Amazing properties of fractals: Koch Snowflake perimeter

[guitarockdude]

Triforce within a triforce... That's some inception shit

[ben1996123]

the area of the koch snowflake is s^2 * √0.48 where s is the original side length.

[The1chihira]

the patern continues on for ever great

[TheBoyFromTheManga]

Wow man your vids are awesome!

Im not that much of a maths brain but you make it both much more fun to learn and also much easier to learn.

[triplehydra]

mind = blown

[BlackRaven117]

1:16 TRIFORCE OF TRIFORCES OF TRIFORCES OF TRIFORCE!!!!

[kyleisreallycool]

@BlackRaven117 yo dawg we herd u liek triforce so we put a triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo triforce, in yo..ect

[ericX97]

@kyleisreallycool To infinity and BEYOND!

[jaleshdikshit]

Perimeter is function of thickness of line, everyone assumes 0 line thickness! If line thickness is 0, curve does not exist! Draw it with very thick line, it becomes impossible to extend the curve when line thickness is equal to height of triangle in Koch's curve.

[fractalmath]

@jaleshdikshit perimeter is not a function of the thickness of the line. Also, a curve in mathematics does have "thickness" 0, and it still exists without any problems. It is a one-dimensional object (embeded in higher dimensions, such as a 2d plane in this case).

[nintendomario007]

@fractalmath in the snow flake on part 3 you have 6 not 3.

[wvb93]

I DEMAND MOAR!

[bookfreak29]

the concept of assigning a dimension between two and three just for fractals is absurd. what that is doing is redefining all shapes so you can make your definition fit, it completely disregards the general definition of dimensions. a fractal is a "special" two dimensional object because of its special duplicative properties, but it is not three dimentional because it has no depth. The human mind cannot percieve any dimension between the two.

[bluecobra95]

You can't just throw out that there is such thing as 1.26 dimensional and just leave it there! Glad to see more fractal videos!

[Kakashinoor]

KOCH SNOWFLAKE?! lol!

Nice video though!

[Troleeboy]

that is really interesting keep making vids like this

[metallicanstallion]

wow, I can't even begin to wrap my head around something that has a finite area but an infinite perimeter. Astounding.

[xXdaveXsuperstarXx]

@metallicanstallion

It doesn't have an infinite perimeter. We don't have a numbering system that can be that exact.

[metallicanstallion]

@xXdaveXsuperstarXx

oh, ok. Thanks for the clarification.

[bookfreak29]

@xXdaveXsuperstarXx

actually, it does make sense, if you take the image of a man squeezing himself into a box there will eventually be a point where he takes up all possible space. This same concept applies in a funky way with fractals where a line takes up an infinite amount of space inside a box, because the area is finite. but since a line is one dimensional and a box is two dimensional it makes sense that the line will be able to expand infinatly

[xXdaveXsuperstarXx]

@bookfreak29

if it truly had infinite perimeter this would have never happened.

[xXdaveXsuperstarXx]

@bookfreak29

What you're saying is that Kochs snowflake never ends. If you use the simplest of logic. It is not infinite. Infinite means never ending. You will never reach infinity. Unless you don't really mean infinite.

[bookfreak29]

@xXdaveXsuperstarXx

First, infinity is a concept, not a number, just because you can't reach it doesnt mean it isn't a valid one, Second, that comment made absolutly no sense at all. Third, how does the Koch snowflake not go on forever?

[xXdaveXsuperstarXx]

@bookfreak29

Does it make more sense if I say that infinity can never be reached? I've seen a few algorithms to generate Koch's snowflake. Most of which do not require an "infinite" algorithm. So, if infinity can never be reached, and you need to apply that algorithm an infinite amount of times, then I'm simply implying that that can't be the right algorithm. Does that make sense? Or was it too confusing for you.

[bookfreak29]

@xXdaveXsuperstarXx

I already answered that if you would have cared to read my comment, infinity is a concept. your only argument is when you try to assign it a numerical value. Since this is not the way it works, you are wrong

[xXdaveXsuperstarXx]

@bookfreak29

CONSIDER THE RESULT AND ENTERTAIN THE CONSEQUENCES.

Apparently neither one of us picked that up... It still doesn't have infinite perimeter. If a line takes up all possible space in a box..... THEN GET A BIGGER BOX AND YOU HAVE MORE "INFINITY". Unless your implying that that line takes up all the space in the cosmos.

[bookfreak29]

@xXdaveXsuperstarXx

Again, I already answered that, a line takes up only one dimension wheras a box takes up two. technically neither of these objects actually exist because they don't exist in all three dimensions, once you realize this fact, then you can see that since a box has one more dimension then the line, then you can fit an INFINITE amount of lines in that box.

[tompster]

The fact that I love math probably increases how much I enjoyed this video but it was excellent.

[lotsagrapes]

First.