Settling Dimensional Confusions


@t1_hopscotch, I saw your comment on @oio's 4D4U project. I just want to get this straight with everybody. These Dimensions are Mathematical Theories. The 1st dimension has one parameter, (X). This means that it is a point on a 1D plane. The 2nd dimension has 2 parameters, (X, Y). This is a point on a 2D plane, which is characterized as 1D planes stacked on top of each other. The 3rd dimension has 3 parameters, (X, Y, Z), plotted on 3D planes which are stacked 2D planes. The 4th dimension gets confusing, though. It has 4 parameters, (X, Y, Z, T). The 4th dimension adds time. These time plots are 3D frames stacked on top of each other that continues on infinitely. There are 10 "Dimensions" that I won't get into, but you can look at this YouTube channel here.

Hope this clears things up, Busack Noodles Man.



I have been disappointed, but not surprised, to see no written responses to your nice post. I think it does a good job of talking about a neat topic. Let me be the person to say "Awesome!" to what you have said. I hope you will have more ideas like that to share.

I love that there are some - i understand, it's not going to be all - coders who care enough about off-the-beaten-path topics to think about and explore them and, better yet, to somehow incorporate them into their code. You know... for fun! Ultimately, that is the whole point, right? I hope so.

That was my intent. :innocent:

I think you have used the right word to describe things, @Nageek2002. That word being "confusion". Yes, it can be confusing, at first, to consider a topic that is both totally incorporated into how we perceive "reality" and also extends so far beyond our experience that it seems unreal (when we start talking about "hyperspace" and other gobbledygook).

And the way we use language sure doesn't seem to help much. It really is a source of confusion... at least sometimes. Not all of the time. In a lot of situations, it's just our first time at bat with an idea, after having only watched the game being played by others. And then there are those people who just HAVE to chime-in, as if they know something. I think those people have a permanent "Like Me!" button on their foreheads. To these, I say, "Ok... I hear you, Great Ones. Here are 13.7 units of praise or 1.618 units of like for your having defined the truth for me."


Lots of words borrowed from my world (the world of mathematics and physics) get misused in everyday speech... all the time. People seem to enjoy the sound of words (especially when they're the ones parroting them) much more than they enjoy knowing their actual, legitimate meanings (pl.). You can hear people blathering-on almost everywhere about "energy" and "frequency" and "quantum" this-and-that, when the ideas being discussed have nothing really to do with those terms. Everybody wants to play "Albert Einstein" (what a horrible game!) or "Michio Kaku." But... really?! I actually have and do, but do most people actually work or otherwise do much with these concepts? Most of the time... no. Nope. And people like us, or people who are just trying to learn something do get confused, when they have to sort-out which meaning is being spoken of using a single word. A "word": a "quantum" of blab. See there? I did it.

"Dimension" is definitely one of these terms. It's enough to say that it has come to mean different things in different contexts. It has been used in its own way in the context of programming, by those who have taught me; and it was in that sense and just for fun that I made the "4D4U" thing, demonstrating a clone hack that I had not yet seen in Hopscotch. The idea was and is,

"Here is a technique - a hack - that makes graphics object locations definable in any of four 'dimensions' that are accessible (as parameters) to the programmer - hence the '4U' part"

The key is that they are accessible. "U" can do something with them! They aren't on rails. They're not some untouchable mass of clones, stuck in an infinite loop that, once started, can't be messed-with or directly coded. I said nothing whatsoever about hyperspace. But... the truth is, the word "dimension" is kind of agnostic to whatever the dimension itself describes. Yes, they can be "spatial" dimensions. Sure. But they don't have to be.

For that reason, and also concerned about the etiquette (or the lack thereof) on display in one published response to what I shared, kinda missing the point and the intended fun, I started a thread here:

Maybe you'd enjoy looking at it and adding something, forgetting hyperspace, bringing it back to code.

When I spoke with Liza and Jocelyn a couple of weeks ago (yipee!) they asked whether I thought the kinds of code ideas I discussed with them were appropriate - I think Liza's words were "too advanced" - for lots of kids. My answer was, "Advanced? Sure. Definitely for some. It depends." But again and again, I am shown that, when it comes to people, it's better to overestimate than to underestimate.

To me, It doesn't matter where the discussion takes place - here, some other thread, wherever - if anyone is interested, I am just glad if he or she gets something out of it or does something fun with it. That would make me happy.



This is really interesting... 🤔