First of all everyone, when I say I want "infinite" with povray, I guess I mean
a full 12 orders of magnitude of zoom as I was able to get with Mandel.  I hope
yall have understood this is what I meant.

Tom Melly wrote:

> "Greg M. Johnson" <gre### [at] my-dejanewscom> wrote in message
> news:3A54F817.35634205@my-dejanews.com...
> >
> > NOT SO with the heteromf. As you tell me, I'd need to keep fiddling with
> the
> > params as I zoomed deeper and deeper in.
> >
>
> But this is almost certainly what any fractal program - that's why they get
> slower the more you zoom in. I know of no reasonable definition of a fractal
> that doesn't imply an infinite amount of calculations for "perfection".

> > Mandel has infinite; I didn't claim that all fractals had infinite.
> ... but you should. They do.

I did some reading on a fractals textbook last night.  If someone were to say
write an INC to make a Sierpinski sponge--truly a fractal object, a recursive
object.  I would have to put in a parameter for "desired number of iterations."
So even if I put in say 2 or 3 iterations to the sponge, it would still be
"fractal," although perhaps a better description is "the 3rd order approximation
of the Sierpinski gadget (/sponge??)".  If I wanted to do a zoom encompassing 12
orders of magnitude on the Sierpinski gadget with interesting details all the
way down, I would have to put in a lot of iterations in the structure--let's say
12 as a first guess.  And the parse time and memory usage for the object at the
1E12 zoom would likely exceed the capacity of my PC and/or C and/or the Intel
chip.  Mandel, however, is quite cool.  See an image I posted in p.b.i.

Post a reply to this message