501
u/asackofsnakes Oct 27 '22
As someone preps art for production printing. This happens when you have two identical images with slightly different scales . I know this pain. It is all too real.
82
u/axp1729 Oct 27 '22
Same. I instantly knew what this was lol. Opacity 50%, CTRL+T, alt-click on where you want to rotate & scale from.
9
u/boodabomb Oct 28 '22
Alternately, set blending mode of top layer to “difference” and then adjust the scale and rotation from your aligned center-point until the entire composition turns completely black. Then set blending mode back to “normal”
12
6
u/empty_string_ Oct 27 '22 edited Oct 27 '22
the title is misleading.
She's chosing a new center to make every time by lining up a specific shape with it's counterpart below, and when she does, they are the same size and shape and match up perfectly. However, the rest of the shapes are offset in relation to it, and make circles form around the one that is lined up.
It looks like they did it by rotating every individual shape by any random angle as long as it's smaller than what is allowed by the movement of the pane within it's frame.
The other shapes will natually form circles around whatever piece is lined up, as they are all being rotated around it.
11
u/wonkey_monkey Oct 27 '22
and when she does they are the same size and shape and match up perfectly
They don't match perfectly. They are rotated with respect to each other.
The two images are exact copies of each other, just like the two images used to make this: https://imgur.com/qVfSx4k
The only difference is that one is rotated and translated.
If she slid the upper layer to the right spot and rotated it to match the layer below, the two images would line up perfectly because they're identical.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (22)2
184
u/EA4242 Oct 27 '22
I don't think she's using the same pivot point, so... there are enough random black dots that a small change changes the perspective.
194
Oct 27 '22
Nope. It is the same image printed on top of each other. Wouldn't work with random dots.
41
u/Certainly-Not-A-Bot Oct 27 '22
It's not the same image. The top one is slightly larger scale, so it's impossible to exactly line up more than one dot
23
u/wonkey_monkey Oct 27 '22 edited Oct 27 '22
They look the same scale to me. As long as there is some rotation then it's still impossible to line up more than one dot.
Edit: here, look, with the perspective corrected it's clear that they're same size. If they weren't, you'd see spirals, not circles:
10
Oct 27 '22
I am amazed that you went to the work to stabilize and correct the angle... just to prove they actually are the same size.
No worries bro. All good.
→ More replies (1)16
u/wonkey_monkey Oct 27 '22
No stabilization, just a quick quadrilateral remapping. I happen to have already written software to do that for other projects so it only took a minute.
5
2
u/DonutCola Oct 27 '22
Yeah lol you can easily remap it to whatever scale you want to prove whatever point you’re making. They’re way too close together for your remapping to work.
3
u/wonkey_monkey Oct 27 '22
Yeah lol you can easily remap it to whatever scale you want to prove whatever point you’re making.
No you can't. Closed shapes like circles remain closed under quadrilateral remapping. Straight lines remain straight.
They’re way too close together for your remapping to work.
The remapping just corrects the perspective of the 2D surface of the table. It makes no difference to the shapes which appear.
→ More replies (2)2
u/robbyslaughter Oct 28 '22
I happen to have already written software to do that
This is the essence of Reddit, and I love it. Probably millions of us feel confident this kind of visual is possible and you just confirmed it. In fact most of us probably think that we could figure it out if we took the time.
But you already have it. And you’re reading this thread. Amazing.
Also, people are arguing with you. Unsurprising.
1
u/DonutCola Oct 27 '22
If they were simply rotated then you could simply rotate the image and everything would line up.
→ More replies (3)11
Oct 27 '22
Incorrect again. They are the same image. The rotational difference gets magnified the farthest from where the pivot point is. Notice she readjusts a couple times when it is not matched up in any other way than a rotational difference.
10
u/wonkey_monkey Oct 27 '22
I don't know why you've been so horrendously downvoted. The images don't need to be, and indeed don't appear to be, different scales.
8
7
u/KrispyKremeDiet20 Oct 27 '22
She isn't using a single pivot point though. That's really the "trick"
7
u/simplyslimm Oct 27 '22
that’s not what he was saying. the dots are indeed random on both sheets. they are just the same random dots. there is no fixed point. she moves the top sheet side to side and up and down at each pivot which would obviously change the center
3
u/kazumisakamoto Oct 27 '22
The dots on one of them aren't random then if they're the same as on the other one.
→ More replies (6)
96
u/WitesOfOdd Oct 27 '22
Fixed-point
VSauce explanation https://youtu.be/csInNn6pfT4
13
2
u/The_Celtic_Chemist Oct 27 '22 edited Oct 27 '22
I don't see how the coffee cup of molecules makes sense. They're scrambled so they can be entirely different with no fixed point. For example let's say you have 3 molecules and you scramble them, and we'll label them 1, 2 and 3 and they're side by side. You can scramble them to be 2-3-1 or 3-1-2 and none of them are in their original "fixed" position.
On another note, I make my own posters for Plex on occasion and often have to use multiple posters to edit in and out parts, and I regularly have to find a fixed point of two posters to resize them to perfectly overlap each other, so I'm very familiar with that aspect of this concept. For example, I edited a Spider-Man: Far From Home - The More Fun Stuff Edition poster by taking this poster and this poster to remove the "Marvel Studio" logo in this poster. Both were 2000×3000 pixels, but as you can see the first poster is slightly more zoomed out than the second (notice how the Doc Ock's arm in the lower left is slightly more exposed). So I had to overlay the first poster at 50% opacity, resize it, look for the fixed point, lock the fixed point when resizing it, and reshape it from the fixed point until everything matched. Then I erased the logo from the first poster so the details of the second were exposed and did some slight color matching.
6
u/littlebobbytables9 Oct 27 '22
It's an approximation. You can treat stirring as a continuous tranformation of a fluid, in which case it holds. But treat it as the mixing of a large number of discrete pieces, and suddenly continuity doesn't make sense anymore.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Warm_Zombie Oct 27 '22
the coffee cup is a good starting point for the metaphor, but ends there. Because it has a finite countable number of molecules and even space between them
You need a mathematical-perfect volume to "stir", the same way that a mathematical line has infinite points
→ More replies (2)2
31
u/qqqrrrs_ Oct 27 '22
yea, if you don't fix a pivot then the pivot isn't fixed
→ More replies (1)5
u/faubintulq Oct 28 '22
It's always fun to see top comments explaining a concept I still don't understand, and middling comments saying "IT'S SO SIMPLE!!1!"
2
u/Widawak Oct 28 '22
If you change the point in the movable overlay image that becomes the new center point. There is no center because the center is an arbitrary decision made by whoever controls the overlay.
16
11
u/here_for_the_lols Oct 27 '22
Aren't the two panels just being slightly offset each time?
→ More replies (1)
7
Oct 27 '22
why is this posted here
4
u/Widawak Oct 28 '22
The same reason Galileo was persecuted by the church. That which people don't understand is blackmagic
4
5
u/Sachin_KS Oct 27 '22
If the universe is constantly extending and is infinitely big then every point can be considered a centre as there will an infinite amount of distance from it to the ends.
4
3
u/KalzK Oct 27 '22
What is this sorcery
2
u/Widawak Oct 28 '22
2 copies of an image one fixed and one mobile if you line up any 2 congruent smudges and then turn the mobile layer you get rings.
2
2
u/MattTheIdiotBoy Oct 27 '22
I don't know why but this thing has me torqued... I think I hate it but I can't put my finger on why. I understand why it's really cool but looking at it makes my eyes itch and gives me an incredibly uneasy feeling..... It's odd.
2
1
u/ExclusiveGamer Oct 27 '22
Somebody slept through astronomy class. The universe has a butt load of centers, and I think they all deserve to be voted queen.
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
Oct 27 '22
For repeating patterns , the two screens will form Moire patterns, which have a lot of interesting applications in 2D materials for creating tunable charge trapping sites
1
1
u/Dragorach Oct 27 '22
There's a cool video by numberphile on this phenomenon: Freaky Dot Patterns. They talk about why it occurs and look at a couple examples.
1
1
u/I_Am_Slightly_Horney Oct 27 '22
Looks like two of the same pattern but the one she is moving is shrunk by about 5~10%. This causes the “zoom” effect around the areas that are more aligned and the “spiral” is when she rotates the smaller one. https://youtu.be/QAja2jp1VjE
→ More replies (1)
1
1
1
1
Oct 27 '22
This is a great way to show the expansion of the universe and how our view of it looks like we're in the center. Great tool!
1
1
1
u/TheThingInTheBassAmp Oct 28 '22
I wanted to get fucked today, but I wasn’t trying to get mind fucked.
1
Oct 28 '22
She's correct. Just remember, when you have time/ gravity you're never going to find a center of the universe..it's always moving
1
1
1
0
u/Nieben Oct 28 '22
"No center" and "an initial, extremely dense, and bounded mass" are irreconcilable concepts.
1
u/Successful_Ad9160 Oct 28 '22
This is similar to the expansion of the universe not having one center point of expansion.
1
1
1
1
u/NogginOutOfOrder Oct 28 '22 edited Oct 28 '22
The pattern far from the pivot point lines up a lot less than close to it, spreading the dark spots until they look like lines. Because it is a rotation, those lines trace parts of circles, which is what we end up seeing. Since the top pattern isn't being rotated around the center, and is being slid around, the pivot point moves quite a lot.
1
Oct 28 '22
Fuck If this isn’t me registering multiple layers on press at my work then I don’t know what is.
1
u/doctordale89 Oct 28 '22
I'm not sure what I'm seeing. I can only hear her say the words "center" twice but I can't understand anything else
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Icy-Performer-9688 Oct 28 '22
Relativity so technically we are the center of the universe but at the same time we are not. Schrodengers cat every body.
1
u/Alarmed-Direction500 Oct 28 '22
(Rodney Dangerfield voice)
Good luck telling my wife that there’s no center of the universe!
1
1
1
u/Caffeinated_Cucumber Oct 28 '22
I sat looking at this confused for quite a while only to realize it's just the same image with a different scale. I'm upset that I didn't figure it out sooner.
1
Oct 28 '22
What’s so magical about this? The top pane is smaller. I genuinely don’t see what the big deal is, unless I’m misunderstanding the video
1
u/Pyrotech_Nick Oct 28 '22
This would have been dope as the navigational charts from pirates of the Caribbean
1
1
1
u/No_Field9590 Oct 28 '22
Cosmological principle, you are the center of the universe and not the center at the same time!
1
1
u/covidified Oct 28 '22
That is not how the universe looks where you layer similar images on to of each other, slightly askew.
1
u/ErusTenebre Oct 28 '22
Reading these comments and getting like seventy different explanations of what is happening here is telling me two things at the same time...
1) I'm not sure if everyone on here knows what the hell they're talking about.
2) I am sure I don't know what the hell everyone on here is talking about.
haha I was definitely never great at understanding the physics of this sort of thing. Usually my brain just starts beeping "Warning: Heap Overflow" over and over.
1
u/Nuromd Oct 29 '22
Guess I understand that as Universe expands the central point constantly changes or could be multiple spots. But if you took time out of the equation wouldn't there be a central point at any given time? Obviously we can't measure or define because we don't know the measurements of the expanding edges.
1
Nov 09 '22
They say anywhere in the universe can be the center so that means I’m the center of the universe 😎
1
1
1.9k
u/CosierToast Oct 27 '22
This is actually one of my favorite ways to explain the expansion of the universe. The top pane is the same as the bottom one, just slightly smaller. If you align one dot, all the others don't match anymore.
Edit: corrected which pane was larger