Search: user:Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
BP1241 |
| Any point contained in (arbitrarily) smaller version of self vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Note if any point is contained in some smaller version of the whole, then any point is contained in arbitrarily smaller versions of the whole.
It isn't possible to unambiguously communicate in a picture whether or not a few specific points are included in the fractal. The pictures are interpreted as what is intuitively simplest. To make matters less ambiguous, all the fractals here contain all points arbitrarily close to points in them. (They are topologically closed. See also BP1239.)
The left hand side of this is a stronger condition than the left hand side of BP1116. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1236 BP1237 BP1238 BP1239 BP1240  *  BP1242 BP1243 BP1244 BP1245 BP1246
|
|
KEYWORD
|
notso, perfect, infinitedetail
|
|
CONCEPT
|
fractal (info | search), recursion (info | search), self-reference (info | search)
|
|
WORLD
|
connected_fractal [smaller | same | bigger]
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
|
|
|
BP1239 |
| Fractal topologically closed (each white point has a neighborhood of pure white surrounding it) vs. not |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1238 |
| Fractal with hole vs. fractal with no hole (simply connected). |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1236 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: connected component vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1235 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: distingushing between distinct curves that cross vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1234 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: diagonal vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1233 |
| Different curves cross each other vs. curves only cross themselves (or do not cross at all). |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1232 |
| Curves with at least one crossing vs. curves do not cross. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1231 |
| Bongard Problems where some information is left out from examples and they are only sorted on the side they seem to fit vs. other Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Bongard Problems sorted left have the keyword "seemslike" on the OEBP.
In a "seemslike" Bongard Problem, some relevant information is left out by the way objects are displayed. Solutions to "seemslike" BPs sound like "Seems like a ___ based on the information available vs. seems like a ___ based on the information available". The two sides are typically negations of one another (keyword notso).
Since there is information missing, examples can only be sorted assuming they appear in a way that hints psychologically at what they actually are (see help). |
|
CROSSREFS
|
Although the rule sorting the underlying objects may be precise, the rule sorting the projections of the objects with lost information is fuzzy and subjective.
See also left-couldbe (and right-couldbe), concerning situations in which the information given may be enough to determine when examples fail to satisfy a rule but is never enough to determine when they do satisfy the rule ("could be ___ vs. clearly is not"). In contrast to "seemslike" Bongard Problems, left-couldbe Bongard Problems can be precise; both evidence of fitting right and absence of evidence of fitting right is clear-cut, so no psychologically helpful hints (help) are needed.
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1226 BP1227 BP1228 BP1229 BP1230  *  BP1232 BP1233 BP1234 BP1235 BP1236
|
|
KEYWORD
|
meta (see left/right), links, keyword
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
|
|
|
BP1230 |
| Invariant under scaling by a certain amount vs. not. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Welcome |
Solve |
Browse |
Lookup |
Recent |
Links |
Register |
Contact
Contribute |
Keywords |
Concepts |
Worlds |
Ambiguities |
Transformations |
Invalid Problems |
Style Guide |
Goals |
Glossary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|