Original Usenet thread from alt.ascii-art, started 23 Oct 1997.
Illusions and impossible things :)
alt.ascii-art
· 29 messages · 23 Oct 1997 - 31 Oct 1997
Jesper Nielsen wrote: > > Just some nice impossible ASCII figures I've collected. Please send additions > to je...@post1.com. > ________ > /\ \ > / \ \ > / \ \ > / 3 \_______\ > \ / / > ___\ / ____/___ > /\ \ / /\ \ > / \ \/___/ \ \ > / \ \ \ \ > / \_______\ \_______\ > \ / / / / > \ / / / / > \ / 1 /\ / 2 / > \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' > what so impossible about this, it looks like 3 cube looks like cube 1 place on top of cube 2 cover a corner of cube2 and cube 3 place on top the side of it -- ���D: �дy�z�t�z? ���T�ӨҤl. Quiz: Describe the Universe? Give Three Example. Use any way you can to predict the end of the world? �Υ����k�h�w���@�ɥ���:��������,�H�H����,�ä�����
"����Ĭ (Benjamin)" <bul...@comports.com> said: >Jesper Nielsen wrote: >> >> Just some nice impossible ASCII figures I've collected. Please send additions >> to je...@post1.com. >> ________ >> /\ \ >> / \ \ >> / \ \ >> / 3 \_______\ >> \ / / >> ___\ / ____/___ >> /\ \ / /\ \ >> / \ \/___/ \ \ >> / \ \ \ \ >> / \_______\ \_______\ >> \ / / / / >> \ / / / / >> \ / 1 /\ / 2 / >> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' >> > >what so impossible about this, >it looks like 3 cube >looks like cube 1 place on top of cube 2 cover a corner of cube2 >and cube 3 place on top the side of it Sorry I don't quite understand your description. This still looks quite impossible to me. -- _____________/|_ /|________________________________________________________ / |\|\/ |/ |/ /_'__ \ | __| _----- - /= WXWXWX\ WXWXWX\ WXWXWX\ IRC: JEZ/Vic | | _\ / \-- \__XW | XW\___\| \__WX / | | _| () () |_ WX | WXWX\ WX / EMU/FCK/MOD | | (` (_) ) XW | XW\_\| WX / WAD/TOLKIEN | | \_ ._____ _/ WXWXWX | WXWXWX\ WXWXWX\ | | _ _\_ |__)_/ _ _/_ \_____\| \_____\| \_____\| je...@post1.com | \__|_|_|_|_________|_|_|_|________________________________________________/
Tom Harvey <tom...@nospam.demon.co.uk> said: >In article <345...@slip.net>, Randy Gardner <ran...@slip.net> >writes >>Tom Harvey wrote: >>> Looking at it again, it is ambiguous. The perspective of the original >>> hasn't translated very well into ascii. I have tried to illustate my >>> poor explaination below. It is based on the same play on perspective >>> that Escher's waterfall uses (Turn your head on its side): >> >>Anybody got an ASCII version of Escher's waterfall anywhere? > >It is one of my favorites. > >There was an excellent (very large) rendition of it posted not long >ago... I no longer have it, but I'm sure some kind soul will have a >copy. _.-"""-._ .' `. / \ | | | | | | \ / _.-"""-._ _.`. .'. .' `. |`-._`-.._..-'_.-| / \ | _ `-._ _.-' | | | | | `-._ " _.-'| | | | | | || | | | | | | | || | | | \ / | | || | | | _`. .'. | | || | | | |`-.`-.._..-'.-'| | | || | | | | `-._.-' | | | _.-'| |_ | | | |`-._ _.-'| | | |'_.-'| |_`-.| | | | || | | | |_.-' | | `-._ `._|`-._ | | || | | | / / | | ``---._ `-._ | | || | | | | / / .-' `-._|`-._ ``-._ `-._ | | || | | | || || / /|-| |-._ `-._ `--._`-._|`-._ | | || | | | | | ' || |\ `-._ `-._ ``---._ `| | || | | | | - | | | || | \ | |`-._ `-._|`-._ ``-| |`-.|| | | | _.-' | | || | \ | | `-._ `-._ | |-._ | |._ | | _.-' | | || | \| | `-._ `-.| | `| |_ `-| | | | | || | | | `-._ _.| | | | `.-| | | | || || | | | _.-'|_.-'_.-' | |_.-' | | | | . || | | | _.-' __.---'' _.| ' | | | || || | | |\_.-'|_.-'_.-'' _.-'|_.-' _. | | | | || | | |' _- _.-' _.-' | | || || || |_.-'| |_.---'' _.-' _ | | | \ | | | || |_.-'| | _.-'|_.-' _.-'|| | | | \ | || .'_| | | |_.-' _.-'| | || | | | \ | | |._ | | | `-._ _.-' | | || | | | \ || | | `| | ```-._`-._|`-._ _.-' | | || | | | |\_.-| | `-._ ``---._ `-._ | | || | | | | | `-._|`-._ ``-._ `-._ | | || | | | | || || | `-._ `--._`-._|`| | || | | | | | | | `-._ ``---.| |`|| | | | | | | | |`-._ `-._|`-._ | |-.| |-._ | | | | ||`-._ `-.| | | |._ `-| | | | | | || | `-._ _.| | | | `-_| | | | | ||__ | | | `-._ _.-'|_.-'_.-' | |_.-' | | | | | ._.-| |. | | `-._ _.-' __.---'' _| | | | | ||/ | | \ | | _.-'|_.-'_.-'' _.-'|_.-' | | || || | | .'| |-' __.---'' _.-' | | | | | |.| '| |-'' _.-'|_.-' | | | || _. | | | | | _.-' | | | | ' | | | | |_.-' | | || | | \ | | / _| ' _.-' |_.-' | _`.| |'-' _.-' |`-._ _.| _.-' | `-._ _.-' _.-' | |' _.-' | | _.-' | | _.-' | | _.-' | | _.-' | | _.-' Veronica Karlsson? | | _.-' _ | | _.-' `-|_ | _.-' `-._ | _.-' `-.|.-' -- _____________/|_ /|________________________________________________________ / |\|\/ |/ |/ /_'__ \ | __| _----- - /= WXWXWX\ WXWXWX\ WXWXWX\ IRC: JEZ/Vic | | _\ / \-- \__XW | XW\___\| \__WX / | | _| () () |_ WX | WXWX\ WX / EMU/FCK/MOD | | (` (_) ) XW | XW\_\| WX / WAD/TOLKIEN | | \_ ._____ _/ WXWXWX | WXWXWX\ WXWXWX\ | | _ _\_ |__)_/ _ _/_ \_____\| \_____\| \_____\| je...@post1.com | \__|_|_|_|_________|_|_|_|________________________________________________/
Tom Harvey wrote in message ... >In article <344...@comports.com>, =?iso-8859-1?q?=A4=FA=C0=BF=C4= >AC_=28Benjamin=29?= <bul...@comports.com> writes >>> ________ >>> /\ \ >>> / \ \ >>> / \ \ >>> / 3 \_______\ >>> \ / / >>> ___\ / ____/___ >>> /\ \ / /\ \ >>> / \ \/___/ \ \ >>> / \ \ \ \ >>> / \_______\ \_______\ >>> \ / / / / >>> \ / / / / >>> \ / 1 /\ / 2 / >>> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' >>> >> >>what so impossible about this, >>it looks like 3 cube >>looks like cube 1 place on top of cube 2 cover a corner of cube2 >>and cube 3 place on top the side of it >> >The bottom of cubes 1 and 2 are in line. The top of cube 1, however, is >further back (being behind cube 3) than the top of cube 2, even though >they appear to be balanced at the same angle. No, he's right. Somebody looking at the picture doesn't necessarily assume the sides line up; I didn't see it. This figure wouldn't stand up very well on its own though-- My version of it: set one and two down, standing on their edges (may be tricky.) put three onto the top edge, so that it pushes one away from and two towards you. About halfway down, it will look like this. continue, and you will get... ____________________ /\ /\ /\ \ / \ / \ / \ \ / \/ \/ \ \ / 1 / 3 / 2 \_______\ \ \ \ / / \ /\ /\ / / \ / \ / \ / / \/____\/____\/_______/ (I can't do a perspective view of that :(.. ) Anyway, it will be three blocks in a row, standing on their edges, in order (front to back) 2, 3, 1. Do you see what I mean? -- Visit my homepage, [now under major reconstruction,] come.to/brocks.place World Domination Through Trivia! .sig(h)
In article <344...@comports.com>, =?iso-8859-1?q?=A4=FA=C0=BF=C4= AC_=28Benjamin=29?= <bul...@comports.com> writes >> ________ >> /\ \ >> / \ \ >> / \ \ >> / 3 \_______\ >> \ / / >> ___\ / ____/___ >> /\ \ / /\ \ >> / \ \/___/ \ \ >> / \ \ \ \ >> / \_______\ \_______\ >> \ / / / / >> \ / / / / >> \ / 1 /\ / 2 / >> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' >> > >what so impossible about this, >it looks like 3 cube >looks like cube 1 place on top of cube 2 cover a corner of cube2 >and cube 3 place on top the side of it > The bottom of cubes 1 and 2 are in line. The top of cube 1, however, is further back (being behind cube 3) than the top of cube 2, even though they appear to be balanced at the same angle. -- Tom Harvey | Newsgroup correspondence should be kept to newsgroups. tom@tomh. | Personal correspondence: UCE spoiler in use. demon.co.uk | For further details: http://www.nospam.demon.co.uk
In article <OD1...@upnetnews02.moswest.msn.net>, Brock Kevin Nambo <new...@earthling.net> writes >>>> ________ >>>> /\ \ >>>> / \ \ >>>> / \ \ >>>> / 3 \_______\ >>>> \ / / >>>> ___\ / ____/___ >>>> /\ \ / /\ \ >>>> / \ \/___/ \ \ >>>> / \ \ \ \ >>>> / \_______\ \_______\ >>>> \ / / / / >>>> \ / / / / >>>> \ / 1 /\ / 2 / >>>> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' >>> >>>what so impossible about this, >>>it looks like 3 cube >>>looks like cube 1 place on top of cube 2 cover a corner of cube2 >>>and cube 3 place on top the side of it >>> >>The bottom of cubes 1 and 2 are in line. The top of cube 1, however, is >>further back (being behind cube 3) than the top of cube 2, even though >>they appear to be balanced at the same angle. > >No, he's right. Somebody looking at the picture doesn't necessarily assume >the sides line up; I didn't see it. This figure wouldn't stand up very well >on its own though-- > >My version of it: >set one and two down, standing on their edges (may be tricky.) >put three onto the top edge, so that it pushes one away from and two towards >you. >About halfway down, it will look like this. continue, and you will get... > > ____________________ > /\ /\ /\ \ > / \ / \ / \ \ > / \/ \/ \ \ > / 1 / 3 / 2 \_______\ > \ \ \ / / > \ /\ /\ / / > \ / \ / \ / / > \/____\/____\/_______/ > >(I can't do a perspective view of that :(.. ) >Anyway, it will be three blocks in a row, standing on their edges, in order >(front to back) 2, 3, 1. > >Do you see what I mean? I think I follow. Looking at it again, it is ambiguous. The perspective of the original hasn't translated very well into ascii. I have tried to illustate my poor explaination below. It is based on the same play on perspective that Escher's waterfall uses (Turn your head on its side): ________ ________ /\ \ /\ \ / \ \ / \ \ / \ \ / /\ \ \ / 3 \_ _\ / / \ \ \ /\ /\ /\ / / \ \ \ /_ / \_ _\ / / \ \ \ /\ / /\ \ / / /\ \ \ \ / \/___/ \ \ / / / \ \ \ \ / / \ \ \ / / / /\ \ \ \ \ / \/______\___\_______\ / / / / /\ \ \_\_______\ \ / / / / \ \ \/_/ \ \ / / / \ / / \ \ /----\-\- / / \ / 1 2 / \ \__/------\- / / \/_______/__\/_______/ \/_/ \/_______/ -- Tom Harvey | Newsgroup correspondence should be kept to newsgroups. tom@tomh. | Personal correspondence: UCE spoiler in use. demon.co.uk | For further details: http://www.nospam.demon.co.uk
In article <yAA...@tomh.demon.co.uk>, Tom Harvey writes: >In article <344...@comports.com> writes >>> Y________ >>> /\ . \ >>> / \.......\ >>> / \(3). \ >>> / \___.___\X >>> \ / / >>> ___\ / ____/___ >>> /\ \ / /\ . \ >>> / \...\/___/ \.......\ >>> / \(1). \ \(2). \ >>> / \___.___\ \___.___\ >>> \ / / / / >>> \ / / / / >>> \ / /\ / / >>> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' >>> Z >> >>what so impossible about this, >>it looks like 3 cube >>looks like cube 1 place on top of cube 2 cover a corner of cube2 >>and cube 3 place on top the side of it >> >The bottom of cubes 1 and 2 are in line. The top of cube 1, however, is >further back (being behind cube 3) than the top of cube 2, even though >they appear to be balanced at the same angle. I cannot make head or tail of what you are saying. Probably because your assignment of "top", "bottom", "front", "back" is unclear. Let's look at the thing in the XY plane: X |________________ z=2.0/| : |z=2.0 / | : | So, er, z=1.5/ | : | what's the problem? /' |-------+-------| z=1.0/ : '| : | | :' | : | | ' |_______:_______|__________Y ________|': / . /z=2.0 z=1.0/| | :/........________/________ / | | / /| : |z=1.5 z=0.5/ |.......|/_______/ | : | /: '| : : | : | z=0/ :' | : : |........;........| | ' | : : '| : | |': |_______:_______:' | : | | : / . /: | : | | '/.......,......./ : |________:________|z=1.5 | / . /| : / . / |/_______._______/ | '/........,........./z=1.5 / | / . / Z |/________._________/z=0.5 |~/ |~/ ~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~ P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O L |{a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"}{/a}_____________|/_______| L and{a href="http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/lynx/q0.html"}{/a}XemuSP4(:)
JEZ wrote: > > "����Ĭ (Benjamin)" <bul...@comports.com> said: > >Jesper Nielsen wrote: > >> > >> Just some nice impossible ASCII figures I've collected. Please send additions > >> to je...@post1.com. > >> ________ > >> /\ \ > >> / \ \ > >> / \ \ > >> / 3 \_______\ > >> \ / / > >> ___\ / ____/___ > >> /\ \ / /\ \ > >> / \ \/___/ \ \ > >> / \ \ \ \ > >> / \_______\ \_______\ > >> \ / / / / > >> \ / / / / > >> \ / 1 /\ / 2 / > >> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' > >> > > > >what so impossible about this, > >it looks like 3 cube > >looks like cube 1 place on top of cube 2 cover a corner of cube2 > >and cube 3 place on top the side of it > > Sorry I don't quite understand your description. > > This still looks quite impossible to me. This is quite clearly NOT an "impossible" figure! I'll try to explain.... (I have left some space so you should be able to see one picture first and get used to it before you go on to the next picture...) Take two of these blocks: ________ ________ /\ \ /\ \ / \ \/ \ \ / \ \ \ \ / \_______\ \_______\ \ / / / / \ / / / / \ / /\ / / \/_______/ \/_______/ And look at it "from the side", just like this stick man: ______ / _ \ / >(') \ \ ( >)'\ \ '' | / ______/ ________ ________ / / /\ \ /\ \ / / / \ \/ \ \ / / __O / \ \ \ \ / / /| ---\ / \_______\ \_______\ / / / ---/ \ / / / / / / /| \ / / / / / / // \ / /\ / / \_/ / `` \/_______/ \/_______/ / | \ What the stick man sees: ____ .-' _ `-. / >(') \ | ( >)' | \ '' / `-. .-' | | | | | | | | ___I__I___ | | | | _____I____ | | | | | | | | |_____| | | | | | | _______|__________|_`-._____________ Remove the tree and the ground and get this: __________ | | | | _____I____ | | | | | | | | |_____| | | | | |__________| Add a third block: __________ | | | | | |__________ | | | | | | |__________I____ | | | | | | | | |_____| | | | | |__________| (see, quite possible :) Look at it from the first angle again: ________ /\ \ / \ \ / \ \ / \_______\ \ / / ___\ / ____/___ /\ \ / /\ \ / \ \/___/ \ \ / \ \ \ \ / \_______\ \_______\ \ / / / / \ / / / / \ / /\ / / \/_______/ \/_______/ DON'T get confused by this just because it reminds a little about this famous triangle: ____ / /\ / / \ / / \ / / \ / / /\ \ / / / \ \ / / /\ \ \ / / / \ \ \ / /___/____\ \ \ / \ \ \ /________________\ \ \ \ \ / \_____________________\/ The three blocks are NOT "aligned" in the way that the three corner cubes of the impossible triangle are: ____ / /\ /___/ \ / /\ /\ / / \/ \ / / /\ \ / / / \ \ / / /\ \ \ / / / \ \ \ /___/___/____\ \ \ / / \ \ /\ /___/____________\___\/ \ \ \ \ \ / \___\_____________\___\/ [I hope this made sense to _somebody_] -- _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _| |__/ __ \| |_ _ __| |__| | | |_ _| |_| |_ ___ ___ \ V / / / / _` | | || / _` / _` |_| | || | _| ' \ _(_-</ -_) \_/|_\_\ \__,_|_|\_,_\__,_\__,_(_)_|\_,_|\__|_||_(_)__/\___| \____/ http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/news LIKE MY SIG? GO HERE: http://www.surfplaza.com/figlet/
In article <Sl3...@xemu.demon.co.uk>, Dave Bird---St Hippo of Augustine <dav...@xemu.demon.co.uk> writes >>>> Y________ >>>> /\ . \ >>>> / \.......\ >>>> / \(3). \ >>>> / \___.___\X >>>> \ / / >>>> ___\ / ____/___ >>>> /\ \ / /\ . \ >>>> / \...\/___/ \.......\ >>>> / \(1). \ \(2). \ >>>> / \___.___\ \___.___\ >>>> \ / / / / >>>> \ / / / / >>>> \ / /\ / / >>>> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' >>>> Z >>> >>>what so impossible about this, >>>it looks like 3 cube >>>looks like cube 1 place on top of cube 2 cover a corner of cube2 >>>and cube 3 place on top the side of it >>> >>The bottom of cubes 1 and 2 are in line. The top of cube 1, however, is >>further back (being behind cube 3) than the top of cube 2, even though >>they appear to be balanced at the same angle. > >I cannot make head or tail of what you are saying. Probably because >your assignment of "top", "bottom", "front", "back" is unclear. Reading it again, I can see I haven't been very clear. I will try and explain myself below. >Let's look at the thing in the XY plane: > > X > |________________ > z=2.0/| : |z=2.0 > / | : | So, er, > z=1.5/ | : | what's the problem? > /' |-------+-------| > z=1.0/ : '| : | > | :' | : | > | ' |_______:_______|__________Y > ________|': / . /z=2.0 > z=1.0/| | :/........________/________ > / | | / /| : |z=1.5 >z=0.5/ |.......|/_______/ | : | > /: '| : : | : | >z=0/ :' | : : |........;........| > | ' | : : '| : | > |': |_______:_______:' | : | > | : / . /: | : | > | '/.......,......./ : |________:________|z=1.5 > | / . /| : / . / > |/_______._______/ | '/........,........./z=1.5 > / | / . / > Z |/________._________/z=0.5 > No, you've changed the picture now. This one clearly is possible, the shape that the original poster was trying to represent (even though it became ambiguous when translated into ascii) wasn't. You have placed the furthermost surfaces of blocks 1 and 2 on different planes, at z=0 and z=0.5. The origanal was supposed to have them both at z=0, making it impossible. Something like this: ________ z=2.5 /\ \ \ z=2 / \ \ \ / \ \ \ / 3 \_ _\ \ /\ /\ /\ These should be in the same plane! z=1 /_ / \_ _\ \ /\ / /\ \ \ / \/__ \ \ \ / / \ \ \ z=0 / \/______\___\_______\ z=1 \ / / / / \ / / \ / 1 2 / z=0 \/_______/__\/_______/ z=0 Is that a clearer explanation? ;-) -- Tom Harvey | Newsgroup correspondence should be kept to newsgroups. tom@tomh. | Personal correspondence: UCE spoiler in use. demon.co.uk | For further details: http://www.nospam.demon.co.uk
In article <345...@on.spammer>, Veronica Karlsson <dre...@on.spammer> wrote: > > JEZ wrote: > > > > "����Ĭ (Benjamin)" <bul...@comports.com> said: > > >Jesper Nielsen wrote: > > >> > > >> Just some nice impossible ASCII figures I've collected. Please send additions > > >> to je...@post1.com. just to save space, I made it smaller: _____ /\ \ / 3\____\ _\ / __/__ /\ \/__/\ \ / \____\ \____\ \ / 1 / / 2 / \/____/\/____/ 'logicko' > > >what so impossible about this, > > >it looks like 3 cube > > >looks like cube 1 place on top of cube 2 cover a corner of cube2 > > >and cube 3 place on top the side of it > > > > Sorry I don't quite understand your description. > > > > This still looks quite impossible to me. > > This is quite clearly NOT an "impossible" figure! > > I'll try to explain.... > > (I have left some space so you should be able to see one picture first > and get used to it before you go on to the next picture...) > [snip of explanation] > ______ > / _ \ > / >(') \ > \ ( >)'\ > \ '' | > / ______/ > ________ ________ / / > /\ \ /\ \ / / > / \ \/ \ \ / / > __O / \ \ \ \ / / > /| ---\ / \_______\ \_______\ / / > / ---/ \ / / / / / / > /| \ / / / / / / > // \ / /\ / / \_/ / > `` \/_______/ \/_______/ / > | > \ I left that part of the explanation there because I'm entranced by it. [snip of the rest of the explanation] > I hope this made sense to _somebody_ > > -- > _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ > __ _| |__/ __ \| |_ _ __| |__| | | |_ _| |_| |_ ___ ___ > \ V / / / / _` | | || / _` / _` |_| | || | _| ' \ _(_-</ -_) > \_/|_\_\ \__,_|_|\_,_\__,_\__,_(_)_|\_,_|\__|_||_(_)__/\___| > \____/ http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/news > LIKE MY SIG? GO HERE: http://www.surfplaza.com/figlet/ . ___ _/ |===%^, Hmmm... |_____| \/> --- == > [_____] __>,^ ejm97 | | //| | Yup, your explanation makes sense to me. NOTE: If you hit the reply button, add an "e" to the "freent"; its absense is to stop the torment of automatic mailers. -- _____ | /\_\| |_\/_/| ,^%--- |_\_\_| __>_ \ Should I be scared? --- == >/ [_____] __>,^ llizard aka ejm cq5...@freenet.toronto.on.ca ejm97 | | //| | http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Studios/9334/
Here's something COMPLETELTY impossible!!! :)#)
_ _ _ ____ _
| | | | _____ ____ _ _ __ __| | / ___|| |_ ___ _ __ _ __
| |_| |/ _ \ \ /\ / / _` | '__/ _` | \___ \| __/ _ \ '__| '_ \
| _ | (_) \ V V / (_| | | | (_| | ___) | || __/ | | | | |
|_| |_|\___/ \_/\_/ \__,_|_| \__,_| |____/ \__\___|_| |_| |_|
_____ ____ ___ __
| ___|__ _ __ / ___| _____ _____ _ __ ___ _ __ / _ \ / _|
| |_ / _ \| '__| | | _ / _ \ \ / / _ \ '_ \ / _ \| '__| | | | | |_
| _| (_) | | | |_| | (_) \ V / __/ | | | (_) | | | |_| | _|
|_| \___/|_| \____|\___/ \_/ \___|_| |_|\___/|_| \___/|_|
_ _ __ __ _
| \ | | _____ __ \ \ / /__ _ __| | __
| \| |/ _ \ \ /\ / / \ V / _ \| '__| |/ /
| |\ | __/\ V V / | | (_) | | | <
|_| \_|\___| \_/\_/ |_|\___/|_| |_|\_\
http://members.aol.com/lester5374
Ansi home page (ANSI are in GIF format only.)
FTP://members.aol.com/lester5374/ansi
To download the ANSI format (a lot more are here than are displayed on the
web page).
Tom Harvey wrote: > Looking at it again, it is ambiguous. The perspective of the original > hasn't translated very well into ascii. I have tried to illustate my > poor explaination below. It is based on the same play on perspective > that Escher's waterfall uses (Turn your head on its side): Anybody got an ASCII version of Escher's waterfall anywhere? -- --ran...@slip.net --Randy Gardner
Tom Harvey wrote: > > In article <Sl3...@xemu.demon.co.uk>, Dave Bird---St Hippo of > Augustine <dav...@xemu.demon.co.uk> writes > >>>> Y________ > >>>> /\ . \ > >>>> / \.......\ > >>>> / \(3). \ > >>>> / \___.___\X > >>>> \ / / > >>>> ___\ / ____/___ > >>>> /\ \ / /\ . \ > >>>> / \...\/___/ \.......\ > >>>> / \(1). \ \(2). \ > >>>> / \___.___\ \___.___\ > >>>> \ / / / / > >>>> \ / / / / > >>>> \ / /\ / / > >>>> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' > >>>> Z > >>> >[ 8< ] > >Let's look at the thing in the XY plane: > > > > X > > |________________ > > z=2.0/| : |z=2.0 > > / | : | So, er, > > z=1.5/ | : | what's the problem? > > /' |-------+-------| > > z=1.0/ : '| : | > > | :' | : | > > | ' |_______:_______|__________Y > > ________|': / . /z=2.0 > > z=1.0/| | :/........________/________ > > / | | / /| : |z=1.5 > >z=0.5/ |.......|/_______/ | : | > > /: '| : : | : | > >z=0/ :' | : : |........;........| > > | ' | : : '| : | > > |': |_______:_______:' | : | > > | : / . /: | : | > > | '/.......,......./ : |________:________|z=1.5 > > | / . /| : / . / > > |/_______._______/ | '/........,........./z=1.5 > > / | / . / > > Z |/________._________/z=0.5 > > > Hehe, and I did a several pages long explanation... This one is so much clearer :) > No, you've changed the picture now. No, it is the same three blocks, "connected" in the same way, only seen from a slightly different angle... > This one clearly is possible, yes, so? > the > shape that the original poster was trying to represent (even though it > became ambiguous when translated into ascii) wasn't. > yes it was! > You have placed the furthermost surfaces of blocks 1 and 2 on different > planes, at z=0 and z=0.5. As they have been all along. > The origanal was supposed to have them both at > z=0, making it impossible. Did you make the picture? If not then how do you know what the original poster intended? > Something like this: > > ________ z=2.5 > /\ \ \ > z=2 / \ \ \ > / \ \ \ > / 3 \_ _\ \ > /\ /\ /\ These should be in the same plane! > z=1 /_ / \_ _\ \ > /\ / /\ \ \ > / \/__ \ \ \ > / / \ \ \ > z=0 / \/______\___\_______\ z=1 > \ / / / / > \ / / > \ / 1 2 / > z=0 \/_______/__\/_______/ z=0 > > Is that a clearer explanation? ;-) I understand what you are trying to say but I claim you are wrong. The picture of the three blocks is quite possible. -- _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _| |__/ __ \| |_ _ __| |__| | | |_ _| |_| |_ ___ ___ \ V / / / / _` | | || / _` / _` |_| | || | _| ' \ _(_-</ -_) \_/|_\_\ \__,_|_|\_,_\__,_\__,_(_)_|\_,_|\__|_||_(_)__/\___| \____/ http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/news LIKE MY SIG? GO HERE: http://www.surfplaza.com/figlet/
In article <345...@on.spammer>, Veronica Karlsson <dre...@on.spammer> writes > >> Is that a clearer explanation? ;-) > >I understand what you are trying to say but I claim you are wrong. The >picture of the three blocks is quite possible. > I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one :-( I still think that it is not possible. I think that the over simplification that the ascii rendition has forced on it has made it ambiguous. I sat and stared at your lengthy explanation last night and thought, 'yes it is possible... no it isn't... yes it is... no it isn't...' I suppose that is what illusion is all about :-) -- Tom Harvey | Newsgroup correspondence should be kept to newsgroups. tom@tomh. | Personal correspondence: UCE spoiler in use. demon.co.uk | For further details: http://www.nospam.demon.co.uk
Randy Gardner wrote: > > Tom Harvey wrote: > > Looking at it again, it is ambiguous. The perspective of the original > > hasn't translated very well into ascii. I have tried to illustate my > > poor explaination below. It is based on the same play on perspective > > that Escher's waterfall uses (Turn your head on its side): > > Anybody got an ASCII version of Escher's waterfall anywhere? sure version one: (requires some "head-tilting") ____________ /\ ________ \ / \ \______/\ \ / /\ \ \ / /\ \ \ / / /\ \ \/ / /\ \ \ / / /__\_\/ / /__\_\ \ / / /______\/ /________\ \/_____________________/ -> waterfall -> (impossible triangle: __ / /\ / / \ / / /\ \ / / /\ \ \ / /_/__\ \ \ /________\ \ \ \___________\/ but the figure with the three cubes doesn't work this way) version two: _.-'\ _.-' \ _.-' \ _.-_-'\ _.-'`-._ |\ _-| _.-'_.-'`-._`-._ | | | |_.-' `-._`-._|`-._ \ \ | | / / _ ``---._ `-._ \ \|_-' | / / .-' `-._|`-._ ``-._ `-._ \ || || / /|-'|`-._ `-._ `--._`-._|`-._ \_.-' | | ||| `-._ `-._ ``---._ `-._ | | | | | ||| |||`-._ `-._|`-._ ``-._ `-._ | | __ ||| ||| `-._ `-._ `-._ `-._ | | | |_.-|||. ||| `-._ _.-'| `-_.'| | | | ||/ ||| \ ||| _.-'|_.-'_.-' _.-' | | | | | . ||| . ||| _.-' __.---'' _.-' | | | | || ||| |||'|_.-'_.-'' _.-'|_.-' _.' | || || ||| |'|||----'' _.-' _.-' | | | | ||| '||| _.-'|_.-' _.-' | | || _.\ ||| / |||.-' _.-' | | | ' |_`.|||' _.-' _.-' | _.-|| | | ||`-' _.-' |`-._ | _.-' _.-' | `-._ _.-' _.-' | | _.-' | | _.-' -._| | _.-' `-._ | _.-' `-._ | _.-' `|' and version 3: _.-"""-._ .' `. / \ | | | | | | \ / _.-"""-._ _.`. .'. .' `. |`-._`-.._..-'_.-| / \ | _ `-._ _.-' | | | | | `-._ " _.-'| | | | | | || | | | | | | | || | | | \ / | | || | | | _`. .'. | | || | | | |`-.`-.._..-'.-'| | | || | | | | `-._.-' | | | _.-'| |_ | | | |`-._ _.-'| | | |'_.-'| |_`-.| | | | || | | | |_.-' | | `-._ `._|`-._ | | || | | | / / | | ``---._ `-._ | | || | | | | / / .-' `-._|`-._ ``-._ `-._ | | || | | | || || / /|-| |-._ `-._ `--._`-._|`-._ | | || | | | | | ' || |\ `-._ `-._ ``---._ `| | || | | | | - | | | || | \ | |`-._ `-._|`-._ ``-| |`-.|| | | | _.-' | | || | \ | | `-._ `-._ | |-._ | |._ | | _.-' | | || | \| | `-._ `-.| | `| |_ `-| | | | | || | | | `-._ _.| | | | `.-| | | | || || | | | _.-'|_.-'_.-' | |_.-' | | | | . || | | | _.-' __.---'' _.| ' | | | || || | | |\_.-'|_.-'_.-'' _.-'|_.-' _. | | | | || | | |' _- _.-' _.-' | | || || || |_.-'| |_.---'' _.-' _ | | | \ | | | || |_.-'| | _.-'|_.-' _.-'|| | | | \ | || .'_| | | |_.-' _.-'| | || | | | \ | | |._ | | | `-._ _.-' | | || | | | \ || | | `| | ```-._`-._|`-._ _.-' | | || | | | |\_.-| | `-._ ``---._ `-._ | | || | | | | | `-._|`-._ ``-._ `-._ | | || | | | | || || | `-._ `--._`-._|`| | || | | | | | | | `-._ ``---.| |`|| | | | | | | | |`-._ `-._|`-._ | |-.| |-._ | | | | ||`-._ `-.| | | |._ `-| | | | | | || | `-._ _.| | | | `-_| | | | | ||__ | | | `-._ _.-'|_.-'_.-' | |_.-' | | | | | ._.-| |. | | `-._ _.-' __.---'' _| | | | | ||/ | | \ | | _.-'|_.-'_.-'' _.-'|_.-' | | || || | | .'| |-' __.---'' _.-' | | | | | |.| '| |-'' _.-'|_.-' | | | || _. | | | | | _.-' | | | | ' | | | | |_.-' | | || | | \ | | / _| ' _.-' |_.-' | _`.| |'-' _.-' |`-._ _.| _.-' | `-._ _.-' _.-' | |' _.-' | | _.-' | | _.-' | | _.-' | | _.-' | | _.-' | | _.-' _ | | _.-' `-|_ | _.-' `-._ | _.-' `-.|.-' -- _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _| |__/ __ \| |_ _ __| |__| | | |_ _| |_| |_ ___ ___ \ V / / / / _` | | || / _` / _` |_| | || | _| ' \ _(_-</ -_) \_/|_\_\ \__,_|_|\_,_\__,_\__,_(_)_|\_,_|\__|_||_(_)__/\___| \____/ http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/news LIKE MY SIG? GO HERE: http://www.surfplaza.com/figlet/
In article <345...@slip.net>, Randy Gardner <ran...@slip.net> writes >Tom Harvey wrote: >> Looking at it again, it is ambiguous. The perspective of the original >> hasn't translated very well into ascii. I have tried to illustate my >> poor explaination below. It is based on the same play on perspective >> that Escher's waterfall uses (Turn your head on its side): > >Anybody got an ASCII version of Escher's waterfall anywhere? It is one of my favorites. There was an excellent (very large) rendition of it posted not long ago... I no longer have it, but I'm sure some kind soul will have a copy. -- Tom Harvey | Newsgroup correspondence should be kept to newsgroups. tom@tomh. | Personal correspondence: UCE spoiler in use. demon.co.uk | For further details: http://www.nospam.demon.co.uk
llizard wrote: > [ 8< ] > [snip of explanation] > > ______ > > / _ \ > > / >(') \ > > \ ( >)'\ > > \ '' | > > / ______/ > > ________ ________ / / > > /\ \ /\ \ / / > > / \ \/ \ \ / / > > __O / \ \ \ \ / / > > /| ---\ / \_______\ \_______\ / / > > / ---/ \ / / / / / / > > /| \ / / / / / / > > // \ / /\ / / \_/ / > > `` \/_______/ \/_______/ / > > | > > \ > > I left that part of the explanation there because I'm entranced by it. > What could possibly be so fascinating about it? (the very badly drawn tree? which I had to put a bird in order to see that it was supposed to be a tree...) :D:D:D > [snip of the rest of the explanation] > > > I hope this made sense to _somebody_ > ___ > _/ |===%^, Hmmm... > |_____| \/> > --- == > > [_____] __>,^ > ejm97 | | //| | > > Yup, your explanation makes sense to me. > :) -- _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _| |__/ __ \| |_ _ __| |__| | | |_ _| |_| |_ ___ ___ \ V / / / / _` | | || / _` / _` |_| | || | _| ' \ _(_-</ -_) \_/|_\_\ \__,_|_|\_,_\__,_\__,_(_)_|\_,_|\__|_||_(_)__/\___| \____/ http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/news LIKE MY SIG? GO HERE: http://www.surfplaza.com/figlet/
Tom Harvey wrote: > > In article <345...@on.spammer>, Veronica Karlsson > <dre...@on.spammer> writes > > > >> Is that a clearer explanation? ;-) > > > >I understand what you are trying to say but I claim you are wrong. The > >picture of the three blocks is quite possible. > > > > I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one :-( > I still think that it is not possible. I think that the over > simplification that the ascii rendition has forced on it has made it > ambiguous. > > I sat and stared at your lengthy explanation last night and thought, > 'yes it is possible... no it isn't... yes it is... no it isn't...' > > I suppose that is what illusion is all about :-) I went out and bought myself some cubes (well, almost cubes) and _built_ this mysterious object. Then I took these pictures of them from five different angles: http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube1.gif http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube2.gif http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube3.gif http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube4.gif http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube5.gif enjoy! :) -- _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _| |__/ __ \| |_ _ __| |__| | | |_ _| |_| |_ ___ ___ \ V / / / / _` | | || / _` / _` |_| | || | _| ' \ _(_-</ -_) \_/|_\_\ \__,_|_|\_,_\__,_\__,_(_)_|\_,_|\__|_||_(_)__/\___| \____/ http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/news LIKE MY SIG? GO HERE: http://www.surfplaza.com/figlet/
In article <6bJ...@tomh.demon.co.uk>, Tom Harvey <tom...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes: >In article <Sl3...@xemu.demon.co.uk>, Dave Bird---St Hippo of >Augustine <dav...@xemu.demon.co.uk> writes >>>>> Y________ >>>>> /\ . \ >>>>> / \.......\ >>>>> / \(3). \ >>>>> / \___.___\X >>>>> \ / / >>>>> ___\ / ____/___ >>>>> /\ \ / /\ . \ >>>>> / \...\/___/ \.......\ >>>>> / \(1). \ \(2). \ >>>>> / \___.___\ \___.___\ >>>>> \ / / / / >>>>> \ / / / / >>>>> \ / /\ / / >>>>> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' >>>>> Z >>>> >>>>what so impossible about this, >>>>it looks like 3 cube >>>>looks like cube 1 place on top of cube 2 cover a corner of cube2 >>>>and cube 3 place on top the side of it >>>> >>>The bottom of cubes 1 and 2 are in line. The top of cube 1, however, is >>>further back (being behind cube 3) than the top of cube 2, even though >>>they appear to be balanced at the same angle. >> >>I cannot make head or tail of what you are saying. Probably because >>your assignment of "top", "bottom", "front", "back" is unclear. > >Reading it again, I can see I haven't been very clear. I will try and >explain myself below. > >>Let's look at the thing in the XY plane: >> >> X >> |________________ >> z=2.0/| : |z=2.0 >> / | : | So, er, >> z=1.5/ | : | what's the problem? >> /' |-------+-------| >> z=1.0/ : '| : | >> | :' | : | >> | ' |_______:_______|__________Y >> ________|': / . /z=2.0 >> z=1.0/| | :/........________/________ >> / | | / /| : |z=1.5 >>z=0.5/ |.......|/_______/ | : | >> /: '| : : | : | >>z=0/ :' | : : |........;........| >> | ' | : : '| : | >> |': |_______:_______:' | : | >> | : / . /: | : | >> | '/.......,......./ : |________:________|z=1.5 >> | / . /| : / . / >> |/_______._______/ | '/........,........./z=1.5 >> / | / . / >> Z |/________._________/z=0.5 >> > >No, you've changed the picture now. This one clearly is possible, the >shape that the original poster was trying to represent (even though it >became ambiguous when translated into ascii) wasn't. > >You have placed the furthermost surfaces of blocks 1 and 2 on different >planes, at z=0 and z=0.5. The origanal was supposed to have them both at >z=0, making it impossible. Something like this: > > ________ z=2.5 > /\ \ \ > z=2 / \ \ \ > / \ \ \ > / 3 \_ _\ \ > /\ /\ /\ These should be in the same plane! > z=1 /_ / \_ _\ \ > /\ / /\ \ \ > / \/__ \ \ \ > / / \ \ \ > z=0 / \/______\___\_______\ z=1 > \ / / / / > \ / / > \ / 1 2 / > z=0 \/_______/__\/_______/ z=0 > > > >Is that a clearer explanation? ;-) So you mean it is supposed to be like this---? >>>>> Y________ >>>>> /\ . \ >>>>> / \.......\ >>>>> / \(3). \ >>>>> / \___.___\X >>>>> \ /\ /\ >>>>> ___\ / \____/__\ >>>>> /\ \ / /\ . \ >>>>> / \...\/___/ \.......\ >>>>> / \(1). \ \(2). \ >>>>> / \___.___\ \___.___\ >>>>> \ / / / / >>>>> \ / / / / >>>>> \ / /\ / / >>>>> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' >>>>> Z Yes, if (2) and (3) are supposed to be at the same Z-height [is this what you are saying?] then it is clearly impossible. |~/ |~/ ~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~ P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O L |{a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"}{/a}_____________|/_______| L and{a href="http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/lynx/q0.html"}{/a}XemuSP4(:)
Veronica Karlsson wrote in message <345...@on.spammer>... >I went out and bought myself some cubes (well, almost cubes) and _built_ >this mysterious object. Then I took these pictures of them from five >different angles: > >http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube1.gif >http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube2.gif >http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube3.gif >http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube4.gif >http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube5.gif Excellent work, Veronicaaa {struggling not to add -stein...) Now, if they still don't believe you, you can sell those pics to them as super-realist impossible art for millions of dollars. (Or whatever currency.) >>BKNambo -- Visit my homepage, [now under major reconstruction,] come.to/brocks.place World Domination Through Trivia! .sigh
Veronica Karlsson <dre...@on.spammer> wrote:
________
/\ \
/ \ \
/ \ \
/ \_______\
\ / /
___\ / ____/___
/\ \ / /\ \
/ \ \/___/ \ \
/ \ \ \ \
/ \_______\ \_______\
\ / / / /
\ / / / /
\ / /\ / /
\/_______/ \/_______/ 'logico'
The picture can be seen in 2 ways, because it is not in 3d, just faked 3d in 2d.
If you still just see a possible shape, check these additions:
________
/\ \
/ \ \
/ \ \
/ \_______\
\ / ___ /
___\ / / __\_/___
/\ \ / \/\ \
/ \ /\/___/ \ \
/ \ \___/ \__ \ \
/ \_______\ \ \_______\
\ / /_/ / /
\ / / / /
\ / /\ / /
\/_______/ \/_______/ 'logico'
Both shapes are well known Illusion-shapes
/Martin - Remove .n0spam to reply
Veronica Karlsson (dre...@on.spammer) wrote: : Tom Harvey wrote: : > : > In article <345...@on.spammer>, Veronica Karlsson : > <dre...@on.spammer> writes : > > : > >> Is that a clearer explanation? ;-) : > > : > >I understand what you are trying to say but I claim you are wrong. The : > >picture of the three blocks is quite possible. : > > : > : > I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one :-( : > I still think that it is not possible. I think that the over : > simplification that the ascii rendition has forced on it has made it : > ambiguous. : > : > I sat and stared at your lengthy explanation last night and thought, : > 'yes it is possible... no it isn't... yes it is... no it isn't...' : > : > I suppose that is what illusion is all about :-) : : I went out and bought myself some cubes (well, almost cubes) and _built_ : this mysterious object. Then I took these pictures of them from five : different angles: : : http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube1.gif : http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube2.gif : http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube3.gif : http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube4.gif : http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube5.gif a little... obsessive??? -mel : -- : _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ : __ _| |__/ __ \| |_ _ __| |__| | | |_ _| |_| |_ ___ ___ : \ V / / / / _` | | || / _` / _` |_| | || | _| ' \ _(_-</ -_) : \_/|_\_\ \__,_|_|\_,_\__,_\__,_(_)_|\_,_|\__|_||_(_)__/\___| : \____/ http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/news : LIKE MY SIG? GO HERE: http://www.surfplaza.com/figlet/
In article <345...@on.spammer>, Veronica Karlsson <dre...@on.spammer> writes >Tom Harvey wrote: >> >> In article <345...@on.spammer>, Veronica Karlsson >> <dre...@on.spammer> writes >> > >> >> Is that a clearer explanation? ;-) >> > >> >I understand what you are trying to say but I claim you are wrong. The >> >picture of the three blocks is quite possible. >> > >> >> I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one :-( >> I still think that it is not possible. I think that the over >> simplification that the ascii rendition has forced on it has made it >> ambiguous. >> >> I sat and stared at your lengthy explanation last night and thought, >> 'yes it is possible... no it isn't... yes it is... no it isn't...' >> >> I suppose that is what illusion is all about :-) > >I went out and bought myself some cubes (well, almost cubes) and _built_ >this mysterious object. Then I took these pictures of them from five >different angles: > >http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube1.gif >http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube2.gif >http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube3.gif >http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube4.gif >http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube5.gif > >enjoy! :) > Wow! You went to these lengths just to prove me wrong?? I am flatered ;-) -- Tom Harvey | Newsgroup correspondence should be kept to newsgroups. tom@tomh. | Personal correspondence: UCE spoiler in use. demon.co.uk | For further details: http://www.nospam.demon.co.uk
> ________ > /\ \ > / \ \ > / \ \ > / \_______\ > \ / ___ / > ___\ / / __\_/___ > /\ \ / \/\ \ > / \ /\/___/ \ \ > / \ \___/ \__ \ \ > / \_______\ \ \_______\ > \ / /_/ / / > \ / / / / > \ / /\ / / > \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logico' >Both shapes are well known Illusion-shapes This is better... now there is no confusion... this on really is impossible (I'm sure someone will now prove me wrong on this one too!) -- Tom Harvey | Newsgroup correspondence should be kept to newsgroups. tom@tomh. | Personal correspondence: UCE spoiler in use. demon.co.uk | For further details: http://www.nospam.demon.co.uk
In article <345...@news.abc.se>, Martin <m97...@abc.n0spam.se> writes: >Veronica Karlsson <dre...@on.spammer> wrote: > > ________ > /\ \ > / \ \ > / \ \ > / \_______\ > \ / / > ___\ / ____/___ > /\ \ / /\ \ > / \ \/___/ \ \ > / \ \ \ \ > / \_______\ \_______\ > \ / / / / > \ / / / / > \ / /\ / / > \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logico' > The ABOVE picture is not impossible, because I have shown how it can be resolvved into a real object. It only becmes possible if you add that you are equating the height of differnet planes: >>>>> Y________ >>>>> /\ . \ >>>>> / \.......\ >>>>> / \(3). \ >>>>> / \___.___\X >>>>> \ /\ /\ >>>>> ___\ / \____/__\ >>>>> /\ \ / /\ . \ >>>>> / \...\/___/ \.......\ >>>>> / \(1). \ \(2). \ >>>>> / \___.___\ \___.___\ >>>>> \ / / / / >>>>> \ / / / / >>>>> \ / /\ / / >>>>> \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logicko' >>>>> Z Yes, if (2) and (3) are supposed to be at the same Z-height [is this what you are saying?] then it is clearly impossible. ************************************* When you put the linkages in below, so that it is linking incompatible planes as being the same height, then the drawing is unambiguous: it has only one meaning, and that an impossible one equivalent to the "impossible triangle". >The picture can be seen in 2 ways, because it is not in 3d, just faked 3d in 2d. >If you still just see a possible shape, check these additions: > > ________ > /\ \ > / \ \ > / \ \ > / \_______\ > \ / ___ / > ___\ / / __\_/___ > /\ \ / \/\ \ > / \ /\/___/ \ \ > / \ \___/ \__ \ \ > / \_______\ \ \_______\ > \ / /_/ / / > \ / / / / > \ / /\ / / > \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logico' >Both shapes are well known Illusion-shapes Yes, why not just do this? >>>>> Y________ >>>>> /\ . \ >>>>> /' \.......\ >>>>> /' ' \(3). \ >>>>> /' ' ' \___.___\X >>>>> /\ ' ' '/\ .'.'./\ >>>>> /__\ ' '/.'\____/__\ >>>>> /\ \ '/.'./\ . \ >>>>> /' \...\/___/ \.......\ >>>>> /' ' \(1/Z \ \(2). \ >>>>> /' ' ' \/__.___\...\___.___\ >>>>> \ ' ' '/.'.'.'./ /.'.'.'./ >>>>> \ ' '/.'.'.'./ /.'.'.'./ >>>>> \ '/.'.'.'./\ /.'.'.'./ >>>>> \/.'.'.'./..\/.'.'.'./ 'logicko' >>>>> That is clearly impossible, the real object is >>>>> Y________ >>>>> /\(3). \ >>>>> /' \.......\ >>>>> /' ' \ . \ >>>>> /' ' ' \___.___\X >>>>> /\ ' ' '/.'.'.'./ >>>>> /__\ ' '/.'.'.'./__ >>>>> /\(1)\ '/.'.'.'./.(2)\ >>>>> /' \...\/.'.'.'./......\ >>>>> /' ' \ /Z \ /\ . \ >>>>> /' ' ' \/__.___\/..\___.___\ >>>>> \ ' ' '/.'.'.'./ /.'.'.'./ >>>>> \ ' '/.'.'.'./ /.'.'.'./ >>>>> \ '/.'.'.'./\ /.'.'.'./ >>>>> \/.'.'.'./..\/.'.'.'./ 'logicko' >>>>> |~/ |~/ ~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~ P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O L |{a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"}{/a}_____________|/_______| L and{a href="http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/lynx/q0.html"}{/a}XemuSP4(:)
Where is Michael Naylor when we need him?
--
_ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _
__ _| |__/ __ \| |_ _ __| |__| | | |_ _| |_| |_ ___ ___
\ V / / / / _` | | || / _` / _` |_| | || | _| ' \ _(_-</ -_)
\_/|_\_\ \__,_|_|\_,_\__,_\__,_(_)_|\_,_|\__|_||_(_)__/\___|
\____/ http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/news
LIKE MY SIG? GO HERE: http://www.surfplaza.com/figlet/
Hi all. Can someone help me. I am looking for an image basically in the form
below. My handel is NEXIS and I would like a sig to replace the one I have.
What I am looking for would be like the shape below but more like arrows
pointing to the center. If you have any ideas please let me know. Thanks :)
_______
/ /
___ / ____/
\ \ / /\
\ \/___/ \
\ \ \
\_______\ \
/ /
/ /
\ /
\/
Nexis class I.K.V. Rising Storm recloaking. Engage!
_______________________________________________________________
| ____ _____ | _ __ _____ ______ _______ |
| / \ _.-'_.-' | | |/ / | ___| | __ | | _____| |
| \ _\/ _/ | | / | |___ | | | | | | ____ |
| ___)/ __< | | \ |___ | | | | | | ||__ | |
| <'-;:\_ _\ | | |\ \ ___| | | |__| | | |___| | |
| '; \_\ | |_| \_\|_____| |______| |_______| |
| >/-,\ | --------------------------------- |
| ""` |_\ | KLINGON SPECIAL OPERATIONS GROUP |
| I.K.V. RISING STORM | HOUSE RESHKA |
| | VANIER, ONT. CANADA |
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Nex...@offsbbs.com * Nex...@storm.ca * cn7...@freenet.carleton.ca|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--- Silver Xpress Mail System 5.4W1b
Veronica Karlsson wrote: > Martin wrote: > > > > > > ________ > > /\ \ > > / \ \ > > / \ \ > > / \_______\ > > \ / / > > ___\ / ____/___ > > /\ \ / /\ \ > > / \ \/___/ \ \ > > / \ \ \ \ > > / \_______\ \_______\ > > \ / / / / > > \ / / / / > > \ / /\ / / > > \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logico' > > > Yes, this is a picture of three cubes stuck together like this: > http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube1.gif > http://jota.sm.luth.se/~e93-vkn/pics/ascii/cube5.gif Am I missing something here?? Your pictures just show that you did NOT manage to put the 'cubes' together in a way similar to the ascii pic above. Try harder. ;) This might not be impossible but it certainly is for three identical cubes. BTW beware of the differences between the 'isometric projection' and a photo! :) Andreas _ | Ascii Dictionary (Collection, Links, ...) | o | http://www.stud.uni-hannover.de/~freise | o <<.|_ _| < > |\ | > > If you still just see a possible shape, check these additions: > > > > ________ > > /\ \ > > / \ \ > > / \ \ > > / \_______\ > > \ / ___ / > > ___\ / / __\_/___ > > /\ \ / \/\ \ > > / \ /\/___/ \ \ > > / \ \___/ \__ \ \ > > / \_______\ \ \_______\ > > \ / /_/ / / > > \ / / / / > > \ / /\ / / > > \/_______/ \/_______/ 'logico' > > Both shapes are well known Illusion-shapes > > > > And this is yet another version of the classic impossible triangle. > > What I reacted on was when somebody claimed that the first figure > couldn't be built in real life... I say it can, and then I did exactly > that... > > -- > _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ > __ _| |__/ __ \| |_ _ __| |__| | | |_ _| |_| |_ ___ ___ > \ V / / / / _` | | || / _` / _` |_| | || | _| ' \ _(_-</ -_) > \_/|_\_\ \__,_|_|\_,_\__,_\__,_(_)_|\_,_|\__|_||_(_)__/\___| > \____/ http://www.ludd.luth.se/~vk/news > LIKE MY SIG? GO HERE: http://www.surfplaza.com/figlet/
hi, earlier posts on this thread gave me a similar idea. take a look at my sig. i was actually trying to do some scientific sig but this is cool too. ~j Valentin Valciu wrote: > > Hi all, > > I didn't follow this thread due to a problem of my ISP. > I just pull out from my notepad this imposible triangle > made from cubes. I hope nobody made this before. > > ______ > /\ \ > / \ \ > / \_____\ > _\ / ____/_ > /\ \ / /\ \ > / \ \/_/ \ \ > / \__/ \_____\ > _\ / \ / ____/_ > /\ \ / \ / /\ \ > / \ \/_____/\/_/ \ \ > / \_____\ / \_____\ > _\ / / \ / ____/_ > /\ \ / / \ / /\ \ > / \ \/_____/ \/_/ \ \ > / \_____\ / \_____\ > _\ / / \ / ____/_ > /\ \ / / \ / /\ \ > / \ \/_____/ \/_/ \ \ -axiac > / \_____\ / \_____\ > _\ / /_ ______ ______ _\____/ ____/_ > /\ \ / / \/\ \/\ \/\ \/\ \ > / \ \/_____/ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ > / \_____\ \_____\ \_____\ \_____\ \_____\ \_____\ > \ / / / / / / / / / / / / > \ / / / / / / / / / / / / > \/_____/\/_____/\/_____/\/_____/\/_____/\/_____/ > > > -- > ____ ____ __ ______ > ___\ \ \/ /_/__\ \/ ____/ To answer me | Best experienced > / __ / / / / __ / /__ remove an 'o' --. | .----------. > /_____/_/\_\/_____/_____/ from my address | | with | Fixedsys | > axi...@skylab.math.unibuc.roo <---------------' | '----------' -- __ / /\ / / \ jason arends / / /\ \ arends @ cns.uni.edu / / /\ \ \ www.math.uni.edu/~arends / /_/__\ \ \ /________\ \ \ \___________\/
Related ASCII art in the Gallery
Explore these categories from our collection of 11,000+ artworks:
Make your own ASCII art
Turn images, text or 3D into ASCII, or draw your own – right in your browser.
About this thread.
These messages were posted publicly to the newsgroup
alt.ascii-art
in 1997 and are mirrored here unchanged as part of the Historic Archives – only email addresses are masked.
The artwork and text belong to their original authors: if you copy a piece, keep the artist's initials or signature intact and credit them where you can.
Are you one of the authors? Contact us to get your posts attributed, connected to your artist profile, or removed.
Report this message
Help us keep the archive clean and accurate. Reports are reviewed by a person – nothing is changed automatically.