I need to settle an argument.

[Sonny Resetti]

My friend and I have been debating whether a sheet of paper is two-dimensional or three-dimensional.

My friend says 2D, while I say 3D (which I'm pretty sure is correct).

You guys can help settle this, is a sheet of paper 2D or 3D?

 

[LambdaDelta]

3D with an super thin level of depth obviously

because it has a length, height, and width

no matter how small it is, so long as all 3 components exist, then it's 3D

 

[Corrie]

Isn't anything in this world, in real life, automatically 3D?

 

[LambdaDelta]

Isn't anything in this world, in real life, automatically 3D?

at least until real life becomes anime

 

[Red Cat]

It's 3D. That's why when you stack a bunch of sheets of paper together, they have some actual height.

 

[forestyne]

Everything is 3D. Paper is just really thin.

O̶b̶v̶i̶o̶u̶s̶l̶y̶,̶ ̶s̶c̶i̶e̶n̶c̶e̶ ̶w̶a̶s̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶m̶y̶ ̶s̶t̶r̶o̶n̶g̶ ̶p̶o̶i̶n̶t̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶s̶c̶h̶o̶o̶l̶.̶

 

[seliph]

Yeah your friend is wrong

O̶b̶v̶i̶o̶u̶s̶l̶y̶,̶ ̶s̶c̶i̶e̶n̶c̶e̶ ̶w̶a̶s̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶m̶y̶ ̶s̶t̶r̶o̶n̶g̶ ̶p̶o̶i̶n̶t̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶s̶c̶h̶o̶o̶l̶.̶

Clearly not since this is math

 

[MorningStar]

Paper is 3D. But the images on it are 2D.

It takes up physical space. If it was 2D, there wouldn't be any part of it that could give you a paper cut. You wouldn't be able to look at it from different angles. It wouldn't cast a real shadow.

 

[LambdaDelta]

Clearly not since this is math

not if we get microscopes involved!

 

[cIementine]

i accidentally voted 2D im sorry

 

[NeonxVandal]

Paper is 3D. But the images on it are 2D.

It takes up physical space. If it was 2D, there wouldn't be any part of it that could give you a paper cut. You wouldn't be able to look at it from different angles. It wouldn't cast a real shadow.

Exactly this!

 

[Leen]

The paper to our eye may seem like there are only two sides, but if you like zoom in to the edge it's got some depth to it. It's just like a very thin box...that we write stuff on

 

[Aquari]

its 3D but i guess i understand why she would think its 2D, i dont blame her.

 

[nintendofan85]

3D because it's a physical object.

 

[Bcat]

It's in real life, so it's 3d-even if it's flat. 2d would refer to something drawn on the paper.

 

[Hash slinging slasher]

It would be impossible for the paper to be two dimensional. It has three dimensions but one of them is extremely tiny. No hard feelings but i think your friend might be stupid because we learned about dimensions in elementary school.

 

[Sonny Resetti]

Paper is 3D. But the images on it are 2D.

Well... Say images are printed on it with ink. Wouldn't the ink form an ultra-thin layer on the paper? Same with pencil, there would be a very thin layer of whatever it is pencils draw with.

 

[LambdaDelta]

Well... Say images are printed on it with ink. Wouldn't the ink form an ultra-thin layer on the paper? Same with pencil, there would be a very thin layer of whatever it is pencils draw with.

the image itself is 2d, but the materials used aren't

 

[KaydeeKrunk]

3D, any physical object has some form of depth, even if it's like a micron or something it's still got depth of some sort.