Sculpting the Impossible: Solid Renditions of Visual Illusions

Artists find mind-bending ways to bring impossible figures into three-dimensional reality

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

N AN IMPOSSIBLE FIGURE, seemingly real objects—or parts of objects—form geometric relations that physically cannot happen. Dutch artist M. C. Escher, for instance, depicted reversible staircases and perpetually flowing streams. Mathematical physicist Roger Penrose drew his famously impossible triangle, and visual scientist Dejan Todorović of the University of Belgrade in Serbia created a golden arch that won him third prize in the 2005 Best Illusion of the Year Contest. These effects challenge our hard-earned perception that the world around us follows certain, inviolable rules. They also reveal that our brains construct the feeling of a global percept—an overall picture of a particular item—by sewing together multiple local percepts. As long as the local relation between surfaces and objects follows the rules of nature, our brains don’t seem to mind that the global percept is impossible.

Several contemporary sculptors recently have taken up the challenge of creating impossible art. That is, they are interested in shaping real-world 3-D objects that nonetheless appear to be impossible. Unlike classic monuments—such as the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.—which can be perceived by either sight or touch, impossible sculptures can be interpreted (or misinterpreted, as the case may be) only by the visual mind.

PENROSE TRIANGLE
The impossible triangle (also called the Penrose triangle or the tribar) was first created in 1934 by Oscar Reutersvärd. Penrose attended a lecture by Escher in 1954 and was inspired to rediscover the impossible triangle. Penrose (who at the time was unfamiliar with the work of Reutersvärd, Giovanni Piranesi and other previous discoverers of the impossible triangle) drew the illusion in its now most familiar form and published his observations in the British Journal of Psychology in 1958, in an article co-authored with his father, Lionel. In 1961 the Penroses sent a copy of the article to Escher, who incorporated the effect into Waterfall, one of his most famous lithographs.


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.


IMPOSSIBLE ARCH Elusive Arch, by Todorović:, shows a new impossible figure. The left-hand part of the figure appears as three shiny oval tubes. The right-hand part looks corrugated, with three alternating pairs of shallow matte ridges and grooves. The bright streaks on the figure’s surface are seen either as highlights at the peaks and troughs of the tubes or as inflections between grooves. Determining the direction of the apparent illumination falling on the figure is difficult: it depends on whether we interpret the light as falling on a receding or an expanding surface. Further, determining the exact position and shape of the transition region near the center of the arch is maddening, because the local 3-D interpretations defy the laws of illumination. For more about the arch, see http://illusioncontest.neuralcorrelate.com/2005/elusive-arch.

HOMAGE TO ESCHER
Escher’s Belvedere showcases columns that switch walls between their bases and capitals, a straight ladder whose base rests inside the building yet nonetheless enters the building from the outside at its top, and a sitting man holding an impossible cube. Mathieu Hama­ekers, a Belgian mathematician and sculptor, created an homage to Belvedere that features a real-life impossible cube. This photograph shows the artist holding the sculpture Upside Down, built in 1985.

IMPOSSIBLE BOX
Hans Schepker has built outstanding sculptures of impossible objects, such as this Crazy Crate made from glass. Other views of the crazy crate show the method behind the madness. Notice that the illusion works only from a specific vantage point. At any other angle, the illusion fails. Scientists refer to this as the accidental view, but there is nothing accidental about it. To perceive the illusion, the view must be carefully staged and choreographed, or else the audience will fail to see the “impos­sible” sculpture.

AND THE WINNER IS ...
For several years, Italian sculptor Guido Moretti has donated copies of his Three-Bar Cube and other impossible sculptures as trophies for the Best Illusion of the Year Contest. Depending on your vantage point, Three-Bar Cube can appear to be a cube, a solid structure or an impossible triangle. For more information, see http://illusioncontest.neuralcorrelate.com/trophies.

INDUSTRIAL-SIZE TRIANGLE
Artist Brian McKay created a giant version of the impossible triangle in Perth, Australia, in collaboration with architect Ahmad Abas. How did they do that? A photograph taken from another angle reveals the trick.

Stephen L. Macknik is a professor of opthalmology, neurology, and physiology and pharmacology at SUNY Downstate Medical Center in Brooklyn, N.Y. Along with Susana Martinez-Conde and Sandra Blakeslee, he is author of the Prisma Prize-winning Sleights of Mind. Their forthcoming book, Champions of Illusion, will be published by Scientific American/Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

More by Stephen L. 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 22 Issue 5This article was published with the title “Illusions: Sculpting the Impossible: Solid Renditions of Visual Illusions” in SA Mind Vol. 22 No. 5 (), p. 22
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind1111-22

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe