensions.

[Draco18s]

a large number of dimensions would be manageable if most of them either doesn't interact much, or are very regular so a single slice gives you all the information you need about them. You can also use things like say colours to represent position in some dimensions.

I've played a 3*3*3*3*3*3*3*3 maze.  It's not easy.  And the represent the entire thing as 2D slices.  XY, XZ, ZY, WX, WY, WZ....
I can only barely manage to navigate it when it shows you ever tile you've already stepped on.

[eerr]

Also, @Eer, the same could be said about 3d puzzles.

no, there are plenty of reasons for 3d vs 2d.
That is to say, I know plenty of reasons for 3d vs 2d, or 3d vs 5d. While I do not know plenty of reasons to have 5d vs 3d.

So, in fact, no I can't say the same for both.

[alfie275]

A wild blog post appears!

[Draco18s]

A wild blog post appears!

Aside from "it doesn't work," nice find.

[alfie275]

Fix is up.

[Draco18s]

Still have no idea what I'm looking at.  But whatever.

[alfie275]

Well, it's an early alpha. Early as in I started coding 2 hours ago.

[Draco18s]

Fair.

[alfie275]

K, another version up, check blog. Goal is to reach white square.

[Ampersand]

If anyone's interested, here's a 4 dimensional maze.

http://www.urticator.net/maze/

Here's a four dimensional Rubik's Cube

http://www.superliminal.com/cube/applet.html

And for the truly masochistic, Five Dimensional Rubik's Cube

http://www.gravitation3d.com/magiccube5d/

Just felt it was semi-related.

[Draco18s]

If anyone's interested, here's a 4 dimensional maze.

http://www.urticator.net/maze/

My brain just asploded.  And I've read Orphans of Chaos.

[Nivim]

If anyone's interested, here's a 4 dimensional maze.
http://www.urticator.net/maze/

Landmarks. I want landmarks! I can keep from running into anything, and missing directions, but all parts of the maze look similar, or in some cases exactly the same. So, like every generic maze game, navigation collapses into nearly-mindless wall following, but now it takes twice as long.
 It would be cool to take just the (unaligned) movement system, then put it in a real game. What better way to figure out how to orient and move than to be given the question "who is shooting at me"? Or perhaps trying to build something structurally stable with that extra dimension.
 Well, he does offer the source code for it, if you (Alfie) think you can get anything from it.