Maybe Mandelbrot...

List,

Not wanting to build an entire aura based on negative postings, here is a mention (which I quote verbatim, and don't vouch for the descriptions) that I received today, and thought some here might find it of interest (or debunk?). About math, scholarship, discovery, hidden people, and all that:

Mandelbrot monk
---------------
http://www.freezone.co.uk/rgirvan/udo.htm

The Mandelbrot set is a fractal illustration of chaos theory in which spirals are made of spirals are made of spirals (are made of spirals) in a dizzying, never-ending cycle. It is based on the multiplication of complex numbers that can be broken down to the equation a+bi, where a and b are "real" numbers (like you count on your fingers) and i is an imaginary number, usually referred to as the square root of -1.

Benoit Mandelbrot discovered this complex mathematical mess in the 1970's and fractals have lead to some seriously cool coding capabilities since.

But according to retired mathematics professor Bob Schipke, the Mandelbrot set seems to have originated with a monk named Udo of Aachen 700 *years* before Benoit started pooping in his pants. Although the very concept of imaginary numbers would take another 500 years to develop, Udo produced a Mandelbrot fractal in a nativity scene as the Star of Bethlehem which lead Schipke to investigate the monk's writings to uncover that this holy man discovered the magic of fractal geometry by continually multiplying numbers by themselves and then substituting complex numbers until he, too, arrived at the, um, Udo set.

Schipke published his findings in 1999, but only now is the news making the rounds.

Cheers,
Jon

`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`
Real Life: Orchestral Percussionist
Web Life: "Corporeal Meadows" - about Harry Partch
http://www.corporeal.com/
NOTE:
If your reply bounces, try --> jonszanto@yahoo.com

Jon Szanto wrote:

> List,
>
> Not wanting to build an entire aura based on negative postings, here is
> a mention (which I quote verbatim, and don't vouch for the
> descriptions) that I received today, and thought some here might find
> it of interest (or debunk?). About math, scholarship, discovery, hidden
> people, and all that:

It's an excellent report. I read it when Slashdot linked to it at the
start of the month. The "Lzip" site linked to on the same day is also
worth checking out.

Graham

--- In tuning@y..., graham@m... wrote:
> Jon Szanto wrote:
>
> > List,
> >
> > Not wanting to build an entire aura based on negative postings,
here is
> > a mention (which I quote verbatim, and don't vouch for the
> > descriptions) that I received today, and thought some here might
find
> > it of interest (or debunk?). About math, scholarship, discovery,
hidden
> > people, and all that:
>
> It's an excellent report. I read it when Slashdot linked to it at
the
> start of the month. The "Lzip" site linked to on the same day is
also
> worth checking out.
>
>
> Graham

You don't think it's a hoax?

--- In tuning@y..., "Jonathan M. Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

> http://www.freezone.co.uk/rgirvan/udo.htm

I'm looking at this page now and it's kind of like one of those "find
twelve things wrong with this picture" games that you used to find
when you were a kid (at least I did). I appreciate the sentiment,
though, Jon.

Paul,

--- In tuning@y..., PERLICH@A... wrote:
> I'm looking at this page now and it's kind of like one of
> those "find twelve things wrong with this picture" games that
> you used to find when you were a kid (at least I did).
> I appreciate the sentiment, though, Jon.

You've recently wondered, for the umpteenth time, how a person could
possible take offense, umbrage, exact confusion, or perceive certain
implications, in the words that you write. So I just thought I'd do a
dissection on this one:

> I'm looking at this page now and it's kind of like one of
> those "find twelve things wrong with this picture" games that
> you used to find when you were a kid (at least I did).

What -- you found those pictures, or you found the 12 things? And "at
least I did" -- you mean as opposed to the idiot children around you
that remained clueless? That didn't think the picture a hoax (as
Graham maybe does)?

> I appreciate the sentiment, though, Jon.

Hmmm. I didn't send it with any sentiment, except that it was
potentially a non-controversial issue that might be of interest to
some here on the list! What "sentiment" did you mean?

My personal bottom line: your little reply not only left confusion,
and didn't shed any light on problems with the article, but I don't
know whether to be insulted (which, this being such a trivial
example, I wouldn't be, and I'm not) or pleased! To be clear, I'm
just using this particular exchange to point out the types of
communication partially-non-functioning widgets that might be giving
fits to both parties in your correspondences. I this particular case
(Mandelbrot / not-Mandelbrot) I couldn't give a rat's comma.

And we both share English as our native tongue; best of luck to you
during your inter-linguistic communications...

Jon

(who is having fun typing this, on a very Spring-lik day, getting
caught up, while committing to DAT an old, 7" 33.33 rpm blue vinyl
disc of Odetta singing live at the Tin Angel in San Francisco in
1953...)

--- In tuning@y..., JSZANTO@A... wrote:
> Paul,
>
> --- In tuning@y..., PERLICH@A... wrote:
> > I'm looking at this page now and it's kind of like one of
> > those "find twelve things wrong with this picture" games that
> > you used to find when you were a kid (at least I did).
> > I appreciate the sentiment, though, Jon.
>
> You've recently wondered, for the umpteenth time, how a person
could
> possible take offense, umbrage, exact confusion, or perceive
certain
> implications, in the words that you write. So I just thought I'd do
a
> dissection on this one:
>
> > I'm looking at this page now and it's kind of like one of
> > those "find twelve things wrong with this picture" games that
> > you used to find when you were a kid (at least I did).
>
> What -- you found those pictures, or you found the 12 things?

No -- only 2 and a half so far.

> And "at
> least I did" -- you mean as opposed to the idiot children around
you
> that remained clueless?

You completely misread than Jon.

, I meant at least I did play those games when I was a kid, maybe no
one else played them.

> > I appreciate the sentiment, though, Jon.
>
> Hmmm. I didn't send it with any sentiment, except that it was
> potentially a non-controversial issue that might be of interest to
> some here on the list! What "sentiment" did you mean?

This is what you wrote:

"Not wanting to build an entire aura based on negative postings, here
is a
mention (which I quote verbatim, and don't vouch for the
descriptions) that
I received today, and thought some here might find it of interest (or
debunk?). About math, scholarship, discovery, hidden people, and all
that:"

_That's_ a nice sentiment, and I mean that sincerely.
>
> My personal bottom line: your little reply not only left confusion,
> and didn't shed any light on problems with the article,

I thought it would be more fun to let others look at it first and see
what they found. I'm sure others will see many things that I would
never catch. I'll give you my #1: Scrool down to the bottom, and look
at the publication date of the article.

J>S>
I understand that she was a friend of Harry's

JSZANTO@ADNC.COM wrote:

>
>
> Jon
>
> (who is having fun typing this, on a very Spring-lik day, getting
> caught up, while committing to DAT an old, 7" 33.33 rpm blue vinyl
> disc of Odetta singing live at the Tin Angel in San Francisco in
> 1953...)
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

Paul,

--- In tuning@y..., PERLICH@A... wrote:
> > And "at least I did" -- you mean as opposed to the idiot
> > children around you that remained clueless?
>
> You completely misread than Jon. I meant at least I did play those
> games when I was a kid, maybe no one else played them.

Ahhhh! Well, dear friend, it didn't read as you intended it. I think
this was the *entire* point of me writing you -- and in a true
attempt at being helpful, not a creep -- that one person's "misread"
is another persons "What?". I try to be a well-read person, but I
wouldn't doubt that if someone did one of those 'sentence diagrams'
to unlock the grammar, your utterance would be found wanting.

Like most of my writing!

But, again, the point is that it was not a transparent but opaque
implication to me, and you might want to try looking at your posts
from a variety of angles. If not, you might have to reconcile
yourself to people constantly wondering what the gamba you mean.

> _That's_ a nice sentiment, and I mean that sincerely.

Well, lovely! I *do* like being positive...

> I thought it would be more fun to let others look at it first and
> see what they found. I'm sure others will see many things that I
> would never catch. I'll give you my #1: Scrool down to the bottom,
> and look at the publication date of the article.

Gad, Paul, that didn't come through to me at all... But I was
listening to some cool music at the same time.

Blue vinyl to you,
Jon

Kraig,

--- In tuning@y..., Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@a...> wrote:
> J>S>
> I understand that she was a friend of Harry's

Having snipped the quote, that was in reference to Odetta. I don't
know about 'friend', Kraig, but in the early 50's Odetta was
introduced to Partch through artist friend Yanko Varda, who had
musical events on his houseboat in Sausalito. She was originally
slated to sing the part of Jocasta in "Oedipus", but backed out
(apparantly) over a lack of funding.

The amazing part is that her name came up later when Partch was
working on "The Bewitched" and was thinking of a strong presence to
cast as the Witch -- amazing in that when Odetta was too busy, he
next turned to thoughts of the young singer-dancer that was his
neighbor in Sausalito: Maya Angelou.

The disc I was taping was originally Harry's, and being that it was
recorded in SF in 53-54 it captures in Odetta the same vocal
qualities he would have wanted in a good Witch (and I don't
mean "Good Witch"!) -- pretty important listening!

(much of the citation stuff above credit to the depth-plumbing of
Philip Blackburn...)

Cheers,
Jon

Jonathan M. Szanto, quoting from http://www.freezone.co.uk/rgirvan/udo.htm , wrote:

> But according to retired mathematics professor Bob Schipke, the Mandelbrot
> set seems to have originated with a monk named Udo of Aachen 700 *years*
> before Benoit started pooping in his pants.

That would be about 1300 A.D., no? Gothic fractal. Now THERE'S a tuning paradigm for ya! :-)

--
David J. Finnamore
Nashville, TN, USA
http://personal.bna.bellsouth.net/bna/d/f/dfin/index.html
--

--- In tuning@y..., "Jonathan M. Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21161.html#21161

>
> Mandelbrot monk
> ---------------
> http://www.freezone.co.uk/rgirvan/udo.htm
>

Well, this is totally cool... but how about a little music to go with
it??

May I recommend my _Confessions of the Goliards_ which are English
translations of the SAME texts used by the itinerant monks of the 13th
Century! (Orff's texts in _Carmina Burana_ from the same sources are,
of course, in Latin and not so perceptibly salacious)

These are the first three songs of the cycle of seven...

http://artists.mp3s.com/artist_song/592/592651.html

Oh... and I am practicing "safe sonority." Since there is no piano
included, the intonation is certainly not 12-tET...

___________ _____ _____ _
Joseph Pehrson