What do you think of the Mandelbrot set...

There probably are multiverses.

>What do you think of the Mandelbrot set?
Pretty cool

>is it a legitimately interesting set?
The set itself is not interesting as it is by no means unique. Just shift it up by 1 unit and boom, another set with all the same characteristics.

What is interesting is the construction. It is so simple and yet it yields such an interesting set. In this sense, it is similar to the Cantor set, a less memey mathematician's favorite that doesn't get popsci'd because it doesn't even have a shape that you can put in a thumbnail and say XD MATH WOW.

To put it into perspective, consider differentiable nowhere but continuous everywhere functions and how our first examples were constructed. The construction itself is really complex and naturally, we get a really complex curve.

But imagine that instead the polynomial x^2 + 1 was differentiable nowhere. You would be like WHAT THE FUCK? Where did that fucking come from? Why does such a simple curve show such a weird behavior?

I think its incredibly interesting.

Ive read about a quarter of Chaos by James Gleick.*

My theory on the chaos theory is this:

When we measure it with our measurement apparatus like a ruler with numbers on it, it makes this shape. This can arise spontaneously out of data. So what if instead of using a ruler to measure chaos, we used chaos as the ruler to measure everything else? Then instead of being an odd shaped polygon with self repeating elements, perhaps WE would become the polygon. In short, the spontaneous arisal of chaos fractals might be because of an external force acting on reality as we know it.

*Popsci nonsense written by a journalist, not a scientist.

The ratio of the sizes of the bulbs on the real line in the negative direction is the feigenbaum constant. One of the many constants that somehow end up in the mandelbrot set.

lol wtf

Are you fucking retarded? The mandelbrot set has nothing to do with the real world. It has more to do with the axioms of set theory. Way back something like the mandelbrot set wouldn't have even been considered a set but then set theory became looser in how you can define a set and now there are dedicated people just constructing the most bizarre shit that is "real" according to our axioms. The first top drug addict to do this was Cantor.

>The mandelbrot set has nothing to do with the real world.

I dont think you know anything about fractals.

Everything is a fractal

...

How would you render this?

Chaos fractals are made of chaos so if we measure the increase of chaos in every fractal we can find the baseline when the reality pop in existence.
The amount of chaos is measured with temperature and the baseline must be 0 K.

So everything pop in existence a 0 K and you can see slices in the edge of the mandelbrot set and other fractals like Cantor and Newton.

There is your recipe for reality handcrafting.

Also consider the Bose-Einstein condesate as the visible part of the Mandelbrot set. The condensate is between the two 'universes', one is the numbers inside the set and the other the numbers outside the set.

Idgaf if it's useful
Did you know it's compact and connected?

Lay off the acid bud

Neither do you, famalam

The Mandelbrot set is the shape of God

The Truth..

Wrong.

Coastline Paradox and Brownian motion don't have anything to do with the real world?

The coastline paradox is more to do with measurement precision than anything else, it doesn't mean that the coast of britain is literally a fractal, it just displays fractal like behaviour at low resolutions.

>WE would become the polygon
lmao dude

I am become the little polygon