New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Perplexing Perspectives

Conflicting viewpoints coexist at the crossroads of math and art

Anton Bakker

In Plato’s allegory of the cave, chained prisoners face a blank cavern wall from the time they are born, the only reality they have ever known. When people and objects passing behind the captives project shadows on the wall, the prisoners believe that their experience of the world is complete, never realizing that their knowledge is impoverished to a vast degree.

A new virtual art exhibit, hosted by the National Museum of Mathematics in New York City, highlights how, whenever we examine a three-dimensional item from a single vantage point, we only ever observe a partial projection, or shadow, of the entire object in front of us. Because we experience the 3-D world around us through the filter of our 2-D retinas, our visual experience is sometimes no better than that of the unfortunates in Plato’s cave.  

Opus 125707, by Dutch sculptor Anton Bakker. Each image represents a different perspective of the same 3-D object. Credit: Anton Bakker


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The intellectual heir of Dutch graphic artist M. C. Escher, Anton Bakker is a contemporary artist exploring the intersection of math, art and illusion. Influenced by Escher’s unique approach to perspective, Bakker uses computer-based methods to find unexpected and ambiguous viewpoints within cubic lattices and polyhedra. “Everything that exists, every piece of matter, is built from these structures,” says Bakker about cubic lattices, which form the basis of the most stable molecular forms of many elements. “I get goosebumps when I pursue a hunch about what exists in a lattice and discover an illusion of stunning beauty.”

Bakker’s mathematical sculptures—whether rendered in steel, bronze or virtually—underscore how different takes on the same lattice can change the apparent reality of the structure, revealing the “multiplicity of perspectives inherent in all things.” The overarching principle is not exclusive to Bakker’s creations; it is a fundamental problem in everyday vision, where our brains must resolve profoundly ambiguous incoming information into one of many possible perceptual solutions.

“The brain thinks it sees two linked squares [from a certain viewpoint],” says Bakker about his Opus 125707, featured at the top of this page. Without studying the other perspectives, viewers may walk away with a false interpretation about the simplicity of the structure they think they have seen. Yet the reality is far more complex than revealed by that first, accidental view—and there are lots more such riddles to discover, hidden in the lattices. “I’ve been playing in this sandbox for 40 years, and I will continue to play in it for the rest of my days,” Bakker says.

Stephen Macknik is a professor of ophthalmology, neurology, and physiology and pharmacology at SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University in Brooklyn, N.Y. Along with Susana Martinez-Conde and Sandra Blakeslee, he is author of the Prisma Prize–winning Sleights of Mind. He is also author of Champions of Illusion, along with Susana Martinez-Conde. Follow Macknik on Twitter @stephen_macknik

More by Stephen Macknik

Susana Martinez-Conde is a professor of ophthalmology, neurology, and physiology and pharmacology at SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University in Brooklyn, N.Y. She is author of the Prisma Prize–winning Sleights of Mind, along with Stephen Macknik and Sandra Blakeslee, and of Champions of Illusion, along with Stephen Macknik.

More by Susana Martinez-Conde
SA Mind Vol 31 Issue 6This article was published with the title “Perplexing Perspectives” in SA Mind Vol. 31 No. 6 (), p. 32
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind1120-32

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe