Hypotheses non fingo
- Newton, Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica -

You don't need to be a morpher to understand that one of the main elements in morphing is the three-dimensional illusion. Whether you have a 3-D video card or not, a pic appears as a two-dimensional object in your monitor (more accurately, on your monitor's screen). And no matter how wonderful a model's protuberances are, her image is as, uh... flat (horrible word, isn't it?), as it would be in any magazine. When your video shows a morph worth the paper it is not printed on, it is likely that the artist did not simply resize and repaste a surface, but he worked on shading and light in order to give the illusion of depth: depth is essential when you work on spheres.

But do tits actually have to be spheres?

Since the Newtonian (meta)physical myth of absolute space has faded, we know that three-dimensional space is just one of many possible ones. If we diminish by one unit the dimensions of our universe, we'll have a two-dimensional world, that we might call BiUniverse. Such a universe would be a plane surface inhabited by two-dimensional beings (let's call them BiAnimals), which would also, perforce, be planes. The BiAnimals will develop a two-dimensional geometry, like our Euclidean one, but to them a three-dimensional world like ours will be a hyperspace: a logical hypothesis not imaginable in terms of perception, but subject to full analytical knowledge through logic and mathematics. And while we (3-D beings) can see not only the borders of two-dimensional bodies, but also the internal parts (because we see a two-dimensional surface from "outside"), the BiAnimals will only see the borders. A BiAnimal in his BiUniverse can hide from his peers in a room (that is, a rectangle), but he won't escape our glance: a two-dimensional "closed" room is always "open" to a three-dimensional eye. We will be able to observe the BiAnimals (e.g. from above), and they won't notice it in any way, because we are outside of their BiUniverse, so to them we do not exist. And to a BiAnimal, the perfect titty-protuberance is a perfect, flat circle.

Now, imagine there are four-dimensional worlds. To us 3-D beings, they are in fact a mere mathematical, not perceivable hypothesis - just as our universe is for a BiAnimal. But if such 4-D worlds exist, and are inhabited by, say, QuadriAnimals, we'll have to make the same assertions as we made about the relationship between the BiAnimals and us.

For instance, let's imagine I (a 3-D animal) am able to move into a four-dimensional universe. From your three-dimensional point of view, I will simply disappear. Looking at the 3-D universe from "outside", though, I will be able not only to see through busty ladies' clothes and bras (this alone is a good reason for our scientists to finally build that damned 4-D travel machine, isn't it?). I will actually see inside bodies - and I am not simply talking of seeing "behind" skin, or muscles, as anatomy does, because this is still a three-dimensional view. I am talking about actually seeing each and every point of a 3-D body at the same time (no scalpel needed); just as we, 3-D animals, can see each point of a two-dimensional object (say, a triangle on a piece of paper) at once.

I will be able to do many other wonderful things, such as reading a SCORE mag, page after page, with no need to open it and skim through it - and we all agree that having both hands free in such cases is a boon for any onanist :-) . I will also be able to visit Linsey McKenzie in her dressing room (a parallelepiped), and she won't even realize it.

Finally, if there are QuadriAnimals, there are also QuadriTits (you don't want our four-dimensional neighbours to be deprived of tits, do you?): and they can be fondled by suitable 4-D hands, sucked by 4-D mouths...and so on. To us these are not perceivable sex acts, merely cold logical-mathematical hypotheses; I, however, being a passionate logician (and a pervert), am turned on by these cold hypotheses. Just multiply them by all the countless (infinite) dimensions you can add to our 3-D world and... hmm, guess I'll have to take my calculator....

But what do we eventually learn from all this? Well, firstly, that sex, and especially voyeuristic impulses, are not only "universal", but extend to several (infinite) logically possible universes. And secondly, that we shouldn't be too complacent, because if QuadriAnimals do exist (and the contrary cannot at present be proved) their four-dimensional eyes and hands might be exploring our own busty lovelies right now....

Franz asked me to write something more effusive than "thanks to St Stephan" for editing his article. Sure, I edited it. But be it known to all and sundry that the ideas are Franz's, and so is most of the expression of those ideas. I just polish a bit here and there. "Thanks to St Stephan" is plenty. And thanks to Franz for expanding our philosphical horizons as well as his more worldly expansions. -- St.S.