New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Wrong-Headed Arrows

This illusion takes the right of way with your perspective

MATTHEW PRITCHARD

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Now that you are fully stocked up on toilet paper, you must be wondering what to do with the cardboard tubes inside the rolls. This is your opportunity to put your hoarded supplies to good use by blowing the minds of your socially distanced friends and family. So grab some leftover toilet paper tubes, a pair of scissors and a mirror for an experiment that will change your perspective.

In the photograph, an arrow and its reflection point away from each other. Impossible, you say? The explanation goes back to the moment in which Kokichi Sugihara, a mathematical engineer at Meiji University in Japan, discovered what he thought was a bug in his software. After writing a computer program to produce 3-D models from architectural blueprints, Sugihara tested his software by feeding it impossible images: illusions such as the Penrose steps in M. C. Escher’s Ascending and Descending lithograph, which appear to go infinitely up and down. Sugihara reasonably assumed that his code would spit out an error when confronted with the impossible. Instead the program interpreted the illusions as possible objects that only looked impossible from a specific vantage point. That is when the mathematician became an illusionist.

Sugihara later incorporated mirrors into his illusory creations—for example, to make an object’s reflection seem incompatible with the original, such as with two arrows pointing in opposite directions. Matthew Pritchard, a British physicist and magician, recently developed the toilet-paper-roll variant of Sugihara’s arrow illusion that we feature here. To build your own version, all you need to do is cut the top of a cardboard tube in a simple pattern that makes it look like an arrow pointing to the same side no matter which way you turn it because of your perspective of the near edge versus the far edge of the tube.


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.


To take your handiwork to the next level, prepare a dozen or so cardboard tubes cut in the same way and arrange them around the edge of your Lazy Susan or glass-plate microwave turntable. As the plate rotates, the impossible arrows never do! You can find the construction steps in Pritchard’s finalist video from the 2019 Best Illusion of the Year Contest.

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

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
SA Mind Vol 31 Issue 4This article was published with the title “Wrong-Headed Arrows” in SA Mind Vol. 31 No. 4 (), p. 35
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0720-35

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