|Three-dimensional space has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Mathematics. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Three-dimensional space article.|
|WikiProject Mathematics||(Rated C-class, Top-importance)|
It's said that a 3D object is several 2D objects stacked on-top of each-other to create thickness but how can several 2D planes with a thickness of 0 add up to be something that has thickness and thus create a 3D object?
- Because you're stacking together an uncountably infinite number of 2D objects. Infinity times 0 is not necessarily 0 (technically, it's undefined). Crispy (talk) 00:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
3d networks as spaces
This article may be improved by adding a mention of Graphs (ie networks of nodes or connectivity information) that have dimension of 3 through Dimensional_analysis. This type of structure is an alternative to the axis-based way of thinking about the dimensionality of space in the universe. See also Fractal dimension on networks. Danwills (talk) 03:51, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- The article would benefit from a link to Dimensional analysis, and but I don't think this application of dimensional analysis belongs in the article. --Una Smith (talk) 01:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
This space is above (in dimension) the sphere or the 2-sphere:
If the 2-sphere lives in her own but also can be viewed embedded in and is defined as such that and .
And the hypersphere -very well known to a real topo-geometer- is: a set consisting of point in the 4-dimensional euclidean space which are equidistant to the origin, usually we take distance one. In other words: such that, if then . So, i don't know why unsavvy geeks think they know and write lies, and only producing that math look stupid... well, that it seems a law in these wikiplaces. --kmath (talk) 22:28, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
- Anyway not all is lost: check 3-sphere for education--kmath (talk) 22:37, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Just as a 3D object casts a 2D shadow (kinda) should it be noted that a theoretical 4D (not time) object would cast a 3D shadow? (kinda.) or is this all too original researchy? 220.127.116.11 (talk) 11:13, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- That wouldn't be about 3D, it would be about 4D. And there's already something at Four-dimensional space saying that. Dmcq (talk) 11:59, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Undid Vandalism, but ...
I undid some clear vandalism, but have no idea what the article is supposed to look like. I just did this 'en passant' and have other things I must do. Can some Samaritan look this over? DeepNorth (talk) 14:16, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
- Nah, space focuses more on space in physics, that is, the spacetime with time held constant. This page is about a mathematical ideal, does not put physics and reality into account. In mathematics there are 4-dimensional space or n-dimensional, this page is for n=3. We collects its mathematical property, insights and geometries here. --18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:47, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- I propose that we add a "for physical space, see space." redirect (something like that) and fix the leading paragraph, ie. put the description on physics a little bit lower than the mathematical description.
- A section and paragraphs on the significance of 3-dimensional space in physics, and a redirect to space for detailed article. --22.214.171.124 (talk) 20:57, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I see your point: parts of the other page having reference to physicality would not apply to this page. The WP:namespace logic is clear, and have taken down the merger tags. Thank you for clearing that up; three dimensions need not be materialized.Rgdboer (talk) 02:08, 24 March 2014 (UTC)