 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'test.jpg' (96 KB)
Preview of image 'test.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote:
> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
Vulcan scrabble?
Slightly more seriously, but probably not specific enough (even if on the right
track):
Cellular automata?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21 Apr 2008 08:16:04 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
An image.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Vulcan scrabble?
No. :P
> Cellular automata?
Good guess, but no.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kyle wrote:
> On 21 Apr 2008 08:16:04 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>
>> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
>
> An image.
While *technically* not false, it's not the answer I was looking
for. :P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
Prime spiral?
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hmmm...
Binary Visualized?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:35:35 EDT, "Kirk Andrews"
<kir### [at] tektonartcom> wrote:
>Hmmm...
>
>Binary Visualized?
>
That's what it looks like to me
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
Quick variation if I'm right, completely random if I'm wrong...
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'var.jpg' (101 KB)
Preview of image 'var.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kirk Andrews wrote:
> Binary Visualized?
Nope.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
triple_r wrote:
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
>
> Prime spiral?
Correct. Also "Ulam spiral" would have been correct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulam_spiral
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"triple_r" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> > What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
>
> Quick variation if I'm right, completely random if I'm wrong...
>
> - Ricky
I'm with you. Gotta be prime spiral.
-
Sam Bleckley
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"stm31415" <stm### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I'm with you. Gotta be prime spiral.
You know you've been browsing MathWorld too long when...
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp a écrit :
> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
>
>
polka dots !
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> triple_r wrote:
>> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>>> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
>> Prime spiral?
>
> Correct. Also "Ulam spiral" would have been correct.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulam_spiral
Hmm, never heard of this before. Very cool. I wonder if there's a new
kind of fractal hiding here....
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stbenge <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Hmm, never heard of this before. Very cool. I wonder if there's a new
> kind of fractal hiding here....
>
> Sam
<some idiot's opinion>
Strictly speaking, I think the answer is no. If there were true structure in
the prime numbers then I wouldn't be buying things and paying bills online
anymore. Seems the mystery is that there's this much order, and not a bit
more.
</some idiot's opinion>
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"triple_r" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message
news:web.480d2f70fdfd42bcae42298f0@news.povray.org...
> stbenge <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> Hmm, never heard of this before. Very cool. I wonder if there's a new
>> kind of fractal hiding here....
>>
>> Sam
>
> <some idiot's opinion>
>
> Strictly speaking, I think the answer is no. If there were true structure
> in
> the prime numbers then I wouldn't be buying things and paying bills online
> anymore. Seems the mystery is that there's this much order, and not a bit
> more.
>
> </some idiot's opinion>
>
> - Ricky
>
Hmm,
I think the reason you pay bills online is the same as the reason you use
credit cards and telephone banking. i.e. that the banks tell you it's secure
and nothing for you to worry about. If you think banks know anything about
mathematical patterns or even elementary mathematics then you maybe want to
look up 'sub-prime' rather than 'prime' :-)
Regards,
Chris B.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:31:24 +0300, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>
> Correct. Also "Ulam spiral" would have been correct.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulam_spiral
A little OT, but this article caused a blonde moment for me. I read the line, "All
prime numbers except 2 are odd numbers", and thought, "There's only one even prime
number that I know of, not two."
...
...
DOH!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Among other things, Warp saw fit to write:
> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
Not pipe?
--
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
>
>
Plinko board.
The new version used by Drew Carrey on The Price Is Right.
Tom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
braille unicode? :-D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
Two can play that game. Any guesses what this is? I can think of a good reason
someone should recognize it...
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'blocks.jpg' (81 KB)
Preview of image 'blocks.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"triple_r" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> > What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
>
> Two can play that game. Any guesses what this is? I can think of a good reason
> someone should recognize it...
A beautiful image, is what it is.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:49:12 EDT, "triple_r" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
>
>Two can play that game. Any guesses what this is? I can think of a good reason
>someone should recognize it...
>
> - Ricky
A Waterfall Graph
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> A beautiful image, is what it is.
I'll have to check with the judges. Nope. Sorry. We can't accept that. We're
going to have to disqualify you for bribery. Thanks though...
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:49:12 EDT, "triple_r" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> >Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> >> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
> >
> >Two can play that game. Any guesses what this is? I can think of a good reason
> >someone should recognize it...
> >
> > - Ricky
>
> A Waterfall Graph
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Remember those little cubes that they gave you in elementary school to teach you
how to count? Someone's been counting too long.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> A Waterfall Graph
Interesting interpretation now that I look at it, but it's just the modulus of a
standard mathematical function. Nothing more. Just plotted with discrete
cubes.
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
triple_r wrote:
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>> What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
>
> Two can play that game. Any guesses what this is? I can think of a good reason
> someone should recognize it...
Hmmm, not sure, maybe the absolute value of the Riemann zeta function?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler <wampler+pov### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
> Hmmm, not sure, maybe the absolute value of the Riemann zeta function?
Correct! As much talk as there has been about web comics, I figured someone
would recognize it from xkcd:
http://xkcd.com/113/
Not easy to calculate either. I ended up resorting to Sage.
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
triple_r wrote:
> Kevin Wampler <wampler+pov### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
>
>> Hmmm, not sure, maybe the absolute value of the Riemann zeta function?
>
> Correct! As much talk as there has been about web comics, I figured someone
> would recognize it from xkcd:
I mostly based my guess on the strange shape of the far contour, and
Riemann zeta seemed like the most likely function that would do
something like that. Now that I see it I have read that xkcd strip
though, so that was probably kicking around in my subconscious.
I like the image (and Warps) the 3D block rendering adds a nice look to
the plots (focal blur is a good touch in yours as well).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler <wampler+pov### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
> triple_r wrote:
> > Kevin Wampler <wampler+pov### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
> >
> >> Hmmm, not sure, maybe the absolute value of the Riemann zeta function?
> >
> > Correct! As much talk as there has been about web comics, I figured someone
> > would recognize it from xkcd:
>
> I mostly based my guess on the strange shape of the far contour, and
> Riemann zeta seemed like the most likely function that would do
> something like that. Now that I see it I have read that xkcd strip
> though, so that was probably kicking around in my subconscious.
>
> I like the image (and Warps) the 3D block rendering adds a nice look to
> the plots (focal blur is a good touch in yours as well).
:\ I'm so out of my league in this forum. (Yeah, I imagined a number once...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kirk Andrews wrote:
> Kevin Wampler <wampler+pov### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
>
> :\ I'm so out of my league in this forum. (Yeah, I imagined a number once...)
>
Well, truthfully recognizing a function like that is a bit more like
doing well in a mathematical version of Trivial Pursuit; fun, but not to
be confused with actually knowing anything deep about the topic at hand
(at least in my case).
Also, I like the pun.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > Kevin Wampler <wampler+pov### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
> >
> > :\ I'm so out of my league in this forum. (Yeah, I imagined a number once...)
> >
Yeah, I'm with you. I've been keeping Wolfram's open in another tab while
reading this thread. There's so much to learn and so little time...
--
Sam Bleckley
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
triple_r wrote:
> Kevin Wampler <wampler+pov### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
>
>> Hmmm, not sure, maybe the absolute value of the Riemann zeta function?
>
> Correct!
I was going to suggest it because it looked familiar, but then I
looked at the image at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_zeta_function
and decided that perhaps it's not that after all. The ridges looked too
evenly shaped.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> triple_r wrote:
>> Kevin Wampler <wampler+pov### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
>>
>>> Hmmm, not sure, maybe the absolute value of the Riemann zeta function?
>> Correct!
>
> I was going to suggest it because it looked familiar, but then I
> looked at the image at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_zeta_function
> and decided that perhaps it's not that after all. The ridges looked too
> evenly shaped.
I imagine that this image is from the x >= 0 half plane, and since the
structure that's most obvious in the wikipedia article is for x < 0 it's
reasonable that this image would look different. But yeah, I get your
point, that very same issue is why I was pretty unsure if my guess was
correct.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>
> I was going to suggest it because it looked familiar, but then I
> looked at the image at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_zeta_function
> and decided that perhaps it's not that after all. The ridges looked too
> evenly shaped.
Yes, the real part is from 0 to 2, and the imaginary part from about 20 to 50.
Oh, and sorry for hijacking your thread--I enjoyed your quiz enough to try and
return the favor though.
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ramdom matrix?
I see a binary 2D matrix, checked in black squares to 0 allways and white
squares distributed randomly beetween 0 or 1.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"triple_r" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> > What is this? Only two-word answers are accepted.
>
> Quick variation if I'm right, completely random if I'm wrong...
>
> - Ricky
Ricky, I liked your variation so much that I made a quick variation of it...
- Rob
"There is no spoon."
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'rwmsackssprialguys.jpg' (215 KB)
Preview of image 'rwmsackssprialguys.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Robert McGregor" <rob### [at] mcgregorfineartcom> wrote:
> Ricky, I liked your variation so much that I made a quick variation of it...
Rob -
And I liked your variation on my variation so much that I made a quick variation
of it. One factor to unite them all...
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'prime2.jpg' (148 KB)
Preview of image 'prime2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Rob -
>
> And I liked your variation on my variation so much that I made a quick variation
> of it. One factor to unite them all...
>
> - Ricky
Haha! This is a "prime" example of how religious zealotry can "spiral" out of
control around "one" small thing, even the smallest of factors... Bravo!
"There is no spoon."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"triple_r" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "Robert McGregor" <rob### [at] mcgregorfineartcom> wrote:
> > Ricky, I liked your variation so much that I made a quick variation of it...
>
> Rob -
>
> And I liked your variation on my variation so much that I made a quick variation
> of it. One factor to unite them all...
>
> - Ricky
Completely random, but this image reminded me of a very similar image I once
rendered. Mine has none of the psuedo-order of primes in it, though.
-smws
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'figuretest.png' (205 KB)
Preview of image 'figuretest.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
