4 ms·
Any sufficiently Turing-complete system will be used to draw the Mandelbrot set. After that, we move on to Zawinskie's law.
by mhd 11y ago
Any sufficiently Turing-complete system will be used to draw the Mandelbrot set.
After that, we move on to Zawinskie's law.
- terhechte 11y agoI always thought that the next step after Mandelbrot is usually running Doom.
- mhd 11y agoI think it's mandelbrot -> read email -> lisp -> web server -> Doom -> operating system
- vezzy-fnord 11y agoOperating system would come before Doom, and web server probably the second thing after Mandelbrot set these days.
- retroencabulato 11y agoWhat does sufficiently Turing-complete mean? I thought a system is, or isn't?
- mhd 11y agoI'm just weaseling out because I don't want to claim that every system that can draw Mandelbrots is Turing complete (not considering pathetic cases like "draw_mandelbrot" keywords/functions/parameters). I'll leave the proof to interested readers.
- thyrsus 11y agoGenuinely Turing-complete machines have infinite memory ("tape") and an arbitrarily large number of steps within which to complete an algorithm. I suppose "sufficiently Turing-complete" to mean that you can express an algorithm to the machine such that the algorithm can complete within the resources (RAM and time) that you have to give it.
- goldenkey 11y agoI wonder if there's some sort of fractal rendering procedure like zooming/rotating/viewing, that could be turing complete with a given fractal. Would be a kind of cool hack.