Inside Out

August 28, 2007 10:18 PM

Inside Out A topographical bedtime story. (Warning, contains spheres!)
posted by loquacious (19 comments total)

WANT MOAR

this is like Square One for growedups.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 10:33 PM on August 28, 2007

This is awesome. You can turn my sphere inside out anytime, loquacious.
posted by ourobouros at 10:42 PM on August 28, 2007

So you can turn a sphere inside out, big deal. If they are so awesome, why don't they show us how to comb the hair on a coconut without leaving a bald spot?

Seriously though, seeing topology visually like this is amazing.
posted by vorpal bunny at 10:42 PM on August 28, 2007

This was very interesting, thank you. I think you meant topological bedtime story though.
posted by Shakeer at 10:49 PM on August 28, 2007

Doh! Bad word-nerd! Bad! I'm so half in bed already, and was drifting off to the soothing sounds of the spheres.
posted by loquacious at 10:56 PM on August 28, 2007

This is nifty, but it left me with one burning question:

What's the minimum number of wiggly bits you need to use to accomplish this topological witchery? Eight seems pretty arbitrary. I imagine it's harder to follow with fewer, but can you do it with two dimples? With one?
posted by darksasami at 11:01 PM on August 28, 2007

I attained samadhi watching that video.

Or maybe the full melt sativa bubble hash is kickin in.

Either way... awesome.
posted by vronsky at 11:01 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

Great. Now I can turn physically-impossible spheres inside out without tearing or creasing.

This skill will be especially useful for recycling all my higher-dimensional Christmas ornaments.
posted by Avenger at 11:31 PM on August 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

I was wondering the same thing, darksasami. Clearly you need more than zero, but it seems like you could get away with far fewer than eight. One? Two?

(The same question applies to the plane figures — how many wiggly sections do you really need? Does it depend on the original shapes? It seems like it shouldn't, topology being what it is.)
posted by hattifattener at 11:36 PM on August 28, 2007

I think this is a double but I don't care. The video is so awesome and clear. My 8 year old has watched this thing dozens of times and talks about it constantly. He can even twist a belt into a figure eight and explain why it can't be straightened into a circle.
posted by DU at 4:54 AM on August 29, 2007 [1 favorite]

this is awesome, thanks loq! *bookmarks site*
posted by lonefrontranger at 6:21 AM on August 29, 2007

the technical term is "sphere eversion"

here's some code:

http://www.dgp.toronto.edu/~mjmcguff/eversion/
posted by geos at 6:21 AM on August 29, 2007

This is great.

On the other hand, now I'm late for work.

(I think there may have been a post here a couple years ago about inverting spheres, but nothing more than an animated gif?)
posted by nobody at 7:24 AM on August 29, 2007

this needs a batshitinsane tag, methinks...
posted by es_de_bah at 7:43 AM on August 29, 2007

Out of curiousity, is there a practical use for this? (Since membranes that can pass through themselves and stretch infinitely are pretty theoretical)
posted by empath at 8:10 AM on August 29, 2007

Warning, contains spheres!
posted by vronsky at 11:12 AM on August 29, 2007

I watched this at a math camp back in highschool. Didn't completely understand it then, but I do now. Thanks.

For those who liked it, check out "not knot" (part 2) which was my favorite of the videos we watched.
posted by Hactar at 1:43 PM on August 29, 2007

This one time, at math camp...
posted by loquacious at 5:26 PM on August 29, 2007

*diffuses Hactar, prevents terrifying Krikket robot invasion*
posted by loquacious at 5:27 PM on August 29, 2007