Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> What the result will be, without an attractor. 
> 
> OK, I'm afraid you're not making any sense to me, so ... nevermind.
> 
> You're either completely missing my point, or you're talking about 
> something entirely different than what I am.
> 
I am saying that, in general principle, large masses of particles act 
"similar" to what a strange attractor does for the images some people 
have been making in povray.images. It changes the behavior of the 
system. Until you plot the result, you don't necessarily have a 
prediction of what that will be, but it "not" what you end up with if 
you had one single particle. Mind, in reality, we have fairly clear 
ideas what happens if you place x number of protons/neutrons and 
electrons together, in a stable configuration, you end up with an 
element or isotope.

None of which describes why, or how, trivially or otherwise, which is 
the crux of your accusation.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message