this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2026
9 points (61.0% liked)
Ask Lemmy
39947 readers
1658 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Tech Support
No Stupid Questions
You Should Know
Reddit
Jokes
Ask Ouija
Logo design credit goes to:
tubbadu
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes that is actually similar. What would more discs than 3 spatial axii mean in this case? The blender object has something like 7 but I'm not sure if it's the correct number. More than x, y and z axii definitely tho.
What could lock into the middle is another question. The sense of scale of it feels huge, like anything between a space station and a planet
The same thing can happen with 4, 7, or 100 rings. If they are allowed to "flatten out" to a single plane, you get gimbal lock, no matter how many rings there are. However, more rings don't actually give more degrees of freedom. 4 rings are enough to provide all degrees of freedom plus guarantee that you never get gimbal lock, but only if you ensure that the innermost and outermost rings are perpendicular to each other at all times.
As for the "meaning" behind it, sense of scale, or whatever you might be feeling, I have nothing to say. Gimbals can be built in all sizes.
Ah gimbal lock is the alignment phase? Thanks for the clarification
Yes, and it's generally a bad thing.
Oh that I didn't get from skimming Wikipedia. Because of a loss of freedom/control or am mistaking the concept?
I didn't understand the timing of why these discs align so it's not accurate in the animation but it seemed cyclical/mechanical/mathematic, like a pulse towards various different directions
Gimbals might be free-spinning or driven by motors, it depends on what they're used for, what their purpose is. Either way though, they usually don't move all that much, it's just shown in animation for demonstration purposes. (And in sci-fi because it's cool.)
For example, there are camera gimbals which are designed to keep a mounted camera steady while the gimbal is held by a shaky human. In that case the gimbal only rotates as a counter-reaction to the rotation of the handheld part. If you have a steady hand, the gimbal would hardly move at all.
I should note that camera gimbals don't look like those fancy rings, but mechanically they do the same thing.
I can't tell you any more than that (frankly that's all I know), but since you seen interested you should take your time to read up on it and watch YouTube videos about it.
appreciate it thanks. I'm familiar with camera gimbals and such as a steadying tool, but didn't connect that topic with whatever this is.
Hi. I'll be your "that guy" today. It's "axes" pronounced "ax-eez", not "axii".
explanation
"Axis" is from Greek, and the general rule is that singular "-is" becomes "-ēs" in the plural, which happens to apply here. We don't usually write the overline when it's adopted into English, so "axes", but with a Greek-derived pronunciation.The rule you're thinking of is that Latin "-ius" usually becomes "-ii", but Latin or not, there's no "u", so we should avoid using that rule here.
I was rewriting the word so many times I couldn't trust the word in any form anymore :D
Semantic Satiation