The Picard Maneuver@lemmy.worldM to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 17 hours agoIt's a matter of perspectivelemmy.worldimagemessage-square82fedilinkarrow-up1494arrow-down117
arrow-up1477arrow-down1imageIt's a matter of perspectivelemmy.worldThe Picard Maneuver@lemmy.worldM to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 17 hours agomessage-square82fedilink
minus-squarePaupersSerenade@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up61·17 hours agoIs there a way to see this as four? I’m assuming so but legitimately can’t see anything other than three. Is that the joke and I’m overthinking‽ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
minus-squareZombiepirate@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up186arrow-down1·17 hours agoIt’s a riff on an old meme.
minus-squarefunkless_eck@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up91arrow-down1·edit-215 hours agoalternative interpretation: it’s only possible to be neither right nor wrong on something when the object is physically impossible
minus-squareimaqtpie@lemmy.myserv.onelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·5 hours agoI agree with you on that. But alternatively: humans can only see a portion of the whole reality of a given situation, and that specific angle can often be misleading.
minus-squarelugal@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilinkarrow-up10·15 hours agoI am very pluralistic so I’m ok with many numbers, except one, the singular is where I draw the line!
minus-squarefemboy_bird@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·edit-211 hours agoWhat about 1+(n/∞) where n is a finite integer
minus-squareSpiralvortexisalie@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up26·17 hours agoPretty sure its a riff on this https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/2/three-or-four-bar-optical-illusion-laguna-designscience-photo-library.jpg
minus-squareVoyajer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up15·16 hours agoIt’s an impossible object optical illusion but edited to be possible
minus-squarePinklink@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up7·17 hours agoThe original is one of those MC Escher type things where all the lines are connected and it actually does have four “ends” on one side
minus-squarelath@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·17 hours agoI can think of a few ways, but considering where this is posted, there’s no need to overthink. Just keep it simple.
minus-squaresloppy_diffuser@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·edit-215 hours agoThe original used XI where it was 9 or 11 depending on the side. edit: Nope I was wrong. That post links this one, lol. https://infosec.pub/post/19153879
Is there a way to see this as four? I’m assuming so but legitimately can’t see anything other than three. Is that the joke and I’m overthinking‽ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s a riff on an old meme.
alternative interpretation: it’s only possible to be neither right nor wrong on something when the object is physically impossible
I agree with you on that.
But alternatively: humans can only see a portion of the whole reality of a given situation, and that specific angle can often be misleading.
No, one! Lol
I am very pluralistic so I’m ok with many numbers, except one, the singular is where I draw the line!
What about 1+(n/∞) where n is a finite integer
deleted by creator
Pretty sure its a riff on this https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/2/three-or-four-bar-optical-illusion-laguna-designscience-photo-library.jpg
It’s an impossible object optical illusion but edited to be possible
The original is one of those MC Escher type things where all the lines are connected and it actually does have four “ends” on one side
I can think of a few ways, but considering where this is posted, there’s no need to overthink. Just keep it simple.
The original used XI where it was 9 or 11 depending on the side.
edit: Nope I was wrong. That post links this one, lol.
https://infosec.pub/post/19153879