|
 |
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:05:53 +0200, Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfr de>
wrote:
> Now, that being said you can certainly define some 4d cubelike
> thing and a position in 4d space that causes 3d projections to align
> in an analogous way to a specific 3d "impossible object". But I think
> there is no longer any specific strangeness associated with that.
That is exactly what I was asking. Not for it to be an impossible object,
but rather an assertion that the impossible object is not impossible, it
is 4d. My question is where can I find a formula to prove/disprove this?
--
-Nekar Xenos-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
