From: owner-fractint-digest@lists.xmission.com (fractint-digest) To: fractint-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: fractint-digest V1 #355 Reply-To: fractint-digest Sender: owner-fractint-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-fractint-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk fractint-digest Saturday, January 23 1999 Volume 01 : Number 355 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:54:28 -0500 From: Bill Jemison Subject: (fractint) MIDI Robin wrote: 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 Para: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" - -------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List Post Message: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 17:34:15 -0700 From: Xylen 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 19:30:08 -0600 From: "Nature Leseul" Subject: Re: (fractint) Simply Elegant and a question <> 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 20:29:29 EST From: Genealogy1@aol.com 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 20:12:33 -0600 From: "Damien M. Jones" 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 \\ dmj@fractalus.com \\ 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 21:39:08 EST From: PKyleCA@aol.com Subject: Re: (fractint) Simply Elegant and a question In a message dated 1/22/99 5:31:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, nleseul@zurich.crosswinds.net 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 19:52:34 -0700 (MST) From: Kerry Mitchell 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 21:01:28 -0600 From: "Nature Leseul" Subject: Re: (fractint) Simply Elegant and a question <> Right, but there were philosophers who started questioning the existence of God in the Renaissance. <> 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. <> 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 23:58:17 -0500 (EST) From: Jim Muth Subject: (fractint) Re: Simply Elegant and a question At 05:34 PM 1/22/99 -0700, you wrote: >Sorry about my rambling, but it has been too long since Jim has had a >good philosophical post. This situation will soon be remedied! Jim Muth jamth@mindspring.com - -------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List Post Message: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 14:08:39 -0000 From: "Matthew Bennett" 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 12:33:45 -0500 (EST) From: Jim Muth 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 jamth@mindspring.com - -------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List Post Message: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 11:36:31 -0700 From: Xylen 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 11:03:24 -0800 From: Christopher Springer 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 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-- - -------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List Post Message: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 13:08:54 -0600 From: "Damien M. Jones" 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 \\ dmj@fractalus.com \\ 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 13:23:43 -0600 From: "Damien M. Jones" 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 \\ dmj@fractalus.com \\ 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 15:03:41 EST From: Hackberg91@aol.com 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 14:11:00 -0600 From: "Tim Wegner" 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: fractint@lists.xmission.com Get Commands: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "help" Administrator: twegner@phoenix.net Unsubscribe: majordomo@lists.xmission.com "unsubscribe fractint" ------------------------------ End of fractint-digest V1 #355 ******************************