Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tomBitonti" data-source="post: 4603343" data-attributes="member: 13107">(Remaining text omitted.)This is close, but not quite correct.  I don't quite have the precise terminology on hand, but if each loop moves X as a fraction of the short direction and Y as a fraction of the long direction (modulus either maximum distance in either direction), then when X is a rational multiple of Y, a path will eventually reach its starting point.  If X is an non-rational multiple of Y, the path will never reach back (but should traverse a dense subset of the space, so will get you as close as you want to the original point).Note: A space can have the topology of torus, without actually being embedded in 3-space.  The descriptions are contradictory as to whether this is the case.  The berk who climbed to a roof and saw nothing lives in a Sigil that is not embedded in 3-space.  Sigil would then be a flat plane with its edges attached and that is isomorphic to a torus, but which is not a torus.  A berk who can see the far side by standing in the middle of the short dimension is in a Sigil that is a subset of a torus.Note Also: Another question is, if you cleared out a clear line of buildings in either of the cardinal directions, would you see yourself?  If street level is "down" in any case, then whether there is a 3-space embedding or not doesn't matter: You should see yourself.  But, in the torus/3-embedding case, if you looked with an angle up or down, you would have odd optics because of gravity bending around in funny ways.</blockquote>

Verification