3744 Shares

Topic: **writing a discussion paper****Question:**
A cube matrix, for example. I realize its not very practical to write or work with on paper... but the concept came to mind of having a single matrix with levels and therefore a third dimensions, with operators and whatnot and its own set of rules.
Oh, I heard of tensors, but didnt know what they were... I didnt know they are a 3-d analogy to matrices. I was always told that matrices are only 2-D. And I guess with tensors in the realm of discussion, matrices are only 2-D after all.
Practical applications? I dont know and I dont care. YOU might NEED a practical use, but I resent the fact you think we all do. Whoever thinks like that is not a mathematician. Dont waste my time with capitalist stupidity.

July 21, 2019 / By Gilda

These are called tensors (or at least they are the notion closest in analogy to a "three-dimensional matrix"), and they can be any number of "dimensions." Note: it is somewhat misleading to think of them as being dimensional; matrices and tensors in general are just linear combinations of tensor products of vectors and covectors. For them to be truly three-dimensional or higher-dimensional in the same sense that matrices are two-dimensional, there would have to be a dual to a covector space which was something other than the original vector space (but no such thing can be constructed).

👍 110 | 👎 1

Did you like the answer? We found more questions related to the topic: **writing a discussion paper**

3A + 2B Answer: 3 14 22 -14 5 10 3A - 2B Answer: 15 10 14 2 1 -10 4C + 3D Answer: 19 11 -12 10 4C - 3D Answer: -11 5 -12 -2

Uh... I hate to be the one to break the news to you, buy 3-D and higher matrices have been used for at least 150 years. There operators and rules are compatible with ordinary 2-D matrices.

👍 40 | 👎 -8

Any ideas for practical applications? I'd be interested to see how you plan on dealing with the operations.

👍 40 | 👎 -17

For many years a lot of maths taught was from a very old Geek book called 'The Elements' by Euclid. He defined a line as "that which has length but no breadth" (or something similar). It is rather a strange definition but it gives us the image of what a straight line is. It does not exist in our world as you rightly point out it is impossible for us to make one without it having some measurable thickness. A lot of maths is about pure ideas and concepts which are difficult to reproduce - has anyone ever drawn a perfect circle or a true square if you measured it to the nearest atom?

If you have your own answer to the question writing a discussion paper, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.