Christopher Compagnon Yet experience shows that it is impossible for an object to have less than four triangular facets. So naturally one extrapolates.
So, we have a response from Charlie (the author), who kindly explained it --
Hi Mindey. Thanks for reaching out! And how fun it is to see so much discussion of my doodles on the group.
Unfortunately, for whatever reason, I'm not able to comment on the Plus threads in that community -- probably because people aren't in my extended circles and I'm not active on Google+. But I can give you some info to pass on to those who are interested.
That reflective tetrahedron is a riff on a sculpture I read about a few years ago: see here (goo.gl/MUzQnX), it looks like a clever use of one-way mirrors. I tried to replicate the effect in this (goo.gl/eV81AB) sketch.
That brings us to the tetrahedron you've mentioned. It's simply a tetrahedron of one-way mirrors where the mirrored sides all face inward. The inside edges of the tetrahedron are illuminated. The reflectivity of the mirrors is less than 100%, which is why n-th reflections of the edges get dimmer and blurrier. The complexity emerges out of the recursive nature of mirrors reflecting mirrors - the scene itself couldn't be much simpler!
Hope that's helpful. Best
-- So, that's was actually my first thought, really! The second thought was that probably the tetrahedron is nearby mirrors, which I wrote. Sometimes first thought is right...
And yet it appears to be a tetrahedron!
ReplyDeleteIndeed, but I see it as a pyramid 😊
ReplyDeleteA half octahedron?
ReplyDeleteTetrahedron is aka trigonal pyramid. Shows how deeply ingrained is square basis.
ReplyDelete(nous vous évitons) pire, amis, deuil est rare, chic
ReplyDeleteDavid Chako been watching this for the last 5 minutes and thinking the same thing. ☺️
ReplyDeleteRick Swartz maybe, looks like tetrahedron in front of two mirrors at an angle. Very very interesting puzzle. I'll ask the author :-)
ReplyDeleteHypnotic
ReplyDeleteHum… just 2 triangles side by side.
ReplyDeleteChristopher Compagnon Yet experience shows that it is impossible for an object to have less than four triangular facets. So naturally one extrapolates.
ReplyDeleteI see chocolate and almond nougat
ReplyDeleteA long time ago, I animated a cube on Tk using only three quadrangles doing double duty, jumping to front as soon as the rotation brought them behind.
ReplyDeleteSo, we have a response from Charlie (the author), who kindly explained it --
ReplyDeleteHi Mindey. Thanks for reaching out! And how fun it is to see so much discussion of my doodles on the group.
Unfortunately, for whatever reason, I'm not able to comment on the Plus threads in that community -- probably because people aren't in my extended circles and I'm not active on Google+. But I can give you some info to pass on to those who are interested.
That reflective tetrahedron is a riff on a sculpture I read about a few years ago: see here (goo.gl/MUzQnX), it looks like a clever use of one-way mirrors. I tried to replicate the effect in this (goo.gl/eV81AB) sketch.
That brings us to the tetrahedron you've mentioned. It's simply a tetrahedron of one-way mirrors where the mirrored sides all face inward. The inside edges of the tetrahedron are illuminated. The reflectivity of the mirrors is less than 100%, which is why n-th reflections of the edges get dimmer and blurrier. The complexity emerges out of the recursive nature of mirrors reflecting mirrors - the scene itself couldn't be much simpler!
Hope that's helpful. Best
-- So, that's was actually my first thought, really! The second thought was that probably the tetrahedron is nearby mirrors, which I wrote. Sometimes first thought is right...
Is Charlie on G+ Mindey I.?
ReplyDeleteCorina Marinescu He is, and, based on my exchange, his account would be - https://plus.google.com/101760567670414468541 ;-)
ReplyDeleteMerci Mindey I.
ReplyDelete