Skip to main content

complex - Why is this Mandelbrot set's implementation infeasible: takes a massive amount of time to do?


The Mandelbrot set is defined by complex numbers such as z=z2+c where z0=0 for the initial point and c∈C. The numbers grow very fast in the iteration.


z = 0; n = 0; l = {0};
While[n < 9, c = 1 + I; l = Join[l, {z}]; z = z^2 + c; n++];l


If n is very large, the numbers become too large and impossible to calculate in practical time limits. I don't know what it would look after long time but doubting whether it would look like here.


What is wrong with this implementation? Why does it take so long time to calculate?



Answer



What is wrong: a) you're using exact arithmetic. b) You keep iterating even if the point seems to be escaping.


Try this


ClearAll@prodOrb;
prodOrb[c_, maxIters_: 100, escapeRadius_: 1] :=
NestWhileList[#^2 + c &,
0.,

Abs[#] < escapeRadius &,
1,
maxIters
]

prodOrb[0. + 10. I]
prodOrb[0. + .1 I]

(if you don't need the entire list but only the final point, replace NestWhileList by NestWhile).


Here, I use approximate numbers by using 0. rather than 0. See this tutorial for more.



EDIT: Since we're doing interactive manipulation:


ClearAll[mnd];
mnd = Compile[{{maxiter, _Integer}, {zinit, _Complex}, {dt, _Real}},
Module[{z, c, iters},
Table[
z = zinit;
c = cr + I*ci;
iters = 0.;
While[(iters < maxiter) && (Abs@z < 2),
iters++;

z = z^2 + c
];
Sqrt[iters/maxiter],
{cr, -2, 2, dt}, {ci, -2, 2, dt}
]
],
CompilationTarget -> "C",
RuntimeOptions -> "Speed"
];



Manipulate[
lst = mnd[100, {1., 1.*I}.p/500, .01];
ArrayPlot[Abs@lst],
{{p, {250, 250}}, Locator}
]

Mathematica graphics


Clicking around changes the fractal. Note the magic numbers sprinkled throughout the code. Why? Because ListContourPlot is way too slow, so that using the coords of the clicked point ended up being too much of a waste of time (and my coffee break is over).


EDIT2: So much for the break being over. Here we have the Mandelbrot set being blown away by strong winds:



tbl = Table[
lst = mnd[100, (1 + 1.*I)*p/500, .01];
ArrayPlot[Abs@lst],
{p, 0, 500, 10}
];

ListAnimate[tbl]

Withering mandelbrot


And see, here it is, sliding off the table while being melted:



tbl2 = Table[
mnd[100, (1 + 1.*I)*p/500, .05] // Abs //
ListPlot3D[#, PlotRange -> {0, 1},
ColorFunction -> "BlueGreenYellow", Axes -> False,
Boxed -> False,
ViewVertical -> {0, (p/500), Sqrt[1 - (p/500)^2]}] &,
{p, 0, 500, 25}
];

(this is very slow, because ListPlot3D is very slow)



enter image description here


Maximal silliness has now been achieved. Or has it?


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...