Mandelbrot

[harmonygirl]

So....I believe that Mandelbrot has tremendous metaphysical implications. Math as becoming, rather than equality. Philosophically, the idea that becoming can be expressed in mathematical terms is the only way that the chaos and order of nature can be captured. I actually call it the theory of broccoli (viz. magnification). I love the fact that something removed and cerebral (math) can describe Gaia et. al. I think becoming is what it's all about.
Takers?

[Guille]

The direct ontological impplication I see in it is that it destroys all theires that defend that everything finite is infinite realtivelly, for as math is exact, then it defends that everything that is whole is infinite even though it might be finite, with no need of completeness (which is a very different concept to wholeness) or any need of circularity. Therefore a finite being or finite power is objectivelly infinite always if it is whole. We can derive a lot of thought from here, it's so big I have to work on it for a time.

[subversion]

I think I can agree but I have a question. I know that the Mandelbrot set sort of repeats itself if you zoom in far enough, but what if you continue zooming in? Does it seem to repeat itself forever and if so is there any change? Hopefully you know cuz I don't really know where to look at the Mandelbrot set unless I got motivated enough to program it into matlab. thanks

[harmonygirl]

I think it repeats, but this is extrapolation (or imagination) because at some point it gets too small. There used to be a great site at USC (?) that did this in changing colour...pretty psychadelic! I don't know about the completeness requirement for in/finite. Maybe it depends on how you concieve of time, ie linear? I think that time is like a slinky, both linear and cyclical, it just depends where you cut it (like how a dot turns into a line which turns into a plane as you dimension jump). I think that time is simultaneously occurring, that every moment coexists with everyother moment, so in effect, it's a dot.

[Mike 5]

I think I can agree but I have a question. I know that the Mandelbrot set sort of repeats itself if you zoom in far enough, but what if you continue zooming in? Does it seem to repeat itself forever and if so is there any change? Hopefully you know cuz I don't really know where to look at the Mandelbrot set unless I got motivated enough to program it into matlab. thanks

There is no limit to recursion.

That is the whole point. I had a fractal program and you could zoom in and in and in and that is the whole point.

The question is can you zoom out and out and out - theoretically yes, in practice, our mathematics has to start somewhere. But reality, our minds, who knows?

Great post Harmony. I think I'll get out of Harm's way.

Becoming - YES! YES! becoming.

[Mike 5]

The direct ontological impplication I see in it is that it destroys all theires that defend that everything finite is infinite realtivelly, for as math is exact, then it defends that everything that is whole is infinite even though it might be finite, with no need of completeness (which is a very different concept to wholeness) or any need of circularity. Therefore a finite being or finite power is objectivelly infinite always if it is whole. We can derive a lot of thought from here, it's so big I have to work on it for a time.

Hiya Guille.

As you may remember, for me infinity is a lie. Religious nonsense - I cannot touch it nor see it nor smell it, it is just made up by someone and I say, OY! NO!

Same with Zero. Zero clearly does not exist, that is what it means.

So how to have mathematics without these limits - ah - my answer is elsewhere on this forum and shit, I get confused trying to explain - it's really ... difficult to say anything, so I see why people are addicted to infinity.

Just as you go far enough East, you come back from West, what if your Mandelbrot gets smaller and smaller, and there is some looping size (like the diameter of this planet for east and west) ... and you come back from larger and larger.

ON paper and on computers this is clearly impossible., YOu need to start somewhere.

Can we imagine it? That is not the question at all. Maybe our intelligence is inadequate to know the deeper truth.

It may be - and I just say, it may all be very wonderful - beyond our concepts and limitations...

Fractals... yeah ... more ...

[subversion]

I think it repeats, but this is extrapolation (or imagination) because at some point it gets too small. There used to be a great site at USC (?) that did this in changing colour...pretty psychadelic! I don't know about the completeness requirement for in/finite. Maybe it depends on how you concieve of time, ie linear? I think that time is like a slinky, both linear and cyclical, it just depends where you cut it (like how a dot turns into a line which turns into a plane as you dimension jump). I think that time is simultaneously occurring, that every moment coexists with everyother moment, so in effect, it's a dot.

hmmm, that's sounds a lot like my theory...

you're gonna like it I can tell

[Guille]

Hiya Guille.

As you may remember, for me infinity is a lie. Religious nonsense - I cannot touch it nor see it nor smell it, it is just made up by someone and I say, OY! NO!

Hi mike. I also believe infinity is a lie. This is my basis: everything (not as the entity, but as all-the-things) is perfect for itself. And that is why things are not to correct when seen to themselves due to this reason.

Same with Zero. Zero clearly does not exist, that is what it means.

Yep: nor a number, or a place, or something...

Can we imagine it? That is not the question at all. Maybe our intelligence is inadequate to know the deeper truth.

If it's thinkable, it's imaginable.

It may be - and I just say, it may all be very wonderful - beyond our concepts and limitations...

Sorry but if you eliminate limits you come circularly to the ideas of zero and infinity (no limit (0 limits) and no limit also means infinite non-limitation). This is the bad thing of maths. Language also does the same thing. They are circular...

[harmonygirl]

Sub,
didn't catch your theory....

[harmonygirl]

Guille,
I'm not sure what you mean by your infinity explanation. I don't know how perfection relates. What am I missing?