ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/fractint/archive/v01.n255

Internet Message Format | 1998-07-10 | 41KB

From: [e-mail] (fractint-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: fractint-digest V1 #255
Reply-To: fractint-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


fractint-digest        Saturday, July 11 1998        Volume 01 : Number 255




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

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 01:06:03 -0700
From: Andrew Schoonmaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Lost Fractal

At 11:10 7/9/98 -0400, you wrote:
>btw: someone told me Cantor dusts have aleph-one points in them.  It
>seems to me that they should be aleph-null, because if you're
>constructing a Cantor dust in the traditional way (take an interval,
>cut out the middle and take the intervals on the ends, repeat) the only
>points that remain in the dust are the points at the boundaries of the
>intervals you take, and you first encounter each one of them at some
>integer-numbered subdivision step, and you encounter only an integer
>number of points at each subdivision step, so each point in the
>eventual Cantor dust has some ordinal number at which it becomes a
>boundary of an interval.
>
>Am I missing something?

  Hmm... well, if you take out the midpoint of each line segment at each
step, then for each operation, you're multiplying the total number of
segments by two...  For aleph-null steps, which gives 2^(aleph-null) line
segments when you're done, which equals aleph-one.  I think.

 -Andrew (who's up late...pardon the incomprehensibility)

- --
Andrew Schoonmaker ([e-mail])
On the other hand, you have different fingers.

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 01:20:48 -0700
From: Andrew Schoonmaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (fractint) Lost Fractal

At 13:38 7/9/98 -0500, you wrote:
>By definition (Aleph-null)^2 = Aleph-one.  You are not scaling Aleph-null by
>a finite number, you are squaring it.

Um, no, aleph-null squared = aleph-null... Squares contain the same number
of points as line segments...  Or at least, that's what I thought...

>For a set of n elements, there are n^2 subsets.

Hmm?
{1,2,3}...{}, {1}, {2}, {3}, {1,2}, {1,3}, {2,3}, {1,2,3} ... what's the
ninth?

>The number of subsets of
>Aleph-null is Aleph-one (the 'continuum' infinity (used for counting all
>line segments, partitions, etc of a line - or counting   polygons, surfaces,
>etc in a  real plane) as opposed to the 'enumerable' infinity (counts real
>numbers/rationals, etc).

This is true, tho.

>>From another point of view, the number of steps to produce Cantor dust is
>enumerable, but the number of points in the dust is Aleph-one (not
>one-to-one with the rationals).

 ....Wait a minute.  Since each point was originally on the line, there
can't be more points than there were originally, and therefore the number
of points in the dust can't exceed aleph-null.  I think it's the _number_
of Cantor dusts that's aleph-one.

  (don't mind the argument in the previous e-mail...tho I'm not sure what
the flaw in it is)

>Brian Baske

 -Andrew (who may well have come off as rude up there...sorry)
- --
Andrew Schoonmaker ([e-mail])
On the other hand, you have different fingers.

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 05:39:37 -0400
From: davides <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: New contest

At 06:52 PM 7/9/1998 -0700, you wrote:

I'll second (or third, or whatever the case may be ...  :)  )


>I nominate Damien Jones for Grand Pooh Bah II.  Any seconds?
>
>Proposed Categories:

and all the listed categories which have been snipped for brevity - I'll
second, that is. Or third...
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Back up my hard drive?
How do I put it in reverse?

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 07:24:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Kragen)
Subject: Re: (fractint) Lost Fractal

On Thu, 9 Jul 1998, Ian Kaplan wrote:
> I'm not entirely sure I know what you mean by "the only points that
> remain in the dust are the points at the boundaries." I mean, you
> construct the dust by removing the middle thirds of the intervals... oh,
> perhaps I do follow. While I can't quite think of what's wrong with this
> argument, do you accept the argument that Cantor dusts have a finite
> area? If you take the limit of the area of the black boxes as n (number
> of iterations) goes to infinity, you get a finite number.

Well, suppose we're doing just a traditional one-dimensional dust, by
removing the middle thirds each time.  Then the remaining length of
line within the set is

    / 2 \ n
    |---|
    \ 3 /

where n is the number of times you iterate the subdivision process.

            / 2 \ n
   lim      |---|   = 0
 n->infinity\ 3 /


Is this what you meant?

> Think of the Cantor dust in one dimension (on a line.) On the nth
> iteration, you create 2^n new boundary points, right? so that seems
> countable.

 aleph-null
2           = aleph-one

> But then in two dimensions, you create 2^n boundary _lines_. Ah, maybe
> that's it. Your boundary points are actually lines, each of which itself
> has aleph-1 points on it. Maybe?

Makes some sense.

Kragen


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 13:43:16 +0100
From: "Christian Strik" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Lost Fractal

Interesting discussion. Just the typo's can be an irritating fact here.

>The sci.fractals FAQ says:

Does anyone know where to get that? - I mean without having to join the
newsgroup.

Christian







- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 07:56:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Kragen)
Subject: Re: (fractint) New Contest

On Thu, 9 Jul 1998, Damien M. Jones wrote:
> Kerry,
>  - I suggest limiting the entries somewhat; allowing any image from any
>  - fractal program sounds just too big (to my aleph_negative-one brain).
>
> :-) But limit in what way?
>
> I'm not sure a coloring formula contest is a good idea, because most people
> simply don't have enough experience in writing formulas to feel they can
> compete evenly.

That's OK.  I'd rather have a contest few participate in that produces
some excellent fractals than not bother to have a contest because some
people might not participate.

Kragen


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 07:58:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Kragen)
Subject: (fractint) Re: your mail

On Thu, 9 Jul 1998, Lee Newsted wrote:
> A few thoughts:
> 1. Post-Fractal-Generating manipulation would seem to test an individuals
> ability to use a image app of one sort or another, not how  well they can
> dream up and produce a fractal.
> 2. Some people have access to the greatest fractal program (Fractint
> )because it's free. And they may not (probably not!) own any photo
> manipulators.

The best photo manipulator (unless you're doing work intended for
print) is also free, in the sense of "liberated".  It's called the
GIMP.  It runs on just about any Unix.

Kragen


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 08:20:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Kragen)
Subject: RE: (fractint) Lost Fractal

On Fri, 10 Jul 1998, Andrew Schoonmaker wrote:
> At 13:38 7/9/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >For a set of n elements, there are n^2 subsets.
>
> Hmm?
> {1,2,3}...{}, {1}, {2}, {3}, {1,2}, {1,3}, {2,3}, {1,2,3} ... what's the
> ninth?

They meant 2^n.

>  ....Wait a minute.  Since each point was originally on the line, there
> can't be more points than there were originally, and therefore the number
> of points in the dust can't exceed aleph-null.  I think it's the _number_
> of Cantor dusts that's aleph-one.

The line has aleph-one points on it.

Kragen


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 08:22:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Kragen)
Subject: Re: (fractint) Lost Fractal

On Fri, 10 Jul 1998, Christian Strik wrote:
> Interesting discussion. Just the typo's can be an irritating fact here.
>
> >The sci.fractals FAQ says:
>
> Does anyone know where to get that? - I mean without having to join the
> newsgroup.

I found it linked off spanky.

Kragen


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: 10 Jul 98 15:05:28 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Wim de Lange)
Subject: Re: (fractint) Lost Fractal

Op 10 Jul 98 om 1:06 schreef [e-mail] over: "Re:
(fractint) Lost Fractal"

> of segments by two...  For aleph-null steps, which gives
> 2^(aleph-null) line segments when you're done, which equals
> aleph-one.  I think.

Wrong, you can't calculate with aleph-1 and aleph-0 in this way. I
don't know if there is a calculus for those numbers, but it is not
legal to do what you did. Read my mail about a better proof, about
which I'm certainly sure.

Groetjes,
    Wim de Lange
 _____________________________________

 Internet:    [e-mail]
 CompuServe:  100142,604
 _____________________________________


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: 10 Jul 98 15:03:44 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Wim de Lange)
Subject: RE: (fractint) Lost Fractal

Op 10 Jul 98 om 1:20 schreef [e-mail] over: "RE:
(fractint) Lost Fractal"
> >>From another point of view, the number of steps to produce Cantor dust is
> >enumerable, but the number of points in the dust is Aleph-one (not

Long time ago when I studied math we had some theory about this, but
this is what I know about the Cantor set. The number of point in the
Cantor set is bigger than aleph-0. Don't ask me how I know this, I
don't remember the proof anymore.  (LATER for a better
answer) (Probably it is aleph-1, but at the moment I was studuing, it
was not sure that there is a number between aleph-0 and aleph-1, I
don't remember all correctly). But I'm sure about the bigger part.

The strange thing however, is that the cantor set is very thin, in
the sense that the measure of the cantor set is 0 (zero). If you
define the measure as the length of a linesegment (or a infinite
set of linesegments) in the normal way. That is proofed easily,
calculate the lengt of the linesegments after every step, and the
total length is (2/3)^n after n steps. And that goes to zero for n ->
infinity.

I think the proof of aleph-1 is also easily. After every step, the
number of points remaining in the set, is aleph-1. (n^2 line
segments) So with n -> infinity, the value is always aleph-1, so the
end result (the limit) is aleph-1. But I'm not sure, this is a
correct proof (the one about the measure is correct).


Groetjes,
    Wim de Lange
 _____________________________________

 Internet:    [e-mail]
 CompuServe:  100142,604
 _____________________________________


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 10:32:19 -0500
From: "Lee Newsted" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [none]

Everyone has a good point!
And I vote for Damien Jones as Grand Pooh Bah.

So, Damien, Are you going to start keeping a list of catagories? If so I
would like to have a catagory for L-System fractals. I know tey are not as
fancy as some other types but they are fractals.

Anybody thought about a entry deadline? I think wee need at least a month,
and maybe we sould have everyone holds their cards till the last minute.

just a few ideas.

nuke.

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 17:24:33 +0100
From: "Christian Strik" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Lost Fractal

>Op 10 Jul 98 om 1:06 schreef [e-mail] over: "Re:
>(fractint) Lost Fractal"


Leuke mailreader, Wim! :-)

Overigens... hij neemt de Return-Path als zender. Dit is bij mailing-lists
echter meestal niet het geval, zoals je wel weet. :-)

Groetjes, Christian


{
Nice mailreader, Wim!

BTW... it takes the Return-Path as sender. This usually isn't the case with
mailing lists, though, as you probably know. :-)

Greetings, Christian
}




- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:07:24 -0500
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: New contest

Jay,

 - Last time we saw three winners, all spirals, with nice coloring.
 - The inventive were ignored, lost in the diversity.

Which is a minor tragedy... perhaps having a variety of categories will
help to highlight some of the more non-traditional imagery.

 - But the clamor will be over the Best HiColor Glamour Art which
 - will leave the Fractintiers out of the running.

Not necessarily.  PHC images rendered at high resolution, then reduced,
will produce high-color images quite nicely.  I have created a few such
images myself.  And if you use Kerry's A+B approach, even more
possibilities arise.

 - Frankly, for now, you will pry 19.6 out of my ... well maybe 20.0 will
 - do the job.  But 20.0 is a while away. :-(

I frequently have people ask me what fractal software I use, partly because
they refuse to believe I still use FractInt.  While it's true that I do
occasionally post-process fractal images, a lot of what I do is still
essentially raw output from FractInt; only the coloring formula technique
is new.

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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:10:30 -0500
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) New Contest

Kragen,

 - That's OK.  I'd rather have a contest few participate in that produces
 - some excellent fractals than not bother to have a contest because some
 - people might not participate.

Who said anything about not having a contest?  I just think it's being a
little too exclusive to say only FractInt users can participate.

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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:09:12 -0500
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Lost Fractal

Christian,

 - >The sci.fractals FAQ says:
 -
 - Does anyone know where to get that? - I mean without having to join the
 - newsgroup.

    http://www.mta.ca/~mctaylor/sci.fractals-faq/

I suspect many fractal pages contain links to this FAQ.

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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:00:57 -0500
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: New Contest

Mike,

 - The categories will need to be such that they demand of folk something
 - they won't have already done, if there is to be a point to it all.

Hmmmm.  What categories do you suggest?  I agree you have a point, but
coming up with examples isn't exactly easy. :-)

 - I'd suggest, particularly if this moves over to the fractal-art list, that
 - we'd get more interest out of the art side of things if folk had to
 - explain their votes.  It is not a matter of justification, but of gaining
 - insight into how others think and relate to the images.

This is an interesting idea, although I think it will have a side-effect of
discouraging votes.  This may not be a bad thing, I just thought it was
worth mentioning.

 - I'd note that the previous contest grew out of a discussion of copyright
 - in relation to formulas and the idea was to test the extent to which the
 - image depended on the artist and not on the formula.  As there was little,
 - or no discussion of how the contest images illustrated this, I feel that
 - it failed to some extent in its original purpose.

Unless, of course, the sheer diversity of the submitted images proved that
there's more to fractal art than the math. :-)

 [as you replied to Gedeon]
 - I agree with this, particularly about the need to be able to view images
 - in high resolution, which may be beyond the ability of any one host.

As I stated, space is not a problem for me.  If the contest site were to
end up occupying three hundred megabytes, it wouldn't bother the
fractalus.com server a bit.  That's why I volunteered the space; I know
most people don't have that luxury.  If necessary, I have a spare hard
drive I can put in the server.  (For those who wonder... I work for a small
ISP.)

 - (Part of the fun is also in seeing new techniques and trying them out,
 - which is a lot easier with the parameters being supplied.  Fractint's
 - installed base gives it a big advantage in this sort of thing.)

Yes... but I think I mentioned earlier that the parameters would only be
withheld until after the contest.  And they wouldn't be *required*, just
encouraged.  I'd hate to deny someone participation just because everyone
isn't using the same tool as they are...

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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:18:55 -0500
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Re:

Nuke,

 - So, Damien, Are you going to start keeping a list of catagories?

I think I can manage that.

 - If so I would like to have a catagory for L-System fractals.

I don't see why not.  Perhaps this will encourage more people to explore
L-Systems.

 - Anybody thought about a entry deadline? I think wee need at least a
 - month, and maybe we sould have everyone holds their cards till the last
 - minute.

I was thinking that there's no point in requiring all submissions from the
same person to occur at once... they could submit one image, then a week
later, one or two more.  So long as they don't submit more than three
total.  Entries, once submitted, could not be withdrawn.

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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 13:13:50 -0700
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (fractint) Re: Cardinality

Andrew Schoonmaker wrote:
>
> At 13:38 7/9/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >By definition (Aleph-null)^2 = Aleph-one.  You are not scaling Aleph-null by
> >a finite number, you are squaring it.
>
> Um, no, aleph-null squared = aleph-null... Squares contain the same number
> of points as line segments...  Or at least, that's what I thought...
>
> >For a set of n elements, there are n^2 subsets.
>
> Hmm?
> {1,2,3}...{}, {1}, {2}, {3}, {1,2}, {1,3}, {2,3}, {1,2,3} ... what's the
> ninth?
>
> >The number of subsets of
> >Aleph-null is Aleph-one (the 'continuum' infinity (used for counting all
> >line segments, partitions, etc of a line - or counting   polygons, surfaces,
> >etc in a  real plane) as opposed to the 'enumerable' infinity (counts real
> >numbers/rationals, etc).

Its been a long time, but if I remember by college topology class
correctly...
for a set of n elements there are 2^n subsets not n^2 so for
the example given of 3 ... (3)^2 = 8 which is how many you found.
Also the cardinality of a set where n is infinite is the same as the
cardinality
of a set with n^2 elements. However card(n) < card(2^n) always even if n
is infinite.
2^(aleph-null) = (aleph-one) > (aleph-nul) ^ 2

Jim

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 15:52:10 -0500
From: "Brian Baske" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (fractint) Re: Cardinality

I lurk on the list for a couple of years, then I open my mouth for the first
time and scramble my trans-finite mathematics/topology.  OOPS!

As has been pointed out, the number of subsets is 2^n, not n^2.  Hence my
argument that number of points in a Cantor dust is Aleph-one has evaporated
(along with all the interior points in the line segments).

Boy am I embarrassed!  Guess I'll just lurk for a while...

bb

- -----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail]
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of
[e-mail]
Sent: Friday, July 10, 1998 3:14 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (fractint) Re: Cardinality


Andrew Schoonmaker wrote:
>
> At 13:38 7/9/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >By definition (Aleph-null)^2 = Aleph-one.  You are not scaling
Aleph-null by
> >a finite number, you are squaring it.
>
> Um, no, aleph-null squared = aleph-null... Squares contain the same number
> of points as line segments...  Or at least, that's what I thought...
>
> >For a set of n elements, there are n^2 subsets.
>
> Hmm?
> {1,2,3}...{}, {1}, {2}, {3}, {1,2}, {1,3}, {2,3}, {1,2,3} ... what's the
> ninth?
>
> >The number of subsets of
> >Aleph-null is Aleph-one (the 'continuum' infinity (used for counting all
> >line segments, partitions, etc of a line - or counting
polygons, surfaces,
> >etc in a  real plane) as opposed to the 'enumerable' infinity
(counts real
> >numbers/rationals, etc).

Its been a long time, but if I remember by college topology class
correctly...
for a set of n elements there are 2^n subsets not n^2 so for
the example given of 3 ... (3)^2 = 8 which is how many you found.
Also the cardinality of a set where n is infinite is the same as the
cardinality
of a set with n^2 elements. However card(n) < card(2^n) always even if n
is infinite.
2^(aleph-null) = (aleph-one) > (aleph-nul) ^ 2

Jim

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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"


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 15:54:05 -0500
From: Debora <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Re: New Contest

Boy, there's nothing like a contest to wake everybody up. : )

Debora

- --
When a girl marries, she exchanges the attentions of many men for the
inattention of one. --Helen Rowland



- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 18:53:54 EDT
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) 4 pars(Gallet-5-06)

Here's a few more strange images I liked......Enjoy~


Jim
*****************************************************************************

g5067101           { ; 0:02:47.03 75mhz 800x600
                     ; 7/10/98 image(c) JamesWeaver
                     ;
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=gallet-5.frm
  formulaname=Gallet-5-06 function=recip/log passes=t
  center-mag=0/0/0.1/1/45 params=0.1/0/1/0 float=y maxiter=50
  inside=bof60 outside=real invert=1/0/0 periodicity=0
  colors=000A4F62E20E321<5>PPKTTNXYQ<6>vxkvxk<5>``TXYQTTN<5>7643210011751C\
  82IC3OH4TL5YO5bS6gX7k`7nd7qg8tl8up8wt8ww8ww8wt8vp8tl8qg7nd7k`6gX5cS5ZO4U\
  L3PH3JC<2>011295<2>4QE4WH5_J5dL<2>7qS7sT8vU8xV9yWAyWAzW9yW8xV8vU7tT7qS6n\
  Q<2>5`J4XH4RE<3>142700<13>N98O99O99<14>7000D6<3>4ID4JF5KG6MH<3>8RM9SN9UN\
  9VO9WO9WO<2>9SN8RM8QL7OK7NJ<7>0D60921B92CE3EK<2>5I_6Jd7Lh8Ml8Op9Pr9RuASw\
  ATxAVyAVyATxASw9Ru9Ps8Op8Mm<3>5HW4FR3EL<2>093201<3>GEEJIHMLJPOM<2>WVTYXV\
  ZYW_ZX`_Ya`Ya`Y`_Y`_X<2>WVTUTSSRPPONMLKKII<4>21120E62EA4FD7FI9G<4>`JIcLI\
  gNIkQIoSIsUJvWJvWJ<5>`JIXHHTFHPDGLBGI9GD7F
  }

g5067102Zoomof01   { ; 0:03:26.79 75mhz 800x600
                     ; 7/10/98 image(c) JamesWeaver
                     ;
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=gallet-5.frm
  formulaname=Gallet-5-06 function=recip/log passes=t
  center-mag=3.12864/-4.46948/0.4267085 params=0.1/0/1/0 float=y
  maxiter=50 inside=bof60 outside=real invert=1/0/0 periodicity=0
  colors=000321<5>PPKTTNXYQ<6>vxkvxk<5>``TXYQTTN<5>7643210011751C82IC3OH4T\
  L5YO5bS6gX7k`7nd7qg8tl8up8wt8ww8ww8wt8vp8tl8qg7nd7k`6gX5cS5ZO4UL3PH3JC<2\
  >011295<2>4QE4WH5_J5dL<2>7qS7sT8vU8xV9yWAyWAzW9yW8xV8vU7tT7qS6nQ<2>5`J4X\
  H4RE<3>142700<13>N98O99O99<14>7000D6<3>4ID4JF5KG6MH<3>8RM9SN9UN9VO9WO9WO\
  <2>9SN8RM8QL7OK7NJ<7>0D60921B92CE3EK<2>5I_6Jd7Lh8Ml8Op9Pr9RuASwATxAVyAVy\
  ATxASw9Ru9Ps8Op8Mm<3>5HW4FR3EL<2>093201<3>GEEJIHMLJPOM<2>WVTYXVZYW_ZX`_Y\
  a`Ya`Y`_Y`_X<2>WVTUTSSRPPONMLKKII<4>21120E62EA4FD7FI9G<4>`JIcLIgNIkQIoSI\
  sUJvWJvWJ<5>`JIXHHTFHPDGLBGI9GD7F<2>20E
  }

g5067103           { ; 0:10:21.32 75mhz 800x600
                     ; 7/10/98 image(c) JamesWeaver
                     ;
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=gallet-5.frm
  formulaname=Gallet-5-06 function=recip/log passes=t
  center-mag=-7.46939/1.41523/0.128866/1/102.5 params=0.05/0/0.825/0
  float=y maxiter=100 inside=bof60 invert=1/0/0 periodicity=0
  colors=00021120E62EA4FD7FI9G<4>`JIcLIgNIkQIoSIsUJvWJvWJ<5>`JIXHHTFHPDGLB\
  GI9GD7F<2>20E321<5>PPKTTNXYQ<6>vxkvxk<5>``TXYQTTN<5>7643210011751C82IC3O\
  H4TL5YO5bS6gX7k`7nd7qg8tl8up8wt8ww8ww8wt8vp8tl8qg7nd7k`6gX5cS5ZO4UL3PH3J\
  C<2>011295<2>4QE4WH5_J5dL<2>7qS7sT8vU8xV9yWAyWAzW9yW8xV8vU7tT7qS6nQ<2>5`\
  J4XH4RE<3>142700<13>N98O99O99<14>7000D6<3>4ID4JF5KG6MH<3>8RM9SN9UN9VO9WO\
  9WO<2>9SN8RM8QL7OK7NJ<7>0D60921B92CE3EK<2>5I_6Jd7Lh8Ml8Op9Pr9RuASwATxAVy\
  AVyATxASw9Ru9Ps8Op8Mm<3>5HW4FR3EL<2>093201<3>GEEJIHMLJPOM<2>WVTYXVZYW_ZX\
  `_Ya`Ya`Y`_Y`_X<2>WVTUTSSRPPONMLKKII<3>644
  }

g5067104           { ; 0:04:40.23 75mhz 800x600
                     ; 7/10/98 image(c) JamesWeaver
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=fractint.frm
  formulaname=Gallet-5-06 function=log/recip passes=t
  center-mag=0/0/0.05 params=0.05/0/0.825/0 float=y maxiter=100
  inside=bof60 invert=1/0/0 periodicity=0
  colors=000EEA<2>PPKTTNXYQ<6>vxkvxk<5>``TXYQTTN<5>7643210011751C82IC3OH4T\
  L5YO5bS6gX7k`7nd7qg8tl8up8wt8ww8ww8wt8vp8tl8qg7nd7k`6gX5cS5ZO4UL3PH3JC<2\
  >011295<2>4QE4WH5_J5dL<2>7qS7sT8vU8xV9yWAyWAzW9yW8xV8vU7tT7qS6nQ<2>5`J4X\
  H4RE<3>142700<13>N98O99O99<14>7000D6<3>4ID4JF5KG6MH<3>8RM9SN9UN9VO9WO9WO\
  <2>9SN8RM8QL7OK7NJ<7>0D60921B92CE3EK<2>5I_6Jd7Lh8Ml8Op9Pr9RuASwATxAVyAVy\
  ATxASw9Ru9Ps8Op8Mm<3>5HW4FR3EL<2>093201<3>GEEJIHMLJPOM<2>WVTYXVZYW_ZX`_Y\
  a`Ya`Y`_Y`_X<2>WVTUTSSRPPONMLKKII<4>21120E62EA4FD7FI9G<4>`JIcLIgNIkQIoSI\
  sUJvWJvWJ<5>`JIXHHTFHPDGLBGI9GD7F<2>20E321764AA7
  }


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 20:11:10 EDT
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Web site URL

Hi folks!  There's nothing new on my web site, but I discovered that there's
been some problem with the homepage URL for some time.  I just want to give
out the correct URL and invite anyone who hasn't visited to come by.

http://members.aol.com/billatny/FRACTOPI.HTM

Apparently, it's case sensitive.

See you there,
Bill

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 17:50:35 -0700
From: "Angela Wilczynski" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Contest Rules

Brian...

Noooooooo.....don't go back to lurking!!! You will notice I can make a complete
fool of myself on ANY topic on ANY given day!!!

Damien....

A couple of (serious) rules I think ought to be implemented if we are to have a
free-form contest .....for those who prefer structure (like last time) I don't
see why we can't have a category that fits that desire....but I'd like to see
some "wild and crrrrrrrrrrazy" fractals this time.

Anyway......my rule suggestions

1.  Let's get the groundrules posted, commented on and Straight before the
contest starts.....that's a lesson learned from last time, at least for me.  I
was doing fractals assuming that the "set" would be judged rather than an
individual entry and might have worked toward different images had I understood
the rules better.

2. In the spirit of creativity, I strongly feel that any image entered MUST be
created specially for the contest.  I was having visions of looking thru my
500megs of fractal gifs when I thought.....wait!!!!!!  that's just too
dumb.......I'm not really going to enter to win anything (except glory, of
course), but to have those artsy juices flowing once I know what the categories
will be.

3. Rule #2 implies, at least to me, that we need some sort of start and stop
dates.  Everyone can fractal like mad....but only during the set period.

Also.....I think we ought to be limited to no more than 3 images and maybe 1
"wild card"......the same image entered into two categories.  If the rules state
that the 3 (or whatever) images can be entered willy nilly into categories then
the logical strategy to to enter them into Every ONE!!!! That defeats the
purpose of categories, in my mind.

Speaking of minds....I was pondering these highly important issues at 2AM last
night/morn.  Sheeeeeeeesh!!!!!!

Angela aka wizzle

p.s.  I have discovered that the itty bitty screwdrivers I use to fix the puter
are excellent cocktail "forks" (stabbing another smoked oyster).

p.s.s. Fractal chat anyone?????? (bring your cocktail forks)


Brian Baske wrote:
>
> I lurk on the list for a couple of years, then I open my mouth for the first
> time and scramble my trans-finite mathematics/topology.  OOPS!

<<snipped>>

>
> Boy am I embarrassed!  Guess I'll just lurk for a while...
>
> bb

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 18:03:42 -0700
From: "Angela Wilczynski" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: New contest

Jay....

Love the nominations!!!!!  I can see you in a tux giving out the prizes.  And
your list reminded me of some more categories.....

1.  Best fractal animation or movie
2.  Best fractal sound

Another thing we need to remember to do this time is to allow ample time for
voting.....and I mean really ample if we decide to have a lot of categories.

An alternative......is to have a series of contests.

1.  A fractint contest (a la last year) based on one of the great formulas we've
seen lately
2.  The "categories" approach - fractal images only
3.  Fractal mania - animation, sound, post-processed, etc.

Then maybe (drumroll.........).......5 finalists in each contest go to.......

FRACTAL OF THE YEAR!!!!!!!!!

My gawd......the mind boggles.....the press.....the cameras.....the great
clothes

Jay Hill wrote:
>
> Hi Angela Wilczynski <[e-mail]>
>
> > The "official" term for the contest official is Grand Pooh Bah. Last time Jay
> > Hill held the title since he hosted the contest at his web site (and very
> well
> > too!!!!).
>
> Thanks, it was fun.

<<Snipped>>
>
> > I nominate Damien Jones for Grand Pooh Bah II.  Any seconds?
> >
> > Proposed Categories:

>
> 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: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 07:46:39 -0700
From: Andrew Schoonmaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (fractint) Lost Fractal

At 08:20 7/10/98 -0400, you wrote:
>On Fri, 10 Jul 1998, Andrew Schoonmaker wrote:

>>  ....Wait a minute.  Since each point was originally on the line, there
>> can't be more points than there were originally, and therefore the number
>> of points in the dust can't exceed aleph-null.  I think it's the _number_
>> of Cantor dusts that's aleph-one.
>
>The line has aleph-one points on it.

  Oh, my, do I feel stupid.

  That makes the _number_ of Cantor dusts aleph-two...

 -Andrew (who's not sure, yet, how your aleph-null argument fails)

- --
Andrew Schoonmaker ([e-mail])
On the other hand, you have different fingers.

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 03:53:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Kragen)
Subject: (fractint) Re: your mail

On Fri, 10 Jul 1998, Lee Newsted wrote:
> So, Damien, Are you going to start keeping a list of catagories? If so I
> would like to have a catagory for L-System fractals. I know tey are not as
> fancy as some other types but they are fractals.

Have you seen the ones made with LPARSER?  They're a lot fancier than
anything else I've ever seen.

Kragen


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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 #255
******************************