ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/fractint/archive/v01.n149

Internet Message Format | 1998-03-30 | 51KB

From: [e-mail] (fractint-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: fractint-digest V1 #149
Reply-To: fractint-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


fractint-digest         Monday, March 30 1998         Volume 01 : Number 149




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 02:02:00 PST
From: "Paul Derbyshire" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Nuclear Explosion

More stuff for your nuclear.par.


nuke_m_c1a_0      {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_0 passes=t
  center-mag=1.12121/-4.02629/5.309354 params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72
  float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0 logmap=yes
  colors=000zzz<146>44N44N44N44N44N<102>000
  }

nuke_m_c1a_-1      {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_-1 passes=t
  center-mag=1.12121/-4.02629/5.309354 params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72
  float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0
  colors=000zzz<147>N44N44N44N44N44<101>000
  }

nuke_m_c1a_1       {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_1 center-mag=1.12121/-4.02629/5.309354
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0
  colors=000<147>vcvvcvvcvvcvvcv<102>zzz
  }

nuke_m_c1b         { ;
                     ;
                     ;
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_cq passes=t
  center-mag=1.00681/-4.18689/15.08339 params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72
  float=y maxiter=5000 inside=16 outside=real periodicity=0

colors=000zzz<32>M22K00K00<29>000_md<35>1HO0GN2HR<7>KUz<15>zzzd_m<36>N0G\
  <8>zKU<14>zwwzzzzzU<35>zn1zm0zk2<7>zUK<15>zzz
  }

nuke_m_c1a_-1_1     {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_-1 passes=t
  center-mag=+1.19583683166125400/-4.09111863540586100/61.73667
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0

colors=000chz<92>11B00A00A00A<22>000000000100100<19>A00A00A01A11B12<106>\
  hcz
  }

nuke_m_c1a_-1_2     {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_-1 passes=t
  center-mag=+1.21129047740710700/-4.07701153144072500/358.9342
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0
  logmap=yes colors=000chz<92>11B00A00A00A<20>001001001001002<132>U0z
  }

nuke_m_c1a_-1_3     {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_-1 passes=t
  center-mag=+1.20863390281262900/-4.07518989884518000/20393.99
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0
  logmap=48

colors=000sqz<76>EBHDAGDAGDAG<25>51B40A40A409308<5>103102100<70>y0Tz0Uz0\
  Uz1U<61>zvv
  }

nuke_m_c1a_-1_4     { ; Microbrot!
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_-1
  center-mag=+1.20863898356600800/-4.07516241164068600/8157594
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0
  logmap=117

colors=000<11>I09K0AL2E<8>aRucUzcUz<68>11L00K00K00K<62>000010021<60>0zU1\
  zU3zV<29>vzv
  }

nuke_m_c1a_0_1     {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_0
  center-mag=+1.09445235312145800/-4.16184078312134600/61.73667
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0
  logmap=yes

colors=000zzz<145>44N44N44N44N44N<21>33I33I33I33H33F33E<7>112000000<49>F\
  07F07H07<14>m0K
  }

nuke_m_c1a_0_2     {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_0
  center-mag=+1.10771039892527700/-4.16509301966420700/506.0383
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0
  logmap=yes
  colors=000zzz<109>9PX9PX9OY<25>0Am0Am0Al<49>000000010<61>0zK
  }

nuke_m_c1a_1_1     {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_1
  center-mag=+1.15115892586405600/-4.08178724091562400/61.73667
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0
  colors=000qpz<47>222000000<111>9TyAUzAUzBUz<45>pozqpzqpzqpz<39>zzz
  }

nuke_m_c1a_1_2     {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_1
  center-mag=+1.15491677961099800/-4.08212513562137500/717.8683
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0
  colors=000zqp<47>222000000<111>y9TzAUzAUzBU<45>zpozqpzqpzqp<39>zzz
  }

nuke_m_c1a_1_3     {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_c_1
  center-mag=+1.15501591094838200/-4.08209545917410600/287147.3
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=0
  logmap=104

colors=000pqz<47>222000000<47>4CQ4DR4DR4DR<62>UAzUAzVBz<46>ypqzqpzqpzqp<\
  37>zzz
  }

nuke_j_12          {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_jcollog center-mag=1.19458/-0.0284745/0.1666
  params=0.2/0.4/-0.145725/0.376796/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000
  inside=0 outside=real periodicity=0

colors=000<14>K2UM3WM3X<12>T1kU0mU1m<32>yxyzzzzzy<14>zfyzdyzdy<44>z0K000\
  <15>L00N00N10<43>zzffzz<47>12M00L00K<11>000
  }

nuke_j_13          {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_jcollog center-mag=1.19458/-0.0284745/0.1486072
  params=0.2/0.4/-0.046468/0.493037/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000
  inside=0 outside=real periodicity=0

colors=000zzz<28>W3nU0mU0l<14>N2YM3WL3VK3TJ3R<14>000zzy<14>zfyzdyzdy<44>\
  z0K000<15>L00N00N01<43>zfzzzf<47>2M10L00K0<11>000
  }

nuke_j_14          {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_jcollog center-mag=1.19458/-0.0284745/0.1486072
  params=0.2/0.4/0.044316/0.310199/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000
  inside=0 outside=real periodicity=0

colors=000<16>z0K<4>zZfzekxek<14>UWq<23>vvxwwyxxyzzzczy<14>xfyzdyzdy<44>\

z0K00A<26>002001001000213<6>H8QKAULCX<9>cZz<10>xwzzzzzzf<47>2M10L00K0<11\
  >000
  }

nuke_j_15          {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_jcollog center-mag=1.19458/-0.0284745/0.1486072
  params=0.2/0.4/-0.236509/0.213331/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000
  inside=0 outside=real periodicity=0

colors=000<6>F0nI0vJ1v<10>YLzbSz<28>000ght<13>xxyKzzzzz<19>zzz<10>z0c<4>\

VfzVfzVfz<2>BVzL`zGYzBVz<16>12400000U00A<27>001000213<6>H8QKAULCX<9>cZz<\
  10>xwzzzzzzf<47>2M10L00K0<11>000
  }

nuke_j_16          {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_jcollog passes=t
  center-mag=0.828202/-0.0284745/0.09601027
  params=0.1/0.35/0.971956/-3.975301/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000
  inside=0 outside=real periodicity=0

colors=000<65>000000100211<29>_HS`HTbJVdLXiQaiQa<5>xdplNb<2>oPdqPerRf<5>\

xdpzgrzis<5>zzz00A<25>002001001000213<4>D6JF7NH8QKAULCX<9>cZz<8>trzvuzxw\
  zzzzzzf<45>5O33N22M10L00K0<11>000
  }

nuke_j_17          {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_jcollogc passes=t
  center-mag=0.828202/-0.0284745/0.09601027
  params=0.1/0.35/1.1978006/-3.9673548/6.9032/2.72 float=y
  maxiter=5000 inside=0 outside=real periodicity=0
  colors=000<65>zzz000<61>zcc000<61>czc000<61>ccz
  }

nuke_j_18          {
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_jcollog center-mag=1.12686/-0.109952/0.2474491
  params=0.1/0.35/1.03185418/-4.1736278/6.9032/2.72 float=y
  maxiter=5000 inside=0 outside=real periodicity=0
  colors=000<12>000000110210<33>TJ9UKAWLB<13>wkazmczmc<186>zzz
  }

nuke_j_19          { ; Close to a Herman ring but not quite.
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_jcollog center-mag=1.12686/-0.109952/0.2474491
  params=0.1/0.35/1.0312381147/-4.1732241218/6.9032/2.72 float=y
  maxiter=5000 inside=0 outside=real periodicity=0

colors=000<12>000000011021<31>8RI9SI9TJAUKBWL<13>awkczmczm<123>rzuVZz<61\
  >ruz
  }

nuke_m_c_1c        { ; WEEEIRD.
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=nuclear.frm
  formulaname=nuclear_m_cq passes=t
  center-mag=+0.95997576518941190/-4.17859193354275100/87.69413
  params=0.1/0.35/0/3/6.9032/2.72 float=y maxiter=5000 inside=16
  outside=real periodicity=0

colors=000zzz<32>M22K00K00<29>000_md<36>0GN<8>KUz<15>zzzd_m<36>N0G<8>zKU\
  <15>zzzzzU<35>zn1zm0zk2<7>zUK<15>zzz
  }

- --
    .*.  Friendship, companionship, love, and having fun are the reasons for
 -()  <  life. All else; sex, money, fame, etc.; are just to get/express these.
    `*'  Send any and all mail with attachments to the hotmail address please.
Paul Derbyshire [e-mail] [e-mail]

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 06:43:02 -0500
From: "Jason Hine" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Your Midgets

Jay wrote back:
>
>I figured it out.  The difference between working and not working code
>is sometimes only a few characters.  :-)  Using this image, you can
>sure see the distortion of one midget vs. the main cardioid.

Wow... no kidding!  This is great stuff... and I do see that there is more to
matching mini-Msets than meets the eye.  Hmmm... describing the Mset using just
a compass and straightedge seems less and less likely all the time.  Thanks for
the par and frm!
Laters, Jason


- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 10:10:53 -0500 (EST)
From: Ian Kaplan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) 640K

>
> Paul Derbyshire wrote:
> >
> > Fractint 19 will run in 640K won't it? I heard it runs on even old 286's
> > without any extended memory at all...
>
> Well, the old 286 part is right, though when I tried it "just for kicks" I had
> 1 meg in mine :-).  Can't remember if I had it set to expanded or extended,
> though.  Does Fractint prefer one over the other?
>

If I remember right, I've run fractint 19.6 quite successfully on an 8086
with 640K. I think it was 19.6, anyway. It wasn't fast, but if you
weren't looking for past-integer-math-limit zooms, it wasn't all that
slow either.


- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 09:48:05 -0800
From: "Mike and Linda Allison" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) copyright - let's stop the ongoing debate!

The copyright issues have been beaten to a pulp on both mailing lists.  To
quote Agatha Christie (with no intent to infringe on her copyrights :))) ),
there is nothing new under the sun.  And it is STILL under debate in the
fractal-arts mailing list.

I've culled all the copyright related messages I could find from messages
I've saved, and put them all together in order, more or less (288K so far).
 I
sent a copy to the last person who posted a copyright question on the
Fractal-Arts List, in hopes of answering his questions on the issue.  I'll
be sending copies to anyone else who asks or answers theoretical copyright
discussion questions on either list, and also to anyone who writes and asks
for a copy.  I really hope that everyone's new questions will be answered
by everyone's old answers, and we can stop debating this question!

Linda


- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 10:57:36 -0700
From: Rich Thomson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) sci.fractals

I don't think moderating the group would make people post more.  It
might make people read more often, but not post.  Because posting gets
you email spam and moderating the group won't change that.
- --
                                               Rich Thomson
                                               [e-mail]

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 10:12:47 PST
From: "Paul Derbyshire" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) 640K

>If I remember right, I've run fractint 19.6 quite successfully on an
8086
>with 640K. I think it was 19.6, anyway. It wasn't fast, but if you
>weren't looking for past-integer-math-limit zooms, it wasn't all that
>slow either.

No FPU I take it? Wow, what a dinosaur. You a masochist or just looking
for a challenge? :-)



______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 13:18:18 -0500 (EST)
From: Ian Kaplan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) 640K

>
> >If I remember right, I've run fractint 19.6 quite successfully on an
> 8086
> >with 640K. I think it was 19.6, anyway. It wasn't fast, but if you
> >weren't looking for past-integer-math-limit zooms, it wasn't all that
> >slow either.
>
> No FPU I take it? Wow, what a dinosaur. You a masochist or just looking
> for a challenge? :-)
>

Deeper thought reveals that I'm not completely sure it was 19.6; it might
have been a release in the 18s? I can look up the timing on this when I
get home, I recall that there was a major new release while I was running
this and I'm not sure whether I upgraded to it or not.

It really wasn't a challenge. This was just the machine that I had
availible at the time...

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 12:22:41 -0800
From: "Mike and Linda Allison" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) List FAQ

Our friend Bill wrote:

> . . .perhaps there should be an
> effort to put together a FAQ for the two lists. (I'm not sure if mailing
> lists traditionally have FAQs or not, but since these lists are now
> filling the need caused by the trashing of sci.fractals ...)
>
> Of course copyright is only one of the topics that newbies could come up
> to speed on quickly if there were such FAQ. (The message footer added by
> the fractal-art and fractint majordomos could also point to where it
> could be found.)

I think that's a good idea, Bill.  I've been thinking of putting together a
similar compilation of discussions on printing fractal art.  Of course,
that discussion will go on, as technology changes.  But I think some of the
info imparted to date is timeless.

If we move forward, I'll contribute the copyright file I've built, and the
printing file I plan to build.  The only real problem I can see is that the
files I've put together aren't List specific.  They include postings from
both lists.  But maybe that's not a problem, given the generic topics.

Maybe we could store it in the archives?  Tim?

Linda




- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 12:58:15 -0800
From: "Jay Hill"<[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) List FAQ

Linda wrote:

>If we move forward, I'll contribute the copyright file I've built, and the
>printing file I plan to build.

It could be a candidate for the iFAQ at my site....
http://home.san.rr.com/jayrhill/iFAQ/iFAQ.html

Jay



- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 16:08:36 -0800
From: Peter Jakubowicz <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) 2 Questions

1. If, possessing a hypercosmic computer, you were to magnify the
Feigenbaum pt by, say, 10^googolplex, what wld you expect to see. That is,
considering the M-set abstractly, so screen resolution is not an issue;
tho, quantum mechanics may be.
2. People say the M-set is bottomless, i.e., one cld, in theory, keep
zooming til the end of the world rolls 'round. But is the M-set's
infinitude analogous to Pi's having an infinite number of digits? As one
day, the Chudnovsky bros. cld run into an ever-repeating sequence of 0s,
might one finally run out of things to see in the M-set -- hit a blank
screen, so to speak.
Thank you.


- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 15:14:59 -0600
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) 2 Questions

Peter,

 - 1. If, possessing a hypercosmic computer, you were to magnify the
 - Feigenbaum pt by, say, 10^googolplex, what wld you expect to see. That is,
 - considering the M-set abstractly, so screen resolution is not an issue;

Some points (Misiurewicz points) become increasingly self-similar as you
zoom.  Although I don't think the Feigenbaum point is a Misiurewicz point,
my zooms on it seem to be pretty self-similar.  Finding cool stuff in the
M-set is all about getting points that aren't self-similar.

 - 2. People say the M-set is bottomless, i.e., one cld, in theory, keep
 - zooming til the end of the world rolls 'round. But is the M-set's
 - infinitude analogous to Pi's having an infinite number of digits?
 - As one day, the Chudnovsky bros. cld run into an ever-repeating
 - sequence of 0s, might one finally run out of things to see in the
 - M-set -- hit a blank screen, so to speak.

While it's true there might be long sequences of seemingly non-random
numbers in the decimal expansion of pi, I don't think this would keep on
indefinitely.  That is, if at any point the decimal expansion settled into
a repeating value, then pi would not be an irrational number, it would be a
rational one, one that can be represented as the ratio of two integers.
There's a big difference between the two.

There are areas of the M-set which are incredibly dull, and there are areas
which are interesting.  Because the boundary of the M-set (the edge, not
the interior) has been shown to have dimension 2, I don't think there will
ever be a point where you find a flat edge in the set.  If there were
anywhere a flat edge, the dimension couldn't be 2, because that portion
(however small) would have dimension 1.

Damien M. Jones   \\
[e-mail]  \\  http://www.icd.com/tsd/ (temporary sanity designs)
                    \\  http://www.fractalus.com/ (fractals are my hobby)

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 14:21:14 PST
From: "Paul Derbyshire" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) 2 Questions

>1. If, possessing a hypercosmic computer, you were to magnify the
>Feigenbaum pt by, say, 10^googolplex, what wld you expect to see. That
is,
>considering the M-set abstractly, so screen resolution is not an issue;
>tho, quantum mechanics may be.

It would approach perfect scaling, with an exact angle along the buds
tangent to them, and exactly repeating filigrees that essentially fill
space.

>2. People say the M-set is bottomless, i.e., one cld, in theory, keep
>zooming til the end of the world rolls 'round. But is the M-set's
>infinitude analogous to Pi's having an infinite number of digits? As
one
>day, the Chudnovsky bros. cld run into an ever-repeating sequence of
0s,
>might one finally run out of things to see in the M-set -- hit a blank
>screen, so to speak.

Nobody really knows about the digits of pi, but this doesn'thold for M.
For instance if you zoom at the spike tip to any magnification
whatsoever, then look for where a boundary dives in toward the spike
side, you will home in on a midget with all the attendant detail.
Two mathematical proofs:
1. M's boundary has dimension 2; therefore it has detail at all scales.
If it ever did smooth out it would have dimension 1, not 2.
2. There are algebraic formulas for the lemniscate boundaries of the
components of each period. These are obtained by setting |(f(z)^n)'| =
1, where ^n for the function means n-fold compounding, ' denotes taking
the derivative, || takes the modulus, and n is the period in question.
Setting (f(z)^n)' = 0 locates the centers of components. This latter is,
for the regular M-set, of degree 2^(n-1) and thus has 2^(n-1) roots. It
can be shown that the roots are all distinct, and thus new roots, and
new components of M, must be found for ever higher periods. It is harder
but not impossible to show that the larger you take n, the smaller the
components, so there are new components at all size scales.


- --
    .*.  Friendship, companionship, love, and having fun are the reasons for
 -()  <  life. All else; sex, money, fame, etc.; are just to get/express these.
    `*'  Send any and all mail with attachments to the hotmail address please.
Paul Derbyshire [e-mail] [e-mail]

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 14:21:25 PST
From: "Paul Derbyshire" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) 2 Questions

>1. If, possessing a hypercosmic computer, you were to magnify the
>Feigenbaum pt by, say, 10^googolplex, what wld you expect to see. That
is,
>considering the M-set abstractly, so screen resolution is not an issue;
>tho, quantum mechanics may be.

It would approach perfect scaling, with an exact angle along the buds
tangent to them, and exactly repeating filigrees that essentially fill
space.

>2. People say the M-set is bottomless, i.e., one cld, in theory, keep
>zooming til the end of the world rolls 'round. But is the M-set's
>infinitude analogous to Pi's having an infinite number of digits? As
one
>day, the Chudnovsky bros. cld run into an ever-repeating sequence of
0s,
>might one finally run out of things to see in the M-set -- hit a blank
>screen, so to speak.

Nobody really knows about the digits of pi, but this doesn'thold for M.
For instance if you zoom at the spike tip to any magnification
whatsoever, then look for where a boundary dives in toward the spike
side, you will home in on a midget with all the attendant detail.
Two mathematical proofs:
1. M's boundary has dimension 2; therefore it has detail at all scales.
If it ever did smooth out it would have dimension 1, not 2.
2. There are algebraic formulas for the lemniscate boundaries of the
components of each period. These are obtained by setting |(f(z)^n)'| =
1, where ^n for the function means n-fold compounding, ' denotes taking
the derivative, || takes the modulus, and n is the period in question.
Setting (f(z)^n)' = 0 locates the centers of components. This latter is,
for the regular M-set, of degree 2^(n-1) and thus has 2^(n-1) roots. It
can be shown that the roots are all distinct, and thus new roots, and
new components of M, must be found for ever higher periods. It is harder
but not impossible to show that the larger you take n, the smaller the
components, so there are new components at all size scales.


- --
    .*.  Friendship, companionship, love, and having fun are the reasons for
 -()  <  life. All else; sex, money, fame, etc.; are just to get/express these.
    `*'  Send any and all mail with attachments to the hotmail address please.
Paul Derbyshire [e-mail] [e-mail]

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 17:41:40 -0500 (EST)
From: Ian Kaplan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) 2 Questions

I think my previous reply was lost, so here we go again...

>
> 1. If, possessing a hypercosmic computer, you were to magnify the
> Feigenbaum pt by, say, 10^googolplex, what wld you expect to see. That is,
> considering the M-set abstractly, so screen resolution is not an issue;
> tho, quantum mechanics may be.

Well, there is indeed a quantum-mechanical limit to the total processing
your hypercosmic computer could do... if we assume that our guesses about
quantum mechanics and about cosmology (specifically the mass, energy and
lifespan of the universe) are correct to some degree, we could put a
pretty fair upper bound to it. Say, a guess within 10 orders of
magnitude, which on this scale isn't so bad. I'll take a stab at it later...


> 2. People say the M-set is bottomless, i.e., one cld, in theory, keep
> zooming til the end of the world rolls 'round. But is the M-set's
> infinitude analogous to Pi's having an infinite number of digits? As one
> day, the Chudnovsky bros. cld run into an ever-repeating sequence of 0s,
> might one finally run out of things to see in the M-set -- hit a blank
> screen, so to speak.

You couldn't run into an infinite sequence of zeros or anything else
periodic in pi. The M set also doesn't repeat itself. However, the notion
of "interesting new things in the m-set, as opposed to old things
repeated in a not-quite-completely-self-similar fashion" is difficult to
quantitate, as they say, so I think we might be able ot run out of those...


- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 16:21:03 -0500 (EST)
From: Ian Kaplan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) 2 Questions

>
> 1. If, possessing a hypercosmic computer, you were to magnify the
> Feigenbaum pt by, say, 10^googolplex, what wld you expect to see. That is,
> considering the M-set abstractly, so screen resolution is not an issue;
> tho, quantum mechanics may be.

Actually, quantum mechanics would indeed put a limit on the computing
power of the universe. Hadn't thought of it quite that way before. When
my brain recovers from today's work, I will attempt to estimate the
computing power of spacetime. Assuming the correctness of the standard
model and the approximate correctness of comsological theory, we could
get maybe within 10 orders of magnitude, at a guess, which isn't bad at
this scale...

> 2. People say the M-set is bottomless, i.e., one cld, in theory, keep
> zooming til the end of the world rolls 'round. But is the M-set's
> infinitude analogous to Pi's having an infinite number of digits? As one
> day, the Chudnovsky bros. cld run into an ever-repeating sequence of 0s,
> might one finally run out of things to see in the M-set -- hit a blank
> screen, so to speak.

who? Pi doesn't have an infinite series of zeros in it, that's quite
provable. The M-set is indeed analagous, as I understand it, in that it
will not at any depth repeat exactly. It won't hit a blank. However, the
human definition of "interesting things to see, as opposed to endless
semi-similar little mandys" is what scientists like to call "Er,
difficult to quantitate..."


- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:12:26 -0600
From: "Paul N. Lee" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Re: Use of Fractal Images

Paul N. Lee wrote:
>
> My questions to all those in Fractal-Land, .....(snipped)......??
>
> Any and all comments welcome (on or off the discussion list).
>

I knew this topic might cause a few postings, but I didn't mean to
restart the "Copyright War".  I just wanted a little bit of
clarification.  I do wish to thank all of those that either responded
publicly on the discussion list and/or privately.

I responded (that same day) to the individual that requested my "wishes
in this matter" by stipulating three ways in which I will allow my
images to be used.  I have yet to here back from them.  I have also sent
an email requesting their decision as to whether or not they wish to
pursue the use of my images, and still no answer.  I will try another
email before investigating this person and the companies they may be
dealing with.

So..... I guess a few questions on the topic of Fractals and Religion
would be best left off of this discussion list??  ;-}

Thanks again,
P.N.L.

- -------------------------------------------------
     Why do most folks hate cynics so much?
       Because we're almost always right.
- -------------------------------------------------
http://home.att.net/~Paul.N.Lee/PNL_Fractals.html

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 20:40:28 -0500
From: "Jason Hine" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: Use of Fractal Images

Paul guessed:

>So..... I guess a few questions on the topic of Fractals and Religion
>would be best left off of this discussion list??  ;-}


<sigh>... I suppose so, for now, at least.  Best let Science and Religion (I'm
thinking Eastern philosophy, mainly) get to know each other a bit more first.
And let Bell's theorem ring in people's heads for a while... And I think we'll
want faster computers, and Virtual Reality gear before we go slicing up
quaternion sets in real-time in search of... oops, there I go!

Oh boy, here comes the future!  (Your choice:  :-P   or   8'))  )
Jason


- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 20:05:13 -0800
From: Wizzle <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: Use of Fractal Images

<<snipped>>
>
>So..... I guess a few questions on the topic of Fractals and Religion
>would be best left off of this discussion list??  ;-}
>
>Thanks again,
>P.N.L.
>


I thought fractals WERE a religion!! ((please pass the collection plate to
the usher))

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 22:09:38 -0600
From: "Justin A. Kolodziej" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: Use of Fractal Images

Wizzle wrote:
>
> <<snipped>>
> >
> >So..... I guess a few questions on the topic of Fractals and Religion
> >would be best left off of this discussion list??  ;-}
> >
> >Thanks again,
> >P.N.L.
> >
>
> I thought fractals WERE a religion!! ((please pass the collection plate to
> the usher))

I've heard of people (lifeforms?) worshipping the Mandelbrot set... in science
fiction.  Don't know where I heard that; perhaps on this very list?  I won't
even speculate on the actual existence of such a cult. :-)


- --
I sense a great disturbance in the Source.
Justin A. Kolodziej
I am [e-mail]
Marquette University is http://www.mu.edu

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 23:15:36 -0500
From: "Peter Gavin" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: Use of Fractal Images

That doesn't bother me, as long as Roman Polanski doesn't lose another wife!
(Jeez, I know that's cruel!  :)  )

Pete

|I've heard of people (lifeforms?) worshipping the Mandelbrot set... in
science
|fiction.  Don't know where I heard that; perhaps on this very list?  I
won't
|even speculate on the actual existence of such a cult. :-)



- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 23:27:45 -0600
From: Bob Margolis <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Re: Copyright Myths FAQ: 10 big myths about copyright explained

Hi Team Fractals:

There's been some talk lately on these two fractal list servers about
copyrights. Here's an FAQ I gleaned from news.answers. Hope it clarifies
some things for you.

Bob "Chocolate-Covered Fractals" Margolis

=========================================



Brad Templeton wrote:
>
> Original-author: [e-mail] (Brad Templeton)
> Archive-name: law/copyright/myths/part1
> Last-change: 16 Oct 1995 by [e-mail] (Mark Moraes)
> Changes-posted-to: news.misc,news.answers
>
>                 10 Big Myths about copyright explained
>                         By Brad Templeton
>
>         1)  "If it doesn't have a copyright notice, it's not
>         copyrighted."
>
>         This was true in the past, but today almost all major
>         nations follow the Berne copyright convention.  For example,
>         in the USA, almost everything created privately after April 1,
>         1989 is copyrighted and protected whether it has a notice or not.
>         The default you should assume for other people's works is that
>         they are copyrighted and may not be copied unless you *know*
>         otherwise.  There are some old works that lost protection
>         without notice, but frankly you should not risk it unless
>         you know for sure.
>
>         It is true that a notice strengthens the protection, by
>         warning people, and by allowing one to get more and
>         different damages, but it is not necessary.  If it looks
>         copyrighted, you should assume it is.   This applies to pictures,
>         too.  You may not scan pictures from magazines and post them
>         to the net, and if you come upon something unknown,
>         you shouldn't post that either.
>
>         The correct form for a notice is:
>                 "Copyright <dates> by <author/owner>"
>         You can use C in a circle instead of "Copyright" but "(C)"
>         has never been given legal force.  The phrase "All Rights
>         Reserved" used to be required in some nations but is now
>         not needed.
>
>         2) "If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation."
>
>         False.  Whether you charge can affect the damages awarded in
>         court, but that's essentially the only difference.  It's still a
>         violation if you give it away -- and there can still be
>         heavy damages if you hurt the commercial value of the
>         property.
>
>         3) "If it's posted to Usenet it's in the public domain."
>
>         False.  Nothing is in the public domain anymore unless the
>         owner explicitly puts it in the public domain(*).  Explicitly,
>         as in you have a note from the author/owner saying, "I grant
>         this to the public domain."  Those exact words or words very
>         much like them.
>
>         Some argue that posting to Usenet implicitly grants
>         permission to everybody to copy the posting within fairly
>         wide bounds, and others feel that Usenet is an automatic store and
>         forward network where all the thousands of copies made are
>         done at the command (rather than the consent) of the
>         poster.  This is a matter of some debate, but even if the
>         former is true (and in this writer's opinion we should all pray
>         it isn't true) it simply would suggest posters are implicitly
>         granting permissions "for the sort of copying one might expect
>         when one posts to Usenet" and in no case is this a placement
>         of material into the public domain.  Furthermore it is very
>         difficult for an implicit licence to supersede an explicitly
>         stated licence that the copier was aware of.
>
>         Note that all this assumes the poster had the right to post
>         the item in the first place.  If the poster didn't, then all
>         the copies are pirate, and no implied licence or theoretical
>         reduction of the copyright can take place.
>
>         (*) Copyrights can expire after a long time, putting someting
>         into the public domain, and there are some fine points on
>         this issue regarder older copyright law versions.  However, none
>         of this applies to an original article posted to USENET.
>
>         Note that granting something to the public domain is a complete
>         abandonment of all rights.  You can't make something "PD for
>         non-commercial use."  If your work is PD, other people can even
>         modify one byte and put their name on it.
>
>         4) "My posting was just fair use!"
>
>         See other notes on fair use for a detailed answer, but bear
>         the following in mind:
>
>         The "fair use" exemption to copyright law was created to allow
>         things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and
>         education about copyrighted works without the permission of the
>         author.  Intent, and damage to the commercial value of the
>         work are important considerations.  Are you reproducing an
>         article from the New York Times because you needed to in order
>         to criticise the quality of the New York Times, or because you
>         couldn't find time to write your own story, or didn't want your
>         readers to have to pay to log onto the online services with the
>         story or buy a copy of the paper?  The former is probably fair
>         use, the latter probably aren't.
>
>         Fair use is almost always a short excerpt and almost always
>         attributed.  (One should not use more of the work than is
>         necessary to make the commentary.) It should not harm the
>         commercial value of the work (which is another reason why
>         reproduction of the entire work is generally forbidden.)
>
>         Note that most inclusion of text in Usenet followups is for
>         commentary and reply, and it doesn't damage the commercial
>         value of the original posting (if it has any) and as such it
>         is fair use.  Fair use isn't an exact doctrine, either.  The
>         court decides if the right to comment overrides the copyright
>         on an indidvidual basis in each case.  There have been cases
>         that go beyond the bounds of what I say above, but in general
>         they don't apply to the typical net misclaim of fair use.
>         It's a risky defence to attempt.
>
>         5) "If you don't defend your copyright you lose it."
>
>         False.  Copyright is effectively never lost these days, unless
>         explicitly given away.  You may be thinking of trade marks, which
>         can be weakened or lost if not defended.
>
>         6) "Somebody has that name copyrighted!"
>
>         You can't "copyright a name," or anything short like that.
>         Titles usually don't qualify -- but I doubt you may write a
>         song entitled "Everybody's got something to hide except for
>         me and my monkey." (J.Lennon/P.McCartney)
>
>         You can't copyright words, but you can trademark them,
>         generally by using them to refer to your brand of a
>         generic type of product or service.  Like an "Apple"
>         computer.  Apple Computer "owns" that word applied to
>         computers, even though it is also an ordinary word.  Apple
>         Records owns it when applied to music.  Neither owns the
>         word on its own, only in context, and owning a mark doesn't
>         mean complete control -- see a more detailed treatise on
>         this law for details.
>
>         You can't use somebody else's trademark in a way that would
>         unfairly hurt the value of the mark, or in a way that might
>         make people confuse you with the real owner of the mark, or
>         which might allow you to profit from the mark's good name.
>         For example, if I were giving advice on music videos, I
>         would be very wary of trying to label my works with a name
>         like "mtv."  :-)
>
>         7) "They can't get me, defendants in court have powerful rights!"
>
>         Copyright law is mostly civil law.  If you violate copyright
>         you would usually get sued, not charged with a crime.
>         "Innocent until proven guilty" is a principle of criminal
>         law, as is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt."  Sorry, but in
>         copyright suits, these don't apply the same way or at all.
>         It's mostly which side and set of evidence the judge or
>         jury accepts or believes more, though the rules vary based
>         on the type of infringement.  In civil cases you can even
>         be made to testify against your own interests.
>
>         8) "Oh, so copyright violation isn't a crime or anything?"
>
>         Actually, recently in the USA commercial copyright
>         violation involving more than 10 copies and value over
>         $2500 was made a felony.  So watch out.  (At least you get
>         the protections of criminal law.)  On the other hand, don't
>         think you're going to get people thrown in jail for posting
>         your E-mail.  The courts have much better things to do than
>         that.  This is a fairly new, untested statute.
>
>         9) "It doesn't hurt anybody -- in fact it's free advertising."
>
>         It's up to the owner to decide if they want the free ads or
>         not.  If they want them, they will be sure to contact you.
>         Don't rationalize whether it hurts the owner or not, *ask*
>         them.  Usually that's not too hard to do.  Time past,
>         ClariNet published the very funny Dave Barry column to a
>         large and appreciative Usenet audience for a fee, but some
>         person didn't ask, and forwarded it to a mailing list, got
>         caught, and the newspaper chain that employs Dave Barry
>         pulled the column from the net, pissing off everybody who
>         enjoyed it.  Even if you can't think of how the author or
>         owner gets hurt, think about the fact that piracy on the net
>         hurts everybody who wants a chance to use this wonderful new
>         technology to do more than read other people's flamewars.
>
>         10) "They e-mailed me a copy, so I can post it."
>
>         To have a copy is not to have the copyright.  All the E-mail
>         you write is copyrighted.  However, E-mail is not, unless
>         previously agreed, secret.  So you can certainly *report* on
>         what E-mail you are sent, and reveal what it says.  You can
>         even quote parts of it to demonstrate.  Frankly, somebody
>         who sues over an ordinary message might well get no damages,
>         because the message has no commercial value, but if you want
>         to stay strictly in the law, you should ask first.  On the
>         other hand, don't go nuts if somebody posts your E-mail. If
>         it was an ordinary non-secret personal letter of minimal
>         commercial value with no copyright notice (like 99.9% of all
>         E-mail), you probably won't get any damages if you sue them.
>
>         -----------------    In Summary   ---------------------------
>
>         These days, almost all things are copyrighted the moment they
>         are written, and no copyright notice is required.
>
>         Copyright is still violated whether you charged money or not,
>         only damages are affected by that.
>
>         Postings to the net are not granted to the public domain, and
>         don't grant you any permission to do further copying except
>         *perhaps* the sort of copying the poster might have expected
>         in the ordinary flow of the net.
>
>         Fair use is a complex doctrine meant to allow certain valuable
>         social purposes.  Ask yourself why you are republishing what
>         you are posting and why you couldn't have just rewritten it
>         in your own words.
>
>         Copyright is not lost because you don't defend it; that's
>         a concept from trademark law.  The ownership of names is
>         also from trademark law, so don't say somebody has a name
>         copyrighted.
>
>         Copyright law is mostly civil law where the special rights
>         of criminal defendants you hear so much about don't apply.
>         Watch out, however, as new laws are moving copyright
>         violation into the criminal realm.
>
>         Don't rationalize that you are helping the copyright holder;
>         often it's not that hard to ask permission.
>
>         Posting E-mail is technically a violation, but revealing
>         facts from E-mail isn't, and for almost all typical E-mail,
>         nobody could wring any damages from you for posting it.
>
>         -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Permission is granted to freely copy this
>                 document in electronic form, or to print for
>                 personal use.  If you had not seen a notice
>                 like this on the document, you would have to
>                 assume you did not have permission to copy it.
>                 This document is still protected by you-know-
>                 what even though it has no copyright notice.
>
>         It should be noted that the author, as publisher of an
>         electronic newspaper on the net, makes his living by
>         publishing copyrighted material in electronic form and has
>         the associated biases.  However, DO NOT E-MAIL HIM FOR LEGAL
>         ADVICE; for that use other resources or consult a lawyer.
>         Also note that while most of these principles are universal
>         in Berne copyright signatory nations, some are derived from
>         Canadian and U.S. law.  This document is provided to clear
>         up some common misconceptions about intellectual property
>         law that are often seen on the net.  It is not intended to
>         be a complete treatise on all the nuances of the subject.  A
>         more detailed copyright FAQ, covering other issues including
>         compilation copyright and more intricacies of fair use is
>         available in the same places you found this note, or for FTP
>         on rtfm.mit.edu in pub/usenet-by-group/news.answers/law/copyright/faq.
>         Also consider gopher://marvel.loc.gov/11/copyright for
>         actual statutes.  Another useful document is
>         http://www.eff.org/pub/CAF/law/ip-primer
>
>         This FAQ can be found at http://www.clari.net/brad/copymyths.html

- -
- ------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

End of fractint-digest V1 #149
******************************