POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : Cool 3D fractals : Re: Cool 3D fractals Server Time21 Jun 2024 09:31:47 EDT (-0400)
 Re: Cool 3D fractals
 From: Invisible Date: 23 Sep 2008 04:05:35 Message: <48d8a34f@news.povray.org>
```
{
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "DiscussionForumPosting",
"@id": "#48d8a34f%40news.povray.org",
"dateCreated": "2008-09-23T08:05:35+00:00",
"datePublished": "2008-09-23T08:05:35+00:00",
"author": {
"@type": "Person",
"name": "Invisible"
}
}
>> There is another possibility to consider as well: the general
>> 3rd-order complex equation has *two* unknowns instead of one,
>> resulting in 2D Julia sets but a 4D Mandelbrot set. So here we have a
>> 4D set based on a true field algebra, which structure in all
>> directions. And it follows the same kind of patterns as the 2nd order
>> set. Maybe this could be interesting to explore?
>
> Are you talking about extruding a 2D fractal along a third axis and
> varying the values? Is this not what ends up producing those bubble gum
> shapes?

No. Those are produced by iterating Z = Z^2 + C, but with Z and C as
hypercomplex or quaternion numbers instead of the usual complex numbers.

What *I* am talking about is iterating Z = Z^3 - 3 A^2 Z + B, where Z, A
and B are all normal complex numbers. A Julia set is rendered by varying
the start value for Z - which still has 2 components (Re(Z) and Im(Z)).
However, the Mandelbrot set is drawn by varying the parameters, which
gives us 4 axies: Re(A), Im(A), Re(B) and Im(B).

This is not new, just not very widely known. A few people have drawn it
before. If you search *waaay* back through the POV-Ray images newsgroup
you'll find some renderings I did.

As I say, it turns out that the higher the iteration count (and hence
the more complex the surface), the less "interesting" the image actually
becomes.

> Perhaps shading is the key. The 2D Mandelbrot makes sense to the eye
> primarily because of the black basin, and then the colors depicting
> iterations after that. So how would this work in three dimensions? The
> basin might extend from itself with branching structures, with certain
> areas of prominence. The whole thing would look confusing unless you
> applied a light shining down upon it. Or maybe each iteration could be
> made translucent, which might work fairly well, though you would have to
> increase the transparency if you wanted to zoom in further.

All of that seems at least plausible.

> Of course
> all this is moot unless you figure out out how to apply true
> transcendental complexity to the third dimension. Those taffy-like
> quaternions don't seem like the ultimate destination to me.

Agreed.
```