Tesseract Trainer

[Post a new comment]
Comments

	I'm not trying to... posted by Anonymous @ 4.160.132.211 on Dec 17 2006 10:05 PM
"You can not download this file directly from another site!"
[Reply]

	Tesseract Trainer posted by Anonymous @ 216.127.82.99 on Jun 10 2005 6:23 AM
Maybe I'm missing something here, but...well, you're asking people to pay $8 to see if they "might" be able to see the effect that you're seeing? XScreensaver comes with a hypercube simulation for free, what's the incentive?
[Reply]
Re: Tesseract Trainer posted by mushware @ 62.253.128.15 on Jun 10 2005 6:47 AM   Nah, it's fully functional without any sort of payment, for as long as you like. It's the give-me-cash-if-you-really-like-it type of shareware. Incidentally I can't fully get the 4D effect either - it's a tricky thing to do.   [Reply]   Re: Tesseract Trainer posted by simcop2387 @ 24.158.39.112 on Jun 10 2005 11:16 AM   you guys are too stupid to understand the time cube! i see the time cube every day 4 times! i experiance 4 days for every single day you experiance.   [Reply]   Re: Tesseract Trainer posted by mushware @ 62.253.128.15 on Jun 10 2005 2:35 PM   Ah, you don't know how many times I've heard people say that.   [Reply]   Re: Tesseract Trainer posted by trick @ 80.202.254.62 on Jun 10 2005 5:47 PM   4 times a day, I expect.   [Reply]   Re: Tesseract Trainer posted by simcop2387 @ 24.158.39.112 on Jun 10 2005 8:44 PM   lol, but truely i can see the 4th dimensional cube, mostly because i'm a bit nuts, i can see it at many levels, the third dimensional intersection of the 4th dimensional (easiest to see), and the complete 4th dimensional form (hard to understand but basically you need to think of each axis of the 3rd dimension and that add one more, and it isn't related to the other three in any way)   [Reply]   Re: Tesseract Trainer posted by mushware @ 62.253.128.15 on Jun 11 2005 12:20 AM   That sounds like it's along the right lines. Can you get the rotations? I think that's the most difficult bit. If you can see that any rotation is the result of two planes rotating at dfferent speeds, then you're doing well.   [Reply]

	4D? posted by x0563511 @ 71.103.117.238 on Jun 9 2005 9:48 PM
You say you can use stereoscopic to get 3D from 4D? I thought monitor screens displayed images in 2D? Just what is this forth dimension?
[Reply]
Re: 4D? posted by mushware @ 62.253.128.15 on Jun 9 2005 10:50 PM   It's a trick - like those sterograms, magic eye pictures, etc. By convincing the eyes that they're looking at the same thing when they're not, you get a 3D effect.   [Reply]

	Needs more interactivity posted by jacius @ 12.210.55.86 on Jun 9 2005 8:39 PM
I think it would be an easier task to try to understand it if the rotation were controlled by the user. Then you could slowly turn it in one direction, see how it changes... turn it in another direction, see how it changes. Right now it's changing on its own, and not even steadily, so it's hard to sort it out mentally. A mouse click-and-drag interface for this rotation control would be good, but maybe there's an extra dimension of rotation, so you can't control its with a 2-dimensional input device? Arrow keys and PageUp/PageDown might be good for such a case. I for one can barely make heads or tails of it because it's spinning too fast for my brain to follow. And I'm starting to get a headache. :( Or maybe it's an eye-ache, from automatically trying to achieve a 'focus' or 'angle' that suddenly makes it understandable. Also, displaying the keys should be a toggle (press K once to show, press again to hide) instead of disappearing on their own after a while. And it would be nice if there were some text feedback to pressing the controls (e.g. "Displaying N faces"). I'd like to see some more display modes, for example a grid of images showing different parts (so you could try to track how the movement of one face corresponds to another face, etc.), without overlap interfering with your perception. Now for the nice comments ;) Fascinating concept. I wonder if showing this to someone from a very young age would be able to understand it. I think the human brain is flexible enough for it, but I don't know if our 2D eyes (stereoscopic, but still 2D) are enough to properly perceive 4D objects. Maybe if we had stereoscopic 3D perception, 4D would seem as obvious and 3D seems to us now.
[Reply]
Re: Needs more interactivity posted by x0563511 @ 71.103.117.238 on Jun 9 2005 9:51 PM   I'm not getting something obviously. If something can have an X, a Y, and a Z coordinate, than it is fixed in space. How can something have a fourth dimension unless you are thinking of time, or something more esoteric?   [Reply]   Re: Needs more interactivity posted by mushware @ 62.253.128.15 on Jun 9 2005 10:33 PM   Because the space is different ;) You wouldn't get a 4D object in this universe, but you can imagine (just about) a 4D universe where every point in space needs four coordinates. A lot of things would be the broadly same (walking, taking a bath, etc.) but some wouldn't (you cant' tie a knot in a piece of string, for example). It's weird - about as other-worldy as you can get. Has everyone found About_Tesseract_Trainer.pdf, by the way? It lives in data-tesseracttrainer and usually gets installed in /usr/share/doc/tessreacttrainer-0.1.4.   [Reply]   Re: Needs more interactivity posted by jacius @ 12.210.55.86 on Jun 10 2005 5:45 PM Another example: you wouldn't have to cross roads in 4D space to get to the other side, you could go around them (sortof like going above or below it, but you wouldn't need bridges or tunnels)! My favorite discussion of this stuff is here: http://tetraspace.alkaline.org/. It has lots of cute little drawings to help picture it, and talks about how some common things (like crossing a road or river) would work in 2D and 4D worlds.   [Reply]   Re: Needs more interactivity posted by x0563511 @ 71.103.125.76 on Jul 1 2005 7:07 PM   My brain hurts now.   [Reply]   Re: Needs more interactivity posted by Gatonegro @ 80.58.15.170 on Jun 12 2005 1:03 AM Actually, if I remember right my readings on superstring theory, the universe is believed to have eleven (11) dimensions. The trick is that most of them are rolled up in tiny circles, too small to see (smaller than Planck's constant, which is a quantum limit to anything we may detect). The Tesseract is a mathematical concept, but it is not that far from reality. It's just that reality is a wee bit weirder than we thought. By the way, I subscribe the above post suggesting improvements for the program. Options and controls are always nice. Fun program, though.   [Reply]   Re: Needs more interactivity posted by mushware @ 62.253.128.15 on Jun 9 2005 10:47 PM   Yep, I'd agree with most of that. For the moment you can slow the rotation by hacking those 0.03s in start.txt (in /usr/share/tesseracttrainer-0.1.4/system, probably), and the space bar will dismiss the keys text. For phase two, I'm thinking of a game where you navigate to the nearest hypercube and fire various beams at it to stop it spinning. Then it'll blow up - certain conventions to adhere to after all.   [Reply]

	:( posted by gaminggeek @ 202.0.37.152 on Jun 9 2005 12:57 PM
caleb@cbb tesseracttrainer-0.1.4 $ ./src/tesseracttrainerbinary Exception: Could not load file (/home/caleb/tesseracttrainer-0.1.4/start.txt) caleb@cbb tesseracttrainer-0.1.4 $ touch /home/caleb/tesseracttrainer-0.1.4/start.txt :(
[Reply]
Re: :( posted by gaminggeek @ 202.0.37.152 on Jun 9 2005 1:05 PM 'k got it to work I recon I am missing sumit cause it looks very prity but... I dunno what is so amasing about it....   [Reply]   Re: :( posted by mushware @ 62.253.128.15 on Jun 9 2005 3:42 PM   Sounds like it's not starting in its data directory. After 'make install' there should be a command tesseracttrainer which cds to the data dir (/usr/share/tesseracttrainer/system usually) and then starts tesseracttrainerbinary. If you don't want to install you could cd to data-tesseracttrainer/system and ../../src/tessracttrainerbinary from there ;)   [Reply]   Re: :( posted by gaminggeek @ 202.0.37.152 on Jun 9 2005 8:57 PM Yeah I did that thats why I said that I got it working :)   [Reply]

	Great Idea posted by Kropemann @ 213.135.225.126 on Jun 9 2005 12:45 PM
A very cool idea indeed. I'll try it out and report back
[Reply]