Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!texbell!attctc!chasm
From: chasm@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Charles Marslett)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: fractals as bad science
Summary: Tain't nature!
Message-ID: <10399@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>
Date: 29 Nov 89 14:38:42 GMT
References: <119.256E54C5@uscacm.UUCP>
Organization: The Unix(R) Connection, Dallas, Texas
Lines: 19

In article <119.256E54C5@uscacm.UUCP>, Jim.McNamee@p7.f12.n376.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Jim McNamee) writes:
[in reference to a comment that the author could well live quite happily never
seeing another fractal display or mountain image generated by binary 
subdivision.]

>    When he was governor of California, the famous 'naturalist' and former U.S.
>president said, "A rock is a rock.  A tree is a tree."  Sounds as though the two
>of you take similar pleasure in the beauty of Nature.

> Jim McNamee == ...!usceast!uscacm!12.7!Jim.McNamee

Actually, I take exception to the implication that nature is really computer
generated graphics of any kind -- fractal or otherwise.

It seems that he who can't tell the difference between a mathematical construct
and real mountains is the one with a limited perception of nature's beauty.

Charles Marslett
chasm@attctc.dallas.tx.us


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com