ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/fractint/archive/v01.n355

Internet Message Format | 1999-01-22 | 40KB

From: [e-mail] (fractint-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: fractint-digest V1 #355
Reply-To: fractint-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


fractint-digest       Saturday, January 23 1999       Volume 01 : Number 355




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

Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:54:28 -0500
From: Bill Jemison <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) MIDI

Robin wrote:

 <there have been a number of people interested in turning the chaotic
 <orbits of  fractal caculation into music of some sort,

You can say that again! Hi Robin...this is my first day on the list.
Anything new on the sound front?

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, 22 Jan 1999 16:24:14 -0300
From: "Alejandro Kainer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: (fractint) Re: Alejandro Kainer's Message

Thank you, George, but I didn't write that. It was Andrew's writing. By the
way, Andrew, did you solve your problem? Because it seems that my "little
contribution" generated a cascade of boos!! and #@$~~~#@ that displaced your
original question. I promise I will study my fractint lessons before I ever
think of helping someone.

- -----Original Message-----
De: George Martin <[e-mail]>
Para: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>
Fecha: Viernes 22 de Enero de 1999 15:36
Asunto: (fractint) Re: Alejandro Kainer's Message


Ale wrote:

>
Yeh, it is nonsense. If you read the documents (I can't remember
exactly where it says so) you'll see that the FractInt authors
strongly warn *against* using, e.g. Q^5, and say that Q*Q*Q*Q*Q is
faster (about 4 times faster in my experience). The reason is that
the "^" operator is designed to work with complex number powers as
well...
<

This is correct. If the power is a real integer constant -1, 0, 1, or 2,
the parser recognizes this and does not run the power function ("^"), but
instead runs recip, one, ident, or sqr respectively. Any other power,
whether real, imaginary or complex, runs the power function, which is one
of the slowest in the arsenal. Thus real postive integers greater than two
are likely to run much faster if expressed as multiplication rather than
power, e.g. X*X*X is better than x^3.


Paul wrote:

>
It parses sqr(x) into (a+b)(a-b) + 2abi, which is two fmuls and two fadds
and a fsub. (The 2ab is one fmul and a fadd since, assuming Tim Wegener
wasn't drunk or deranged on the day he wrote that particular line of code,
he has it actually work as ab + ab, since the add is less expensive than
another multiply.)
<

Paul is right. Here is the ASM code for the sqr function:

      fld          st(0)               ; x x y
      fld          st(0)               ; x x x y
      fmul         st,st(3)            ; xy x x y
      fadd         st,st               ; 2xy x x y
      fxch         st(3)               ; y x x 2xy
      fadd         st(2),st            ; y x x+y 2xy
      fsubp        st(1),st            ; x-y x+y 2xy
      fmulp        st(1),st            ; xx-yy 2xy

Note line 4. This code was written by the eminently sober Chuck Ebbert. :)

George Martin

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 22 Jan 1999 17:34:15 -0700
From: Xylen <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Simply Elegant and a question

In a recent newsletter, I learned something interesting.

"That under orthodox Jewish law, the word "God" cannot be destroyed.
You can't, for example, throw away a piece of paper with the word=20
God on it--instead you have to ritually bury it or arrange for its
storage. The inevitable question arose over what to do when computers
are
involved: can you erase the word from a word processing document or from
some other digital form?=20

Last week, one of the leading orthodox rabbis, Rabbi Moshe Shaul Klein,
decided that it was OK to erase or delete digital versions of the word
"God," because they did not contain the actual word, but a composition
of 1s and 0s. If everything is binary underneath, the rabbi reasoned,
then even the word "God" is not actually G-o-d but a series of
numbers."--Alice Hill

Okay, so if everything is binary, including fractals, I guess that means
that they don't really exist. Just a bunch of 1's and 0's.  But we all
know that fractals exist, since we spend a lot of time creating them and
coloring them. :)  Now my questions is--when did fractals first exist?
With the invention of the computer, or did they exist but we were unable
to perceive them? Jim Muth asked where do fractals go when the power
fails. Do they continue to exist or is it really our power of perception
that is lost with the loss of electricity? If they exist only while on
the screen, are we guilty of murder every time we change screens?=20

Sorry about my rambling, but it has been too long since Jim has had a
good philosophical post. To make up for my rambling, here is a PAR.
Instead of seeking infinite detail and a fancy coloring algorithms, this
one is "Simply Elegant."

************************
Minimal            { ; ;
                     ; Dec 10, 1998 (c) Mary Tupper=20
                     ;   0:00:02.58 generation time at 320x
  reset=3D1960 type=3Dmandel center-mag=3D0.0407306/0.873298/5.350562
  params=3D0/0 float=3Dy maxiter=3D2 inside=3Dstartrail
  invert=3D0.4168904722619/0/0
colors=3D00000e0e00eee00e0eeL0eeeLLLLLzLzLLzzzLLzLzzzLzzz000555<3>HHHKKKO=
O\
OSSSWWW___ccchhhmmmssszzz00z<3>z0z<3>z00<3>zz0<3>0z0<3>0zz<2>0GzVVz<3>zV\
z<3>zVV<3>zzV<3>VzV<3>Vzz<2>Vbzhhz<3>zhz<3>zhh<3>zzh<3>hzh<3>hzz<2>hlz00\
S<3>S0S<3>S00<3>SS0<3>0S0<3>0SS<2>07SEES<3>SES<3>SEE<3>SSE<3>ESE<3>ESS<2\
>EHSKKS<2>QKSSKSSKQSKOSKMSKK<2>SQKSSKQSKOSKMSKKSK<2>KSQKSSKQSKOSKMS00G<3\
>G0G<3>G00<3>GG0<3>0G0<3>0GG<2>04G88G<2>E8GG8GG8EG8CG8AG88<2>GE8GG8EG8CG\
8AG88G8<2>8GE8GG8EG8CG8AGBBG<2>FBGGBGGBFGBDGBCGBB<2>GFBGGBFGBDGBCGBBGB<2\
>BGFBGGBFGBDGBCG0NkTTT0EqSSS03xRRR60tQQQ cyclerange=3D1/2
  }

- --=20
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Windows 98   Pentium of Borg--=94Prepare to be assimil-Gated=94
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 22 Jan 1999 19:30:08 -0600
From: "Nature Leseul" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Simply Elegant and a question

<<If they exist only while on
the screen, are we guilty of murder every time we change screens? >>

  Not any more than things out the window cease to exist when you close the
window. Fractals have been ingrained in the nature of mathematics ever since
God decreed that 1+1=2, so they're there, no matter what.

  Which brings up another point that I've been wondering about for some
time. If you've read Carl Sagan's novel Contact, the final scene involves
the discovery of a message from God ingrained in the nature of the universe,
specically in a deep decimal place in the value of pi, supposedly since God
would want to leave His signature in something universal and apparent to any
alien race anywhere in the universe. But the value of pi is ingrained in the
nature of the circle, which is geometric and not purely mathematical in
nature. It's concievable, although improbable, that an alien race could
exist with no concept of physical shape and thus be unaware of the existence
of the circle. Mathematics, however, is universal, and the process behind
fractal images is purely mathematical. Fractals can be shown to include
chaotic order and/or orderly chaos in both light and sound, and probably
would be able to in other human senses and in alien senses as well. So a
fractal seems like the perfect place for God to leave His "signature" in the
universe.

  Plus, pi was fairly well known to nearly every ancient civilization on the
planet, most of which were still fairly spiritual and faithful to their
god(s). (Even the Bible mentions pi at one point, though it just uses the
value of 3.) Fractals, however, cannot concievably be generated without the
aid of computers. Computers by their nature are unlikely to be developed
except by a race which has succeeded in unlocking a large part of the
physical nature of the universe and is beginning to doubt its faith in God.
If I were God, I'd want to place My signature at exactly the point where a
race with growing science and atheism would find it and reaffirm their faith
in a higher power. Fractals seem perfect for this purpose.

||===================== ||
||   --v^v-[Nature Leseul]-v^v--    ||
||  The weird guy in the corner ||
||          Dreamy Smurf            ||
||             Donatello!               ||
||      "Some are vicious,          ||
||         some are fools,           ||
||        and others blind            ||
||          to see in me,             ||
||       one of their kind."          ||
||  -Anatoly, Endgame (Chess)||
||   "Is this off-topic or what?"   ||
||===================== ||



- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 22 Jan 1999 20:29:29 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (fractint) 3 Mandel types...

I thought these Mandel type images may interest some of you. They look best
(too me) at resolution 1600  x  1200. I'd like UltraFractal to be able to
handle these
PHC formulas in the future.

- --Bob Carr--

Carr3385                {; Clown's Face.    Copyright 1999 Bob Carr
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=43hCarr.frm formulaname=Carr3385
  passes=1 center-mag=-0.000890819/0.0465995/0.8539132/1/180
  params=200/300/400/550 float=y maxiter=647 periodicity=0
  colors=000<10>00048Q45O53M<10>0kt0ow0qn<3>0wF0xG000000000wlZ<10>MF7<14>z\
  o`000700<11>b00e00f70<5>oo0<5>g70e00b00<9>70000000003F<14>Rft<4>0wF<3>K_\
  t<16>15H03F000000``U<13>zyn<14>``U000000F00<15>d00<12>800000<33>0000tX0r\
  e0qn0ow<4>1bm
  }

Carr3385a               { ; A Framed Clown. Copyright 1999 Bob Carr
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=43hCarr.frm formulaname=Carr3385
  passes=1 center-mag=0.0010622/-0.019894/0.3939572/1/180
  params=200/300/400/550 float=y maxiter=647 invert=0.25/0/0
  periodicity=0
  colors=000<10>00048Q45O53M<10>0kt0ow0qn<3>0wF0xG000000000wlZ<10>MF7<14>z\
  o`000700<11>b00e00f70<5>oo0<5>g70e00b00<9>70000000003F<14>Rft<4>0wF<3>K_\
  t<16>15H03F000000``U<13>zyn<14>``U000000F00<15>d00<2>X00000<2>000L00<4>8\
  00000<33>0000tX0re0qn0ow<4>1bm
  }

frm: Carr3385(YAXIS){;Modified Sylvie Gallet frm
;passes 1 needs to be used with this PHC formula
pixel=(-abs(real(pixel))+flip(imag(pixel)))
b5=flip(conj(abs((pixel*pixel))))+0.1-conj(0.1/pixel)
b4=flip(conj(abs((pixel*pixel))))
c=whitesq*b4-(whitesq==0)*b4
z=whitesq*b5-(whitesq==0)*b5
c1=1.5*z^1.2,c2=2.25*z,c3=3.375*z,c4=5.0625*z
l1=real(p1),l2=imag(p1),l3=real(p2),l4=imag(p2),l5=300
bailout=16,iter=0,pp2=pixel/imag(p2):
t1=(iter==l1),t2=(iter==l2),t3=(iter==l3),t4=(iter==l4),t5=(iter==l5)
t=1-(t1||t2||t3||t4||t5),z=z*t+0.02/pixel-0.25
c=c*t+c1*t1+c2*t2+c3*t3+c4*t4+c5*t5+pp2+0.0009995
z=(|z|/5)+z*z+c-0.09/pixel
iter=iter+1
(|real(z)|)<=bailout
}


Carr3386              { ; Just beautiful !  Copyright 1999 Bob Carr
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=43hCarr.frm formulaname=Carr3386
  passes=1 center-mag=-0.00131402/-0.00173241/1.404666/1/180
  params=200/300/400/550 float=y maxiter=647 periodicity=0
  colors=000<10>FIK<4>000_YS<6>OI5<6>eYJg_LiaNkcPneR<4>zpa<4>jdWgaVcZT`WSY\
  UR<6>AAK000000A3M<11>`Fw<6>5oP<10>007000000000A00<10>c00<16>A00000000UDG\
  <10>zz0<7>``9YYAXVB<6>KAJMAKOAM<12>ziF<13>K8C413000<2>BB8EFAIIDLLG<10>zy\
  n<15>UMH00000000053M<10>5Px<6>5wP<5>5Ur5Px5Ms<6>53M000000
  }

frm: Carr3386(YAXIS){;Modified Sylvie Gallet frm
;passes 1 needs to be used with this PHC formula
pixel=(-abs(real(pixel))+flip(imag(pixel)))
b5=(((pixel^4)*(conj(pixel*1.5)))/(tanh(0.3/pixel)))-0.12
b4=pixel/(tanh(0.3/pixel))
c=whitesq*b4-(whitesq==0)*b4
z=whitesq*b5^0.745-(whitesq==0)*b5
c1=1.5*z^1.2,c2=2.25*z,c3=3.375*z,c4=5.0625*z
l1=real(p1),l2=imag(p1),l3=real(p2),l4=imag(p2),l5=300
bailout=16,iter=0,pp2=pixel/imag(p2):
t1=(iter==l1),t2=(iter==l2),t3=(iter==l3),t4=(iter==l4),t5=(iter==l5)
t=1-(t1||t2||t3||t4||t5),z=z*t+0.02/pixel-0.25
c=c*t+c1*t1+c2*t2+c3*t3+c4*t4+c5*t5+pp2+0.0009995
z=z*z+c
iter=iter+1
(|real(z)|)<=bailout
}


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 22 Jan 1999 20:12:33 -0600
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) 3 Mandel types...

Bob,

 - I thought these Mandel type images may interest some of you. They look
 - best (too me) at resolution 1600  x  1200. I'd like UltraFractal to be
 - able to handle these PHC formulas in the future.

Well, the reason Ultra Fractal doesn't like them has nothing to do with
them being PHC formulas (UF handles those fine) but is because this formula
writes a value to "pixel", which in UF is not permitted. I was able to
rewrite Carr3386 to work, but I can't get 3385 to work yet.

A quick look at the formula indicates you are only writing to pixel so as
to enforce horizontal symmetry, which you only need to do in the formula
(instead of by using the symmetry feature in FractInt) because it's a PHC
formula and using built-in symmetry would produce a break in the dither
pattern at the symmetry seam. The idea behind the PHC method is to
composite two fractal shapes, at a 50/50 mix. Ultra Fractal supports this
more effectively through layering, which can take advantage of 24-bit color
and eliminate the PHC dithering. And, you get to pick more than just a
50/50 mix. Layering is like PHC, much the way a Saturn V rocket is like a
firecracker. :-)

Damien M. Jones   \\
[e-mail]  \\  Fractalus Galleries & Info:
                    \\  http://www.fractalus.com/

Please do not post my e-mail address on a web site or
in a newsgroup.  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: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 21:39:08 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (fractint) Simply Elegant and a question

In a message dated 1/22/99 5:31:50 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<<  Computers by their nature are unlikely to be developed
 except by a race which has succeeded in unlocking a large part of the
 physical nature of the universe and is beginning to doubt its faith in God.
 If I were God, I'd want to place My signature at exactly the point where a
 race with growing science and atheism would find it and reaffirm their faith
 in a higher power. Fractals seem perfect for this purpose. >>

Amen!  I like the type of fractals that show me this "signature".......

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 22 Jan 1999 19:52:34 -0700 (MST)
From: Kerry Mitchell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Simply Elegant and a question

On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Nature Leseul wrote:

>   Which brings up another point that I've been wondering about for some
> time. If you've read Carl Sagan's novel Contact, the final scene involves
> the discovery of a message from God ingrained in the nature of the universe,
> specically in a deep decimal place in the value of pi, supposedly since God
> would want to leave His signature in something universal and apparent to any
> alien race anywhere in the universe. But the value of pi is ingrained in the
> nature of the circle, which is geometric and not purely mathematical in
> nature. It's concievable, although improbable, that an alien race could
> exist with no concept of physical shape and thus be unaware of the existence
> of the circle. Mathematics, however, is universal, and the process behind
> fractal images is purely mathematical. Fractals can be shown to include
> chaotic order and/or orderly chaos in both light and sound, and probably
> would be able to in other human senses and in alien senses as well. So a
> fractal seems like the perfect place for God to leave His "signature" in the
> universe.

Ah, but geometry is one aspect of mathematics, and pi has many
applications in other aspects of mathematics.  For example, if you have a
set of horizontal lines on a piece of paper on a tabletop, and you drop a
toothpick onto the paper, the probability that the toothpick will cross a
line is related to pi.  Also, pi can be found in the Mandelbrot set, in
terms of the relationship between the number of iterations to escape and
the distance of the point from the edge of the set.

> Plus, pi was fairly well known to nearly every ancient civilization on the
> planet, most of which were still fairly spiritual and faithful to their
> god(s). (Even the Bible mentions pi at one point, though it just uses the
> value of 3.) Fractals, however, cannot concievably be generated without the
> aid of computers. Computers by their nature are unlikely to be developed
> except by a race which has succeeded in unlocking a large part of the
> physical nature of the universe and is beginning to doubt its faith in God.

I wouldn't go that far.  Fractals (not called that, of course) were know
to mathematicians of many years ago.  For example, Gaston Julia of Julia
set fame (1800's ?) and David Hilbert, of Hilbert curve fame (early
1900's).  Most mathematicians didn't quite know what to do with them
(maybe something like Pythagoras not knowing how to handle irrational
numbers), but they were certainly known.

Also, don't underestimate the computational power of a society without
cable tv.  Log and trig tables to n decimal places have been around for
hundreds of years, as has many decimal places of pi.  Since the
fundamental calculation involved in fractal generation is simple, most
cultures could probably do it, should they choose to.  A great deal of
calculation has been accomplished by dedicated individuals with very
little in the way of (modern) technology.  In fact, the first "computers"
were people, not machines, who calculated such things as projectile
trajectories.

Fractals, in the guise of natural objects, have been around forever, so
it's not inconceivable that non-electronic cultures are making them.

> If I were God, I'd want to place My signature at exactly the point where a
> race with growing science and atheism would find it and reaffirm their faith
> in a higher power. Fractals seem perfect for this purpose.

If I were God, I'd probably make myself more visible to my people.

Kerry



- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 22 Jan 1999 21:01:28 -0600
From: "Nature Leseul" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Simply Elegant and a question

<<I wouldn't go that far.  Fractals (not called that, of course) were know
to mathematicians of many years ago.  For example, Gaston Julia of Julia
set fame (1800's ?) and David Hilbert, of Hilbert curve fame (early
1900's).  Most mathematicians didn't quite know what to do with them
(maybe something like Pythagoras not knowing how to handle irrational
numbers), but they were certainly known.>>

  Right, but there were philosophers who started questioning the existence
of God in the Renaissance.

<<Also, don't underestimate the computational power of a society without
cable tv.  Log and trig tables to n decimal places have been around for
hundreds of years, as has many decimal places of pi.  Since the
fundamental calculation involved in fractal generation is simple, most
cultures could probably do it, should they choose to.  A great deal of
calculation has been accomplished by dedicated individuals with very
little in the way of (modern) technology.  In fact, the first "computers"
were people, not machines, who calculated such things as projectile
trajectories.>>

  Agreed, you could calculate fractals by hand, but it would take a whole
lot of scratch paper and a very bored mathematician. And computers make it
far easier to actually explore the full complexity of the M-set and others.

<<If I were God, I'd probably make myself more visible to my people.>>

  Ah, but if we knew Him for sure, then that'd take all the mystery out of
life. :-)

||===================== ||
||   --v^v-[Nature Leseul]-v^v--    ||
||  The weird guy in the corner ||
||          Dreamy Smurf            ||
||             Donatello!               ||
||      "Some are vicious,          ||
||         some are fools,           ||
||        and others blind            ||
||          to see in me,             ||
||       one of their kind."          ||
||  -Anatoly, Endgame (Chess)||
||"Is this off-topic or what?"||
||===================== ||



- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 22 Jan 1999 23:58:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Jim Muth <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Re: Simply Elegant and a question

At 05:34 PM 1/22/99 -0700, you wrote:

        <snip>
>Sorry about my rambling, but it has been too long since Jim has had a
>good philosophical post.
         <snip>

This situation will soon be remedied!

Jim Muth
[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: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 14:08:39 -0000
From: "Matthew Bennett" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Simply Elegant and a question

I know some people have linked Fractals and God's existence, but I'd guess
this sort of thing might not appeal to as many subscribers as more "down to
earth" Fractal topics ;)

There's no problem with the chat that's been going on so far, but I just
thought I'd suggest it wasn't taken too far - before someone gets cross and
fills our mail boxes with angry rubbish (you know the sort that need only
the slightest hint of religion before releasing their "strong opinions").

Don't forget though, I'm not saying anything that has been said so far is
particularly unreasonable for this group (most of the stuff has been
relevant to Fractals) - but just a warning to start changing/ending the
topic (from previous experience with the for and against God arguments!)...


Matt


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 23 Jan 1999 12:33:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Jim Muth <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Re: Simply Elegant?

At 02:08 PM 1/23/99 -0000, Matt wrote:

>I know some people have linked Fractals and God's existence,

Yes they have!  The connection might or might not be valid, but
isn't it curious that the abstraction of fractal math can be
connected in this way in some people's minds with the even more
abstract idea some call God?

>but I'd guess this sort of thing might not appeal to as many
>subscribers as more "down to earth" Fractal topics ;)

Yes it might not!  As a result, I suggest we stay "down to earth"
and limit our search to the fractal dirt instead of aspiring to
the fractal stars.  :-(

>There's no problem with the chat that's been going on so far,

That's because it hasn't gone anywhere yet.

>but I just thought I'd suggest it wasn't taken too far - before
>someone gets cross and fills our mail boxes with angry rubbish
>(you know the sort that need only the slightest hint of religion
>before releasing their "strong opinions").

I suppose this implies that the Fractint group has such members.

>Don't forget though, I'm not saying anything that has been said
>so far is particularly unreasonable for this group (most of the
>stuff has been relevant to Fractals) - but just a warning to [not]
>start changing/ending the topic (from previous experience with the
>for and against God arguments!)...

You are right.  Mankind has not yet reached the stage of maturity
where he can intelligently and unemotionally discuss such important
non-objective topics as religion and the philosophy of science.

So let's stick to objectively real things such as fractals.

Jim Muth
[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: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 11:36:31 -0700
From: Xylen <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Re: Simply Elegant?

> So let's stick to objectively real things such as fractals.

But are fractals "real"? Intuitively, something isn't real unless I can
touch it, smell it, or taste it. Yes, I can see an image of a fractal,
but is this the real fractal itself or an artifact of 1's and 0's?
Consider a fractal that is viewed at F3 and the "exact" same fractal
viewed at SF3. They look different. Are they the same fractal or just a
different arrangement of bits?

Xylen

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 23 Jan 1999 11:03:24 -0800
From: Christopher Springer <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Re: Simply Elegant and a question

- --------------4D5B890CD7BDC265C71EA918
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Matthew Bennet wrote:

There's no problem with the chat that's been going on so far, but I just

thought I'd suggest it wasn't taken too far - before someone gets cross
and
fills our mail boxes with angry rubbish (you know the sort that need
only
the slightest hint of religion before releasing their "strong
opinions").

I sympathize with Matt's position.

BUT we should realize there is a price for "Peace in the Mailbox",
namely that by "giving in" to the mail threat, we have allowed another
group to control our free speech.

I doubt any of us "want" to risk a fight with anybody, but if we let our

tongues be tied today regarding Fractals and God, on what will
we allow them to be tied tomorrow??? And by whom???

Now I'm no hacker, and only have about four months experience on the
Internet, but if every item of email was date stamped upon reciept
and a full copy mailed back to the sender, this would serve
two useful purposes: First, acknowledgement of receipt. Second, anyone
trying to hose another with ludicrous email would equally hose himself.

Any thoughts???

Chris Springer

- --------------4D5B890CD7BDC265C71EA918
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">Matthew Bennet wrote:</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FF0000"></FONT>

<P><FONT COLOR="#FF0000">There's no problem with the chat that's been going
on so far, but I just</FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000">thought I'd suggest it wasn't taken too far -
before someone gets cross and</FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000">fills our mail boxes with angry rubbish (you
know the sort that need only</FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000">the slightest hint of religion before releasing
their "strong opinions").</FONT>

<P>I sympathize with Matt's position.

<P>BUT we should realize there is a price for "Peace in the Mailbox",
<BR>namely that by "giving in" to the mail threat, we have allowed another
<BR>group to control our free speech.

<P>I doubt any of us "want" to risk a fight with anybody, but if we let
our
<BR>tongues be tied today regarding Fractals and God, on what will
<BR>we allow them to be tied tomorrow??? And by whom???

<P>Now I'm no hacker, and only have about four months experience on the
<BR>Internet, but if every item of email was date stamped upon reciept
<BR>and a full copy mailed back to the sender, this would serve
<BR>two useful purposes: First, acknowledgement of receipt. Second, anyone
<BR>trying to hose another with ludicrous email would equally hose himself.

<P>Any thoughts???

<P>Chris Springer</HTML>

- --------------4D5B890CD7BDC265C71EA918--


- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 23 Jan 1999 13:08:54 -0600
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: Simply Elegant?

Xylen,

 - But are fractals "real"? Intuitively, something isn't real unless I can
 - touch it, smell it, or taste it.

Not true. These are *physical* aspects. Is love real? How about hate?
Fractals are as "real" as any other abstract concept. Arguing whether
fractals are "real" seems rather silly to me, an excuse to sound
philosophical. :-) The very definition of "abstract" is "considered apart
from concrete existence".

 - Consider a fractal that is viewed at F3 and the "exact" same fractal
 - viewed at SF3. They look different. Are they the same fractal or just
 - a different arrangement of bits?

They are two approximations of the same abstract object. Although we can
never achieve a precise physical representation of the object, that doesn't
mean the abstract object "does not exist".

Damien M. Jones   \\
[e-mail]  \\  Fractalus Galleries & Info:
                    \\  http://www.fractalus.com/

Please do not post my e-mail address on a web site or
in a newsgroup.  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: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 13:23:43 -0600
From: "Damien M. Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: Simply Elegant and a question

Chris,

 - BUT we should realize there is a price for "Peace in the Mailbox",
 - namely that by "giving in" to the mail threat, we have allowed another
 - group to control our free speech.

You err in _assuming_ you have a right to free speech on this mailing list.
Tim is the list administrator; he is within his rights to squelch any
discussion at any time, ultimately by removing the participants from the
subscriber list if necessary. That he generally lets the discussion wander
where it will, without too much restriction, is our good fortune in having
such a benevolent moderator. And ultimately, since this list is run on
Xmission's servers, they have the option of suspending the entire list if
they so choose.

We have freedom in this forum to discuss what we want, subject to the
overriding decisions of Tim and Xmission. (Although I don't think Xmission
monitors the list.) So while you have the freedom to say what you want, you
don't necessarily have the freedom to use this forum to do it. If you don't
like the forum, you have the freedom to set up your own.

PLEASE NOTE: I'm not saying Tim will censor us! I'm not saying he should or
shouldn't! I'm just saying that before we rally behind the cry of "free
speech" we should understand what we're really getting into. I've read the
discussion with interest, even though I don't necessarily agree with the
participants.

 - Now I'm no hacker, and only have about four months experience on the
 - Internet, but if every item of email was date stamped upon reciept
 - and a full copy mailed back to the sender, this would serve
 - two useful purposes: First, acknowledgement of receipt. Second, anyone
 - trying to hose another with ludicrous email would equally hose himself.

Nice thought, except for a few problems. First, you instantly *double* the
mail load on the Internet. This is a bad idea; the net is already heavily
loaded. :) Second, you double the amount of mail everybody receives. Third,
what about mailing lists like this one? If I post a message to this list,
should I receive "your message was read on Thursday" notices from every one
of the hundreds of subscribers? Please, no.

Oh, and you might want to refrain from using HTML-formatted mail when
posting to a mailing list. There are still quite a few situations where it
renders your mail totally unreadable.

Damien M. Jones   \\
[e-mail]  \\  Fractalus Galleries & Info:
                    \\  http://www.fractalus.com/

Please do not post my e-mail address on a web site or
in a newsgroup.  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: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 15:03:41 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (fractint) MIDI

Hi folks.
Fractals and music is an interesting topic and there are some serious attemps
there (I know some Germans and some US Americans) to make the orbits audible
and to get these series of notes into something like a piece. As I don't have
the URLs at hand, please let'em serach with "fractal music" and you'll get a
real lot valuable stuff.
What I am interested in is a way to transform linear fractals into waveforms
to beplayed by a soundcard. If anyone would like to communicate on that,
please email me. Thank you.
And many thanks to all the contributors who made my screen glow in ever
renewed beauty.
Michael Hackenberger

- --------------------------------------------------------------
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, 23 Jan 1999 14:11:00 -0600
From: "Tim Wegner" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Re: Simply Elegant and a question

Damien wrote:

> You err in _assuming_ you have a right to free speech on this mailing list.
> Tim is the list administrator; he is within his rights to squelch any
> discussion at any time, ultimately by removing the participants from the
> subscriber list if necessary.

Darn tootin I can and will squelch discussion and boot list
members if I see fit :-)

> That he generally lets the discussion wander
> where it will, without too much restriction, is our good fortune in having
> such a benevolent moderator.

My only concern is that this list be useful for the members. That
means keeping reasonably on topic. The reason for this is that the
traffic is high, and the more off topic messages there are, the less
useful the list is for it's intended purpose. Otherwise I see little
reason to use a heavy hand to try to control what list members
write. Over the life of the list there has been very little trouble. From
time to time I have nudged folks to stay on topic.

The topic is fractals and fractint. It can wander a bit into related
topics such as philosophy or computer issues related to fractal
images.

Everybody should be clear that there is no "free speech" on this
list. The list is for discussion of fractals and fractint, and not other
subjects. But quite frankly we are all mature folks here and
policing on my part is unnecessary and won't happen without good
cause. I expect everybody understands why the list has the most
utility if we stay on topic.

FWIW I hereby declare mail bombing etc. as off topic. This should
be obvious to everybody. If folks want to talk about philosophy or
religion with regard to fractals, that is OK with me, within the limits
of what is of interest to most list members. I would ask that anyone
who posts a message on any subject do a sanilty check on
themselves and make sure sure their posting has a reasonable
chance of being of interest to many of the list members. Postings
of limited general interest should go as emails to specific folks you
know are interested.

Tim



- --------------------------------------------------------------
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 #355
******************************