Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: OT hypercube (was: Con-other)

From:Peter Collier <petecollier@...>
Date:Friday, May 30, 2008, 18:34
You're most of the way there, but you're still thinking (not surprisingly)
three dimensionally. There is no "inner hollow", anymore than there is a
square "inside"  a cube - that is just the way it is drawn in  perspective.
The tesseract is a solid four dimensional object (polychoron).

From: "Eugene Oh" <un.doing@...>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 4:36 PM
To: <CONLANG@...>
Subject: Re: OT hypercube (was: Con-other)

> Oh dear me, to both Mark and Peter. But what remains constant, I presume, > is > that the inner hollow remains cube-shaped? I think I more or less get it > now. > /ObConlang: What are the names of geometric shapes and oddities in your > conlangs? In Classical Arithide I used _nozais_ "four-sider" (nost "4" + > daedos "side" + attrition) for square, optionally differentiated from cube > as "flat-four-sider" vs. "standing-four-sider"; rectangles are called > _mázais_ "long-siders" (massa "long"). It seems as though I shall need to > invent a new term for "tesseract". How would you translate that? > > Eugene > > On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 7:20 PM, Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> wrote: > >> Yup, the "cube inside a cube" picture of a tesseract is exactly >> analogous to a perspective drawing of a cube as a square within a >> square, with diagonals connecting the corners. Only the two squares >> are the proper shape; the other four sides, while square in reality, >> are squashed into trapezoids in the drawing... >> >


Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>