/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5287491]

Ok /sci/,
I know you have it: MATH ART
Let see it, or at least what you consider mathematically beautiful.

[Anonymous No.5287494]

>He's never heard of a Mandelbrot set
ISHYGDDT

[Anonymous No.5287506]

>>5287494
of course I have. That doesn't mean I consider it particularly beautiful, even in a mathematical sense.
The point of this topic is to see what your opinion of mathematical beauty is. So, according to you it's the Mandelbrot set. Okay interesting.. anything else to add?

[Anonymous No.5287510]

inb4 euler's identity

[Anonymous No.5287518]

This is one of the most elegant proofs of one of the oldest theorems.

[Anonymous No.5287530]

I worked with some artists for a while. One of our projects was to project cool patterns onto buildings. I programmed some Vorenoi polygons, Mandelbrot set, Conway's game of life, etc. I'll dump some more pics if you like.

[Anonymous No.5287525]

>>5287510
okay, that's a good answer. Though anything else "less obvious" would also be interesting.

[Anonymous No.5287524]

oh many i have a crapload of original content i could dump ... but i don't want anyone to steal it

[Anonymous No.5287533]

Draw a diagonal across a unit square. Then make a rectangle from that. keep doing that and you can graphically get the values for the roots of all the whole numbers

[Anonymous No.5287535]

<span class="math">i^2 = j^2 = k^2 = ijk = -1[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.5287537]

>>5287518
I love that proof. Always wondered why Pythagoras' proof was so much more complicated.

[Anonymous No.5287540]

Check this stuff out.
http://bulatov.org/polyhedra/bruckner1906/index.html

[Anonymous No.5287582]

>>5287537
What exactly was his proof?

[Anonymous No.5287598]

Schwarz-Christoffel in this bitch.

[Anonymous No.5287602]

>>5287535
what is this shit? This isn't true.

[Anonymous No.5287629]

>>5287602
It's a possible definition for quaternion bases.

[Anonymous No.5287692]

Vihart has got some neat stuff. Not really intended to be art but she actually ends up making some pretty crazy doodles and shit in her vids.

[Anonymous No.5287702]

...Escher?

[Anonymous No.5287857]

(x^2+9/4*y^2+z^2-1)^3-x^2*z^3-9/80*y^2*z^3=0

Go ahead. Model it.

[Anonymous No.5287876]

>>5287857
Too lazy to do anything except WolframAlpha, but unfortunately:
Computation timed out.

[Anonymous No.5287886]

.gif edition

[Anonymous No.5287899]

>>5287886
NOW I GET IT

[Anonymous No.5287935]

>>5287857
>(x^2+9/4*y^2+z^2-1)^3-x^2*z^3-9/80*y^2*z^3=0

I guess this counts as art

[Anonymous No.5287933]

Fractals. Thread closed.

[Anonymous No.5287949]

Animation of k-means clustering:
http://animation.yihui.name/mvstat:k-means_cluster_algorithm

It's not some universal principle of mathematics, but pretty nifty to me.

[Anonymous No.5287966]

>>5287886
ian

[Anonymous No.5288048]

>>5287530
I'm interested. Was this in Vancouver? I did a reverse image search and that's what I came up with.

[Anonymous No.5288894]

commencing dump of fractals i made after 30 seconds with chaospro/mandelbulber last night

[Anonymous No.5288899]

yep

[Anonymous No.5288905]

the originals are like 5 Mb large .bmp's

[Anonymous No.5288911]

>DDCsol cause

[Anonymous No.5288914]

>>5288905
woops, correction, ~31 Mb .bmp's

this one is a zoom-in of >>5288911

[Anonymous No.5288920]

>>5288894
Requesting wiggle stereogram gifs.
I'm going to try and make some tonight.

[Anonymous No.5288939]

Moebius transformations, maybe?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JX3VmDgiFnY

[Anonymous No.5288938]

>>5288894
Whats the generating function for this?

[Anonymous No.5288952]

>>5288920
>>5288938
sheeyut niqqas
i dunno
it was just, like, the default, and I dicked around with some random numbers

...but i have it open now, and if you tell me how, I'd love to make a stereogram of it...
not sure how to move the camera left/right. I can maybe try. and then go to gifsoup, right? and make a gif of two images of the same fractal taken from slightly different views?

[Anonymous No.5288957]

>>5288939

it's beautiful.....nearly shed a tear

[Anonymous No.5288967]

>>5288939
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JX3VmDgiFnY

this reminded me of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFXRRW9goTs&feature=related

Very cool, I would like to make that with a glass sphere and light.

[Anonymous No.5288974]

x^2 + y^2 = 1

[Anonymous No.5289233]

I'm back

[Anonymous No.5289240]

[Anonymous No.5289243]

[Anonymous No.5289303]

[Anonymous No.5289301]

>>5288952
Better yet, make the camera move in a circular path and turn those renders into a gif

[Anonymous No.5289306]

>>5289233
I have to ask, what are those things ?

[Anonymous No.5289307]

>>5289243
>600x450

[Anonymous No.5289312]

>>5289301
that would take forever. these are taking 2 minutes a photo, and not every random talentless input of numbers looks good enough.
That's why I'm dumping unoriginal content at this second.

[Anonymous No.5289321]

>>5289306
A 4D Julia set.
If you were to slice it along the axis of symmetry you'd see pic related, the Mandelbrot set.

[Anonymous No.5289333]

>>5289307
Good thing the full size isn't above the limit.
Fix'd.

>>5289306
They're... well... damn if I know
Some kind of fractal rendered with mandelbulber, a program.

[Anonymous No.5289329]

>>5289312
Render them on your GPU!
Fragmentarium uses it default.

[Anonymous No.5289348]

>>5288939
I learned more from this than my entire complex analysis course.

Thank you Anon. You have brought light to these dark times. I feel my eyes watering...

[Anonymous No.5289354]

>>5289333
forgot pic wtf
and due to lag, apparently the original IS too large.

[Anonymous No.5289378]

Okay back to original fractals

>>5289329
Um, how would I go about doing that?

[Anonymous No.5289393]

Unoriginal, more coming

[Anonymous No.5289407]

Previous fraktel with less iterations

[Anonymous No.5289419]

asdf

[Anonymous No.5289432]

>>5289378
It's a program, silly. Download it.

[Anonymous No.5289433]

behold, a fractal
for no matter how one zooms, it will re-iterate itself

[Anonymous No.5289454]

>>5289432
does it take infinitely long to render?

[Anonymous No.5289460]

>>5289454
Try 60 FPS. At least, that's what I can get with my graphics card.

[Anonymous No.5289465]

>>5287491

[Anonymous No.5289477]

>>5289321
that's... beautiful

[Anonymous No.5289486]

>>5289477
>>5289348
>>5288957
Y... you guys high or something?

[Anonymous No.5289523]

>>5289460
I tried, anon, I tried, but I have no idea how to use it and it lagged horribly to the point of causing a vague error box on the bottom right of the screen that said something crashed and recovered.

[Anonymous No.5289540]

>>5289523
>shitty computer
>2012

[Anonymous No.5289538]

I went to Rome 3 years ago. The marble columns, buildings, bridges, waterworks, everything had a timeless and inspiring beauty.

The artworks in the museums, the sculpture, all had exquisite beauty and aesthetics.

Now look at the 20th-21st century CAD designs, the soulless, ugly, vain, and stupid designs that will become our modern ruins.

The implication is clear. As long as the image is made with a computer, using mathematics, its unlikely to to aesthetic, and likely to be a curse on the future. Already nearly every building built in the last 30 years is a blight on the landscape.

3D, geometric math-art bullshit of the last 20 years is all self-evident garbage of a particular sort that drains inspiration from life.

Likewise, the slavish relationship between mathematics and corporate capitalism is reaching for its nadir: a sterile pseudo-aesthetic with no past and no future, a disposable mass-marketed kitsch.

[Anonymous No.5289548]

>>5289538
I too am scintillated by utilizing my vast and extensive vernacular to convey convoluted concourses of confusion.

Those who eschew obfuscation are insipid, my companion, do you comply?

[Anonymous No.5289560]

>>5287518
WHY THE ABSOLUTE FUCK ISN'T THIS IN EVERY GRADE SCHOOL LESSON IN MATH?

This makes it blindingly obvious. Holy shit.

[Anonymous No.5289561]

>>5289540
nice fractal
I'm rendering more but it's got 8 minutes to go
;_;

[Anonymous No.5289575]

>>5289433
>behold, a faggot
>for no matter how one bans, they will re-iterate themselves

[Anonymous No.5289576]

>>5288048
Yes. We set it up at the 2011 and 2012 Illuminate Yaletown, also the Surrey library for a few months. We're using projectors second hand from the Olympics.

[Anonymous No.5289582]

>>5289433
Truly beautiful.

[Anonymous No.5289586]

>>5289575
Indeed you are a faggot.

[Anonymous No.5289593]

>>5289575
I'm sorry, but did Mitt already lose? Oh, that's right. The election isn't even over yet. In fact, it's only 86%. Does not having the lead at 86% count as a loss? Is that what you're saying? Because if you're saying that I can assure you that you're wrong. Why would you make this topic when the election is still on? Mitt are still playing right now and they have been the best party in the US for how many terms now? He's against one of the worst presidents in history who just happen to have a lead because they're feeding off the projections of the voters. But you know what? They still fucking suck. Romney is one of the best fucking candidates in the Republican party, it was 50/50 last month and would of won the debate if the nigger didn't cheat. Maybe you should shut the fuck up before you make retarded topics like this. You know why? Because you're going to be embarrassed when Romney wins and someone bumps this topic. Oh look at that, Romney just got west virginia, just like Bush did. Are you a fucking drunk? Are you retarded? Are you autistic? You are a fucking idiot and you should never make a topic on this board again and I'm fucking serious. I almost have a feeling you're the only guy making all these anti-Mitt topics because you're a faggot hater who doesn't like the Republicans because they're good. Fuck you, be good at something in YOUR life and then maybe try to troll these fucking teams on the board, like I give a fuck. It's so easy to spot out your threads now, you're a retard. Always doing stupid shit like this. Why don't you try to be a good poster? Just for once? For once in your fucking life try not to make a topic like this. That's just you, you're always right at getting it wrong. Fuck you. You are nothing.

[Anonymous No.5289606]

>>5289561
h-here it is

[Anonymous No.5289660]

Art is "math" by default.

[Anonymous No.5289677]

google image result for "math art"

[Anonymous No.5289682]

>>5287533
What are those curves based on? They have to be orthogonal to the diagonal at the corner but what else?

[Anonymous No.5289686]

wikipedia's gif illustrating the "dragon curve"

>captcha is Wikeyys produced
>
>wow

[Anonymous No.5289692]

>>5289682
Not sure I understand what you're asking.
It seems pretty straight-forward to me, you just draw to the corner and "let it fall".

[Anonymous No.5289690]

>>5287524
post that shit

[Anonymous No.5289706]

>>5289682
The curves are simply arc lengths of a circles traced from the corner to where they coincide with the bottom edge of the rectangle.

[Anonymous No.5289703]

>>5287524
I think they would be gentlemen about such a thing.

[Anonymous No.5289704]

>>5289686
how does that work ?

[Anonymous No.5289710]

>>5289704
He gave you the name of the curve, go look it up.

[Anonymous No.5289713]

fractalforums.net
That's where the "mandelbulb" was discovered. That's what most of the 3D images in this thread are. Be warned, fractals will destroy your life, especially if you already have some nerd-ish tendencies. They are the crack cocaine of the mathematically inclined.

[Anonymous No.5289718]

>>5289706
>arc lengths of a circles
Gotcha. Thanks.

[Anonymous No.5289719]

>>5289704
from wikipedia:

It can be written as a Lindenmayer system with
angle 90°
initial string FX
string rewriting rules
X ↦ X+YF+
Y ↦ −FX−Y.
That can be described this way : Starting from a base segment, replace each segment by 2 segments with a right angle and with a rotation of 45° alternatively to the right and to the left

[Anonymous No.5289731]

>>5289713
I stumbled upon /sci/ for the first time in my life this evening, you have me interested

care to develop ?

[Anonymous No.5289743]

>>5289713
FFFFUUUUCCCCKKKK

I have so much homework to do. Why man, why?

[Anonymous No.5289786]

Got sidetracked, will hopefully get one or two more before I have to go, here's another unoriginal

[Anonymous No.5289793]

>>5289786
No, I won't

[Anonymous No.5289801]

Last one. this was my desktop for a long time.

[Anonymous No.5290233]

>>5289786
I never really cared for fractals, but this is nice.