The simpler the better.
Children's toys which cause a child to think are probably the best for any kid.
But what kids understood that these rings should be placed from the largest to the smallest before he outgrew the toy.
These things were better used as makeshift teething rings.
Lincoln Logs, Legos, and Tinkertoys seemed to predict future builders or engineers.
Playing with these toys, children learned the basic importance weight, balance and strength.
Since I had a Schizophrenic mother and a drug addicted step-dad, I was always in trouble for something.
After being whooped - I usually had to sit in my room for days or weeks at a time.
To pass the time, I always asked for toys which took some thought to play with.
But these toys also helped me to develop a mental image of how things could be constructed.
A guy online posits that we perceive the universe (and reality) in proportion to the number of similar squares on any given side of a Rubik's Cube and our proximity to other solved sides.
(With an entire side solved our level of consciousness would reach it's maximum potential.)
But I'm not a Cube kind of guy.
I see things with more flow,
As not being limited by the any given shape.
No monolith can describe how my idea of thought, the Universe or consciousness works.
(If this toy could be reproduced to form 3-D models it would be a great representation.)
So where's the missing mass in the Universe?
What is Dark Matter?
Why isn't the Universe uniform in alignment?
With a three, four, five,...-D model, one would be able to better convey that the missing mass and Dark Matter all exist in different dimensions than our own.
That other dimensions may have created gravity which shaped our universe.
That, like how a 2-D model can project a 3-D image, our 3-D world is just a limited perspective on a multidimensional Universe.