• BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    113
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    No. He shows how non euclidean (spherical) space translates to euclidean (flat) space. Description is bullshit.

      • BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        There’s nothing to extrapolate here. The description is BS. There’s no such thing as ‘linear plane’ there’s a flat plane and curved plane (with positive and negative curvatures). There’s a thing called linear algebra but it’s not the same. Also planes are 2 dimensional spaces. When you have more dimensions name ‘plane’ doesn’t apply. If you extrapolate BS you’ll get even more BS

        • 87Six@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Isn’t the description dumbed down to fit thosoe of us with less than mathematician level brains? :-)

          • bearboiblake@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            The description hurts my brain, it doesn’t make any sense to me at all, it just seems to be filled with irrelevant words that sound sciency to someone who doesn’t know what they mean. Like a bad sci fi script.

  • 58008@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    18 hours ago

    This is like me laying naked on my back with an erection and saying the shadow cast by the sun is a complex timekeeping device.

  • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    218
    ·
    1 day ago

    Seems to me like it’s demonstrating the projection of a complex three dimensional shape which produces a simple pattern on a two dimensional plane.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      104
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s worse. It’s the projection of a 3d shape onto a 2d shape, which is then captured on a different 2d shape to be displayed to us.

      It also has a brief 4d dimension, sliced at the second the picture was taken.

      • mathemachristian[he]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Manifolds such as these are actually defined by the maps used from a linear space. Two manifolds (i.e. two sets of maps) are considered the same (isomorphic) if the maps of one set can be “morphed” into the other and vice versa.

        The flashlight demonstrates how the manifold’s map projects into the linear space. See stereographic projection.

        That’s kind of part of a larger point actually: There is no 3d vector space in reality. It’s a made up construct used to make sense of the world around us.

    • AnarchoEngineer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      23 hours ago

      I mean typically people refer to planes as hyperplanes once you go past 3D, but I’ve definitely heard them just called “planes” too

      Hyperplanes are just a generalization of planes to higher dimensions. Often you hear the term when working with vectors because, like in 3D, you can define an n-dimensional hyperplane by a surface normal vector and a point. All lines perpendicular (orthogonal) to that normal vector which pass through the point form the plane.

      It’s a useful concept and since we already have a word for that kind of structure in 3D space we just use the same term for it in other dimensions

    • traxex@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Hmmm. I don’t think so but I do think it is incorrectly used here. To me, the 3rd dimensional plane would just be the z axis. If you were talking about the entire 3D shape which they are here, I would just say 3rd dimension.

  • timeghost@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Neat. How does this help me violate causality or skip over to a different planet? “Scientists discover we are trapped in an even deeper infinite fractal of hell from which there is no escape.”

    • OpenStars@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Um, hypothetically speaking, for a ah friend, if I wanted to STOP slipping into the ever deepening abyss of further levels of hell, how might I, oh I mean my friend, accomplish this?