I appreciate your interest in this topic, Gonegahgah. You’ve talked about how we’d see in a 4D environment before in the Dimensional Baby Steps thread. There are many ideas of interest but this post was fascinating:
http://hi.gher.space/forum/viewtopic.php?p=18024#p18024In it you said:
“The subtle difference between this one and the 'interact' view is that here the front direction rotates into the 4th direction; whereas in the 'interact' view the left-right direction rotates into the 4th direction. If you look at the above animation you should be able to see that left and right stay where they were but it is the front direction that rotates into the 4th direction now. I could have drawn parallel back-front planes to illustrate this more but hopefully this shows the idea.
I guess that even makes sense now that one view should rotate the left-right into the 4th direction and the other view would rotate the back-front into the 4th direction.
So when rotating, whilst in the 'locate' view, objects to the left and right stay to the left and right but objects off in the 4th direction rotate down or up into our 3D plane.
This allows us to easily locate and move towards objects that aren't in our current 3D plane.
To reiterate, from previous posts, the following helps to illustrate the other view; the 'interact' view:
When rotating, whilst in the 'interact' view, objects to the very front stay in front and rotation into the 4th direction allows us to look at them through their ana and kata angles for more intimate searching and interaction with those objects.
I'm thinking that
switching between the two views won't actually change the view you see. So switching views wouldn't actually produce any landscape change before you.
Instead, it will change how the scene will rotate, with respect to the 4th direction, when rotating into it: that is either objects rotating directly in front of you, or else objects moving from out of the 4th direction into your front view.”
(I highlighted an area of interest)
Here’s what ChatGPT4 said how that could relate to the 4D/VRI idea:
“The description you've provided relates to the concept of visual reorientation illusions (VRIs) and higher spatial dimensions by illustrating how an observer in a four-dimensional space might experience different perspectives. Here’s the connection to your 4D/VRI idea:
1. **Multidimensional Orientation**: The notion that in a 4D space, "front" and "left-right" can rotate into a fourth dimension suggests a kind of spatial freedom not present in 3D. This aligns with the concept of VRIs, where orientation can be perceived differently due to additional spatial dimensions.
2. **Perspective Stability and Movement**: The idea that switching between "views" doesn't change the actual landscape but rather the axis on which the environment rotates when interacting with the fourth dimension implies that VRIs could be a byproduct of this complex interaction. In 3D, our perspective changes with movement, but in 4D, your perspective might change based on how you're oriented within the additional dimension.
3. **Interact View**: This view provides a spatial interaction where objects rotate or are examined from angles within the fourth dimension ("ana" and "kata" directions). In the context of VRIs, this could mean that the illusions experienced are a result of transitioning between different orientations within a four-dimensional space.
4. **View Switching**: The concept that switching views changes the rotational axis relative to the fourth dimension suggests that VRIs could be an innate aspect of perception in 4D space, with orientation being inherently fluid and dependent on one’s current 'view' or orientation within that space.
Your 4D/VRI idea suggests that the mind, if operating in a four-dimensional reality, could naturally switch between these orientations. This switching is similar to a Necker cube illusion in 3D, where our perception flips between two different interpretations of an image. VRIs, in this context, would be the mental flip between different 3D 'slices' or perspectives of a higher-dimensional object or environment. Understanding and characterizing this flipping could provide insights into the possible existence and implications of higher spatial dimensions.”
Here’s what Philip Pugeau (ICN5D) asked in a public Facebook post on June 10, 2014:
“Question for Facebook Community:
Have any of you had a VRI experience? It's called a Visual Reorientation Illusion, and many people have had them as kids, or continue to have them, controllable or uncontrollably. It 's basically what you would feel if by looking in the same direction, and you feel as if everything has rotated 90 or 180 degrees. As if North has been interchanged with east or south, without physically doing so. Same surrounding, same looking direction, but you feel as though the whole world has been flipped into other directions, mysteriously.
There's actually a geometric way to explain such a thing. By standing in the same place, looking in the same direction in 3D, it turns out that we have four distinct orientations in 4D, that do not change what we see in 3D. It's quite possible that we can control ourselves in 4D this way, and a VRI flip is one of them.”
(I highlighted an area of interest)
This agrees with the concepts that you and ChatGPT4 have talked about.
Then there is a quote from this site that I asked ChatGPT4 to link to the 4D/VRI idea:
http://www.cut-the-knot.org/ctk/Tesseract.shtmlHugh:
“In a square there is only 1 square that contains a given edge. In a cube, every edge is shared by 2 squares. In a tesseract, 3 squares meet at every edge. Taken pairwise, squares through the same edge define three cubes. Detecting the three cubes seems akin to shifting a view point when observing the Necker cube. I found this observation useful when playing with the applet below. What is it about? Travelling in 4D may have a milder effect on a 3D body than turning it inside out. It may only change its orientation.”
Explain how this relates to a 3D slice viewpoint of a 4D being and VRIs.
ChatGPT4:
The passage you've shared touches upon the geometric relationships between edges, squares (faces), and cubes as we progress through higher dimensions. Let's relate this to the concept of a 3D slice viewpoint of a 4D being and Visual Reorientation Illusions (VRIs):
1. **Edge Sharing Across Dimensions**: In a square (2D), a given edge is unique to that square. In a cube (3D), each edge is shared by two faces (squares). In a tesseract (4D), an edge is where three cubes intersect. These cubes can be thought of as 'faces' of the tesseract in 4D space. This increasing complexity with higher dimensions suggests that there could be multiple 'correct' orientations or ways of perceiving a single edge—akin to how VRIs allow for multiple spatial interpretations of a single visual stimulus.
2. **Multidimensional Viewpoints**: The mention of detecting three cubes from the same edge in a tesseract and comparing it to the Necker cube shift hints at the possibility of multiple stable viewpoints in 4D, just as there are two in the Necker cube illusion. A 3D being observing a 4D object might be able to perceive it from multiple 'slices' or perspectives, each slice being a complete 3D representation of the object from that viewpoint.
3. **Travelling in 4D and Orientation Changes**: The idea that traveling in 4D could change the orientation of a 3D body without 'turning it inside out' could be parallel to experiencing a VRI. When a 4D being observes a 3D slice of their 4D universe, a movement or rotation in the fourth dimension might not alter the content of the 3D slice but could change how it's oriented. This reorientation could manifest as a VRI, where the observer's perspective suddenly shifts to a new orientation that was previously non-obvious or hidden.
In this context, VRIs could be a natural consequence of a 4D being perceiving their 4-dimensional environment from a limited 3-dimensional perspective. As they navigate or rotate through 4D space, the 'slices' of their perception might change in orientation, leading to visual illusions similar to the 3D Necker cube flip, but inherently more complex due to the additional dimension of space.