[thejakeman]

Originally Posted by TF-Viewer

Okay, so the point of this was to show us some nifty animated optical illusion and try to give us a headache with bullshit about how shadows have no depth? Well of course they have no depth, because light has no mass (discussed in an earlier thread) therefore shadows can't have mass either. All a shadow is is a spot where light isn't as present as the area around it due to it being blocked by an object. No mass, no substance, no depth. Making the entire concept of a 3D shadow.. retarded. That 4D object animation, is only 2D, using optical illusions to attempt to represent a moving 3D object, but even the most complex of 3D objects are still only 3D whether you put another object inside it or not it does not create a 4th spatial dimension.

Mathematics that "prove" the existence of higher dimensions are only mathematical theories, in that they can only be "proven" within the field of mathematics. Sure because 2+2=4 and so on.. it must be true that there's a 4th spatial dimension? No, that = bullshit unless and until it's existence can be proven outside a chalkboard drawing or computer simulation.

Next you'll be telling us that the quantum theory of infinite worlds is "proven" by math, even though no one has ever actually observed another quantum instance of reality in which the cat in the box was actually both alive and dead at the same time.

wow, so vitriolic. you're ignoring the fact the unless we somehow attain a method to perceive things with three dimensional vision we are never going to actually be able to perceive the fourth dimension.

so, your saying that a shadow is not a 2 dimensional construct? that 4d spinny thing is a 3 dimensional shadow of a fourth dimensional tesseract.

and you're right. having mass would imply that shadows had depth. which they don't. a three dimensional shadow would obviously look quite different. maybe spongy and squishy and gray. and minutely folded.

again, these are conceptualizations, something you don't seem to be getting.

so... if i were to use, say, literary techniques, i could prove that 2+2=5? it still wouldn't be true, no matter what the ruling party says. you could percieve it to be true, having be led along by an oppressive government, but whether you like it or not. putiing together two objects with another two objects still makes four objects. lets not have some junior-grade solipsism here, even if Haruhi Suzumiya is excessively popular.

so, anyway, if it helps, remember that the above gif is a 4th dimensional object rotating, not a cube going through another cube. try following on line at a time.