Greg M. Johnson <gre### [at] my-dejanewscom> wrote in message
news:37E2407B.F551ABC8@my-dejanews.com...
> Why can't we implement a Sierpinski pattern in povray?
>
> As I understand povray, for some of the more mathematically complicated
> thingies,  such as isosurfaces of complex equations and the bozo or
> Mandelbrot patterns,  the complexity of the feature depends on the
> density of rays hitting it.  For example, the computer doesn't have
> stored the "entire" Mandelbrot set at all magnifications, but merely
> calculates the pattern at the place where a traced ray hits the object.
> Thus, there are few practical limits to zooming in (reducing camera
> angle) to see smaller and smaller regions of the Mandelbrot pattern.  Am
> I right so far?
>
> It's pretty hard for me to construct a Sierpinski object beyond a half
> dozen orders of scale. Isn't this just another mathematically
> complicated thingy that povray can solve procedurally?
>
> So why can't we put a Sierpinski pattern in povray?

    Undoubtedly, it could be done. However, it could also be done as a macro
rather easily, and there are so many variuations on the Sierpinski theme
that a good macro, editable by the user, would be far more flexible.

    More to the point: how about a Julia set pattern? The Julia sets, being
more repetitious, are a better pattern for most purposes than the Mandelbrot
set. The periodic-function variants are even better for such a purpose.

    -Robert Dawson

Post a reply to this message