Is it possible to create an inside out object?

It sounds like a stupid question but I’m not sure it is so simple: how can you tell if an object has been turned inside out?

From a design standpoint: is something inside out because of the way it functions? E.g. a metal pot with a lip that tapers inward and has handles on the inside.

Or is eversion (the state of being inside out) a function of memory? E.g. we remember how an object looks in its “right” state so we can, based on that memory, imply the everted state.

Or is eversion logical? E.g. why would a pot have handles on the inside?

Or is eversion an act? Is it possible to create something that is turned inside out, or is it just a non-everted object imitating an object in its everted state, created in reaction to memory and logical function?

And further can an object with no open sides (besides a sphere) even be flipped inside out? E.g. a pencil or a piece of paper

Look at the artist Rachel Whiteread, she deals with this topic. It may help?

I love Rachel Whiteread’s work but I’m not sure it is really turning objects inside out. The object created by filling a coffee cup with plaster is not the same thing as a coffee cup taken apart and put back together inside out, no? The plaster cast would still, I think, not be inside out. I also think that it has to do with materials. Whiteread presents the interior texture and form of an object on the exterior of a new object that she has created. However, I feel like a true eversion doesn’t change the material. An everted paper coffee cup is still paper, an everted metal pot is still metal. A hollow object everted is still also hollow.

Most solid objects (e.g. a metal pot or a coffee cup) can’t be turned inside out without cutting, melting, or breaking them down, so a transformation is almost out of the question unless what you end up with looks butchered. I think that to create an object that has been turned inside out, you must actually create a realistic replica of the object in its everted state. However is the object you create actually inside out or is it an illusion based on memory and function…?

I guess that in writing this sentence I kind of answered my own question, but also came up with new ones. If you wanted to turn a pot inside out, cut it into strips, melt it a little, and put it back together. It might look butchered but it is inverted.

Here’s another question? If you’re looking at a butchered everted metal pot and a shiny new everted metal pot, could you tell which one had actually been everted?

The crude-looking butchered metal pot was made by taking it apart and putting it back together so it is actually an everted object, I think it would look strange but a viewer would agree that it has been turned inside out.

The smooth, shiny everted metal pot next to it was constructed specifically to appear everted (e.g. edges tape inward, handles on the inside). I think this object would seem surreal, illogical, and even funny, and I also think a viewer would agree that this is an inside out object. However, this created object hasn’t been flipped inside out, it was created in this state.

I don’t know if this clarifies what I’m trying to figure out, but it seems like eversion might be all in the head. There seems to be a conflict between the fact that turning something inside out is an act that must happen for it to be true and the idea that we make assumptions about the everted state of objects based on our memory of how they are supposed to look and function.

the seam will be on the outside? Urban outfitters had some shirts that where printed inside out, so the printing was against your skin. The brand logos will be obstructed, so the marketing people might let you know also.

What you are referring to may be understood as a Möbius Strip.
Möbius Strip.jpg

Look up “roto-molding.”

A mobius strip can’t be turned inside out because it only has one side.

do the math case… virtually everything has “thickness”; meaning six surfaces; L, W, D.

You’re tilting at windmills… . . …

Good point (and turn of phrase). I can’t wrap my head around what a solid object, such as a pice of paper, looks like turned inside out.

There’s this video of a sphere turning inside out, but it’s only theoretical (I think):

Do other theoretical or real eversions like this exist for non-spherical objects?

What does it even mean to evert something that isn’t a structure with open sides? (e.g. a piece of paper as opposed to a metal pot or a pillowcase)

I gotta ask…where are you going with this? Is this an art project?

I know … ask Michio!

Mishio knows everything.

Wow, if you sat through that entire video without falling asleep, you are officially a nerd.

I too would like to know where you’re going with this. Before the video I was going to post that “inside out” is a matter of association, or as you put it - memory. Take for example the t-shirts that were in (no pun intended) a few years ago with seams on the outside. People would say “hey your shirt is inside out” and one would reply “No it’s not. Look - the tag is on the inside and logo on the outside” and there would be no further argumentation - the present out-side was intended to be outside, and therefore the object was not inside out. Even with the sphere - as soon as the transformation was completed, what defined the purple side to be the in-side? One needed to witness the transformation to arrive to that conclusion, therefore - memory and association.

Oh and btw, I watched the entire vid fascinated. Tripping! :open_mouth:

Lew: I love Michio Kaku too! I second the plug, ask that guy!

Fourth Dimension

Many athletic balls, soccer, football, basket ball, are constructed inside out.

I sometimes prefer the Fifth Dimension myself.

I sometimes prefer the Fifth Dimension myself.

Me 2