Thread: Complexity

Simple. There is a pattern to it.

111000111000111000111000 may look confusing, but it's simple. It has a pattern. The next numbers are predictable.

1230984029384029352763923095720384 is complex. There is no pattern. The next numbers are not predictable.

In structures, a cube cut into 1000 smaller cubes of equal size is simple.

A cube cut into 2389 smaller figures, random in all 3 dimensions is complex.

Simple. There is a pattern to it.

There's not, each bit is different.

sort of. Whenever you zoom in, you see a copy of what the original was. There is a pattern to it.

It isn't a copy. It's slightly different.

Originally Posted by A Roxxor

Well...

I would probably say based on the number of nonredundant, working systems in the structure.

This works fairly well. If we're talking about mathematical objects, this would be the number of independent objects in a space.

Originally Posted by Xei

It isn't a copy. It's slightly different.

The Mandelbrot set has some sort of "induced" complexity. Personally, I wouldn't call it complex because to generate it in any arbitrary fidelity requires a computer program about 10 lines long. And to increase the resolution does not require a lengthening of the computer program. That would suggest that the embedded fractals are, in fact, self-similar enough to call them computationally identical to the whole.