3 best explanations for me... so far

The 3 best explanations for me... so far

Number 1 is best... similar to what I think. Number 2 and 3 are good explanations using mathematics and physics. But missed the point.

For the Cube in this movie:

1) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0285492/board/thread/117859095?p=2

by idahoblue

2) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0285492/board/thread/57809941?p=1

by Nonym (mathematical point of view)

3) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0285492/board/thread/57809941?p=6

by poeticavarice

1) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0285492/board/thread/117859095?p=2

by idahoblue

Someone on the YouTube boards for this film had an interesting notion that the characters were all duplicate versions of themselves.

"They shot Kate's duplicate. Matter transportation [quantum teleportation] is the same as matter duplication.

The clue is in the bed under the plastic. The runaway Alex had no 'original' under plastic in the bed.

'They' had to get the full design of the hypercube out of the actual hypercube the designer gave them. She didn't give them the whole design. She thought making duplicates of people was immoral and open to abuse."

So:
- they make a duplicate of Alex Trusk to get the full design out of her
- they kit her out with a recording device in the hope that it will capture the information they require
- they send in other people who might be able to decipher some of the information (e.g. the scientist who works out that there is a time limit, Mrs Paley was a personal link to Alex Trusk and knew her work), check that the design works (e.g. Jerry confirming that his design for the doors works) and explain various features further (e.g. Max explaining how his variable time speed rooms works) - all of this is captured on Sasha's recording device
- they ensure an agent (Kate) is there to bring that information back to the real world, as otherwise it would just disappear when the hypercube implodes
- when Kate escapes the hypercube, IZON manage to get the missing information they require AND prove Alex Trusk's theory that flesh and blood duplicates can be created as a result of hypercube (also proving that Alex Trusk fears that creating duplicates would be immoral and open to abuse)
- they shoot the test subject (duplicate Kate) because she serves no further purpose.

The question is, if Alex Trusk didn't give them the full design for a hypercube, how were IZON able to construct one and put people in it? Unless all they had was the basic design and the information they needed to be able to control the hypercube and make it work in their best interest was the information that they were missing?

As the hypercube only existed for around 6 minutes, the use of duplicates could also mean that Izon could run multiple simulations/scenarios by populating the different parallel universives that existed inside the hypercube all at once, thus increasing the possibility of getting the information they required.

Sasha seems aware that she is a duplicate and when she says to Simon 'there's no point, we're all dead anyway' just before he kills her, she could be implying either:
a) that they are all dead in the real world or
b) there is no point to any of their actions in the hypercube as all of the duplicates will end up dead anyway. If b) is the case, the real-world versions of the characters never leave the gurneys. As we never see Sasha in the real world, she is either dead already, or they cannot find her.

I don't know if anyone else noticed, but right at the start of the movie as you are seeing things from Becky Young's perspective, the last thing she does is go through a door and someone in a surgical mask turns round to look at her - it looked like it could be Kate - although I couldn't be sure!

It's actually 6-dimensional: it has 4 dimensions of space and 2 of time. But before I explain why it is 6-dimensional, I'll explain why it isn't 4-dimensional.

Most people would consider any normal old cube to be 3-dimensional, but it is in fact 4-dimensional, since it occupies the 3 dimensions of space and the one dimension of time. If it didn't occupy the 4 dimensions, the "normal" cube would literally only exist for an instant. (just as a 2-dimensional square has infinitessimal depth and only exists at a single point in the third dimension)

Now, imagine we build a perfectly normal cube with a side-length of 5m at 06:00:00 and dismantle it at 06:06:59. So, this cube has dimensions of 5mx5mx5mx419s. Now put someone in that cube. If that person exits the cube, they just exit into whatever place the cube was built in (analagous to exiting a house into your neighborhood, or exiting your car into the parking lot or driveway). If you were to attach other cubes to the sides of the first one to create a network of cubes, it would be no different from the cubes in the first movie (Note, however, that it is implied that the entire hypercube consits of only a single room at different points in time). Also, if you were to just wait until 06:06:59, when the cube is supposed to be dismantled, the cube is simply dismantled around you and you are left in whatever place the cube was built in the first place (like having your house being dismantled around you to be left in your yard, or your car dismantled around you to be left in your driveway). Obviously, such a cube is no different from the boring old cube from the first movie.

So, how many dimensions do you need to get a cube like the one in the movie? The answer is 6, and the cube isn't really a "hypercube" either... it's closer to a "hypertoroid". I'll explain why: In the movie, as I have said, it is implied that the entire cube is only one room. So, when a person leaves through a side of the cube, they simply appear on the other side (like we saw near the end of the movie, though earlier in the movie, they would actually appear back in the cube at a different point in time). Instead of starting with a cube and try to figure out how we would accomplish this, let's start out with a line. We want to deform the line so that by going in one direction, we'll eventually end up back where we started. How do we do this? By turning the line into a circle. So now we have a 2-d object, which locally appears to be 1-dimensional (since one can still only move back and forth along the "line".) Now, let's say we want to do the same thing with a square, so that if one moves off one edge, he reappears on the opposite side, or if he walks in one direction, he'll end up back where he started. We do this by mapping the square onto the 3-dimensional shape called a torus (a doughnut or bagel shape). The reason we use a torus instead of a sphere is the sphere would only truly wrap in one direction (for example, on earth, if you were to just keep going north, you wouldn't suddenly appear at the south pole after reaching the north pole, instead you start coming back down on the other side of the earth.) Also note that while the torus is 3-dimensional, it still locally appears to be 2-dimensional, since we are only walking on its surface. Now all that we do is apply the same mapping of a cube onto a 4-dimensional hypertoroid, and we get a shape which is locally 3-dimensional, but wraps in all directions - just like the hypercube in the movie.

So we now have a shape which has 4 spatial dimensions and 1 time dimension, for a total of 5 dimensions. But, with only one dimension of time, it still flows perfectly normally. This is simply solved by adding another dimension of time, but which is orthogonal to the other time dimension and the 4 spatial ones at inside of the cube, but not at the edges. (orthogonal means "at a 90 degree angle". If 2 axes or dimensions are orthogonal, then motion in one does not correspond to motion in the other, ie if I move forward, then I haven't also moved left or right. If they are not orthogonal, then motion in one *does* correspond to motion in the other.) In this way, we can have the time in one axis pass normally, while time in the other axis passes as we move through the doors in the cube. This even allows it to seem as if passing through a door moves you into a completely different room, since now you're in a different point in time in one of the axes, and your timeline doesn't intersect with the original timeline (until the cube collapses at the end, that is). Another effect of this (though it would take too long to explain why) is that people moving in the same direction through time would experience time passing at the same rate, but 2 people moving in different directions would both appear to one-another to move more slowly (seemingly [but not] paradoxically, and also contrary to the movie's portrayal of one appearing to move more slowly while the other appears to move faster. Thus, many effects in the movie can be explained by adding this second time dimension.

So, the hypercube isn't 4-dimensional: a 4-dimensional cube is nothing special. In fact, it is a 6-dimensional toroid.

I read every post here, and no one has it fully correct.

Let's start with the first four dimensions...these are simple.

Everything you've EVER interacted with (in a macroscopic (naked eye observable) sense) exists in three spatial dimensions (yes, there are possibly more, but lets stick with what we can observe with a naked eye for now). It also exists in a relative fourth, time. Time is inexorably bound to the first three (since we haven't invented a time machine yet, and even when/if we can/do, it's still bound, just more flexible), however, it's relative to the observers speed and local gravity of the observers position. Attempting to alter the object in question's position in the first three results in movement, attempting to alter the object in question's position fourth can result in paradoxes/recursive loops/general bad stuff. Short version: DO NOT mess with time.

Dimensions 5 - 11 or higher, (as required by 11 dimensional super-gravity, among others) are curled up on themselves and each other so small as to be unnoticeable to the observers naked eye/experience, however their EFFECTS can be seen. I won't waste your time explaining how, just know that you'll never SEE them outright.

As far as a second dimension of time...when you find it, contact Stephen Hawking via Cambridge University. He'd stand up to see/hear that one. It falls under the same category as the spatial dimensions higher than 3: too small to be noticed macroscopically. Any three (four if you must) dimensional being moving through a second dimension of time, or a dimension of space higher than three, wouldn't even notice it. In fact, if you (as a three dimensional being) did move through a "4 dimensional cube" (6 dimensional toroid), regardless of it's size in the higher dimensions, you wouldn't end up back where you started, you'd end up right where you are, with no observable movement at all (once again, I'm speaking macroscopically, your subatomic fundamental particles however, may have experienced a journey of relatively MASSIVE proportions).

The best explanation of said "hypercube"? In a word: Wormholes (I'm not going to explain these either, except to say that they allow the crossing of tracts of space faster than light can transverse the same space without breaking the light speed barrier by "folding" space). Each parallel side of the cube being joined through said wormholes would mean that however you chose to move through the cube's three dimensional space, once you crossed the cubes boundaries, you'd end up back where you started, only not WHEN you started. The length of the wormhole relative to the distance crossed in standard space would account for the difference in time: if it was a comparatively short wormhole, you could end up arriving before you set out, if it was a comparable distance or longer, you would arrive when you left and after you left respectively. While a wormhole allows you to cover vast distances in a shorter time than light itself can, a wormhole containing finite "time loops" (I'm not going to get into those either, Google it if you must, or watch Groundhog Day) could cause your travel to be MUCH slower, relative to your own personal time and a separate observers personal time.

I'm not attacking anyone's post, it's just that most (it's so close to ALL it's scary) of the arguments here are based on THEORETICAL physics, or on QUANTUM-SCALE physics, neither of which apply to humans, being macroscopic, three (again, four if you must) dimensional beings. My wormhole theory doesn't truly stand up either, until we find proof of "exotic matter" (explaining what that truly is/would be would turn most people's brains to tapioca, and the few that it didn't would simply say "yeah, I knew that"), or perhaps an infinite power supply (good luck on that).

The absolute, rock bottom explanation of said "hypercube"?



It's a movie....
...it can do what it wants and reality will just look the other way.