this post was submitted on 09 May 2026
787 points (99.1% liked)

People Twitter

10247 readers
157 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major celebrity, figure or any politician. If you replace the "x" at their site with xcancel (so it beomes xcancel.com), and you're not on mobile, it will save video. https://web.archive.org/save is another great option. Archive.is is no longer recommended because they remove/alter content.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bitteroldcoot@piefed.social 70 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is a lot like when Boston PD was found to screen out all the smart applicants. Sometime the company wants an obedient idiot.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-smart-to-be-a-cop/

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 32 points 2 months ago

Might actually be the case, lol.

Answer this question correctly (or even intelligently at all) and your application is rejected.

[–] Eggymatrix@sh.itjust.works 45 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

This is a direct appliacation of the hairy ball theorem.

I ain't even kidding

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hairy_ball_theorem

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 43 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Hairy ball theorem applies to even-dimensional spheres (the ordinary sphere is the 2D surface of the 3D solid), but a cube in four-dimensional space is a three-dimensional surface, so it doesn't apply.

This is a question about graph theory, not topology; it's asking for a Hamiltonian path on the surface of 4D cube (where faces are vertices, which is different than the normal polytope graph).

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Ethanol@pawb.social 36 points 2 months ago (3 children)

This is actually quite fun and simple! Even if the problem and my following explanation look complicated :P

Let's look at the three dimensional case. One can parametrize a 3 dimensional cube as the Cartesian product of intervals [0, 1] x [0, 1] x [0, 1]. This means a cube is a set of points (a, b, c) where a, b and c are real numbers between 0 and 1. The 2 dimensional sides of the cube are then given by fixing one coordinate. That is, the 6 sides are

{0}    x [0, 1] x [0, 1], 
{1}    x [0, 1] x [0, 1], 
[0, 1] x {0}    x [0, 1], 
[0, 1] x {1}    x [0, 1], 
[0, 1] x [0, 1] x {0} and 
[0, 1] x [0, 1] x {1}. 

Now we just start in the middle of a side at (0, 0.5, 0.5). To get to the next side we walk towards an edge (0, 0, 0.5) and then to the middle of the next side (0.5, 0, 0.5). We iterate this process until we run out of sides with a fixed 0, then walk towards a side with a fixed 1 and continue there. That is:

   (0  , 0.5, 0.5)
-> (0  , 0  , 0.5) 
-> (0.5, 0  , 0.5) 
-> (0.5, 0  , 0  ) 
-> (0.5, 0.5, 0  ) 
-> (1  , 0.5, 0  ) 
-> (1  , 0.5, 0.5) 
-> (1  , 1  , 0.5) 
-> (0.5, 1  , 0.5) 
-> (0.5, 1  , 1  ) 
-> (0.5, 0.5, 1  ) 

This path basically spirals around the cube, going through every side only once. Here's a visualization (sorry, I'm no artist :P) visualization of this path on a 3 dimensional cube

The same procedure works on a 4 dimensional cube or any other higher dimension. For the 4 dimensional cube it goes like this:

   (0  , 0.5, 0.5, 0.5)
-> (0  , 0  , 0.5, 0.5) 
-> (0.5, 0  , 0.5, 0.5) 
-> (0.5, 0  , 0  , 0.5) 
-> ...
-> (0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0  )
-> (1  , 0.5, 0.5, 0  )
-> (1  , 0.5, 0.5, 0.5)
-> (1  , 1  , 0.5, 0.5)
-> ...
-> (0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 1  )

This works for arbitrary dimension except for the 1 dimensional cube (which is just a line) because the "sides" there are the two end points of the line and not connected at all. Additionally note, that it is never specified how edges count in this problem, whether they somehow count towards a face or whether you're allowed to go back and fourth on edges. You could technically only walk along edges and step into the sides every now and then.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.cafe 51 points 2 months ago

You owe me $14.50 for reading that.

[–] Obi@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 months ago

I skipped all the blabla and looked at the drawing and was pleased to see the path I started visualising in my head was exactly like that. I do think I would've needed a cube in my hands to confirm it, or a bit longer thinking about it instead to complete it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Akasazh@lemmy.world 33 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Too many people are obsessing about 4d topology in this thread. The real difficulty in the question is the non -deterministic pathfinding of the ant, in the absence of pheromones.

[–] Entertainmeonly@lemmy.blahaj.zone 30 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Four dimensional? That is a tesseract. This is impossible to describe how an ant would even interact with let alone touch all eight cells only once.

[–] RedGreenBlue@lemmy.zip 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Once done with the first cube, the ant takes a gondola, going along the 4th dimension and repeats the walk he did on the first cube.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] kepix@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago (2 children)

making sure you cannot solve it, so you are perfect for the job

[–] PuddleOfKittens@sh.itjust.works 32 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Possible candidate responses:

  1. Solves it (too smart for job)
  2. "That's bullshit, who needs this for a $14.50/hr job?" (too intolerant of bullshit for job)
  3. Tries to solve it but fails (lacks self-awareness for job)
  4. Knows they can't solve it so doesn't even try (too lazy for job)
  5. Doesn't understand the question/comprehend what a hypercube is (too dumb for job)
[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago

Maybe they're trying to weed out all actual applicants because they're hiring the boss' kid.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You forgot option 6, spew a bunch of techno bubble at the HR person who will definitely not understand the problem themselves and wouldn't be able to tell if you'd answered it or not.

[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 11 points 2 months ago

That's just response 1 from the perspective of the HR person scoring it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mirshafie@europe.pub 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I believe this is sometimes the case. I was called for an interview with a group of 15 other people ones. We were like a class, being interviewed as a group, and were supposed to solve some problems together. Nobody in that group could solve even the simple, obvious problems - we're talking basic math and reading comprehension here. Got an email the next day informing me that they had I had not been selected for recruitment.

[–] MIDItheKID@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Sure. Draw the cube for me and I will plot it's path.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)
[–] Tja@programming.dev 36 points 2 months ago (6 children)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] AlolanYoda@mander.xyz 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I still don't understand it. Can you rotate it along the W axis so I can visualize it better?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

tricky with only four dimentions, but I'd use a Grathenbour's loop with a transverse Z axis movement if gimbal locks are ignored, naturally.

[–] Apeman42@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

How does this compare in efficiency to casting Xagyg's Planar Binding and simply using a standard verity geas to question a daemon from one of the higher hypergeometric dimensions?

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago

Be glad you got the shitty interview instead of getting ghosted

[–] CromulantCrow@lemmy.zip 17 points 2 months ago (7 children)

Okay, if you can explain to me in detail how four dimensional topology is going to be important to me while I'm stocking the shelves of your grocery store, I'll give you an answer.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Meron35@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Entry level positions to Gregg's (fast food sausage roll chain) require 1000 word personal statements as part of online applications

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 8 points 2 months ago

Yeah but you also get equity in the company so I think that's fair enough.

You have to be proven worthy before you are handed the recipe for the vegan sausage roll. I want to know what addictive substance they put in there.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] muse@piefed.blahaj.zone 15 points 2 months ago (3 children)

One does not simply walk into the 4th dimension

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.cafe 15 points 2 months ago

At $14.50 per hour, he's going to take the shortest route.

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Choose a starting face and remember it. Walk each face of a cell containing that face touching each face once much like you would a 3-cube.

Pick any adjoining cell and move into one of its faces from there, walk each of its faces saving the one opposite the face you started on for last.

From there you're on a shared face with the cell opposite your starting cell. Traverse this one in a similar manner to the last, but this time also visit the adjoining faces of each cell adjacent to the second cell you filled, before once again ending opposite the face you started on for this cell.

Now you're on a shared face with the final cell, opposite the face you started on. Walk around the remaining four faces and you're done.

[–] mirshafie@europe.pub 17 points 2 months ago

Followed these steps, ended up on the ceiling of my neighbor's tea room.

[–] AnarchoEngineer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Wait, isn’t this trivial?

If we’re talking about “faces” as in the cubic faces of a tesseract then each of the 8 faces are connected to all other faces except the opposite face. So just spiral around from your starting face (keeping the faces you’ve visited on the inside of the spiral) and you’re fine.

If you mean 2D faces connecting the 3D ones, then things get more difficult but not that much because you can do the exact same thing. Choose a 1D edge as your origin, pick a face touching that edge to start with, traverse that edge twice to get the next two faces. Then traverse three faces which share edges with those faces you already traversed (there are 6 faces with this property, 3 for each vertex of our origin edge, the set you pick determines the “direction” of your overall progress through/around the tesseract). Repeat that step again but for the faces that share edges with two of the three you just did. Repeat again and again and again until the last three faces share a vertex with the origin edge you started with. You’re done.

Am I missing something? Did the prompt mean to say you can only traverse each edge once?


Edit: the 2D face path I described would miss 6 faces. Those six faces should be traversed in the middle, so do the first three faces, the second three, then all six which touch both those three you just traversed and the three you would have done next on the original path. Then do the rest just like I originally mentioned.

[–] ooterness@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I understood some of those words.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] user1234@fedinsfw.app 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Isn't a cube by definition a 3 dimensional object? If it were 4 dimensional, it would no longer be a cube.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 23 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Its a generalisation. A 4d cube is a shape that has the same length in all 4 dimensions. You can also talk of 5d cubes, 6d cubes, etc. These are commonly called n-cubes: a 4-cube is a 4d cube.

There are also 4D spheres, even though spheres are definitionally 3D. They are called n-spheres.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kayzeekayzee@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 2 months ago

Well I think the ant would probably wander around until it found food

[–] ech@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Forward, left, right, forward, left.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 months ago (5 children)

That’s a three dimensional cube.

Which I thought by definition was a cube.

What is a four dimensional cube?

What is a two dimensional cube?

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] spicehoarder@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 months ago

Am I fucking stupid? Just walk in a shallow spiral?

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
[–] Inucune@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›