Even if the Koch Snowflake is restricted to those 3 angles, you don't have
to be restricted to the Snowflake itself -- by expanding, contracting or
transforming the space of interest, you can get somewhere more interesting
(anywhere you want, maybe?). For example, if you take the natural numbers,
y
I see that fractals also came up in the other current thread.
I can see the believableness of your conjecture (Turing-completeness
of the Mandelbrot set), but I see this (if true) as intuitive
(heuristic, "circumstantial") evidence that reality is more than what
can be computed. (My belief in th
The trouble with this whole area is that it's so incredibly easy to
not-quite understand each other without quite realising it. It's like that
Wilde quote: "England and America are two countries separated by a common
language."
I think I understand you, though
As regards the crystal, I think
Redface - ME!
Michael, you picked my careless statement and I want to correct it:
"...You cannot *build up* unknown complexity from its simple parts..."
should refer to THOSE parts we know of, observe, include, select, handle, -
not ALL of the (unlimited, incl. potential) parts (simple or not). Fr
"You cannot *build up* unknown complexity from its simple parts"
That would be the case if we were trying to reconstruct an arbitrary
universe, but you were talking about 'the totality'. My take is that the
whole caboodle is not arbitrary - it's totally specified by its requirement
to be complete.
5 matches
Mail list logo
